The art and craft of winning a campaign is often subjective.

Seems to me we have two issues here:

(1) How do Republicans win back the 19th?

(2) How do we prevent the lack of integrity that plagued the 23rd Congressional District from repeating itself in the 19th or anywhere else?

I find that sometimes political troublemakers want to lobby an issue so manipulatively that they (a) start believing their clippings, and (b) want everyone else to believe them too.

It doesn’t mean it is true.

The voters in the 19th Congressional District of New York are not “moderate” nor have they embraced the support of abortion rights in any majority in the past. Therefore, it would make sense from a political science perspective not to feed sugar to a diabetic.

Then again, I know of some political sweeteners that substitute for these beliefs — but sugarcoating it usually kills the patient before Election Day.

If Nan Hayworth wanted to win, she never would have accepted money from a healthcare PAC already giving 81% of its monies to Democrats.

She also would have articulated a pro-life stand without mumbling so intolerably that everyone during her “listening tour” wouldn’t have raised doubts about her commitment to more than one issue.

The tangent on green initiatives and her only recent NRA membership set off all the alarms long before the abortion issue was mentioned.

Eventually, one’s skin gets so uncomfortable being scripted that the voters get as uncomfortable. That is what happened to Nan Hayworth. The NRCC likes her money but the political diabetes on both sides of this debate can only poison the 19th later on.

We should find a candidate who reflects the beliefs of those who reside in the 19th, not force the beliefs of troublemakers with an agenda.

I would dare say that the pro-life sentiments on this blog reflect the district — and the pro-abortion sentiments reflect people who are out of touch.

Hayworth won’t win. Worse, the Republicans will alienate their base.

That’s bad politics.

Also, our viewpoints aren’t so different, you know. It’s just a matter of my having very strong feelings about some fellow Putnam residents who are still angry about a certain candidate’s having exited and proceed to take it out on what is (so far, at least) our only hope to put someone reasonably conservative in Congress.

I also wouldn’t label you a no-name in the first place, and you seem to be more about commentary than claiming to have a scoop. Logic and reason are accessible to all; facts have to be made so, which is where credentials start to matter.