Rigell to pick up Sessoms endorsement
By JR Hoeft | Tuesday, March 23rd, 2010 | PoliticsScott Rigell announced he will be appearing with Mayor Will Sessoms Thursday to clarify each gentlemen’s “position” on the 2nd District GOP nomination campaign.
“For the first time, the Mayor will be making public his position on the congressional campaign for Virginia’s Second Congressional seat. Scott Rigell, the leading candidate for the Republican nomination in the Second Congressional District, will also present his own statement regarding his congressional campaign and the Mayor’s position.”
What are we as interested campaign followers, pundits, and reporters, five years old? Why else would Sessoms be appearing with Rigell? To state he’s supporting another candidate?
Please, don’t insult our intelligence and just send a release out that, ultimately, says, “Mayor Sessoms will be endorsing Scott Rigell Thursday at 5 p.m. Both will be available for questions and interviews at the event.”
Anyway, I digress.
The reality is that while Sessoms is a big name, this endorsement might not help Rigell. The first thing that came to mind to me is that it might remind voters of Rigell’s biggest blemish: his Obama donation.
Sessoms won in 2008 in part because, as a Republican, his campaign used an image of Barack Obama on campaign literature, which reminds voters that Rigell also gave Obama a $1000 check.
Call me crazy, but this week might not be the best week for conservatives to be reminded about a candidate’s association with the president.
Read more about the endorsement at CQ.
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
Share this post
About the author
Conservative to the core; liberal with his opinion! J.R. has been involved in politics for over a decade and has worked on several campaigns in Hampton Roads. He has served on the Executive Committee of the Republican Party of Chesapeake and the Central Committee of the Republican Party of Virginia. He is also the director of “Blogs United” in Virginia. E-mail J.R.. Follow J.R. on Twitter.
We're 75% there! Thank you to everyone who has so far contributed! Just $2000 to go!
Comments
79 Responses to "Rigell to pick up Sessoms endorsement"
Sessoms defeated Oberndorf by 10,000 votes. That flier was distributed to a few hundred people and was pulled by the Mayor as soon as he knew that it was out there. How do you conclude that Sessoms won the mayor’s race due to that flier? Even suggesting that it was partially responsible makes no sense.
Back on the Obama check… really? There’s nothing else I guess. Okay here we go again.
Everyone refers to the Obama check like it was written last week. They refer to it as if it propped up Obama and saved his campaign in the nick of time-never mind the fact that Obama raised $730 million dollars. I’m bad at computing percents-can someone do the math for me. I think it’s divide 1,000 by 730,000,000-but I could be wrong (you might need a scientific calculator to get in all the digits). The $1k made little to no difference in that campaign. We all know it, but it’s the only hope that people think they have at defeating Scott so the beat goes on until the nomination.
A novel approach would be to compare and contrast the ideas and proposals of our 2nd District candidates. I’m just saying. It appears the check is gaining no traction except form the far right who already chose their candidate and won’t change their minds until after the primary.
I conclude with this: Ronald Reagan was a democrat for over a decade. He gave lots of money to democrats in his lifetime. Percentagewise much more than Scott Rigell ever did, but if Ronald Reagan came to the GOP in two years after changing his political philosophy there would be a chorus of RINO chants from here to Richmond by many people eon this blog. How sad to think that so many people have so little faith in the political philosophy known as conservatism. I’m not comparing Rigell to Reagen. That’s not my point. What I’m saying is that there are some within the party today that feel like new members to our party must be deemed worthy-found to be an unblemished calf led to the electoral slaughter-so to speak in the week’s leading to Easter. It is that thinking that could potentially lose us elections or prevent the next Ronald Reagan from switching parties. Don’t you guys understand this?
I look forward to responses.
While I cannot compare Scott Rigall to Ronald Reagan, I do agree that Ronald Reagan may have a hard time being included in the Republican Party of today. The climate and times have changed.
I was raised by staunch Democrats, I am the only Republican in my family. Ronald Reagan is the man who will have to take credit for my switch.
Richard, for his $1,000 investment in Obama, Rigell received $100s of thousands of dollars back for his loyal patronage to Obama in the “Cash for Clunkers” program. I admire Rigell for his business acumen for his Obama donation because the return on investment was many thousands of times what he gave to Obama. I would like to call on the Rigell campaign to release the numbers that Freedom Automotive received from Cash for Clunkers so we can get an accurate number.
His huge “cash on hand” numbers reported for the campaign dwarf the other candidates which we are speculating is the result of Obama paying him back with money through the Cash for Clunkers program. Scott is well versed in deal making and would fit in well in the current environment where we keep seeing political patronage, kickbacks and deal making with examples like the Nebraska Corn Husker deal, Louisiana Purchase, hospitals and many other deals that have been made to buy votes.
Besides, Rigell has given more to Democrats than Glenn Nye has which should make him a favorite among Democrats who vote in the Primary.
I wonder if Obama will be at this event for a photo shoot?
Kathy-
What I’m addressing is the general attitude that people display when discussing Rigell and the Obama check. The complete lack of understanding demonstrated by some people. They think that members of the GOP should tow the line on all issues. It is not healthy for a growing poliitical party.
Perspective on the check is key to understanding Scott Rigell. Scott wrote a check to stop Bill and Hillary Clinton. That was the framework and the intent. A meaningless gesture when added to the totality of Obama’s fundraisning. Was it a mistake for Scott? But does it disqualify him to run for office? Is it the unforgivable sin? I say absolutely not. He tried to stop Hillary Clinton.
Do people recall “Operation Chaos”? How about the “Stop Hillary Express”? Dick Morris wrote a book and was planning a movie for a September 2008 release date blasting Hillary because she was the presumed nominee. He predicted a Hillary Victory as did most other major conservative pundits and thinkers.
Obama rode a wave of populist voter disgust for all things Washington. Predominantly independents voters pushed him over the edge-most political scientist’ point to the demographics of middle aged white men and women as the difference. He was perceived as an outsider to the Clinton’s and to McCain. George W Bush undermined the GOP brand to the point that it was irretrievable. When Scott Rigell wrote that check the world was a different place. Those are the facts. The peoople condemning Scott don’t want to admit it, but it was a far different political climate. Making it appear as if the check happenned under different circumstances is disingeniuous. Perspective can makes things clear.
And if we want those independents who gave Obama the victory to vote for our guy in November we need to understand and welcome them into the party. We advocate the philosophy of conservatism. All are welcome to join us.
Tim J-
Take your time and come back to us. You’re pretty far out there. Look for some lifelines along the way. Perhaps an economics course or a political science course will bring you back form the nether reaches of political thought. LOL
Another politician who Rigell donated money to, suddenly endorses him. I’m shocked.
Will Sessoms is a moderate Republican, yes. But, Scott Rigell has already been endorsed by a lot of conservatives, and the bottom line is Sessoms in the mayor of one of the largest cities in the district and the state. He won because he took on an incumbent and beat her focusing on job creation, investment and growing the economy.
As far as the “Obama” check, I just point to this article in from the Va. Pilot on 03/01/2010
[In the past dozen years, Rigell has donated more than $230,000 to candidates, according to Federal Election Commission reports and the Virginia Public Access Project.
Most have been to Republican office-seekers - with one noticeable exception. In March 2008, during the Democratic presidential primary, he gave $1,000 to then-candidate Barack Obama.
"I had never at any point wanted Barack Obama to be president. It was to stop Hillary Clinton," Rigell said. He made the donation less than a week after Clinton won presidential primaries in Ohio, Texas and Rhode Island on March 3, 2008. "She had a lot of momentum," he said.
Rigell supported Republican Mitt Romney early in the GOP presidential primaries and later gave the party's nominee, John McCain, the maximum $2,000 donation in May 2008.]
Richard…I would submit that when Reagan was a Democrat, it made sense to donate to a Democrat. What upsets people about Rigell’s donation to Obama is the fact that he was a REPUBLICAN giving to one of the most radical liberals we have ever seen. There is absolutely no justification for that and the fact that Rigell has stated his comfort with writing him a check speaks volumes to the fact that he’s no visionary or forward thinker…by March of 2008 it was already clear that Clinton was on the downward spiral. Rigell’s focus should have been on the Republicans, and when he maxed out on Romney, and then McCain, that should have been the end of his Presidential donations. Or, if Rigell really cared about the Republicans, he could have given that $1000 to a PAC, who in turn could have distributed that money to a Republican to help in their battle against the liberal radicals. I don’t care if he’s managed to give 300k to Republican candidates/causes, what I do care about is when he deviated from that, and to deviate on a man like Obama is unforgiveable.
Now some might turn around and say that past donations don’t matter, we are supposed to look forward…well I’ve got news for you…the past does matter. Think about it, when you go to buy a house, or a car (which Rigell should know a little something about) you have to show a credit history to complete the sale. Well I will submit that in politics, it is the same way. Your credibility depends on what you have done in your life, and the past will never leave you alone. Reagan at least admitted that he had made a mistake and changed parties.
Check out this interesting video of scott rigell and his statement on his $1,000 donatation to barack obama…
So did Rigell vote for Obama in the primary as well?
If he truly feared a Clinton presidency, wouldn’t it make sense to VOTE against her and not just give money to her opponent?
The onloy thing that differs between Rigell and Nyeis that Nye has given less money to democrats. Nye just dosent have the courrage to run as a republican
Ben-
Do you have any friends that you’ve had for twenty years? Do you think they might support you if you ran for office? What if they ran for office as a “moderate”? Would you support them? I wouldn’t hold that against you. I would hold it against you if you didn’t support a friend just because he was a “moderate”, but that’s my moral position. I don’t advocate it for everyone.
The Sessoms endorsement is just another example of why Rigell is the best candidate. He bridges gaps within the party(I mean the larger party that is the electorate that sees themselves as a republicans). People are desperately attempting to portray Rigell as moderate. It’s their only hope. He isn’t, but they’ll contiue to try it.
Call Rigell if you think he’s a moderate. If it weren’t for the Obama check the irony is people would say he was too conservative. It’s kind of funny-if you can step back and look at it from a different point of view.
Sounds to me like Rigell is building a broad coalition of the very conservative and the moderately conservative. All of them are needed to beat Nye in November. We cannot be so short-sighted. The endorsement of the Mayor of Virginia Beach is a positive to Rigell, bottom line.
You Rigell paid campaign guys keep explaining, explaining, explaining and trying to use all the money Rigell donated to Republicans to atone for his guilt in desperate attempts to cover up or diminish the $1,000 Obama donation.
For all of his Conservative self-righteousness, Rigell still can’t explain why he was obsessed with supporting one Democrat against another Democrat in a Democratic campaign instead of focusing on his other in-state Democratic causes like the YES campaign at the expense of Republicans. The answer is that Rigell is a car dealer businessman and I admire the fact that his $1,000 Obama investment turned out so well for him.
The question remains – Why has Rigell donated more money to Democrats that Glenn Nye ever did?
Richard if Scott donated to Obama after Super Tuesday then the excuse that he only did it to stop Clinton is valid from your perspective. We all know you support Scott and that is your right to support anyone you choose.
Not that I am making a big deal out of it but I have never given a penny to any candidate that I did not want to see get elected. But, that’s just me. I have quite a lot of Democratic friends, three in particular I would count as best friends, but I wouldn’t give them money to win in an election. Maybe for something else like food, clothing, missions, business, their kids, whatever. But not for politics.
Mr. Jenkins, your condescending tone is not needed. I am a step back. I don’t even live in the District. Do you want to know what I see?
Voters in June will be presented with four viable republican options: Rigell, Taylor, Mizusawa and Loyola. (Sorry for those who support the other ones, they just won’t win.)
Rigell donated $1,000.00 to Obama, in addition to the $10,000.00 that his company donated to the Yes Campaign, in addition to $1,000.00 to Mark Warner’s governor’s race. He’s a car salesman. There are rumors of his infidelity. He’s short, looks awkward in a suit and can’t invigorate the youth vote.
Taylor has no money. There are rumors of sexual “deviancy”. He’s never donated to a Democrat. Former SEAL. Owns three small businesses that his Father-in-Law didn’t have to pay for. Attractive. Can mobilize youth voters. He’s single.
Mizusawa who? Name recognition sucks for him. He lives in Hampton, yet his wife and children live, work and go to school in NOVA. That’s weird. General in the Army Reserves. Has some money. Fairly good looking. Not enough time to drive his name ID up.
Loyola has money for the campaign. Good name ID. Fairly good looking. He’s Hispanic, which will only help if the Hispanic population decides to vote. He’s awkward in public and while speaking.
Wow. Who to choose…
Now on to Glenn Nye. Nye has more money for his campaign than any of the Republicans. He’s the incumbent. He voted for Pelosi to be Speaker (people can get over that). He voted NO on the Health Care reform bill. Despite his weak military resume… he has something. He’s young and the average age in the 2nd District is 33.something. He hasn’t pissed off many democrats, only his republican opponents who weren’t going to vote for him anyways.
To be honest. Nye is looking good right now. I’m sure he’d be happy to face any of the republican nominees. If I was Nye, I would pray for a Rigell victory in June. I would stand up and say, “You know the difference between Me and Scott?”…”He donated money to Obama.” Put that on TV and you’ll see how fast that “little” check will begin to matter.
Tim J, easy answer, Rigell had more money to give than Nye
$1,000 for a guy who makes $75,000 a year is worth more than $1,000 to a guy who makes $a.lot.more a year
Logical Conservative-
If you’re doing credit score analogies then it should be noted that you get credit for all the positive things as well as the few negative things-you might want to factor that in there.
I don’t preseume to tell a man how to donate his time or money. He chose to do it that way. You might have decided another way. As I said before it is not ideal, but I do give the man credit for what he’s done and stood for over the past twenty plus years.
You’re upset with Obama. So am I. What you’re doing here on this blog is displacing that anger and projecting it onto Scott Rigell because you feel that the GOP candidates,donors, and party in general let you down. I suspect that is the primary psychology behind this rationale that pervades many people’s thoughts and words. I’m going philosophical I know…Be upset. Be mad as hell. Go out there and find the best candidate or run yourself-heaven knows it’s not stopping anyone else. Get motivated and energized. Do it, but dfon’t be blinded by the Obama check. It defies reason and logic.
I love the passion of everybody on this board because I have it too. Vote for you guy. Tell me why the other is better and try to influence me with facts, but displaced anger on Scott Rigell doesn’t convince me and it will not convince the elctorate as well. We need to think clearly and come together when this stuff is done.
I get aggressive out here because people refer to Scott’s busines in a derogatory way. Because people presume to tell others how to act or how to spend their money. They impose ridiculous standards and throw out everything they know about winning elections. It’s time to be pssionate, but not destructive. It’s time to build up and move forward. We can do this in a primary without losing our minds and our ethics.
Interesting, I’m pretty sure “LogicalConservative” and “IntegrityinPolitics” have been fairly pro-Rigell in their past postings…looks like someone has hijacked some screen names here. So pitiful.
Why is it all these paid staffers and supporters have to explain away this donation?
Here is Rigell’s explanation from his own writings. This quote surely contradicts BryanR’s Rigell quote. the man says he was inspired by Obama’s rhetoric.
http://www.virginianewssource.com/editor/?p=369
(youtube link deleted by mod)
Reid S.-
Thanks. We’ll look into it.
J.R.
Just to chime in two cents…
The inherent logic of the Rigell gave $1000 so Obama gave Cash for Clunkers is just moronic. To imply an correlation between the two is just ridiculous. Show me anywhere where a PRIMARY (not a general) election donation somehow was rewarded with the Cash for Clunkers program, a program that took root in Congress after researching an example in Germany that worked quite well (double digit sales growth year to year). With the same logic, does Rigell’s $2400 contribution to McCain mean that he would have received the same program but better because he donated more?
There’s valid claim and points to the contrasts in candidates. However, there is no valid claim to using Cash for Clunkers to make your point. It’s a ridiculous leap in logic to try making it. Stop trying, it’s not working.
Ben,
Hard line Dems are furious with Nye for voting against Cap n Trade and the Health Care package. There’s alot more discontent on the progressive side then you realize.
Ben – nice assessment of what we are looking at here! I too do not live in the district, but I live on the north edge and what happens in the 2nd has a great deal of impact on my life, so I have been following this race closely. Personally I can say that there are only 2 candidates that have struck me as being worth supporting (and I have met most of them), those two are Loyola and Taylor. It is pretty easy to tell when a politician cares about what you are saying vs just acting like they are listening because they have to, these two fall into the former category. Additionally I have found that this trait makes a big difference when they actually get to Congress (my Representative is fantastic at this) in how actively they engage their constituent’s ideas and opinions. For me this is an area of utmost importance, so all other things being equal on issues and so forth, I tend to go with my gut, and my gut says, anyone other than one of these two is just more of the same problem we already have too much of in DC.
Ben, Rep. Nye has really upset a good number of democrats here in the 2nd because of his votes.
D.J., I agree, the check and cash for clunkers had nothing to do with one another, it’s ridiculous to put the two together. As for Ben’s postings, I’d be careful about rumors. They are usually started by someone who doesn’t like you and are usually untrue.
Ben-Do you have proof of those allegations you just levelled at 3 of the 4 candidates in the 2nd? This is the kind of crap that is not needed. If I want to argue against Taylor, Misuzawa, or Loyola I will go after them with ideas and facts. We don’t need unfounded accusations in a heated primary so unless you have proof then don’t repeat it. How’s that tone for you?
Here is something no one has pointed out yet. Scott Rigell had to be planning this race for a while. It’s a congressional race and he’s a businessman and understands things take planning. Now he’s also observant enough to know that any donations to Mark Warner, Louise Lucas, or Barak Obama would be a campaign issue. Also he has to know no single $1,000 check would matter in any race ever. At that level a single $1,000 dollar check is insignificant. So either Rigel has no political sense whatsoever or he actually had some ulterior motive in writing that check. I don’t belive him to be dumb at all but I would be very suspious of what local Democrats was Scott Rigel trying to impress with his campaign donations. What were his real motives. If he truely thought that his $1,000 check would turn the corner for Hillary he’s truely the poster child of inept, but I don’t think so. He had a local reason to be sucking up to local Dems in the business community or such and I’d like to know what that is.
The problem is that the check to Obama is not his only negative…and it blows my mind that the party has simply vetted a candidate by going into their accounting books and picking the guy who’s given the most money, and not necessarily the one who will be the most successful. You better believe I’m angry with the President, but that anger didn’t just start this past Sunday, it started when I learned about his true character on the campaign trail. Rigell’s check says to me that he failed to research the man he was giving his money to…and to be perfectly honest, Hillary Clinton would be a better alternative to the current administration.
Here’s the ultimate problem…Rigell over the past couple decades has supported conservative principles and ideas…why did he all of a sudden decide to write a Democrat a check in 2008? I would be singing a different tune if say…he donated to Mondale or Bill Clinton and has since been actively working with the Republicans. It bothers me deeply that just 2 years ago, he sat down and wrote a check to a Democrat. To me, that’s an abandonment of those principles and ideas for a short sighted goal. And it’s that kind of short-sightedness that has gotten us into many of the messes that we’re trying to clean up in Washington.
Reid -
After looking at the IPs, they appear to be computers originating out of Scott Taylor’s and Ben Loyola’s campaign offices.
“Integrity” is at Taylor’s and “Logical” is at Loyola’s.
Lee, I can tell you firsthand that Scott had no plans to run as recently as a year ago. He has told me personally before that he never worried about the consequences of actions that would prevent him for running for office because he had no aspirations to run, despite pleas for party leadership over the last decade.
J.R. ,
I appreciate you looking into that. I am very disappointed by your discovery, but not surprised.
DJ is absolutely right. I had a conversation with Rigell at Blogs United and he told me the same thing. I have no reason to believe anything other than Rigell’s only intention is to represent the citizens of the 2nd District in the most professional and best way possible. I see no insiduous motivations.
I recieved 3 phone calls and a Facebook message on this post. I have instucted a volunteer to end posting ,take down video,and delete youtube account. Our apologies to the other campaigns, emotions are running high.
Respectfully,
Scott Taylor
DJ and JR-
Perhaps some people will listen to you and call Rigell themselves before buying into conspiracy theories and rumors.
I also suggest you call the other guys too. If you hear something crazy call the candidate and ask them for yourself. They’re all good people-they just bring different attributes to the table.
Bottom line: Sessoms’ endorsement brings more votes, volunteers, and campaign money. His people know how to win campaigns and they will be another obstacle to overcome for the other 2nd district candidates. It’s a significant endorsement.
JR and DJ,
No I wasn’t saying about Scott running being some alterior motive but the $1,000 check very well might be. Something to get a business favor for his company perhaps from a local Dem leader is what I’m saying. If he’s truely that damn the torpedos and full speed ahead then really is that the right kind of leadership we need. I prefer someone in Government who thinks before they speak. If I wanted someone who acted before they thought heck I’d run for office.
“Hard line Dems are furious with Nye for voting against Cap n Trade and the Health Care package. There’s alot more discontent on the progressive side then you realize.” Good point DJ, but do you think that they’ll buck him in favor of not voting at all? Maybe, but I think that Nye will be fine when it comes to the turn-out of his base.
“Ben-Do you have proof of those allegations you just levelled at 3 of the 4 candidates in the 2nd? This is the kind of crap that is not needed. If I want to argue against Taylor, Misuzawa, or Loyola I will go after them with ideas and facts. We don’t need unfounded accusations in a heated primary so unless you have proof then don’t repeat it. How’s that tone for you?” I mentioned that there are rumors. I never leveled any allegations towards anyone. The fact remains, the appearance of impropriety is just has bad as the act itself.
To Kathy and Richard: From the eloquence of your speech and depth of knowledge, you’ve both clearly been in politics long enough to know that RUMORS can kill campaigns. THAT was my point.
Richard,
First of all, Vivian Paige did an analysis (which she posted on her blog) that had the Sessoms/Obama flier changing the result of the Mayoral election. I don’t necessarily agree with it, but the case can be factually argued.
Second, the big question isn’t Rigell and how conservative he is. (Hey, I gave a small amount of money to Obama for the same reason.) What raises concerns among many are the number of local status quo elitists in the Rigell Campaign’s inner circle. They’re despised by grassroots activists.
Should Rigell win the nomination, it’s going to be possible to argue that Nye (with the voting record that ticks off liberals) is the strategic choice in November, producing a large crossover vote.
(mod edit at Scott Taylor’s earlier request)
First off, I accept the arguement about the check. If he was in a “anybody but Hillary” frame of mind, I can accept that. I don’t even consider that check issue.
As an owner of dealerships, I may frown upon money given to Mark Warner (if that is true), but sometimes big companies are victims of extortion and end up paying “protection money” to both parties. Bill Gates of Microsoft may have feelings on this.
The “yes” campaign is a big negative, but not necessarily a deal breaker.
Here is my assessment of the endorsement:
The endorsement is a big negative. It will unfairly add to any perception that Rigell is a moderate or even RINO.
I don’t care if Sessoms is a friend or not. This high profile endorsement activates the fiscal hawks against you. It is just a BAD call, probably involving ego.
If Sessoms were a true friend, he’d endorse quietly and add to his friend’s campaign behind the scenes.
A public endorsement of this magnitude might have been better AFTER a Republican nomination. Now, he may lose primary votes to other contenders.
My conclusions:
1)This high profile endorsement – Big Negative that loses votes
2)Sessoms and his machine behind you in the campaign – Big Positive
I have never seen any donation report to Warner
VPAP report on Rigell’s state donations (which would include Warner for Governor):
Rigell VPAP ALL Years State Donations
JR. As your smart enough to tell this IP is not a Taylor staffer or Lylola staffer. Scott can ask that his volunteers comments be removed. But since im a private citizen I can can post what I like
Freedom Ford gave $1000.00 to Warner. Found via vpap.org.
Looks like a inaugural donation/contribution? took place a month after the election?
RINO -
Yes, you can. And I can delete it.
I bet Nye is shitting over this endorsement.
Ben,
“To Kathy and Richard: From the eloquence of your speech and depth of knowledge, you’ve both clearly been in politics long enough to know that RUMORS can kill campaigns. THAT was my point.”
Ben, I would never in a million years put anything on the internet that is a rumor. If I have posted anything incorrectly, it was a mistake, but to put something that cannot be erased, (except for J.R. doing it) that could damage someone’s reputation or career that is more than likely a heinous lie is unconscionable. If you are the one that does it, it will ruin YOUR reputation. Just think about it. If I were you I would ask J.R. to erase your post and apologize to Rigell and Taylor. I am sure they both deserve an apology.
Kathy,
The point of this Blog is to comment, discuss and gauge the political atmosphere of our area. Part of that is to discuss the rumors that are circulating about our candidates. Do I personally think that either candidate engaged in those behaviors? NO. Let me say that again so no one misinterprets me. I DO NOT BELIEVE THE RUMORS I HAVE DISCUSSED. However, the fact of the matter is that there have been several instances where these rumors have been brought up; not only on this blog but on several others. As a political observer and commentator I was making the simple point that APPEARANCES matter. Especially when weighing the pros and cons of individual races; as I was attempting to do. The candidates’ family, haircut, sexual history, speaking voice, tie color, the car they drive… they ALL matter. For example… that is why Ron Villanueva didn’t drive around his Mercedes during the campaign.
If this simple fact has offended either Taylor, Rigell, their campaign staff (who should agree with my argument) and/or their families; then I apologize.
Kathy, believe me [or note] when I say that my intent is not to tear them down and make untrue accusations against them. My intent is to help facilitate the process through which our party deals with these rumors [i.e. where do we go from here]; both in the primary and [if either are elected to be our nominee] in the general election.
As always, JR can edit my comments. So if he feels that I have in any way made baseless accusations in an attempt to slander a campaign, then he can remove my comments.
Please comment again if my explanation wasn’t enough.
Ben, there are some rumors not worth repeating. If the proof comes out, that’s another story. Maybe I am dating myself, but from my generation, gossip, rumor, slander, whatever you want to call it is something you just don’t do. And you don’t make excuses for it either.
DJ… back on your “Just to chime in two cents…” post… news flash.. McCain was a RINO Republican and wasn’t a car dealer who could directly benefit from a huge Government program. McCain wasn’t going to win anyway, so whatever money Rigell donated to Republicans were the entry fees to get a seat at the 2nd District candidate table with endorsements and support he bought and paid for where the mainstream Republican establishment anointed him as the Republican candidate.
I didn’t mean to hurt your feelings about tying Rigell’s donation to the Cash for Clunker program, but a lot of us feel that this is an example of political patronage. Is there any direct proof to tie the Rigell Democratic contributions to the C for C program? … no, only circumstances and coincidence but in the political season that is enough to make us nervous about his ability to maintain Conservative core values when lots of money is changing hands. And what the hell does comparing a program in Germany to C for C have do with McCain or Rigell or Congress in this discussion other than being a weak argument supporting the program?
You mention that the connection between the donation and C for C is “moronic”. The decision and donation for Rigell to insert himself into a Democratic primary takes “moronic” to a whole new level. The facts are that he supported one Democrat against another Democrat in a Democratic primary and in doing so showed that he has an incredibly huge ego to be a “king maker” or incredibly poor judgment by supporting Democrats. Well, Rigell can bask in the glory that he played a small role in a Primary that was one of the steps that resulted in the eventual election of “King Obama” and because of his help, we are now all becoming subjects of the Realm. Oh, yeah… and not to mention, “Health Care”.
You as a Rigell supporter may profile us with name calling and characterizations, but this is one of several posts we have noticed where you are more frequently compromising your status with blatant positions as a political blogger. Case in point – your piece on Jessica Sandlin, where your bias was completely off the meter.
Your presenting talking points and positions is more characteristic of a spokesman and supporter of the Rigell campaign rather than that of an objective blogger who should state an opinion or report the news, not take positions that represent or defend a campaign. If you want to take a position as a supporter of a candidate against all others, then please put out a disclaimer so we know that you are a supporter, not a blogger.
So now we are sensoring people – thats great for a blog to do. How about you try sensoring the mindless “just forget every liberal thing Rigell has ever done and pretend he is conservative because he has money crowd” – oops shouldn’t have said that, it might get my comment deleted.
Concerning the Sessoms endorsement: Will Sessoms carries weight and represents a large portion of our party and community. He might not be the epitome of conservatism, but he is very representative of many in the GOP and many other independents. Look at how he won and who he won against. He defeated a fiscal hawk in Moss, an eloquent newcomer in Taylor and an entrenched battle-hardened democrat stalwart in Meyera. He won a huge victory with a broad coalition.
We must have a large coalition to unseat Nye. Rigell is the only Republican building that coalition. Why is it so clear for me and so cloudy to everybody else? I can only assume I’m missing something, but no one offers me anything of substance. What am I missing? Seriously-this is not in jest. I want to know how these other candidates hope to build a coalition to beat Nye in November when they aren’t doing that in March. And a coalition means diverse groups of people-even moderates and independents. What do you guys think we don’t need independents to win? Seriously?
People on this blog are now saying the Tea Partiers might back Nye due to his voting record. Really!? You really think that these engaged activists want to send Pelosi a potential ally over a strong foe? I just don’t get that, especially when critics are finally starting to admit that Rigell is a conservative.
To the activists who “despise” status quo elitists. Get to know these people you claim to despise. You’ll find they aren’t that elite and they have miles of wisdom to share with you-if you’re willing to listen. You can also influence them. Do you know why you should get to know them?-because they aren’t going anywhere. You want a serious voice with a large portion of the party-earn their respect. Learn to respect your philosophical counterparts. You’ll influence more people through open honest discussion than “despising” them from afar.
Concerning Vivian Paige’s analysis: she should have analyzed enough election returns to know that a few hundred leaflets over a couple of hours had minimal impact on a 10,000 vote spread, but I’m sure she was trying to justify the Meyera beat down as much as possible. Having just read it, the analysis takes a very generic look at voting populations. She assumes the bulk of the electorate, sadly enough in minority precincts, are mindless dupes voting straight ticket. She assumes these voters opt to omit the personalities of the individuals running for office when she concludes her analysis. It’s too simplistic for my taste. Lastly, she places a great deal of impact on the flier hand out. Hell, if this is the case-forget about new media guys-it’s all about the leaflet! I’m laughing while typing that. It’s simply a rash attempt to justify the Sessoms election, especially reading that so many months after the election IMHO.
I hate to seem so confrontational. I don’t intend to offend.
Tim, you remain completely off the mark, and if I have to provide disclaimer I wouldn’t be posting literally any of this regarding the 2nd District. Whether you like it or not, I’m not supporting anyone in this race, I can’t vote for any of them anyhow, I can’t endorse anyone, not writing a check to anyone, but I have my trains of thoughts of likely outcomes and whatnot, as everyone does. They’re called opinions. That’s what bloggers do.
Your first paragraph regarding McCain and endorsements and the 2nd is so insane I’m just going to ignore it completely but…wow….
My point, that you completely missed, was that you saying Rigell donated to Obama so ipso facto Obama gave him/us Cash for Clunkers is simple ignorance of any logic, reason or coherent thought. To bother trying to make such an argument, as you horribly did at the beginning of this thread, shows your political ineptitude. And you say ‘alot of us’ and ‘we’ throughout. No one shares your train of thought, and no one could try tailing a path from a small check in a primary on March 3rd 2008 to the start of a program that had no discussion until March of 2009. Please don’t insult the other readers and commenters by trying to tie your failed logic to them.
Proving that you’ve missed the point entirely, you take my correct statement that any insinuation of a tit for tat donation for Cash for Clunkers statement that your logic is moronic. This is true. You then launch into a tirade about the check itself, as if anger will justify your failed logic. It won’t.
As i stated in my comment rightfully taking your logic to task, the donation is a contrast that any candidate can and will set themselves apart from Rigell on. However, as it remains, none of which has anything to do with the Cash for Clunkers program. If your program is with the legislation of the C4C, fine. If your problem is with Rigell writing a donation check, fine. But trying to tie the two together you lose everyone. Implying or in your case stating that Rigell was rewarded for his minuscule donation with C4C is ludicrous.
Govgirl, no offense, but it is my blog, what are you talking about?
Didn’t say you didn’t have a RIGHT to do it, just questioning the wisdom, that’s all and wondering (given most of what gets said on here most of the time) what was so terrible it could not be posted.
You’re taking what I wrote too literally. I haven’t deleted a comment for a long time.
Yes, I have a right to delete comments. My blog, my rules. Y’all, like it or not, are on my turf.
But, like anything, you have to take the good with the bad.
If I start deleting comments, no one comments. If I leave every spam, innuendo, hearsay, rumor, etc. up there, no one takes us seriously.
It’s called judgement and balance. Hopefully, occasionally, we exercise it.
I find it funny that above this post sits Rigell’s ad…Business Sense. Conservative Conviction.
Enough conviction to give Obama $1,000. Nice.
DJ, my, my… such vitriol and emotion!! My responses to your post were auguring in on the raw facts in trying to respond to your insane and clueless babbling in talking about C4C, Germany, Congress and a lot of other nonsense. I must have struck a nerve somewhere, and to that end in your post above, unfortunately you are still clueless. If you had read any of what I had said instead of repeating the post you had originally commented on, maybe you would sound more coherent rather than prattling on like one who doesn’t want to read, or can’t read and comprehend.
Rigell is the “establishment candidate” and is because of many reasons. If the truth is a little harsh for you, then you had better get into something where you can do things to feel good about yourself rather than be a blogger.
You made a point that I missed your point which, if you had read my last post I say that there isn’t a provable connection, again… now read… keep reading… I said that there were “coincidences”… are you still reading??… not “connections” which is your word, not mine. The dictionary, if you don’t have one, says that “connections” are different than “coincidences”.
As to your “no one shares your train of thought” are you speaking of those in the Rigell camp, or the rest of us who are in a scattering of Tea Party and other groups who don’t trust any “establishment” candidates? The Republican Committee endorsement in the New York 23rd district was a RINO disaster, and we are suspicious and want due diligence with all candidates who are running.
You are in denial of you think that any, yes, any financial support for Obama, where ever it came from, didn’t help him win that Primary against Hillary. In case you didn’t take or pass PolySci in college, this is a step in that election that was required before he could be the candidate of his party. So, to spell out the “failed logic” out for you…. Rigell donation, no matter that it was a “minuscule donation” for Obama in his win against Hillary (A), Obama becomes candidate of party (B), Obama wins and becomes President (C) which in logical terms is… A + B = C. So, waaaay back in the beginning of that process, Rigell as part of (A) did his part to help.
On your “tit for tat donation for Cash for Clunkers statement that your logic is moronic” you are repeating yourself again, and I thought we already covered this above?
Again, there IS NO PROVABLE TIE between the donation and C4C program, only COINCIDENCES. These COINCIDENCES which involve money make us nervous about Rigell as a candidate and call into question his judgment and ability to represent us without being co-opted by ego, promises, money and power.
Taylor and Loyola just put out a “Contract on Congress”, where is Rigell’s Contract with anybody other than his customers at Freedom Ford?
Oh, and as far as accusing me of having “anger”, “launching into a tirades” and all the other negative energy you seem to be projecting about this… it’s fun!
I heard on the radio there are 8 candidates running for the 2nd. I was hoping someone could give me a rundown on who the 8 candidates are. Thanks in advance.
Let’s not forget Rigell’s checks to Mark Warner for Governor, his support of Warner of Senate, his check to a cause that lobbied for increased taxes on Second District voters, and a possible check to Louise Lucas.
Rigell is an expert of one thing – SPENDING MONEY for his benefit. His campaign is a big spending spree that is packaging an opportunist as a conservative. Smoke and mirrors…
Whoh everyone you critcism of rigell is not allowed here.
Clearly past donations to Obama, yes campaign, and mark warner have noting to dowith him wanting to be the republican nominee.
The Candidates are;
Brigadier General Bert Mizusawa
Scott Taylor
Kenny Golden
Ed Maulbeck
Ben Lylola
ChuckSmith
Jessica Sandlin
Scott Rigell
Thank you ODU Conservative. Where did the article about Loyola and Taylor teaming up on their contract to the people go? Was it removed?
Chris – I was wondering the same thing.
But it is still on the Loyola and Taylor webpages
http://www.scotttaylorforcongress.com/page/2/
http://www.benloyola.com/news/
“Whoh everyone you critcism of rigell is not allowed here.”
Wow. Is that what passes for an ODU education these days? How far that university has fallen.
The Taylor/Loyola post is being edited by me, the author. I will repost when I’m ready.
My question for the Rigell bashers. Please explain to me why he gave so much in personal donations to GOP candidates? You imply that corporate donations and a check to stop Hillary Clinton demonstrates that Rigell is a liar. You would have us believe that Rigell has fooled the Governor, the RNC, the NRCC and the Wall Street Journal (because obviously he’s a liberal-by your logic). Continuing in that vein, Rigell has duped the majority of local activists and several tea party leaders as well. You paint a picture of Scott Rigell that is so obviously false and riddled with illogical arguments it makes you appear foolish. I’m asking for more than pointing to an expense report. Tell me what demonstrates Rigell’s liberalism. maybe I’ll try to recap the arguments right now…
Rigell is a liberal because of a check to stop Hillary’s campaign-in his words dun dun dun (dramatic music). But it is more sinister than that. How do we know he’s libneral: is it the fact that he home schooled? Perhaps his degree from Regent? Maybe his role as an elder in his church? These are all liberal hallmarks.
How about the fact that he gave over $300,000 to GOP candidates sine 1990-another strong indicator that he is a master manipulator liberal.
You see he gave willingly to countless candidates and conservative causes over two decades in order to position himself to run as a GOP Congressman to only then and finally reveal his master plan of deceit and unmask himself as a liberal. He just was overwhelmed by Obama and slipped up during the primary with that check. I’m so glad you guys figured it out.
It is so absurd I have a hard time writing it-again.
Now for all you young guys out there-go back and read a little modern history. Look at the Clinton years and follow the line of scandals associated with Bill and Hillary. If you understand the conservative revolution of the early 90′s and the role that the Clinton’s played you’ll understand why Limbaugh and Hannity and activists like Scott Rigell were so determined to keep Hillary from returning to the White House.
Now all you political Nostradumses, tell me you knew that Obama was a greater threat than Hilary back during the democratic primary. I’m sure you will and you were all Saints fans too. You all knew they’d win the Superbowl last August too. You can prove it with that winning betting ticket-but you lost it, darn I’ll just have to take your word for it. Your hindsight must be fantastic- of course I don’t recall many conservative commentators fearing Obama as they feared a return of the Clintons, but I digress.
This is all about revealing the master plan of Scott Rigell. His idea was to start a small business and build it into a tremendous success-no problem-easily done-hell, I wonder why we all don’t do that. Many seem to think that “just” selling cars is easy. You must be right-quit today and start your dealership. It’s easy-just ask all those that comment hear under assumed names.
So then Scott decided to get actively involved locally and help the Beach Boys win every seat in VB back in the early 90′s-no sweat-the democrats were giving those seats away-none of the old “elites” had to work to get it done-and everybody knew Bob was going to be governor. It was a no brainer to befriend Bob to support conservative credentials in twenty years. Downright diabolical.
Then Scott planned on working and building the party through the Tusk and Trunk Club. Along the way he masterfully hid behind donations to GOP candidates eventually totaling $300,000.
And then the plan hinged on his friend Thelma Drake losing. Sure he worked hard on her campaign-but it was a ruse so he could take her seat and reveal, luaghing dastardly, that he is really a liberal and the proof lies in a $1,000 check and Cash for Clunkers-a three month poorly run Govt program that was specifically designed to benefit Freedom Automotive Group-sure the Federal Govt won’t say that, but we all know the truth-at least some of you guys do.
I’ve seen the light. Rigell must be a liberal-which one of us is going to break it to Governor McDonnell? Anyone want to present their case to the Governor? I mean hell-it’s as air tight as a three year old’s model submarine. Somehow I bet the critics won’t. I bet you won’t even make the case on a blog using your own name.
Um, anyone know why my comment is going to be moderated? I just posted sources for Chris to look at the the document he was asking about.
Thanks JR. I was just wondering if it was going to be denied because I received that notification email from a campaign.
GovGirl, thanks, I’ve got it in an email.
Been reading this thread and it’s clear that no only did Rigell spend alot of his money on Republican causes — and that’s a GOOD thing and deserves kudos — he also unwisely spent on Obama and Mark Warner and whoever else he shouldn’t have — and that’s a BAD thing.
Why make it worse?
The burning question is, “Why the heck can’t Scott just say, ‘I screwed up?’”
Instead of “manning up” — he says, “I’m perfectly fine with it!”
Voters are TIRED of weasles. To be frank, we don’t believe the mealy-mouthed nonsense about stopping Hillary. A leader would say “I screwed up.” It’s about character. It’s about leadership. He’s a successful car dealer and self-made millionaire, but DC already has plenty of folks with deep pockets — and their hands in our not-so-deep pockets.
Perhaps, instead of spending time with his speech coach, he can re-read his leadership manual from basic. Start with the Corps motto:
It’s Semper Fidelis, Scott — NOT Most-of-the-Time Fidelis.
To Richard Jenkins (a poster who ought to declare how much he’s being paid to blog for Scott before urging those of us who are NOT on anyone’s payroll to step out): Your revisionist and voodoo statement about all of us “Nostradumses(sic)” out here being able to predict the threat of Hillary vice Obama — well, that is nothing more than another shovelful of dung heaped on the pile. Look, Dick — Ray Charles, wearing his sunglasses and with an IPOD in his ears could have told you — could have seen and heard — that, on the date and at the TIME of Scott’s donation to Obama — Hillary was already in the rearview mirror. Kinda makes you a Nostradumass, Dick, doncha think?
Let’s kick the Rigell anyone-but-Hillary strategy can down the road, Dick — Who was Scott trying to keep from winning when he donated money to Mark Warner?
Hypocrite. Weasle. Maybe even: Liar. Man up, Scott.
A voting tsunami started in VA & NJ in November. It rolled thru Massachusetts in January and will flood this land this fall. We have a decision to make in June as to who represents the Republican Party this fall.
VA Second District has a great slate of candidates from which to choose. But, just because a guy has big bucks and names his business Freedom doesn’t mean I believe he will fight for it. When he looks me (or the camera) straight on and tells the truth, I’ll listen. I’m certainly no Nostradamus, but until then or until he comes clean, he’s just another politician-wannabee and doesn’t deserve my time or my vote.
Well said, LLE.
Richard…. man… , your above spew has qualified you for the title of “Mad Hatter” in the new “Rigell in Wonderland” campaign show where the title song is ”Money, Money, Money” by Abba. Also, your sophomoric attempt at sarcasm is best left to professionals and you should really practice first so that we aren’t embarrassed for you. Rigell should demand a refund of the money he is paying you so he can give it to worthy Democrats.
Speaking of 3 year olds… please go back to school and study English as you need some help with usage and spelling. We will give you a pass if English isn’t your first language.
TimJ, regardless of your feelings, flat out insulting someone will not be tolerated.
To both of you, knowing the Rigell campaign and Richard both, I can personally attest that Richard is not and has not been paid by Scott Rigell. He is simply a passionate supporter.
I supported Scott early in his bid and sent a donation quite a while back.. After seeing with my own eyes online a few months ago which democrats that Scotty supported, not just liberal democrats but true to the manifest red-left wingers who are actively undermining the American way of life, my faith in the mans character fractured. I researched the other candidates and threw my support behind Kenny Golden.
Nobody is perfect, I sure am a flawed human, but, in this election I want a reliable republican with reasonbly conservative values and an excellent record of upholding the basic republican principles that are more crucial than ever.. I have resisted asking Scott to return my contribution to his campaign because I like the guy as a businessman. For me it comes down to who is the best qualified candidate to defeat Glenn Nye, who understands the issues and who do I think has the intestinal fortitude to stand up to the political bullying of an overly powerful left.
Richard, you speak of building coalitions, but suggest center stage for a polarizing Will Sessoms that will turn off A LOT of Republicans and not just Tea Partiers. Sessoms didn’t just give money to democrats, he ENDORSED them! He also championed HRTA(HB3202). It isn’t just the Tea Partiers that will take offense to things like that.
I am NOT comparing Rigell to Sessoms, but Sessoms highlights Rigell’s negatives, fair or not. I wouldn’t toss the mayor, but I wouldn’t have put the spotlight on him either. Btw, independents are more fiscally conservative than Sessoms.
It was a bad move and it hurt the campaign. You need to accept that. I mean, look at the picture at the top of this post. Mayor Sessoms got that kind of treatment, because he earned it.
At the Chesapeake Tea Party event, he also earned this:
http://tidewaterliberty.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/sessoms.jpg?w=1000&h=800
To Richard: My apologies for the incorrect presumption you were being paid to blog for Rigell. Mea culpa. Nothing wrong with being passionate about any of this.
We all need to step back and look at all the candidates and figure out who REALLY has the best credentials, experience and character to represent the party. I’ve met Scott several times, spoken to him and heard him speak. I don’t question his desire to serve or that he has helped alot of folks pursue office, but don’t think he is ready to have an impact in Congress. I also don’t wish away the influence his significant contributions have had. That’s why he is the darling of the establishment. Still, Scott Brown’s election ought to show all of us that the right guy with a beat up truck can carry the day.
We need someone who can beat Nye in 2010 — AND retain the seat in 2012 when Obama is back down here working the broader demographic and pushing for the Democrat and Independent vote. OMIGOSH!!! I just realized the Rigell genius. Of course! Can’t anyone else see it??? If Rigell wins, wuddint THAT put Obama in a tight spot as to who HE would campaign for. This is almost Kafka-esque — I just can’t figure out who woke up to find himself a dung beetle. Hey, Scott, THAT’s another reason why you gave to Obama.
Reason #1: To support your “Anyone-But-Hillary” strategy.
Reason #2: To have Obama campaign for you in 2012 if you win. (I’m kinda guessing you haven’t asked him to come down her to get a turnout for you in the primary . . . but your strategic decisions are a bit perplexing, so I’ll just have to wait and see. Any chance that Obama called Sessoms and asked him to do the work as his surrogate?)
Let’s look a bit OBJECTIVELY at the candidates:
Of the 8 running, only five have yet met the primary filing requirements.
In alphabetical order, they are:
Loyola
Mizusawa
Rigell
Sandlin
Taylor
It makes you wonder why Golden, Maulbeck and Smith haven’t been able to get 1000 signatures or submit the $3500 fee. Maybe Golden is waiting for another illegal, FEC-violating “loan” from his parents to raise the bucks. Maulbeck probably needs more time to get signatures and was likely counting on the “Booth Fairy” (Byler) to deliver on his promise to get “some filled-out signature sheets to all of the candidates.” PSYCHE!!! Hey, Ed, chances are, the “Booth Fairy” only slipped some signature sheets under the pillow of his bed-buddy — and you aren’t him. As for Chuck Smith, it’s hard to consider him a serious contender. He may have re-entered the race only to have a chance to pick a different candidate to endorse as he departs again. Derr go da judge.
Let’s all look at these five candidates (and the others when they come across the start line) and insure we give them ALL a chance. And let’s hold all of them up to the same scrutiny and same tests.
The Lifelongelephant has seen it all and heard it all. The bad news for the faint of heart is that elephants have a good memory. I call it the way I see it. It’s not personal. It’s focused. It’s direct. And it’s meant to call it the way it is.
And when I’m off the mark, I have no qualms about retracting. Based on DJ’s note, I respectfully retract the comment about Richard being a paid blogger. I’m sure it not too hard to believe that I based my comment on the fact that Richard was so passionate, and so knowledgeable about the Rigell camp and campaign. Add to that fact that it was hard for me to give creedence to the fact that he was doing it for free when there was enough money to spend on Obama and Mark Warner.
These are things that an elephant can’t forget.
Can someoneexplain to be how sandlin got the necessary signatures but golden cant and hes been running 16x longer?
Richard, I retract my “paid” comment, if in fact you and DJ are not paid and the comments about your language skills. The rest stands.
Rigell is the leading candidate, by whose accounts???? Let’s wait till June 8th to determine that!
If the “lead” is based on money then Mizusawa’s next in line
Leave your response