WI: Green/Doyle debates, and CCW

[Monkeyleg]

Last night Congressman Mark Green and Governor Jim Doyle held the last of their three debates before the November 7th election.

The three debates have covered just about every issue from health care to funding for schools. Last night's debate also got into the topic of violent crime, the causes of crime, and other law enforcement issues.

What was strikingly absent was the mention of our shall-issue CCW bill, which Doyle has now vetoed twice. Or Mark Green's support of the shall-issue CCW bill.

I fully expected Doyle to attack Green for supporting a bill that would "allow people to carry hidden guns into shopping malls, restaurants, child care centers, hospices, schools, rock concerts, youth sporting events, bingo halls," etc, etc.

I certainly didn't expect Mark Green to be the first of the two to mention his support of concealed carry. There was no good reason for him to draw himself into a controversial issue unless forced to do so.

But, Doyle never even brought it up.

Could it be that Doyle is so afraid that his two vetoes of our CCW bill will hurt him that he wants to run away from them?

It looks like that's the obvious conclusion. And, while I'm nervous as can be about the outcome of the November 7th election, Doyle's retreat from the issue gives me a ray of hope. The NRA will soon be hitting Doyle hard. They've already poured money and resources into the state, and they're going to increase their efforts.

Nothing would give me more satisfaction than to listen to the media pundits in the days following the elections postulating that it was the NRA that defeated Doyle.

 

[jenniferjane]

I missed the debate and I was wondering what if anything would be said about the CCW issue. I'm feeling cautiously optimistic at this news.

 

[artjs]

I saw an ad for/by? Doyle after the debate Friday night that talked about Green's support (Oh My GAWD) for MORE GUNS ROTFLMAO. That was the first time I've seen anything in the political ads referring to CCW.

Also saw an ad last night (Saturday) with Green where he states that Doyle is now running attack ads against him, but that he's not going to do that and just comments on what he represents.

At least one of the candidates may run a 'clean' campaign!

 

[Monkeyleg]

jenniferjane, the real polling is showing Doyle with a two or three point lead over Green, but still within the margin of error. If Green is, as artjs said, running positive ads, that may mean that his campaign's internal polling is showing him pulling ahead.

It still bothers me, though, that Doyle has consistently held a small lead. In 2004, weekly polling by Rassmussen showed Bush with a ~50 to ~48 point lead over Kerry, and those were the final numbers.

With the numbers so close, turnout is going to be key. So, I'm praying for a cold, rainy day. Or, better yet, snow.

 

[Trip20]

Green is running negative ads just as is Doyle. Neither is running a "clean campaign" in that respect.

 

[Travis Lee]

Within 2-3%?

Well that's close enough for a variation in polling accuracy.... and close enough for the dems to steal with vote fraud.


Free cigs, and booze to bums, tire slashings....
They'll give it their best.
Count on it.


--Travis--

 

[Monkeyleg]

Travis, vote fraud is a concern, but it is the least of my concerns.

In 2002, the indian casino tribes poured $750,000 into Doyle's campaign in the last couple of weeks. I expect the same to happen this time.

The Journal Sentinel is now so blatant in their bias in covering the campaign that only in their wildest dreams can the editors believe they're being fair and neutral.

Reporters routinely describe the $470,000 that Green transferred from his congressional campaign fund to his gubernatorial fund as "illegal money."

It was never "illegal," and still is not. When an elections board committee comprised of four Doyle appointees, one misguided Libertarian, and three Rebublicans votes 5:3 that Green's campaign should divest itself of those funds, something really stinks.

The corruption in this state is rampant. Everything is for sale, as long as the proceeds go to Jim Doyle.

This is a tough state politically. And I only think that things are going to get rougher in times to come.

 

[Low-Sci]

I'm really not surprised that the CCW subject didn't come up. It makes sense to me that both parties avoided it because a) you don't support guns in the face of Madison and Milwaukee, and b) you don't denounce guns in the face of the rest of the state. Bringing it up gives too many opportunities for Milwaukee and Madison constituents to attack Green, and for everywhere else to attack Doyle. Its too late-stage to work out that kind of controversy.

It also seems to me that the candidates at this point are working to claim the moderates' votes. People who are pro-gun and consider that an issue have sided with Green, people who are anti-gun and consider that an issue have sided with Doyle. Now both of them are working to gain the votes of people for whom guns are not an issue, and have other issues. They were all about finance. Economics is politics for moderates.

 

[Standing Wolf]

It also seems to me that the candidates at this point are working to claim the moderates' votes.

Multiple parties would solve that problem.

 

[AJ Dual]

Dick,

As I've said multiple times, I'm pretty confident that Green will win. I'm more concerned about the legislature, putting us in a "win the battle, lose the war" scenario, for at least another two years.

Here's ten reasons I think Green will win:

1. As you yourself said, "margin for error".

2. Republicans/Conservative traditionaly underreport in polling by up to 8% for various reasons. (call it the "we have jobs/lives" factor, if you wish)

3. The Gay marriage amendment.

4. Property Taxes.

5. Voter ID and Election Fraud bills that Doyle has vetoed.

6. Mid-term election, works in favor of the Republicans this time.

7. No third-party spoiler of any note this time.

8. The JFK vs. Nixon factor. Green is just much more likable, younger (dark hair, more of it), and vigorous looking in his appearance. Doyle drips with the "Chuck Schumer" factor. (And I'm trying to be impartial here.)

9. The NRA has the WI gubanatorial race as one of it's top priorities.

10. School choice/vouchers as a wedge issue with urban minority voters.

I could go on...

Frankly, I'd be shocked if Doyle wins. FWIW, I just don't feel it in my gut. I felt Doyle would win in my gut when he faced off against McCallum too.

I also know that anecdotal polling by election signs are supposed to mean squat. However, the fact that I barely ever see any Doyle signs has got to mean something...

 

[Trip20]

I also know that anecdotal polling by election signs are supposed to mean squat. However, the fact that I barely ever see any Doyle signs has got to mean something...

I hope you're right, because in the Wausau (and surrounding) area I've seen no - repeat, no - Doyle yard signs. I've seen a few of the large 4'-ish wide Green yard signs, and many of the smaller signs.

I too hope this translates into some good news.

 

[jenniferjane]

It is good to hear that others are noticing a lack of Doyle signs...I thought it was just my neighborhood. I hope that means something.

 

[langenc]

Isnt Green Bay pretty polish. They vote 90++% Democrat.

 

[Monkeyleg]

"It is good to hear that others are noticing a lack of Doyle signs...I thought it was just my neighborhood. I hope that means something."

I don't want to rain on anyone's parade, but yard signs are a poor indicator. Always were, always will be.

Compared to door-to-door literature or even direct mail, yard signs are expensive. The most costly part of a yard sign is the wire, which is why many campaigns have volunteers go out and collect yard signs after election day so that they can use them again for the next election.

Another factor in the cost of yard signs is the volunteer time required to assemble them, and then deliver them, not to mention the cost to the volunteer in terms of gasoline and abuse of vehicle.

Having said all of the above, this is a weird election. I don't see many Doyle signs, see some Green signs, see very little in the way of bumper stickers (and I live on the liberal South Side of Milwaukee), and don't see much activity from either side in terms of volunteers. It's almost like Doyle and Green are just spending money on broadcast and nothing else.

The NRA has said they're going to come in heavy near the end. I sure hope so.

 

[Trip20]

The NRA has said they're going to come in heavy near the end. I sure hope so.

Considering Michael J. Fox is doing the tear-jerker add for Doyle, I hope you're right.

 

[Monkeyleg]

I heard an interesting factoid today: two-thirds of undecided voters tend to choose the challenger rather than the incumbent.

It would take someone here on THR a year to verify that claim. But, if true, it offers us a bit more hope.

Doyle's campaign still isn't using the CCW issue, although independent expenditure groups are.

It's interesting to observe which directions the two campaigns are taking. Doyle is using the Michael J. Fox ads to attack Green. I find this interesting, since I don't think that more than 1% of the voting public understands what stem cells are all about, or even know Green's position.

Green has finally taken the gloves off, and is going after Doyle on the indian casino deals. This is something I think the public can understand: before Doyle ran for governor, he opposed expansion of indian gaming casinos; when he decided to run for guv, he got nearly one million dollars from the tribes, and changed his tune; and, now, he's raking in even more dollars from the tribes in donations.

Meanwhile, independent expenditure groups are hitting Doyle on all of the campaign finance scandals.

The NRA will be starting TV ads, radio ads, and newspaper ads in the next few days. They're spending a ton of money here.

We're so close to having a clean shall-issue bill passed that I sometimes can't believe it. If we win on November 7th, we'll only have to fight the RINO's over restrictions on carry. And we may actually be able to tell some of them to kiss off, as we should have some good Democrat supporters.

We're so close.

Eleven days.

 

[Edmond]

I boldly predict that WI will be #49, which leaves IL. Sadly, I don't think it'll ever happen in IL.

 

[FireBreather01]

One thing I've learned in watching politics and elections is that the poll's margins themselves aren't usually that interesting - 9 times out of 10 the winner of an election will show momentum in the polls leading up to election day. I recall candidates that were behind in the poll numbers but showed recent gains and they end up the winner. So it's not so much who's ahead as who is gaining - Green has been consistently gaining on Doyle in nearly every poll over the last few weeks - that is VERY meaningful.

My only worry is that Doyle and his minions will pull out all of the stops right around November 2nd - look for some very, very negative (if not outright lies)ads about that time.

Doyle has to go, not just for CCW (although that's reason enough for me) but also because he has sold this state to the highest bidders (donor) that come along -Milwaukee Magazine http://www.milwaukeemagazine.com/murphyslaw/ just reported that UWM did some fancy footwork to escape the usual rules and regs on a multi-million dollar construction project to rig the contracts to go to Doyle campaign contributors - guess who had to approve the project??? He's so dirty he has to bathe just to get to slimy.

 

[Autolycus]

I am sad to agree with Edmond. IL will be the last safe place for criminals.

 

[Low-Sci]

I disagree, Tecumseh.

You can't really call Illinois "safe" for anyone, the way folks there drive.

 

[Bill2k1]

I hope Green wins. I saw JB Van Hollen on WTMJ-4 (NBC Milwaukee) today and he brought up CCW and made his case for supporting it. I am just happy DUI in a state vehicle Peg is gonna be gone.

The civil union ban is what is going to be the big issue for the most people I assure you. Usually people I know would talk about the governer race, or AG, but so far it has been all about the ban.

I feel good on us getting CCW, not so good on a No vote however. Its gonna be a hell of a ride for the next few days.

 

[Monkeyleg]

FireBreather01: "Green has been consistently gaining on Doyle in nearly every poll over the last few weeks - that is VERY meaningful."

Nope. For months now, Doyle has maintained a consistent lead, although it's a lead of just a few points. And he still hasn't broken the 50% threshold.

On top of that, roughly 13% of voters are still undecided. I find that incredible, considering that we're just nine days away from the election.

One conventional wisdom holds that, when the incumbent is only a few points ahead, the undecideds aren't happy, and are looking for an alternative to the incumbent.

I went back and looked at the Rasmussen weekly polling data for the 2004 presidential elections. Bush pretty much held a 50+% to 48+% margin over Kerry for months before the election. The numbers never changed much.

And that's where the election finished.

In this case, we still have 13% (according to averages of the most respected polls) still not knowing which way they will vote.

Again, the conventional wisdom is that 66% of the undecideds will go for the challenger. Even if that's true, that means that Doyle and Green will be almost exactly even. Doyle might win by a 50-49 margin, or Green might win by the same margin.

Green's campaign has been calling many of us daily to volunteer. There's a lot of us who've been fighting for concealed carry who will be volunteering.

I hope others will take the three or four hours necessary to help.

The opportunity for Green to win is there. He just isn't giving those undecideds a reason to vote for him.

He needs to do something dramatic. And I think (as a political neophyte) that he could do a personal ad addressing one of the issues that Doyle and the national Democrats have been beating up Republicans on: stem cell research. Most people don't understand the issue, and only believe that it can cure everything from dry, flakey scalp to total paralysis.

Green's position on the issue has been grossly misrepresented by the Doyle campaign. I think that a, "hello, I'm Mark Green, and I'd like to tell you about the great promises that stem cell research holds for our future, and let you know exactly where I stand on this issue" ad would help him. If this is where Doyle thinks he has Green boxed in, I'd say a two-minute, very conversational ad at this point would be effective. Expensive, though.

Also, Doyle just cut another shady deal with the UW system, in exchange for campaign donations. This would be a job for the independent expenditure groups, but it's high time they attacked Doyle on a brand-new scandal.

 

[WI-Guy]

Help Wisconsin Elect Green!

It is a tight enough race that all we need to have happen is every freedom-loving Wisconsinite vote. And we can all help get out the vote with simple acts.

There is a big need for "get Out The Vote" efforts in the metro areas, so...

If you are in Madison, call Amy Lunde at 608 442 8705.

If you are in Milwaukee, call Chirag Shah at 262 334 0485.

If you are in Racine, call Jessica Irving at 262 898 2059.

If you are in Kenosha, call Ryan Phillips at 262 697 6144.

They have a program to assure that we maximize the voter turnout if there a few volunteers to help. Basically, Friday through Tuesday we will be calling folks, knocking doors, and other such activities to help encourage supporters to get out to vote.

Give us a call and come help for a couple of hours!

 

[FireBreather01]

I rely most strongly on the Zogby polls as I have found them to be the most accurate through the last several elections - http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2006/governor/wi/wisconsin_governor_race-58.html#polls. The real indicator will be who is moving in the polls this week.

I also agree with you on the Stem cell issue - a complete lie by the dems, IMO. And I did hear a recent Green commercial where he states he supports stem cell research - but it could have been a lot stronger.

Once again, the dems resort to outright lies to bolster their candidacies - no one has banned stem cell research, except Bill Clinton in 1995. There are existing lines (I believe that 60? lines are currently being federally funded) that Bush and Congress agreed to support - what they won't support with federal dollars are more embryonic lines. So the important things here are 1) federally funded embryonic lines already exist, 2) the private sector can create more and study them to their hearts content, 3) the only currently available treatments of any kind that are derived from stem cells are from the adult stem cell lines, 4) this is all about researchers wanting more of our tax dollars and 5) - in 1995 Clinton signed a bill banning all embryonic stem cell research - Bush actually was the first pres to sign a bill authorizing any kind of research on embryonic lines.

Once again, the republicans suck at getting their message, and the truth, out to the masses.