Wednesday, 24 March 2010
Kentucky US Senate GOP Primary Update
Money
Paul and Grayson have both raised well north of $2 million dollars in the primary. They should both have vast resources available to them over the next two months. I imagine they both have more money on hand than either Democratic candidate and I look to see both candidates dominate the airwaves in the coming weeks. It will be interesting to see whose message will resonate most with voters.
Endorsements
A month ago the Paul campaign received the endorsement of Sarah Palin. An endorsement that provided them with a boost with the GOP base in Kentucky. Looks like the score on endorsements evened out as Grayson received the endorsement of Dick Cheney today.
“I’m a lifelong conservative, and I can tell the real thing when I see it,” Cheney said in a statement. “I have looked at the records of both candidates in the race, and it is clear to me that Trey Grayson is right on the issues that matter – both on fiscal responsibility and on national security.”
Cheney added, “There is no doubt that the real conservative in this race is Trey Grayson, and there is no better choice for Kentuckians in May and November.”
The endorsement of Cheney, a solid conservative, should prove a real boost for Grayson and more importantly cement his conservative credentials with the base. Is the endorsement a game changer? Probably not, but it provides Grayson with an opportunity to tap into the GOP base. A group that has gone solidly to Paul up to this point. If he can't make any inroads with that crowd he is done. Cheney gives him an opening. We will find out if he can leverage it into votes.
Odd Challenge
Paul's campaign said Grayson's position as overseer of elections puts him into a conflict of interest and he should immediately step aside. The Executive Branch Ethics Committe ruled there was not conflict.
The commission’s unanimous opinion held that it is “highly unlikely” a secretary of state in Kentucky could influence the results of a statewide election “without having the universal cooperation of election officials across the state.”
“He quite simply, under normal circumstances, lacks the ability to affect the election's outcome,” the commission concluded in a six-page opinion.
Members also said “it seems unlikely that his participation would affect the public's confidence in the integrity of the executive branch.”
I thought it was a bit of a paranoid request by the Paul campaign. Do they not understand the Secretary of State's role in elections? He basically is there to tally the results from all of the precincts. He has no power to effect the election process. Is this story a big deal? No. But it is weird.
