NY-20: Another teabagger loses against the GOP establishment

It is renarkable (4.00 / 4)

that the best the Republicans could come up with is a nobody with no money, in a district drawn to be a GOP stronghold.

---

by: devtob @ Wed Mar 31, 2010 at 23:26:18 PM UTC

I did think Murphy handled his August 2009 Town Halls well. The problem (2.00 / 2)

is a lot of what he said then, support for Health Savings Accounts, lack of faith in the Federal Employee Health Benefit Program (part of the template for the Exchanges in HCR), his endorsement of Professional Employee Organizations used in his own Venture Capital business, something very much like Rep. Ryan's "Association Plan" idea, don't comport with a vote for HCR.  

At best, poor Rep. Murphy looks indecisve and running against a former Colonel in the Airborne, that is a BAD way to look.  

At worst, he looks like a cynical career pol (not a good thing this year).

I suspect Charlie Cook will change his mind.      

---

by: John Minehan @ Thu Apr 01, 2010 at 00:02:47 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Thanks for sharing your views (4.00 / 2)

while I disagreed strongly with Murphy's initial No vote on health insurance reform and disagreed with some of his reasoning the one thing that came through clearly in all of his dealing on the subject was that this was a man that did his homework. As you said, he handled his townhall meetings well. He clearly knew the issues thoroughly and was prepared to handle supporters and detractors in a respectful and honest manner. Nothing in what he has done has looked indecisive. Quite the contrary it has looked extremely well thought out and well researched.

Also, calling a guy that has run for one office in his life-time and by being elected through a special election has served just short of one full term "a cynical career pol" is just kinda silly.

Kinda like the Manhattan thing. Silly republican rhetoric that consistently fails because voters recognize it for the silly nonsense that it is.

Peace,

Andrew

---

by: Andrew C. White @ Thu Apr 01, 2010 at 12:48:49 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

career pol (4.00 / 3)

Being in Congress a little more than one year hardly qualifies as "career pol".  

While I applaud ret. Col. Gibson's military credentials, he has a nice pension, healthcare until he dies, education paid for while in the military and no private sector experience.

Each time I hear Gibson soundbites it's something that has little relevance to the 20th CD.

I'm not worried about Al Queda as much as jobs for my children, healthcare and funds for infrastructure, not wars.

Have a great retirement Col. Gibson, you've earned it.  

---

by: Upstate Blue Girl @ Thu Apr 01, 2010 at 19:10:03 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Couple of Problems with your theory: (4.00 / 1)

1)  COL (R) Gibson "served two liaison tours with the US Congress." (http://www.hoover.org/bios/Colonel_Chris_Gibson.html) Therefore, he probably has more of an idea where the light switches are in the Capital than poor Rep. Murphy does.

2)  He had two combat tours in Iraq, back during their elections while he was commanding 2-325 IN (ABN).  Developing a real quick grasp of local politics ASAP is probably how he got to be selected for both 0-6 AND Brigade Command in the 82d ABN.

3)  This being the kind of area it is, someone who answers to "Colonel" has instant cred.  This is NOT Manhattan.

4)  COL (R) Gibson didn't just reverse himself on a Bill that is NOT popular in a conservative district, a very bad mistake on poor Rep. Murphy's part.

5)  COL (R) Gibson "has not been through the crucible of a Congressional campaign" like poor Rep. Murphy (which he almost lost against a weak Opponent).  Gibson has, instead, been "through the the crucible" of a military career in which he earned "three Bronze Star Medals, a Purple Heart, the Combat Infantryman's Badge with Star and the Ranger Tab,"  while also finding time to earn "several graduate degrees from Cornell University (MPA, MA, and PhD in government) and was the Distinguished Honor Graduate of the US Army Command and General Staff College." (Id.)

Why do I suspect that Charlie Cook is going to be changing that call?        

---

by: John Minehan @ Wed Mar 31, 2010 at 23:46:04 PM UTC

OK, we get it (4.00 / 5)

You're a Republican/libertarian/teagagger type who doesn't like any Democrats.

And insists on promoting Republican candidates on a progressive Democratic site.

Since you are obviously wasting your time here, please keep it up.

Because your blah-blah promotion of "COL (R) Gibson" here will earn him exactly no votes in November.  

---

by: devtob @ Thu Apr 01, 2010 at 01:09:55 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Game on dev (4.00 / 2)

---

by: Andrew C. White @ Thu Apr 01, 2010 at 12:58:53 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yup. Got it John (4.00 / 5)

Everything you just told us about him says this:  He's spent most of his life collecting a government paycheck.  The taxpayers even paid for his college education. He's had government provided healthcare all along, and continues to.  

Now, you're telling us he's going to run on an anti-big government platform, railing against the evils of government healthcare, yada, yada, yada.  (yawn)  Tell you what, I might listen to that line the day he gives up his government healthcare and reimburses the taxpayers for his college.    

---

by: Norbrook @ Thu Apr 01, 2010 at 01:54:03 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Since he went to Siena, it is possible that (0.00 / 0)

the Army paid his tuition, through an ROTC scholarship, but does not necessarily follow.  When he was commissioned (1986), many people went on active duty who were NOT on scholarship.  These folks got exactly $100 per month in their junior and senior years.

If he WERE on ROTC scholarship, he repaid that with 4 years of Army service as an "obligated volunteer."  He served almost 20 years beyond that initial obligated service, when he could have left at any time in those 20 years and cashed in, especially right at the 20 year mark when he could have made a lot of money as a defense contractor.

If you ever served in the Army, you understand that big, bloated one-size fits all programs are what DOES NOT work, especially if you are, as COL (R) Gibson is, a veteran of the Global War on Terrorism and, specifically, the Iraq War.          

---

by: John Minehan @ Thu Apr 01, 2010 at 16:13:31 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Well, John (4.00 / 2)

Hate to break it to you, but, yes, I did serve in the Army.  12 years in fact.  So, color me unimpressed with your bullshit.  No, the Army didn't pay for my college education, and yes, I went in after college. Matter of fact, by the time Colonel Gibson had gotten is butterbars, I'd been in for 7 years.  

---

by: Norbrook @ Fri Apr 02, 2010 at 02:43:36 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

So, why didn't you understand that the Army probably din't pay for COL (R) (0.00 / 0)

Gibson's education?

---

by: John Minehan @ Sun Apr 04, 2010 at 19:28:37 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Also, I hate to tell you but the Army where Gibson commanded (0.00 / 0)

a battalion (in combat) and a brigade (in relief work in Haiti) bear no real resemblance to the Army you left in 1991.    

---

by: John Minehan @ Sun Apr 04, 2010 at 19:39:38 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Welcome to the Albany Project (4.00 / 3)

it is always good to be able to have a respectful debate on the issues and relative merits of various candidates.

Col Gibson's resume as a military man is quite strong and so far he sounds like a good man and a decent human being.

However, he will have to show that he is a quick study as he has yet to show that he has any grasp of the economic issues that are the leading concern of the people in NY-20.

He will also have to show that he is a quick study of the mechanics of political campaigning. I have been very surprised on several occasions in the past when military men that you would expect to have a natural affinity for the strategy and competitiveness of political campaigning have shown themselves to be wholly unprepared and frankly inept at making that transition.

As or Cook changing his rating... I doubt it. Not until Gibson actually does show that he can campaign. As it stands today Gibson is wholly unknown and untested. As it stands today, Gibson is likely to be yet another also-ran in a district and a state that has shown clearly that it has little to no interest in what the modern-day Republican party has to offer. Perhaps he will show himself to be something different but as of today there is no reason to believe he'll be any different then the poor fare that the Republicans have been offering of late.

What does "This is NOT Manhattan" have to do with anything? If that is the best you can offer then you've already lost. Sweeney tried that. Treadwell tried that. Tedisco tried that. The people in NY-20 just don't buy into that meaningless rhetorical manure.

Do you have any citable statistics or polling to show that Health Insurance Reform is not popular in NY-20? Just about everyone I know, Republican, Democrat, and independents alike, all believe our health coverage system is a serious mess and in need of serious reform. We differ over what and how but not on the overall need. National polling confirms that is the basic feeling of all Americans.

Do you have citable statistics to support your claim of NY-20 as "a conservative district"? This district has elected a Democrat to Congress in 3 straight elections. It has voted for Democrats to all federal and state-wide offices for several election cycles now. While NY-20 "is not Manhattan" it isn't Mississippi either. People here vote for people that produce positive results. This has overwhelmingly meant Democrats and not Republicans in recent years.

Lastly, your claim that Tedisco was a "weak opponent" and that Murphy "almost lost" is laughable. That special election was Tedisco's to lose and he did. Tedisco had overwhelming name recognition and media coverage. Murphy was the complete unknown at that time that closed with a roaring finish to win a special election he should never have had a chance in and that most folks were writing off for Democrats.

Good luck with your candidate and please do continue to share your thoughts and opinions here but be prepared to present a strong and proper defense of both him and the completely destructive Republican agenda of "No" that he will be representing to the people of NY-20.

If Mr. Gibson can show that he is a new kind of Republican I am sure that everyone will be interested and VERY glad to see it, Democrats included. Democrats especially. We'd love to see the Republican party rejoin the American political debate of respectful ideas and positive vision for our great nation.

If he does that then he has a chance to win. If he remains just another modern day Republican party candidate then... not so much.

Peace,

Andrew

---

by: Andrew C. White @ Thu Apr 01, 2010 at 12:42:52 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

a couple of thoughts... (4.00 / 2)

...on the one hand...becoming a Colonel or higher in the military does involve a lot of experience with internal politics, so, perhaps Gibson maybe more savvy than expected (although that hasn't always translated to success for similar candidates in the past). We'll see if his extensive military experience is an asset in terms of running for political office.

...on the other hand, as a new face, politically, he starts with low name recognition, late, against and incumbent who's had more than a year to burnish his image and name and raise sustantial funds...and Gibson also happens to come from one of the counties in the district with the smallest population.

If an untested retired military officer is the best the Republicans can come up with at this late date, Charlie Cook's current assessment of this race makes a lot of sense to me.

Gibson has about six months to raise a lot of money, raise his name visibility and convince the voters of the district that they made a mistake in elected Murphy in the first place. Is it possible? Yes. Is it likely. Not to my way of thinking.

---

by: paco @ Thu Apr 01, 2010 at 15:55:34 PM UTC

a couple of thoughts... (4.00 / 1)

...on the one hand...becoming a Colonel or higher in the military does involve a lot of experience with internal politics, so, perhaps Gibson maybe more savvy than expected (although that hasn't always translated to success for similar candidates in the past). We'll see if his extensive military experience is an asset in terms of running for political office.

...on the other hand, as a new face, politically, he starts with low name recognition, late, against and incumbent who's had more than a year to burnish his image and name and raise sustantial funds...and Gibson also happens to come from one of the counties in the district with the smallest population.

If an untested retired military officer is the best the Republicans can come up with at this late date, Charlie Cook's current assessment of this race makes a lot of sense to me.

Gibson has about six months to raise a lot of money, raise his name visibility and convince the voters of the district that they made a mistake in elected Murphy in the first place. Is it possible? Yes. Is it likely. Not to my way of thinking.

---

by: paco @ Thu Apr 01, 2010 at 15:55:35 PM UTC

Internal politics (4.00 / 3)

and being an aide on Capitol Hill do not equate to skill in running for office.  Different skill sets. :D  I'm not saying he couldn't pick it up, but usually it takes at least one time through the mill for them to get the idea.  Remember, most of these same people were the ones who touted Doug Hoffman in NY-23 as a great idea, pointing to his membership on various boards of directors, and his success in business.  He was lousy as a candidate - and that was someone who had a ton of money and support thrown at them.  

---

by: Norbrook @ Fri Apr 02, 2010 at 02:50:53 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

"Lousy as a candidate" and he still ran an exceptionally close (0.00 / 0)

race as a third party candidate (who far outpolled the Republican).

---

by: John Minehan @ Sun Apr 04, 2010 at 19:31:04 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Why don't they just form their own party? (4.00 / 2)

I mean, this is New York State, where anybody with five bucks and ten Cheerios box tops can form a political party and probably get on the ballot.  I exaggerate, of course, but my point has been made.

Surely there are a few locales in New York State where the Tea Party can gain a foothold, winning a town supervisor seat here or a family court judgeship there.  Going from there to the State Assembly in 2012 ought to be a real piece of cake.  I'm sure there are lots of places along the route from Syracuse to Watertown or from Utica to Fort Drum that would jump at the chance to elect one of these colorful individuals.

---

by: Steaming Pile @ Thu Apr 01, 2010 at 16:29:23 PM UTC

Gibson has no platform (4.00 / 3)

So far the only things Gibson seems to be running on are the usual Republican solutions for every problem: lower taxes and less regulation. That's pretty blah, especially when everyone in the district, left, right, and center, knows that neither is going to happen within our lifetimes. He may jump on the repeal healthcare reform bandwagon, which will be his certain demise. Tell that to the families that now have their children with pre-existing conditions covered. Sure, he may get the Teabag vote from those who drool over a uniform, but Murphy wasn't getting those votes in any case. Gibson won't gain any traction unless he can distinguish himself from the rest of the Party of No.

---

by: Wuwei @ Thu Apr 01, 2010 at 16:36:28 PM UTC

Children whose pre-existing conditions are not yet covered under this Bill. (0.00 / 0)

---

by: John Minehan @ Sun Apr 04, 2010 at 19:32:05 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Again, I'm at a loss (0.00 / 0)

Why the continued use of the term "teabagger?"  This phrase does nothing but incite the other side and serve to weaker our side's argument.

Great reporting, great reporting, great reporting...

But terrible, terrible choice of words.  It's never going to change anybody's mind.  And isn't that the goal of insightful reporting?  Not just to confirm what we here already know, but to perhaps enlighten those who are usually adverse to our views?  You'll turn those converts off with the word "teabagger" thrown about everywhere, I'm serious!

Again, I suggest "Tea Partier" at best or "Tea Drinker" if you must.  You can report and provide argumentation just as well this way.

---

by: Soundpolitic @ Sat Apr 03, 2010 at 19:13:17 PM UTC