Yesterday morning I received the GO-NH voter's guide, in which they've rated candidates on RKBA. Regular readers will recall that I spent 7+ months trying to get candidates to answer the Gun Rights Questionnaire and rating them. Some readers may even recall that GO-NH Prez Kopacz expressed an interest in being provided with the candidates' responses for rating purposes of their own. So much for that idea. I knew there was a problem when GO-NH wouldn't even link to my GRQ project.Carl Bussjaeger explains why he's annoyed. With details.
So I expected to be annoyed when the GO-NH guide came out. I am. [More]
Imagine that. "Pro-gun" candidates avoiding taking an unequivocal stand on the right of the people to keep and bear arms...and being rewarded anyway.
8 comments:
Jack Kimball would have no reason NOT to answer it. so I can only conclude he didn't get it.
I'm wondering which e-mail he used to send that. he has one he doesn't monitor anymore (the @granitestatepatriots.com one)
he is 100% pro-gun. I've been shooting with him. he was part of the pro-HCR6 group with state rep Dan Itse...and when that went down it was one of the reasons he decided to run for governor.
I used the web contact form on Kimball's campaign website. If he isn't monitoring that, then he has voter accessibility problems. I attempted to contact him twice, with no luck.
People I never heard of, candidates in other districts I never tried to reach were able to discover, answer, and send me GRQ responses. Kimball didn't, although he was able to notice the NRA affiliate.
So: Is Kimball pro-RKBA, but oblivious to voters? Or does he cater to the NRA at the expense of voters? Could he be incapable on monitoring his owwn website contact form? Do his campaign staffers insulate him against incovenient questions from voters?
Allen, since you know him, while he ignores me, how about asking him to explain himself to me and my readers?
Also, to further clarify: Kimball's campaign, while not deigning to answer the GRQ, did use my contact attempt to add my email address to a campaign spam list originating from "info@jackforgov.com" (which I also tried unsuccessfully to contact).
I contacted him at the jack@jackforgov.com address all the time. usually he gets back to me in a few days. and not a staffer either, it's him.
the only "contact form" on the website is a "Volunteer to help" form. http://new.jackforgov.com/contact-2/
the only reason jack would not have answered this survey is he never got it.
from your website, sir.
"The problem with that claim is that I used Kimball's own campaign website contact form and the very email address he used to spam me after I sent him the GRQ"
so, which was it? the non-existant contact form, or his e-mail address?
the story keeps changing here.
don't get me wrong, we're on the same side here. I would have preferred that he had sent the form back to you. he had no reason to not send it if he got it, and I know him well enough that he would ahve answered it i na heartbeat.
but if he never got it..how can you blame him?
I noticed the volunteer form Kimball's site directs you to when you click on the "Contact" tab from his home page had a "-2" after it, so curious, I tried the same url sans the appendage.
You can try it, too.
http://new.jackforgov.com/contact/
Why they disconnected that is anyone's guess-it could just be a tech glitch or indication of a site redesign.
Mr. Bussjaeger does not deserve the insinuation that accompanies "which was it?...the story keeps changing here."
Q.E.D. that a form which is NOW "nonexistent" is not his doing, and it took me less than a minute from reading your comment to verify and document that.
You admit, Allen, "we're on the same side here." And you can make sure the form does not come in under Kimball's radar.
Please work with Carl to elicit a response to the questionnaire in that heartbeat.
"the story keeps changing here."
No, it doesn't. I used the contact form to send the GRQ (since no other address could be found at the time). The Kimball campaign then spammed my address (which they received via the contact form) from the "info" address. Not caring for spam, I attempted to contact the campaign via the originating spam address, as I said. For the record, they never replied to that either.
"don't get me wrong, we're on the same side here."
Are we? I'm pro-RKBA, and spent months trying to get all candidates, regardless of party affiliation or lack thereof, to answer the GRQ. I made multiple attempts to contact the Kimball campaign in pursuit of that goal. I know they got my messages because they spammed me.
You on the other hand, make excuses for a non-responding politician, and imply I'm changing my story or lying.
Why would I do that? I have no party agenda. In this project, I've made positive and negative observations of candidates of at least three parties (and some apparent independents). I don't care what party an individual is in, some long as he or she is pro-freedom (and pro-RKBA in this specific case). Any candidate who failed to respond to contact attempts got a down-check from me: if he won't respond when he wants my vote, why would I expect him to respond once safely settled in office?
As it happens, I got so tired of being ignored by politicians like Kimball that I changed my policy to a single attempt. Kimball got more chances than many others (who managed to respond). And then there are the folks who answered the GRQ without being contacted by me at all; that just makes non-responders look that much worse.
Again: You claim to be able to contact Kimball, while I am ignored. Use that ability to get him to explain himself to me and my readers. But if his explanation is that he "didn't get it", he should be prepared to explain why he didn't get something that his campaign clearly received. Staffers who insulate him from inquiring voters, whether by policy or incompetence, are a bad thing.
I'll admit I haven't heard of your blog , quiz, or you for that matter until yesterday. if I had, I would have put it down in front of him myself. so, we ARE on the same side here. don't confuse my questions of "where did you send it?" with an accusation of incomptence or malice. they are neither. when he closed down the Granite State Patriots and the @granitestatepatriots.com address, to run for governor, I had difficulty contacting him myself and I thought you had the same problems.
instead, you accuse him of being a liar. "Oh, wait; politician: of course he can lie."
that's accusing Jack of malice when you have no proof of that.
I'll send it to him myself. it is primary day today so odds are he'll be a little busy.
Post a Comment