Specter’s 2004 Competitor Ready for a Rematch…
Specter’s 2004 Competitor Ready for a Rematch…
|
Comment Commandments:
1) No Personal Attacks. (Debating is encouraged, but be respectful). 2) No Sexual Discussion (unless it specifically pertains to a cited story). 3) No Profanity (Let’s all behave like adults). |
GOLDEN RULE:
Be civil and statesmanlike. You can disagree without being disagreeable. Annoying trolls who break these rules will be blocked from commenting. ***Please don't disable anonymous commenting for everyone else*** |
NOTE TO COMMENTERS: CREATE AN INTENSE DEBATE ACCOUNT
|
-vote comments up or down
-email notifications when someone replies |
-pick a profile picture
-promote your website or blog |
***TOPIC FORUM: 50 STORIES LAST COMMENTED ON***
***LIST OF TOP 50 COMMENTERS***
***LIST OF 50 MOST COMMENTED ON STORIES***
***LIST OF 50 LAST COMMENTS***
.
85 Comments
How absurd. This woman is an egomaniac. She actually thinks that politics has nothing to do with who can win but everything to do with who was in the race first?
ugh…
Toomey can win a general. Luksik would lose in a blowout of epic proportions.
No one plays the role of spoiler and martyr like Peg Luksik. She craves attention. She'll ratchet up her her histrionics until people ackowledge her presence. She's the world's oldest child.
Ditto. I was going to write the same thing. She already lost.
Boy, talk about a bunch of embittered people. Why is Luksik such a bad candidate – such because you Toomeybots are afraid she might take the wind out of Pat's sails? Let the best man (or woman) win.
No, the grandmother's who voted for her are dead. There is no one left.
Yes, we've heard that before, we are bitter! Are we going to use the same tactics as Obama, now?
But why vent your fury on a fellow reformer?
Really? Well, I guess time will tell, won't it?
Fellow reformer? Really? Where was Luksik during the pay raise? Eich vs Jubelirer? Folmer vs. Brightbill?
She pops up intermittently like a ground hog, an opportunistic groundhog at that.
At least she has bothered to announce. Toomey doesn't seem very clear on what he wants to do.
Obviously Mike, you haven't met her. You are quick to decide what her motivations are.
Well said, greensburger, SHM, rita, and truth & light. I have no doubt she's a solid conservative, but she is not well known statewide. It has been a decade since she last ran for office and Pat, even though he lost in 2004, has remained active in the movement and is more well known because of it. All Peg is gonna do is split the conservative vote in the primary. She should knowshe'll have an extremely hard time in the general election as well.
Here we go with the Republicans shooting theirself not only in one foot, but both feet. The Pennsylvania Democrats don't have to be concerned with beating the Republicans in State wide elections, The Repbulicans will beat theirself.
What we really need is a good conservative governor, somebody that could hold the Pennsylvania Legislature's feet to the fire and get some of Eich's and Folmar's reforms passed. What's the chances of that happening ? As soon as one good candidate starts considering a run, 2 or 3 others jump in ? What a mess the Pennsylvania Republican Party is. Is there no leadership at all ?
I voted for Peg when she ran for Governor, and I'm not dead, and I'm not a Grandmother yet, but G-d willing, I will be someday.
This does create quite a conundrum. When was the last time "Republicans" had to choose between two conservative candidates? This is great! Could it be that the party is getting the message that mushy moderates lose elections? Could it be? Hope springs eternal.
I agree Stephen—we need a good conservative governor. I think the real opportunity to implement change is within the Commonwealth. Our Senator will be 1 of 100, and will run into the O's machine at every turn. Who do we sacrifice? Who do we send into the belly of the beast to repeatedly run headlong into a brick wall? Who do we sentence to that hell?
I'm a grandmother and I'm not dead.
She wasn't welcome by any of the reformer camps because of her ill-advised association with the Constitution Party.
Having said that, I seem to recall she was very active in trying to take out Murtha, which, in and of itself, is noteworthy.
Peg announced several years ago that she was taking time off to be with her youngest children and now she's back. What's wrong with that?
If Peg hadn't made a decision, when would Pat have made his announcement? Is he an official candidate yet or is he still deciding? Should Peg have waited until it was too late?
You all are doing what you complained about the Party for doing — annointing a candidate.
Does anybody have a contact email for Ms. Luksik? I'd like to share my thoughts about a run with her. I respect Luksik (on her work for the pro-life movement, of which I'm a proud member), but she should first consider running for the State House or State Senate. As I've said before, Toomey definitely has a chance to win in the general. And I'm not worried about his chances in the primary. But the prospect of a Luksik primary challenge is an unnecessary distraction. In the general, she'd lose 25-75%.
Not so. PA CleanSweep welcomed all REGARDLESS of political affiliation. If she took time off to be there for her children, as would be consistent with her conservative nature, I certainly understand that.
Nothing, unless of course you believe some daycare worker should raise your children, help them with their homework, and McDonalds serves dinner through a drive-through window. Details.
Perhaps Pat should set his sights on the Governor's mansion? I suspect Peg is reading this exchange.
Ray,
I'm not complaining about Peg announcing. I'm more concerned with the lack of leadership in the Republican Party. Is there nobody in charge that could organize those seeking office ? Here we have two candidates, both qualified and their going to end up shooting each other down instead of a Democrat. Why not one for Governor and one for Senator ? As it stands ,,,,lack of organization, the Republicans will more than likely lose both. As I said before, we really need a good conservative governor to push the legislature to recognize some of Eich and Folmar's reform issues. And a good conservative U.S. Senator wouldn't hurt either.
No Stephen, there is no one within the Party who can or will do anything except obstruct conservative candidates. And I'm not so sure that I want anyone deciding who runs for what office, given the Party's history of screwing things up.
Pat was going to run and then he wasn't sure. Then he wasn't sure what office he wanted. Indecision is not what we need. Also, Pat has been loyal to the Party since his defeat endorsing Specter and then Santorum because they wore the "R" on their lapel. Will he support the Party or will he support our principles?
send me email at bobguzzardi@yahoo.com and I will forward it and let Peg decide if she wants to respond.
It would be good if we could discuss some issues. What is of Peg's message that anyone disagrees with? What of Pat's message which is in part set out at http://www.clubforgrowth.org I would like to see what weaknesses or refinements would be necessary.
Peg made a good point to me that the elimination of the charitable deduction essentially 'eliminates the competition", that is, all humanitarian aide comes through the government and we all have to beg the government for support of arts to hospitals to schools. The government controls everything. Enforcing rule that no abortions; no money essentially closes down any Catholic hospital and, if I were a senior, I would worry about calculation by Government HMO. Peg has a message. I am an Open Primary guy and we have a year before the primary. Let us see how it plays out. The contest makes it more interesting.
Did Toomey support Saylor? Did Luksik?
First she homeschooled her children.
She was Bill Russell's campaign manager. Two of Murtha and Gleason's republican friends challenged Russell's petitions. Got him thrown off the ballot. She pulled a campaign that had fallen into the tank, ran a write in for Bill and got more than 4000 votes.
I am still wondering who told Murtha that he was losing in the RNC internal polls. Hmmmmmm Who had access to the RNC internal polls. Hmmmmm
Lot's of cleansweeping needs to be done at the PAGOP. We're working on it. Should be an interesting race for state committee next year. Stay tuned.
Actually, Peg endorsed Eich in the primary against Jubelirer. She was unavailable to appear in person but sent a letter.
Check out a group called conservativeallies.com This group was started by three women 1 from Scranton area, 1 from Chester County, and 1 from Allegheny County (not me). In 2 months we have more than 600 members. The group is not associated with any party. They will be organized down to the county level. We will be looking at those in State Committee who voted to endorse judges rather than for an open primary to replace them. We will be looking at those state committee members who still support Specter to replace them. We only need 76 to take the majority at State Committee.
I am also working with another group that will be doing the same thing. We hope to challenge every RINO on State Committee.
Stay tuned.
We don't need somebody deciding who runs for what, but we do need somebody that could direct party traffic. There is no organization to the Republican Party at all. They have lost their way.
Don't jump all over me. Just putting out information. Tom Corbett is running for Governor. My only opinion in favor of him is that he has fulfilled every promise he made to the gunowners in PA. We asked for reciprocity and we got 12 states in 4 years with more coming. We asked the same of Fisher when he was AG and got none.
Peg is the only candidate tin the history of the state to get the 60,000 signatures needed by a party other than R or D to get on ballot on the constitution party.
So did Toomey.
Luksik cannot win the general. She probably could barely win the primary. She might have an ego bigger than Arlen's.
Her only issue is pro-life. Talk about the party being out of touch with the concerns of the people at the moment. We have a strong candidate on the economic issues and some self-serving social conservative maniac cannot get out of the way.
Her behavior has already lost my vote in the primary and general.
If she stays in the race and destroys the chance of defeating Specter, it will be time for a GOP civil war against people like her. Her behavior is worse than Specter's. At least Specter admits he is a moderate. She acts like she is a social conservative, but she actually only cares about her ego.
We are about to see the fiscal conservatives and social conservatives of the Republican Party duke it out over control of the party, but what is going to happen is the ultimate problem, Specter, will win in the end.
Peg is unelectable. Her affiliation with the Constitution Party is distasteful. That alone would sink her. Just imagine the crazy stuff the media will say. Remember when they went after Santorum for homeschooling his kids. Imagine what they will say about her. Most people do not understand the practice so that would compound the problem.
More importantly, the Republicans have a truly viable conservative for once in Pat Toomey. He has won in Democrat territory before and is hard to paint as a social conservative extremist. He also has a smaller ego than Specter or Luksik. This is enough to get my vote.
If Luksik gets a lot of support, it will be a sign for people like me to leave the party. This party will no longer be about limited government at all, but a moral agenda first and foremost. We have an economic crisis on our hands and we cannot even put abortion on the backburner for a few moments? Talk about a party with its priorities out of wack with the majority of Americans.
"He also has a smaller ego than Specter or Luksik."
This is the guy that told everyone and their mother that he was NOT running for Senate and then, when he changed his mind because of the poll numbers, expects everyone to jump out of the race, unfile their papers and give back the money that they raised…? Really? THAT is what qualifies as a small ego?
Peg formed a committee and started raising money based on Toomey's commitment not to run. Now, because the poll numbers say he can win, Toomey wants to change his mind and have the field cleared for him to be anointed king of the Republican Party. Peg is saying, "sorry, it doesn't work like that."
Don't underestimate Peg Luksik. You may not like her, but she'll surprise you every time.
Toomey has been begged to run. Soon as Arlen really sided with the dark side once and for all (voting for the stimulus was his worst antic ever!), people called Toomey. Did they call Peg? No.
Part of caring about an agenda is getting out of the way when there is someone who can advocate it better than you. Peg should see the writing on the wall.
Ummmm….do you know that people didn't call Peg? No, you don't. And you obviously don't know Pat very well. Even his most ardent, rabid supporters will tell you that Pat doesn't do anything if the polls don't support it. It's a well-known fact that Toomey, while he adheres to his principles when it comes to policy, makes ALL of his political decisions based on polling. This one is no different.
The arguments against Peg from this forum are: 1) she's an egomaniac; 2) she can't win. Every politician that I've ever met (including Pat Toomey) is an egomaniac…it's like a prerequisite. Also, if Pat isn't in the race Peg handily beats Specter and stands at least a good a shot as Pat at the General.
Even those on this forum that don't like her agree that Peg is with them on all of the issues. Pat is with us on economic issues but has already endorsed Specter (pro-abortion) and Saylor(anti-Constitution)…two big black marks. Peg has stood on principle her entire career. Again, whether you like her or not is irrelevant. The main argument FOR Toomey seems to be that he can win. I seem to remember people making that argument about Specter, too…sometime around 2004…
Pat's issues are economic. My issues are economic. I could care less about who Pat endorses when it comes to abortion. For all I care, Pat could have been running a private abortion clinic out of the Club for Growth.
Peg's issues are not economic. She might be an fiscal conservative, but her bread and butter are social issues. In 2010, what are most Pennsylvanians going to care about? I doubt they will be going to the polls in hordes to vote over abortion or any other social issue.
In fact, I would go as far as saying Peg is not a great economic conservative. Her stance for small family farms during the 1998 campaign shows that she is a cultural conservative first. We should care less who controls farms as long as they are not taking government handouts. It shows she is obsessed with the past. Defending a quaint rural ideal is misguided.
I think make or break for many with Corbett will be bonusgate. He is the Republican frontrunner now, but who knows.
There you go again.
You put words into her mouth and then say that she is wrong. She is a stronly principled fiscal conservative who will fight for liberty who cares passionately for the life of the preborn.
Don't forget to include us grandfathers who voted for her before.
The old saying is 'don't speak ill of the dead'. Since so many people say so many bad things about me, I assume that I am still alive to vote for her again.
You are exactly right, Dolley.
Hey, jokester, Did Peg send you those talking points? Toomey has never poll watched and, as was reportedly multiple times on this website, many people called him, e-mailed him, even stopped him on the street to run again. If he was and egomaniac, why did put a term limit on himself when he served in Congress? He has continuously been actively involved in the conservative movement, while Peg disappeared for a whole decade. I'm not faulting her for that, what with her raising her children and all, but it's a joke for her to take that cheap shot at Toomey. When she spends more time helping out the conservative movement, then she (and you) can lecture all you guys want.
But not quite as big as yours.
She has been involved in politics longer than you have been alive. She has a following. She has principles. And she is unwavering.
But you — before the race has begun, before a single campaing speech, before a single vote has been cast — has decided that she is unelectable.
That's hutzpah. That's ego. That's hubris. That's BS. (Why bother with campaigns and elections when we have you?)
You critiize her as a social conservative nutjob but that is how Pat was portrayed. Why are you supporting that 'nutjob'?
You criticize social conservatives and so does Specter.
The things that make you go hmmm.
"Her affiliation with the Constitution Party is distasteful. That alone would sink her. Just imagine the crazy stuff the media will say."
Distasteful? Do you realize that the main tenet of the CP is that we follow the Constitution? And you find that distasteful? Do you prefer the 'living breathing type of constitution instead?
Do you base your support on what the lying media and lying dems will lie about? If so, how can you suport any candidate?
" If Luksik gets a lot of support, it will be a sign for people like me to leave the party. "
Is that supposed to scare us? LOL
What term limit did he put on himself? One term? Are you sure he doesn't look at the polls? And how do you know Peg disappeared? Just because she hasn't been an egomaniac and gotten her name in the news does that mean she wasn't active? Did you know she was Russell's campaign manager against Murtha? What do you know about her?
Nice woman – good heart, however, this is not what we need. She is a virtual unknown and won't win statewide…..she has a place in politics, true, but this is not the time….time for her to concede and get out before more harm than good is done. I would support her in another race, just not against Specter, not now.
You obviously were not around when Outcomes Based Education was all of the rage 15 years ago – which was the issue which actually launched Luksik's celebrity status. In fact, at a debate with advocates of OBE, she was able to mop the floor with them and outline why this new form of education was a failure before it started.
Reality check: Luksik is genius on educational issues, and that is a winning issue.
Some of the individual campaigns had elements that were biased against anyone like Luksik, although I don't think people like Folmer would have minded her support.
Although, now that I think about it, wasn't there a pro-life PAC – of which she was a leading board member – that endorsed Folmer and Eich during the primary?
…and on that I will agree.
If memory serves correct, Toomey did support Saylor; can't recall if Luksik even made a comment on that race.
Concede to who, Specter? Who else has declared?
Since she was asked to leave the CP because she wasn't wacky enough, that whole issue may prove to be a badge of honor.
I wouldn't lose sleep over that one.
Toomey endorsed Saylor for retention. Definitely NOT his finest decision. I don't know if Peg took a position on his retention.
"If Luksik gets a lot of support, it will be a sign for people like me to leave the party."
See ya. Don't let the door hit ya where the good Lord split ya.
Besides complaining what are you doing to change the party?
ARGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THE TAX CODE IS NOT A SOCIAL ENGINEERING TOOL. IT MUST NEVER BE USED AS SUCH. THE TAX CODE SHOULD BE USED TO RAISE ENOUGH REVENUE TO FUND CONSTITUTIONALLY AUTHORIZED EXPENDITURES IN THE LEAST DESTRUCTIVE MANNER POSSIBLE. PERIOD.
The correct point to be made is this: The federal government has NO CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY to spend money on charity. NONE.
Congress can lay and collect taxes ONLY for those items specifically enumerated in Article I, Section 8. See Federalist 41 for the correct interpretation of the "General Welfare Clause." Peg is 180 degrees out of phase on this and apparently, her view of the tax code.
It is beyond amusing to watch the "conservatives" posting here perform acts of self-cannibalism — all based on who they want to become Captain of the Titanic, after it hit the iceberg.
The "conservative" on the board have a difficult choice, which unsuccessful hero to trash. While I'm sure Toomey can win a primary (I'm willing to admit that I am not an expert on the internal politics of the GOP), I don't think Luksik can. Neither he nor Luksik can win the general election against a serious Democrat in 2010. They are jockeying to be chosen as the lamb to be led to slaughter.
I actually know Peg Luksik (and it isn't because I merely met her at some conservative event, I actually do know her). While I think she is a nice woman and I commend her for being a true believer who is committed to her principles, I think she also is an egomaniac who doesn't know much about practical politics.
Let's actually think about just how "popular" or "well-known" she is. She ran for Governor in 1994 and 1998, and got CRUSHED. So she ran for office 15 years ago and 11 years ago, and didn't do nearly as well as Ross Perot when he ran as a third-party candidate for President (and Perot was regarded as a joke after his first unsuccessful attempt, yet he still did better in his second run than Luksik did in her second run).
Then, Peg demonstrated that her lack of political acumen is as great now as it was in the 1990s. In 2008, she ran Bill Russell's campaign against Murtha last year. In spite of big talk from "conservatives," Murtha won in a blowout (by 16%). Further, all of the big talk about Russell's tremendous fundraising ability was attributable to the fact that he participated in the BMW Direct scam (no candidate who participated in this scam won), where "conservatives" around the country pump $ into a quixotic campaign, only to have the vast majority of those funds contractually-dedicated to BMW Direct, to make rich the people running the scam. Don't believe me? Try learning a little about BMW Direct before trying to refute the information I provided — though facts are not the strongest suit of the "conservatives" posting here.
Morby – you have no idea of what you are talking about.
"Since she was asked to leave the CP …"
And you know this how?
No wonder Delaware County is in Republican shambles. Those corrupt RINO's in your county have you brainwashed. They wouldn't like Peg either because she is too principled for them.
Nice to go on attacking me for the weaknesses of Peg.
I can tell you based on electoral history in this state Peg does not have a chance. No candidate has won statewide office whose primary reason for being in politics is social conservatism in this state for a long time. That does not mean a social conservative cannot win, but they cannot focus on those issues.
I typically do not have litmus tests on social issues, but her decision to oppose abortions when a mother's life is endangered is an automatic non-starter. No individual should be denied the right to protect their life from a threat. I really could care less if she is pro-life in every other circumstances, but when you deny the right to self-preservation you cross a line.
What issue did she run on in 1998? She was the pro-life Constitution Party challenger to Tom Ridge! That is what she has defined her career doing.
I admit she is good on education issues, but she made her political move being a Pro-Life challenger to Tom Ridge.
If she feels so strongly about education, why is she running for US Senate? She should be running for Governor of a state legislative seat where the real education policy is made.
Try three terms. He served for six years.
I seem to recall that when Santorum was running for re-election the first time that all the RINOs in SEPA had Hoeffel signs in their yards.
Actually, it kind of makes sense to run for the US Senate on an education platform because of the mess that No Child Left Behind continues to make.
But a well-rounded conservative candidate will be pro-life; for while the pro-life vote will not make or break an election, it's a heck of a lot easier to have the pro-lifers in your corner than not – especially since being pro-choice or indifferent on the issue actually hampers candidates.
Trust me on this one, folks. The CP has been shifting in an extreme religious tilt which the original organizers would not recognize today. As a consequence they have gone thru their "French Revolution" period where a bunch of people who did not conform to their "principles" were forced out – and then the purgers, like Robespierre, eventually found themselves on the chopping block.
If you don't think the CP is in shambles, then ask yourself "Why did the Nevada and California delegations [those that made the CP the third largest political party in the country] bolt the CP this past summer?"
The CP had good intentions but it was hijacked along the way and, unfortunately, is in a tailspin into the dark recesses of history.
BTW, none of this changes the fact that Luksik is a good candidate against Specter.
how about pro-constitution?
Dolley I was not clear. I was not setting forth Peg Luksik's Tax Policy which I don't know. I fear I may have misrepresented what her point.
I was, ineptly, trying to make a point about Pres. Obama's and the Democrat's tax policy. The effect of eliminating the charitable deduction is to move toward Federalizing charitable and eleemosynary activities and making them dependent on the government. See my blog posting on Federation of Jewish Agencies Lobbying for Recovery. "charities" were lobbying for partisan policy. For analogy, see the government monopoly school system.
Additionally, Sen Specter bashed opponents of Stimulus as being "ideological", that is, setting policies based on ideas. Horrors! however, as a PRACTICAL matter, instead of the government misusing taxpayer money, if ALL CAPITAL GAINS taxes were eliminated for next EIGHT years ( 2 presidential terms), investment in business and jobs, in my opinion, would take off. Add to that, your point about eliminating the Corporate Net Income Tax and, I think, jobs and production would skyrocket. Worst case scenario, it would not be worse that Trillions in debt and budget deficits.
Thanks for the clarification! I'll check your blog posting.
Agreed. If government just got out of the way. The administration appears hell-bent on raising taxes on the producers and job creators. Our corporations already labor under one of the highest CNI's in the world. Democratic tax policy is suicidal tax policy.
Before we consume, we need to produce.tax consumption, encourage savings and investment and jobs by NOT TAXING them. of course how would Team Obama reward friends and punish opposition?
If you know so much about Russell's race then tell me about Murtha and his good friend PAGOP Chairman Bob Gleason and how he, Gleason, throws Republicans under the bus for Murtha. You see, the RNC internal polls had Russell beating Murtha. Somehow I think Murtha found out about those polls and the DNC, Obama sent out the army the weekend before the election. ACORN, etc.knocked on doors of almost 1 million democrats many who had never voted and told them to go to the polls and push the party button. In some cases they took them to the polls. This happened in every Congressional District that the RNC internal polls that had the Republican winning and Allegheny County. – Barletta, Manion, Hackett, Craig, English, Russell. Someone told someone about those polls.
And when figuring the loss if Russell had gotten 9 more points he would have beaten Murtha.
Thanks for pointing out the facts, nittanygop. How many times, mombrown1, did you see Peg, over the last 10 years, speak out on all the major issues during that period, statewide or nationally? She left the Republican party in the early nineties and joined the Constitution party. I have no problem with that party, but again, she obviously stopped her efforts to bring the GOP back to it's conservative roots. Now ,all of a sudden after serving as the manager for one campaign (where people were donating money to Bill Russell and his efforts to beat John Murtha, not to her), she all of a sudden is the best candidate and most well-known person to beat Specter. There is your "egomaniac." If she had been, conservatives in Pennsylvania would have been talking about her the last 10 years. Toomey has been talked about because he continued his efforts as the head of Club for Growth, which Peg just attacked, by the way. That's what I know about her, more than you, apparently.
If you consider my questions and my challenges to be attacks, you are pretty thin skinned — or you are simply using the liberal tactic of trying to deflect, rather than answer the questions.
Believing that there is never an exucse for an abortion and :
A] wanting that to be enacted into law, or
B] it actually having a chance of becoming law
are two differnet things.
I've never heard her say that. For myself, the IMMEDIATE threat to the life of the mother is the only acceptable reason. Not her health, convenience, comfort, or anythjing else, just the immediate threat to the loss of her own life.
Can you provide a link that proves that she actually advocates that as law?
Past history may be a good indicator of the future, but it is not a guarantee. As situations change, attitudes change and with that, election results can and will vary.
Most candidates have a signature issue. That does not mean that it is their only issue. If I were to run for office, my signature issue would be our gun rights. That does not mean that I am not also interested, knowlegable, and passionate about other issues.
Since you were too young to have actually voted for him, in hindsight can you tell me if you would have supported him?
He sought to deny our right to self preservation by restricting our gun rights. Considering that more people die as a result of criminal activity than do in childbirth, who is a bigger threa to our livest, Ridge or Luksik? Who is a bigger threat to our liberty, Ridge or Luksik?
Apparently Ryan hasn't noticed yet that even the Dems had to run a candidate (Casey) who most everyone thought was or at least hoped to be pro life against Santorum who most everyone thought was pro life.
PW,
WHAT ATTACK? You and others here — in your zeal to shoot Peg down — are mischaracterizing her remarks.
She did not attack the CFG. She responded to a question about what the Dems would go after Pat for.
Now, while you are busy slandering Peg, what if Pat doesn't run after all? He's been dragging his feet for a long time and making excuses. If he doesn't run, then all you have succeeded in doing was to slander our best candidate. Is that what you want?
If Stallone is against Peg, that has to be a ringing endorsement of her.