Comments are temporarily disabled on TucsonSentinel.com while we upgrade our system.
— 30 —
21226473I want to help TucsonSentinel.com offer a real news alternative!
We're committed to making quality news accessible; we'll never set up a paywall or charge for our site. But we rely on your support to bring you independent news without the spin. Use our convenient PayPal/credit card donation form below or contact us at donate@tucsonsentinel.com today.
Subscribe and stretch your donation over time:
Or give a secure one-time gift with PayPal or your credit card:
TucsonSentinel.com is an Arizona nonprofit organization. Your contribution is tax-deductible.
Please be respectful and relevant. Thought-provoking. Or at least funny.
We want comments to advance the discussion and we need your help. Debate, disagree, yell (digitally) or laugh, but do it with respect.
We won't censor your comments if we don't agree with you; we want viewpoints from across the political spectrum. We're dedicated to sparking an open, active discussion. We believe people with differing opinions can spark debate and effect change.
Comments are open to registered users of TucsonSentinel.com.
Keep in mind:
TucsonSentinel.com does not allow:
Comments that violate these guidelines may be removed. We reserve the right to make up the rules as we go along.
Commentors are solely responsible for the opinions they express and the accuracy of the information they provide. Users who violate these standards may lose their privileges on TucsonSentinel.com.
Sentinel editors can't read every comment. Trolls, spammers and other troublemakers can slide under the bridge. We rely on you to help maintain a healthy conversation - more than likely, you're reading these comments before the editors.
What if you see something inappropriate? Use the 'Flag' button to send it to a moderation queue. Help us out and tell us why you're reporting it; please don't report someone just because you disagree with them. Boy who cried wolf and all that. We'll take appropriate action on violations.
We will not edit comments to alter their meaning or censor comments because of political content.
We will not remove comments solely because they are heartless, cruel, coarse, foolish or just plain wrong. Your disapproval can maintain a decent signal to noise ratio. Ultimately, however, self-policing is the best method.
Bottom line, don't be a jerk.
3 comments on this story
Those drinking the Giffords/Barber Kool-aid should pause for a moment and ask why there were elements who felt it necessary to spend this sort of money to attack and slander Kelly. This is more money than the average “Middle Class” that Barber pledged to protect (though he never told us from what or how) would earn in a decade.
Very true. Kelly campaigned on national issues, and Barber campaigned on smearing Kelly.
To be clear, it’s not the fact that Barber won that upsets me so much (though I do think Kelly would have been better for the job)...it’s how he won. He based his entire campaign on smearing Kelly, and took out Giffords and used her for a puppet and a shill like so many others have since she was shot. Worse than all of that… the idiots in CD8 allowed it to be successful. This special election was more like special education.
It really was the political process at its absolute worst. All the wrong things happened, and for the wrong reasons. Barber, those who worked on his campaign, and all those who voted for him should all be ashamed of themselves.
@Bret Linden
If outside money is bad, how do you defend/explain the fact that outside groups spent over 30 percent more - $1.3 million compared to $900k - backing Kelly?
@Dylan Smith
Not necessarily saying that outside money is bad. Well, it is, of course, but the unfortunate reality of modern politics is that there’s no getting around it. The Kelly-backing dollars you reference were spent MUCH more responsibly…or as responsibly as any political contribution can be spent, anyway. The money coming in for Barber was coming in for one of two reasons…either to disparage Kelly, or with the intent to elect Giffords in Burl Ives’ body, another rubber-stamp vote for all those who want our borders wide open and thinks the government should be all things to all people.
You know I don’t do partisan politics. That said, my guess is the repubs thought they had to pump more money in because they know this electorate…most of them just look for the “D” and fill in the circle. Attempting to overcome such stupidity in an electorate is difficult and expensive, and as we just saw, futile.
I will say that, I myself being an informed voter and resident of CD8…I’m not going to say I saw no mudslinging from the Kelly camp. But, what I did see was minor (especially in comparison to that of the Barber campaign), and well within the levels of comparable campaigns in other races. With mudslinging, Barber went WAY over the top of what could reasonably be called acceptable or tolerable. The “Giffords is no hero” commercial? Come on…the Kelly camp attempted nothing so disgusting, or even close to that.
I’m not siding with a particular party, but I am siding with a particular candidate. The wrong guy was elected, and for all the wrong reasons.