This week's skinny....

[IA_Seth]

http://www.dmcityview.com/skinny.shtml

"We now know why gubernatorial candidate Mike Blouin went to the television airwaves with commercials showing him buddy-buddy with the governor - without asking the popular Tom Vilsack if he could do it: Blouin needs a Hail Mary if he's going to have any kind of chance of catching Democratic opponent Chet Culver. True, Vilsack is in the Blouin camp - but can't play favorites if he wants to run for president; however, it will take more than the governor for Blouin to even be in the game. Why so? Because it's not even close. According to recent polling (based on 616 likely Democratic primary voters in April), Culver is up on Blouin by 25 percent, 42 to 17. Ed Fallon was selected by 12 percent of those polled. Undecided voters still make up some 27 percent of those polled. In a similar poll done in August 2005, Culver was the choice of 26 percent of voters, followed by 13 percent for his running mate Patty Judge, while Blouin and Fallon both were in the single digits. Thus, Culver's handlers insist Judge has given Culver a big bump - opposite of what many insiders predicted, while Blouin's running mate, Andrea McGuire, according to the poll, is viewed favorably by only 8 percent of those polled. Republicans continually knock Blouin because he is perceived to be "Republican light" and might be more difficult to campaign against, the pundits maintain. But Culver has been the only Democrat who has shown to be equal to or ahead of Jim Nussle in spring polling. Culver, overall, has a favorability rating of 65 percent of primary voters, including 70 percent of union households. Blouin is seen favorably by only 41 percent of those polled. With Culver set to go up on TV with much more cash on hand than any of his opponents , a top statehouse source said, "If Chet can keep it together, it's over."

------

Great news for Chet's campaign. While this may be more insider-scoop than die-hard news, they've been right on more often than not.

[Debi]

1. Damn you Seth...

While I was defending Trial Lawyer's virtues you swooped out of thin air and posted the Skinny before me (that's two times this week I have been scooped...am I losing my touch on this Forum????)

Well *sigh* good news AGAIN for Chet Culver. Hard not to be happy :bounce:

[pstans]

2. What poll?

I have never heard of this poll they are talking about.

[Hardrada]

3. These must have been the people that were calling me

the other day but I never reply to phone polls. 99% of the Democrats that call us want money. Something called Democracy Now called us last night. I told them that they had just made that up and bade them a courteous goodbye.

[Debi]

5. Here's a link to their site

http://www.democracynow.org/

Still weird that you'd get a call out of the blue from them unless somebody sold them your info.
:shrug:

[CornField]

4. Sadly, not even the skinny has made note of the political posturing

of the republican Iowa legislators in relation to verifiable paper trails. To recap: SF 351, a bill calling for all Iowa voting machines to produce a verifiable paper trail, passed the Senate in the spring of 2005 and was immediately dispatched to the house. It was supported by *everyone* who commented on it *except* Iowa county officials (who did not want to spend the money for the printers to go along with their new electronic voting machines).

When it arrived in the house, the Republican Leadership sent it straight to a sub-committee, made up mostly of other republicans, at let it sit... and sit... and sit...

It wasn't until the beginning of 2006, when the drums of the citizens reached a fevered pitch (much do to activist groups focused on voting making calls, staging meetings and providing presentations to legislators) that it was brought out. The mortal blow to the bill was made by Republican leadership when they agreed to verifiable paper trails only if an ID requirement was tacked on. The wide-spread support the bill had been given (ACLU-IA, AARP, etc.) was pulled in the face of the new amendments. When the fat lady sung, the bill was defeated.

Shy of a miracle, 47 out of Iowa's 99 counties will vote in the 2006 primaries and election on machines which are not properly audited, with code which has not be widely tested or inspected, and will leave the polls without a receipt.

Above all else, this bit of information alone should be enough for republican balls to be stapled to the wall... problem is, no news reporters seem to want to touch it. Are they afraid people will come to doubt our electorial process? (They already do.) Have they been convinced that any article they write about elections maybe not being on the up-and-up might keep people away from the polls? (If so, then they deserve to be fired.)

Someone tell me this: Exactly when will our journalists in this state return to their previous status as watchdogs of the people in lieu of being lapdogs for our legislators?