Today, the Lunsford campaign invited bloggers to a conference call with Bruce Lunsford and Andrew Horne.
Yes, I was as baffled by that decision as I'm sure you are, too....
KY bloggers don't really.... well... like Bruce. At all, really. So jumping into the pit with us seamed pretty damn risky, but I at least give him credit for having the nerve to do it (if he even realized what he was getting into, and there is a strong posibility he didn't). He's just really fortunate that folks like Yellow Dog couldn't make it (Now, that would have been a scene!)
Anyway, not many folks picked him up on the offer, and the results were quite mixed.
In his opening statement, Bruce said that Mitch had been in Washington too long, and it has changed him. Andrew said exactly what he told me last night, that we need to keep our eye on the ball (Mitch), and it's quite obvious that no one else can compete with him in the primary at this point, so keep it clean, boys.
My first question was about this "change" that he talked about Mitch going through. I asked him what has changed about Mitch over the years, and what he used to like about him. Bruce steered WAY clear of the question, going back all the way to the days when he was a judge (early 80's), saying that he was more moderate back then. So I followed up asking him what has changed about Mitch in the last 10 years, what he liked about him back then that would make him give big big money to Mitch.
The answer he gave was a little odd. First of all, he mislead by saying he only gave $250 to McConnell. In actuality, he gave many thousands to the NRSC and PACs that helped McConnell. He never answered my question as to what he liked about McConnell back then. Then, it got a little weird. He mentioned that Elaine Chao was on the board of his company and he was looking out for his business. So.... was he saying that he gave to Mitch so he'd look after his company? What? I can't really believe he said that. Bad answer. Very.
Jake asked him how much he was going to spend on the race and Bruce completely avoided answering directly through two questions. He mentioned the millionaires amendment and that the DSCC was going to support him.
The DSCC? No friggin way, Bruce.
Jim Pence asked him how he would combat the old Chandler ads and the endorsement he gave to Fletcher in 2003. He said that he's apoligized before and made amends last year by staying positive and helping Beshear out big afterwards. He said that it was an emotional response to the Chandler ads, and it was a bad mistake. He also said that beating Mitch would certainly heal all wounds.
I went back to his DSCC comment and asked "Do you really think that Chuck Schumer is going to spend DSCC money on this race and not tell you to spend your own money?"
The response was short and abrupt- "I believe we'll both be happy with each other's participation." You just keep on thinking that, Bruce.
I asked him if he planned on actually attending and of the senate primary debates. He said that he would be attending the one on May 12th or 13th. Woot. Should be fun.
So that was that. I respect that he would go directly into the line of fire, but he's going to have to work on that "Mitch has changed" line. Explain to people why Mitch was good in 1997-8, but not now. And I'm quite certain that Bruce will spend his own money. A whole damn lot of it. Once he finds out that Schumer is a snake oil salesman that was recruiting him only because his zillions would tie up McConnell and leave him free to spend DSCC money on other races, he'll get the idea that he has to break open the giant piggy.
So, that's that. Thoughts?
Posts
