As noted by xoff over at Uppity Wisconsin and Cindy Kilkenny at Fairly Conservative, Republican gubernatorial candidate Scott Walker has gone negative in a big way in the weeks leading up to the September 14 partisan primary election, sending out a mailer attacking his opponent, Mark Neumann, for voting for “$9 billion in pork-barrel spending” including funding for the infamous “Bridge to Nowhere”. The mailer goes on to tied Neumann to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who also voted for the bill cited by the Walker attack ad.
Here’s a copy of the mailing:
As I’ve said over at Fairly Conservative and elsewhere, Scott Walker’s gubernatorial campaign is clearly floundering. If you’re ahead in a race by as much as Walker’s campaign wants folks to believe, then why do you need to resort to a nasty attack mailer only two weeks before the election? As xoff has written over at Uppity Wisconsin Scott Walker needs to win the Republican gubernatorial primary by a big margin, given the high expectations placed on his campaign given his status as the candidate endorsed by the Republican establishment in Wisconsin.
Keith Best sent out an email today saying that Neumann is gaining ground..
I hate negative campaigning, but I personally don’t think this qualifies. I think calling people out on votes they actually made is sensible campaigning not negative campaigning. If they cant back up a vote why did they make it? We all know why he voted for it, because repubs march in lockstep, had Walker been the rep he would of voted for it also. But he wasn’t and didn’t so he can call him out on it. It also shows that the term “fiscal conservative” is an oxymoron.
I hope that Walker stays consistent, since this is an issue for him, though and turns down Sarah Palins help when she comes to WI to campaign.
Comparing Mark Neumann to Nancy Pelosi is utterly ridiculous. It’s like you guys calling Ron Johnson a communist. Oh wait…
That’s a big sign that Walker believes he’s in trouble. Doing a contrast ad is one thing; tying Neuman to Nancy Pelosi (the all-time republican harlot for some reason no one has been able to explain to me) is going negative. The rule of thumb for the incumbent, which Walker has acted like and the party wants him to believe he is, is to go negative when you’re behind. And only then. Neuman’s campaign has been sharp, and relentless, and when you get the two into the same room he comes across as way, way smarter than Walker. I’ll vote for Barrett no matter what but Walker has run a bad campaign. He believed he had the republican nomination locked up and could go after Barrett early, only to find himself in a race to win in September. Just one of a thousand ways Walker is just stupid.
Walker’s entire campaign has been predicated on his inevitability as the Republican nominee, and you’re absolutely right that he’s run a terrible campaign.
I’m not a big time political prognosticator and I’m sure not a republican but I’ve always thought Mark Neumann would win the primary. I would love to see Scott Walker cry during his concession speech like the other inevitable winners Paul Bucher or John Gard.
As a matter of fact, just for fun, I might vote for Mark Neumann next Tuesday.
Will reince cry also if neumann wins?