On Monday, I posted an analysis of the Dent-Dertinger congressional campaign that includes the thoughts of an insider, PaProgressive and Smitheus. They all make good points.
But the best analysis I've seen is at Lehigh Valley Common Sense, with all kinds of inside information you just won't find anywhere else. The biggest shocker, at least to me, is that the DCCC had originally intended to fund this campaign. But no local Dem with name recognition was willing to take on Charlie Dent. "Now I know with 100% certainty that Emmanuel called State Senator Lisa Boscola, Bethlehem Mayor John Callahan, and State Representative Jennifer Mann about running for the seat. All three declined his invitation, for very good, and personal, reasons."
Unfortunately, this race was over before it started. I wonder if the Lehigh Valley is the home of yellow dog Democrats.
Today's one-liner: "The shortest way to the distinguishing excellence of any writer is through his hostile critics." Richard LeGallienne
Local Government TV
▼
Wednesday, November 15, 2006
16 comments:
You own views are appreciated, especially if they differ from mine. But remember, commenting is a privilege, not a right. I will delete personal attacks or off-topic remarks at my discretion. Comments that play into the tribalism that has consumed this nation will be declined. So will comments alleging voter fraud unless backed up by concrete evidence. If you attack someone personally, I expect you to identify yourself. I will delete criticisms of my comment policy, vulgarities, cut-and-paste jobs from other sources and any suggestion of violence towards anyone. I will also delete sweeping generalizations about mainstream parties or ideologies, i.e. identity politics. My decisions on these matters are made on a case by case basis, and may be affected by my mood that day, my access to the blog at the time the comment was made or other information that isn’t readily apparent.
That's News?
ReplyDeleteThe well-written perspective offered contasined a number of interesting revealations. For example I do not know that a number of well-placed Dems were approaced by the DCCC. I had not known that DCCC took a long look again in June or July and might have funded but for the fact that Charlie already had $700k in his till and Dertinger had squat. The article also implies that locally elected Dems did not do their part.
ReplyDeleteTheere was a lot of good stuff in that post. I highly recommended it.
No actually according to the Fec filing Dent had raised closer to 900k and had 536k on hand
ReplyDeleteDertinger had raiser close to 9k by that filing in July and had 5k on hand.
ReplyDeleteGreenDog, We are talking about expense reports back in July. LVCC says $700k. You say close to $900k. You're both basically right. At that time Dent had $840k and Dertinger had about $8k. I blogged about it around that time. The point LVCC made was that Dent had a lot of money and Dertinger did not. And that's why, if I understand his report correctly, the DCCC decided against funding the campaign.
ReplyDeletejust wanted to make it clear Dertinger didn't have zero.
ReplyDeleteThe other question is had it been targeted would have simply have caused more damage than good.
ReplyDeleteThe troll/pretender on his own little fantasy-in-the-know blog is a lying bastard. I'm Bernie, Lisa's chief of staff. Bernie knows how to get in contact with me. Rham Emmanual NEVER called Lisa at any point (and neither did anyone from the DCCC). Our internals showed that Lisa would have beaten Charlie by 5%. Now that the blood is in the water, stay tuned for '08! It's Lisa's mid-term, she won with 73% of the vote, and she won 63% of the Republican vote! Can you say, "Exploratory Committee" early next year?
ReplyDeleteone of the mistakes that was made was that a number of campaigns when the DCCC screwed them over went to the net and asked for money directly. Through sites like Mydd and others of similar ilk I saw no Direct appeals through those groups for money for him. Dertinger's act blue account was the only congressional candidate in the state that didn't have a picture on it. On the avg most of the challenger candidates got on avg close to 6k or more.
ReplyDeletePatrick Murphy $165,726.52
Chris Carney $93,547.07
Steven Porter $10,837.35
Lois herr, $9,959.07,
Tony Barr(the other write-in candidate) $7,045.00
Jason Altmire $6,018.34
Phil Avillo $1,448.95
3 other ones got 199.00 for just putting their picture up from someone
Charles Dertinger $50.00
Bernie,
ReplyDeleteThe point of my post is not that the electeds who turned down the DCCC are cowards or unloyal, but that the DCCC had failed to deliver the candidates they had sought to recruit. As far as local electeds not doing their part, it is well known within party circles that some of the names I brought up, including Lisa and Mayor Callahan, did actively support Charles Dertinger, either internally or publically, so it's not fair to say they didn't help.
As for the attack on me by Lisa's COS, I would like to point out that I did not get that info out of her office, but out of a couple of high ranking party members in the Lehigh Valley. If he, as her chief-of-staff, is saying that's wrong, I tend to believe him. The others I can and would attest to. I got that info from "the horse's mouth" so to speak.
The main point I am really trying to get at though is not who said yes or no. It's that the party failed their nominee. The field plan wasn't good enough to defeat a candidate like Charlie Dent, the money never came in, and the DCCC missed the boat.
As for being a troll/pretender, I find it funny that a chief-of-staff would come on here with so much to say about some "troll/pretender." If he would like, he can email me and I'll tell him exactly what part of Dertinger's concession I was mentioned in. I do hope he is right about an exploratory committee, but I doubt his boss really wants him on here telling a bunch of "trolls/pretenders" that she is interested already.
I also have to admit, he proves himself right that he never got a call from Emanuel. Like myself, he didn't even know how to spell the guy's name (until a reader called me to let me know I had it wrong). Shame on us both I guess.
As for the internals, I saw the internal polls that were run here in the Valley and I think Lisa would win by a lot more than 5%. I hope whoever that is, is right about the exploratory committee, even if they seem to want to imply I'm talking about things I heard out of thin air.
Rich
p.s.- for the future, let's save the "trolls" talk to referring to Mr. Millan
Anon 10:04, Bernie!! Whew! Is that really you? LVCC is a "lying bastard?" I see you made the same comment on his own site. His identity is certainly no secret. Unlike many bloggers, he is not anonymous. All you need do is look at his profile and you'll have his name. He claims to know what he said with "100% certainty." If he is mistaken, I'm sure it is just an honest mistake. He does not strike me as the kind of person who is out to cause trouble. That would be me. The preface to his blog states he is "23, a recent college grad, Democratic Committeeman, and union member." He sounds like the kind of person who would support all three of the Dems he mentions by name. So Bernie, if you want to say he is mistaken, that's fine with me. It's probably fine with him, too. But it's a bit harsh to call this young man a "lying bastard." There aren't enough young people interested in politics, and I'm happy when I see someone like LVCC or Green Dog take an interest.
ReplyDeleteAs I type this response, I just saw a comment came in from the subject of your wrath. He defers to your knowledge about what happened. So you may be right to correct this dude, but there's no need to use a sledge hammer on someone who actually is your ally. Save that for me, bippy. I'm the real bastard.
As far as your polling goes, let me tell you something. Several months before the election, you sent me an email telling me you had internal polling that showed Lisa would beat Bonnie Dodge with 71% of the vote. I was tempted, but did not go with your data because I honestly didn't think anyone could win with 71%. I thought you might be playing me. You weren't. Lisa won with 72%. So if you have internal polls saying that Lisa would have beaten Charlie by 5%, I tend to believe you now.
Looks like Lisa is gearing up for a stab at Congress.
I'm trying to confirm from you that you did in fact make this post and have sent you an email to confirm that. I suspect you are Bernie K, Lisa's chief of staff, but just want to be sure.
Rising Sun, Thanks for your explanation. It takes a real man to do that, even if you don't have a scar on your forehead. Bernie K is fiercely loyal to Lisa, as you can see. But for reasons I can't understand, he's always nice to me.
ReplyDeleteThe only point I would make is that it does no good to blast "the evil, maniacal, grotesquely round, negative machine named Shawn Millan" as a troll. That's cold, dude. I know many Dems who hold him in high regard. He's very good at what he does.
Bernie,
ReplyDeleteHe's great at what he does. I find his campaigns to be rather negative though. I also find his clients to be people I hold in very low esteem. With that said, it may be a bit cold to rip him so badly. It's not as though he killed anyone.
As for the poster, I find it hard to believe a chief-of-staff would be on here calling anyone a "lying bastard." Doesn't reflect well on his boss. I sincerely hope he can temper that temper if his boss wants to challenge Charlie. Charlie's camp will beg that to come out.
As for my explanation, if that was Bernie then I stand corrected, but if not, the two people who told me she was asked I hold in pretty high esteem and would tend to believe they didn't make it up out of the air. I kind of wonder why he got so angry about the posting anyway? If she really wanted to run, she could have entered on her own and cruised to the nomination, then probably won the seat. Whether she was called or not would have no effect on a proven winner like Lisa. Has she ever lost a race yet?
Rich
Rich,
ReplyDeleteI'm trying to confirm the post came from Bernie Kieklak, who is Lisa's chief of staff. Bernie is very protective concerning Lisa.
Actually you didn't criticize her. I was the one who suggested our local big name Dems were too afraid to take on Charlie. And it's the truth. They may not like to hear that, and that's too damn bad. I didn't hear too many of them speaking out against the war, either. I saw them at no candlelight vigils. Of course, there was blood in the water then, too. It just wasn't our blood. Leaders are supposed to lead, but too many pols from both sides just stick their fingers in the air to see which way the wind is blowing. We deserve better.
As far as the personal attack against you is concerned, don't let it bother you. I'm sure Bernie did not mean it quite the way it came out. The Internet is strange that way. Once you say something, it's out there for the whole world to see. You can't take it back. But I admire Bernie's forthright style. It's different and refreshing. A few days before the election, he called Angle on his radio show and took Ron on. Whenever you call a radio talk show, you instantly put yourself at a disadvantage because the talk show host can control the dialogue, but I still admired Bernie's combative style. it's good for democracy.
So if it was Bernie, and I suspect it was, try to cut him a little slack. His heart is in the right place. He was protecting his boss, and didn't go behind your back. He came right at you. He didn't threaten you with libel or get a bunch of goons to post anonymous comments. Personal attacks are an occupational hazard when you blog.
And I think your analysis was the best I read.
Thanks Bernie. Now that I got some venting out on my blog (as well as a story about next year's elections), I think I'll just try to forget about the whole thing. I think the general theme of my posting is well known now.
ReplyDeleteI've confirmed the anonymous blogger is, in fact, Lisa Boscola's chief of staff - Bernie Kieklak.
ReplyDelete