A Weblog of Centrist Voices in American Politics
|
|
|
A Weblog of Centrist Voices in American Politics | |
|
July 24, 2005Potts RisingI just got an email from Jeremy (Charging RINO) that contained some really good news. A Mason Dixon poll released last night has the maverick Republican State Senator, and Independent candidate for Governor Russ Potts, at 9%. This is a four 4 to 5% increase from the last polls that were released. Yes, 9% still represents a long way to go, but I think this will at least take some air out of the argument, from the Republican nominee, that Senator Potts is not valid enough to be included in the debates, especially in a three way race that could be won by the candidate who reaches 36%. Furthermore, an increase of 4 to 5% shows that people are starting to tune into the Potts candidacy, and more and more are relating to his message. The good news is that it is still early, if Potts can get that number up above 10%, or closer to 15% by Labor Day, than a Jesse Ventura/Lowell Weicker type upset is not out of the question. Stay tuned, a radical centrist may be making history in the Commonwealth of Virginia. Here is Jeremy's excellent take on the latest poll. Go here to email Jerry Kilgore's staff and let them know that someone who wants to be Governor should have the courage to debate his opponents, and not behind closed doors in a private West Virginia club. Posted by Mathew at July 24, 2005 11:30 AMComments
I'd like to know why we can't have a debate in which all three are invited and if Kilgore refuses to attend, stage it with just Kaine and Potts and let viewers know that Kilgore was invited and chose not to attend? Posted by: Scott Smith at July 24, 2005 10:30 PMQWell a big part of it is that debates are generally sponsored. This puts the details how the debate is conducted in the hands of the sponsors to some extend. IOW, the rule applies that freedom of the press is for whoever owns the press. So we "can" have the debate you describe, it's just not what the sponsors want to do...Unless and until debates become an expected function funded and regulated by the government itself, we'll continue to see substantial variance from state to state and from election to election, based on the preferences of the sponsors. Personally, for reasons of expedience, I'm not all that troubled by using polling figures as a proxy for a candidate's relevance. Many possible rules of thumb might apply. I'd say 9% is borderline, but it depends on the other candidates numbers. I'd say that I'd want every candidate in the debate to have evidence of at least 1/3 to 1/4 as much support as the candidate with the highest support level. Posted by: bk at July 25, 2005 10:50 AM |
Archives
March 2006
February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003
Recent Entries
Dubai Out
Why So Long Between Democracies? Round One, Centrism Rock Lobster? Blackwell Releases "Worst-Treated" List "IRV" used in Burl., VT for mayor election. Great idea! Random Thread Election 2006: Round One A Proper Multiculturalism Bush proposes line item veto act - what's changed?
|
