Wednesday, October 26, 2005

This guy is great!

Atkinson caters to young demographic
Oregon Sen. Jason Atkinson, 34, has been told he’s too young to be in politics since he started his career in the Oregon legislature seven years ago.

“Do you want to believe that I can turn it around, or do you want to do it the way it’s always been done? Cause there’s a bunch of candidates out there that are saying ‘Vote for me, I’ve got lots of gray hair, and I’ll give you the same government you’ve got,’” Atkinson said. “Our campaign is entirely different from the others, certainly based on age and youth and passion.”

Atkinson said his philosophy is based on faith, family and friends. Both of his parents were involved in ministry, and he’s been a part of Fellowship of Christian Athletes since he was a child. He also serves on the board of International United Christian Broadcasters.

I just took a few paragraphs out of this story. Please read the whole thing, it's a great profile piece.

The Daily Emerald also offers a chance to post feedback at the bottom of the page.

http://www.atkinsonforgovernor.com/

33 comments:

Anonymous said...

Hey, you have an excellent blog here! Great job. I have a Electric Furnaces site. It pretty much
covers Electric Furnaces related stuff.

Come and check it out when you get time :-)

Gullyborg said...

Hey, you have an excellent blog here! Great job. Electric furnaces are the tools of SATAN! Never, ever, click on a link to an electric furnaces site!

Go check out Atkinson for Governor when you get the time :-)

Anonymous said...

I bet an electric furnace blog would be a great way to spend an afternoon.

Anyway, once again, we have people going googley-eyed over Atkinson. Now, instead of his snazzy webiste quotes, I am supposed to vote for him because he is young and doesn't have grey hair? Well, then, I suppose we should have reelected Jimmy Carter...

Or is it that he helped a legally blind kid drive? I mean, I think what he did was noble, but it shows that he is a really excellent senator, not that he knows how to be governor. Governors are chief executives, they dont have time to pat every kid on the head that comes to thier office like a senator does. They deal in big ideas, and not just ideas, but in making those ideas turn into laws that make big changes in the government.

So far, Atkinson has done everything out there to convince Oregonians that he is new and different. So what? I want to know how my life will be better with him in the office instead of Gov Colonoscopi. And so far, I haven't heard anything. Just I am young, different, a new day in Oregon, blah blah blah.

Sounds like a typical politician, not a "new" anything. Even saxton says the same stuff.

At least for now, I will stick with Mannix. He was conterculture and edgy last time (3rd in polling, told he couldnt win, etc), and he always gives me a reason to believe that he could actually make change happen. He always give me the way he would do something different, not just agreeing with the concept of "different".

Atkinson could do that too, but I think the time to start it is 4 years ago, not when you decide to run for Governor.

-Andy

Gullyborg said...

Andy is just a bitter hack who is pissed off that there actually is a better choice than Mannix to lead our party into the 21st Century.

You want to know what Atkinson stands for? You obviously haven't paid attention. He has an excellent voting record and put up a lot of great new ideas in the legislature. What has Mannix done in the last 10 years, I mean other than lose elections?

You keep posting to our blogs, but you never get past the same tired argument "Atkinson is a big unknown, Mannix is the old warhorse."

Well guess what: Atkinson ISN'T an unknown. Talk to him for 5 minutes and you will KNOW what he stands for and what he will do as governor. Mannix... well, he is the old warhorse: in other words, put him out to pasture.

Daniel said...

Atkinson isn't an unknown because he has a voting record. I suppose that Mannix does too... but as a Democrat.

And my electric furnace blog will be up and running shortly. It will cover everything about electric furnaces.

Anonymous said...

Great blog! I also have a site about kansas waterskiing camps
. You can check it out at kansas waterskiing camps
.

Also, as a special bonus, I want to tell you about a great site that is giving away a FREE Sony DVD Handycam. Just click the link below and enter your Zipcode to qualify.

FREE Sony DVD Handycam

Sailor Republica said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Sailor Republica said...

Mannix has not told me anything "new" that he'd do. Hell, he's getting support from LIBERAL groups.

Atkinson did tell me what he wants to do, he knows more about the issues, he's IN THE LEGISLATURE NOW.

Makes me wonder if "Andy" isn't just Stan Pulliam, Mannix's campaign director, in disguise. I mean, he did say he posted anonymously on NW Republican and on this website.

Gunslinger said...

I thought Mannix was just running so he could cover his huge ass debt with campaign contributions. He has a track record of losing elections. He cannot win. Let's get someone in there who can, or even if that person can't, let someone else try to win.

Anonymous said...

Once again, I will post a letter I sent to many Republican groups and people.

It has yet to find one response from really anyone.

On the Victoria Taft show tonight, she and I and an,others did not run from a fight with those callers who were celebrating the death of the 2000TH American in Iraq.

Once done, I realized that not playing into their "conflict resolution" style debate, or being nice, and not offending them was the key to getting over the of case of apathy this party is clearly in a slump over.

People want a leader ,a fighter, someone who will not back down. IF YOUR LIFE IS AT RISK, AS IT IS NOW.....you don't want a "can't we all just get along leader in Salem or DC.


So I sent a letter to the new state party leader..NO RESPONSE!

That fellow Americans...is how we are viewed, we will not fight back.

So, If we ask someone in John Day to vote our way, then in Multnomah county we better show the same fire, or these people will bury us.

The letter: Mr. Day, I live in Portland and was over the years active in local neighborhood politics as Neighborhood president in the Foster-Powell neighborhood.

I have worked with Bob Tiernan, Steve Doell, Lars Larson, Victoria Taft, and others on an issue of community safety -- that being the placement of 5 criminally insane people in a group home next to a grade school in my neighborhood. This currently is a 300 plus client placement in Portland of clients such as these from the Oregon State Hospital.

I activated the unsuccessful recall of Vera Katz.


The above is just to point out that I care about this state.


Today in the Oregonian there was a letter where the writer whined about an airline captain holding "captive" two people enroute to PDX from Chi-Town. These two passengers were OFFENDED, by the captain recognizing two fellow passengers, soldiers returning from Iraq.


http://www.oregonlive.com/letters/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/editorial/112997710362400.xml&coll=7&thispage=2
Held captive by pilot

A funny thing happened to us on an American Airlines flight from Portland to Chicago this month.

After having welcomed us, the captain pronounced a political speech glorifying a couple of soldiers in the plane, their labor and their mission in Iraq.

By doing so, the captain acted as an ideological kidnapper. That was not his plane but American Airlines' plane. And, we paid to be transported from Point A to Point B safely; we did not pay to hear about the political opinions of a pilot, nor the glorification of a re-re-redefined (more "re-" to come, that's for sure) mission.

He had no right to do what he did. Keep politics off planes.

SEBASTIAN REYES GARCIA and FRIEDERIKE MACKENSEN, Southwest Portland

This is a prime example of us being held "captive' as well!

Then the "events" planned for the 2000th death of an American soldier in Iraq....SICK!


BOTTOM-LINE: I'm asking politely for now, WAR DECLARED on Multnomah County, we fight this disease by energizing all possible efforts for voter signups (what the other side does), and we describe it as a WAR. We fight this statewide. We honestly are on a short timeline to take back this state without even mentioning GWB.

This has to be done...TOM POTTER is out on the eastern part of Oregon "selling" Portland as a friend not foe in politics of the state. WHAT BS!

I beg you to react in such a way...that people feel their apathy has been noted, and the party is not impotent as it is now perceived. I hope you will respond.

Gunslinger said...

I saw that today there was a letter by some lady condeming those morons with the hostage letter. I know I am preaching to the choir here, but even if you don't like the prez, or don't agree with the war, for God's sake support the men and women who volunteer to go there so you don't have to.
I may just fly A/A from now on.
That is, if I flew anywhere.

Anonymous said...

First off, no, I am not Stan Pullam.

And this is the second time on one of these blogs I have been accused of beign Mannix's campaign mangager, because I happen to disagree with some of you in the Atkinson Kool-Aid Circle. Take off the tinfoil hat and realize that there are a lot of people who voted for Mannix and still think he is pretty swell. Its not a conspiracy.

I'm from Atkinson's district, I have met him a number of times, and I think he is one of the best people you will ever meet. I just don't think it is his time to be governor. I think that the governor should be someone who has a record of moving big ideas forward. And Senator Atkinson doesnt. He has a record of really caring about people and moving small ideas that help individuals.

And I am no "bitter hack." I just have a different opinion. And I and others have laid out why Mannix is the right guy for the job.

I wasn't old enough to vote for him last time, but I will be this time. I think he has done a lot. All his anti crime stuff, his help on the measures (28,30,36,37), the fact that he is conservative but a lot of independents trust him to not be goofy, and stuff like that.

It doesnt make me an Atkinson hater or a "bitter hack." If anyone is bitter, Gullyborg, it is you over the fact that Mannix did not break his party rules and let you use the party logo to further your own cause, though it is a good one. You even admitted that is why you dont like him and support Atkinson, and I think it is a dumb, personal reason, but you can hold to it if you want. On a personal basis, I like Atkinson better than Mannix, but on a professional basis, I like Mannix better. I think he is a better candidate for Governor. I think Atkinson needs to build his reputation as a "street fighter" in politics before he runs for governor. I think I should hit the return button more often when I ramble on like this.

I also think that it would be good for all of us to remember that after May, we are all still Republicans. Unless Saxton wins, in which case I will be something else. -Andy

Sailor Republica said...

I call Bullshit.

Definetely sounds like the exact same language I heard at the College Republicans meeting on Tuesday. Same words about moving big ideas forward, talking about Atkinson's age as if it MEANS ANYTHING (Mark Hatfield, 36, 8 years in assorted offices, won.), professional basis, whatnot.

Like I say, I call full-on bullshit.

Gunslinger said...

Sailor uber pwned Andy. Sailor is L33t.

W00t!

Tony said...

Great blog! I also have a site about Antarctic Beach Vacations!
. You can check it out at my Antarctic Sand and Surf blog!
.

Also, as a special bonus, I want to tell you about a great site that is giving away a FREE Black & Decker back hair remover. Just click the link below and enter your birth weight and the circumference of your nipples minus the weight of all your skin cells to qualify!

FREE Black and Decker back hair remover!

Sorry, Daniel, but I merely illustrate the sad reality that it is time to turn on the word verification.

Gullyborg said...

For the record, I was not the person giving away the "not my mayor" stickers. I have no idea who that individual was. Andy is making assumptions. And if he actually READ my blog post about it, he would see that I was rooting for the person doing it, not taking credit for it.

Andy wants to talk about records.

Over the last 8 years, the records are:

Atkinson: 3-0 in his elections

Mannix: 0-3 in his elections

That record pretty much speaks for itself.

Had any Republican other than Mannix been on the ballot in 2002, he'd be governor now.

Oregon is shifting from blue to red. But canidates like Mannix are so despised by moderates that they hand elections over to the left. And the more Mannixes we have, the more liberal the left can be and still get elected.

Atkinson is even more conservative than Mannix, but he is a likeable person. He will bring in moderates, independents, soccer moms, and the undecided. And even if loses the general election, he will force the democrats to turn back to the middle in order to win.

grandmasasi said...

For all you young wipersnappers out there :) ~ gotta tell ya ~ hubby & I, in all our 60+ years of being residents & voting faithfully, haven't heard in a LONG time a candidate we like as well as this young man. Driving along one day listening to Lars when Atkinson was a guest & hubby said "Who is that? He's got his act together & is right on!".

Am SO glad that you young folks are so involved in taking part in the political process. If Atkinson can rally the young people to vote, then I'm all for him, young age or not!

Anonymous said...

Sorry, sailor, but no, I am not Stan Pullam.

I think that anyone who thinks that a candidates age is a factor (especially when that candidate is over 30) is dumb. And so are those who think that because he is young, that matters either.

All I care about, consistently, is someones credentials in moving big policy forward, and electablility. Thats it. I dont care if he rides a damned bike and loves his mom and hanglides in his spare time or whatever the hell. I dont care how he parts his hair, how old he is, what his favorite color is.

And I really am not impressed when someone votes right. I vote right. I am not qualified to be governor. And I am really young and ride a bike! I want someone who can take how we all believe and turn it into policy, The governors job isnt to vote right or be conservative. That is why the Dems are so pissed at Kulongoski. His job isnt to just be liberal. His job is to move liberal ideas forward (as the Democrats believe). I dont want a conservative Kulongoski who thinks right but cant get it done. I want some proof that Atkinson can get it done, or even cares enough to try. When he announced I went to the legislatures website and looked at what bills he introduced. There wasn't anything I disagreed with, but it is pretty mundane stuff to help various constituents in his district. That isnt a leader. Where is the constitutional spending limit, or the bill to limit illegal immigrants (like maybe changing this dumb law saying we cant have our cops ask illegals if they are illegal)? See what I mean?

This is why US Senators and Congressmen have such a hard time becoming President, while Generals and Governors and VP's have an easier time. People want leaders who move big things and make big decisions that affect big groups of people, not a person who just votes right on stuff that other people are doing.

Gullyborg, your "electoral record" argument is juvenille and too simple. I have told you before: Abe Lincoln lost like 11 times. So what? And Mannix won all of his local races just like Atkinson (I think he won 6 of 6), as well as 2 (soon to be 3) statewide primaries.

Your thought that candidates like Mannix are despised by moderates is just not true. Mannix is no far right idealogue...he is a middle of the road conservative, which is why people like the old OCA people hate him. And you think that Atkinson, who you say is "more conservative" will somehow escape criticism from these same "moderates" you are trying to impress?

And for the record, the Riley poll indicated that Mannix will outperform the other candidates among Dems and Moderates. He knows how to talk to Democrat, having been one, so he has credibility with them. I think that is why, anyway, but I dont know. The point is, a lot of them voted fo rhim, which is why he damn near won last time. And no, not any old Republican could have come that close last time. Maybe Roberts could have, but I doubt it, cause the hardcore religious conservatives wouldnt have voted for him or worked for him or gave him money. And I wouldnt wipe my butt with Saxton's campaign literature...that guy is John Kerry packaged for Oregon.

As to the stickers, I still think Mannix was correct in not giving WHOEVER the permission to do it, because he lacks the authority to do so and shouldnt anyway. The party logo should be used for party stuff, not everyones pet projects. If ther ewas some extreme "kill all mexicans" or a "hang the n**gers" sticker with a Republican elephant, I wouldnt want that kind of crap being associated with my party, and if you allow some to do it, it becomes harder to police it.

So sorry, yall have me wrong. I'm not the undercover supersleuth campaign manager guy. I just dont jump up and down and pee myself when Atkinsons name is mentioned. I just think someone else is a better candidate this time. Let's see if we can just disagree on that and have an open discussion for other people to read and make up their own minds without throwing around accusations and conspiracies. As I said before, after May, we are all Republicans, so lets not beat up on each other too bad.

-Andy

Gullyborg said...

Mannix is worse among moderates not because he is too conservative. He is worse among moderates because he puts forth the perception that he is such a fanatical anti-woman draconian that if elected, teenages who get raped by their fathers will have to get back alley abortions.

And remember, Mannix won his last primary without getting a majority. That means, guess what: MORE REPUBLICANS WANTED SOMEONE ELSE THAN WANTED HIM. So he really doesn't even have his own party on his side. Had Jack Roberts or Ron Saxton dropped out during the primary, the other one would be our governor now. Either one had Mannix beat in a 2 person race.

You keep trying to tell us that you don't believe Atkinson can accomplish anything, but Mannix can. But you can't point to a single thing Mannix has ever actually accomplished. His legislative record is ancient history now. Atkinson is fresh, with votes on current issues. And people who have met Atkinson, heard Atkinson speak, keep saying that he comes off as a leader who will get things done. But you don't want to listen to any of us. You just want to tear down Atkinson. You make it hard for any of us to grant you any credibility.

What are you going to do if Atkinson wins this primary? Are you going to support him?

I ask because (and I speak for no one else here), I have already gone on record: if Mannix wins, I am voting 3rd party. I am so convinced that Mannix can't win, that I will feel no remorse at "throwing away my vote" and supporting a lost cause. I will feel no remorse because I believe with every fiber of my being that Mannix will lose the general election. Voting FOR him would be throwing away a vote when I could cast a principled ballot for a libertarian or constitution party member.

If you are so convinced that Atkinson can't win, or can't accomplish anything even if elected, then put your keyboard where your principles are and tell us you will go 3rd party if Atkinson wins this primary. Because that will at least show us what sort of true believer you are.

Sailor Republica said...

Same language. Smells like a duck, walks like a duck, talks like a duck, is a duck.

I call bullshit on Andy yet again.

Gunslinger said...

Once again, Andy got Pwned! W00t to the L33ts!

So if I undertand this correctly, and I think I do...

A vote for Mannix in the primary is like voting for the Dems in the general election?

He Cannot win, he has proven his innability to win, not once. Not twice, but three times! If the third time is supposed to be a charm, what does that make the 4th time? Oh yeah, a waste of resources.

Daniel said...

Mannix won all of his local races just like Atkinson (I think he won 6 of 6), as well as 2 (soon to be 3) statewide primaries.

Are you counting when he ran as a Democrat? I notice you left out the statewide AG race...

I know that I haven't really participated in this conversation but I have been following it. (and enjoying the differing opinions)

I certainly never thought I would see the day when Gully was so adamant about a candidate that he would vote 3rd party in the general election.

Andy, you make some interesting points but I am still enthusiastic about Atkinson's candidacy. (It's not a kool-aid thing)

But what I am really interested in is Tony's Antartic Sand Vacations. No link Tony?

Tony said...

The website is under development. And we are still looking for the @#%^$! sand, but that is a minor glitch.

Did you now how friggin cold it is down there? Man!

Anonymous said...

Allrighty, lets take em one at a time.

Gully: your premise that moderates dont like mannix because he is pro-life has a lot of holes.

First, it assumes that moderates dont like him. Wrong. He couldnt have gotten as many votes in 2002 as he did, winning places like Clackamas and Washington Counties, if moderates didnt like him. And as I said before, check the Riley poll. Moderates like him. Check the Dorchester straw poll. Even the leftie Republicans defied their fuhrer, Herr Packwood, and voted for Mannix (he only lost by 2 votes to walden, who isnt running until 2015 or so, and beat their Little Lord Fauntleroy Prince Saxton by 55-30 or so).

If your premise is that moderates hate Mannix because he is "anti woman" and would force teenage rape victims to get "back alley abortions" (a premise you pulled out of your posterior...he has never said that anywhere I can find), what are you saying about Atkinson? That he is less pro-life, and would encourage teenagers to get abortions if they were raped, as though that somehow makes the hurt go away (it doesnt...it adds to their feelings of guilt, but I digress). You said, if I recall, that Atkinson is "more conservative." So what is he going to do differently? I can tell you from my contact with him, nothing, and the media and the NARAL bloodbath lobby will make sure that everyone knows how pro-life Atkinson is. He won't escape being tarred on that issue. NARAL gave him a "-" rating, even though he voted with tehm on 3 out of 4 of their bills (http://www.prochoiceoregon.org/assets/files/senate_scorecard_2005.pdf.pdf)

Nothing I can find in Mannix's record suggests that moderates view him as a draconian woman hater. I think the fact that he authored and got passed the anti-stalking law for women will negate that perception if it indeed existed. Do you have some evidence to back up your analysis, or is this just the dislike talking?

As to the notion that he doesnt have the party on his side because he didnt get a majority last time, guess what? Even if Atkinson wins, he wont get a majority either. That happens when you have 3 people in the race. Also, last time Mannix was written off by everyone, but still pulled it out.

And if it was a two man race, he still would have. You assume that Roberts and Saxton's vote would have gone one to another. I disagree. When Republicans like me heard in 2002 "Mannix is too conservative" from the likes of Roberts and Saxton, we liked him. And when Right to Life endorsed him, that was all he needed. He still would have won, I think, but that is debatable. And Roberts might have been able to win, but I don't think so. The base was supercharged last time in favor of Mannix, and he pulled them in force along with some moderates.

Roberts, and especially Saxton, would have had the base voting for Cox or the Constitution party guy or someone else. They would not have given money, or volunteered, or put up signs. Mannix did so well because his base was super jazzed, but he didn't go over the top in his rhetoric like Mabon/Sizemore/Mobley etc and was able to appeal to moderates. He just needs to build a bit on it this time.

I never said "Atkinson cant accomplish anything". I don't believe that at all. I think he can. I just said he hasnt YET accomplished anything of statewide consequence. And I think that will hamper his chances. And I get suspicious of politicians who say they are going to do all this great stuff, but can't answer the "what have you done for me lately" question.

And I have given you several of Mannix's accomplishments. M11 being a crown jewel, but he also helped push M30. He also led what former RNC chair Ed Gillespie and new chair Ken Mehlman recognized as one of the best get out the vote programs as a state that was a target for the Bush campaign. He got the party debt free for the first time in its history, paying off the last chair's 200K in debt. He raised 2 million for the party (nobody else has ever broke even 500K I dont think). He wrote the anti stalking law, witness protection law, etc etc etc. That full house beats your pair of enviro bills Atkinson is known for.

(in case you are wondering, I have a bio flyer I got at a Mannix speech - its mostly public info).

I'm not trying to "tear down" Atkinson. I htink he is a great guy. I'm a great guy too. Neither of us, I think, will be governor next year. Being "young and fresh" doesn't impress me either. I'm younger and fresher, but I won't be governor either.

Neither does being cute, having good hair, or any other irrelevant category. Maybe it might help him, I dunno. I don't agree with whoever said he was too young, I think that is as dumb as saying he is white or male or Christian as a reason to not vote for him.

What will I do if Atkinson wins the primary? I will work my ass off to help him, because he is a great guy and I hope he wins if he wins the primary. I never said I didn't like him or wanted him to burn in hell. I think he would be a pretty good governor, if perhaps somewhat innefective in some ways, he would be a 10+ in others (particularly appointing state agency heads that will irk liberals.) But I will work hard to get him elected if he wins the primary. But I don't think that will happen, and if he spoils it for Republicans, I fear it will never happen for him, because people like me will be really pissed off at him for screwing it up.

I'm a true believer in electing a conservative. Thats it. If Atkinson does it, cool. Your threat to go third party if the conservative you want doesnt get elected again de-legitimizes your support for him and makes you sound petty. If "voting right" is your standard, then Mannix and Atkinson would be identical governors (and you should have supported Harriet Miers, whoi we were assured would "vote right", as though she was being made a congresswoman). So if Mannix and Atkinson would vote right, you should support Mannix if he comes out of the primary. Atkinson liked him last time in the primary because he liked his positions, and nothing has changed.

Atkinsons' dad liked Mannix's positions enough to ask him to come take over the party and bail him out when Smith was gunning for him and Jason, which he did (kinda seems like ingratitude to me). So they all liked his policies. So if "voting right" is your standard, you shouldn't be threatening to have a temper tantrum if a different "right voter" wins.

Now then...on to sailor and his quick draw on the bullshit calls. Notice that I was blogging on this topic at 3pm the other day, when, as your blog seems to hint at, Mannix's campaign guy was either speaking to your group or would have likely been driving down there, because, as I understand, Mannix's campaign office is in Lake Oswego, according to the phone prefixes on his website. So whatever the hell being "Pwned" and crying "W00t to the L33ts!" means, I think that just happened to you. Amateurs!!

Gunslinger:

No, a vote for Atkinson is a vote for Saxton, and if that happens, I will be a write in vote for Gullyborg before I vote for Saxton. And if that happens, kiss Atkinsons' career goodbye, as he becomes the "spoiler" we didn't need in the race.

I don't know how many times I have to say it, losing does not make you unelectable, it makes you MORE electable, until you lose the same office twice. Boquist as a case in point, Linda Lingle in Hawaii, Vic Atiyeh here, Gordon Smith in his second run, Abraham Lincoln, etc. It builds up your name ID and you add a little to it each time. Mannix didn't win last time because some Republicans pouted that their guy didnt win, and they thought he was too conservative. That all changed on election night when it looked like he was winning, but Multnomah County came to the rescue with its illegal votes and won the day. Now, a lot of those people (like Jack Roberts) are saying, holy crap, this guy is actually within striking distance! Unfortunately, I think you don't understand the mechanics of elections.

Daniel: No, I didn't count the first AG race when the D's hosed him for being too conservative and put Hardy Harhar up. So his record would be, in statewide primaries, 2 for 3. 2 for 2 as a Republican. And soon to be 3 for 3 as a Republican. But my point was more to say that being able to win your home district is kind of irrelevant to the discussion, which others seem to think is some great accomplishment for Atkinson, that he won all his home district races. Maybe he won Jr. class vice president too, but it isn't any more relevant to the discussion about if he can win a statewide primary than his winning with home field advantage. My point was more to say that on local elections, Mannix did that and actually won more of them, in both parties no less. The difference is that Mannix has won his last two statewide primaries, to Atkinson's 0.

And I, too, look forward to dipping my toes in the sand at Tony's place on the Antarctic beaches. If he can sell that, maybe he should run for Governor.

-Andy

Sailor Republica said...

Nice job pulling that one out of your ass.

You are him. You've admitted as much.

Gullyborg said...

I never said Mannix WOULD force teenage rape victims to get back alley abortions. I said moderates have that perception of him.

And they do.

Atkinson may be as pro-life as Mannix. He may be more so. But he doesn't put forth the same image.

You keep saying that things like hair don't matter. But they really do, unfortunately.

Do you think the 1986 Senate democRats could have succeeded in "borking" Robert Bork if he had a decent haircut and a close shave?

An awful lot of voters vote based on IMAGE.

Mannix has a public image problem. It isn't just me. It isn't any cabal of Atkinson Kool-Aid drinkers. It is REALITY.

REALITY says that Mannix LOST his election against Kulongoski.

Kulongoski was a weak candidate then and a decent Republican would have beaten him.

Jack Roberts would have beaten him.

Ron Saxton would have beaten him.

Mannix lost.

What has happened since 2002?

Kulongoski has become a STRONGER candidate. Sure, there is grumbling on the left. But there is ALWAYS grumbling on the left. Any democRat who is less that a card-carrying communist is ALWAYS going to be a disappointment to the far left (just as there are some right-to-lifers who are making it their life's mission to purge the GOP of anyone who has ever said anything remotely pro-choice: these are the people who LIKE Mannix).

Sure, a lot of Republicans hate Kulongoski and are energized to beat him. But by definition, the conservative Republicans ALWAYS are fired up to beat the liberal democrat. This is nothing new.

There is no real reason to believe that Kulongoski is in any way weaker than he was in 2002. The libs who don't like him are the same ones who didn't like him then... but they still voted for him. And the conservatives who hate him now aren't any more formidable than they were then.

What else has changed since 2002?

Since then, Kulongoski has become the incumbent.

People LIKE incumbents.

Most swing voters will always go for the incumbent unless there is a Watergate-like scandal, or a disaster on the scale of the Carter administration. And what do we have now?

The economy may be weak, but it is getting better. There is dissatisfaction, but it's not like people are rioting in the streets. Conservative ideologues like us may be pissed off, but the average person isn't outraged at anything. Most undecideds would rather maintain the known than vote in the unknown.

Kulongoski now has experience on his side. Sure, some people think he has done a bad job. But most voters don't pay attention to the details. In 2002, Kulongoski had never been governor. But he pulled off a win. Now, he has been the sitting governor for 4 years. He has more experience, experience in the very position he is running for.

The biggest advantage he has now is fundraising. People like to back winners. In 2002, he was an outsider seeking the open seat. Now, he is the proven winner. He will raise far, far more money this time than last time. This is especially true with the big dollar donors: people who give thousands of dollars to candidates expect something in return. When you give a candidate that kind of cash, you expect him to win, so that once in office, he will remember your donation and grant you access. Big donations are all about access. And once you are a proven winner, the access donors line up at your door.

Finally, there is the power of news exposure. As governor, Kulongoski has been on TV and in the papers a lot. Sure, not all of it has been good. But face facts: the press is liberal, and the majority of the press coverage is favorable. Kulongoski signs a bill: news at 11. Kulongoski name a judge, page 2. Kulongoski does something, link here. Most voters don't read the fine print or watch the news at 11. But they keep hearing Kulongoski Kulongoski Kulongoski and most of it sounds good. That has a LOT of power.

What has Mannix done since losing (emphasis: LOSING) in 2002?

While Kulongoski has been governor and getting all that power, Mannix has been out of the public eye.

Mannix has had very little press coverage. Sure, he gets more than Atkinson right now. But that will change as the Atkinson movement gains momentum (which means Mannix will get even less).

Mannix has held NO position in government. In 2002, he had already been away from any government office for 4 years. Now it will be 8 years.

Eight years without having ANY government experience, while Ted has spent the last 4 doing the very job they are running for.

The only job Mannix has had these last 4 years has been head of the state GOP--and his legacy from that is allegation of campaign finance fraud.

Kulongoski has huge fundraising power as an incumbent, and Mannix has a fundraising stigma.

People have short memories. In the last 8 years, Atkinson will be able to say "look at all the bills I have sponsored, voted on, and made into law." Meanwhile, Mannix will be saying "in the last 8 years, I have..."

Hear that silence?

No one gives a damn that a decade ago Mannix was in the legislature. What has he done for me NOW? And even if people cared about his old record, he can't run on it because back then HE WAS A DEMOCRAT.

You love to keep bragging about how Mannix has won his last two primaries. BUT YOU KEEP OVERLOOKING THE FACT THAT HE LOST HIS LAST TWO GENERAL ELECTIONS.

People don't like losers. People don't want to associate with losers. People don't give money to losers. People aren't excited to vote for losers.

Atkinson may not have won any statewide elections yet. THAT'S BECAUSE THIS IS HIS FIRST ONE!

When Ronald Reagan ran for Governor of California, HE HAD NEVER WON A STATEWIDE ELECTION BEFORE.

When George W. Bush ran for Governor of Texas, HE HAD NEVER WON A STATEWIDE ELECTION BEFORE.

So now Jason is running, but has never won a statewide election before. Well, he can win if you vote for him! Mannix has proven that he can't.

Mannix is in danger of being our Bob Dole. Everyone got behind Bob Dole when Clinton was weak. Clinton had previously been elected with only 42% of the popular vote, and the GOP had just taken over both Houses of Congress. An energetic young candidate would have beaten Bill Clinton. But instead, the old school party hacks all said "it's Bob Dole's turn" and let him have the nomination. He ended up losing. But just to make matters worse, he lost and Clinton still couldn't get a majority of the vote.

THE MAJORITY OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WANTED SOMEONE OTHER THAN BILL CLINTON IN 1996, BUT HE WON BECAUSE THE GOP RAN A CRAPPY CANDIDATE.

This will happen to Oregon in 2006 if too many people like you just roll over and settle for a loser like Mannix just because he is the old man of the party.

Put the old man out to pasture. The old horse has lost too many races. Put your money on the hot young thoroughbred. Support Jason Atkinson.

Gullyborg said...

>Your threat to go third party if the conservative you want doesnt get elected again de-legitimizes your support for him and makes you sound petty.

I don't believe Mannix is a real conservative on the two issues that matter most to me: taxes and guns. And I am far from alone there.

If your definition of conservative is "stops abortions," then sure, Mannix is your man. But I care about other things as well. And when the Oregon Firearms Federation says "Mannix is no good" that matters a lot to me. When they put him on the same list of bad candidates as GINNY BURDICK, it SERIOUSLY matters to me. And on taxes, Atkinson has spelled out his platform in no uncertain terms: TAX CUTS. That's not just "no on 30" (a no-brainer for any politician), but CUT THE TAXES. Atkinson beats Mannix here.

So I am supporting the real conservative. If Mannix is the candidate, and I vote 3rd party, I believe I will STILL be supporting the real conservative.

Anonymous said...

Gullyborg:

On your analysis, I think you are wrong. I don't know how else I can keep answering the same arguments, and yet you keep making them. Kind of like Sailor who, despite 100% incontravertible electronic fingerprint evidence, still thinks I am Mannix's campaign manager. Whatever. Think what you want. If you want to think that while he was talking to you, he blogged as me, suit yourself. But that seems pretty dumb.

Gullyborg, your analysis of Kulongoski is askew. Kulongoski is weak, not just among his own party, but among independents as well. He has not engaged on the problems of the state. His appearances in the papers have been scant, and as liely to turn peopel off as on. And you are right, not a lot of nonpundits pay attention, but enough do to sway a close election. That has changed since 2002.

So has the corruption. That was exposed last year in, of all places, Willamette week, and we know who reads that.


So Kulongoski has the same problem Bush has had the last few weeks, and his dad had in 1992...you cant fight your enemy and your base at the same time, and this will be Kulongoski's downfall.

I didnt say NOBODY votes based on superficiality...some do. I think that WE should not back someone based on superficiality. And Dole's problem was not age..Reagan was older when he ran. Dole's problem was stiffness, rigidity, and an appearance of inability to connect.

Mannix has been in the paper often as party chair. His name ID is high.

Your analysis of who it is in the party who backs Mannix is completely wrong. Those who lead with abortion, the former OCA types, are the ones who most vocally criticise Mannix - the OCA, Republican Assembly, Constitution Party people. They hate him. Mannix is the one who marginalized them, and got most of them to leave the Party structure, central committee, and the like. From what I hear, there is only a couple of them left after he got done with them at the the Party level, because they all quit when he wouldnt let them have thier way, and they formed the Repub Assembly adn the Legislative Coalition and Life Support, all to rail against how some people aren't prolife enough.

Guns and taxes, in that order, are my 2 biggest issues also. I am a regular Carnival of Cordite reader. I believe that without the second amendmnet, the rest of the amendments are unenforcable. But OFF is dead wrong on Mannix, and the NRA is right. Ask Mannix sometime during the campaign, as I did, about what that OFF flap was about.

On taxes, Mannix supports tax cuts as well. From expressing support publically for the Bush tax cuts, to proposing his own, he has been a leader there. If you dont think so, call Citizens for a Sound Economy and ask them what they think of him. My bet is nothing but praise.

Atkinson passing laws is precisely what I have said DIDNT happen. I looked at his record before I stopeed being a blog reader and started commenting. His legislative record is underwhelming. The bills he passes are always issues of local importance in his district, not the kind of stuff we need to see from a gov...not that he couldnt do that, I am just saying he will lack credibility on that because he HASNT done it though he had the PLATFORM from which to do so. If he wanted a tax cut, he should have proposed one in the last 6 years. If he wanted better gun rights, he shoudl have proposed them. Because, as you said, HE is the one IN the LEGISLATURE. He shoudl be writing the laws. It is his responsibility to do so. Whn Mannix was there, that is what he did. He passed laws and fixed stuff. Atkinson has been there and done unfortunately little, which will hurt his chances.

And if you vote 3rd party, that is a vote for Teddy K, who will most definitely do whatever it takes to raise your taxes and take away your guns. Even if he wanted to, Mannix's party wouldnt let him, so your 3rd party vote is not a principled stand at all, but would be repeating the stupid mistake that got us here last time.

The fact that he was a Democrat, he has been out of government, and he has run and lost before, are all strengths for mannix, and that is where your analysis breaks down as well. When Atkinson runs, it will take us a few election election cycles to push him to the front also.

As the election heats up, keep promoting your guy, but keep an open mind. I think you will find that your perception of Mannix is incorrect, and it will keep you from having to eat so much crow, which, with the bird flu out there, could save your life.

-Andy

Tim Lewis said...

Isn't the job of the governor to execute, and the legislature to legislate?

Sailor Republica said...

There's more to life than guns or taxes, and to use those two as criteria shows a lack of analysis and skill.

Kinda like that campaign manager, who you seemed to have parroted all the way down to the "By May, we're all still Republicans" line.

Atkinson is a better rounded candidate on EVERY subject, not just guns and taxes. Mannix's only strong suit is crime legislation.

Anonymous said...

Tim:

Sort of. The job of the Governor is to execute, but it is also to LEAD. The Gov should be out using the bully pulpit to push an agenda that works - not just wait for the Legislature to do whatever it wants and then execute it. It's not like the actual governor executes much anyway (certinly not ciminals, unfortunately), though his office is charged with same. He is the CEO/President figure that should be leading from the front.

Sailor: Wow dude. A guy was standing in front of you while I was blogging, and you still think we are the same person? With that kind of dedication to your premise, I don't htink I can help you. At least accuse me of being another campaign hack, that would at least make some sense.

And I think you will find that a lot of us who have met both of these guys (Atkinson & Mannix) will say the same thing, vis a vis making sure that we dont pile up on each other too much, and we come together in May. That is just what is done in politics when people are professional and concerned about the big picture, which is advnacing conservatism, which is bigger than any one person.

As far as guns and taxes, those are my two biggest issues. Sure, I really care about social issues, land use, spending, state agency abuse of citizens, etc. And I think that Mannix is more qualified on all of these issues (not "more conservative", just better able to turn his ideas into law), though Atkinson seems to have a really good handle on land use.

-Andy

Anonymous said...

When will Vance Day meet with a few more people then those that think all is OK? Jack Peek

TheDevilIsInTheDetails said...

Another death opinion penalty Resource... LifeLaw.org . A discussion forum for all that deals with such hot-button issues as death opinion penalty .