AvengingTiki

     There are a lot of Republican seats in jeopardy this year and I wanted to write about one that I would particularly love to see get overthrown.  I speak of none other than Georgia's Saxby Chambliss.  So, why do I want this guy gone so badly?  You might remember him from the 2002 election when he got voted into office defeating incumbent Max Cleland.  Why would you remember any one of a number of Republican pickups from 2002, because of an ad that Senator Chambliss ran.  This ad was run against Senator Cleland, who is a triple amputee Vietnam War hero.  If the act of suggesting that an amputee veteran isn't serious about homeland security isn't enough to make you question Senator Chambliss's character, he also used to get money from Mr. Jack Abramoff.  Do you still not find this guy repulsive?  Well don't worry I've got one more doosie up my sleeve.  In November 2001, then Congressman Chambliss said that the Georgian government should "turn the sheriff loose and arrest every Muslim that crosses the state line," [read it] after making those comments he went on to win the Senate race a year later on a national security platform...  So what has he done with his time in the Senate?  He's been an avid anti-conservationist, and has also received terrible rating from the ACLU and NARAL.  This isn't super absurd given his party affiliation and geographic location.  What is absurd is the stuff on this guy's website.  Go to it (link above) and watch some of the videos on the right side of the main page.  First off he talks at the speed of molasses in a wonderfully droll monotone voice, but more importantly his issues and the way he presents the issues are almost all mud slinging and half-truths (on a plus side for Chambliss he has embrassed the internet with a big website with lots of videos, so he's got one over on old John McCain).  To summarize my views of Saxby: he's not a good Senator.  So what do the Democrat's have coming down the pipeline?

     Not so much so far.  To be fair there are seven candidates currently running for the Democratic nomination, which will be cut to two candidates on July 15th with a nominee decided on August 5th.  As we've seen with Obama once the primary is over we can expect a bump for the Democratic Nominee.  According to Rasmussen, however, they'll need a pretty big bump to overcome Chambliss.  The most disturbing part of the poll is that Chambliss maintains a 57% favorability rating.  So what should be the Dems plan for getting Chambliss?  Obviously it will differ depending on the candidate, the African-American Vernon Jones (who unsurprisingly has the highest unfavorable ratings of any Democratic Candidate) will need to rally the sizeable minority base in Georgia (Obama will help with this), while finding an angle to pull moderates from Chambliss.  If Jim Martin wins he can go toe to toe with Chambliss on the national security issue, given that he's a vet, but he'll need to watch himself, Chambliss has proven to be a mudslinger of considerable talent even when up against a veteran on national security (A quick note during Vietnam Chambliss received five student deferments and eventually a medical deferment).  Finally the last major Democratic contender is a TV journalist named Dale Cardwell.  Dale will have name recognition which is nice since the winner of the nomination only gets three months to become well known to non-Democrats in the state.  However, Cardwell also needs an angle to attack Chambliss on.  So where is Chambliss weak?  I pointed out a lot of issues that liberals will dislike him for but an issue needs to be found that can get moderates to the Dem side.

     Given the current political climate I think a two-pronged attack would best serve the Democratic nominee.  First a large amount of vetting and publicizing about all of Chambliss' past mud slinging.  The political climate is a lot different than it was in 2002 and people seem to be a lot more fed-up with dirty politics this year.  As for the issue side of the campaign a big point is Chambliss' vagueness and seeming ineptitude about the economy.  He wants to make the tax-cuts permanent but pushes a lot (in his economy video on his site) for a balanced budget.  He wants to pass more tax cuts but still wants to balance the budget.  Despite wanting to give individuals more buying power he wants to remove all current tax laws and just have a national consumption tax (think a super giant huge sales tax). I would hate to see what this "fair tax," as he put it, would do to food and oil prices, and what that would mean for the  lower class, who don't pay that much in taxes right now.  He offers no suggestions on how to balance the budget and in fact seems to advocate spending more money on farmers (not a bad idea but where's that money coming from).  Also the environment has become increasingly more important to voters and if played well could actually steal some farmers from Chambliss' base (a point that if shown clearly enough could work nationally 'your crops are hurting, your family's financial situation is hurting, you depend on a healthy earth').  I think targeting Chambliss on the economy with the environment as a side note is the right direction to go.  He can clearly hold his own on national security (though maybe not so well against another vet who knows his tricks), so a different approach would be wise.  So there you have it another election rundown.  Next time I think I'll find a policy issue to rant about.  Thanks as always for reading and comments are greatly appreciated.