Truth be told, Democrat Jay Nixon is likely to be the next governor of Missouri. Early pollshave him ahead of the likely Republican candidate by a solid 10+ point margin. But it's early and the GOP primary matters even if the nominee ends up losing. Why you ask?
Because Sarah Steelman is a Reformer Republican in a primary against the MO GOP establishment choice, Rep. Hulshof.
For an insight as to why the GOP is down and out in Washington, take a look at Jefferson City. That's where Sarah Steelman, the state treasurer, is running in an Aug. 5 primary for the Missouri governorship. And it's where her reform campaign against earmarks and self-dealing is threatening the entrenched status quo, causing her own party to rise against her.
So bitter are House Minority Whip Roy Blunt and Sen. Kit Bond at Ms. Steelman's attack on their cherished spending beliefs that last month they rallied the entire Missouri congressional delegation to put out a public statement openly criticizing her campaign against six-term U.S. Rep. Kenny Hulshof. Joining them in their support of Mr. Hulshof has been the vast majority of the state Republican machine. Ms. Steelman is clearly doing something right.
Her sin is in fact to belong to that new mold of Republican - Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, Sens. Tom Coburn and Jim DeMint - who know it's no longer enough to simply hawk lower taxes. In 10 years as a state legislator and treasurer, her target has been the slothful political favor factory that's led Republicans away from small-government principles and outraged conservative voters.
It should be noted that Mr. Hulshof has been a loyal Republican who would vote with the GOP on almost every issue. Just like OKC Mayor Kirk Humphries was a staunch conservative in the 2004 OK SEN race, Hulshof is not a bad choice. But it's time for the GOP to look for more than another party vote in the primaries. Like the 2004 OK SEN race, MO GOPers should buck the establishment favorite and put a principled, reformer forward as their nominee.
And the best news is that in mostpolls, Steelman is a few points closer to Nixon than Hulshof is. So it's both principled and pragmatic. I'll be watching the August 5th primary results in MO. I hope the MO GOP take this chance to send a message that the GOP is on the wrong track, and it is time for Reformer Republicans to take the lead.
The most recent poll in the primary shows the following:
Hulshof 29 Steelman 25 Long 10 Undecided 32
Hulshof has all the establishment support, including the current Governor, the GOP Senator, and most of the other elected GOPers. You can see that "it's his turn" in the grand scheme of things. But the primary electorate can send a message to the GOP that it's no one person's turn; it's time for reformers to take the lead.
Any other recommendations in MO
zforce July 22nd, 2008 at 6:51 p.m. CDT (link)
I'm currently an Ex-Pat from Missouri and just got my primary ballot. Anyone have any recommendations for other MO-3 Primary Ballot candidates?
For MO-03
Brian Simpson July 22nd, 2008 at 8:25 p.m. CDT (link)
As I was doing research for my congressional rundown post, I checked out the two Rs running. My impressions of the two candidates are that if you are primarily interested in social issues then John Tucker is your guy. If you are primarily interested in fiscal issues then Chris Sander is your guy. [You can get the links to their websites through my diary.]
Government´s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidise it. ~ Ronald Reagan
Visit me here for more of my musings.
Oh, and Adam (and anyone else interested)
Brian Simpson July 22nd, 2008 at 8:35 p.m. CDT (link)
Hulshof and Steelman debated on local radio station KMOX. As soon as the audio is available for download I'll listen to the debate again and give a good rundown on it.
First impressions were that Steelman is not the best in a debate format.
Government´s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidise it. ~ Ronald Reagan
Visit me here for more of my musings.
Hulshof would beat Nixon in a debate.
MORepublican July 22nd, 2008 at 9:22 p.m. CDT (link)
Steelman might hold her own, but absolutely no guarantees on that. I have heard both Sarah and Kenny speak separately, and Kenny is the more articulate of the two. I think he won today's debate on KMOX, but there was not a knockout blow on his part.
And don't go there about being more articulate. Kenny has the record to back up what he says as a conservative Republican, unlike Obama, who flops around like a Missouri catfish out of water. He won his district in 2006 (not a good year at all for the Republicans on a national level) by about 25-30 points. The people of the 9th District know his record, or else Kenny would not have won the seat since 1996. This district is a conservative district, going way back many years.
Now, I like certain things Sarah has done, like the MOST program updates (college tuition investments), and the terror-free investing. However, when Dick Morris comes to an event in support of you, something doesn't pass the smell test for me.
The wildcard in the general will be if Nixon actually gets the Dems to vote for him. Nixon is not liked by a lot of MO Democrats. There was a push to get Sec. of State Robin Carnahan (D) to run for governor this year as well, but she passed. So, not all is rosy in Democrat land here is Missouri.
"Free Government Requires Active Citizens"
More more more
Darin_H July 22nd, 2008 at 8:20 p.m. CDT (link)
The leadership will hopefully get the message when we keep voting for these reformers (Coburn, Broun, DeMint, Jindal, Palin) over the establishment candidates. They will be a thorn in their side until they clean up their act and start behaving like Rs said they would.
Just like PayPal, except it's free and a $25 bonus to sign up!
What's the beef against Hulshof?
gimlet July 22nd, 2008 at 9:09 p.m. CDT (link)
So, what exactly is the beef against Hulshof? I admit that I haven't been following the race very closely, as I'm guessing that Nixon will probably crush whoever wins the Republican primary. But I haven't seen anyone give any specific reasons why Steelman would make a better governor than Hulshof other than that he is the establishment candidate Everything I can find and even this posting admits that he has been a pretty consistent vote in the House. So what is it?
Disclosure: My wife went to church in Columbia with the Hulshofs and used to babysit his kids. My lefty in-laws can't stand his politics, which is a big plus in my book. But, that's about all I know about him.
Gimlet
"A real gimlet is half gin and half Rose's Lime Juice and nothing else. It beats martinis hollow." - Raymond Chandler, The Long Goodbye
One big negative about Hulshof
Brian Simpson July 22nd, 2008 at 10:02 p.m. CDT (link)
is that he is wedded to ethanol.
Even during today's debate, he kept saying that he believed that ethanol was helping to keep the cost of gas down. He didn't realize that it was the hefty subsidies that ethanol producers get that would make the product cheaper. Steelman kept hitting him with the free market on this issue.
Government´s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidise it. ~ Ronald Reagan
Visit me here for more of my musings.
Hulshof
Adam C July 22nd, 2008 at 10:23 p.m. CDT (link)
I don't know much that is bad with Hulshof. But I know that sending another non-descript, votes-with-the-GOP type into higher office is not preferable to a True Reformer.
I would probably have no problem with Gov. Hulshof. But I hope MO does not pass on the opportunity to have a Gov. Steelman.
The US House has a lot of Hulshof's right now. They do business as usual. It's time to shake things up.
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard
Hulshof is not just another R
Nick Haynes July 22nd, 2008 at 10:48 p.m. CDT (link)
See my comment below, but the simple fact that he stood up to DeLay (getting booted off the Ethics Committee in the process) should serve as enough of an indication that he stands on principle and not on party.
If MO Republicans pass on having a Gov. Hulshof, I can almost guarantee that they will not see a Gov. Steelman. Besides her record and her amazing lack of any sort of speaking ability, there is enough dirt in her personal life to make it a cakewalk to the governor's mansion for Jay Nixon.
Like I said below, you and the WSJ got this one wrong.
In politics, you have your word and your friends; go back on either and you're dead. (Rule #11 of the public policy process)
My money: Hulshof's the Reformer
Spills July 22nd, 2008 at 9:31 p.m. CDT (link)
Hi all, I’m a long-time lurker but this post drew me out of the shadows. I have followed both candidates’ careers and I can say that Hulshof is anything but “Just Another R.”
This is the man that was kicked off the Ethics Committee for writing an admonishing report of Tom DeLay. This is also the lead sponsor of the Death Tax elimination act and as a member of the Ways and Means Committee helped author the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts. It also says something that this 100% pro-life, 100% pro gun candidate can hold a district that has a college town as a population base. Furthermore, Hulshof is one of those deep candidates that actually knows the issues not just the talking points, something that is very evident when you hear him talk.
On the other side we have Steelman. It is true, she is a maverick but not because of courageous stands but more because no one in the party likes her. How can she be a maverick, she has been in elected office in Jeff. City for 10 years, her husband was an elected official before that, her father was head of the state party, that sounds like an old-school republican to me. Her positions are certainly not courageous either, she led the filibuster against tort reform and has supported collective bargaining for state employees. No is really sure where the latter position comes from but the former position is a result of the fact that her husband is a trial attorney. On a related point, she talks a good game on reform but she has not walked a good walk. In the beginning of the campaign the Chief of Staff from her Treasurers office was running her campaign while still on the state pay roll (he said he was just taking his six weeks of vacation time), it has also been brought to light that she directed state resources to a bank that has her husband as a paid member of the Board of Directors. Additionally, she is just not that bright, I don’t think that she knows the issues or even why she takes the positions that she does.
Sorry to have first post that is not completely positive but I felt some of these facts needed to be listed here. Also, sorry I didn’t include any links to back up this information, I am still trying to figure out how to embed.
RE: MO-GOV: Adam C, both you and the WSJ got this one wrong
Nick Haynes July 22nd, 2008 at 10:43 p.m. CDT (link)
I can understand how you and the WSJ got it wrong, though: after all, you are not from Missouri, and are not that well informed on what is happening on the ground.
The fact of the matter is, Kenny Hulshof is one of the best candidates we have. Besides being a great speaker and extremely likable, he is also a principled conservative. When the House Ethics Committee was going to let Tom DeLay off the hook back in 2005 or 2006, Hulshof was the one who stood up and said that DeLay was wrong and needed to be investigated. For that courageous stand, Hulshof lost his spot on the committee. Hulshof was one of the leaders in the House to end the death tax. He also has a great story in that he brought himself up from a farm to being a top-notch prosecutor, and then knocking off a 20-year Democrat incumbent in 1996 (in a district that had, since 1883, only seen 6 years of a non-Democrat representative). In a state heavy on agriculture, Hulshof knows the subject hands-down.
Then you have Sarah Steelman, whose campaign is run by Jeff Roe. Roe, for non-Missourians, is known for running completely negative campaigns. You expect the other side to hate your own political consultants, but when over half your own party can't stand you, it says something. They've run nothing but negative advertising, all centered around a few dubious votes on earmarks. I could argue them all day, but I digress, because that's the only thing they potentially have-one small dent in an otherwise spotless record. Steelman's record is far more mixed. It was recently reported that a former chair of the state Democratic Party donated money to her campaign in 2006. She has multiple former donations from organizations that have (shall we say) been charitable to Democrats, and in strong support of stem-cell research. A few years back, she worked to block tort reform-surely a principled stand, and not due to the fact that she comes from and married into a family of trial attorneys. Her campaign/official office management was extraordinarily inept starting out the campaign, with Sunshine Law requests showing that the state deputy treasurer in her office had only filed "appropriate" timesheets showing him taking vacation to campaign for Steelman after media scrutiny came on him and her for apparently allowing him to campaign on the state dole, with the campaign paying him nothing. And the rumors surrounding her personal life are intense, and not very positive or complementary.
Then, take a look at campaign donations. Now, I know that sometimes the big money comes from big donors, but she bragged in March/April about having pulled in $1.1 million to Hulshof's $900,000. Her total, though, was inflated since she loaned her campaign $500,000. In the June/July numbers (they're done quarterly in MO), Hulshof pulled in over $1.4 million (remember, none of Hulshof's money is from his own pocket), while she pulled in $289,000.
Hulshof commands respect from everyone who knows him. Even the Democrats here in the People's Republic of Columbia can only muster a "rubber-stamp Republican" comment. He not only talks the talk, but walks the walk and is a model politician in the mold that you aspire for your public servants to be. Steelman might not be the establishment choice, but that's partially due to the fact that she makes it that way for her own personal gain, tearing down some of the best public servants in the state if it means an extra 1/2 percent in the next poll. With her, there is so much political calculation that it's not even funny. She turned buying her son's 13th birthday present (a gun) into a speech and photo op.
At the beginning of the race, I would have been content with either candidate, but was pulling for Hulshof. After this campaign she has waged, though, I am hard pressed to even think about voting for her in November if she wins. She has been an embarrassment, in my opinion, to the Republican Party and the state of politics in Missouri in general.
Just giving you perspective from a guy on the ground.
In politics, you have your word and your friends; go back on either and you're dead. (Rule #11 of the public policy process)
Adam, you are being sucked in.
paulseale July 22nd, 2008 at 11:57 p.m. CDT (link)
Steelman is no jindal.
I wished you would have asked some of us Missourians about the matter before posting.
Steelman is a solid politician and I think would do a fine job as governor.
However, right now there is more of an internal power struggle within the MO gop - and very little of it is over policy. It is mostly over people.
Truth is, if you were to look at Steelman's record it is more moderate than anything.
That isnt meant to be a bad thing, but lets be clear that Steelman is not in the same sentence as those others you mentioned who are a new set of conservative policy makers.
Sorry, steelman is not as you are advertising.
What I'm finding funny about this post
Nick Haynes July 23rd, 2008 at 9:44 a.m. CDT (link)
and don't get me wrong, Adam: even if I disagree with you on candidates, I admire your work on here.
What I'm finding funny, though, is that the only support for Steelman here on RS are folks who don't live or work in or near Missouri (except for maybe Brian-I'm not sure who he is supporting).
Next time, Adam, I hope you look to people inside a state and ask them before you post something to the front page. I know some of Steelman's people, and if any of them follow Redstate, I wouldn't put it past them to advertise (on a lesser scale) that the internet crowd across the country is supporting her candidacy.
In politics, you have your word and your friends; go back on either and you're dead. (Rule #11 of the public policy process)
I'm going to have to disagree on this one.
itrytobenice July 23rd, 2008 at 10:13 a.m. CDT (link)
I'm from MO and am not impressed with Hulshof. I went to one of his campaign events and he was nice enough and he seemed to be real proud of his work on ethics, however...
He is a dirt farmer and strongly supports ethanol, in spite of its obvious flaws. To me, that says that his own desires for his industry overrides his brainpower and desire to protect Americans.
He implied (without outright lying) that the only earmark he had ever supported was the widening of a dangerous road.
He badmouthed service industries and said that he would work to subsidize manufacturing industry, but not service industries. That rankles me because the worst job I ever had in my life was manufacturing, while everyone successful that I know is happy in service. (Mom was college prof, dad - engineer, sister - accountant, me - banking, hubby - tire sales, etc.) That is one of those politician opinions that should get knocked down, not promulgated.
I have not been to one Steelman's events, and I don't watch local TV, so I haven't seen any ads, but I approved of her job as Treasurer. It may be a mistake, but right now I'm for Steelman, as is hubby and mom.
I meant what I said and I said what I meant. An elephant's faithful 100 percent.
In spite of what Nick and Paul
Flagstaff July 31st, 2008 at 12:28 a.m. CDT (link)
have written, the following seems telling to me:
It would be hard for me (Mizzou '65) to ignore that one significant fact.
And personally, I thought the House Ethics Committee treatment of DeLay was ridiculous.
Effective public speaking is a prerequisite for election, however.
Visit rightchange.com and contribute to put out the messages we want to see.
Pluto, the Ninth Planet - Forever!
Darn...so to speak...
dbecraft July 31st, 2008 at 12:59 a.m. CDT (link)
and you actually thought that Delay should not have be brought up on charges...?
Well, this Republican thought that not only should he and several others should have been brought under charges, but should have been convicted.
When we get confined to parties, this is what results. The Democrats are far worse and we have only scratched the surface...
Formally known as Deagle... "Golf is a way of life..."
I don't claim to be an expert on what happened in Texas and DC several years ago,
Flagstaff July 31st, 2008 at 10:57 p.m. CDT (link)
but at the time it seemed to me that DeLay was indicted in 2005 on charges of conspiracy to violate Texas election laws in 2002. From Wikipedia,
He was also charged with money laundering and conspiracy to launder money. Wiki again,
The rules that made DeLay step down would not have applied to a Democrat. The timidity among Republican Party leaders that forced DeLay out is actually the stupidity of wussiness.
There has been no trail as yet. Let's see if he's convicted.
Visit rightchange.com and contribute to put out the messages we want to see.
Pluto, the Ninth Planet - Forever!
How could you figure he should
Flagstaff July 31st, 2008 at 11:02 p.m. CDT (link)
be convicted? There hasn't been a trial yet to lay out the facts. Were you personally involved, and therefore more knowledgeable than the average news reader/viewer?
Visit rightchange.com and contribute to put out the messages we want to see.
Pluto, the Ninth Planet - Forever!
Darn...so to speak...
dbecraft July 31st, 2008 at 12:59 a.m. CDT (link)
and you actually thought that Delay should not have be brought up on charges...?
Well, this Republican thought that not only should he and several others should have been brought under charges, but should have been convicted.
When we get confined to parties, this is what results. The Democrats are far worse and we have only scratched the surface...
Formally known as Deagle... "Golf is a way of life..."
Darn, don't imderstamd why this was
dbecraft July 31st, 2008 at 1:02 a.m. CDT (link)
posted twice. Oh well... sorry...
Formally known as Deagle... "Golf is a way of life..."
Darn, don't imderstamd why this was
dbecraft July 31st, 2008 at 1:03 a.m. CDT (link)
posted twice. Oh well... sorry...
Formally known as Deagle... "Golf is a way of life..."
Darn, don't imderstamd why this was
dbecraft July 31st, 2008 at 1:11 a.m. CDT (link)
posted twice. Oh well... sorry...
Formally known as Deagle... "Golf is a way of life..."
Darn, don't imderstamd why this was
dbecraft July 31st, 2008 at 1:12 a.m. CDT (link)
posted twice. Oh well... sorry...
Formally known as Deagle... "Golf is a way of life..."
Darn, don't imderstamd why this was
dbecraft July 31st, 2008 at 1:12 a.m. CDT (link)
posted twice. Oh well... sorry...
Formally known as Deagle... "Golf is a way of life..."
Okay, this is a major problem
dbecraft July 31st, 2008 at 1:24 a.m. CDT (link)
with RedState, I did not cause this to be repeated here... Please fix this problem.
Formally known as Deagle... "Golf is a way of life..."
Adam, you forgot to include the "Missouri" tag on this one
Brian Simpson July 31st, 2008 at 8:26 p.m. CDT (link)
It doesn't show up on the Missouri Get Local page.
Government´s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidise it. ~ Ronald Reagan
Visit me here for more of my musings.