Had Enough?
By E M Barner | Monday, August 8th, 2011 | PoliticsIt’s no secret that Jamie Radtke’s campaigning style has been more positive than negative negative than positive, but is this a new low?
Facebook Ad
George Allen ≠ Tim Kaine
They are both former VA Governors. And that’s where the resemblance stops.
I’m one of the more receptive voters out there to Jamie’s anti-establishment message (not a big fan of some of Allen’s Senate votes), and this turns me off.
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
Share this post
About the author
E M Barner
E M Barner, the blogger formerly known as DCH / De Civitate Hominis (“concerning the city of man”), writes from a Northern Virginia perspective. Barner has been active in Republican politics and policy since 1994 – as a grassroots volunteer, party leader, and professional.
Comments
11 Responses to "Had Enough?"
I’m the last person to consider themselves a Radtke fan (full disclosure before someone has a hissy-fit again: I’m part of the Donner team) and I have criticized her myself for her perpetual negative campaigning, but this is just a little bit petty from the biggest political blog in Virginia. Considering Bush and his cohorts, of which Allen was one, contributed in the ballpark of 50% of the problems we have now, it’s actually a fair comparison.
Did you mean to say “more negative than positive”?
Who are you guys fooling? Are you a bunch of establishment wannabes? According to Allen, Kaine is his opponent so what are you worried about lil ole Jamie for huh?
There is plenty of resemblance.. Both are establishment pro-carreer politicians. Both of them made it to the big leagues and both became integral parts of the Washington big givernment (not a typo) establishment that created this crisis of opportunity which the dems exploit through the deliberate actions of the president.
A contingent of the conservative wing of the republican base rejected Allen and voted against him in favor of an establishment bucking bronco who initially busted the chops of both parties wreckless spending habits. This did not happen to Kaine and in spite of your assumptions Tim remains very popular among the dems and many indys.. Pay for poll data and weep.. Can’t make this stuff up.
Wow. I guess the Facebook ad is the main issue we need to be concerned about? The Dow tanked today by how much? But we’re talking about a 1 X 1 Facebook ad? George Allen voted for the debt ceiling increase how many times?? (4) And yes, many people have had enough of “these guys”. That’s why there are so many candidates in the primary against George Allen.
Let me get this straight- talking about someone’s voting record is negative campaigning? What, pretend it didn’t happen? If George Allen is being treated “unfairly” about his voting record, then why doesn’t he defend his votes to federalize the TSA, votes for hate crimes legislation, his vote on Ted Kennedy’s pet project No Child Left Behind, and his vote for the biggest expansion of givernment since LBJ w/Medicare Part D?
So are we to pretend he doesn’t have a voting record or it’s “going negative”? Not that George Allen’s supporters would *ever* do something like go negative, would they? I guess all the snarky comments and blogs about Jamie Radtke are positive campaigning by George Allen’s proxies. But then again, she must be gaining on him, or they’d ignore her.
Karen, and others. We can multitask. This was just one of several posts from yesterday.
This is an individual post, not a corporate BD opinion. However, we’ve been consistent in saying that Jamie would be better served telling us why she should be Senator rather than telling us why George Allen should not.
That advice has been offered publicly and privately. And for the most part, it’s been ignored.
@Ken Falkenstein
Yes, I got that reversed. Meant more negative than positive. That’s what I get for doing a quick bedtime post. Thanks for laughing w/ me.
Well EM Barner, what would you propose if you were the campaign manager for either candidate?
I clicked on this link thinking the article was probably about the recent reemergence of the expression of our lousy economic fundamentals. I though it might be a cry for relief from the managed economy that is so obviously an abject failure. I briefly (and foolishly) imagined it might be a call for a return to genuine free market principles, a call to allow investors (no matter how wealthy and well-connected) who make bad investments take their losses, to allow the markets to clear, to dismantle mind-numbing regulations, price distorting market interventions, and unbacked fiat currencies.
I should have known better. It was merely another cheap shot at Jamie Radtke by the establishment boys here at BD.
By the way: did you guys have fun in the markets yesterday? How are you liking your debt deal by now? What part of “we need to balance the budget now, not later” did you not understand? Are all of you silently hoping the Fed will embark on QE3 and save your ass(ets)? Do any of you really believe in the free market, including the “pain” part? Or would you rather continue to postpone (and enlarge) the pain and push it off onto your kids?
This “managed economy” thing sucks, bad. Nothing will get better until we understand that. But, being genuinely free is too scary for most people.
I just have to smile when someone says Eve is establishment. Anyone who knows her, knows it sure isn’t true. People should engage the discussion instead of call people they don’t know names.
When it comes to political opinions, you guys ARE the establishment compared to me. I just have to smile when someone spends at least 4 or 5 minutes writing an “article” which has only one point: to attack someone by complaining about the other’s habit of attacking.
Perhaps it’s all about whose ox is being gored, eh?
SO, let’s talk about issues. Those of you who’ve read any number of my rants know that I regularly rant about the productivity of debt, the fact that it is negative and has been for years, and that this is due to the fact that we borrow to consume and NOT TO PRODUCE. Since we are not producing excess wealth, we have to borrow to be able to afford to pay people to do nothing.
Well, it ain’t just me. Google the article and read it. I can’t post links.
“Zerohedge: Must Read: UBS’ Andy Lees On Why The US Economy Is, All Else Equal, Doomed”
“We are in this mess because of excessive leverage and excessive consumption, financed by excessively cheap real capital – (not just Bernanke & Greenspan but further back to the end of the gold standard, and in fact even before that as it was this misallocation of capital that forced us off the gold standard in the first place). If capital had been allocated productively, then by definition debt would fall as a percentage of GDP. Total debt may rise, but efficient allocation of capital would always mean the economy would grow faster than the debt as it means you are making a positive rather than negative real return on that capital.
“Whichever way you look at it, capital has been massively misallocated for years.”
“The real cost of capital has to rise. That will happen through default in one way or another. Debt has to be cleared. Multiple contraction is inevitable.”
“Until the debt is cleared and capital starts to be properly allocated, economic growth per unit of additional debt will continue to sour.”
Leave your response
The comments section is for meaningful discussion. Readers are reminded to post comments that are germane to the article and write in a common language that steers clear of personal attacks and/or vulgarities.
Please take a moment to review our comment policy.