Posted on 07/26/2004 5:24:08 AM PDT by kjfpolitical
Research 2000, July 15-19, +-5%
McCollum 27
Martinez 21
Doug Gallagher 16
Byrd 7
Klayman 2
Saull 1
March 1
Kogut -
Undecided 25
Mason-Dixon, July 19-21, +-5%
McCollum 29 Martinez 24 Byrd 7 Doug Gallagher 5 KLAYMAN 2 March/Saull/Kogut 1 each Undecided 30
The difference between Research 2000 and Mason-Dixon is most remarkable with regard to Gallagher's support. I would guess that they identify him differently, one just using his name, one his name and occupation?
You're right about the uphill climb.... so shouldn't be true that the one we have run against the libs be best suited to be a Senator? Bill McCollum was a congressman for 20 years, founded the taskforce on Terrorism, and helped Ronald Reagan and Newt Gingrich pass economic expansion.... the list goes on. Electibility is a bogus issue for Martinez.... anyone that says he's "more electible" is 100% a racist statement saying that the hispanics will vote based on his last name. I know he lost in 2000, but Ronald Reagan, George Bush 41 and 43, Jeb Bush, etc... all lost elections before winning. 9/11 has created a need for Bill McCollum in the U.S. Senate, not some RINO trial lawyer who needs "on-the-job" training.
The fact is that Bill McCollum could have real traction with Broward County Jewish voters based on Betty Castor's terrorist appeasement of Al-Arian at USF. This is a different racial issue, because Bill is a regular contributor to many pro-Israel efforts and has written many local editorial articles. Martinez is incredibly underqualified, unaccomplished, a RINO trial-lawyer. The DNC has already started attacking Bush based on the fact that a Republican Trial Lawyer is running for Senate. This hurts Bush's attack on John Edwards... its creating a hypocritical situation for us... and he needs to lose. Its a shame that he's getting a lot of support because of his last name.
It has nothing to do with racism. Martinez is organized in South Florida, McCollum is not--it's as simple as that. I don't think that McCollum would be a better Senator than Martinez. The problem with McCollum is that he doesn't close--he sponsors the right stuff, but doesn't actually get it done. We saw that with the bankruptcy bill. McCollum was one of the chief forces behind that bill, and it was a disaster. I have no doubt that the only candidate on the Republican line up that can pull it out is Martinez. And you brought up another interesting point. McCollum was one of the impeachment leaders, but that is only an asset within the party. Once you're nominated, it's a liability. All of those liberal nutcases in South Florida will come crawling out of their holes to vote against him.
Actually they're attacking Martinez and echoing McCollum's attack on Martinez because they know that Martinez is the GOP's best chance at victory and McCollum is Betty Castor's ticket to the Senate.
Edwards used junk science to win bogus $$$$ lawsuits -- Martinez was as respectable a trial lawyer as you can find.
If you want to talk about using a candidate's stand against Bush, how about the possibility of using McCollum's pro-embryonic research stand against Bush?
By the way, do you ever post on FR at all except to attack Mel Martinez and defend McCollum? (I'm sure it's a coincidence that you have the same agenda as the DNC.) FYI, Martinez was elected as the Chairman {mayoral equivalent} of a large, electorally pivotal county, so maybe you should keep that in mind before again deriding him as a "county commissioner".
I would concede the point that they probably fear his last name, and think he's the most formidable opponent for Castor... however, I do think he would be the best Senator out of the field. His record on terrorism and national security IS a more important than a County Commissioner which has suddenly escalated to mythic proportions even though it is non-partisan. The DNC aren't echoing anything, they are using a legitimate political knock against him..... inserting him into Cheney's rhetoric against trial lawyers is a legtitimate liability against him.
As far as his stance on embryonic research, he happens to hold the same position as Trent Lott, Bill Frist (a doctor), and Nancy Reagan... the pillars of Liberal America, right? This is campaign rhetoric to attack him on social issues... but I forgot, Mel is MOST pro-life of all the candidates, because that is measured accurately. Mel opposes the President's medical liability reform, a legitimate ECONOMIC issue..... he doesn't want to upset his trial-lawyer buddies..... is it a coincidence that that community is supporting him and Kerry?
I came onto this site to talk about this campaign, because it is very important to our state to have proper representation.... it turns out that all I saw was a political operative for Martinez (KJFpolitical) trashing Bill McCollum, a patriotic man who has served and protected our country in the military and congress. So you're right that I will defend him, and proudly at that.
Wow, a new low for Martinez. He's been running anti-gay ads for months now, and it turns out he has 2 homosexuals in his inner circle. There is nothing wrong with that, but why is he running as the PRO-LIFE ANTI-GAY CHAMPION of the WORLD? He obviously condones this behavior if he's willing to have them work for him... but its not okay when its not politically expedient.
I have no problem with gays, they can do what they want. However, I do have a problem with politicians lying to be politically expedient in Primary Season. He can be for or against gay-rights, thats all fine and well..... but he's obviously using this anti-gay rhetoric for votes, and not because he stands against that lifestyle. He's even refusing to comment as to whether he knew they were gay or not.
If he's really the Christian Conservative candidate that he's claiming to be, and stands against the "atrocious" (his word) lifestyle, then why is it okay to for such atrocious people to help him get elected.... oh yeah, to get him elected.
Some of these democrats and republicans are just moving for name recognition for the 2006 gov race.
The only person trashing anyone is you trashing Mel Martinez. You've been condemning him left and right: "RINO", "liberal trial lawyer". Just what IS your agenda here? Why don't you stop lying about Mel Martinez' record, stop making snide remarks about his ethnicity, and stop making a fool out of yourself?
fair enough that I have been trashing Mel, but I feel it is a fair retort to a Martinez Campaign staff member putting their press releases on this thing. However, I'm not making snide comments about his ethnicity, I think having minorities represented in Congress is very important... I'm merely using it as the reason that the dems fear him.
If you want to know my agenda, here it is plain and simple: Bill McCollum as the next U.S. Senator from Florida. He is the best choice in a worthy field. He has the best record, experience, and is best equipt to help our country fight terrorism and to serve as a fiscally responsible member of congress. I thoroughly enjoy this dialogue, and I have perhaps gone overboard in my defense of Bill... however it is hard not to when everytime I sign on, I see an article that is either for Martinez, or against McCollum.
I'm afraid there's going to be a lot more of that for the next month. I think the handwriting is on the wall on this one, the storyline is going to be McCollum=loser, fading in polls, and Martinez=winner, gaining support. I'm no Daniel, but that's how I read the writing. Maybe there will be some turnaround in the polls and in press coverage, but my unbiased opinion is that I highly doubt it. (My biased opinion says that's a darn good thing 'cause McCollum is a loser and Martinez would make a better Senator.)
Ma'am,
I am not a Martinez "operative", but a very enthusiastic Martinez supporter.
I also think your attacks on Mel Martinez are a little off base.
After all, President Bush appointed this man to his Cabinet. Are you suggesting our President is a fool for doing so?
I'm not denigrating McCollum as a person. I think he was a fine Congressman. But Mel Martinez is a better choice both ideologically and politically.
It's not too often we have a solid conservative who appeals to independents and Democrats (hispanics, in this case). There is a reason President Bush and the GOP party leaders asked him to run and are so enthusiastic about his campaign.
He's a man of high moral character, strong ethics, conservative principles and he has a good background as a Cabinet member, Chairman of one of Florida's largest counties (Orange/Orlando) and in the private sector both in business and as a lawyer.
Jeb Bush said all of this a few weeks ago when McCollum took another cheap shot at Martinez.
If McCollum has a good record, he should run on it and not spend so much time attacking Martinez.
It's really starting to turn off a lot of Republicans.
First of all, I'm a sir :) I don't feel my attacks are off-base, when they're often just a counter to the barrage of "RINO" and "BABY-KILLER" type of remarks I've seen about McCOllum on your posts.
I understand his appeal... the whole hispanic thing and Pro-Life Champion of the World thing... but I truly feel that Bill McCollum is the best choice, and will take every opportunity to defend him. To tell the truth, I don't even know how to make my own posts, and I rely on responding to yours, and yours are the only ones about this race.
I would imagine that Mel is the Bushs' boy... however Jeb fully stands behind many of the initiatives that McCollum has been behind, like liability reform...etc... and neither has endorsed anybody. I know thats standard, and the President or Governor rarely does so before a primary... but its still the case. Bill has the best record on National Security, Terrorism....etc., the real issues facing our country... that is what we should be focussing on, not toting one's Moral Character and "More Pro-life" than the other.
Bill hasn't attacked Mel in public, he's asked numerous questions in forums that were understandable like: "Why did you give money to Democrats, namely Bob Graham?" But its been the Medical communiy that has been far harsher in their criticisms, actually running ads against Mel about his pro-trial lawyer anti-medicine stances.
I'll agree on the biased media coverage, the liberal South Florida Media always loves a good hispanic in prominence story. However, I think McCollum grassroots is strong, and I think he will win because of that. Mel has no traction outside of Miami and Orlando, Bill has traction all over the state, in addition to splitting the Orlando vote.
Its okay to think Mel has a good chance of winning, but its proposterous to think he's be a better Senator than a 10 term Congressman with his credentials against terrorism, hand-picked by Ronald Reagan to represent him in the Middle East on numerous occassions, Intelligence Committee, Terrorism Subcommittee....but wait, I forgot that a County Commissioner and "the guy in the room" for a few months in the White House has comparable experience.
See, that's where you make yourself sound like a total moron.
Mel has no traction outside of Miami and Orlando, Bill has traction all over the state
Then you had better be prepared for a massive Martinez victory -- McCollum is already known statewide and his support is now stuck below 30% and dropping, while Martinez will gain more support in the areas he's not yet well known.
Martinez donated to the campaigns of Senators Biden, Hollings, and the Democratic Senatorial PAC in 1990.
He led the fight against a constitutional amendment in Florida in 1988 that would have limited noneconomic damages when he was president of the Academy of Florida Trial Lawyers. (By the way, I would love to know who the AFTL endorsed while he was at the helm).
He refuses to support President Bush's tort reform package that was narrowly defeated this past session.
Trial lawyers give more to Democrats than any other group, and they have a real friend in Mel Martinez. If we can cut off the INSANE amounts that trial lawyers extort each year (and then give to various campaigns), then it will have a HUGE impact on the nation's political scene.
President Bush has said that you cannot be pro trial lawyer and pro small business at the same time.
There are few issues that were as hotly contested last session as tort reform was. Why should we choose a Senator that will vote AGAINST the President when we can choose someone (McCollum, Byrd, or Gallagher) who will vote WITH the President?
You are mistaken. Mel will vote for tort reform. That's why the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the head of the Florida Chamber of Commerce endorsed Martinez--not McCollum or Byrd.
Gallagher is just a Democrat in GOP clothing. He said this week he's "not sure he would have voted with the President on the war in Iraq, knowing what we know now." He is more aligned with the Democrats on the life and same-sex marriage issues. I'd take Byrd or McCollum before Gallagher.
McCollum took over $25,000 from the Trial Lawyers PAC when he was in Congress and voted against a $250,000 cap (he supported $1 million instead). He was one of the few Republicans who voted with the Democrats to water down the tort reform bills during the Contract with America.
Byrd is a good conservative, but would get trounced in the general election because he is a bit, shall we say, ethically challenged. He's also got zero chance of winning the primary.
Advantage: Martinez.
So are you saying that Martinez would have voted for the tort reform bill that recently stalled in the Senate? That bill would have capped noneconomic damages at $250K and was supported by the President.
Bill McCollum has been a staunch supporter of tort reform efforts in the state, specifically the FMA constitutional amendment which would limit attorney fees. MARTINEZ IS THE ONLY GOP CANDIDATE WHO OPPOSES THIS INITIATIVE. THE GOVERNOR AND PRESIDENT ALSO SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT. You say that "Mel will vote for tort reform," but apparently not the reforms that physicians or Republicans want. Why don't you address the other issues about his campaign contributions or how he headed the effort to defeat tort reform in 1988?? Everyone wants to talk about how Mel is 100% pro life, but how can you say that when he contributed to the campaigns of pro-abortion senators???
Ah, the Martinez supporters are like Arnoldbots, they only want to "win" and will hold their breathe until they turn purple rather than listen to any evidence that their candidate's ACTIONS do NOT match his RHETORIC.
Not only are we supposed to believe him on the gay issue, but we're also supposed to believe that a lifelong trial lawyer is for tort reform and Bush/Rove's handpicked guy for his "Hispanic outreach" strategy is against the President's amnesty plan (bet he conveniently forgot to tell the President this during cabinet meetings over the last THREE years) And he's the only "100% pro-life" candidate, despite working his butt off to elect pro-abortion Democrats during the 1980s. Yeah, sounds like a "conservative" Democrat to me. Funny how Virgil Goode never did that when he was a REAL conservative Democrat.
It's getting downright Orwellian. Trial lawyers for Tort Reform, Freedom is Slavery. If Robert Byrd were running with an "R" next to his name, the "pragmatic" crowd would be insisting he was pro-civil rights during his years in the Klan. Shameless, eh?
We better hope we can replace some liberal Senators in the rest of the south with staunch conservatives, since the "pragmatic" types seem to love electing closet RINOs everywhere. Oh well, we can't get ANY judges confirmed or ANY conservative legislation passed, but it doesn't matter, cuz the Arlen Specter types who "join" the GOP can WIN!!!
Well, let's see... President Bush ALSO appointed Paul O'Neill, Christie Todd Whitman, John Snow, Colin Powell, Norman Mineta, Tom Ridge, and Gale Norton to his cabinet. Do you think they are ALL outstanding conservative leaders who could serve in the U.S. Senate because they happened to be in the President's cabinet? Sure they are are plenty of great people in his cabinet, but there are a few RINO hacks and losers too.
If being in the President's cabinet automatically makes one an outstanding choice for the Senate, would any of you Martinez supporters favor drafting Norm Mineta as the Republican nominee for U.S. Senate in California? After all, he was handpicked by President Bush, right? And following your logic, it's a "smear" for ANYONE to mention Norm was a liberal Democrat in the 1980s and Clintonite, cuz only his current association with Bush matters, right? We'd be engaging in "vicious lies" if we brought up any FACTS about the liberal stuff Norm backed in the 80s, I guess.
Nah, it's just the double-standards you Martinez apologists set simply boggles the mind. Then again, Norm is asian, so if the "pragmatic" California RINOs were also desperate to get the "minority" vote, maybe they would flock to Mineta after all and run campaign ads where proclaims that he's Mr. Conservative.
>> There is a reason President Bush and the GOP party leaders asked him to run and are so enthusiastic about his campaign. Jeb Bush said all of this a few weeks ago when McCollum took another cheap shot at Martinez. <<
You know, I just find something strange that the Bush bros. and Karl Rove are so desperate to get Mel to win the primary when he "opposes" their efforts to reward amnesty to illegal aliens in an attempt to pick up the "Hispanic" vote. Since Mel is their no. #1 point man on Hispanic Outreach, one wonders why he would be "opposing" them on this huge issue. Like I said, we must have missed all the news stories where Mel told President Bush point blank at a cabinet meeting that the amnesty proposal was dead wrong and wouldn't get Hispanic votes. I mean, the ONLY other possibility would be that Mel is not being truthful about his position on amnesty, and of course, you Martinez supporters insist all his campaign positions are 100% genuine.
>> If McCollum has a good record, he should run on it and not spend so much time attacking Martinez. <<
Pot. Kettle. Black. If Martinez was so damn great and "electable", HIS supporters wouldn't feel the need to smear a conservative icon who impeached the first popularly elected President. Or claim that a guy with a lifetime conservative rating in the 80s and an "A" rating from the NRA is SOMEHOW a "pro-abortion gun-grabber". Sickening. And I bet you're the same "conservatives" who worship guys like Zig Zag Zell Miller.
Incidentally, I'm not backing McCollum, not because of your camp's lies about his record, but because a statewide office is not the kind of position he's suited to campaign for. I'm am supporting Johnnie Byrd as the "default" candidate who's both conservative and has a proven record of winning. Make no mistake though, McCollum is a heroic house manager and will be remembered by history far longer than Mel "elect me cuz I'm Hispanic" Martinez EVER will.
Any freeper trashing McCollum should be ashamed of themselves. If it weren't for him, Slick Willie might be remembered as the guy who stuck it to the House Judiciary Committee and emerged with a wimpy "censure"
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.