Knaperek has lost two races in the last, what?, 5 years. Granted, she is in a swing district, and the Mitchell loss is one thing. But going down against Ableser and Schapirra? Not exactly a sign of strength. It’s time for Knaperek to move on.

This seemed to be a conversation about potential candidates for the CD5 seat. On that basis, it is fair and reasonable to point out that Knaperek burned lots of bridges with her actions in the James-Pullen race. Maybe other people burned bridges with their actions too, but so what? That doesn’t change the fact that Knaperek burned a lot of bridges with folks that used to like her. Since she would be looking at an uphill race anyway, the loss of that portion of her old base is a mortal wound. She can’t win. The other folks Ann seems to be talking about don’t appear to be potential candidates for CD5.

I’d look for Laura to run for Corporation Commission or carpetbag into LD20 or something. Why she has to keep running for something is beyond me. Some sort of disease that afflicts politicians. Perhaps she feels that there are no other good candidates in the state so she needs to run to save us all? Maybe she just likes being elected to something? Who knows…

To the other issue; there is a clear and present divide concerning the ideology and leadership of Arizona Republicans. I would never consider myself to be a liberal or even a moderate. My views have been previously established. However, because of my public support for Lisa James I have been wrongly identified as not being a “good Republican”, yes that was the phrase, and others where admonished to steer clear or they too, would be labeled. The recent accounts of defining a profile that determines acceptable or unacceptable Republican status and then holding individuals up for measurement have become too numerous to list. The party chair race is just a very obvious symptom of the much larger ailment. If private individuals are not free to support the candidate that they believe best suits the job, then what is this all about anyway?

Some may choose not to participate in the current party organization based on the manner and style of leadership and then some have been isolated or pushed out. Should those people, their time, talent, and treasure be left out of the possibility of successful Republican efforts? Weekly, I receive countless numbers of requests for money and support, all from various Republican organizations. Do they compete for my dollars? You bet. Do they all offer a different pathway or my personal priorities to be identified and applied? Yes they do. Are they in opposition to the goals and objectives of the larger organization? Absolutely not. Recognizing a need and meeting that need is not the same as deriding others to establish your own superiority. If other efforts do emerge and it solidifies the base of support for the candidates and the party is it a bad thing because one person, or machine, cannot take credit for the success? I thought this was about a belief system and a purpose that was greater than our own egos. Maybe that is where I am wrong.

You say the time for this infighting to end was in January, and then you proceed to list perceived grievances as if to justify continuing the infighting. If turnabout is fair play then here it goes.

What about the James supporters who have pledged to “box Randy Pullen in”? What about the James supporters who are in the process of setting up a “shadow party” to run money through? Should I continue?

It runs both ways.

Laura Knaperak is a fine person and a solid candidate should she even consider exposing herself to further venom in the name of public service. And if you think she was so bad with her letter, perhaps the degree of counter measures just weren’t as overt. At least she had the guts to sign her name and be forthcoming with her position. To this day Pullen supporters are name calling and deriding solid conservatives who have worked hard for years in the party, based on the James support they voiced. This is not conjecture; I have first hand knowledge of negative repercussions toward James supporters by some who were very much a part of the Pullen camp and his current establishment.

If certain transgressions are worthy of forgiveness and others not, who decides? How do we know which is a forgivable sin? Is donating to Dems OK but supporting another Republican in an intra-party contest not OK? Is filtering PC appointments of James supporters OK but speaking your mind (with factual back-up) isn’t?

Enough already. When spite would motivate the desire to see a conservative lose to an incumbent liberal, that is when a reality check is in order and priorities have gotten tossed. When hard working and giving Republicans are shut out because they supported the unsuccessful candidate in a 4 point defeat, who is being served?

Lets hope she gets her butt kicked by Mitchell again if she chooses to run.

I would bet a brazilian dollars that Hugh Hallman is polling like crazy, but that he’ll decide in the end to run again for mayor for the 2008-2012 term. In 2012, redistricting will open up one or two more congressional districts, and the kids’ll be older. But you KNOW that Barbara Sherman is whispering in his ear that he should whack Harry NOW.

Knaperek has been bested not only by Mitchell, but also by Meg Burton Cahill and by a couple of whippersnappers barely old enough to not smoke in a bar. Plus, her whole gestalt screams “gorgon”. It would be fun to watch Harry mosey over her on his way to the finish line.

Nobody ever heard of Ogsbury. Nobody ever heard of Renzi, either, until…. (of course, he has a little TOO much name recognition now)

You need a moderate candidate that can pull those Indys back to the GOP, not someone who can consolidate a base that has no chance at taking Mitchell’s Tempe/ASU/Independent/GOP crossovers coalition of voters.

Whether or not this district swings back to Republicans also has a lot to do with the national mood, which is looking pretty bad for the GOP.

The district will definitely go GOP next election just like it did when JD beat Karan English after she beat Doug Wead two years prior. For Dems to win in that district, it is an anomoly. Keep in mind that 2008 will have essentially no statewide campaigns and no Senate race so all the money will be focused on key congressional races.

CD 5 is a fairly conservative district with a contingent of strong social Catholics (City of the Lord) in Tempe who vote staunchly on the life issue and pockets of evangelicals scattered throughout Scottsdale. Any candidate with experience in the fiscal arena will garnish the fiscal conservative vote.

On another CD race, stand by Ken Bennett. Your congressional district may be calling very soon. GOP donors be ready to write some checks for the special election!

For Knaperek, lots of things were said and done during the race for State Party Chairman, but the most dishonest and downright nasty attack was signed by Laura. We will remember that if and when she’s ever dumb enough to come around and ask us for support and help. The knock against her losing is that people will know (or learn) that she has already run head to head against Mitchell during a good GOP year and lost. That will create a perception that she cannot win so why support her?

Not sure about Sean Noble. I’ve heard he is LDS but the district really isn’t. The carpetbagger label might apply, but it might not. Raising money for a GOP incumbent who is in leadership (to the point where he ran for Majority Leader) and is reassured of re-election in a safe district is much different from convincing people to give to you in your own personal race. I’m also not sure how much, if any, credit Sean Noble deserves for John Shadegg’s fundraising success. Does Shadegg use professional fundraisers? Noble would be interesting, but if Shadegg is really facing a serious challenge as The New York Times says, perhaps Noble will stay with Shadegg? I don’t know what to think. Safe to say Noble does not have any sort of a base in the district. Another interesting angle is that most of the delegation (Shadegg, Kolbe, etc.) never really helped Hayworth during his career. Whether they felt jealous of his success or feared him in a Senate primary, or just plain didn’t like him, doesn’t really matter. Hayworth has lots of folks in that district who loved him and are still loyal to him. In a tough race last year, Shadegg and his people didn’t give much (if any) assistance to Hayworth. Noble will not get any help from Hayworth’s people!

AZGOPgal must have serious insider information. Because Mitchell seems to be raising money like someone who is running!

Agreed with Walter on the funding question and appreciate the clarification on the self-funding aspect of the $250,000…