Herseth Wikipedia driveby discussion continues over at Mt. Blogmore. Lets talk about the lack of debates instead.
There's a discussion raging over at Mt. Blogmore regarding the Wikipedia information posted on Congresswoman Herseth's profile that I discussed on Thursday.
While some of it is with regards to the falsification of the information in her Wikipedia profile, some of it is with regards to.. er, the content of the announcement of the information being there. I'll leave that discussion over there.
Regardless, I'd reiterate the comments I made before. Whomever posted this on Stephanie didn't do Republicans any favors. And it puts me in a really awkward position essentially having to defend her honor.
For crying out loud, I'd rather be questioning why she's avoiding debates with Bruce Whalen. Yes, yes, before you bring it up, I've read the excuse on this one that she was never told about it. And I can even accept that. But what about the next time? And why aren't more being scheduled?
As recently as yesterday, I've been told by a prominent Democratic friend that she loves debates. But on the other hand, I've also been told from good sources that this round of debate cancellation is not dissimilar to the campaign of two years ago. So which one is it, and can we expect more than three debates to be scheduled?
Now that's the type of issue we should be talking about.
While some of it is with regards to the falsification of the information in her Wikipedia profile, some of it is with regards to.. er, the content of the announcement of the information being there. I'll leave that discussion over there.
Regardless, I'd reiterate the comments I made before. Whomever posted this on Stephanie didn't do Republicans any favors. And it puts me in a really awkward position essentially having to defend her honor.
For crying out loud, I'd rather be questioning why she's avoiding debates with Bruce Whalen. Yes, yes, before you bring it up, I've read the excuse on this one that she was never told about it. And I can even accept that. But what about the next time? And why aren't more being scheduled?
As recently as yesterday, I've been told by a prominent Democratic friend that she loves debates. But on the other hand, I've also been told from good sources that this round of debate cancellation is not dissimilar to the campaign of two years ago. So which one is it, and can we expect more than three debates to be scheduled?
Now that's the type of issue we should be talking about.
Comments
This is no different...The argus reports this morning that Steph isn't going to start her campaign until September or October.
My guess is that she won't start her campaign until the weekend before election day. That allows her to dodge the debates.
This shows you what kind of character she has. Maybe smart politically but she lacks grit and leadership for dodging debates.
And before you say he's busy, I say that there's a big difference between debating a "forum" and doing it before KELO Land or South Dakota Public Broadcasting.
Rounds is ducking and dodging those too, and I am willing to bet he doesn't accept.
He cares too much about politics snd too little about people.
I hear Cuba might be minus a leader down there, maybe Rounds should look into that job.
Then again, he might, since he won't firmly committ to serving out his full term if elected.
This blog supposed to be about SD campaigns and strategy. Whalen got caught launching the sleaziest move in recent SD political history, and you're trying to change the subject. And, of course, you link to the story out there that doesn't mention this line quoting her spokesman -- "He said Herseth won't officially begin her re-election campaign until September or early October and has three other campaign appearances with Whalen on her schedule." You can find that on the Madison Daily Leader site. My guess is that you know that, but chose the KELO story because it left that key line out.
Also, according the Rapid City Weekly (which you can find at rcweeklynews dot com)-- "Herseth said she has agreed to three debates; Whalen said he knew of one that had been confirmed."
So Herseth has confirmed for three, and Whalen has confirmed for one. But you need to try to create a story to cover up what may be the dumbest move in the history of SD campaigns.
I think you're smart and enjoy reading your site, but this is ridiculous. First of all, how can you claim that she's avoiding debates by missing one they forgot to tell her about? Seriously, PP, do you think it wise of Bruce Whalen's campaign to accuse Herseth of 1) adultry (calling her a homewrecker) and sexual harrasment (sleeping with your chief of staff would clearly be harrasment)? Do you think it a good move to send this kind of stuff to the media? Would you advise other campaigns to do the same? If the Billion campaign said Mike Rounds was sleeping with his staff and having an affair with a married woman, would you think it appropriate? You purport to be an expert, so tell us if you think this is smart...
Also, anon who said "This shows you what kind of character she has" -- I assume you're being sarcastic... Dakotafest forgets to invite Herseth to a debate, yet Whalen knowingly spreads lies accusing her of adultry and sexual harrasment... but it's a reflection of her character? Lee Breard, is that you?
I know you're a Republican, and that you're a friend of Whalen's, but you're starting to look more like a tool of the Whalen campaign, than someone who calls them like he sees them.
That e-mail was way below the belt. It's that kind of crap that makes it impossible for me to register with any party.
It's hilarious that you guys are accusing her of dodging debates when she has confirmed for more debates than Whalen. But you guys don't let the facts get in the way. That's why she's pregnent. That's why she is engaged to her Chief of Staff. That's why she had an affair with a married man. She's probably a lesbian too, sleeping with Hillary Clinton.
This place is turning into sibbyonline.
If some Democrat state legislator sent a press release spreading lies about someone's fidelity, you would (properly) skewer them.
In fact, if someone posts a rumor about a public official's private life on your blog, you delete the comment. You know that this kind of stuff is garbage.
You said yourself that the stuff on the wikipedia was false before, it seems, the news about the Whalen press release/e-mail broke.
I know you're a Republican, but geez, could your double standard be any more blatant?
After being very consistent in saying this kind of rumormongering has no place in politics, you now sit by silently?
I've always appreciate that you call a spade and spade, but I'm beginning to wonder...
I think you're giving me too much credit.
I write about that which catches my fancy at the moment. And yes, I do it from my admittedly Republican activist point of view. If you haven't noticed, CCK, SDWATCH, NVB, and DWATG do it the same thing, albeit from their democratic activist points of view.
Coincidentally, all of us think we're right.
I would have preferred to link to the Mitchell Daily Republic Story on the debate with the quote on how we shouldn't be taking this as ducking debates, but it wasn't on-line. It was closer to the topic at hand, and they were the ones who brought it up. So I took the first one I found.
Is there someone out there who disagrees that this would be a better tactic than calling her names? That was my point.
Do I think the "House wrecker" comment up on blogmore was cool? No, and heck, no.
(Please recall I was also the one investigating who did it, and called the wikipedia thing BS in the first place).
But please, terming the house wrecker comment "the sleaziest move in recent SD political history?" at the moment, I think that's a bit overblown.
Besides, aside from some of you guys thinking I live with a computer attached to my hip, I think sometimes people jump the gun on this stuff.
Right now, unless the story goes past a blog post on blogmore into a MSM story with comments from both campaigns, it's nothing more than a snide remark that should not have been uttered.
This is supposed to be a site about campaign strategy. Whalen's complex masterplan seems to be getting sibby to post absurd nonsensical lies. Congratulations! Mission accomplished.
I know that Whalen is a paid advertiser on this site, but come on - let's analyze his candidacy accurately and call it what it is: a joke.
Which of the Whalen allegations are true?
Is Herseth pregnent?
Is she engaged to her Chief of Staff?
Did she have an affair with a married man?
Each of these were pretty much debunked on blogmore. So which ones do you know to be true? And how do you know?
I noticed at least one Republican on Blogmore saying that Whalen lost his vote over this. And according to the Argus Leader/KELO poll, Whalen wasn't even getting a majority of Republicans before his idiotic comments.
He was sitting at 26% last week. And the first real news of the campaign is a blunder on Whalen's part. Is it possible that he actually goes lower? He's going to have to work his butt off to get ten more points... and that puts him right at the Schmidt mark.
and aaron, are you saying whalen's campaign isn't calling out rep. herseth about the debates? who is then? and it wasn't whalen's campaign who sent out a press release/email about the wikipedia issue? who sent that out to the media then? (notice i said the press release/email and not the wikipedia post)
Hillary, Jr had someone take the fall for her on missing a debate. She is sacred the truth will come out. She is a LIBERAL! She even thinks it is okay for an adult to take my minor child over the state line to get an abortion. Her true colors will start showing soon.
I have been out of the State for a while, did a Staffer really say Hillary Jr. is pregnant, is Max the Texan the Dad? If a staffer actually did this they need to be gone.