Saturday, July 15, 2006

Campaign News - 7/15/06

Lots of stories out there worth talking about. Here are just a few:

  • Nancy Johnson's support for the weakening of language provisions in the Voting Rights Act is taking criticism from Chris Murphy and others.
  • To Nancy Johnson, the debate over a federal law requiring Election Day help for people who speak English as a second language is overblown.

    "I've never had a minority person say, `I can't read Nancy Johnson,'" she says with a smile.
    ...
    "Connecticut has historically been a leader in civil rights. This shows how out of step Nancy Johnson is," said Democratic foe Chris Murphy. "It's hard to understand her motivation."
    ...
    Johnson, the only state lawmaker to vote against the language provision, said it is unnecessary and burdensome.

    "Our citizenship laws are very clear," Johnson said. "People are required to read and write English." And, she said, the bilingual ballot provisions can be costly for state and local governments. (Lightman. "Johnson")

    Perhaps Nancy Johnson should check to see whether a "minority person" has ever actually voted for her.

  • A funding mishap involving reimbursements from Mary Glassman's campaign to Dan Malloy's is drawing fire from the DeStefano camp:
  • Supporters of the Democratic gubernatorial campaigns of Stamford Mayor Dan Malloy and New Haven Mayor John DeStefano are disputing the significance of an error in recent financial filings by Malloy's running mate.

    The disclosure statements submitted July 17 by the campaign committees for Malloy and Mary Glassman, his running mate for lieutenant governor, failed to explain almost $109,000 in reimbursements from Glassman's committee to Malloy's.
    ...
    DeStefano's campaign said the lapse raises "very serious questions," but Malloy's campaign said it was an unintentional, quickly corrected oversight. (AP. "Democratic")

    Perhaps the DeStefano campaign should remember its own fundraising troubles before throwing stones.

  • Joe Lieberman comments on the crisis in Israel and Lebanon:
  • "I will raise the question of whether Iran ... is not provoking this crisis for the purpose of not quite distracting us, but flexing their terrorist muscles as the world begins to pressure them to stop their nuclear weapons development," Lieberman told The Associated Press.

    He said Syria, which also has ties to Hezbollah, may also be involved. (AP "Lieberman")

    I wouldn't doubt it one bit. Keep a close eye on this conflict, because in between Syria, Lebanon, Israel and Iran is a country containing 130,000 U.S. troops.

  • Lastly, the Connecticut Post slams the Lieberman campaign for making stuff up in its attack ads:
  • Thumbs down to the campaign of U.S. Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman, D-Conn., whose latest campaign ad blurs the line between political semantics and an attempt to downright mislead people. Lieberman, who is currently in the middle of a hotly-contested primary challenge for the Democratic Party nomination by Greenwich businessman Ned Lamont, approved the ad that aired across the state last week. The ad shows bumper stickers, supposedly distributed by the Lamont campaign, reading "No More Joe" and "NoMoreJoe.com," accusing Lamont of merely running against Lieberman and not on his own merits. The problem is that the bumper stickers and Web site are completely fake, dummied up entirely by the Lieberman campaign. The tactic is an unfortunate one from the Lieberman camp, especially given the campaign's assertions that the senator is a "principled" leader. If Lieberman wants to attack his challenger in the future, he would be best suited to keep his criticisms based in reality. (Best)

    It would be nice.

    Sources

    "Democratic rivals differ on significance of filing error." Associated Press 15 July, 2006.

    "AP Interview: Lieberman suspects Iran is behind Hezbollah." Associated Press 15 July, 2006.

    "Best and the rest for the past week." Connecticut Post 15 July, 2006.

    Lightman, David. "Johnson Takes Heat On Language Issue." Hartford Courant 15 July, 2006.

    25 comments:

    Anonymous said...

    Ugh... the DeStefano camp is doing exactly what Jodi Rell wants them to. Dragging their own party member through the mud over what looks like a filing error.

    And you're right Genghis. This after DeStefano had his own problems back in December, which so far look MUCH worse than what I've read about the Glassman thing.

    This is bush league, and it is only serving Rell.

    GMR said...

    I don't know the exact borders of Nancy Johnson's district, but Litchfield County is 95.77% white, 2.14% Hispanic, 1.10% black and 1.17% Asian. So I don't think there are going to be that many minorities voting.

    Anonymous said...

    Draft Jack Draft Jack Draft Jack Draft Jack

    Anonymous said...

    I don't know if the Molloy thing is such small potatos. (Or as Dan Quayle said, 'such small potatoes.') I started looking through Glassman's donations, and the vast majority of the contributors who maxed out to her, already maxed out to Malloy. If this was a pass through to avoid the 2500 limit, it starts to look like he was trying to launder money through her campaign. They'd better have the i's dotted and t's crossed.

    The Architect said...

    "Perhaps Nancy Johnson should check to see whether a "minority person" has ever actually voted for her" is a racist comment in and of itself, GC.

    Stereotyping all minorities as liberals? I'd expect better from you.

    bluecoat said...

    GMR: this renewal of the Voting Rights Act was supposed to sail through the House earlier than needed per Hastert and Bush; the ammendments from the conservatives came as a total surpirse to Hastert who works to never allow them to get to the floor unless there is already a majority of the majority lined up...apparently, this was part of the hardline on immigration from what little i have heard on the commentary side.

    Chris MC said...

    The conspicuous absence of the DeStefanite bloggers is all too familiar. Where are the dismissives? What about the "this is just a paperwork glitch" arguments, and so on? Yes, they are Righteous Indignation itself when they or their candidate is criticized. But a convenient amnesia sets in about their committment to a high moral tone when the shoe is on the other foot.

    And the hypocritical commentary by DeStefano campaign manager Derek Slap on this is a clear sign of desperation.

    So much for not going negative, eh guys?

    If and when it comes back around your way, no whining about it, OK?

    Wrath of Conn said...

    If this was a pass through to avoid the 2500 limit, it starts to look like he was trying to launder money through her campaign.

    Launder? Haha. It's perfectly legal for those people to max out to both campaigns - and in fact likely because they are obviously big supporters of the ticket.

    I think this part of the article sums up what a non story this is:

    The Malloy/Glassman campaign submitted an addendum Friday to the Secretary of the State's office detailing what the money covered.

    "At this point, I think there was an effort at voluntary compliance. I think they are attempting in good faith to try and provide the details that are necessary to comply," Jeffrey Garfield, executive director of the state Elections Enforcement Commission


    It sounds like they didnt include some form, were told to, and did so in the same day. Big deal.

    Anonymous said...

    to Anonymous, re Quayle:

    If you're gonna make fun of someone's idiotic spelling mistakes, you should probably try not to make them yourself...

    The correct spellings are potato (sing.) and potatoes (plural). Quayle's mistake was using potatoe as singular.

    But nice try, though.

    Anonymous said...

    Maybe the conspicuous absence of DeStefano bloggers means that they're out volunteering and working the campaigns to get their candidate elected - rather than sitting on the internet talking trash.

    And even though they had their own problems with campaign financing reports, I don't think it was anywhere near the level of this. If anyone knows anything about campaign finance law - what Malloy/Glassman was doing amounts to having a slush fund. And thats 109,000 dollars. Buys a weeks worth of ads. I don't think its small potatoes.

    Anonymous said...

    Chris Murphy will defeat that old tired Nancy Johnson who is supported by Big Oil and Insurance Lobbyists She is a big part of the problem why we pay high gas prices and high insurance.

    Why Cant Jodi Rell just get a brain and cut the gasoline tax I think everyone needs to get on the legislature and put on the pressure to do something. We pay the 3rd highest behind Hawaii and either New Jersey or New York.

    If Jodi cut the gas tax she wouldnt need her 80% rating she would have a 90% one But like all the other politicos she is going to make all of us suffer and bust everyone's budget when she could give us some temporary relief.

    GMR said...

    NJ has low gas taxes, but they have no self-service.

    How is Nancy Johnson in any remote way responsible for the price of gasoline?

    Wrath of Conn said...

    Maybe the conspicuous absence of DeStefano bloggers means that they're out volunteering and working the campaigns to get their candidate elected - rather than sitting on the internet talking trash.

    If you read the article, and moreso the Stamford Advocate one, its very clear that the DeStefano camp immediately began lobbying the press about this. So whatever the bloggers are doing, it's the DeStefano campaign themselves who are trying to run down a fellow party member to better themselves, and its they who are "talking trash" as you put it.

    If anyone knows anything about campaign finance law - what Malloy/Glassman was doing amounts to having a slush fund.

    There is pretty much no way to respond to this, because it's complete and utter BS. What both articles say this amounts to is not providing the neccessary amount of details, which they apparently provided immediately after it was brought to their attention (see the quote from the EEC guy above). Nowhere was it implied that Glassman's campaign couldn't give money to Malloy's in this way. It's perfectly legal, and I'm sure Slifka did it for DeStefano as well.

    Anonymous said...

    Slifka did it to the tune of about $8k, which is a heck of a lot more believable than $109K in shared expenses.

    BTW, I'm not even going to try and spell that starchy tuber.

    Rell is going down said...

    Surprisingly enough, Genghis Conn is attempting to downplay a Malloy campaign mistake. The law seems pretty clear to me.

    "The committees must keep their expenses separate because Democratic voters in the Aug. 8 primary can vote separately for governor and lieutenant governor. Reimbursements between committees must be labeled and itemized."

    The Glassman campaign can reimburse the Malloy campaign for expenses that they share, but they cannot simply give them money to spend. That is why it is necessaryto itemize each expenditure. What would the Glassman campaign need to spend $108,000 on in one month?

    Chris MC said...

    Maybe the conspicuous absence of DeStefano bloggers means that they're out volunteering and working the campaigns to get their candidate elected - rather than sitting on the internet talking trash.

    Uh, except you're here. And they're posting elsewhere just like always. Truth is that the DeStefano campaign and their vocal supporters are completely full of sh*t about keeping a high tone. They said that when they thought they had a lock, and now they recognize things aren't going well. Just like DeStefano's own strategy of offering Malloy the LG and preparing to paint a primary challenge as divisive. Then - oops! - JD loses and it's off to the races. DeStefano for Connecticut is like the Keystone Cops.

    And even though they had their own problems with campaign financing reports, I don't think it was anywhere near the level of this.

    Wrong again. DeStefano's campaign was fined, remember? Malloy's has complied in good faith. Big difference, and it isn't one that reflects well on DeStefano for Connecticut.

    If anyone knows anything about campaign finance law - what Malloy/Glassman was doing amounts to having a slush fund. And thats 109,000 dollars. Buys a weeks worth of ads. I don't think its small potatoes.

    If anyone knows how to read the newspaper, they know what you just said is total crap.

    [...] it is necessary to itemize each expenditure. What would the Glassman campaign need to spend $108,000 on in one month?

    Snap out of it RIGD, that is what they did Friday:
    The Malloy/Glassman campaign submitted an addendum Friday to the Secretary of the State's office detailing what the money covered. (Courant.com)

    In other words, not only do you guys have nothing, but you are blatantly misrepresenting what happened and what the impact is. Desperation everywhere in DeStefano's neck of the woods.

    And again, for the record, if Malloy supporters take the gloves off, y'all got nothing to complain about.

    Big mistake, Derek.

    Rell is going down said...

    Chris,

    You really cannot sound any more ignorant. Do you remember why they were fined? They didn't report the employer information of some of their larger donors. Then some 'anonymous' person filed a complaint, and they provided the proper information immediately. They wound up being fined $4,000, after it was reported that they might possibly be fined as much as $100k. The reason? The sec. of state's office felt that the error was not intentional, and it did not affect the campaign one way or the other. However, funneling $100,000 into a gubernatorial campaign through a separate campaign is illegal, and there is a clear reason why that is. Look at the Slifka campaign's report on the SoS website. http://cfisct.sots.state.ct.us/servlet/com.cfis.control.CFISTotalStatementReportServlet

    Notice how every expenditure has a secondary payee so that we know what the money was used for? Now look at Glassman's.

    http://cfisct.sots.state.ct.us/servlet/com.cfis.control.CFISTotalStatementReportServlet

    It simply shows up as a $108,000 expenditure. How do we know what this money was used for? Do we know that this money wasn't used to directly pay for Malloy's first TV ad? No. Maybe a mailing that went out? No. You clearly do not understand the issue, or you wouldn't make the comparison that you did. there is reason that this law is in place, and if the Malloy folks couldn't adhere to it, there are only 2 reasons:

    1. They are incompetant. The law is extremely clear, and if they couldn't figure it out, then you should question their ability to lead.

    2. They knowingly did it. This is probably the truth, and any non-partial person can see this clearly. What's the easiest way to pump some cash into your account when your chasing your opponent by 10%? Go back to your wealthy donors that can no longer give to your campaign, and ask them to contribute to your running mate's campaign. Then just funnel that money into your coffer.

    Your comments on this site are completely irrelevant Chris MC, because you blindly follow the candidates you are supporting. Can you really say that, deep down, you don't know that Malloy used the Glassman campaign to funnel money? You told me to 'snap out of it' and posted a quote from a reporter. But I looked at the SoS website, and got no answers. The law says they need to itemize each expense. They still are not doing that.

    Anonymous said...

    The DeStefano Campaign has been on life support since the convention where they never got motivated and energized like the Malloy Campaign did,DeStefano lied to the 5th CD about his Lt Governor Choice which is why If somehow DeStefano were to win the primary I will not vote for him or the weasel from West Hartford and to let Audrey Blondin believe she was his choice for LG and left her to twist in the wind when he had decided on Slifka probably a month in advance was a really sleazy and unforgivable thing to do to the delegates and The Democratic Party.

    RIGD I know you are going to whine Because I brought up Audrey's name I just have a question why don't you like Audrey's name being mentioned.

    Well DeStefano can have Scott Slifka, Maureen Magnan,The 1/2 of the West Hartford DTC that supports him,Derek Slap(the press rumor inaccurate spreader) and the DeStefano Sorority Squad Because on August 8th The DeStefano train will come to the end of the line

    Chris MC said...

    RIGD, I can't guess whether you are too lazy to read the Stamford Advocate account, which quotes Garfield, or are being intentionally thick.

    You guys are completely wrong, your "arguments" are total BS, there is really nothing else to say on the subject, except that if this is the way you want to play, don't start with your wimpering if it comes back around on you.

    Anonymous said...

    Dan Malloy is the only Democrat who can beat Jodi Rell in November.

    The Time will come very soon that Jodi Rell's popularity will hit its peak and then it is all down hill from there and Malloy will rise to the top and will close in by election day to win the Governorship 52% to Rell's 48% I believe it will be that close and it will go in Malloy's favor.

    Rell is going down said...

    Answer this question honestly. Whose shoes would you rather be in right now? DeStefano, with a %11 lead in the polls, higher name recognition, and an ad campaign that has been up for 4 weeks, or Malloy who has nothing to show but a convention win and the endorsement of the most powerful woman in American politics this side of Hillary Clinton? With the Lamont Lieberman race dominating the headlines, what is Malloy going to do do increase his name recognition over the next 3 weeks? I'll give you the fact that the Bondin endorsement is good for at least $25,000 votes on Aug. 8th (and I'm being conservative), but I'll still take my chances and go with DeStefano.

    bluecoat said...

    GMR: I bet you don't know why NJ has no self service.

    Chris MC said...

    RIGD -
    Simply put, Dannell Malloy is your Governor elect come November, even with DeStefano for Connecticut's flailing attempts to smear him.

    Really, do you think Malloy and his organization, who have been kicking DeStefano's can consistently for at least a year, are going to blow it by doing something dishonest? Of course not. And while a psuedononymous blogger might be excused for failing to get his facts straight and going off half-cocked, DeStefano's campaign manager Derek Slap gets no such slack. It might as well have come out of JD's own mouth.

    Malloy is clearly the better choice, the Party will confirm that come August 8, and then Rell is going down.

    Anonymous said...

    Its Chris MC who's facts are wrong - Derek Slap is the communications director at the DeStefano campaign. The manager is Henry Fernandez. Don't you read the newspapers Chris?

    Anonymous said...

    Derek Slap is nothing but John DeStefano's mouthpiece and lackey.

    The DeStefano Campaign is disorganized and has been from its inception.

    Henry Fernandez never heard of him you might of well said Sid Fernandez or Tony Fernandez they could run a better political campaign than this guy.

    The SS DeStefano is run about as good as an episode of Gilligan's Island.

    DeStefano is the Skipper and Scott Slifka could be Gilligan Derek Slap could be the Professor A couple of The Sorority Gals could be Ginger and Mary Ann.The Rich people you could find someone.

    Anyway Bottom Line DeStefano loses on August 8th and Malloy moves on to defeat Jodi Rell.