Blunt: Nothing to see here
Tony Messenger has an interesting piece today in the Post-Dispatch about John Danforth's criticisms of Roy Blunt's Senate candidacy, Danforth's public support for Thomas Schweich as an alternative candidate, and how that conflict may impact Blunt's fundraising at upcoming events and party unity in general.
Reading the article, I find it a little odd that Blunt doesn't want to call Danforth's frank assessment of Blunt's considerable campaign baggage a "conflict." That's a "strong word," Blunt says. What, exactly, would he prefer it be called? Conflict seems like a kind word.
- Blunt believes he can become a US Senator in 2010. Danforth does not.
- "We [Republicans] really are very weak right now," Danforth says.
- Danforth's candidate, Thomas Schweich, published an op-ed about the establishment's support of Blunt called "The end of the Republican Party," in which he wrote, "the Missouri Republican Party seems to have no plan for responsible Missourians."
- Blunt's campaign and his surrogates have already gone after Schweich's 2001 support of Claire McCaskill.
- In response, Schweich said he was flattered that Blunt "launched a vintage Washington-style smear campaign."
- And in today's Messenger article, Blunt reminded readers that Schweich and Danforth were Bush Administration appointees too.
Seems like a conflict to me. But what do I know?
Also, I found it a little amusing that Blunt can't seem to have conversation about his support without mentioning money from the inside-the-beltway crowd, this time at a Washington fundraiser with Kit Bond and John Aschroft.
