Tuesday, November 28 is also almost over. Sorry for the delay.
There are, however, three things I wanted to respond to today:
I consider Elesha Gayman a friend and I'm proud to have helped elect her to the legislature. I'm glad she's getting press coverage, but if I read one more story like this one, I'm going to scream.
I donated to Elesha's campaign, I volunteered for her campaign, and on more than one occasion I used this space to promote her campaign. I can tell you from experience that she's more than just a young woman. Elesha is a solid progressive on the right side of most issues and she'll be a breath of fresh air in Des Moines. At some point the press is going to have to take a step closer and realize she's more than just a sideshow. But right now, all they seem to notice is her age and her lack of testicles.
Moving on, I got an email from Christy Vilsack today, subject line "We're coming to your state this week." Never has this site been more appropriate. I think it says a lot about the way Tom Vilsack has operated over the last six months that he'll be "visiting" Iowa this week.
Finally, I wanted to respond to this comment, which Ted Sporer left on this post regarding Bill Northey:
Give Bill a chance-he's a good guy and not a pawn of big agriculture. No one really gave Bill a lot of money and he comes into the office beholden to few if any particular constituents.I think the "no one gave really gave Bill a lot of money" line is particularly ridiculous. If you've lost your scorecard, allow me to remind you of something: Iowans for Agriculture, which was funded by Iowa Farm Bureau, outspent both candidates. If that figure, nearly $200,000, is not "a lot of money" to you, then we must run in significantly different financial circles.
KL
3 comments:
I agree 100% with you on the Sporer comment. Not only did Iowans for Ag spend an incredible amount of money compared to the total spending in the race, Farm Bureau also gave the Northey campaign some hefty checks directly. If there was ever a situation when a special interest was in a position to "own" a candidate, this would be it. Do we really think Northey is going to say no to Craig Lang?
Anyways, Northey does not seem like a bad or evil guy. He may turn out to be a fine SOA and we'll likely continue business as usual at IDALS. It is just pretty clear to me he won't be rocking the big ag's powerful boat.
Has Gayman moved out of her parent's house yet?
Sorry. That's probably one of the other things you're sick of hearing about, but it's astonishing that someone who has yet to step out into the world on her own is now representing a bunch of full-fledged adults. I suppose there are two ways to look at it: Old man Van Fossen ran a crap campaign in a bad year for the GOP, or Gayman's a force to be reckoned with. We know where you stand, the rest of us will figure it out in due time. What Gayman has to look out for is coming off as a looney lefty. She's young, a woman, and represents a pretty balanced district. If she comes across as someone trying to be the next Nancy Pelosi, she'll also be a one-hit wonder.
To clarify: I have a lot of respect for the campaign she ran, it was incredible for a first time candidate. But I'm not convinced it would have been enough without both an overall disgust with the GOP and papa Van Fossen's do-nothing campaign.
Post a Comment