local

From the archive: This story is more than 10 years old.

Comments on

Outside groups poured money into race to succeed Giffords

Outside groups poured more than $1 million into polling and advertising in the three weeks before the election to replace former U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, according to the Federal Election Commission.

Read the full story »







Comments are temporarily disabled on TucsonSentinel.com while we upgrade our system.

have your say   

3 comments on this story

1
1770 comments
Jul 23, 2012, 10:41 am
-0 +1

National groups spent $517,570.06 in ads attacking Republican hopeful Jesse Kelly between May 24 and the special election on June 12, according to FEC reports filed last week.

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.

...the race wasn’t run on “anything at all about local issues.”

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.

2
556 comments
Jul 23, 2012, 1:31 pm
-0 +1

@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?

3
1770 comments
Jul 23, 2012, 1:51 pm
-0 +0

@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.

— 30 —

{/exp:weblog:entries}

Best in Internet Exploder