Okay. We saw the presidential and vice-presidential debates. We endured the bailout bill. And now we're dealing with a crass partisan attack on our right to vote.
You've had some time to stew. Let's get back to raising funds for our women candidates in Montana. Remember, the legislature is critical. We need to win this thing.
Your donations are critical to these campaigns. A last-minute mailer could tilt an election. A radio commercial running for a week could win an election. A $25 donation feeds the volunteers who make the calls and knock the doors, pay for gas for the candidates who live in a rural district to drive to the doors.
(Sounds like a push poll to me. And now another Rehberg staffer is working for the state political party. What gives here?
As for cleveland's allegations about the legality of a Bozeman fundraiser, it's not illegal if the folks paid fair market value for the space. So there's that. - promoted by Jay Stevens)
So the Montana GOP is lying to Montana voters, and attacking one of the finest men in the Montana Legislature, with a dishonest push poll about a cell phone tax.
Nothing new there. After a while you expect the gutter from them. But wait, who do they send out to spin?
Montana GOP staffers said Friday that the poll was theirs, but they said Larson was wrong to call it a push poll, that is, a poll designed to influence or change the views of potential voters who are questioned. The party indicated it was trying out messages on potential voters.
Bridger Pierce, GOP staff member and spokesman for U.S. Rep. Denny Rehberg, insisted Larson did vote to double taxes on cell phones during the 2007 Legislature.
How can a guy be both a GOP staffer and Congressional Communications Director? How the hell does he do that and not double dip?
This guy was paid $47,375 last year in taxpayer money and he is asking us believe that he can be effective in that position while serving as a hatchet man for the GOP.
I grew up in this state. And when a man lies about a good man's record, then denies it, ("It wasn't a push poll"), and does it all on the taxpayer dime, well, it doesn't sit too good.
On the bright side, Bridger (?) only costs taxpayers one third of what Erik Iverson does. Erik made $148,590 last year to serve the people of Montana as Rehberg's Chief of Staff, or wait, serve as Chair of the Montana Republican Party.
Like I said last night: What I cant figure out, for the life of me, is how this sh*t is legal.
Update: As MTSentinel diplomatically and politely pointed out, Pierce has been hired as the state GOP's new communications director. Therefore, unlike in the case of Erik Iverson, taxpayers are not paying Pierce to do partisan political work.
Love the enthusiam over at the poll on the right. Shirley Baumgartner has come out of nowhere and taken a commanding lead to be our next featured fundraising target!
Okay, but remember folks: we won't start raising money for Ms. Baumgartner before we fulfill our fundraising goal for all of Left in the West's "battleground women."
Frankly, if I see 17 votes in the poll, I should also see 17 donations to our slate of candidates. Remember, five dollar donations are welcome, even encouraged! Let's get this done, and then we'll go batty for Baumgartner.
Assuming, of course, that some other candidate doesn't take the lead in the poll in the meantime...
Below the fold, I've pasted over their race's profiles, and added any pertinent links that have come up since I originally published the posts on the battleground races.
To the right, I've created a new poll. Once we've reached our modest $250 goal for all of these candidates, we'll do an intense fundraiser for the woman senate candidate of your choice. Yes, it's not fair to the House candidates, but it takes a lot more money to win a Senate seat...
(Jes' keeping this at the top for a while... - promoted by Jay Stevens)
Senate District 7 is one of the battleground Senate races I identified a few weeks ago. It pits Paul Clark - a former House legislator of distinction - against Greg Hinkle, a furniture maker who believes our health care crisis is caused by illegal immigrants. Clark's an experienced campaigner, and Hinkle flirts with nut-casery. Advantage Clark in this rural district.
But wait. There's a twist. The loser of the Democratic primary - Judy Stang - has filed to run as a write-in candidate. Stang lost the primary narrowly, and you've got to believe she'll poach a few votes in November.
Clark, being generous:
"It (could) introduce a big unknown and make this race a lot more complicated, but I certainly don't hold it against her," he said. "I'm one of those who think that democracy works in strange ways."
Stang, you may remember, was funded by two Republican staffers and had strong ties to the MT Contractors Association. Lamnidae speculated that Stang was placed and funded in the primary to get Clark out of Helena, because of Clark's work on gravel pit regulation while a member of the House Natural Resources committee.
Apparently the mission continues.
Classy, eh?
Luckily there's something you can do about it. Let's raise $250 for Clark before I leave for the Convention.
That's the sound of my Lane Larson fundraiser. Okay, so I dropped the ball...but...6 donors? I'm not the only one. We need just four more -- let's make them $5 donations.
So what are you waiting for? Hopefully you're staggering home drunk after a good Saturday night, and you'll prop open your wallet without thinking twice. And that's the spirit I'm looking for!
I gotta hand it to y'all; our goal for Lane Larson donations was met within 24 hours. Sheesh. What's a guy to do around here?
Luckily JC's going to lead a little fundraising for a PSC seat (I'll let him fill you in on the details later), while I'm on the road for a few days next week.
But still, let's keep this Larson thing going for a few more days. And to do that, I'm changing the rules a little bit. Forget $250. That came and went in a flash. I want more donors. At least ten.
You know what that means! Yes! Five-dollar donations!
And, yes, I'll still get a profile of Larson up sometime or other...I swear...
Okay,so we didn't get the 25 votes yet, but I figure Larson's running away with this thing, so let's get started.
Here's the link to donate to his cause:
Let's get two-fifty to this guy. I'll also contact him and pump some more information out of him about his race, his beliefs, what's going on with the race, etc & co...
An upset in the Senate regional fundraiser: the East Region walked away with the race! In fact, East Region candidates earned the most money combined for their House and Senate candidates -- by $10. (See? Those $5 donations do mean something.)
And we raised almost $600 dollars for state legislative candidates in the last two weeks. That's amazing.
In celebration of the East Region's come-from-behind win, we at LiTW are going to pick one of the East Region candidates and do a $250 push for that candidate. Two-fifty is a lot for a legislative race. So a lot is on the line here.
You're going to choose (see poll at the right) from the five candidates who received the most individual contributions (not the most money -- see? Those $5 donations do mean something). They are...drum roll...
HD58 - Doc Woerner
HD60 - Ross Keogh
SD22 - Lane Larson
SD26 - Lynda Moss
SD27 - Gary Branae
I'll reprint those race's profiles below the fold.
In addition to giving the candidate of our choice $250, I'll do a more in-depth profile along with an interview, either by email or by phone. So it's a pretty big deal, IMHO.
Get busy voting! You have until Monday at midnight to pick a winner. Cheating is encouraged.
Halfway there! And with barely any prodding from me! Nice work, people! (Sorry about that lack of prodding. I've been a bit busy lately. Actually massively busy. More on that later.)
Yes, halfway there, but still half way to go, and an absolute dearth of $5 contributions. You know me, I love those $5 donations. They have a certain charm, don't they? They tell me, yes, I can't pitch in as much as I want, but I believe...so believe already! Five bucks! That's less than what you'll pay to see "The Dark Knight"! I'll tell you what: pitch five bucks at your favorite candidate, and I'll save you the trouble of seeing the flick by telling you the ending, and you'll actually save yourself $3.50 (Note from Singer: Throw in the five bucks, but go watch the movie too; it is awesome.)! Which you can spend on a double cone at the Big Dipper. If you're from Missoula, which I assume you are based on the donations.
Anyhoo...
The seats:
Missoula & Kalispell
SD2 - Brittany MacLean
SD7 - Paul Clark
Bozeman, Great Falls, Helena & Butte
SD9 - Erik Somerfeld
SD10 - Brad Hamlett
Billings & East
SD18 - Shirley Baumgartner
SD21 - Sharon Stewart-Peregoy
SD22 - Lane Larson
SD26 - Lynda Moss
SD27 - Gary Branae
First of all, go ahead and pat yourselves on the backs, LiTW community: you met the goal of $250 last week for House candidates. And congratulations to the Region West donors: you cleaned the East and Central Regions clocks'. In fact, you more than doubled the combined contributions to our Eastern and Central brethren. And our Butte/Bozeman/Helena readers are the most tepid donors, coming in a distant third...
Anyhoo, it's time for the Senate version of our regional fundraiser. Same amount, same time limit. You have a week to raise $250 for candidates in Montana's battleground Senate races.
For a refresher on the races, check out my battleground Senate posts -- part 1 and part 2.
Again, same challenge. I've split up the Senate races between East, Central, and West Regions. East roughly corresponds to Billings and points east; central to Bozeman, Butte, and Helena; and West to area around Kalispell and Missoula.
The seats:
Missoula & Kalispell
SD2 - Brittany MacLean
SD7 - Paul Clark
Bozeman, Great Falls, Helena & Butte
SD9 - Erik Somerfeld
SD10 - Brad Hamlett
Billings & East
SD18 - Shirley Baumgartner
SD21 - Sharon Stewart-Peregoy
SD22 - Lane Larson
SD26 - Lynda Moss
SD27 - Gary Branae
Now the East Region has the majority of seats here. I know I'm pitting you all against one another for money -- but, you know, don't let your geography limit your donations...
Remember this flap, way back in the dinosaur days of May?
Republican Party Executive Director Jake Eaton, an Army National Guard veteran of the Iraq War, leveled the charge against Hunt on Tuesday, saying Hunt's ad, campaign Web site and press releases violate a February 2008 directive from the U.S. Department of Defense.
The directive says any candidate who mentions his or her military rank or appears in uniform in political material must place a disclaimer on the material, saying neither the Department of Defense nor the branch of the military endorses the candidate.
Take a look at the website for the GOP candidate for SD2 (a battleground race!), Ryan Zinke. I don't see a disclaimer! Hey, Jake! What's your ruling on that?
...crickets...
Honestly, I thought it was a stupid, small thing back in May, and I don't give a rat's *ss if Zinke showers in his uniform now.
Still, wouldn't it be nice if the party hacks were in any way consistent in their outrage? Come on, Jake, if this was so important to you this spring, why lay off now? I'll answer for him: "Because I'm a paid political operator who manufactures outrage for a living, and you should never, ever believe a word I say."
Attention, media: can we have a moratorium on reporting what any paid spokesflack says, regardless of party? It's been a long and dreary election already...let's ignore these folks and enjoy the rest of our summer...
I've finished the posts on what I see as the Senate's "battleground" races (part 1 and part 2), and the outlook for the Senate isn't as rosy as it is for the House this election. Even if Democratic turnout is high and the majority of these seats fall to the good guys, it's still possible the GOP wins the majority in the state Senate.
How, you ask? Out of the nine races I've identified as battleground, seven of them are currently in the hands of Democrats; two are held by Republicans. The two held by Republicans, too, are going to be tough to win.
Still - who knows? If we win each of these races, the Democrats will increase their majority in the Senate. And, just as it was with the House seats, it'll take time and money. And you can help.
Just as I did for the battleground House races, I created an ActBlue page for the battleground Senate races. Donate, already! In any case, I promise you'll see these pages again...and again...and again...as I beg, plead, and nag this community to help with these races. And I'll try to make it fun, too. A fundraising competition between the regions of Montana?
And I noticed that many of you - thanks to the poll over there on the right - can't donate, but can only volunteer. In the next few days, I'll create a list of all the battleground candidates and their contact information, so you can start knocking on doors, pronto.
Also keep your eyes on the "Election Diaries" pane in the upper right-hand corner of the blog. That's where you can find a link to the posts for each of this election's key races. I'll add links as we, as a community, start writing about them.
And that's another thing - I've said this before, but LiTW is a community blog. That means if you're familiar with a race - even one not listed as a "battleground" race - please write about it. No one person can keep everyone up to date on everything, and writing a post once a week about a particular district is an easy, free way in which you can have a palpable and lasting effect on this election and the quality of life in Montana.
One other thing before I jump into the rankings - we need to find out how to spread word about these races among the new voters pouring into the process because of Barack Obama. I'm open to ideas. Or, if you're a volunteer for Obama campaign, consider passing around the link to LiTW to other volunteers, or getting to know the Democratic candidate in your district and helping hand out literature while you're performing your Obama duties. Or something. We need to get the word out that the presidency isn't the only game in town.
So. The rankings. These are based on my opinion and nobody else's. They could be wildly inaccurate; only time will tell. And again, this is assuming that the candidates work and they find support.
(Ah...the first shots fired in SD22... - promoted by Jay Stevens)
Taylor Brown has taken some time off from telling anyone that will listen what he's going to run for after he's done with the stepping stone that is the Montana Senate. He granted an interview to the Billings Gazette.
In the story, our favorite Disc Jockey reminisced about his old pal (and fellow radio personality) Conrad Burns. Brown says, "I am not Conrad Burns, although we probably do share agreement on many philosophical values."
Exactly which 'philosophical values' do they agree on?
There's a lot of buzz about today's FISA vote, and well earned.
As always, the presidential races and the Senate are inherently conservative events. Not ideologically conservative, but married to establishment opinion and ideas and the current system.
We all want change -- and we can get it, here, in Montana, in our legislature, where we can pass laws that affect our everyday lives and the communities in which we live.
So...with that in mind, check out this, the last installment of my legislative battleground races. Thoughts tomorrow...
Did I say there was going to be only one "battleground Senate races" post? Er, I meant there's going to be two...
In the meantime, just a quick aside before delving into the post -- I had meant to offer my thoughts on Obama's move to the "center," but really they're not worth a post of their own.
A couple of things, though. First, the "center" here is a weird place for Obama to go. It's not like, say, embracing NAFTA is going to win over many conservatives. And getting jelly legs over FISA isn't that appealing to all conservatives, either, especially the libertarian variety out here in the West. The "center" he's taking isn't between left and right; it's between the people and power.
Next, it's never been my opinion that Obama was our savior or rescuer; I liked him because of the grassroots organization that formed around him, and the cross-partisan appeal he attracts. He's good at standing on common ground. So...I like Obama because his campaign isn't really about him -- other than as a lucid expression of progressive and American values we can rally around.
This election -- as always -- our citizenship doesn't end at the ballot box. It begins there. Change must start with us, not Obama.
