Commentary

As I watch the wide range of reactions to the passing of John McCain, it seems like a good idea to remind people that we ought to function on three levels in a case like this...

In two weeks or so the Republican primary for U.S. Senate will be over, although judging by the millions of dollars being spent to boost McSally and to attack Kelli Ward, it may already be all but over. So it is a good time to write a series of thoughts I have been allowing to ferment over the last several months.

Nothing in this post should be construed as any sort of an attack on Sen. John McCain. In fact, we can assume he may be unaware of what is going on, which is to a large degree the real problem.

Blame it on a desire to get noticed by a TV show.  Blame it on an effort to whip up enthusiasm.  Blame it whatever you want, but the trend in campaigns is for candidates to say more and more outrageous things, largely without any accountability from the voting public.

With it now taking more than a week to finish counting the ballots, we don’t get to add up wins and losses on Election Night anymore. But the counting is finished and we are now able to add ‘em up and report on the results.

Over the last month or so, a great deal of attention has been paid to the #NeverTrump movement, to the possibility that delegates to the Republican National Convention in Cleveland could somehow nominate a more conservative alternative, and to the struggle over the rights of conscience of convention delegates.

Many thanks to all those who voted for me.  I was nominated with some distinguished company, so your support and the resulting award means a lot to me.

A few days ago I read Chuck Coughlin’s blog post wherein he trashed the Tea Party in a manner both surprisingly full of animus, and devoid of understanding of our nation’s newest and largest movement.  Coughlin is a professional when it comes to politics and lobbying, which made the post so much more remarkable.  I spent a few days thinking about it but resisted the urge to post my various responses.  After all, we get along, we’ve worked on the same side a few times and it makes little sense to pick a fight needlessly.  Then I realized that Chuck was talking trash about me and everyone who shared my beliefs.  I don’t know why he attacked us so personally, but responding was fair, and someone ought to say something.

As we begin 2015, a quick look back at 2014 reveals that at some point on the evening of November 4th, 2014, we successfully elected or re-elected our 100th candidate since 2004. By the time the evening was done, the count was 102 candidates we had successfully gotten across the finish line.  That doesn't include candidates for whom we provided products, like direct mail or automated dialers.  Our list was for those candidates we consulted for directly. Not bad for just six cycles of work.

So I wasn't sure what to expect from a story that National Journal was going to write on Arizona politics.  Sure, its NJ, so there will be a bit of a slant leftwards as there usually is, but the interview I gave to James Oliphant, the author, was really pleasant, and the questions gave me hope that someone was going to actually get it right for a change.  Then you see the headline and realize "Better luck next time!"