Saturday, September 10, 2016

Is Schumer Giving Up On Murphy And Strickland Already? What A Waste!


Schumer and his pathetic Montana sock-puppet, Jon Tester, spent millions of dollars people contributed to the DSCC to defeat Democrats Joe Sestak and Alan Grayson. Early in the cycle, Schumer informed Bernie Sanders that if he interfered with Schumer's 4th rate candidates in Ohio, Pennsylvania or Florida he would not be a committee chair when the next Senate convened. So now the Democrats are stuck with three inferior candidates-- Katie McGinty, Patrick Murphy and Ted Strickland-- who probably can't win their races against 3 terribly flawed Republicans-- Pat Toomey, Marco Rubio and Rob Portman-- who should be easy to knock off in a presidential election year. Sestak, Grayson and Sittenfeld probably would be in the middle of spirited campaigns pitting a clash of ideas right now and there's a better than even chance all three would have beaten their weak Republican opponents. Thanks to Schumer and Tester the GOP may well keep all three seats, which will be catastrophic for the Democrats' hope to win the Senate in 2016 or-- if everything else goes their way-- a sure-fire incentive for the GOP to filibuster everything until McConnell is back in charge in 2018.

Schumer is about to be handed the Democratic leadership on a silver platter. The Senate Dems would be better off hanging him a harikari (or seppuku) tantō... pronto. Although Huffington Post polling averages shows Clinton ahead in all three states, Schumer's three disastrous Senate candidates are losing. Clinton is beating Trump in Florida 46-42%, but Rubio is beating Murphy 47-41%. Clinton is beating Trump in Ohio 43-41%, but Portman is slaughtering Strickland 46-39%. Clinton is beating Trump in Pennsylvania 46-40%, but Toomey and McGinty are in a dead-heat.

The Ohio race, as anyone who watched the primary would have predicted, is the worst mess. Strickland is like a barely animated walking corpse whose past conservatism has come back to bite him in the ass. He's a nightmare from the past Ohio voters don't want to deal with and instead of Hillary's coattails dragging him to victory, his reverse coattails could drag her down. His campaign, like the candidate, is a total mess. Seeing the futility of spending money on him, the DSCC cancelled millions of dollars in ad buys. And yesterday, Strickland's own campaign followed suit, canceling ads scheduled to have gone up in Cincinnati, Dayton, Toledo and Youngstown over the next two weeks. Sittenfeld is the opposite of a corpse and would have been running an energetic and inspiring campaign instead of sitting around hoping for an anti-Trump tsunami. This is Chuck Schumer and his know-it-all arrogance at work.

Toomey is taking on the Trump problem head-on. As Steven Dennis explained yesterday for Bloomberg readers, "Toomey knows he has a Donald Trump problem. He’s just hoping his opponent has an even bigger Hillary Clinton problem. As the only endangered Republican incumbent yet to back or reject his party’s nominee, Toomey is campaigning as an independent voice who can be a check on whoever is president. He’s also working to tie his Democratic challenger, Katie McGinty, as closely as possible to Hillary Clinton, whose unfavorable ratings rival those of Trump."
"There is no question that Katie McGinty will never stand up to Hillary Clinton, but I will, and I’ll stand up to Donald Trump if I think he’s wrong," he said in an interview last month.

Toomey is trying to find the middle ground by motivating disgruntled Republicans and independents to vote without alienating Trump’s passionate backers. Barring a Trump comeback, his message of independence might be the best he can do in the state that has emerged as a key battleground for control of the Senate, as well as the presidency.

Pennsylvania is already the second most expensive Senate race this year by some measures, with campaigns and outside groups spending an estimated $31.8 million on advertising on the general election so far, according to data from ad-tracking firm Kantar Media/CMAG.

Toomey has irritated Trump fans by withholding his endorsement of the nominee and many have peppered him at events across the state for his stance. But he hasn’t gone beyond saying he won’t vote for Hillary Clinton.

The senator is reflecting where a sizable, key bloc of voters stands, particularly in the vote-rich Philadelphia suburbs-- not enamored with Clinton but not sold on Trump.

...Like Senator Marco Rubio in Florida, Toomey emphasizes he will be a check on whoever becomes president, and he dinged McGinty for failing to name a single issue where she disagreed with Clinton at a press conference last month.

"I have played that role. I have separated myself from my party when I thought it was wrong," he added. He touts his long fight against spending earmarks, which were prevalent a decade ago before being banned, and his failed bipartisan push for expanded background checks for gun purchases.
This slug-fest is going to go on and on 'til election day, with all the worst right-wing elements in American politics, like the Kochs and the NRSC, in the mud and muck with the DSCC and EMILY's List, the worst garbage on the Democratic side. If the outside groups cancel each other out, Toomey will probably rout McGinty, possibly the least qualified candidate running for Senate this year other than Patrick Murphy... which brings us to the latest election news out of Florida.

At least in Ohio and Pennsylvania, Strickland and McGinty for all their obvious flaws, are the lesser of two evils for Democratic voters. Strickland isn't as terrible as Portman and McGinty isn't as terrible as Toomey-- close but not as terrible. Murphy, on the other hand, is as terrible as Rubio.. and, man, is that terrible. This is the one race where there is, literally, no lesser evil. (If I was a Florida voter I'd cast my ballot for independent Steve Machat.) And, now that they got rid of Grayson-- who Wall Street puppet Schumer was so scared to see in the Senate that he would rather lose the chance to win the majority than have anyone as brilliant and effective as Grayson challenging him-- they're willing to cut the embarrassingly pathetic Murphy loose. Or... maybe it's just a shot over the bow of the family yacht, Miss Cocktails, and a threat for Murphy's father to pay up the other $4 million he promised the DSCC for backing his feeble son. Daddy Murphy gave Schumer and Reid's Senate Majority PAC a million dollars as a downpayment for the endorsement and now they're squeezing him for the rest. Squeezing? Well the DSCC cancelled their first week of TV ads for Florida, just like they did for Ohio.

According to a report from the Columbus Dispatch, Schumer's lackey at the DSCC, Tom Lopach, was in a private meeting with a trade association a few days ago where he went through Schumer’s top targets. On the list were Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Nevada, Missouri and North Carolina. Not on the list: Ohio and Florida!
[A]ccording to a source who attended the meeting, Lopach said Strickland could only win "if a wave comes" in, a reference to Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton winning by a strong margin in Ohio.

When asked why Ohio is not among the likely states for Democrats to win, Lopach reportedly replied, "Portman has run a damn fine race."

"The rest, I’ll have to tell you over a drink," Lopach added, the source said.
Blue America is backing just two candidates running for Republican-held Senate seats this year. How about helping them out with $5 or $10 each? They're both real progressive Democrats, not craven, worthless Schumercrats like Strickland, McGinty and Murphy. Please click on the thermometer below and give what you can:
Goal Thermometer

Labels: , , , , , , , ,


At 3:35 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Considering that Schumer actually works for Wall St., it really doesn't matter to him which lapdog candidate wins. He still gets to shepherd financier-friendly legislation through the Senate and collect his "contributions" in return.

At 4:24 PM, Anonymous ap215 said...


At 1:53 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To two posters above:

But Schumer doesn't get to control the senate (worth a LOT more in now-legal bribes) if his own party of lapdogs fails to win the majority of senate seats.

One more clarification, Schumer's first consideration is Schumer. Wall Street is simply one obvious mechanism to manipulate for his personal benefit.

John Puma

At 8:53 AM, Anonymous Sue said...

I was a strong Sestak supporter and long time volunteer.
MCGinty is a better candidate now than she was a few months ago.she is smart and she is learning.
She is certainly not perfect, but she would be light years better than more false equivalences please!
THERE ARE ALOT OF POLICY DIFFERENCES and although I agree with your analysis of the money issues, we cannot ignore them

# one being the supreme court!!!!!

At 5:06 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The argument isn't to vote for HRC "because SCOTUS" but, rather, to see if the new Democratic president will get confirmation of any SCOTUS nominees with her party holding fewer that 60 seats in the senate.

For the radical reich SCOTUS is also important and the Dems cleverly nominated someone the reich hates probably more than they do Obumma. The Dems will be lucky to gain back the majority in the senate:

John Puma


Post a Comment

<< Home