Did the National GOP Help or Hurt Mr. Burns?

Factor of the '06 Campaign (0.00 / 0)

I'd been thinking. This past election the GOP pushed very hard that we needed to keep Senator Burns in office because of his seniority and experience. Can they honestly do a 180 that fast on Senator Baucus just two years later? The Democrats never said seniority wasn't important. We just wanted to get the man out because he was so damn crooked.

Back to my main point. In 2008, Senator Baucus will be able to come to Montana and say that 70% of the federal budget goes through his committee that he happens to chair. That is real power for Montana. So if anyone has any ideas how the GOP can spend millions of dollars defending the most corrupt person in Congress, and then try to take down the Montana golden boy please let me know.

I'm keeping in mind that this isn't going to be a walk for Max. They may be able to pull something out. Contentment is poison to campaigns.

---

by: Mathello @ Thu Dec 28, 2006 at 09:08:17 AM UTC

Ooops (0.00 / 0)

The stuff above was suppose to go below. My bad.

---

by: Mathello @ Thu Dec 28, 2006 at 09:09:11 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yes, but... (0.00 / 0)

I challenge you to find Rehberg on statement attesting to the value of Burns' seniority.  It's not there.  He may not do much of anything, but he's a fairly sharp guy.  We won't get him that easy.

---

by: Nick Domitrovich @ Thu Dec 28, 2006 at 09:22:52 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

My Point (0.00 / 0)

My point is not that Rehberg will look like a hypocrite, but that can still happen. He has his own work cut out for him by proving to Montana that he would be the best person for the job. He's going up against a 30+ year veteran of Congress who will be controlling the Finance committee. It's an uphill battle. (Of course that's not impossible. Senator Tester went uphill twice this last year.) If the national GOP gets into it then the seniority card comes in to play. There will be two fronts in '08 like this year: the national parties and the individual opponents.

Rehberg doesn't have to say a thing and let the GOP do all the dirty work, but when he gets asked by the media (and he will) about his stance on the Senator's seniority he gets the option of rejecting the GOP and making them all look like an idiots, or agreeing with them and looking like a hypocrite.

Options: he can ask the GOP not to enter in and let him go at it alone with his pittance and Max's war chest. Well I guess that's just one option. I can't think of anything else.

---

by: Mathello @ Thu Dec 28, 2006 at 16:34:36 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I can't remember Rehberg (0.00 / 0)

uttering a word during the election.  Not that he didn't, I'm sure, but it seems like he did his best to distance himself from Conrad.

Wonder why?

---

by: jhwygirl @ Thu Dec 28, 2006 at 16:37:06 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Iverson said it for him (0.00 / 0)

(I knew I find something after hitting 'post')

Iverson said Burns and fellow Republican Rep. Denny Rehberg work well together with Baucus to bring federal money to Montana.

"Senator Burns has never suggested that he's the only one who brings money to Montana, because it's not true," Iverson said. "It's good to have three powerful leaders, and it makes no sense to weaken our team by replacing one member with a rookie."

---

by: jhwygirl @ Thu Dec 28, 2006 at 16:40:37 PM UTC

[ Parent ]