I like the idea of Kate Hogan, Larry Bulman and Funiciello in a 3-way race. And I appreciate that he lobbied them to run. Oh well, one out of three ain't bad. Of course, they're all from Warren County. There are 11 other counties. But, that just goes to his point, that in a district as large as the 21st there are few natives stepping up to run. Mind you, I'd still like to see the most capable person elected over some yokel like me who has lived here for 57 years.
We run into some disagreement at, "I see Aaron Woolf as a privileged dilettante from NYC."
At the point in the election where this statement was made, Aaron Woolf was down by 18 points. I realize politics ain't beanbag and all. But, this seems a little unnecessarily petty. We've had many politicians from the founding fathers forward who would qualify as privileged. Pretty sure Frost would not have referred to Willard Romney as a privileged dilettante. The definition of ad hominem:
1 : appealing to feelings or prejudices rather than intellect
2 : marked by or being an attack on an opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions made
Better yet, from the urban dictionary:
An attack upon an opponent in order to discredit their argument or opinion. Ad hominems are used by immature and/or unintelligent people because they are unable to counter their opponent using logic and intelligence.
He also points out that Woolf only registered to vote in the district 5 days before declaring his candidacy. He declares Woolf to utter Democratic talking points and to have a generic candidacy. You know who else utters their party's talking points and has a generic candidacy? Elise Stefanik! Pretty sure she hasn't been registered to vote in the district all that long either.
But, when he gets to Stefanik, Frost expresses great affection. He really, really likes her. He states, "She's smart and able-and I like how hard she's working to get to know the district and its people. She's paying some dues." Not like that big city phony, Aaron Woolf.
I'm not going into the actual endorsement except to say thanks for the news that Matt is a
Truther Questioner. That bit hadn't hit my RADAR. Also appreciate the Chronicle interview from back in February. There was enough in there to keep me from considering to vote for him.
That reminds me: there was this constant drumbeat from the Chronicle for Woolf to do an interview with them back then. He did two. Stefanik never did one at all, that I saw. And what else I didn't see was the idea that she was ducking them, as was put forth for Woolf. It's different for Republicans.