Owens mailer

Fair trade, knocks previous administration, focus on middle-class, invest in infrastructure, military benefits. Sounds like a Dem to me.

---

by: conspiracy @ Fri Aug 14, 2009 at 13:09:41 PM CDT

Owens seems like a good guy to me.

The more I read about him, the more I like him. He's really pushing his cred as a non-politician ("While politicians in Washington just talked about creating jobs, Bill Owens was out there creating them") which really sells in this cynical time period.  

---

by: NJCentrist @ Fri Aug 14, 2009 at 14:51:24 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Is "fair trade" a winning stance in a Canadian-border district

that is dependent on international trade?

---

by: davybaby @ Fri Aug 14, 2009 at 15:06:16 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

As long as he's not anti-NAFTA

I'm guessing they're more concerned with European competition for ag and aero.  

---

by: tietack @ Fri Aug 14, 2009 at 21:48:05 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

TX-GOV News

State Sen. Kirk Watson is not running for Governor, instead choosing to seek re-election to the State Legislature.

TX Dems live to suck another day! Schieffer, Kinky or (likely) Ronnie Earle who would be the most politicized candidate we could nominate.

---

by: trowaman @ Fri Aug 14, 2009 at 13:19:40 PM CDT

Grrrr.

Kirk Watson is the kind of guy who could conceivably, maybe, maybe, maybe win if Hutchison gets rejected in the primary and there is a backlash against the thought of more Rick Perry.  Schieffer and Kinky Freidman and Ronnie Earle are not that kind of guy.

Austin is a horrible base from which to run statewide, but even so Watson is better than the alternatives so far.  

Too bad we need Chet Edwards in the House; against Perry I think he could take the mansion.  DeLay's redistricting plan has successfully left us with very few white Democrats in high office.

And are there no term limits here or what?  Perry filled out half of W's term, ran for full terms in 02 and 06, and gets to run again in 10?  Are we the only state with no executive term limits?

---

by: texas dem @ Fri Aug 14, 2009 at 15:33:48 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Other States

This is fairly old (2007), but according to this list there are quite a few states with no limits:

http://www.nga.org/files/pdf/B...

---

by: RuralDem @ Fri Aug 14, 2009 at 15:55:24 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Edwards

May know how to win his district but not sure if he knows how to win statewide. He is not as moderate as people think. Hes not even a conservative Dem or a Blue Dog. Though certainly to the right of the national Dem Party and probably isnt anymore liberal or conservative than the TX Dem Party. But still probably not conservative enough to win for Gov. At least not in the year 2010. Perry is unpopular but this is TX we are talking about. Unless he is involved in corruption or something he would probably beat Chet.

---

by: HarrisCountyBrian @ Sat Aug 15, 2009 at 01:50:50 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

SC-03 race still wide open

I disagree with CQ's assessment that Rex Rice is emerging as a favorite in the SC-03 race. In fact, I would say it's as wide open as ever.

Rex only slightly out-raised Shane Massey and Jeff Duncan because he threw in $30k in seed money, or half his current CoH.

Rex has hired Richard Quinn and Associates to run his media efforts and by the sound of it, they're doing an excellent job pushing the narrative that Rice is pulling ahead. (RQA also represents folks like Lindsey Graham, AG Henry McMaster, Rep. Joe Wilson, and ran John McCain's 08 efforts in SC).

However, there are no clear favorites in this race and the universally weak fundraising totals from all half dozen or so GOP challengers leaves an opening for any well-financed SC GOPer to potentially swoop in and take over this race. This one is still a free-for-all.

---

by: Elonkey @ Fri Aug 14, 2009 at 13:46:50 PM CDT

My Most Memorable Moment of Linda McMahon

was her kicking Vince in the "grapefruits" during his match against Shane at Wrestlemania 2001.

---

by: Don't Tase Me, Bro! @ Fri Aug 14, 2009 at 14:08:18 PM CDT

NJ-Gov.

Here's something to consider concerning the Greenberg Quinlan Rosner poll: Chris Daggett only got 18% name ID, whereas Corzine got 95% and Christie got 82%. Most people haven't heard about Daggett, at least not yet. But here's the catch: Daggett gets 10% in the poll. Assuming that all the people who said they'd vote for Daggett also said they recognized his name, 5 out of 9 likely voters who recognized Daggett said they'd vote for him. Granted, this is only one poll. But if he keeps building name recognition, and if half or more of the people who hear of him decide to vote for him, it's a whole new ballgame.  

---

by: NJCentrist @ Fri Aug 14, 2009 at 15:09:22 PM CDT

Frankly, MEH

---

by: andgarden @ Fri Aug 14, 2009 at 15:31:53 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Feel free to elaborate. haha

To be fair, this poll has some dubious data in it.  

---

by: NJCentrist @ Fri Aug 14, 2009 at 15:47:35 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

There is absolutely no reason to expect

a linear increase in his support as (if) he name rec goes up.

As usual, this is a race between two candidates.  

---

by: andgarden @ Fri Aug 14, 2009 at 15:53:39 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Of course not

But I just thought the fact that a majority of those who recognized Daggett supported him.

As for your assertion that it's a race between two candidates, I disagree...Daggett is a Dean Barkley in this election, not a Ralph Nader.

---

by: NJCentrist @ Fri Aug 14, 2009 at 18:36:24 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

There is no effective difference

between Dean Barkley and Ralph Nader. A vote for someone polling at 8-20% is effectively no vote at all.  

---

by: andgarden @ Fri Aug 14, 2009 at 19:06:32 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

What NJCentrist means

is that Daggett might be more of a protest vote because of Corzine and Christie's high negatives, like Barkley with Franken and Coleman, instead of a spoiler like Nader was. (Bush and Gore didn't have such high negatives.) I think had Barkley not been in the race, a lot of moderates might have held their noses and voted for Coleman.

Check out the 2010 California races (http://2010californiaracetracker.wetpaint.com) and help us take back Red California! (http://www.takebackredcalifornia.org)

---

by: californianintexas @ Fri Aug 14, 2009 at 20:07:23 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I do not see the distinction

---

by: andgarden @ Fri Aug 14, 2009 at 20:22:27 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

The distinction

is that Nader was clearly a spoiler for Gore, as most votes that had gone to him probably would have gone to Gore. Barkley drew voters from both Coleman and Franken, and fellow SSP commenter Mark noted that

My suspicion is that Franken has more people who would never consider voting for him than does Coleman, meaning a Barkley collapse likely benefits Norm.  Essentially, I think Franken is best positioned for victory if Barkley stays where he's at in the high-teens.  If Barkley is polling 15-19%, Franken probably wins.

(Which happened, with Barkley taking 15%. Had Barkley not been on the ballot, or if he had polled above 20%, Norm would have been back for encore.)

While had Nader not been on the ballot, Gore probably would have been the outgoing president early this year.

Check out the 2010 California races (http://2010californiaracetracker.wetpaint.com) and help us take back Red California! (http://www.takebackredcalifornia.org)

---

by: californianintexas @ Mon Aug 17, 2009 at 01:09:25 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Thanks

Thanks, Californianintexas, for explaining. That's exactly what I meant.  

---

by: NJCentrist @ Sat Aug 15, 2009 at 10:49:33 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Let me repeat

Daggett has zero chance to win.  New Jersey is a party machine state, and independents just don't win there.

Could Daggett get 10 or 15%?  Sure.  But he won't get more than 20%.

---

by: JSmith @ Fri Aug 14, 2009 at 16:34:42 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

If he gets 10-15 percent

I'll say right now Corzine wins.

---

by: conspiracy @ Fri Aug 14, 2009 at 17:46:11 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Just to clarify

I'm not saying that Daggett winning is within reason. What I am saying is that he has the potential to win a large chunk of the electorate and completely change the race's outcome. Chris Christie can't win this race simply because he's not Jon Corzine; he's got to prove that his platform is worth something too.  

---

by: NJCentrist @ Fri Aug 14, 2009 at 18:34:16 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

What is the nomination procedure for CT Rethugs?

As I recall from the 2006 Lieberman-Lamont race, the nominee was named at the state convention, subject to any candidate who received 20% at the convention having the right to challenge in a primary. Is that still the case for Democrats? Are the GOP rules the same?

If so, there won't be six candidates on the ballot.

---

by: davybaby @ Fri Aug 14, 2009 at 15:12:18 PM CDT

Rep. Rex Rice

Best name ever.

---

by: SC @ Fri Aug 14, 2009 at 22:45:14 PM CDT

As someone who follows the 'inside' of the wrestling biz...

I can tell you that Linda McMahon is DOA in both the primary and general. Even if she certainly comes across as everything opposite of a 'wrestling character' or a controversial person/businesswoman. In fact, when you hear and see her speak you would never think she could be the CEO of WWE. She does not come across as flamboyant, arrogant, loud, ignorant, shady, vile, and everything synonymous with the WWE's image. She seems like a dignified, soft-spoken businesswoman. Her husband, on the other hand, is a character if there ever was one. He would be even more DOA than Linda in such a race. Even though he would probably be much more combative than she is in an election. He would be no holds barred...pardon the pun! But Linda is still DOA. So lets go through some of the reasons:

The biggest reason being: The steroid scandal back in the early 90's. It was a long time ago but it will be dragged back up again if she runs. Also there is a good argument that the WWE's current 'wellness policy' (testing for steroids, other drugs, certain health conditions, etc) isnt up to the best of standards. Im not saying I agree with that argument or not...but many people do agree with it.

The WWE is notoriously anti-union, at least with its wrestlers. Maybe their office workers and security and other non-wrestler employees are unionized, I really dont know, but their wrestlers certainly are not. To be fair, this will probably not hurt her in the GOP primary. And probably every single American wrestling company in the history of the pro wrestling business has been anti-union. I cant think of a single one that hasnt been. Not even WCW's wrestlers were unionized despite Ted Turner (a staunch liberal) owning the company for a long time. And he was a big wrestling fan to boot. And, from what I recall, WWE does not give its wrestlers pensions and health benefits. Though it does pay for its wrestler's surgeries if they get injured inside the ring. They also pay for their alcohol/drug rehabs...and recently instituted a policy where they pay for the rehabs of ex-WWE wrestlers (which is very generous, IMO. Not too many corporations will do that). Also, to be fair, most of their wrestlers make enough money to pay for their own health care, and for their family, as well as for a pension. It is up to the wrestlers themselves to spend wisely when they are on the road. It is not the fault of the WWE if they dont and then go broke like Mickey Rourke's character Randy the Ram.

The WWE's content. It is violent, lewd, and denegrates women sometimes (bra and panties matches? cmon now). To be fair, again, they are less so than in the past. They now consider their programming to be 'PG'. While I think its alot worse than PG it is certainly not 'R' rated like it was for a long time. But its also not as family-friendly as it was up to 1997 or so. Theres no 'eat your vitamins, say your prayers, brother!' in this WWE! Oh and I wouldnt be shocked to see one of her primary/general rivals show footage of Stone Cold Steve Austin giving a defenseless woman the 'Stone Cold Stunner'. Or footage of other male wrestlers attacking a defenseless woman. Many times when they arent even 'interfering' with a match.

So those are some reasons her candidacy will be flawed. But itd be an entertaining 'bout'. And Linda would certainly put up a fight. And Vince would help! And believe me, Vince knows how to play dirty. He helped to wipe out so many of the pro wrestling 'territories' back in the 1980s. Due to him having a bigger checkbook, for example. He took so many wrestlers from other companies despite many of them being on a contract. Even though he complained about Ted Turner/WCW 'stealing' many of his wrestlers back in the 1990s because Turner had a bigger wallet. And another good example of how dominant WWE is within the industry: WWE ended up buying WCW from AOL/Time Warner back in early 2001, I think by that time under Linda's watch. Though they never truly took advantage of WCW's assets. In fact they actually humiliated WCW in the 'WWE vs. WCW' storyline. Not a good way of doing business. But it shows that you dont mess with the McMahons! They can get quite personal. WWE literally does dominate the industry and is now the only true 'major' wrestling company in America. TNA is close to being a major one but nowhere close to being an actual 'threat' to WWE's bottom line. Like how WCW was back in the 90s. Many non-wrestling fans may shrug at that but you have to realize there was so much competition from the start of the industry's existence until around the mid-80s. WWE went from being a 'territory' (that only ran shows in the northeast and some other places) to a global dominant force. Vince even became a billionaire at one point though he is actually not one today. Due to WWE's sagging business. So, in closing, this 'bout', if it becomes one, will be entertaining as all hell. I would not completely rule out Linda from winning...but the chances are very slim. Sure, Ventura did but he didnt have her/WWE's baggage. She may not have been the head of WWE during some of its scandals and controversies, in the last some 20 years, but she still had a major role in the company. Wikipedia says this about her: McMahon has served since 1999 on the Board of Directors of WWE (known until 2000 as the World Wrestling Federation or WWF). In addition, she has extensive involvement with the charitable work of WWE. In May 1993, McMahon became the President of the WWF, a job she kept until May 2000, and would later become the CEO of the company in May 1997.

---

by: HarrisCountyBrian @ Sat Aug 15, 2009 at 01:14:03 AM CDT

I agree

Linda will have the WWE as an albatross.  Don't forget the Undertaker's Ministry character, which involved allusions to HUMAN SACRIFICE.

Not to mention, if her personality is ANYTHING like the one she had on screen when I actually watched wrestling, she's dead.  Boring as hell and maybe a bit elitist.

Follow the elections in Georgia at the 2010 Georgia Race Tracker.

---

by: TheUnknown285 @ Sat Aug 15, 2009 at 13:15:21 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Her on-screen personality

It definitely is boring. Perhaps thats a good thing considering how over-the-top her husband is even in real life...but boring is still boring. I actually think Shane McMahon (Vince/Linda's son) would make a better politician, as hes more charismatic and a pretty good speaker. Im not sure if hes a registered Republican, although Joementum proved you can be an Indy and still win statewide in CT. Last I heard, which was years ago, is that Vince himself is just an 'Independent'. But starting out in a Senatorial race a little high for the heir apparent 'Shane O Mac' (as they like to call him), although he does have a very high position within WWE. Stephanie McMahon, Vince/Linda's daughter,  I just dont see being the politician type. She is very attractive and is a good speaker on some nights, and would probably be a cuttthroat politician, but she doesnt seem like the type. Hard to explain what I mean. Shes pretty much seems like a sorority girl youd see at a frat party. Despite her husband actually being a longhaired, big time heavy metal fan.

Also, while i do not have the link handy, Linda (or her spokesperson or something) confirmed that she is considering running for the Senate.  

---

by: HarrisCountyBrian @ Tue Aug 18, 2009 at 03:51:31 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

And who knows

Maybe Shane is a Dem. But I doubt it.

---

by: HarrisCountyBrian @ Tue Aug 18, 2009 at 03:52:36 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Speaking of wrestling

Pro wrestling legend Jerry Lawler is running in the October special election for Memphis Mayor. As a Republican in heavily Democratic Memphis. He previously ran for Mayor in the late 90s and got 10%. I believe as a Republican, then, too. Though I believe that race featured many candidates from any party. He is an even bigger wrestling legend in Memphis itself. Memphis use to have its own very successful 'wrestling territory', for a very long time, and he was the top guy in it for many, many years. If you watched the Man on the Moon movie, with Jim Carrey portraying comedian Andy Kaufman, you will know who Lawler is. Lawler and Kaufman had a legendary, mainstream wrestling feud back in the early 1980s. And Lawler even appeared in the movie about Kaufman. Lawler and Kaufman even appeared on Letterman together back during the feud. Was a classic rivalry and if Lawler wasnt a local legend before then he certainly was afterwards.

---

by: HarrisCountyBrian @ Sat Aug 15, 2009 at 01:45:07 AM CDT

Most pro-wrestlers are Republicans

At the very least conservatives from what I understand. Maybe something to do with a southern base. Though I do remember Lawler having some very interesting things to say about Bush on-air on numerous ocassions. I do know Mick Foley is very liberal. The McMahons don't strike me as particularly conservative though. Obviously pro-business but they wouldn't do half the stuff they do in WWE if Vince in particular was socially conservative. Maybe that comes from Connecticut. He is famous for not holding grudges if it helps his bottom-line. Very pro-military as well. Not that that is in any way a bad thing. The sum of their political donations seems to be to Chris Shays which isn't all bad.  

---

by: conspiracy @ Sat Aug 15, 2009 at 12:43:33 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Just off the top of my head

Ric Flair was a Huckabee supporter.  I've read the Rock is a Republican.  I can't imagine the ones who became holy rollers (Sting, Lex Luger, Shawn Michaels, etc.) to be Democrats.

Though, Hulk Hogan actually endorsed Obama.  And, like you said, Mick Foley is a Democrat.

Follow the elections in Georgia at the 2010 Georgia Race Tracker.

---

by: TheUnknown285 @ Sat Aug 15, 2009 at 13:04:21 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Also,

Kane is a pretty big Libertarian/Paulite, as evidenced by this:
I swear I remember reading something somewhere last year that he was hanging out at the Libertarian Party Convention, and he mentioned that he likes reading about Austrian Economics in his spare time. It was perhaps one of the funniest mental pictures I had in my head.

---

by: Captain Joe @ Sat Aug 15, 2009 at 23:15:44 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Itd be funny if Kane ran for public office

As hes one big, downright creepy looking guy LOL. But Im sure hes a great guy, though. I dont know if hes an actual Libertarian but Rob Van Dam is a big, big pro-pot legalization supporter. Hes even been on TV news programs advocating for it.  

---

by: HarrisCountyBrian @ Tue Aug 18, 2009 at 04:34:09 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Rock, Foley

Yup, Dwayne Johnson (The Rock, of course) is a Republican. Or at least was when he spoke at the 2000 GOP Convention. Im sure he still is. I wouldnt be shocked if he one day considered running for office. He seems to be a 'traveler' when it comes to careers. He first played CFL football for a little bit (after playing college ball at Miami), then followed in his family's footsteps to be a pro wrestler and now is fully devoted to acting. Perhaps he gets a change of heart very easily. And he would be a natural campaigner. Hes got Obama like charisma, to be quite blunt. And a very charismatic speaker. Not to mention very attractive. Yeah, his old, lewd and crude wrestling promos would come back to haunt him a little bit...but i doubt most would hold it against him. Of any Republican in the entertainment business hes the one Dems would fear the most, I think. Given how good of a campaigner hed probably be. His ethnic background (black and Samoan) is also a big plus...whether as a Republican or a Democrat. And the parallels between him and Obama are kind of bizarre, actually. Not just the charisma and multi-racial background, but the fact both have family ties in HI (his family being big wrestling legends in HI) and having spent a part of their childhood there (although I have only read Dwayne spent 10th grade there) and both spent part of their childhood halfway across the world (Dwayne in New Zealand).

Foley is not only a Dem but is quite intelligent, as well. Probably one of the most intelligent wrestlers ive seen. And when talking politics he really, really knows what hes talking about. He lives in Long Island...I wonder if he lives in Peter King's district ;).

---

by: HarrisCountyBrian @ Tue Aug 18, 2009 at 04:29:21 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Wrestlers political ideologies

Yeah, I cant imagine Vince being socially conservative LOL. He seems like the kind of guy who wants the govt out of everything (except maybe on things like the Patriot Act).

I dont know too many liberals in the wrestling industry. Off the top of my head the only ones I can think of are Mick Foley and Jim Cornette. Conservatives and Republican-leaning wrestlers I can think of are Ric Flair, Jerry Lawler, JBL, Joey Styles, AJ Styles (not related), BG James (ex-Road Dog Jesse James when in WWE, and whom admitted, before the Nov. election, that hed vote for Obama), etc. Libertarians I can think of are Kane and Val Venis (Venis actually being Canadian. Not too many Libertarians there). Chris Jericho, another Canadian, is also a pretty big anti-tax guy, really lashing out at Obama over his tax policies when a TMZ cameraguy interviewed him on the street. Some religious conservatives are Sting, Ted DeBiase Sr, Shawn Michaels, AJ Styles, Joey Styles, etc. I actually would not be surprised to see many WWE wrestlers be diehard fiscal conservatives. They make upper income money but alot of it goes to travel expenses, health insurance, etc. It is pretty ironic that Flair endorsed Mike Huckabee of all people. Flair does not seem like a Huckabee guy. Hes very much a big time party animal. And not a young guy either! Hes 60, I think. And still partying strong. Not to mention hes had like, what, 3 divorces? LOL. He seems more like a McMahon, Rudy or at least Romney guy. He considered running for political office a while back, i believe. but im sure he thought his party lifestyle would kill any chance he had. A Republican in NC has gotta keep that kind of thing quiet. Not admit it, especially not flaunt it.

---

by: HarrisCountyBrian @ Tue Aug 18, 2009 at 04:14:46 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

LOL

I meant Flair seems like a McCain guy, not McMahon ;)

---

by: HarrisCountyBrian @ Tue Aug 18, 2009 at 04:16:50 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Oh, I forgot about Jim Cornette

There was a video (well, audio only) on DailyKos of him ranting on Vince McMahon and the Republicans.  Completely awesome.  It included the line "The Republicans drove this country into the ditch.  Now, they're bitching about the cost of the tow truck."

Follow the elections in Georgia at the 2010 Georgia Race Tracker.

---

by: TheUnknown285 @ Tue Aug 18, 2009 at 17:19:23 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Cornette

It was a funny rant, i heard some of it (if that was the one you were referring to). But Cornette is a bit hypocritical, I must say. He had no problem completely tearing apart (perhaps in that video you mentioned) ex-ECW announcer, arch-conservative Joey Styles for his far right views yet hes never said anything, at least publicly, about AJ Styles (no relation to Joey) and BG James for having some very conservative views themselves. Which theyve stated publicly on the internet, as well. Hypocritical because: AJ and BG are in the same company as Cornette. That kind of thing just irks me. Im not saying he has to be personal in his attacks but at least be fair and also talk smack about your own co-workers views.

---

by: HarrisCountyBrian @ Tue Aug 18, 2009 at 23:21:29 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

So yeah

The whole, 'i'll go after another company's worker but leave my own co-workers alone' bit is a little immature.

---

by: HarrisCountyBrian @ Tue Aug 18, 2009 at 23:22:57 PM CDT

[ Parent ]