Sunday, September 05, 2010

When is age a factor in a candidate's viability? If you ask Republicans, only when the candidate is a Democrat

Has Greg Patterson of Espresso Pundit started working directly for the Schweikert campaign (if he has, it's not obvious from the campaign's most recent filings with the FEC)?  Or has he chosen to turn his blog into a Schweikert campaign press release outlet? 

I, and most Democratic bloggers, for that matter, happily republish campaign press releases, but when I do so, I always clearly identify them as such.

Patterson never publishes such a disclaimer.

Earlier this week, he published a post declaring the race over in CD5 based on the results of what was essentially a third party-funded internal poll.  This suspect poll declared Schweikert ahead in the race by 5 percentage points.  Patterson focused only on the percentages, not the questionable methodology of the company that conducted the poll.

He also rather blithely ignored the fact that in late October 2006, a SurveyUSA poll showed then-Congressman JD Hayworth ahead of Mitchell by three percentage points.

Mitchell ended up winning the race by slighly more than 8000 votes.

He backed that one up with a post published on Sunday.  Perhaps he was simply regurgitating Schweikert campaign's wishful thinking, or perhaps he is doing his part to add a little reality to some of the lies that the Rs spewed about health care reform last year, but he took the initiative to become a self-designated "death panel."

He placed a "Do Not Resuscitate" directive on Harry Mitchell and his political career.

His primary concern was Harry's age, 70.

Perhaps Patterson *is* correct in his insinuation, and Mitchell is too old for public service, but then that would then bring up another point -

Harry Mitchell, date of birth: July 18, 1940

John McCain, date of birth: August 29, 1936

Guess which one is running for a six-year term, and which one is running for a two-year term?


Thane Eichenauer said...

Even if you omit the party labels there are two votes that separate Mitchell and McCain.

Mitchell, yes on the stimulus bill, yes on the health care bill.
McCain, no on the stimulus bill, no on the health care bill.

I would just as well ignore all polls but I do notice that as best I can determine neither Mitchell, Gifford or Kirkpatrick are touting their votes on the historic health care bill.

Patterson's reasoning is that given a widespread presumption that Democratic Party candidates are headed towards stormy weather come election day that there are some campaigns that the DCCC aren't going to be able to help out. His reasoning makes plenty of sense.

The good old ship U.S.S. McCain has been around a long time but it has managed to prevail in political battle. The good old ship U.S.S. Mitchell is coasting into port on the fumes of goodwill.

Stop HB2639 said...

Considering Schweiert is one of Greg's best friends, do you trust anything Greg says? Also, Greg thought Hayworth would win in 2006 and Schweikert would win in 2008... so even if he is being objective, his judgment is off.

I am realistic and admit that Mitchell is facing a tough reelection, but I am not prepared to think CD5 is going to elect a guy who will put investors ahead of common people.

That being said, if Harry loses, at least he will lose proudly. I would rather lose the house having done something than keep the house having done nothing.