AK SEN: Is Joe Miller done?

[BrentWil]

I took a look at the latest polls, ( http://www.huffingtonpost.com/electi...t=10AKSenGEMvM ) and he seems to be falling into second and even third. He looks to be in serious trouble of winning. What are your thoughts on his chances? Could the Dems pull an upset in this very odd race?

While it looks to be a very bad night, having to tea party candidates lose will create a civil war in the GOP. Plus it would ensure we keep the Senate.

[Valienteman]

1. Lisa Murkowski will win and she is an extreme wingnut

I am not happy either way.

[ProSense]

2. You don't know that she'll win, and it's Miller who is the extreme wingnut. n/t

[Valienteman]

4. She's an extreme wingnut. Here's Murkowski on the issues

Foreign policy:

Prewar Iraq was a safe haven for terrorists. (Oct 2004)
A democratic Iraq will be a role model for the Middle East. (Oct 2004)
Voted NO on redeploying non-essential US troops out of Iraq in 9 months. (Dec 2007)
Voted YES on designating Iran's Revolutionary Guards as terrorists. (Sep 2007)
Voted NO on redeploying US troops out of Iraq by March 2008. (Mar 2007)
Voted NO on redeploying troops out of Iraq by July 2007. (Jun 2006)
Voted NO on investigating contract awards in Iraq & Afghanistan. (Nov 2005)
Voted NO on requiring on-budget funding for Iraq, not emergency funding. (Apr 2005)
Voted YES on $86 billion for military operations in Iraq & Afghanistan. (Oct 2003)
Sanctions on Iran to end nuclear program. (Apr 2009)

Rated 14% by NARAL, indicating a pro-life voting record

Rated 83% by the Christian Coalition: a pro-family voting record: Strongly Favors topic 4
Rated 0% by the AU, indicating opposition to church-state separation

Rated 0% by the ARA, indicating an anti-senior voting record

Rated 0% by the CAF, indicating opposition to energy independence:

Etc. What do you call that? a moderate?

Here's how the independent website place her in the ideology spectrum:



http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/Lisa_Murkowski.htm

[ProSense]

5. I know who Murkowski is and how she votes. She's not Joe Miller. n/t

[Valienteman]

She's not Joe Miller, and she's an extreme wingnut n/t

[Blue_In_AK]

7. Miller is the overt wingnut, Murkowski the covert.

She presents a facade of being a moderate and is very busy talking out of both sides of her mouth since August, but if you look at her voting record, she has voted with McConnell almost 90% of the time. Her trick is to "work" for Alaskan issues in the committees so she can say she's working on Alaskan issues, but then when the bills come up for consideration, she joins the Republican filibuster. That way she can have it both ways.

She's a snake, in my opinion.

[ProSense]

9. Agree

If you look at John McCain's voting record from before 2008, he isn't a moderate at all.

Supporting Republican filibusters is common among Republicans. The teabagger agenda is not filibustering bills or tweaking legislation. It's about destroying the government. The thing to do is not allow a single one of these kooks a seat in Congress.

[Valienteman]

10. In how many issues do you agree with Murkowski, and in how many do you disagree?

?

[ProSense]

11. What exactly are you arguing?

There are three people in this race. You claimed Murkowski is going to win and she's an extreme wingnut.

I believe McAdams has a really good chance of winning this race.

The last person I want to win is Joe Miller.

[bahrbearian]

25. What exactly are you arguing? That Murkowski isn't a extreme wingnut?

[saltpoint]

15. +1.

[vaberella]

27. Doubtful..her name is not even on the ballot. n/t

[Blue_In_AK]

3. The scene here changes with every passing day.

What is for sure is that Joe has very high unfavorable ratings, which I think will do him in once all is said and done, despite his still very enthusiastic (and stupid) base.

I think the race really boils down to Lisa and Scott. Lisa's taken a hit in the past couple of days because it appears that the Division of Elections and now our Supreme Court is affording her write-in campaign certain concessions that no other write-in candidate has ever had before -- assistance in the polling stations with spelling her name, for instance. That's really pissed a lot of people off in both the Miller and McAdams' camps and may be enough to take some votes away from her from the "undecided" pool.

What everyone agrees on is that Scott has run by far the best and cleanest campaign and even his two opponents speak quite highly of him on a personal level.

If you want to get a pretty clear picture of how sentiments are running here, you might want to click around the Anchorage Daily News site and read the comments on the political articles. They're pretty revealing, I think. I'm hopeful for a McAdams' win. He is the one with the momentum.

www.adn.com

[ProSense]

6. Thanks for the insight. n/t

[Blue_In_AK]

8. In my opinion, if Scott McAdams doesn't win this race outright,

it will be in the courts for months. There's been too much hinkiness as regards the write-in campaign of Lisa Murkowski here at the end, and people are really upset about it, both Miller and McAdams supporters.

[BrentWil]

12. From the outside, it looks like McAdams has run a very good Campaign

What are your thought?

[Blue_In_AK]

20. He's run one of the best campaigns I've ever seen,

and that's no joke. Remember that he was virtually unknown statewide prior to the primary in August, having been an advocate for education, a teacher and football coach, and part-time mayor of a small town in Southeast Alaska (which we here in Southcentral can't even reach except by boat or air). I'm sure people within the education sphere knew him because of his statewide work on behalf of schools, but as far as regular people up here in Anchorage, we had never even heard his name.

Sitka was the host city for this year's Democratic convention. Of course, one of the things they were doing there was trying to find candidates to run in the primary, but no one wanted to take on Lisa because she had such a high approval rating, 70% or something. The powers that be in the party were so impressed with Scott's service to his community and his hospitality that they asked him if he'd like to be essentially the place holder. He agreed, and he got on the primary ballot with a couple of lesser candidates.

Everything changed after Joe Miller upset Lisa in the primary. All of a sudden we had a viable candidate and a chance to win the senate seat, and as people got to know Scott, they really liked him. Lisa diddled around for about three weeks trying to find a party that would let her get on their ticket, which she couldn't, and then finally declared her write-in candidacy. By this time, Scott had already started raising money and traveling around the state getting to know people.

One thing is certain. If Lisa hadn't re-entered the race, Scott would have walked away with it. The only things the other two candidates have been able to throw at him are that he's big (his Tlingit name means boat size killer whale), he's inexperienced (not corrupt, in other words), and that he'll vote with Obama/Begich, as if that's a really bad thing. He's very personable (both of the other candidates have said how much they like him), and he states his positions clearly and with conviction. The message is the same no matter the audience.

The most impressive thing, to me at least, is that he has raised well over a million dollars in donations, more than enough to campaign in Alaska, with over 80% being from individual contributions of $200 or less. He has accepted no corporate PAC money and has pledged that if he wins, he won't take corporate PAC money in the future. This is really amazing when the other two candidates are backed by the Tea Party Express, unknowable PACs and special interest groups, and/or huge corporate donors. They each have an unlimited supply of campaign money, and they're burning it up on each other, because there's lots of room for criticism of each of them, plenty of ammo to use. You can bet with Scott's numbers rising, if there were any dirt out there about him, we would be hearing about it night and day. He has presented himself as trustworthy and a good listener. No one has stepped up and said otherwise, except two or three people from Sitka who are either friends of Lisa's or have personal or political grudges. A lot of people are starting to think that we should give him a chance. We've had some great leaders here in Alaska, and it could turn out that Scott will be another.


One thing I know for sure, even if Scott loses this election, he's going to be around and active in Alaska's politics in the future. He has made a huge positive impression on Alaskans all over the state, rural, urban, Native, non-Native. Everybody likes him.


Here is a very good article (with videos) by Linda Kellen Biegel, a/k/a Celtic Diva, at The Mudflats. http://www.themudflats.net/2010/10/30/mcadams-full-page-ad-im-twice-the-man-joe-miller-is/ It'll give you some other Alaskans' perspectives on Scott McAdams.

I'm just really impressed, as I guess you can tell, and people who know me around DU know that I'm not easily impressed. :evilgrin:

[Arkana]

13. I think he'll lose--the question is who will win.

Murkowski winning reelection would be a thumb in the eye to Sarah Palin and the Republicans and it would free her from obligations to the national GOP, but McAdams winning would be a huge coup, and he's actually a Democrat.

So there are really good things to come from it either way.

[saltpoint]

14. It would delight me if Republicans skipped this

one and McAdams won.

I don't know if it will happen, but I'm wishing real hard for just that.

[jmowreader]

16. This is for Blue_in_AK and any other Alaska DUers...

Are there enough Democratic voters in Alaska that, if Murkowski and Miller split the Republican vote plus the independents who haven't been totally disgusted by both Republicans, McAdams can take the seat simply by collecting the remainder?

[Blue_In_AK]

19. It's tricky.

Since almost 60% of Alaskan voters are independent or otherwise undeclared or with small parties, they hold the power. There's 25% Republicans and 15% Democrats. Early on, some Democrats were scared into supporting Murkowski, but with Joe falling and Scott having run such a good campaign, they may be coming back to the fold. The Republican vote is probably pretty well split. A lot of Republicans are mad at Lisa for not accepting the primary results. Other Republicans, of course, can't stand Miller.

The Independents are the big unknown. If Lisa had been on the ballot, a lot of them would have voted for her, but whether or not they're motivated to write her in is another matter. I really have no idea how this is going to go.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

21. All he needs is 35% of the vote. It's not impossible!!

[jmowreader]

23. That requires Miller and Murkowski to evenly split the vote

If he gets 35 percent of the vote, and either one of the Republicans pulls less than 29 percent of the vote, the other Republican wins. So...it's a nail biter.

[sabrina 1]

24. He went from about 24% to 29% yesterday almost overnight as

Miller's campaign began to implode. Miller lost about 5-6 points in the same time frame. I didn't think he could win two days ago, but now I think he has a chance. I wrote off Alaska but now think it's in the 'maybe' category.

But even without Alaska, the Dems will hold the Senate with at the very least 51 seats, at the most 58. They will probably end up with 54-55 seats.

Some stats here http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9407623

[golfguru]

17. Joe is toast /

[Jennicut]

18. I think Miller could lose this one. But write in candidacies are tricky.

Has anyone ever won a Senate seat this way? It could benefit McAdams. Interesting race, for sure.

[bornskeptic]

29. Stro Thurmond won as a write-in candidate in 1954.

That's the only time anyone has done so.

[Sheepshank]

22. Joe is toast alright...and Dems just sent some $ for ads

that attack Murkowski. Wouldn't be a hoot if all of this came together for the Dem???

[vaberella]

26. Don't read most polls. But I've been saying for weeks; Miller is out.

And that was once Murkowski stated she was doing right in.

[saltpoint]

28. Miller strikes me as a

thug, head to toe.

If his polls are tanking, it may be as much an indictman of his personality as his extremist political positions.

McAdams is the only evolved being in that Senate race, and of the two Pukes, as bad as Lisa is, Joe is even worse.

[Xenotime]

30. Yes. THere just needs for somethign to come out that would bring his run to an end.

[Alexander]

31. Isn't there a write-in candidate also named "Lisa M"?

Seems to me the 160 or so write-in candidates could spell trouble for Murkowski.

[Cognitive_Resonance]

32. K&R nt