Here's why we can win (and how we can get there...)

81 posts / 0 new
Last post
Jim Cyr
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 5 days ago
Joined: 06/27/2005 - 12:01am
Here's why we can win (and how we can get there...)

Undeniable, important realities:
1). We have an extremely unpopular governor (I do marketing research on this, and trust me-- even those who "support" him do so very weakly)
2). The lineup of candidates is ideal and works to our advantage
3). We have a decent candidate (who is in line with past newly-elected governors, like Longley and King: a non-careerist who connects with the "regular people" of Maine)
4) His campaign has a clue (as evidenced by an excellent primary strategy)
5) The party is pretty-well united

One missing ingredient, which is up to us---[b]hard work[/b]:
1). The media can easily sway it to Baldacci if we let them. They will be rabid this time. Every time they are biased we must CALL THEM ON IT--and call them:
*Bangor Daily News: 1-800-432-7964
*Lewiston Sun Journal: 784-5411
*Portland Press Herald: 791-6650
*Brunswick Times-Record: 504-8204 (Publisher) or 504-8231 (Managing Editor)
*Kennebec Journal: 1-800-537-5508
*Waterville Morning Sentinel: 1-800-452-4666
*Journal Tribune: 282-1535

*WCSH: 828-6666
*WMTW: 782-1800 (Auburn), 1-800-248-6387 (Portland)
*WGME: 797-1313
*MPBN: 1-800-884-1717
*WVII: 945-6457
*WABI: 947-8321
*WLBZ: 942-4821
*WAGM: 1-800-393-9246
Print these numbers and put them by your phone. You MUST ask for the managing editor or news director. Threaten them with a protest outside their front door: I have used that and it gets their attention FAST. Let nothing go.....we have to nip them in the bud.

2) REMIND everyone we can that while the REST of the country is doing great, Maine is not sharing in the boom (people forget what's going on outside their little corner of the world...)

If we do this work, Woodcock wins. And Maine wins.

Jim Cyr
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 5 days ago
Joined: 06/27/2005 - 12:01am
just bumping it for the contact info~

Sorry if this looks egotistical!

democrat
Offline
Last seen: 8 years 6 months ago
Joined: 11/15/2003 - 1:01am
Here's why we can win (and how we can get there...)

A party that is pretty much united????? Not the R's that I know. They're running in the other direction as fast as they can so they won't be associated with a right-wing party leader.

Jim Cyr
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 5 days ago
Joined: 06/27/2005 - 12:01am
okay, I'll take your word on that lol

[quote="democrat"]A party that is pretty much united????? Not the R's that I know. They're running in the other direction as fast as they can so they won't be associated with a right-wing party leader.[/quote]

If the above work gets done, then people of Maine will KNOW that while he may be conservative, he's no "right winger" (love that term--how many times have you ever heard the media call a Democrat politician a "left winger" or "leftist"?? :lol: )

The Distributist
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 6 months ago
Joined: 05/15/2005 - 12:01am
Here's why we can win (and how we can get there...)

D-Rat is going for some kind of record for inaccurate, wrong-headed, distortionist remarks about Woodcock. Wonder who pays him per post?

Jim Cyr
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 5 days ago
Joined: 06/27/2005 - 12:01am
again, I apologize for the "bump"

I just want to keep these contact numbers front and center----we'll need them!
Keep on top of them NOW and they will learn their lesson..........and might back off a bit.
Favorite media attack of the day: the cartoon in the BDN painting Woodcock as a preacher (maybe even one of those "evangelicals"!!), while moderate Reps and unhappy Dems snooze. What a cheap, nasty little piece of crap. I'll call them tommorrow......please do the same.

Doug Thomas
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 7 months ago
Joined: 08/29/1999 - 12:01am
Here's why we can win (and how we can get there...)

[quote="democrat"]A party that is pretty much united????? Not the R's that I know. They're running in the other direction as fast as they can so they won't be associated with a right-wing party leader.[/quote]

democrat
You couldn't be more wrong. In the last few days I've talked to a number of Republican Primary voters, even those who voted for Emery or Mills weren't disappointed Woodcock won, and they plan on supporting him this fall. As far as I can tell Republicans are united by a strong belief that Baldacci is one of the worst Governors Maine has ever seen, and we want him replaced.

One afternoon this week I was picking up my lawn sign from a supporter's lawn. I went to the door to thank them for letting me put up the sign, and we got into a conversation. The lady of the house told me she had been a Democrat since she first registered in the sixty's. She changed party registration a while ago to Republican so she could vote for Chandler, and she has no plans to change back.

gopcollegestudent
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 2 weeks ago
Joined: 10/16/2005 - 5:38pm
Here's why we can win (and how we can get there...)

The Republicans that Democract is talking to are prob. the ones that changed there party to vote for Mills in the primary he had a number that did so, and the ones that did are supporting LaMarche or Merill but not Baldzy...

Also, democracts in Maine are ready for change proved by the 24% by Miller..I even heard that some dems wrote Peter Mills in on thier ballot for governor..

David Burke
Offline
Last seen: 11 years 4 months ago
Joined: 09/28/2004 - 12:01am
Here's why we can win (and how we can get there...)

You guys are out of your mind.

As of '04, these were the voting enrollments by party affiliation.

Democrat Green Ind. Republican Unenrolled Total

319,198 24,155 287,452 393,151 1,023,956
31% 2.4% 28% 37%

Let's say the Republican Party is totally unified, and all vote for Mr. Ultra Right-Wing Conservative Woodcock.

That leaves 72% of the vote.
Will any Green party people vote for him? No.
Will any Democrats vote for him? Probably not
How about Unenrolled? This is the big unknown. It's often hypothesized on here that an Unenrolled voter is typically a Liberal voter. If so, bye-bye Woodcock.

I suppose the only hope is that Merrill and LaMarche are strong enough contenders to split the middle-of-the-road right leaning liberal vote. I don't think Merrill is. I've heard her speak on Ray's show and frankly, she didn't come off that good. LaMarche has a much stronger presence, but the public will be scared off by her alliance with the Green Party. I'd say if each got 10% of the vote, they will be doing good. Hardly enough to destroy Baldacci.

I don't want the guy re-elected, but the selection of Woodcock was a major mistake by the Republicans, unless he can back pedal his way out of his socially conservative stands. Guess you'll be able to complain for another four years.

Dan Billings
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 3 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2005 - 12:01am
Here's why we can win (and how we can get there...)

It is odd that liberals think so little of liberal/moderate voters that they think they will vote based on an issue that is out of the state's hands due to court decisions (abortion) and an issue which the candidate has said he will take no action on because it has been decided by the voters (gay rights).

David Burke
Offline
Last seen: 11 years 4 months ago
Joined: 09/28/2004 - 12:01am
Here's why we can win (and how we can get there...)

Dan - Maine voters have time and time again been repulsed by social conservatives, particularly for the Governors slot.

Woodcock wasn't particularly strong in Southern/Coastal Maine even amongst his own party. How do you think he's gonna fare against the rest?

Dan Billings
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 3 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2005 - 12:01am
Here's why we can win (and how we can get there...)

Really? Who was the last nominee for a Governor of a major party that was a social conservative? Wasn't Joe Brennan pro-life when he was elected in 1978? Who was the last social conservative that Republicans ran for Governor? Even Jim Longley was pro-choice. Sure Wyman got creamed, but who else have Republicans ran for statewide office that was conservative? How about some facts to back up your statement?

Woodcock was a close second in York and Sagadahoc Counties. Emery was only a few votes ahead of him in Cumberland, where Mills won. Woodcock won Waldo and was a close second in Hancock. Emery, as the local candidate, won big in Knox and Lincoln. Woodcock spent little time or money there because Emery was local. Woodcock won 9 of the 16 counties in the state. Mills won only 4 and Emery won only 3.

Emery and Mills spent a large percentage of their time and resources in York and Cumberland Counties. The Woodcock campaign intentionally ran a statewide campaign instead of making the same mistake as the other two candidates of concentrating so much on southern Maine.

gopcollegestudent
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 2 weeks ago
Joined: 10/16/2005 - 5:38pm
Here's why we can win (and how we can get there...)

The same group is saying Woodcock can't win the general that said he could not win the primary..

Woodcock won the primary..I beleive he will win the general as well..

David Burke
Offline
Last seen: 11 years 4 months ago
Joined: 09/28/2004 - 12:01am
Here's why we can win (and how we can get there...)

Intentionally ran a state-wide campaign?

Come on, Dan. The tactics were wise for winning a primary. Avoid wasting money where you can't win. The problem is, for the general election, you can't win without a decent showing in southern/coastal Maine.

And apparently, your definition of "social conservative" is different than mine.

Dan Billings
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 3 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2005 - 12:01am
Here's why we can win (and how we can get there...)

The Republican candidates for Governor over the last 34 years have been: Cianchette, Longley, Collins, McKernan, Cragin, Palmer, and Erwin.

Of those candidates, who was a social conservative? Longley was even pro-choice.

The Republican candidates for U.S. Senate over the last 34 years have been Snowe, Collins, Cohen, Wyman, Emery, Monks, and Smith?

Of those candidates, Wyman was a social conservative and I guess Emery was still pro-life in 1982, though there has been debate over that here in recent weeks. In any case, Emery did not lose in 1982 due to social issues.

So all you have to back up your claim is Jack Wyman. Who was cannon fodder for Mitchell in 1988 because nobody else wanted to run.

gopcollegestudent
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 2 weeks ago
Joined: 10/16/2005 - 5:38pm
Here's why we can win (and how we can get there...)

The people that I talk to about the campigan say that they don't think Woodcock wears the social conservative agenda on his sleeve..But at the same time know his views on the issues...

I don't think its going to play a big role in this campigan.. The Maine ecnomy is stinky...And it will smell right up to the ballot box. Four more years of Baldacci and I am out of here moving to some place that I will be able to get a job! Grad school and all will be done in another state..
---

I was just sitting in the dorm with my Woodcock button on a well not dem came up to me and said, I am voting for him, Baldacci's got to go and I'll vote for anyone but him even a Republican..

Baldacci's loosing votes every second of the day..

Dan Billings
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 3 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2005 - 12:01am
Here's why we can win (and how we can get there...)

[quote="David Burke"]The problem is, for the general election, you can't win without a decent showing in southern/coastal Maine.[/quote]

True. As illustrated above, Woodcock had a decent showing in southern/coastal Maine. He got above 32% of the vote in every county accept Cumberland, Lincoln, and Knox. Knox County, where Emery is from, was the only county where Woodcock fell below 26%.

In contrast, Mills fell below 32% of the vote in half of the 16 counties in the state. He fell below 26 percent in 3 counties, including Knox, which was Woodcock's worst county. Mills also came in third in York County, which was in southern Maine, the last time that I checked.

gopcollegestudent
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 2 weeks ago
Joined: 10/16/2005 - 5:38pm
Here's why we can win (and how we can get there...)

How about Woodcock in Oxford county wow! A place I thought Mills or Emery would take strong..

Roger Ek
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 12 min ago
Joined: 11/18/2002 - 1:01am
Here's why we can win (and how we can get there...)

Knox and Lincoln Counties will vote liberal as they did last Tuesday. I don't think it will be enough against TABOR and Chandler Woodcock. What a powerful and complementary slate we have this November.

gopcollegestudent
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 2 weeks ago
Joined: 10/16/2005 - 5:38pm
Here's why we can win (and how we can get there...)

Rogerek-
VERY TRUE WORDS!!!!!!

Dan Billings
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 3 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2005 - 12:01am
Here's why we can win (and how we can get there...)

[quote="gopcollegestudent"]How about Woodcock in Oxford county wow! A place I thought Mills or Emery would take strong..[/quote]

Former Senate President Rick Bennett, co-chair of the Woodcock campaign with Senator Paul Davis, had a lot to do with that.

One thing was made clear on Tuesday -- Rick is the guy you want on your team to win a primary in Oxford County.

Peter Mills had Senator Hastings in his TV commercials, and former Senator Ferguson was also backing him. Oxford County Probate Judge and former Senator Dana Hanley was Chair of Emery's campaign. They couldn't deliver Oxford County.

Mike Travers
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 2 days ago
Joined: 08/04/2002 - 12:01am
Here's why we can win (and how we can get there...)

A longtime friend and Democrat activist told me he's convinced, and will be voting for Woodcock this fall. He'd told me previously that he'd never vote for Baldacci again, but to hear him explaining why he thought Woodcock was what Maine needed well, it just made my day. This is someone who's been involved in Dem campaigns, fundraising, etc. and he actually said he thought his party had come close to destroying Maine. Do I think Woodcock can beat Baldacci? I smell garlic toast.

Dan Billings
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 3 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2005 - 12:01am
Here's why we can win (and how we can get there...)

The other secret weapon we have is the candidate. The more people get to know Chandler Woodcock, the more that they like him. Most Republicans did not know him before this campaign. As they got to know him, the campaign started to move. The same thing will happen in the general election. As the wise Professor Reisman wrote not too long ago, the Democrats will try to make Chandler seem scary but it won't work because he's not. He's one of the most geniune and down to earth people that you will ever see in politics. Maine people will come to see that during the campaign.

gopcollegestudent
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 2 weeks ago
Joined: 10/16/2005 - 5:38pm
Here's why we can win (and how we can get there...)

My parents are great exaplins of that..

They are as liberal as you get are voting for Chandler Woodcock and its not because I told them too..

Jim Cyr
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 5 days ago
Joined: 06/27/2005 - 12:01am
FYI

[quote="David Burke"]Intentionally ran a state-wide campaign?

Come on, Dan. The tactics were wise for winning a primary. Avoid wasting money where you can't win. The problem is, for the general election, you can't win without a decent showing in southern/coastal Maine.

And apparently, your definition of "social conservative" is different than mine.[/quote]

I can tell you from having done the research that Mills and Emery probably had wider and deeper support in southern/coastal Maine AMONG DEMOCRATS than exists for Baldacci.
Scary, huh?? :wink:

Jim Cyr
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 5 days ago
Joined: 06/27/2005 - 12:01am
just want to get the contact numbers up there

The point is to call the media when you see any bias at all (NOT that hard to find it) and ask them why they've picked sides.
The Bangor Daily got Woodcock's name completely wrong the other day..........and things don't happen in a vacuum. Of course, they had some lame excuse when I called the editor....

One missing ingredient, which is up to us---hard work:
1). The media can easily sway it to Baldacci if we let them. They will be rabid this time. Every time they are biased we must CALL THEM ON IT--and call them:
*Bangor Daily News: 1-800-432-7964
*Lewiston Sun Journal: 784-5411
*Portland Press Herald: 791-6650
*Brunswick Times-Record: 504-8204 (Publisher) or 504-8231 (Managing Editor)
*Kennebec Journal: 1-800-537-5508
*Waterville Morning Sentinel: 1-800-452-4666
*Journal Tribune: 282-1535

*WCSH: 828-6666
*WMTW: 782-1800 (Auburn), 1-800-248-6387 (Portland)
*WGME: 797-1313
*MPBN: 1-800-884-1717
*WVII: 945-6457
*WABI: 947-8321
*WLBZ: 942-4821
*WAGM: 1-800-393-9246
Print these numbers and put them by your phone. You MUST ask for the managing editor or news director. Threaten them with a protest outside their front door: I have used that and it gets their attention FAST. Let nothing go.....we have to nip them in the bud.

Tony Bessey
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 10 months ago
Joined: 08/18/2002 - 12:01am
Here's why we can win (and how we can get there...)

[quote="David Burke"]Intentionally ran a state-wide campaign?

Come on, Dan. The tactics were wise for winning a primary. Avoid wasting money where you can't win. The problem is, for the general election, you can't win without a decent showing in southern/coastal Maine.

And apparently, your definition of "social conservative" is different than mine.[/quote]

David you are off the mark here. Peter lost to Governor Baldacci in the Second Congressional District. With fewer union jobs, the governor's refusal to support a racion downeast and a poor economy this district is in play for Woodcock. One only has to look at the way the Pleasant Point Passamaquoddy Reservation voted in the primary to see that the Governator is in trouble.

Tony

Dan Billings
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 3 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2005 - 12:01am
Here's why we can win (and how we can get there...)

I did not write what you quoted.

But 2006 is not 2002. People in politics all too often fight the last battle. What happened in 2002 will have little to do with what happens in 2006. The candidates are different, as are the dynamics of a 7-way race.

Tony Bessey
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 10 months ago
Joined: 08/18/2002 - 12:01am
Here's why we can win (and how we can get there...)

I meant to refer to David, sorry Dan, and I stand by my remarks. I understand that the dynamics are going to be different, but the liberal vote is going to be split in some very interesting ways which in the end hurt the Governor. When you add that to his declining popularity in the 2nd CD, it is hard to see how he can pull this one out if Chandler runs on the right message.

Tony

Jim Cyr
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 5 days ago
Joined: 06/27/2005 - 12:01am
Re: just want to get the contact numbers up there

[quote="Jim Cyr"]The point is to call the media when you see any bias at all (NOT that hard to find it) and ask them why they've picked sides.
The Bangor Daily got Woodcock's name completely wrong the other day..........and things don't happen in a vacuum. Of course, they had some lame excuse when I called the editor....

One missing ingredient, which is up to us---hard work:
1). The media can easily sway it to Baldacci if we let them. They will be rabid this time. Every time they are biased we must CALL THEM ON IT--and call them:
*Bangor Daily News: 1-800-432-7964
*Lewiston Sun Journal: 784-5411
*Portland Press Herald: 791-6650
*Brunswick Times-Record: 504-8204 (Publisher) or 504-8231 (Managing Editor)
*Kennebec Journal: 1-800-537-5508
*Waterville Morning Sentinel: 1-800-452-4666
*Journal Tribune: 282-1535

*WCSH: 828-6666
*WMTW: 782-1800 (Auburn), 1-800-248-6387 (Portland)
*WGME: 797-1313
*MPBN: 1-800-884-1717
*WVII: 945-6457
*WABI: 947-8321
*WLBZ: 942-4821
*WAGM: 1-800-393-9246
Print these numbers and put them by your phone. You MUST ask for the managing editor or news director. Threaten them with a protest outside their front door: I have used that and it gets their attention FAST. Let nothing go.....we have to nip them in the bud.[/quote]

Anonymous
Here's why we can win (and how we can get there...)

[quote]It's often hypothesized on here that an Unenrolled voter is typically a Liberal voter. [/quote]

Says who? Most unenrolled voters are sick and tired of the status quo and therefore won't commit to a major party. Woodcock will pick up a significant number of unenrolled voters, including those who felt Baldacci screwed them on the racino deal in Washington County.

You can also add some state workers to the Woodcock column who aren't fans of the fair-share provision.

Pages

Log in to post comments