Some Political Reality for the 8th District

Bitter did an excellent job of covering the candidate forum in our Congressional district last night, which highlighted all the folks who are lining up to challenge Democrat Patrick Murphy for his Congressional seat in 2010. I was disappointed that the Second Amendment received no consideration in the questioning of each candidate, but let’s face it, that’s not really the hot issue right now. We do have a wide selection of free market oriented candidates, but I think we need to be cautious, and make sure we’re supporting someone who can actually win. In determining what formula you need to win, it’s worthwhile to look at the district as a whole. Some facts:

  • The 8th District Congressional seat flips more often than many. In the past 30 years, it’s flipped parties four times. Prior to that, it was in Republican hands from 1923 to 1977. This is not a seat either party can take for granted.
  • Democrats enjoy a healthy registration advantage over Republicans in our district. Republicans can only win by two means, turnout, and carrying large numbers of independent voters. In 2010, turnout will probably work in the GOP’s favor. But I’m going to be looking for a candidate that can carry independents.
  • Because our district is a swing district, I’m not too keen on a candidate who’s going to agree to term limit himself. If we can get a conservative or moderate Republican in that office, I want to keep him there as long as he can stay. Let’s not go through this again in a few years. The GOP class of 1994 had several Congressmen who made this mistake.

I’m not a rigid believer in politics by the numbers, because so much goes into winning an election, but ultimately it is about getting enough votes to win, and in our district that’s going to mean carrying independents in large enough numbers to overcome the GOPs registration disadvantage. When I hear a candidate say they want to abolish the department of education, or get rid of the home mortgage tax deduction, I might be sympathetic, but those aren’t winning issues. Murphy is going to be tough to beat, even in 2010. He has a strong support base, and a lot of money. I want a candidate that can not only beat him, but hold off strong Democratic challengers. After last night, I’m concerned we don’t have that candidate. I can see why the County GOP might want to tap Fitzpatrick again. But given that Fitz lost to Murphy in 2006, I don’t think that’s him either. The GOP in Bucks County desperately needs some new blood, and unfortunately for us, it takes time to incubate talent at the local level, before someone with experience and ambition agrees to step forward. Last night we were long on ambition, which is good, but short on political experience, which is necessary. I am optimistic, because 2010 will be a hell of a year for the GOP, but my optimism is guarded.

The 8th District Circus Candidate Forum

Last night, we gave up a couple of hours to civic duty in the name of being educated voters. The local Tea Party organization, Kitchen Table Patriots, did an absolutely swell job at pulling together a great event that served as a fantastic way to weed out the serious candidates from the not-so-serious candidates. Just about everyone in attendance – and they filled a large school auditorium – could walk away feeling like they had a choice of key candidates.

But that’s not very fun to report, so in comes the snark. And some interesting observations about Patrick Murphy via his sleazy staffers who kept violating the rules to disrupt those around them.

General Observations
These kinds of events are very hard on candidates, especially if they don’t have any formal public speaking experience or haven’t been trained to really rally an audience. While my criticism will mostly be snark, it also pales in comparison to what Patrick Murphy’s deceitful little followers will say. Not to mention, if some of the candidates had more confidence, they could have better sold their most controversial plans. I have two very specific examples of this winning over audience members with one candidate and costing support to another.

The moderator, Steve Highsmith, did a fantastic job at keeping the event running smoothly. He was friendly and engaging without getting boring and monotonous with the same questions for each candidate. Since there were 9 candidates each getting 12 minutes, that was serious work.

There were some crappy questions. Like the “Yes or No: We should weaken Roe v. Wade.” What does that even mean? You’re talking about one of the most hotly debated legal questions of our time, it’s hardly a yes or no answer. They also asked candidates to take an ATR-esque pledge on taxes that all save one agreed to. I will say now that there were no questions or remarks about the Second Amendment.

One big surprise of the evening was a question about medical marijuana. They asked it in the context of 10th amendment, and whether or not candidates agreed with President Obama’s executive order to not go after those growing & distributing medical marijuana in states that have legalized it. Half of the candidates agreed! Holy cow! The old woman in front of me was in great distress every time someone agreed, so I took extra joy in each answer. It was wrong, but I laughed inside each time she shook her head disapprovingly. I was tempted to say something controversial involving drugs, alcohol, and sex in front of her for kicks, but I figured after the crazy controversy of medical marijuana, her heart could probably only stand so much… Continue reading “The 8th District Circus Candidate Forum”

Money Bomb for Scott Brown

If you want a head start on decreasing the Democrat’s majority in 2010, I would suggest that folks consider taking part in the money bomb for Massachusetts State Senator Scott Brown. On guns, he’s been good on the issues as long as I was following the minutiae of the Bay State’s gun control debates.

I don’t want to completely get your hopes up about this race. If you opened a dictionary, this would be the definition of long shot.

BUT, for those you who paid attention to the Massachusetts political scene several years ago, remember that his current Senate seat was formerly held by Cheryl Jacques. Remember her? He won that seat in a special election against her staffer, Angus McQuilken. So remember that anything is possible. So if you have a few spare bucks in your wallet today, lend a hand to the long shot campaign today. Let’s make sure that we don’t lose it because of a lack of resources in the last few days.

It’s High Time

Since there aren’t too many bloggers that cover New Jersey politics from a Second Amendment angle, I decided it was high time I added a category specifically for New Jersey. Nothing happens in this issue in a vacuum, and we’ve had more than a few examples of New Jersey based activists crossing the river to push for gun control in Pennsylvania. Bitter and I keep a close eye on what happens in New Jersey, and are in regular communication with leaders in the issue over there. I feel confident we can provide good coverage for New Jersey gun owners.

New Jersey Pols in McDonald Case

Cemetery points out some New Jersey pols that have signed up to oppose McDonald, in response to Bitter’s list of Pennsylvania reps who either joined, or who did not take a stand in the case.

Even in New Jersey, they could only get three Congressmen who wanted to go in record in favor of gun bans. I should also note that New Jersey had three Congressmen who joined the Congressional Brief supporting McDonald, and standing up for the Second Amendment, those reps are:

If you live in New Jersey, be sure to thank them. Even in the Brady Paradise of New Jersey, the anti-gun forces still couldn’t outnumber pro-Second Amendment forces.

Gerlach Out, Then in, Then Out, Then In

Rep. Jim Gerlach announced last year that he would give up the 6th district Congressional seat to run for something. First it was going to be challenging Pat Toomey for the Senate nomination. Then it wasn’t. Next, Gerlach announced he’d run for Governor and challenge Attorney General Tom Corbett for the GOP nomination. Yesterday, he changed his mind about that, too.

This morning, John Micek gave hints that there may have been an important timing factor beyond just the low fundraising numbers (he raised only $1 million, not enough to run a statewide campaign):

Gerlach’s exit came just about 48 hours before central Pennsylvania Republicans are to meet in Harrisburg for a regional endorsement meeting. Corbett locked up the endorsement of his home turf southwestern caucus earlier in the week.

These regional meetings are usually the first tests of a campaign’s mettle in advance of the party endorsement meetings in February.

Technically, State Rep. Sam Rohrer is still in the race. He’s considered the underdog, especially against a man who has already won statewide office even in a very anti-Republican year. (Also, I’ve already mentioned that there’s not much historical precedent to making the leap from State Representative to Governor in Pennsylvania.) If he isn’t pulling off one hell of a surprise in advance of party meetings, then hopefully he’ll shift back to local campaign mode soon. We can’t afford to take losses at the State House.

Going back to Gerlach, he is expected to announce within the hour that he’s no longer giving up his Congressional seat. I can’t imagine that this will go over well with rising Republicans who already stepped up and put together campaigns to make sure his seat didn’t go to Democrats. Hopefully, Gerlach has plans to make up for his indecision of the last year.

More on INTERPOL Executive Order

We previously covered the Executive Order President Obama signed giving INTERPOL more freedom of operation in the US. It would appear there was a lot of bad information in initial reports. Howard Nemerov does a pretty thorough job of explaining why it’s not such a big deal.