Gatsas offers ‘clean campaign’ pledge to Backus
By Brian Lawson, PolitickerNH.com ReporterState Sen. Ted Gatsas (R-Manchester) has proposed a "Clean Campaign Pledge" to his challenger Bob Backus (D-Manchester), which Backus calls a "gimmick."
The pledge would have the candidates agree to denounce third party activity, agree not to personally attack one another, have the candidates follow "an exemplary code of conduct" and force the candidates to have third parties honor the pledge.
"It's my hope that Bob will agree to run on issues based campaign rather than resorting to scare tactics, distortion and cheap campaign trickery" Gatsas said in a press release.
Backus told PolitickerNH.com that the pledge is a "gimmick to allow Ted Gatsas to buy this seat" and that he will run a campaign based on issues.
"I will be offering plans to tackle issues of the day like improving public transportation and home heating," he said. "Teddy has had years to address them and I still believe that his failure to do so is a very appropriate topic of this campaign. To me that's still campaigning on the issues."
Gatsas said that Manchester Republican Chairman Will Infantine, New Hampshire Republican Chairman Fergus Cullen and state Sen. Jack Barnes (R-Raymond), representative for the Senate Republican Victory PAC, have all signed the pledge. The pledge was also sent to New Hampshire Democratic Chairman Ray Buckley, Manchester Democratic Chairman Chris Pappas and state Sen. Sylvia Larsen (D-Concord) for the Senate Democratic Caucus.
Gatsas is facing Backus in re-match of their 2006 race in senate district 16.
Contributors
James Pindell
The year 2008 brought many fun memories for New Hampshire political junkies. From Hillary's tear in Portsmouth to the >
Dante Scala
Another county that moved toward the Democrats in the 1960s and 1970s was Carroll County. By the end of the ‘70s, Carroll was still strongly ... >
PolitickerNH Partners
Hot Topics
| Politicker INTERACTIVE | |
 |
Lawmaker Profile Follow the funding of your representatives |
 |
270 to Win See how Obama got to the magic number |
Most Active Stories
- Update: Guinta to speak outside Queen City
- House GOP group elects new chairs
- Obama supporters organizing pre-inaugural events
- Another former NH reporter heading to cover White House
- Shaheen sworn in to U.S. Senate
- NH Political Library elects new members
- Gregg, Shaheen pledge bipartisanship
- Hodes looking forward to working with Shaheen
- Bestani forms committee to explore congressional bid
- Shea-Porter plays down senate rumors
- Patrick Arnold announces bid for State House
- The short list for U.S. Attorney
- Prominent Dems to lead McCain group
- Stephen officially declares candidacy for Congress
- John Hutson to speak in Denver
- The Senate's newest candidate, Callahan, in race for the race's sake
- Merrill to run for state Senate
- Stephen continues discussing economy, trust
- Shaheen criticized at BAE Systems
- D’Allesandro says ‘stars aligned’ for expanded gaming
Quote of the Day
“In this era of crisis, it is important that all Americans step up in service to our country. In these next five years, the leading national issues will surely be the creation of new jobs, the economy, finance and financial regulation, energy, the environment, infrastructure and foreign policy,” Bestani said in a press release. “I have been privileged to have had a thirty-five year career which has given me high level experience in each of these complex fields. I think I would be remiss if I did not come forward and once again offer to serve our country.”
Bob Bestani (R-Newmarket) on why he might run for Congress in 2010.
Recent Press Releases
Syndicate
It IS a gimmick.
In half the political campaigns in this country, one candidate offers the other(s) a "clean campaign pledge", which nobody ever accepts. Why? Because the recipient of the offer can't win.
Accept and you've ceded the moral high ground, decline and you're planning a dirty campaign. That's exactly why candidates offer it, and why their opponents, no matter which party is on which side, should always ignore these offers.
Backus is right to call this a gimmick, because it is. If Backus had offered it to Gatsas, that would have been a gimmick too. If John Lynch offers it to Joe Kenney, it will be a gimmick. I say this because I don't want people to think I'm attacking Gatsas just for being a Republican.
Meanwhile, saying no to third party groups is easy for Gatsas to offer since he can easily run laps around Backus--or anybody else--in funding just by reaching into his own pocket.
so then
Backus plans on running a dirty campaign. I do not understand what the problem is. You can have a policy disagreement without devovling into Ray Buckley politics. Maybe Bob Backus can not do that. too bad Backus is just another Buckley puppet.
Alternate Reality
NH Republicans calling for a clean campaign? That's rich!
How embarrassing!
Teddy is looking like he is on the ropes. Teddy is begging for mercy! Teddy looks so weak that he has to send out such a release, c'mon, is he REALLY that afraid of his opponent? The last candidate to do this was Dave Gelinas against Andre Martel in 2004 and we all know how well that worked out! Only a candidate trying to find an excuse as to why he lost would expose himself to such ridicule.
The Real Trick
So now comes millionaire Teddy Gatsas (estimated worth 40m) in the guise of "clean campaigns" demanding that Bob Backus (despite the fact that nothing untrue was sent out by Bob or anyone else in the 2006 race) agree to a "clean campaign" by pledging that Bob not accept any help from his party or supporting groups.
Nice trick Teddy. A dumb one if you ask me but with Teddy knowing he is in for the race of his life I guess I have to give him credit to try.
If Teddy really wanted fairness he would pledge not to spend anymore than $5,000 of his own money.
denounce third party activity?
How is denouncing "all third party activity" a clean campaign?
The pledge is deliberately vague....
...which would allow Gatsas to claim that Backus (or vice versa, for that matter) is breaking the pledge and playing dirty for any number of otherwise harmless acts.
Specifically, point number two--"an agreement to not personally attack one another"--is susceptible of multiple interpretations. What constitutes an "attack" or a "personal attack"? If one candidate challenges the other's positions or motivations for those positions (e.g., by suggesting the influence of lobbying dollars), is that an "attack"? The recipient of the criticism can certainly claim that it is.
Even more questionable is point number three of the pledge--"denounce all third party activity." This seems to call for the candidates to attempt to silence any citizen or citizen's group (in addition to so-called "special-interest" groups) that wants to express its opinion on the issues. Strikes me as more than a bit undemocratic.
Post new comment