Advertisement

Archive for Sunday, September 28, 2008

Candidates of both parties downplay affiliations

U.S. Rep. Nancy Boyda and State Treasurer Lynn Jenkins, who are competing against each other in the 2nd Congressional District race, are both working to depict themselves as having independent judgment.

U.S. Rep. Nancy Boyda and State Treasurer Lynn Jenkins, who are competing against each other in the 2nd Congressional District race, are both working to depict themselves as having independent judgment.

September 28, 2008

Advertisement

On the street

Do you find it difficult to ally yourself with either major political party?

No, of course not. Sarah Palin is so pretty.

More responses

Election 2008

In-depth coverage of the candidates and the issues, all leading up to the Aug. 5 primary and the Nov. 4 general election.

U.S. Rep. Nancy Boyda and State Treasurer Lynn Jenkins aren't going out of their way to tell voters which political party they belong to. Boyda is the Democrat, and Jenkins, the Republican, in the 2nd Congressional District race.

But during this election, that's not unusual. In fact, candidates in many races are running away from their party labels. In TV and radio ads and campaign literature, there is little, if any, mention of party affiliation.

Joe Aistrup, head of the political science department at Kansas State University, said in Republican-dominated Kansas, it's common for Democrats to downplay their party affiliation in general elections.

But Aistrup said that this year, "The Republican brand name is also tainted."

He added, "Voters perceive them (Republicans) to have been in charge for the past eight years, and as a consequence, those things that are going poorly right now are often attributed to the party in power."

An independent run

Candidates from both parties are working hard to depict themselves as having independent judgment.

In the race between U.S. Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., and Democratic challenger Jim Slattery, Roberts has noted that he opposed President Bush on health care, while Slattery has mentioned his support of a proposal by Republican presidential candidate John McCain to try to lower prescription drug costs.

In the race between Boyda and Jenkins for the district that includes west Lawrence, Boyda says both Republicans and Democrats are to blame for high gasoline prices, while Jenkins has criticized Republicans, saying they blew their chance when they were in charge of Congress.

Boyda has gone so far as to effectively shut the door on national Democratic Party funding in the campaign. Jenkins, however, will receive significant financial help from the national GOP.

Party officials weigh in

Officials from both parties in Kansas have different ideas about what is going on.

Mike Gaughan, executive director of the state Democratic Party, said it is not unusual for Kansas Democrats not to focus on party labels.

"Kansas Democratic candidates are building on a history of elected officials like (Gov.) Kathleen Sebelius, (U.S. Rep.) Dennis Moore and Nancy Boyda who reach across party lines to find common ground and promote ideas that help Kansas families," Gaughan said.

He said Republicans from President Bush to Kansas House Speaker Melvin Neufeld of Ingalls are "changing every important debate into divisive, partisan bickering."

Kansas Republican Party Chairman Kris Kobach, however, said he doesn't believe that GOP candidates generally are downplaying their party identity.

"It's hard to make generalizations across districts," Kobach said. "The prominence of the party label is something the candidate decides. In one district it may be extremely beneficial, and in one it might not."

He disagreed that President Bush is considered a negative for Kansas Republicans. "Whenever George Bush comes to Kansas, he can raise a lot of money and draw a huge crowd. The Republican brand is still very strong," Kobach said.

But KSU's Aistrup maintains there is general discontent among voters for both the Republican Party and Democratic Party. But, he added, that hasn't translated into gains by third-party candidates.

"The institution of American politics is generally winner-take-all," he said. "That leads to two-party competition, and once they get entrenched, through state laws and regulations, they continue to perpetuate their own power base."

Comments

madmike 5 years, 6 months ago

Log, are you kidding me? Paul and Kicinich are as crazy as s*ithouse rats, McKinney is nothing more than an absolute racist and good ol' Ralph Nader is just plain nuts. I think that says a lot about you!!

0

spenmar 5 years, 6 months ago

Cut and Paste This Into Your Browser: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5tZc8oH--oOr Go To You Tube and Search for BURNING DOWN THE HOUSE - WHAT CAUSED THE ECONOMIC CRISIS

0

ASBESTOS 5 years, 6 months ago

SParko you need to review and research the "Community ReInvestment Act". Tha is where 92% of these bad loans came from.Bush and McCain were both trying to reform it, however the lobbyists had their claws into congressmen in both parties.Get out of yout BDS and start looking at the hazatrds around you.You are alseep.I know Bush is a massive Fup, but the two we have running is just SSDD.

0

volunteer 5 years, 6 months ago

I didn't hear a word from the CPA on the concept of the $700 billion Wall Street bailout. Perhaps in their debate that topic may come up. (Ya think?)

0

Sparko 5 years, 6 months ago

It is embarrassing after the disasters of the Bush Administration that the Republican party still exists. They still have time to completely bankrupt the country. Boyda will be an important member of Democratic Congress in an Obama administration, God willing.

0

logrithmic 5 years, 6 months ago

Party affiliation really means nothing. I support the agendas of Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, Cynthia McKinney, Ralph Nader, and Brian Moore - a Republican, Democrat, Geeen, Independent, and Socialist. What does that make me? A pluralist????No, it make me an independent. Sometimes I use the words libertarian socialist to describe my positions, statement that says government policies should be for the common good but neer intrude on individual liberty. I do not view those as mutually exclusive.Back to the topic, Jenkins will say she's a fiscal conservative, but I tend to paint rightwingers with the label fiscal commieservative. Why commie? Let's start with a $700 billion ($1 trillion?) bailout. Then let's sprinkle in another $500 billion in bailouts and purchases of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns. Not enuf government spending for you?How about tripling the national debt while Bush has been in office? Most of this spending occurred while the Grand Old Propaganda (GOP) party controlled both houses of Congress, the presidency, and the federal courts. And while the rightwing likes to spread propaganda about Democraps having the Congress the last two years, most Americans know that the Democrats only have power in the Senate because Lieberman cacuses with them, and he's an independent who openly supports and travels with McSame/Palin. Even with Lieberman caucusing with the Democraps, the "control" is a single vote. In the House it's about 30 votes. These are not overwhelming margins and as many acknowledge, there is far more diversity in the Democraptic party. Democraps tend to come in three flavors - progressives, those that favor the progressive view on social programs but are pro business and pro military, and those that agree with Bush 90% of the time (the McCain Democrap). I'd put Boyda in the second group - call them the milktoast Democraps. The result are her dreadful votes for FISA and telecomm immunity for breaking the law. For this alone, I will not vote for her again. But she has also pushed military spending and supported the war in Iraq with her votes. She was not elected to do this - she was elected to end the war by most.Neither one of these candidates are worth of a vote. But don't be fooled by Jenkin's appeals of fiscal commieservatism. We've seen over the last 30 years that while RepubLICKlans talk a good talk about "cutting spending," one can simply sum up their record in one word:Lies.

0

toe 5 years, 6 months ago

Just vote for the the one that is most likely to give you a hand out. Party affiliation is irrelevant.

0

notajayhawk 5 years, 6 months ago

Centerville;You'd be amazed at how many people don't know that.I would love to see two changes made on the ballots:1) Remove a party checkbox - make people vote for each office individually.2) Remove the party identification from the candidate's names - force people to pick a candidate by name instead of affiliation.If someone doesn't know by November that Obama is the Democrat's candidate and McCain is the Republican's, they're probably too stupid to be deciding who runs the country. And candidates should be chosen on where they stand on the issues, not by which party they belong to. I have voted the party line just once - it was my first time voting, and I just wanted to vote, without bothering to even find out who the candidates were. It was stupid then and would be equally stupid now. Since then (over three decades) I have never voted the party line, and there hasn't been one election where I didn't pick at least one candidate from each of the two major parties. And if I didn't know anything about either candidate for a particular office, I didn't cast a vote for that office.As I drive around, I see a lot of signs that just mention a name without a party mentioned, and I think that's great.

0

Centerville 5 years, 6 months ago

I would have never guessed Boyda is a Democrat! Why, she's voted against Pelosi at least two percent of the time! I'll be!

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.