Comments on: McKinney campaign shakes things up a bit

By: paulie cannoli

paulie cannoli — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 08:23:54 +0000

My point exactly.

Seeing Verney’s history in the Reform Party should not have inspired confidence.

Do some research on his history there.

By: Mike Theodore

Mike Theodore — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 06:39:33 +0000

Well, he was working under Perot, who had those millions.

By: paulie cannoli

paulie cannoli — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 06:30:32 +0000

With or without, you mean. Ref: Reform Party.

By: Mike Theodore

Mike Theodore — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 17:53:17 +0000

Well, Barr has people leading his staff, and see what happened with him. It’s not that you have someone leading, it’s who’s leading.
This Russ Verney (is that his name?) doesn’t seem to know much about campaigning without millions of dollars.

By: paulie cannoli

paulie cannoli — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 16:27:30 +0000

Actually, SKCM Curry. Duh me.

By: Peter Orvetti

Peter Orvetti — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 16:17:16 +0000

I suppose in a small campaign that could work out ok, but I think it’s a bad idea. The candidates should focus on getting votes, and there should be a head of staff to coordinate and decide on the internal stuff.

By: paulie cannoli

paulie cannoli — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 15:13:31 +0000

That would be my guess too.

By: Trent Hill

Trent Hill — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 14:49:08 +0000

If I had to guess, Peter, I’d say: McKinney decides.

By: Peter Orvetti

Peter Orvetti — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 12:24:43 +0000

So there is no single campaign manager to oversee operations? That seems unwise — who decides if the three campaign leaders disagree?