Wednesday, March 29, 2006

 

Oh I see

And I thought we were back on speaking terms, Eric Mitchell. From the comments:
Our hard count of OUR delegates are accurate and we stand by them. If your count of your delegates are correct, then it appears we are exactly where we were Caucus night.

Someone asked how do we know what Hatch think. Well, seeing that we are not at war and I've been doing this for a few years and come out of the same school that Hatch's folks do, I called and asked if what your campaign was putting out lined up with what they had. He said no.

We both could be wrong in the numbers assigned to Kelley, as only Team Kelley will know is they are doing their homework and follow-up. Just like we know what exactly we have at this point without speculating on 'Uncommitteds' that we have not contacted.

Without getting into percentages or specially worded spin, the count as of yesterday was 132. If Kelley has 130, and Hatch has about that plus his command on the super delegates, its right where it was Caucus night.

Calling my campaign liars is out of order. Its actually kind of fucked up. I do know from Capitol Press Corps what was being pushed as fact yesterday and that was fucked up.
If I gave you the impression I was calling you liars, forgive me. I didn't mean to say that. What I meant to say (and indeed, DID say in an email response to your Mr. Pomroy) is that your numbers contain numerous errors that should be correctable either by getting accurate data from SD/CU Convention chairs, or by doing your homework and contacting each and every delegate. I really hope that in the future, we'll all make sure we get all the data before we issue press releases containing egregious omissions of data and facts. Seriously, how difficult is it to check for typos like "1/3 of state delegates" instead of the correct "more than 1/2..."?

As for the rest of the comment, specifically the bit about us being right back where we were on Caucus night....is that the Lourey campaign's goal? To make people think that the convention will look just like the straw poll so the one candidate who wants to bring strength back to the DFL by abiding by its endorsement will do the honorable thing, stick to his word, and drop out?

Eric, you know as well as I do that the straw poll, while great for spin, means .... not a whole lot in the real delegate chase. It doesn't take into account who actually goes to their convention, it doesn't take into account who runs to become a delegate, and it doesn't take into account organization on the part of campaigns and their supporters at the conventions.

The simple fact remains, we in the campaign-season inner sanctum can believe anything we want. We can believe our favorite candidate's numbers, we can believe Shawn Towles's "analysis," we can believe or disbelieve the rumors that Mike Hatch has told people point-blank that he can't or won't win the endorsement. Perhaps all the campaigns should ever report is THEIR delegate total - Kelley reports his, Hatch reports his, Lourey hers, etc - so that all anyone outside the bubble will ever know is whether or not SOMEONE's wrong or blowing smoke up our collective rear ends But I'm not calling your staff liars. I'm simply saying your estimates, given the data they are missing, are way off the mark, and should not be worthy of a press release designed to give supporters something to bring with them to the next series of Conventions.

In any case, I would really appreciate it if we kept the comment language family-friendly. Swearing in my comments doesn't hurt me, and it sure doesn't help you.

Comments:
----------------------------------------------
Blogger Eric_Mitchell said:
We can talk whenever. I would've said something to you the previous posting- its tiring.

No one goals are to be where it appears they were caucus night.
You need not stuff words in my mouth. My point was is that it seems that- if your hard count is correct- we are still in a statistical dead heat.
Hatch will remain ahead to this date, because of super-delegates.

No need to wander any further. It was our campaign that was told of the numbers that you were going to put out today, so I called to find out if this lined up with what Hatch had and the answer was no.
So after hearing how you were going to spin it, the decision was made to put out what we have. It wasn't to have something to carry into the conventions this weekend (thanks for the idea), but to keep you from trying to quell any momentum from us.

This was Steve's weekend, and you got no funny business from Camp Lourey. You actually got help from us. When your staff approached and ask for help with a ruling at the convention, it ws me, not them that pulled to chair to the side and insisted that he do as they requested. Did it benefit us? No. It was between Hatch and Kelley.

Now that we move into the weekend with Lourey's counties in her home district up, we run into this.

C'mon, I see what's happening. I saw it in 2004 when we beat Dean in Iowa (actually Joe Trippi was at fault, not Howard. I saw it with the Bush team in Western Pennsylvania later that year. Experience matters at the ground level. Hype won't make up for it.


I'll drop the 'eff bomb' on your blog.

---------------------------------

I'm not st paul dfler. You are not the first to ask. Go back to MDE (where I was first accused of being him/her) and read some of those posts. Don't know how I can prove it except to say for that person to prove it who told you. Again.
 
----------------------------------------------
Blogger Eric_Mitchell said:
My first paragraph was suppose to say i would've spoke to you in Sunday but didn't see you after you came by when I was talking to Kenny.

I told you guys from day one, unless you are sleeping with these people, its never personal. However, its just not in-kind. Look at the response from your first post on this. hard to smile when people are throwing 'stuff' in your face. Right? And now, this st paul dfler thing again. "I heard...stpauldfler is you". Eva Young was the last one to ask me that, can't remember why.
I have been posting under my name and Trillin- jsut kidding. If it doesn't say Eric Mitchell its not me.
 
----------------------------------------------
Blogger Eric_Mitchell said:
This is what i get for writing from my sick bed.
The last line in the first comment should indicate that I will drop (stop using) the "F" bomb on your blog.
 
----------------------------------------------
Blogger MN Campaign Report said:
Haha, no sweat - I figured that's what you meant. I'm about ready to crawl into a corner and die with this chest cold myself, so I know how you feel.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Google
Web
MNCR