Memo to Linda McMahon
Although I have very little interest in professional wrestling, I am a fan of yours and hope you win the Senate race.
Please consider my thoughts re how to push through what Rasmussen calls a five point lead by Blumenthal. An earlier Qunnipiac poll noted the following:
Blumenthal is running stronger among Democrats than McMahon is running among Republicans. He is winning women by an overwhelming 31-point margin, while McMahon has struggled with women throughout the campaign. They have a negative image of her but like him by more than 2-1,” Dr. Schwartz added.
Women don’t appear to care that Blumenthal has been an abusive prosecutor, is bad for business, has no idea of how a job is created.
Respectfully, I suggest that in the two weeks that remain if you can convey just why women should turn to you over him, the race is yours to win. I further suggest that the issue is the Senate role in confirming judges, and the horrible slate of judges put forward by Blumenthal’s party.
You need to ask Atty Gen Blumenthal whether he would vote in favor of a judge with a clearly documented history of going easy on sexual predators in Connecticut.
Consider Judge Robert Chatigny, who joined the Second District federal court in 1994, and has been nominated by President Obama for a seat on the Second District Appeals Court.
Here is what Human Events http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=39120&keywords=chatigny says about Chatigny:
As a federal district court judge in Connecticut, Chatigny did everything in his power to prevent the execution of confessed serial killer and rapist Michael Ross (the “Roadside Strangler”). Chatigny even claimed that Ross’ “sexual sadism” was a “mitigating factor” that made him less culpable for his crimes. Chatigny also has never given more than the minimum sentence in every child porn case over which he has presided, and found Megan’s Law to be unconstitutional (overruled unanimously by the U.S. Supreme Court).
* Serial killer Michael Ross was convicted of the kidnap, rape, and murder of six Connecticut women ages 15 to 25. After granting two stays of execution, which were both reversed by appellate courts, Chatigny bullied Ross’ lawyer into filing for an additional stay despite the fact that, after almost 20 years on death row, the murderer didn’t want to appeal anymore. Chatigny asserted that the murderer suffered from death row syndrome, was not competent to waive further appeals, called him “the least culpable person on death row,” and argued that he “never should have been convicted” because his sexual sadism was a mitigating factor.
Here is what Judgipedia http://judgepedia.org/index.php/Robert_Chatigny says about the case:
The Senate Judiciary Committee has postponed a hearing for Chatigny due to receipt of a letter critical of his conduct during the 2005 trial of convicted serial killer and rapist Michael Ross, known also as The Roadside Strangler. During that trail Chatigny is alleged to have pressured Ross’ attorney to appeal his sentence of execution even though Ross had said he did not want to fight it. Chatigny also threatened to go after Ross’ attorney’s law license. Seven prosecutors from Connecticut filed a complaint against Chatigny with a federal judicial review panel. The panel found that his behavior was unusual but not improper. On March 5, 2010 one of those seven prosecutors wrote to Patrick Leahy and Jeff Sessions of the Senate Judiciary Committee saying, “Judge Chatigny completely abandoned the role of neutral and detached magistrate and instead became an advocate for the position held by the parties who were seeking to stop the execution of Michael Ross”. Upon receipt of the letter, Leahy canceled Chatigny’s scheduled hearing.  The hearing was rescheduled for April 27, 2010. 
You need to ask every Connecticut mother of a 15-year old girl whether this is the type of judiary they want overseeing the safety of their daughters and their families. You need to ask whether Blumenthal or yourself is a better keeper of the gate the Senate holds over judicial appointees.
You need to ask what kind of a political party brings forth judges like this and whether the women of Connecticut want to be supporting it.
Because it is one thing to stage a match between two professional and professionally trained wrestlers, and another to countenance a life and death match between a sexual predator like The Roadside Strangler and six women between the ages of 15 and 25.