Comments on: Ganley Misinterprepts NY-23

By: Kevin Holtsberry

Kevin Holtsberry — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 00:57:34 +0000

I am sure your accusations would come as a surprise to Ohio Right to Life who just endorsed Portman.

By: Matthew Miller

Matthew Miller — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 00:26:25 +0000

Rob Portman is just another corrupt politician. He has no qualms about voting for bills which contain funding for Planned Parenthood and funding for abortions in cases of rape and incest, chemical abortificients, and conception-based sex education.

http://lefemineforlife.blogspot.com/2008/02/pro...

http://clerk.house.gov/cgi-bin/vote.asp?year=20...

By: Guy Average

Guy Average — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 11:40:11 +0000

I'm not getting how Ganley feels that running for Senate as an initial elected office is a workable idea. It seems that it would fragment the vote at least a little and maybe more if he throws a lot of money into ads.

I know Al Franken did it, but that's Minnesota and Al is part of The Establishment Left.

By: guyaverage

guyaverage — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 03:40:11 +0000

I know Al Franken did it, but that's Minnesota and Al is part of The Establishment Left.

By: Jeff Dean

Jeff Dean — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:33:57 +0000

Excellent article. A preview of the primary race if Ganley stays in.

By: Mark Byron

Mark Byron — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 02:41:55 +0000

It depends on whether the Republican primary electorate is in "throw the bums out" mode; it that's the case, Portman's track record in Washington is a liability. Even if he is fairly conservative (but not enough of an immigration hawk for some), he is an establishmentarian, which isn't an asset in the Tea Party era. He's also moderate in tone, which might make him look suspect to the rhetorical bomb-throwers.

I haven't seen any polls, but Ganley should be lucky to break 25% in this race assuming a well-run Portman campaign.