You are currently browsing the tag archive for the 'Bunning' tag.
Here are your updates for the 2010 Republican primary for the U.S. Senate.
Politico catches Senator Jim Bunning dozing off in a meeting. Maybe he’s dreaming about retiring.
Rand Paul’s moneybomb is today. He’s been telling everyone about it.
The Trey Grayson camp is fairly quiet. But will the Secretary of State come out against cancer?
FiveThirtyEight has weighed in on Sen. Jim Bunning’s retirement, but not with the site’s famous statistical analysis. Instead, Tom Schaller revisits a piece from last week. In the new post, Schaller looks at Bunning’s legacy.
There is no Gramm-Rudman-Bunning or Bunning-Feingold Act. Nor, if memory serves, was the former pitching great a particularly prominent voice during the debates leading up to the Iraq war vote or as an advocate on behalf of George W. Bush’s income tax cut agenda. He did, of course, serve on the baseball-steroids panel, a good fit for a backbench legislator and former star major-leaguer. A few years ago, Time magazine called him an “underperformer” and rated him among the five worst senators. Whatever one thinks of their motives and methods, in far shorter Senate stints both of South Carolina’s senators, Lindsey Graham and Jim DeMint, have done more to distinguish themselves.
Schaller goes on to compare Bunning’s tenure in the Senate to the conservative movement. Bunning is an elderly caucuasion who supports a conservative ideology but does not offer substantiative alternatives or new ideas. Is he accurate? Is there value in a Senator who, rather than creating legislation, reminds the party of the ideas they purport to defend?
I don’t mean to antagonize our readers, but for reasons that are not at all political, Rand Paul is becoming my favorite contender for Sen. Jim Bunning’s seat. Why? Because his supporters are our busiest commentors.
I’m not being sarcastic, I really enjoy the conversations Paul supporters start. Dialogue is essential to the political process.
But the thing is, of the 9 people who commented on that post, none of them had Kentucky IP addresses. It’s possible that they’re masking their whereabouts or are Kentucky voters on vacation, and it’s also possible that they aren’t Kentucky voters, but still plan on putting powder into Paul’s money bomb scheduled for next month. Then again, maybe they aren’t donors and maybe they’re proving my point.
Anyway, I’m glad to see outsiders getting interested in Kentucky politics. Stick around and comment on other stories, too, please.
With Jim Bunning out of the Senate race, the likely successor to the candidacy is Kentucky Secretary of State Trey Grayson.
But a few commentors on The Edit disagree. They say Bowling Green eye doctor Rand Paul is going to use his father’s famous money bombs to raise enough money to beat Grayson in the primary.
I’ve been quick to dismiss Rand Paul’s internet popularity as just that, popularity that only exists on the internet. But while Grayson may have more active supporters who are actually in Kentucky, a giant money bomb could buy tons of ads all over the Commonwealth. And ever since the days of Lincoln, voters have generally favored the big spenders. The first money bomb will test my theory, but I think that without Bunning, Grayson’s fundraising will increase, giving him a larger and more reliable source of funds than Dr. Paul.
Let’s say the money bombs exeed all expectations. Grayson is still likely to have the support of party big-wigs, including Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. Some supporters may not be pleased with how McConnell handled Bunning’s short-lived candidacy, but an endorsement from McConnell is unlikely to hurt Grayson, unless those DNC ads make an unexpectedly large splash. There’s also the fact that Grayson is a well-liked politician in a statewide office with supporters in both parties and across the Republican spectrum. Sure, he once supported Bill Clinton, but he’s in the GOP now, and since Kentucky once went to Clinton in the presidential election, Grayson’s preferences 17 years ago might not do as much damage as some people hope.
My favorite website for punditry is FiveThirtyEight. I like it because editor Nate Silver and his team of bloggers rely on stats rather than wild speculation. It cuts down on hackery.
For some time now, Jim Bunning’s Senate seat has made 538’s list of the most vulnerable seats. In July, it was number 2, with Silver saying:
Attorney General Jack Conway has thus far outfundraised intraparty rival Daniel Mongiardo. That is arguably good news for the Democrats, since Conway has tested slightly stronger than Mongiardo against extremely vulnerable Republican incumbent Jim Bunning.
Silver hasn’t weighed in on Bunning’s retirement yet, but it seems like a Conway-Grayson race is inevitable, and that will likely be more exciting than a Bunning-Conway contest. Can Grayson keep the seat under GOP control? I’ll be reporting on that later today on WFPL.
Another week, another politician not seeking re-election. This time it’s Jim Bunning, whose retirement has long been expected.
Politico has Bunning’s statement:
Unfortunately, running for office is not just about the issues. To win a general election, a candidate has to be able to raise millions of dollars to get the message out to voters. Over the past year, some of the leaders of the Republican Party in the Senate have done everything in their power to dry up my fundraising. The simple fact is that I have not raised the funds necessary to run an effective campaign for the U.S. Senate. For this reason, Iwill not be a candidate for re-election in 2010.
Trey Grayson will probably announce he’s running soon. Rand Paul, too.
Before his speech at the Kentucky Chamber of Commerce’s annual meeting on Wednesday, Washington Post columnist George Will held a brief press availability. I was there, along with Al Cross and two other reporters. Here is the audio, where you can hear us all ask the conservative writer questions.
Lieutenant Governor Daniel Mongiardo raised just over $300,000 for his Senate bid last quarter. That’s a million dollars less than Attorney General Jack Conway. The Herald-Leader has the story and Page One does too.
It looks like it doesn’t matter what Jim Bunning says, Rand Paul may run for the Senate in 2010. Right now, Paul is in the same state of readiness as Secretary of State Trey Grayson. Both candidates are raising money (one more successfully than the other) and both candidates used to say they wouldn’t run against Senator Jim Bunning, whom most people expect to drop out, despite the Senator’s insistence that he’s staying in the race. Grayson says he has no plans to run against Bunning, but Paul may flip (see the above link).
Paul raised over $100,000 for his campaign in the last quarter. That’s compared to the $600,000 in Grayson’s Q2 coffers. (Both have far below than the roughly $1.3 million raised by Democratic Attorney General Jack Conway, who has officially entered the race). Paul’s website says can raise cash through the same kind of internet “Money Bombs” that helped his father Rep. Ron Paul raise some $30 million in his presidential campaign. Rand Paul hopes to earn another $1 million through a money bomb this summer.
Money raised online is great, but if Ron Paul’s estimated 35 convention delegates are any indication, web money doesn’t necessarily translate to actual votes. Yes, Obama did raise significant money online, but he also had so many campaign offices and feet on the ground that it’s difficult to measure the effect of internet fundraising.
Several media outlets are treating Rand Paul like a novelty candidate. He’s probably not happy about that, but tangible success remains to be seen offline. If his dad can use the web to win a congressional seat, maybe Rand can compete in the Senate race using the same tactics, especially if he attracts new voters to the Republican Primary. Those new voters could be young internet libertarians, disillusioned small-government types or frustrated Ayn Rand readers. But again, that kind of excitement hasn’t yet materialized, though we certainly do get enthusiastic comments whenever we cover Dr. Paul (Ron or Rand). Many of those comments are from out of state, and Alaskans can’t vote in Kentucky elections.
Although winning candidates probably need to use the web in parallel with old-fashioned flesh-pressing, there still isn’t a formula to translate blog comments and PayPal donations into votes. Name recognition and a strong platform also help. Paul’s brand of quasi-libertarianism may have some supporters in the Commonwealth, but is the Bowling Green-based eye doctor and son of an unsuccessful presidential candidate really able to rally voters? If so, those supporters seem awfully stingy.
Here’s what we reported on today:
