Friday, August 17, 2007
The Focus is on Walberg
From an anonymous poster at WalbergWatch and To Play the King.:
I think everyone-especially when they post here, needs to remember that the focus is beating Walberg.
I like Mark Schauer and think he is doing a good job in the Senate.
I think Jim Berryman was a good State Senator and fought a good fight against Smith in '98.
As Republican's go, I think Joe Schwarz was a good Congressman and if he switched parties would do an excellent job.
So, ironically, after so many years of wandering the wilderness of nobody to run or having a nobody run against "Do Nothing Nick"-Reiner, Crittendon, etc, we seem to have too many qualified candidates to run against Walberg.
The logical thought then, seems, to boil it down to who is doing what now.
Sen. Schauer is a sitting Senator, currently serving the largest poplulation centers in the 7th. Then, along with that, the complex and important role of leading one of the four caucus' and (presumably) preparing the caucus for both the 2010/12 re-districting fight and 2010 election.
Jim Berryman is fighting for teachers benefits with the MEA.
Joe Schwarz is working on Health Care issues and (I assume) continuing his medical practice.
We can debate the relative importance of Congress/State Senate, but it is irresponsible to suggest that either isn't or is more important than the other. Maybe to you, one is bigger than the other, but they are both big. It matters who is serving and the policys they promote.
At the end of the day, I return to my opening line, focus on beating Walberg.
If Berryman continues to run or Schwarz jumps in as a Dem, then I think it is probably better to have Schauer stay in the Senate. Both Berryman and Schwarz are credible, realistic alternatives to Walberg.
Ultimately, I think any of the 3 (S,S,B) can beat Walberg, but lets say Schauer does. Then we are left with a special election in the 19th.
Would Simpson run? Griffin? Whomever-hopefully-the Dems in Calhoun have elected to replace Nofs?
The bets on all of the above are long. All are/would be important to keeping the Dems in charge of the State House.
What would likely happen? Probably the first of an 8 year run in the Senate for Mike Nofs.
Now, how bad can that be? Well, doing the math on the Senate today, the Dems have 17 seats. Ultimately, when the budget and the rest of the important decisions are made in Lansing, the Senate Republicans have two marginal seats-Kahn and Richardville. Both will have to be very careful how they vote btwn now and the next election. So, they are the most likely to join with the Dems on a "mission critical" vote (Education, taxes, cuts, etc.) With the two of them today, that gives you 19, with the Lt. Gov breaking a tie.
Take the 19th/Schauer off the table, put in Nofs, and you drop to 18. Or, to put it another way-wave goodbye to getting anything done during the last two years of the Granholm administration.
I like Schauer. I like what he is doing, but I would also like him to stay in the Senate.
"As Republican's go, I think Joe Schwarz was a good Congressman and if he switched parties would do an excellent job."
Joe Schwarz would do an excellent job as a Republican, Democrat or Independent. If he runs, he will stay with the GOP.
Got to tell you there is no way Berryman can defeat Walberg. Just look at the history. He has lost to Walberg before, for a house seat that was made up of Lenawee County, Berryman's so called base. The Senate seat that he represented has a majority of its population outside of the current Congressional seat. Berryman hasn't run for public office in over a decade, this congressional seat, which he lost. And so far in this race he boasts of raising $11,000 a week for five weeks, a pace that will have him raise a total of $750,000 for a race that will cost at least $3 Million.
As for Schwarz...Nice Guy...easy to negotitate with...Rebulican...voted for the war...never voted against John Engler during his tenure in the Senate...lost to Tim Walberg...why should progressives be with him?
Guess that leaves Sharon Renier. I'll let you make that case.
In the interest of maintaing some integrity in this medium, I take isuue with the post by Anonymous 12:19 AM
1. Get some balls and knock of the anonymous posts. Or better yet, take the time to give yourself a name. That way you can own your statements and opinions. At the very least you will have shown some creativity by comming up with something other than "Anonymous"
2. I am not necessarly a "Schwarz should get in the race" guy. However, I am for a political conversation based in truth, and taking democratic control of the 7th seat.
To Anonymous 12:19AM - Show me where Joe Schwarz cast a "vote for the war" while in the service of the 7th. I will save you the time newbie, he didn't. Any votes he cast were in support of the troops, that doesn't equate to support for the war. Get with the program! We are all working to defeat a republican that voted against legislation that defines troop breaks before returning to combat.
Schwarz at least servd in combat. I would wager he is a better judge on the affairs of war than the man curently in office or any other declared candidate to date. In the end anyone is better than Walberg.
If you are going to weigh into the debate with your political drivel, try to avoid spewing statements you ca not back up with fact. Your approach only serves to cheapen this political medium and dumbs down the conversation in general.
That's something I've wondered about too. Lots of people have said Schwarz voted for the war here. How could he have? He was elected in 2004.
Schwarz served on the House Armed Services Committee, one of the few freshman on that committee. He was a voice of reason and with his experience in Vietnam and CIA he was an asset to that committee. He made at least three trips to Iraq and Gitmo, so he was one of the most knowledgeable people on the real story over there. Too bad America lost that kind of insight and background to a wingnut like Walberg who is clueless and is simply a pawn of the the administration and CFG.
The only reason I wouldn't go for Berryman at this point is if Schwarz jumped in the race. If Susan Demas was right and Schwarz did poll 3% above Walberg, I'd say Schwarz should run!
I really hope Schwarz runs. I think he would clean up, but only of the lazy voters got off their collective duff's and voted in the primary. If not it's anybody's race.
The one long comment on this post attacks Berryman because he has lost races to Walberg before. One point of counter argument, Walberg lost to Schwarz before he beat him. Persistence can be a virtue. Lenawee County today is different than the Lenawee of the 80's. I hope Fitzy gets into the trends within the counties and that would be an interesting angle to investigate.
Lenawee County today is different than the Lenawee of the 80's. I hope Fitzy gets into the trends within the counties and that would be an interesting angle to investigate.Post a Comment
I agree, that would be a fascinating angle to investigate. Unfortunately, I'm not sure if I'm the guy to do it. I've lived in the 7th District for 15 years now, but my knowledge of the detailed trends within each part of the district only goes so far. You gotta remember, I'm not a political science major. This is a hobby for me.
Now, if there's anyone out there that could point me towards a good resource, I'd love to learn.
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
August 2006 September 2006 October 2006 November 2006 December 2006 January 2007 February 2007 March 2007 April 2007 May 2007 June 2007 July 2007 August 2007 September 2007 October 2007 November 2007 December 2007 January 2008 February 2008 March 2008 April 2008 May 2008 June 2008 July 2008 August 2008 September 2008 October 2008 November 2008