Watch my KY3 News @ 5 report HERE1. Both Kenny Hulshof and Sarah Steelman are sufficiently pro-life for Republican primary voters.
2. Like Hillary and Obama, their distinctions on the substantive issue of abortion are less stark than their differences in style.
3. Both candidates are slightly more willing to take a direct shot at their opponent in one-on-ones with reporters than in front of a crowd or at a press conference.
4. Hulshof's umbilical cord blood bank proposal is probably the most unique idea offered up in the race so far, and it's a subtle signal to voters that he's willing to be "progressive" in a conservative way.
5. Since women need no legal "reason" to have an abortion, it's unclear how Sarah Steelman would enforce a ban based on gender, deformity or disability.
6. It's doubtful Matt Blunt will take his cues for a special session from anyone but himself.
7. Gauging background comments, rapid response and the amount of Springfield media coverage, both campaigns seemed to view this as the first meaningful engagement of the campaign.
8. The Steelman camp sees Hulshof's willingness to negotiate with Democrats in any way on abortion as a weakness in a primary.
9. The Hulshof camp believes Steelman's plan was thrown together quickly (and sloppily) in order to respond to them "taking the lead" on the issue.
10. It's unclear how prominent the abortion issue will appear in a general election against Jay Nixon.
1 comment:
When did being "progressive" actually even go under the Conservative heading? I thought that was a term used only for Democrats. I supposed that there may be progressives that are Republicans too.. obviously. I don't like how we wants to package everything together either. We should have each bill discussed separately and have it stand on its own merits, not get passed because it is with some other legislation. This is how they got the Real ID Act passed, they lumped it with another 'good' bill.
Post a Comment