Linda McMahon resigns as WWE chief executive to run for Connecticut Senate against Dodd image and article NY Daily News
Updated: Linda McMahon's website: www.lindaforsenate2012.com - "It's about jobs"
One development in the 2010 mid-term elections that cannot be ignored is the number of women running under the GOP banner, be it Congress or the Senate, women have stepped up and stepped out, prepared to take the usual heat (because they are women) and Linda McMahon, running for the CT. Senate Seat left vacant by the retiring (Get-Out-of Dodge) Dodd, is no exception.
McMahon, who’s issues page here, gives a snapshot of solid conservative beliefs mixed with moderation. McMahon is opposed to Card Check, deficit spending, Government Bailouts as well as the administration’s Health Care Reform bill (which will add to rising deficits). She is more moderate on her stance on abortion, clearly stating she is pro-choice, to a point, and where she draws the line is at partial birth abortion, and federal monies spent on abortion unless a woman’s life is endangered.
Linda McMahon has business sense, although in some media reports, the business is given a raised-eyebrow or two. She rose to the top of World Wresting Entertainment, as the CEO. The fact that Ms. McMahon was able to be so successful in a male dominated industry, gives on the notion that she is more than capable to stand on her own and take a firm stand on issues that affect the Nutmeg State, should she be elected to the Senate this November.
The opponent, one scandal clad Richard Blumenthal, has been caught fabricating several times, most recently, according to the AP: about his not taking PAC monies – the article gives McMahon a platform and she comes out swinging about honesty.
Prior to Ms. McMahon winning the primary, Blumenthal was polling in the 30 percent plus range against any Republican candidate (when he first announced in January) the latest Rasmussen poll, however, tells a different story post primary - Blumenthal’s lead has shrunk considerably, he now holds a 7 point (margin of error plus or minus 4.5%) over McMahon, which is clearly indicative of a chance in perspective regarding Mr. Blumenthal as well as McMahon.
McMahon in a recent television interview spoke about retail politics, and how much she enjoyed getting to know the individuals and what concerns they may have. It is that type of political think, and the no-nonsense approach she has to issues, that will endear McMahon to CT Voters. Considering the trends to date on Real Clear Politics (a combination of polls) one can see that the more CT voters get to know her, the more her poll numbers rise. Therefore, the seat that was thought to be “safe democrat” should, by the end of September, be “Safe Republican”.
To learn more about Linda McMahon, visit www.linda2010.com
2 comments:
So Linda McMahon believes in punishing the poor. If you wealthy you get a safe abortion, if you are poor you get a coat hanger or a child you cannot afford. Good thinking.
Dear Anonymous – Male or Female?
First – how on earth does Linda McMahon state anywhere she wishes to punish the poor?- and if she is “pro-life” – how does that actually affect anything at all in regards to Roe vs. Wade? Other than the argument that Ms. McMahon may, if the opportunity presents itself, approve of a conservative, rather than liberal future Supreme Court Justice, which would be the only way she could either effect or, not effect, depending on the outcome of the nominee, have an impact. Then there are no guarantees, as millions of conservative found when Chief Justice John Roberts upheld the Affordable Health Care Act, as a tax, under the Constitution. There are zero politicians who can affect Roe vs. Wade – either Republican or Democrat, they can either be pro-life or pro-abortion, personally – but on a governmental level, they can’t do zip.
Just like gay marriage, another political football that will not get solved by anyone saying they are for/or against.
If you want to add another, real pressing problem, try immigration reform - that’s another “political football” – but one that needs addressing quickly - (real immigration reform – border fence, north, south, etc., with $45.00 fees to take a test, even one of our eighth graders could pass, instead of a someone having to hire a lawyer, pony up thousands of dollars, take an extensive test, and wait years, not months, as it should be).
Obviously, if you had a clue, you would understand that it’s more about political ideology – and spend, versus, budget, and jobs in the public sector versus, jobs in the private sector (the only way the government gets’ money) – that is of import in this election, and in any, for that matter.
Post a Comment