Arkansas Blog

You can tell that neither cadidate is truly a "front runner " or Dustin McDaniel would not have accepted the challenge. Golden rule, if you have a big lead, don't debate.

This is one of the best races in a long time!

I agree that these candidates should debate the issues. Do you expect a debate in the Lt. Governors race?

Sounds great. I would love to see the two of them debate.

Dustin hasn't accepted or declined.

I've met them both but I'd like to see them debate. I still do not feel like I know enough about each to make an informed decision.

Not to get the haters from the earlier thread started, but I once saw Paul debate at Student Congress when he was in college. He's a smart guy, an excellent speaker, and he wasn't afraid to go head-to-head (in a friendly way) with my then-future husband, which is a feat in itself.

Sounds great. Will Paul want to debate issues involving teens since he is running on his high school record?

Let's see: the pros and cons of school uniforms, peer pressure, dry humping versus heavy petting, the great debate of homecoming carnivals versus homecoming parades and one issue that I know Paul personally worked on while clerking at the AG's office: the School Short Task Force and whether shorts at school should stop at the knee or within 3 inches of the knee.

I for one would like to hear the moderator ask the question on all of our minds (and since Suskie was the Governor of Boy's State, he should know) as to whether or not they really put soft peter in the eggs at Boy's State every year.

Too late.

Dustin would be crazy to debate Suskie. There's no way he could hold his own against Suskie, and he'd put what voter base he has at risk. I don't blame Suskie for seeking the debate. His growing voter base would spiral with the side-by-side comparison of the two. Don't do it Dustin.

I don't want to get it going again either, because I think this would be a good way to learn about the candidates. How is Paul running on his high school record? I saw his TV ads and they mentioned his Boys State Govenorship, but that is it. Am I missing something?

I think it's possible that Dustin McDaniel's campaign is the most immature of this political season. Instead of yet another round of childish attacks, just say yes or no to the debate.

Dustin will be saying no.

Hell no Dustin won't debate. He's all hat and no cattle. He'll manufacturer some excuse to dodge the side by side comparison. Suskie has the Mo and Dustin knows it.

I thought Dustin said he would debate if his "demands" were set. Wasn't that his statement yesterday? Now that the Suskie camp has figured out a way to do it, why hasn't Dustin accepted?

This guy looks like a chump. Looks like I'll be changing my vote from the first round.

Dustin will say yes...if the debate is held at an airport so he can fly in on his private jet and then fly back out to resume his bonding with "rural Arkansans" like he talked about in that interview on KTHV shortly before the primary.

I don't want to get it going again either, because I think this would be a good way to learn about the candidates. How is Paul running on his high school record? I saw his TV ads and they mentioned his Boys State Govenorship, but that is it. Am I missing something?

drives a jag, daddy is rich, spoiled, airplanes, arrogant............ try something new boys.

And where did this wealth of information come from about Dustin not being a good debator come from? And where the the info come from that Suskie was such a good debator? Let me guess........he was in the high school debate club!!!!! Idiots.

Come on, both these guy have their pros and cons. Instead of attacking each one, why not point out the differences and make an argument why one would be a better AG than the other?

agreed

Debate issue: Pro-Life(S) v. Pro-Choice(Mc).

Roe v. Wade & Ark. AG

Remember, this is the Democratic Primary!

Anyone who follows politics knows the guy literally BEGGING for debate always has a camaign on life support. I thought the runoff could be close, but as scared as Suskie is running he most be afraid of NE Arkansas turnout.

I like Suskie, I do. But McDaniel is going to win this. If it wasn't clear before Suskie's behavior about this debate, it is now.

For this runoff to even be close Pulaski county is going to have to turnout like crazy, and rural arkansas is going to have to forget to come to the polls. And that's unlikely.

I thought democrats wanted a true democrat in office, not a pro iraq war, pro life kind of guy like paul suskie. i wonder how HIS survey from the arkansas family council would match up to wooldridge's, pretty close i imagine?

This race is just too close to call.

Suskie calling for a debate could have the effect of getting his folks out to vote (ie: oh no! my man is in trouble, we better get out there and vote!)

At the same time, it could have the effect of making McDaniels folks relaxed and not vote (Our guy has it won, I don't have to go vote).

A debate could effect the outcome if one of them just wins hands down.

Who knows!

I say this race will be within 3 5 percentage points and we will not know the winner until well into the a.m.

The last few comments are why Suskie wants the debate, to stem the weak personal attacks coming from the campaign. Suskie wins no problem, McDaniel tries desperately to hold on but fails.

mmmmmmm, abortion, what a great republican issue for Paul. Let's see, what else will Paul's people nominate as an issue for debate as to what is important in the race for AG? If habit is any indication from his side, I would suggest that he and his staff thumb to page 14 of the "Karl Rove Guide to Republican or WannaBe Republican Campaign Tactics." There you will find that hot button conservative issue that Paul can debate his ever loving ass off on: GAY MARRIAGE. And what timing since the Chimp threw that one back out there today for the evangelicals to eat on. Oooooh, how about FLAG BURNING? That one is huge in the AG office. Why, I bet the AG deals with the issues of abortion, flag burning and GAY MARRIAGE at least twice an hour. How about Paul suggest during the debate that he is thinking of setting up a seperate branch of the AG's office, which will be headed by his wife (because she is pretty and he loves her and she worked there before and all....) that will deal specifically with GAY MARRIAGE and also may be used to tie up any lose ends from Paul's administration while Governor of Boy's State.

The reason for a debate is to get low cost publicity. It seems like a good way to get each candidates ideas across without having to spend a million dollars on advertising.

Paul just wants to get out there and show everyone why he is the only qualified candidate in this race to hold the office.

"Debate issue: Pro-Life(S) v. Pro-Choice(Mc). Roe v. Wade & Ark. AG. Remember, this is the Democratic Primary!"

McDaniel is NOT "Pro-Choice." Anyone who is pro-choice would not vote for House Bill 1033, the parental consent bill sponsored by Jeremy Hutchinson that was designed to put up yet another roadblock to choice. McDaniel voted for it.

It was signed into law by Huckabee as Act 537 of 2005, for which the anti-choice lobby could say: "Thanks, Dustin!"

Here are the 13 pro-choice Democrats who voted AGAINST this anti-choice bill. McDaniel wasn't among them.

Buddy Blair
Nancy Blount
Jay Bradford
Linda Chesterfield
Booker Clemons
Joyce Elliott
Stephanie Flowers
David Johnson
Sam Ledbetter
Wilhemina Lewellen
Jodie Mahony
Rick Saunders
Lindsley Smith

full roll call at
http://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/2005/scripts/ablr/hvote/rcsnumvote.asp?rcsnum=182

In the Senate, just three pro-choice Democrats (and Tim Wooldridge isn't one of them--in fact, he was a co-sponsor of this bill):

Irma Hunter Brown
Sue Madison
Mary Anne Salmon

http://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/2005/scripts/ablr/svote/rcsnumvote.asp?rcsnum=297

"I don't want to get it going again either, because I think this would be a good way to learn about the candidates. How is Paul running on his high school record? I saw his TV ads and they mentioned his Boys State Govenorship, but that is it. Am I missing something?

Posted by: STILL JUST CURIOUS | May 31, 2006 03:34 PM"

I'm not in the inner workings of the Suskie campaign, but I'd wager that he is bringing this out to show that he has been a recognized leader for some time.

I think that the anonymous McDaniel supporters who mock the fact that the Suskie campaign uses this personal history miss the point of the ad, and show a basic lack of civility. If I weren't already a Suskie supporter, I would certainly vote for him now. If only to vote against McDaniel. I do not think that sort of stupid, cowardly attack should be rewarded.

"Anyone who follows politics knows the guy literally BEGGING for debate always has a camaign on life support. I thought the runoff could be close, but as scared as Suskie is running he most be afraid of NE Arkansas turnout.
Posted by: Desperation | May 31, 2006 03:56 PM"

You say so. Personally, I think that Suskie could be calling for the debgate to highlight his superior experience compared to McDaniel, solidifying his support. I do not believe that wanting to debate equals campaign in the toilet. In fact, it could be the other way around intirely. This is just some more shoddy reasoning from the McDaniel camp. And it is pushing me further into the Suskie camp each time I read something like this.

"or this runoff to even be close Pulaski county is going to have to turnout like crazy, and rural arkansas is going to have to forget to come to the polls. And that's unlikely.

Posted by: Desperation | May 31, 2006 03:56 PM"

I fail to see your reasoning here too. A quick survey of a few counties around the state show Suskie competative with McDaniel if not outright winning. In addition to Pulaski County, Suskie won Washington and Jefferson Counties, and was second ahead of McDaniel in some other key counties like Benton. Even in East Arkansas, like Arkansas County, he only trailed McDaniel by 1%. Ths clearly shows that Suskie can and will win this race.

Thanks, Dustin!

Love, Bruce

All I want to know is which one will stand up for consumers and sue the hell out of those who take advantage of consumers or the state.

Maybe Paul's employee's should spend more time meeting voters and raising money instead of spending time on the blog.

Ain't no one going to watch the debate.

The fact of the matter is, the only thing these candidates should be focusing on is getting people to the polls and this is a distraction and waster of their time.

Why exactly is Paul the ONLY candidate qualified to hold the office of AG?

Besides being captain of his high school football team, in the Beta Club, FBLA et al...

Because he wasn'ta legislator for months, a cop for 8 months, and a daddy's boy his whole life.

I see. It sounds like he has been a brown-noser for about 34 years though.

The thread has degraded to name calling.

So us the differences. I am leaning towards Suskie at this point.

Wow, McDaniel's camp has gone into fullblown crazy mode. They know that Paul has him beat on issues and experience so now they are pulling out all the stops to try and go after Paul.

Dustin, do you really think that the people you are calling and spreading lies to aren't calling Paul and telling him exactly what you are saying? I know my brother did and now instead of just voting FOR Paul he is working against you and will continue to do so if you happen to be the nominee.

Just to clear a few things up that Dustin has been telling people.
- No, Paul is not a Republican, never has been. He has worked and volunteered for Democratic candidates for almost 20 years.
- No, Paul is not pro Iraq war. I challenge Dustin's campaign to give an example where Paul has supported the war in Iraq.
- There have been no arguments between Paul and anyone else. (Dustin I'm sure you know who I'm talking about)
- I won't repeat the personal remarks made about Paul on this thread yesterday that either Max or Warwick had to remove. But they really were pathetic.
- Paul is a nice person. In fact he is one of the most decent people I have ever met and is certainly the most honorable running in this Attorney General runoff election.

Dustin, if you were to beat Paul on issues and experience you could have had the full support of Paul's supporters to help you through the general. I believe that Paul will carry through and win in 2 weeks, but if for some reason you happen to win you have alienated a huge chunk of Democratic voters for the general election and any future races. Lies and deception earn you no allies.

Calling for a debate is not a desperation ploy. I recall that Winston Bryant, the perceived frontrunner, challenged Asa Hutchinson to a debate in the 1990 AG race. Remember who won? That's right, Winston.

Debates are good for democracy. The two candidates have different backgrounds and are running on different issues. Let's see the candidates articulate them side by side. Sure hope McDaniel agrees to participate on the Roby Brock show.

The true colors of the McDaniel supports are coming out on this thread. Dustin's experience pales in comparison to Paul's, and the Dustin supporters know it!

So they attack his high school and college accomplishments to minimize what he has done as in the NLR City Attorney's Office for the last 10 years or so.

Dustin has been spreading outright, distastful lies about Paul the last month or so. I have had 5 people report to me some of the trashy/vile crap he has said about Paul. He has even made negative comments about Paul's 4 year old son. I won't list them, since they are so distasteful, but I think these all go to show what kind of person Dustin and his supporters are.

I am a strong Democrat, and have never voted for a Republican. But, if Dustin wins the nomination, I will vote for Gunner Delay come November.

Dustin and Co., you people have lost a lot of credibility with your nasty lies. You should be ashamed to call yourself Democrats!

While all of this is going on...Gunner is sitting back going.."Oh yeah...keep it up boys...get me get my pencil and write some of this down."

"I heard Paul say nasty things about Dustin's daughter...I wont list them since they are so distasteful"

Talk about Republican smear attacks 101.

You should be ashamed!

Paul Suskie is a good guy he is just not a Democrat.

Dear Paul,

Who the hell are you?

Sincerely,

David Pryor

Other than Dustin's Johnny-Come-Lately view on abortion, what issues make Dustin more a Democrat than Paul? I would like specifics please and not just the juvenile rantings that have been previously stated. It seems to me that Dustin keeps throwing out accusations and when asked for proof suddenly falls silent.

Paul Suskie?

Oh yes, I know you. You are the one running for AG against that spoiled idiot Dustin McDaniel. By the way, I think you should roll over ole' Dusty McDonut. I mean think about it, your 10 years in public service vs. Dustin's 6 months as a Rep and a couple years as a trial lawyer for his daddy. By the way, did Dustin ever make Partner in that law firm? Last I heard he was still an Associate....just wondering. Did he also get suspended? Oh I remember now, that was when he was a cop "serving the people."

Don't worry Paul, Dustin is only known through this dad's contacts. You should win this run-off based on your record compared to ... well Dustin's record...or should I say lack of...

"I heard Paul say nasty things about Dustin's daughter...I wont list them since they are so distasteful"

When did you hear Paul say these things? I have never heard Paul say one negative personal attack on any of his opponents? Plus, you are obviously a McDaniel supporter...so I doubt he would say anything like that to you..

You are loosing credibility bud...but keep it up. You are making the case for us, i.e., how tasteless and immature Dustin's supporters are...

I worked in David Pryor's office with Paul, so David Pryor knows Paul well. David also has known the Suskie family well for about 30+ years...so I doubt if you asked him he would not know who Paul is or what his qualifications are.

Rove is that you...?

I resent that you referred to me as Karl Rove. But, I will just consider the source.

I was not stating what I heard to get into the fray with you...but just stating facts.

Don't take my word for it...ask around to people who have talked with Dustin. You will see what I am talking about.

Yeah right. Paul just wouldn't launch that kind of attack on any. If there has been something like that said it is most likely Dustin lying to people about what "Paul said" to turn voters his way. Shameful really isn't it.

Dustin wins hands down because Melissa Moody Rocks!!!

Hey awesome, since you are obviously close enough to the campaign to know that Melissa Moody "rocks" maybe you could answer my previous question about what issues make Dustin more of a Democrat than Paul. I stiil have yet to see anything compelling to support that statement or give me a reason at all to vote for Dustin.

Why was Dustin's law firm suing a gun manufacturer? I need details. Was it because the gun was faulty? Surely it wasn't just because it was a murder weapon. Can anyone clear this up?

I am truly ashamed to be a democrat right now.

I still want to hear why Dustin is still an Associate in his Daddy's law firm. I mean..if he is so good shouldn't he be a Partner?

...and some people think he is ready to run the biggest law firm in the state...The AG Office?

Dustin has never been a boss or been in charge of anything vs. Paul has been the leader of the City Attorney Office and a group of JAG Officers in the guard.

I just don't see Dustin being a good AG...just my opinion. Can the McDaniel supporters explain these things to me? I would really like to know why he is still and Associate in his own father's law firm...

Melissa Moody does rock. She is the only steady person over there. She is also the nicest, most sensible person on the entire campaign trail this year. I only consider Dustin as a choice because he has her on his staff.

I am a supporter of Paul's and have already posted on his behalf on this thread, but I have to say that I see no relevance in Dustin's status at his dad's law firm to him running for AG now. There is no need to bring up trivial information about Dustin, Paul's record and experience stand just fine on their own.

As someone who has gotten to know Paul very well, I fully understand the frustration with the tactics of Dustin's campaign and unfortunately I have let my anger at the lies being told about Paul spill into my comments on this blog.

I truly think it would best serve Paul and his campaign if his supporters would only refute the lies with the truth and tout Paul's excellent record without resorting to name-calling or bickering.

I think these two stories do a good job comparing and contrasting the two candidates:

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/nation/20050529-11002-helicoptercrash-soldier.html

http://www.kthv.com/printfullstory.aspx?storyid=20216

I am the anonymous poster from 10:04 p.m. Panther '06, I know that you mean well and I hope that this doesn't offend you or damper your support for Paul, but I know that Paul has intentionally not brought that event up during the campaign.

I am waiting to see the McDaniel supporters put a negative spin on this, trivalize the crash, or make light of it in some other way....

"Melissa Moody does rock. She is the only steady person over there."

You have got to be kidding or just sarcastic.

Moody has run a terrible and unorganized campaign.

Moody spent $100,000 in black outreach money and came in dead last in Jefferson County. That is one for the record books.

Paul Suskie won Phillips and St. Francis Counties in McDaniel's backyard.

That is a slap in the face for Moody after spending $100,000 and getting beat in those key counties with a heavy black population.

Melissa Moody is the best thing to happen to the Suskie campaign.

The post by Panter '06 should pretty much put a stop to the negativity towards Suskie's time in Afghanistan....

Moody does rock, even if she is on the wrong campaign. Hopefully, after her campaign ends on June 13, she will go to work for Beebe's campaign...