So the Trib ran its obligatory Bennett (insert any incumbent really) outspends their opponents article this morning. You can see it here: Bennett spends 20 times his opponents.
I think people over estimate the role money plays in campaigns - especially the media. They love those stories. Don't get me wrong, marketing budgets are a huge part of a campaign's success. But Jason Chaffetz proved that you don't need big bucks to win.
For me the most interesting sentence in the whole article is the last from Kirk Jowers director of the Hinckley Institute of Politics: "The bigger problem for candidates like Eagar and Lee is that their message has been so tailored to the far right that it may not appeal to mainstream Republicans."
I know I'm from Utah County so I'm supposed to like Mike Lee - and I do - a lot. But right now I'm kind of leaning Tim Bridgewater. Although I have some concerns I don't worry too much about electing a candidate that is too far out of the mainstream. But for me as a partner in a small business Tim's message of knowing what it's like to make a payroll really resonates with me.
In a recent Forbes article the SBA announced that 30% of all small businesses fail in the first two years - 50% within five. I don't get the sense that Lee, Bennett, certainly not Eagar understand or fully appreciate how hard it is to run a small business. And really, small and medium sized businesses are what fuel job creation.
At this point in the campaign it seems like all of the GOP challengers are on board with a return to conservative/constitutional principles. I'm looking for something that further distinguishes them though, and right now Tim's story and message are leading the pack for me.
Anyhow, those are just a collection of thoughts I have as a state delegate at this stage in the convention process. Stay tuned...
Tim's story is compelling but don't forget that Bennett is a businessman too. Being a businessman is not a better reason to favor or reject a candidate than being a lawyer or being a woman.
ReplyDeleteI think Tim would be an improvement over Bennett at least initially but I don't get the feeling that his committment to keeping the Constitution at the forefront of his decisions runs as deep and will be as lasting with Tim as it would be with Mike. Just my two bits.
I think one's experience is a significant factor in deciding who to vote for. That's why I think having a businessman - and not just a guy "in business" but one who has started and run a company speaks a lot to Tim's qualifications.
ReplyDeleteMy concern with Mike is that he's too academic or theortical in his approach. When I evaluate a candidate I have to consider how they may be an effective change agent. Both Mike and Tim are conservative and I believe equal champions of the Constition so I'm left with the decision of who is more likely to actually get something done? I think Mike is the better constitutional scholar - no question - I am inspired when I hear him speak. I see him as a someone who has a deep knowledge and understanding of the Constition and can talk intelligently about it but still not be effective at changing anything.
My post indicates Tim's message resonates with me because I have a sense of what it takes to start and run a small business. I know how much hustle and sacrifice it takes to be successful. When an (successful) entrepreneur is faced with a challenge they do whatever it takes to figure it out. This is the kind of dedication I want my Senator to have when battling for conservative principles.
Tim's background and experience indicate to me that Tim has what it takes to make a difference. I'm not necessarily saying Mike can't but he just hasn't demonstrated his ability to truly be effective to me (yet).
Amen David... Bennet was a business man. That means nothing. How many businessmen do we have in Washington, that for years, have sunk our nation by excess spending. Sometimes the worst people are our business men because they know better and the deliberately do the opposite. It is like the people who claim being fiscal conservative and vote for legislation that the congressional budget office indicates will increase the national debt. I believe that medicade part D legislation was anticipated to add more than 400 billion dollars to the deficit according to the congressional budget office. Bennet supported it
ReplyDeleteComparing Tim and Bennett because they are businessmen is like comparing Mike Lee and Barack Obama because they both are constitutional scholars. That isn't fair. Does Mike Lee care more about the constitution than any others in the race? I would say no, he just really has nothing else to promote. He's a good guy, a nice guy, but he doesn't have much real experience with practical application of the constitution. The constitution was written for people just like Tim and Ryan. People who want to go out in the world, take risks, start businesses and want government out of their lives. That is why the business message is compelling, because business people understand how important it is to have government out of the way. I don't think Mike has a greater understand than Tim on the practical application of the constitution.
ReplyDeleteInteresting, where do we go from here?
ReplyDeleteThe difference between Tim and Bennett is that Tim started and ran his own businesses, Bennett just ran the family biz.
ReplyDeleteps- just a side note, but all this constitutional talk kind of bugs me. I believe in defending the constitution, but right now its the trendy issue because a Democrat is in the White House. I know certain guys like Mike Noel and Governor Herbert have been fighting for this stuff for years, but its hard for me to believe these others have been champions on this issue like they claim to be. Mike Lee was general counsel for Gov. Huntsman and I don't ever remember anything coming out of that office on states rights, constitutional issues etc.
Since Ryan and JJGOP have come to the same conclusions I have (following a similar path), I'll just say 'Yes!' to both comments. I think a lot of people are now drawing the same conclusion that Bridgewater is the most likely to succeed on our behalf in Washington DC.
ReplyDeleteI'd really like to see a primary between Bridgewater and Lee. I agree that Bridgewater is pushing the constitution more these days because it's popular, but Lee has been a Supreme Court law clerk and his work at the federal level has historically been about the constitution.
ReplyDeleteAs for the "Far Right" viewpoint of following the constitution, I think it's the only way to fight the bloated, corrupt bureaucracy in DC. Cut the Federal government back to it's chartered mission, and then we don't have to worry so much about whether this state or that state wants socialism, they can choose to collapse as they see fit.
For now, corporations full of business men own DC, and use increasing governmental power to further their own interests at the expense of the people. I like Bridgewater's message of small business savvy, but the federal government shouldn't be screwing around with small local businesses in the first place. I need to find Bridgewater again and see what his business solutions are. On the other hand, Lee may not be an effective senator if he just votes no on everything because it's all unconstitutional (as much as I wish that would work). Foreign policy has also been a messy issue for all the candidates in the last week.
For now, it seems like both Lee and Bridgewater have raised some new questions. The only candidate that we can really be certain on is "Bailout" Bob Bennett. He represents the worst of business-as-usual big government.