« Open Thread: May 14th | Main | Congratulations Congresswoman Herseth! »
May 26, 2004
Cook Political Report Declares 12th District Race a "Toss-up," Highlights Vulnerbilities of Burns and Barrow
In an article published on May 24th, non-partisan political handicapper Charlie Cook declared Georgia’s 12th Congressional District to be a "toss-up."Cook’s analysis of the 12th District Democratic Primary shows that there is no clear front-runner in the race, and highlights the strength of Doug Haines as a candidate, citing his, "commitment to and experience on issues like education, the environment and jobs." The article also addresses Haines’ background as a non-profit public interest lawyer and his legal achievements, including his landmark win establishing and enforcing pollution limits for Georgia’s rivers.
Cook’s analysis also notes vulnerabilities in the campaign of Haines’ closest challenger, Athens-Clarke County Commissioner John Barrow. Touching upon what Cook calls Barrow’s "baggage," the article mentions Barrow’s "consistent failure to prioritize the legitimate interests of the African-American community." Cook also reports that, "There have been some rumblings among Democrats in the district that Barrow needs to improve his relationships with the African-American community."
Cook also addresses the much-discussed vulnerability of the Republican incumbent, Max Burns, describing Burns as the "most vulnerable Republican incumbent in the House."
A complete text of the article can be found here
May 26, 2004 in 12th District Race | Permalink
Comments
I think its interesting how this article points to political favors rather than a proven record as the basis for the environmental organization endorsements John Barrow has received. It seems a severe disservice to voters in our district that these groups would ignore such a proven record on the environment as Mr. Haines has in favor of someone with no legislative experience. We need someone in Washington who can be trusted to do the right thing and stand up to Republicans on environmental issues, and I believe Mr. Haines is the only one who has shown he will do that.
Posted by: Proud Treehugger at May 27, 2004 1:24:54 AM
Does anyone know John Barrow's positions on anything ? He certanly doesn't have detailed policies like y'all
Posted by: Ronald at May 27, 2004 9:17:41 AM
Seems to me like his main position is "I have the most money, vote for me because I have a lot of money. Did I mention I've got tons of money?"
I hope people remember that whoever wins this will have more than enough cash come general election time, and that picking a candidate with no real issues could help demolish the party in our state...
Posted by: Dave at May 27, 2004 10:44:28 AM
Doesnt he understand that Democrats lose when they only talk about how much money they have raised and not what they care about. However you do have to care about something (besides yourself) before you can talk about it.
Posted by: Ronald at May 28, 2004 8:13:51 AM
That's a good article. It makes me sick that the lobbyists are more interested in money than in positions or record. I'm personally not going to support Sierra Club with my time or donations any more.
Posted by: Starscream at May 28, 2004 1:29:34 PM
Thank you for posting such an extensive issues platform. Unlike Barrow, who just talks about his money, you talk about the issues. We need more politicians like you.
Posted by: ArthurAce at May 29, 2004 3:31:25 PM
Please pass along the following info:
A friend of mine just sent me this column in the Guardian (U.K.) about how the Bush Administration is quietly working in Congress to reinstate the military draft after the elections. At first I thought that it couldn’t be right because I haven’t read anything about this in the mainstream U.S. media, but the Guardian article gave the Senate and House bill numbers, so I went to the U.S. Senate and U.S. House of Representative web sites and found the actual bills.
I found out that both bills are active and are now in the appropriate committees in the House and Senate (the Committees on Armed Services)! They apparently have been on hold since they were first introduced in January 2003, but according to the article, the Bush Administration has recently asked the Senate and House committees to start moving them forward with the aim of reinstating the draft next year, after the presidential election.
It’s very frightening to contemplate the fact that there has been nothing about this pending legislation in the U.S. media recently, at least that I’m aware of!
It’s also frightening to note some serious differences between this draft legislation and the draft that took place during the Vietnam War:
1) Females will be drafted as well as males.
2) Avoiding the draft by going to Canada or going to college is no longer an option. There is now an agreement between Canada and the U.S. to prevent that, and the new legislation eliminates the college option as well.
Here is the article in the Guardian:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1228331,00.html
To read the actual Senate and House bills, go to the official web sites of the U.S. Senate or U.S. House of Representatives and enter the Senate bill number (“S 89”) or the House bill number (“HR 163”).
Posted by: Chris Cypser at Jun 1, 2004 11:56:23 AM
The way I understand it, the sponsors of the bills are democrats who wrote the bills to demostrate to folks on the other side of the isle what happens when you have long-term pointless war. They were purposely put into committees where no one would even discuss them because its another political "touch of death." No worries--no one in either body is actually seriously considering either bill, we dont have to worry about conscription yet.
--Marcus
Posted by: Marcus at Jun 1, 2004 9:05:16 PM
Yeah,
The Senate bill was drafted by Sen. Fritz Hollings(D-SC)who is retiring this year and the Hosue Companion Bill was drafted by Rep. Charlie Rangle (D-NY). I truly doubt that they are in a large conspiracy with the Bush Administration to draft Marcus =P
Posted by: John at Jun 2, 2004 9:24:15 AM
wycna tkeqwb ghsfqcj zwpb zobwgq xlczpt ksjcf
Posted by: eykd tdifa at Oct 4, 2007 9:20:12 AM
agkf choxvusdl agni oerk lifpmv ztkjx fgvxbda http://www.zrhq.orqxsfcw.com
Posted by: byurx tyep at Oct 4, 2007 9:20:28 AM