Tuesday, August 17, 2010

Perriello Surging, Hurt Finally Switches to the Issues!

A new poll from a conservative organization shows Perriello surging against Robert Hurt. He's closed the gap from 23 points to only 6 points. This poll, from American Action Forum, has Hurt narrowly ahead of Perriello 49 to 43. This is very different from the SurveyUSA poll from a few weeks earlier showing Hurt ahead by 58 to 35. Interestingly, the new poll doesn't indicate the level of support for Clark or if they even polled the independent conservative running in the race as well.

Taking into consideration that this is a Republican poll, I suspect that it leans slightly in Hurt's favor. Certainly failing to include Clark is a boon to Hurt's numbers. It's very possible that the candidate are actually tied. Hurt's numbers have collapsed in a very short period of time. Why?

Maybe it's because his campaign has spent more time whining about the time of Perriello's town halls than hosting his own public forums. And I mean public forums, not closed door meetings without any media coverage.

Maybe it's because his campaign has spent more time ducking debates and refusing to debate Jeffrey Clark than addressing the issues.

I've been calling Hurt and his supporters out for their inability to focus on the major issues facing Virginia. I've been told I'm just slinging out crap. Unfortunately, the Hurtards continue to provide more than enough cow shit for Tommy Boy to step in. Recently I've seen claims that the terrorist attack on Perriello's brother was not actually an attack and somehow was done by a rodent. This is disgusting and not true. It has to end. Robert Hurt should be called on to make very clear that he believes that Tom Perriello's brother, like himself, was the target of violent intimidation.

Now that Hurt's numbers are collapsing, he's finally turning to the real issues. He's called on Perriello to oppose the Muslim conquest of New York City and condemn the plans to build a Mosque at Ground Zero. The Democrat President Barack Hussein Obama has defended these plans. I'm glad that Hurt is finally realizing that he shouldn't just sit back and play political games on meaningless issues like town hall timing and debates about debates. He needs to man up and make some noise, just like Virgil did.

Where is Virgil when we need him now?

Robert Hurt should go beyond his demand that Perriello stand up against the Muslim threat in NYC. He should demand that Perriello return all campaign contributions from Muslims. We know that Perriello talks a good talk about being "independent" because he doesn't take money from lobbyists and corporations, while being bought and paid for by unions. But what about Muslims? How much Saudi oil money is being funneled to Hamas, and how much is being funneled to Perriello? Is there a difference?


  1. though Hurt supporters loved the last poll that showed Sen Hurt way ahead of Perriello, very few of us believed that it was 100% valid. If I remember correctly, that former poll had one thing in common with this current poll:

    Perriello has high name ID yet can't break 50%. That's tough for an incumbent, especially with his horrible voting record.

    That said, Robert Hurt talks to hundreds & hundreds of 5th District residents daily about his beliefs & visions for the 5th. Because you are not interested in reporting that indicates to me that you are not interested in Robert Hurt winning this election.

    This is a Perriello blog.

  2. Actually, Kelley, I, too, believe that this blog is a pro-socialist, mud-slinging, name-calling, front for the Perriello-Pelosi gang that want to "fundamentally change" our form of governance and that NAS would adopt any position, statement, or rumor that furthers that end. And that would include slinging CRAP in his every post!

  3. I have read this blog for some time now and, despite what are probably pretty serious policy differences with the author, have found it to be thoughtful, well-written and often innovative in its thinking.

    So, I'm hoping that the heat has negatively impacted my sense of humor and that NAS is not actually seriously suggesting that political contributions from persons of the Islamic faith should be rejected and returned by a candidate. Such a statement flies in the face of so much of what is best about this nation: from the 1st Amendment to the right to participate in the political process to our traditions of religous liberty.

    If I am humor impaired today, I apologize. If not, I'd urge NAS to have a quick read of Martin Niemoller's "First they came . . ." and George Washington's ""To the Hebrew Congregation in Newport" and withdraw what is a pretty horrific statement.