Monday, November 13, 2006

Milford and the Margin of Victory

This is me checking in on my earlier thoughts.

Today's Telegraph has an article about how Milford, and other traditionally Republican towns, were a key to Paul Hodes' victory or Charlie Bass' loss, depending how you look at it. Although Bass won Milford, and Pelham and Hollis and Amherst, he barely did so - by 28, 457, 48, 131. Those towns all gave him solid wins in 2004, and could have helped carry him along this year, but Republicans just didn't show up to vote.

Back in September, I wrote about the Milford Labor Day parade, focusing on how strikingly few people I saw visibly supporting Republicans there. I was hesitant to embrace anecdotal evidence like that, but it did give me some hope. No, Hodes didn't win Milford. That would have signaled a win of truly epic proportions. But he held his own, against expectations.


Blogger kentdecide said...

Well our boy made his first mistake - signed the letter endorsing Hoyer. Is it going to be a long two years?

11:15 PM  
Blogger MissLaura said...

I'm not thrilled with either Hoyer or Murtha as choices, but it's hard to see how Hoyer is a distinctly worse choice than Murtha on any level. And in this, Hodes stands with more than half of his entering class. So I'm curious on what grounds you feel this is such a bad sign?

11:31 PM  
Blogger yankeedoodler said...

He made a mistake by not endorsing someone with serious past ethics issues?

Whoever the leader is, they'll have to deal with a large group of new and more progressive reps. No going back to what got Newt all riled up pre-1994.

6:25 AM  
Blogger kentdecide said...

Sorry for the delay Miss Laura. I beseech you to now consider my reply.

Hoyer's bad news. A real insider. Pushed the e-voting (HAVA or whatever). Pushed hard on the bankruptcy bill. I saw him weasel around that on a talking head show. In response to a question like "what about families driven broke from medical bills their insurance refuses to cover", his reply was we have to "make allowances for that", and the host didn't call him on the fact there are no such allowances in that bill. Started his * own * "K Street Project" and bragged about it. Pulled the web page when it was blogged about. I thought this was what we voted to clean up?

Murtha? Yup, some current issues. Some deal with Pelosi involved over some SF real estate. Maybe an allegation of some family funneling. Yankeedoodler, Murtha's past ethics issues are bogus. Watch the tape. He turned them down. The "maybe later" line - he was stringing them along. Remember these were rich Arabs willing to invest in his 25% unemployment district. He turned them down.

Murtha's been out in front on Iraq for over a year now. Let's remember that is 1) what got us here (Iraq)and 2) the number one problem to solve (Iraq).

Jane and Joe Q. AmericanIdolWatcher don't realize how we've lost the class war. Blissfully unaware. They glaze over at income distribution stats, national debt figures, all that egghead stuff. Show them Billy down the street coming home stretched out under a flag, * that * they understand.

Hoyer's a phased withdrawal guy. There's only two choices left now - pro or anti war. Ain't much of a difference between "stay the course" and "phased withdrawal". Would you be the last one to die for a "phased withdrawal"?

Didn't we vote for change? Hoyer is more of the same. And won't have Pelosi's back.

8:35 PM  
Blogger MissLaura said...

Hey, kentdecide,

No worries about not getting through moderation unless you're fairly obviously living under a bridge, and you're thoughtful and honest here, so it's a no-brainer.

You're actually less likely to get replies here these days because we've moved our focus to a new site, which you've just reminded me I really need to post about. So come register at - it's a soapblox site with diaries and more sophisticated commenting, so you should really be able to get interesting discussion there.

1:31 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home