I believe John Kennedy did so today.I might have also.
I received an email coming from the John Kennedy campaign that said, “On the eve of Mary Landrieu’s speaking role at the Democratic Convention this Tuesday, a prominent pro-Landrieu Web site today reported her highly touted push poll from Rasmussen was “commissioned” by Landrieu herself! Louisiana’s own BayouBuzz this morning wrote the “poll commissioned by Mary Landrieu showed her with a sixteen point lead over John Kennedy.”
“Two polls for U.S. Senate in an approximate two week spread have shown an amazing change. This is assuming one accepts the results of either the Zogby poll or the Rasmussen polls. Zogby which was an opt-in online poll showed Kennedy with a lead for the first time within the margin of error, but still a lead. A few weeks later, a poll commissioned by Mary Landrieu showed her with a sixteen point lead over John Kennedy. That would mean an approximate twenty-two point differential within a matter of a few short weeks. “ (Itallics by Bayoubuzz for demarcation)
.
Here are the facts surrounding what I consider to be the mistakes:
Early this morning right after the column was released, I heard from the Landrieu camp who told me that I was mistaken about my claiming that the Landrieu campaign paid for a recent poll showing they were 16 points ahead of John Kennedy.
A few hours later, I received the above Kennedy’s statement.
Based upon my memory of information—none coming from the Landrieu camp, I wrote they commissioned the poll. They asked me to clarify the record. In fact, in fairness, and in retrospect, I have no idea who commissioned the poll but will be contacting the Rasmussen firm and asking them this information and will report their response to you early next week.I personally regret making that statement based upon my information and belief without first checking with the Landrieu campaign and the Rasmussen polling firm.However, earlier this morning, I had contacted the Kennedy campaign and asked if they had any information on the poll or any other information they thought would be relevant to a column I would be writing.I did not receive any response from them although I normally do.
However, I think that John Kennedy’s campaign made a real mistake in suggesting that Bayoubuzz is "pro-Landrieu".The absolute fact is that Bayoubuzz is “pro nobody” in this election or in any election.In fact, I have written and believe that I like both candidates very much for different reasons.Also, unlike other publications, Bayoubuzz does not endorse any candidate for any election and never has done so.So, I guess when those publications start endorsing, that will mean they are "pro-the candidate", right?.
I believe that the John Kennedy camp should not have called Bayoubuzz “pro-Landrieu” and then suggest that even a "pro-Landrieu" media has reported that Landrieu paid for a poll and even call it a “push poll”, which I certainly did not do so.
I believe the Kennedy campaign was mistaken in trying to make the suggestion and believe they were trying to undermine the validity of a poll by suggesting that even a pro-Landrieu media would make such a statement.
I strongly encourage that you read the column I wrote today.I pride myself on being fair and will continue to do so and be so.I will make mistakes and if I do, I will fall on my sword in open public as I have done here.
Bayoubuzz does not, and will not support any candidate, we are not pro or against any candidate and do not endorse.I strongly encourage you to read the columns I have written that have praised and criticized both Mary Landrieu and John Kennedy as this one did this morning.
I personally, as publisher of Bayoubuzz will continue to praise and to criticize them and others when I feel it is appropriate and will do so without any bias. I also strongly encourage that the readers and the voters become educated on the issues in this race and vote for the person of their choice based upon their beliefs and information, not based upon what others say or others' endorsements. I think we have two good candidates and I again urge "let the debates begin".
ChiefPete,I think you speak with forked tongue or smoke from your "piece" pipe has gotten into your eyes. Your piece that Steve is bias against Kennedy is absolutely foolish. That he would be backing Landrieu at every chance is absurd. If that were the case, why would he repeated argue for debates, why would he have questioned the poll differences, why would he said that Kennedy might have changed and that debates would help tell us the truth? Why would he have run the Zogby defense of their poll in full detail? Oh, and the TP has just supported Cedric Richmond for Congress, so does that mean the paper is biased in favor of Richmond? At least Steve endorses nobody which is a lot better than most of these publications who say they are fair and balanced and then go and support candidates. But, just to give you your say, where is your proof that Steve is biased against Kennedy given what I have cited above and what he personally said in his article and his comment in the Buzzback comment. Where is your proof other than just calling him names and labelling him? Written by Jimmy H.
on 8/24/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Let's put it this way. What good is Seniority when the Leadership of your party has all but threatened to destroy the biggest industry in your state? Written by Sharon
on 8/24/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
"your post does show bias against John Kennedy. You are a Democrat, and will push for Lil Mary every chance you get"...... WAIT-- I thought Steve was a Republican!!... LOL!............ I tell ya what-- Even if they called this blog the "Kennedy Buzz"- and plastered Kennedy's mug on every post-- (no audio, please).... He'd STILL lose!............People don't trust traitors. Who would trade seniority-without-scandal for a turn-coat?... That reminds me--- Kennedy spent mucho bucks on TV commercials all over the State-- when he was un-opposed last Fall-- what was THAAAT all about? Written by KjunLady
on 8/24/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Steve, your post does show bias against John Kennedy. You are a Democrat, and will push for Lil Mary every chance you get. You probably don't even know how bad it really is, because you just can't see it both ways. Written by Chiefpete
on 8/24/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
I happen to pay very close attention to actual votes and trends. I watch or listen to much of the actual debates on the floor of the House and the Senate. I check the grades given to the candidates by different citizen's groups. The Chamber of Commerce and the Sheriff's Associations might be happy with Landrieu but there is no way that anyone who votes primarily with the very left wing Democratic leadership can claim to be conservative. Sorry. The vote is what it is. The Dead Pelican has done a good job of pointing out the discrepancies in Landrieus campaign rhetoric and her actual voting record. I have checked every single vote and it is correct. Her speeches and actions in committee is just as liberal. Her claims of success for Louisiana are more often with Republican backing than with her colleagues especially when it comes to Big Oil. The Democrat Party of 2008 is far left wing liberal. The same goes for the so called Blue Dog Democrats in the House. During the campaign they tout themselves as Conservative and disagreeing with the leadership. But when their vote is needed it is with the leadership. Otherwise there is no National Party backing. I am not saying that the Republicans don't try to keep their members in line. However, if you check the votes you will find that far more Republicans will go against their leadership and cross the aisle. Seems "bipartisanship" is a one way street in DC. Written by Sharon
on 8/24/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
I love your posts Steve, really I do. It's great that we have a place to speak our minds and feel like our opinions matter (at least to us anyway). Joe Lieberman is a Liberal who is very strong on defense of our country. He gets it whereas the democratic party does not,when it comes to national defense. The democratic party (both parties actually) has changed and appear to be interested only in getting re-elected and getting power to push their socialist platform. Lieberman supports McCain primarily because of their common belief that the US must remain strong. He hasn't changed, the party has changed, the same party that abandoned Kennedy and supported Rep. Johns who was for UN oversight of our presidential elections. We need debates to get past the bull. But why do you insist on bashing Kennedy for not demanding that Jindal have more debates and not every other politian running for office? Alot of polls are biased and debates are the best way to see the candidates without the prepared speech and the media glitz. Mary failed us after Katrina, she needs to go. It's time for "change!" That's my personal opinion for what it's worth which is not much. Written by Sid
on 8/24/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Sid and Sharon, I always enjoy your comments when I have time to read the Buzzbacks. On Friday in that last paragraph you mention Sharon, I said "However, Bayoubuzz, notwithstanding what might be a sizeable lead by Landrieu is again strongly urging debates on television and other media and forums, even if the current US Senator is in Washington. While I definitely do not agree with the Kennedy camp that Landrieu has been liberal (she won the endorsement of the US Chamber of Commerce) and firmly feel she has been fighting very hard for Louisiana post-Katrina, I admit that we should discuss the differences in style and substance of the two candidates. Also, it is true that John Kennedy ran in 2004 as a Democrat and could have been a liberal Democrat to boot at that time, but, people’s opinions do change based upon the circumstances and the issues. Who would have thought that Joe Lieberman would be strongly supporting Republican John McCain after sharing the ticket with John Kerry whom Kennedy supported? So, politics do change and events sometimes evoke those swings. Only with the crucible of debates will we be able to see the real ghosts of the US Senate past, present and possibly the future of this Louisiana US Senate Story. So, my dickens, let’s get it going." Thus Sharon and Sid, I do not think that Sen. Landrieu is as liberal as you say she is but I have written about four columns urging debates immediately so we can see their differences in personalities, their visions, their records and their philosophies. I also want to see what each has done for the state given their respective capacities. I do think it was grossly unfair for the labelling by the Kennedy camp since I have taken up the banner on the debates, have questioned the differential in the polls (I even ran the Zogby defense of his poll verbatim) and I even said that people can change--look at Joe Lieberman. Also, Landrieu's main attack is that Kennedy has "flip flopped" but I gave him the benefit of the doubt on that and said let's debate and let's see why he has changed as his reasons could be legitimate and not just political to get elected--we need to vett them both. Also, using Kennedy's logic, if a publication endorses I guess using the Kennedy campaign's logic, that would make them automatically "pro-the candidate" they endorse? Therefore, using the same logic, shouldn't we just ignore the endorsements and call those publications biased? So, if Kennedy gets the endorsement of a newspaper, shouldn't we just write it off and say the publication is biased? As mentioned Bayoubuzz does not endorse, so, I think that labelling us as being Pro-Landrieu was unfair on its face given our attempts to catalyze the debates, our willingness to allow both candidates to defend their records and changes, our questioning the poll differentials and the posting of both positions on the site. If the Kennedy campaign wants to label Bayoubuzz as being pro-Landrieu so they can undermine the latest Rasmussen poll by suggesting that a "pro-Landrieu" website is questioning the numbers, I consider their labelling outright unfair, inaccurate, politically motivated and unfortunate. But, I still will defend the debates and everything else I have said since I want to see who they are under fire before I personally decide with switch I will pull on election day. Regardless of their unfair labelling of Bayoubuzz, I like both candidates and will continue to present both sides fairly and will personally make up my mind who to vote for on election day after all facts are presented. This is how I have operated on all elections for years and will do so for this and all elections this election season. Written by Stephen Sabludowsky, Publisher of Bayoubuzz.com
on 8/24/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Stephen I believe you try to be unbiased but the last paragraph in the article gives you away. I read the article you mentioned and agree with Sid's comments on that one. Mary Landrieu turns conservative when election time comes around. The revenue sharing bill was the Domenici-Landrieu because the Republicans were in power. It passed the Senate on Aug. 1, 2006 and the House Dec. 9, 2006. I believe that despite Ms. Landrieus claims to the contrary, that bill would not pass today with the Democrats in charge. Ms. Landrieu returns to the left side of the aisle after elections. Just check her voting record. As for Kennedy, perhaps he made a mistake in reporting this poll. Wouldn't be the first time a politician has done that but from my research, he seems to have been a very Blue Dog Democrat and not very liked by either the State or National Party. Seems that the Party left him as much as he left them. He seems much more conservative than Landrieu. We all have our opinions on issues and candidates. Bloggers are no exception and there is no reason they shouldn't. I admire the way you allow all of us to express our views on this forum. I would encourage everyone to examine each candidates voting record not just their rhetoric. IMHO if one is truly conservative they do not serve very well with leaders like Pelosi and Reid who cannot by any measure be called even moderate. They control the agenda and in most cases if you want to stay in their favor, you vote their way regardless of what you say during the election or even believe for that matter. Only around election time are you allowed to disagree with the leadership of the Democratic Party. We Republicans alas have not mastered the "fist" that keeps ours in check since Republicans are more likely to "cross the aisle". Written by Sharon
on 8/24/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
No one has asense of humor any more. Maybe if we would just lay off the meds a little. I do take exception to Steve's constant rants on why didn't Kennedy tell Jindal to get more involved in pre-election debates. Why not ask the Lt. Gov, your local sheriff, your senator why they didn't demand more debates? All I want is for Mary to quit hiding and debate Written by Sid
on 8/24/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
C'mon Sid. Don't be foolish. We already know you are supporting Kennedy and as you have said in your recent post. Tell us, are you working with his campaign? On this issue, it seems to me that you should look at how fair Bayoubuzz has been to both candidates and how Steve has supported Kennedy on issues that Sen. Landrieu has attacked Landrieu upon and how he has urged debates about which you have written. I personally have no clue whether Steve or whether if any of the many writers who frequent these boards wrote the post but it would not seem logical to me if Steve did so. If he wanted to speak out, he could have just written whatever he wanted to write in his column under his own name where people can agree or criticize his position. So I think your comment is absurd. In this case, based upon Kennedy's email, I think candidate Kennedy absolutely and purposefully mischacterized Bayoubuzz and Steve for Kennedy's own benefit. I also believe Steve has been very open and even-handed to all candidates. So, tell us, since you seemed to have played such an active role in trying to get the US Chamber of Commerce to not get involved in supporting Landrieu as you have written in your prior post, are you working for the Kennedy campaign? Cmon, Sid, are you? Written by Clarence
on 8/23/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Steve, did you write that last comment and sign it Bob? C'mon did you? Written by Sid
on 8/23/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
I think that what Kennedy did was really sleazy. I have read many of your columns, Steve. You are as hard on Mary Landrieu (who I am not voting for) as you are on Kennedy. You also present the positives of both candidates. That is why you have the credibility that you have because you take both sides in account and give the pros and cons on candidates. I find that very few media outlets do this and certainly no pure Internet sites does it. All of the other sites and much of the media seems to have an agenda. That is why I think Kennedy used your site because he knew you are credible and was trying to make Mary Landrieu look bad and bolster his position at your expense. Right now, I am not going to vote because I think Kennedy really is a sleeze since all you have been doing is being impartial and he was trying to destroy the poll using you. Real sleaze. Written by Bob
on 8/23/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Oh, Steve.... we know BayouBuzz is fair.... and brown-bag Kennedy is desperate. Doesn't matter who paid for the poll... Rasmussen is much more credible than Zogby. Written by KjunLady
on 8/22/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Sometimes people make mistakes.
