MLN has the video. I came away from this debate the same way I went in, I'm still basically behind Chris Murphy until something changes my mind. All three seem fine on the issues, for the most part.
Tong and Bysiewicz spend a lot of time reciting canned attacks on Murphy that are tangentially related to the question asked. The worst example being when Tong literally said in response to one Murphy statement, "That's not what Chris said at the last debate, I don't have a response to that but here's a long rebuttal of what he said last time." I get they have to take shots at Murphy because he's ahead, but it felt really forced.
Chris Murphy saying a primary would be a bad thing is really stupid. Didn't we learn anything from 2006 and 2008?
They keep going on about their plans. This is my plan, I have a plan, That's not really a plan, My plan is better than his plan, etc, etc, etc. News flash: You're running for senate, not president. No plan from any of these people is going to be worth a damn thing after Jan 1, 2013. Seriously, who thinks we're going to enact a financial transaction tax in this country because the freshman senator from Connecticut has one in their plan? I don't care about any of these people's plans, I want to know how they'll vote on things that will actually come up for a vote in the Senate.
Susan Bysiewicz says she admired the role Olympia Snowe played in the health care reform debate in 2009-10? Seriously? Olympia Snowe, who spent a year dangling her vote in front of Democrats on the end of a stick but who would up being less open to compromise than Joe freaking Lieberman? By the end of that process Lieberman was changing his policy positions daily just to piss off liberals, but he still wound up being a more gettable vote than Olympia Snowe, who never broke from the Republicans' unanimous lockstep opposition to health care reform at any time on any vote. I think Bill Tong just jumped to number 2 on my depth chart.
And a quick aside to close, if you're watching the CT senate race you'll want to know what exciting candidate is back for another run!
Showing posts with label CT-Sen. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CT-Sen. Show all posts
Sunday, March 4, 2012
Thursday, January 7, 2010
Richard Blumenthal thoughts
I find myself unsure as to how Richard Blumenthal will perform as my new Senator.
Blumenthal has been the state Attorney General for as long as I've been aware of such an office, and I've always thought he did a great job in that role. I've often compared many of the lawsuits Blumenthal has brought as Attorney General to suits brought by the ACLU - Even when I disagree with them and think they're going too far, I'm still glad they're doing it, because it's almost always for a cause that deserves to be heard. Blumenthal would file a suit at the slightest whiff of injustice to Connecticut citizens, and I thought that kind of over-zealousness by our Attorney General served us well.
How he'll do as Senator may be another matter, though. Blumenthal, based on observing his performance as my state's AG for the past 20 years, loves the spotlight, loves to be on-camera, on-screen, the focus of attention. To steal an old joke, the most dangerous place in Connecticut is inbetween Richard Blumenthal and a news camera. Now, is this craving for media attention a means by which he seeks to forward the issues he's pursuing? Or the flipside, how much of his laudable over-zealousness as AG is just a bid to make news, to insert himself into whatever story is in the headlines this week?
My question is, between the issues and the attention-seeking, which is the means and which is the end? I'm not sure myself, I think they both happily aligned in the same direction in his role as AG. It may in fact be why he's been so reluctant to pursue other offices, turning down entreaties to run for governor in 1998, 2002, 2006, and 2010. But what happens when those two goals are no longer aligned? What happens when the best way to get exposure and screen time is to go along with whatever sell-out party leadership is selling today? Will he continue to be a strong advocate for justice, or will he be angling for a speaking slot right after Harry Reid at the press conference?
I keep waffling on which I think it'll be, it depends on whether I'm feeling particularly optimistic or particularly cynical at the moment. We won't really know until over a year from now, in any event. But it's the one thing that worries me about Blumenthal in the Senate.
Well, that, and who'll be the new AG?
Blumenthal has been the state Attorney General for as long as I've been aware of such an office, and I've always thought he did a great job in that role. I've often compared many of the lawsuits Blumenthal has brought as Attorney General to suits brought by the ACLU - Even when I disagree with them and think they're going too far, I'm still glad they're doing it, because it's almost always for a cause that deserves to be heard. Blumenthal would file a suit at the slightest whiff of injustice to Connecticut citizens, and I thought that kind of over-zealousness by our Attorney General served us well.
How he'll do as Senator may be another matter, though. Blumenthal, based on observing his performance as my state's AG for the past 20 years, loves the spotlight, loves to be on-camera, on-screen, the focus of attention. To steal an old joke, the most dangerous place in Connecticut is inbetween Richard Blumenthal and a news camera. Now, is this craving for media attention a means by which he seeks to forward the issues he's pursuing? Or the flipside, how much of his laudable over-zealousness as AG is just a bid to make news, to insert himself into whatever story is in the headlines this week?
My question is, between the issues and the attention-seeking, which is the means and which is the end? I'm not sure myself, I think they both happily aligned in the same direction in his role as AG. It may in fact be why he's been so reluctant to pursue other offices, turning down entreaties to run for governor in 1998, 2002, 2006, and 2010. But what happens when those two goals are no longer aligned? What happens when the best way to get exposure and screen time is to go along with whatever sell-out party leadership is selling today? Will he continue to be a strong advocate for justice, or will he be angling for a speaking slot right after Harry Reid at the press conference?
I keep waffling on which I think it'll be, it depends on whether I'm feeling particularly optimistic or particularly cynical at the moment. We won't really know until over a year from now, in any event. But it's the one thing that worries me about Blumenthal in the Senate.
Well, that, and who'll be the new AG?
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
Thank you, Chris Dodd
Chris Dodd, my senator, one of the few really good representatives left in the mess that is the US Senate, is retiring. I know a lot of people are happy about this, because replacement candidate AG Richard Blumenthal is polling about 30 points better than Dodd was, so this means the seat is safe for Democrats. But I can't be anything other than disappointed, because it comes at the cost of having Chris Dodd in the senate.
Everyone has been hammering Dodd for the past year or two, because he was on the senate Banking Committee when the global financial system hit the fan, and because he got a mortgage. Some have slammed him for owning a cottage in Ireland, where his family hails from. Many have slammed him for his 2008 Presidential campaign, as if campaigning in the Iowa caucus showed disloyalty to Connecticut. Somehow that didn't hurt Joe Lieberman in 2006, but IOKIYAR.
I still believe that Dodd would have won reelection. Even in the polls where he trailed Rob Simmons, Simmons was still only getting around 40%. Anger towards Dodd for stupid shit like having a cottage, or having a mortgage, or the deep betrayal of campaigning for president in another state, would only have decreased as time passed. In the end, Democrats would have come home, and Dodd would have won a close one.
But Dodd didn't want to have that fight. He didn't want to spend resources that can now go to other competitive races, he didn't want to be a potential drain on other Democrats running in the state, and he didn't want to run the risk of losing the seat to the Republicans. And, after three decades in the Senate, he didn't want to have to spend a year fighting for his political life. And in my opinion, after the service he did not only for Connecticut but for the country during those three decades, that's his right to make that decision. If he wants to take some time to relax and watch his girls grow up rather than fighting and clawing for votes, I can't complain. He gave me thirty years.
Chris Dodd has been my senator since I was two years old. For as long as I've understood what that meant, I've been proud to have him as my senator. I don't know what Richard Blumenthal will be like in the senate. There may be times in the next six years, when Blumenthal makes some dumb mistake, or caves on an important issue, that I curse the day Chris Dodd gave up his senate seat, and curse Chris Dodd for not fighting it out. Maybe that day will never come, because Blumenthal turns out to be better than anyone can imagine. But either way, I wanted to take this moment to say, Thank You, Chris Dodd. Thank you for your service, thank you for fighting to improve this country. Even when nearly every Republican and even most Democrats fought against your efforts, it was still heartening to see someone making the fight. I'll miss that.
Everyone has been hammering Dodd for the past year or two, because he was on the senate Banking Committee when the global financial system hit the fan, and because he got a mortgage. Some have slammed him for owning a cottage in Ireland, where his family hails from. Many have slammed him for his 2008 Presidential campaign, as if campaigning in the Iowa caucus showed disloyalty to Connecticut. Somehow that didn't hurt Joe Lieberman in 2006, but IOKIYAR.
I still believe that Dodd would have won reelection. Even in the polls where he trailed Rob Simmons, Simmons was still only getting around 40%. Anger towards Dodd for stupid shit like having a cottage, or having a mortgage, or the deep betrayal of campaigning for president in another state, would only have decreased as time passed. In the end, Democrats would have come home, and Dodd would have won a close one.
But Dodd didn't want to have that fight. He didn't want to spend resources that can now go to other competitive races, he didn't want to be a potential drain on other Democrats running in the state, and he didn't want to run the risk of losing the seat to the Republicans. And, after three decades in the Senate, he didn't want to have to spend a year fighting for his political life. And in my opinion, after the service he did not only for Connecticut but for the country during those three decades, that's his right to make that decision. If he wants to take some time to relax and watch his girls grow up rather than fighting and clawing for votes, I can't complain. He gave me thirty years.
Chris Dodd has been my senator since I was two years old. For as long as I've understood what that meant, I've been proud to have him as my senator. I don't know what Richard Blumenthal will be like in the senate. There may be times in the next six years, when Blumenthal makes some dumb mistake, or caves on an important issue, that I curse the day Chris Dodd gave up his senate seat, and curse Chris Dodd for not fighting it out. Maybe that day will never come, because Blumenthal turns out to be better than anyone can imagine. But either way, I wanted to take this moment to say, Thank You, Chris Dodd. Thank you for your service, thank you for fighting to improve this country. Even when nearly every Republican and even most Democrats fought against your efforts, it was still heartening to see someone making the fight. I'll miss that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
