Mackenzie Poised For Victory in Pa. 7 GOP Primary

With a projected 43% of the vote, it appears that Republicans have elected Ryan Mackenzie as their nominee in the race against Susan Wild for the Pa. 7 Congressional seat. Kevin Dellicker snagged 33% of the tally, and Maria Montero finished last with just 25%. 

Though arguably the best candidate to face Wild in November, Montero raised far too little money and ran a disorganized campaign. Despite being able to raise money, Dellicker lost Republican support when he failed to endorse Lisa Scheller, who defeated him in the last Congressional race. 

Star of Wild's Cancer Ad Works For Her

Earlier this month, Congressional wannabe Susan Wild ran a TV ad starring a cancer survivor named Jo Ann Connors. "I don’t understand why Marty Nothstein wants to take away our insurance," worries Connors. "It keeps me awake at night. What would we do? What would my children do? It’s terrifying."

It's also bullshit.

Nothstein has made clear on several occasions that he supports continued coverage for those with pre-existing conditions.

“I am on record as supporting current law that requires insurers to cover preexisting conditions. Likewise, I am in favor of policies that would ensure health care for every citizen who wants it,” Nothstein said in a statement released to the press. “What I oppose is government forcing people to purchase policies they do not want and imposing plans that take away a patient’s choice of doctor.”

Nothstein was particularly upset by that ad because members of his own family are cancer survivors.

As it turns out, Jo Ann Connors is actually employed as a certified paralegal in Susan Wild's law firm.

Nothstein mentioned this at a WAEB-790AM interview last week. The proof that he is accurate is in the link provided above.

So basically, Wild used a firm employee as a prop in a fake ad.

She's worried Nothstein wants to take away her insurance? What about a law firm with 34 employees? Is Connors saying that Wild's law firm provides no health insurance for their employees?

This is precisely what I mean when I say Wild is dishonest.

I'll have another story about a case in which she was involved, but need to finish my research.

Bizarre Anti-Wild Robocall

One of my readers got a robocall on Sunday, the day of rest, that begins "In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. The most ungodly congressional candidate ever is Attorney Wild ... ."

What I consider ungodly is an ugly attack like that, and on a Sunday.

An Ugly Debate

Sue Wild, Marty Nothstein & Tim Sifies

Gracedale's tiny chapel is going to need an exorcism after last night's Pa-7 Congressional debate starring Tim Silfies, Susan Wild and Marty Nothstein. The 200 people jammed inside had no interest in Divine guidance or spiritual inspiration. They were there to see the other side bashed in an ugly display uncharacteristic of League of Women Voter sponsored debates. LWV official Beverly Hernandez asked the audience for civility before the show got started. "We're all Americans," she reminded everyone. Moderator John Kincaid asked the audience to hold applause until the end. These requests were ignored.

LWV's Beverly Hernandez

Wild and Nothstein supporters were both guilty of poor behavior, applauding and jeering answers. At the end of the night, Silfies remarked on the divide within the room, saying the audience "was not so much listening as rooting for a team."

I expected this immature behavior at the NextGen America debate, but not in a crowd of geriatrics who themselves are one step away from being Gracedale residents.

The debate itself started off with Wild predicting that she would be attacked that night with untruths about her from her opponent. Nothstein began by claiming that almost all of his campaign money comes from Pennsylvania, while Wild is getting her money from Nancy Pelosi. He said he stands for freedom and liberty. To find out what Wild stands for, "just follow the money." Silfies portrayed Nothstein and Wild as two sides of the same coin. He's tired of endless war, mountains of debt and broken government, and promised to bring common sense and an independent voice.

The maddening crowd

The first question of the night was the two top priorities of each candidate.

Wild answered that her two top priorities are health care reform and infrastructure. Nothstein agreed. Silfies said his top priority was figuring out a way to pay for these things with $21 trillion in debt.

Just a few weeks ago, at the Business Matters debate, Wild said her top priority was campaign finance reform. Nothstein said it was the national debt. Silfies agreed with the $21 trillion debt.

Susan Wild

The only candidate who gave consistent answers to the top priority question was Silfies.

Speaking of campaign finance reform, I can understand why Wild dropped that as a top priority. Her campaign has received over $2 million in PAC money, most from out of state. Silfies hit her pretty hard on this point.

"She talks about representing the common man, but then she takes more than a quarter million dollars from one PAC composed of Wall Street big wigs who want power and influence. She talks about sensible policy in the Middle East, and she takes PAC money from PACs that get their money from Boeing, Lockheed Martin. These are the backbone of the military industrial complex. These are companies that profit from selling arms for wars."

Tim Silfies

Wild responded weakly she takes money from value-based PACS, not corporate PACs.

Nothstein was at his strongest when he talked about his support for tax cuts. He wants them made permanent.

"Right now we see a booming economy in the Lehigh Valley. That's a direct result of the tax cuts. Speak to anybody. Speak to anyone who owns a small business. I'm one of them. I'm washing more cars. Right now the tax cuts are very important to every day working people and to small business owners like myself, who now have confidence to invest in the business. This is the type of stuff we need to make permanent and keep the money in your pocket and less in the government's pocket."

Wild is opposed, saying most of the tax cuts go to the wealthy one per cent and major corporations. But she agrees tax reform is needed. She called the proposed tax cut is an "election year stunt."

Nothstein meets LWV officials

Nothstein took issue with the one per cent argument.

"Sounds like my opponent is not for the tax cuts to put more money in the working man's pockets. You talk about one per cent. I met a lot of truck drivers, construction workers, who have seen more money in their hard-earned paycuts. I ask them, 'What do those crumbs get you?' 'Marty, for the first time in seven years, I was able to take my family to the shore. Marty, for the first time I've been able to take my kids to Hershey Park.' These are positive results of these tax cuts. More jobs, lower taxes, better future. Unemployment right now is at the lowest level since 1969. Wages grew nearly three per cent, the highest since 2009 and nicely outpacing inflation. A record seven million jobs are on the market, more jobs available than people willing to work. Pennsylvania has added more jobs this year than at any time over the last 18 years. Record job growth in Pennsylvania, also right here in the Lehigh Valley. Why? Tax cuts. More money.People are motivated. USS has reported that middle class income rose to record levels. Last time I checked, middle class wasn't one per cent. So I don't know who you're hanging around with, aside from your donors. These tax cuts are helping people. These are hard working, hard hat wearing, backhoe driving people who are seeing more money in their pockets, and they like the tax cuts."

Wild was at her strongest when she defended a woman's right to choose against pro-life candidate Nothstein.

"I do not believe the government belongs in anybody's medical examination room.It isn't there in men's examination rooms; it doesn't belong in women's. The decision about whether to terminate a pregnancy is a decision that should be made between a woman,her partner and a physician. ... It's a misconception that Planned Parenthood uses federal funding for abortions. they do not. Planned Parenthood provides vital, comprehensive health services for many, many women across all income sectors across the country."

I'm still trying to understand what Silfies said on that point.

At the end of the debate, when candidates were given the opportunity to question each other, they all did a pretty lousy job. Silfies managed to get Wild to say some nice things about Trump. I still haven't figured out what point Nothstein was attempting to make about Wild's legal career. He's no cross-examiner. But neither is Attorney Wild. She attempted to blast Nothstein for trying to tie her to disgraced Mayor Edwin "Fed Ed" Pawlowski, now serving a 15-year sentence for political corruption. She opened the door to this response:

"I find it hard to believe that when you were asked about the contract process with your job as Solicitor, that [you said], 'We believe there is no wrongdoing here.' There obviously was a lot of wrongdoing. So you were either incompetent or you were just completely unaware or complicit in what was going 30' down the hallway from you."

Wild responded that all the wrongdoing took place before she became City Solicitor.

"Susan, it's your quote. 'We believe there is no wrongdoing here.'"

It was a strange debate in which the Republican candidate claimed with some justification to be the voice of average Americans while the Democrat was tied to the one percenters she disdains. The Libertarian made a point of distinguishing himself from the two major party candidates, but pretty much gave the same answer to every question. No candidate could claim to be the winner or labeled the loser.

The losers were the audience. I have no idea why people from Central America would walk thousands of miles to have those kinds of neighbors.

Pa-7: How Much Have Nothstein and Silfies Raised?

Yesterday, I told you about Susan Wild's campaign finances in the Pa-7 race. What about her opponents, Marty Nothstein and Tim Silfies?

As of September 30, Nothstein has raised $856,359.88. This includes $145,000 of his own money. $219,058.19, or 26% of his total funding, comes from Pennsylvania.

As of September 30, Silfies reports having raised $48,276.00. Of this total, $33,975 came out of his own pocket. The site was nonresponsive much of the night, but it is clear from his own contribution that most of his money comes from Pennsylvania

Only 15% of Susan Wild's $2.4 Million is From Pa.

As of October 1, Susan Wild has raised $2.4 million in her bid for Pa-7. Only $341,756.10 of her total, or 15%, comes from Pennsylvania. The rest is outside money.

In her Business Mattes debate, Wild defended the money she received, claiming that most of it comes in the form of very small donations. This is false. Those under $200 donations amount to $326,728.67, or 13%, of her total contributions.

Wild claims her first priority is campaign finance reform.

Right.

In the meantime, she has sent an email to her fans, falsely claiming she's unable to pay her staff.

I will give you the skinny on Marty Nothstein and Tm Silfies when their most recent reports post. The Morning Call ghas a story, but I prefer to look at the numbers myself.

Browning, Wild Trade Barbs Over Campaign Finance

Dean Browning, darling of the local tea party, came up short against Marty Nothstein in capturing the GOP nomination in the PA-7 race. But he still recently slammed Democratic nominee Susan Wild over her fundraising:

Browning: "One of the things that is most irritating about liberal politicians like Susan Wild is their hypocrisy and double standards. A case in point is Wild's most recent "Saturday with Susan" post on Facebook. In her video, Wild says she believes it is "incredibly important" to reduce the role of "big money" in politics. Wild says she will push for campaign finance reform once she is elected and will work to eliminate the role of PAC's.

"Wild fails to mention in her video that $383,263 or 35% of her donations have come from PAC's and Committees including $249,813 from just one PAC that is based in Washington! Wild also takes a swipe at Marty Nothstein for receiving money from PAC's that may have items that could come before Congress. In doing so, Wild ignores the fact that she has taken money from PACs for Planned Parenthood and the National Education Association. Want to take a guess as to how Wild would vote on continuing funding for Planned Parenthood or on supporting school choice?

"Wild says she wants to increase the role of small donors at the grassroots level. Meanwhile only 31% of the money Wild has raised has come from individual donors who live in Pennsylvania. Actually, Wild has received more money in total from donors in California, Massachusetts and New York than she has from donors in Pennsylvania. That's because Wild's policies are better suited for San Francisco, Boston and New York City than they are for Slatington, Bangor and Nazareth.

"If you don't want another politician in Washington who has a different set of rules for themselves than they do for us and who says one thing while doing another, then you need to vote for Marty Nothstein on November 6th."

Wild responded, not on the merits, but with an ad hominem: "Gee, Dean, maybe you should tell folks about how you called me after the primary and offered me your “opposition research” on Marty (which I declined).".

I would have preferred an answer that actually addresses Browning's argument over a personal attack

I made similar arguments concerning Wild in the primary. This argument, though correct, has no appeal. Wild probably should have ignored Dean.