Re: [prezveepsenator] Reed Blames McCain for Loss
- Nevermind that he is a swindling, slandering
hypocrite....I thought conservatives were big on
--- Greg Cannon <gregcannon1@...> wrote:
> July 19, 2006
> Reed Blames McCain for Loss
> The buzz is that Ralph Reed blames Sen. John McCain
> for his loss in last night's primary.
> Rich Lowry: "Here's the view of what happened from
> Reed camp: Once the Abramoff stuff exploded, it was
> going to be a very tough road for Reed. Glen Bolger
> did a poll for the campaign in January showing that
> was possible for Reed to win, but his negatives were
> very high and he would have to squeak by. Reed had a
> choice to make, and decided to stay in the race and
> try to make it happen. In the end, soft Republicans
> appear to have broken very strongly against him in
> suburbs. There may have been some cross-over
> Democratic votes in the open primary, but that alone
> can't account for a 54-46% loss. Reed's connection
> the Abramoff stuff had broken back in the summer of
> 2004, so it couldn't have been predicted that it
> be such a huge deal even now. But it was. The Reed
> camp blames John McCain for playing payback for his
> 2000 primary defeat with a campaign of leaks, and
> press, of course, was happy to pile on."
> The connection was the report issued by the Senate
> Indian Affairs Committee, chaired by McCain, that
> found Reed had been paid more than $5 million by two
> casino-owning Indian tribes -- both clients of
> lobbyist Jack Abramoff -- to rally Christian voters
> against other tribes opening competing casinos.
> Nevermind that he is a swindling, slanderingMy two cents: If a fake-Christian partisan hack can't win a third-tier
> hypocrite....I thought conservatives were big on
> personal responsibility.
REPUBLICAN primary race in GEORGIA, he's pretty much done in politics.