It is a full 9 yard load of stuff that occurred to me in the last 24 hours…
The Hoot gets an Endorsement!
After being stiffed by the WaPo and turned down by the Fairfax Times newspapers, Janet Oleszek gets the endorsement of the Connection papers:
“[she is] far better on the job than she is on the campaign trial…It’s an understatement when she says, “I am not a politician.”
But in her four years on the school board…Oleszek has demonstrated excellent priorities and the ability to work with others to accomplish her goals. Her advocacy of full day kindergarten is an example of her success. She’s patient and cooperative, skills that will be needed in the Senate in the coming years. Her expertise in education, including a focus on higher education, will be needed in Richmond. Her views on most issues, especially guns and education, are far more in line with this district than the incumbent.”
Fair enough…although as I recall the Times papers chose not to endorse her because she could not tell them what her goals were. What I really found interesting in the Connection endorsements (they also endorsed George Barker and JMDD in their races) is that a close reading of the piece, even allowing for misspellings, shows there is no “trigger” statement involved…in fact, if it were not for the title of the piece “Endorsement: Three Senate Seats: Oleszek for 37th Senate Barker for 39th Senate Davis in the 34th Senate“, one is sometimes hard pressed to discern exactly who the paper is endorsing.
Tired of the Ads…
Last night after supper I sat down with SWMBO to catch some tv…and between 6:30PM and 8PM on NBC 4 we saw four Chap! campaign spots and three JMDD! spots. I was overwhelmed, SWMBO was not…apparently the night before in the same time range the ratio was reversed.
Now I know that this was the syndication period (which is controlled by the local station) and not network time, so rates are cheaper. I also recall reading that rates are either generally cheaper around news time or have special rates for political ads during that time period.
All I know is that anyone listening to these ads tell you (with fact citations) how terrible the major party candidates are, most thinking voters might prefer to write someone in instead of voting for either of them.
I will say that Chap! (and Cooch, for that matter) run their candidate image and disclaimer up front, and then attack. JMDD! (and the Hoot) put their’s at the end. I have a hunch if you are going to run an attack ad, you should put the candidate up front and then attack (and use a theme comment like Chap! did, or like George Allen did last year) rather than attack and then, while the viewer is trying to digest the attacks, give the candidate disclaimer.
Prince William Warfare
Life in the trenches is heating up out toward Manassas. The Journal Messenger offered a strong endorsement of Jackson Miller while admonishing Jeanette Rishell for her prevarications and pettiness:
“While he has only had a short time to prove himself, we believe he has shown that he is a delegate who does his best to keep his promises. We believe he deserves a full term to show us what he can do.We endorse Miller for the 50th district of the Virginia House of Delegates….Miller’s opponent, Jeanette Rishell has shown, through false attack ads, that she cannot be trusted to pay attention to detail or get her facts straight.And her positions on issues are often vague and weakly expressed.
We want a delegate with definite ideas, positions and plans, and who will fight to do what he considers right.
That candidate is Jackson Miller. Please give him your support on Nov. 6.”
Meanwhile, retiring Senators Chichester and Potts endorsed Chuck Colgan. Chichester has already donated to Colgan’s campaign fund. Colgan was also endorsed by Mattie Parrish, wife of the late Delegate Harry Parrish.
None of this comes as much of a surprise…friends of long standing coming to his aid during a tough campaign.
But either Colgan is running scared or he has turned his campaign over to the same DPVA mailing operation that repeatedly distributed completely false charges toward Jackson Miller (much to their candidate’s detriment). A recentmailing attacked Fitzsimmonds for a pro-life position he holds. Fair enough. However, and surprisingly, Colgan does not list reproductive rights as an issue he is concerned with in this campaign, perhaps because his strong pro-life commitment is well known…so why is he attacking FitzSimmonds on ground they presumably share?
This is not the first attack on FitzSimmonds that seems out of kilter. Fitz once worked for The Cooch in Richmond, but Fitz has been repeatedly attacked in the DPVA mailings for positions taken by The Cooch after Fitz left his employment. I find this bizarre…isn’t this very much like blaming a former employee of Colgan Airways for a bad experience that occurred after said employee left Colgan’s employ?
The Colgan campaign is blaming (see comments) the mailing, and presumably the many recent attacks on Fitzsimmonds, on the state Democratic Party…as if that somehow distances himself from the attacks. One would think a long term incumbent would be able to exert some control over his own campaign.
Political expediency can be an ugly thing…
On the flip side from questionable conduct, I noted on my last trip to Manassas that Bob Fitzsimmonds has joined Cooch and Hoot as the only candidates who include their party affiliation on their campaign signs.