Skip to comments.Kansas US Sen. Milton Wolf running against 47 year incumbent Pat Roberts in Republican Primary 08/05
Posted on 07/20/2014 7:04:41 PM PDT by Steelers6
A new poll shows conservative Dr. Milton Wolf (R-KS) surging in the Republican primary against incumbent Senator Pat Roberts.
The survey shows Roberts with only a 42-30 lead over Wolf, which is a stunning 21-point drop since the last poll taken three weeks ago!
Dr. Milton Wolf's message of limited government, personal freedom, economic liberty, and respect for the Constitution is resonating with voters.
Roberts is like the rest of those who have spent their entire adult lives in Washington. He doesn’t pay much attention to anyone without a lot of money in their pockets. He is quite shocked to have opposition and is running the same type of ads that Cochran used against McDaniel in Mississippi. He thinks that we are all a bunch of stupid hayseeds.
Roberts has been in the Senate since 1997, not 1967.
Why should these guys use the Senate our House as a nursing home? I.E., Robert Byrd and Strom Thurmond.
True enough, and in that regard the headline is misleading. However, he truth of the matter is that Roberts first went to DC as a Senate staffer in 1967, and has been an inside-the-beltway creature/fedgov titsucker since.
I have voted for and supported Senator Roberts for years. I am not happy with him refusing to debate Dr. Wolf. Also, I have had the opportunity to meet Dr. Wolf and though he’s not held elective office, I believe him to be a good candidate. I am also unhappy with Senator Roberts that he does not reside in Kansas (big negative). I will vote for Dr. Wolf. The Great OZ has spoken.
Not just misleading, it’s demonstrably false. The big problem I have with Wolf is exactly, “Who is this guy ?” He seems to be running on the “disgruntled cousin of Zero’s” schtick. That’s not enough for me. If we’re going to replace Roberts, do it with someone we know with some sort of public record or contribution to the cause. Kris Kobach, for example.
In any event, Roberts may have flaws, but he is not in the pantheon of premier RINO traitors (Cochran, Graham, McConnell, Lamar!) up this year that needed to be taken down at all costs.
“Roberts has been in the Senate since 1997, not 1967.”
He became a Member of Congress in 1981 (KS-01). He moved from the House to the Senate in 1997. This hog never left the trough, he just moved from the House Trough to the Senate Trough.
Perhaps if Roberts would debate Wolf, people would be able to compare and contrast their views a bit better.
I know that. But the headline is still a falsehood.
“In any event, Roberts may have flaws, but he is not in the pantheon of premier RINO traitors (Cochran, Graham, McConnell, Lamar!) up this year that needed to be taken down at all costs.”
So in the “Land of the Blind, The One-Eyed Man is King,” is that what you are saying? Kansas needs to sweep this turd out too. Just because he isn’t as big a POS as those you mention, doesn’t mean he should stay on. Turnover is healthy. At least we know that Wolf won’t be a “connected statist” coming out of the box. And if he turns out to not be as advertised, you need to get rid of him too, but at the earliest point that you can, not after allowing him to screw his constituents for half a lifetime! The time for “lifetime service” needs to be over immediately.
It’s not unusual for incumbents not to debate. Sometimes they’re not good at it. Again, with Wolf, he can make any claim to being to the right of Roberts, but what is his record ? I never heard of this guy before he decided to run. What has he done for the Conservative cause in Kansas (or anywhere else for that matter) ?
“I know that. But the headline is still a falsehood.”
And just how is that? Are you quibbling because part of the time was served in the House? Do you really think that that should make any difference? Or is it the fact that there isn’t a comma after Sen.? What’s your point?
It’s a valid point. I personally wish Roberts had hung it up this year. Unfortunately, Wolf remains too much an unknown. If Kobach or one of the House members (such as Pompeo) had stepped up to run, I’d have been a lot more enthusiastic for the challenger.
By your logic, I should just ignore your post, since I've been on FR longer, and everybody should just accept that my reply is better.
The quibble is that the headline states he has been in the U.S. Senate since 1967 (”47-year incumbent”), when he has only been in that body since 1997 as an incumbent. It’s a falsehood.
However, a change of a few words would make the headline true, as such:
“Kansas US Sen. Milton Wolf running against 47 year DC insider Pat Roberts in Republican Primary 08/05”
14 years as assistant to Sen. Frank Carlson & Rep. Keith Sebelius (1967-1980)
16 years in the U.S. House (1981-1997)
17+ years in the U.S. Senate (1997-
New Blood, bump.
It’s a simple question. As a supporter of his, you should be able to answer it. My whole point is you’re putting your faith in an unknown quantity with the hope that he MIGHT be better than Roberts. Again, we don’t know much of anything about this guy other than he’s NOT Roberts. For some folks, that’s enough. Not for me.
“Unfortunately, Wolf remains too much an unknown.”
But so was Roberts back when he ran for Congress. To be sure, there may well have been better vetted options for Kansas, but when the race starts, you run what you brung! Roberts is comfortable with the GOPe Senate “leadership.” We need, by every means possible, to chip away at the GOPe, or there is no reason to think that we can win against the RATs ultimately. These men do not have anything approaching any morals. They are not there to help the vast majority of their constituents. Undoubtedly, with time, Wolf may well fall into that category as well and it is then he should be sent on his way.
Roberts is endorsed by Kansans for Life. I’ll vote for him. For some reason I don’t trust Wolf.
My whole point is that you're expecting a healthy defense of ideas and vigorous debate from other FReepers, but you don't expect the same from your candidate. If Roberts has so much going for him, he ought to stand up and defend his record. His failure to do so makes for very poor optics in a time when people are getting fed up with insiders with a sense of entitlement to the seats they've been elected to fill.
Agree 100%. Time for the old guard to go.
Actually, Roberts wasn’t an unknown when he ran in 1980 for the House. He was the leading candidate and heir apparent to the retiring incumbent, Keith Sebelius. I’d dare say folks knew well about Roberts more so than Wolf now.
You’re not going to catch me disagreeing with you on dumping the party establishment, but I want something assuring me we’re going to have a reliable foot soldier for the cause.
Remember, Wolf is the challenger. Roberts’ record is on the record. He’s playing it the same way many incumbents do, not wanting to give more exposure to the challenger (yes, it’s frustrating, but he’s not the only one to do it. Many good members and bad members alike often refuse to debate).
I again find it odd that no one here yet can outline anything substantive about Wolf, and this has been a problem for months since he declared. I do give a lot of attention to challengers (especially in these times when so many need to be ousted from power), but there’s nothing that stands out about him that says “this is the guy that MUST be elected.” Many of the challengers to the worst offending RINO incumbents DID have something that spelled it out, but Wolf just doesn’t seem to (and playing up his relations to Zero is simply bizarre).
“Youre not going to catch me disagreeing with you on dumping the party establishment, but I want something assuring me were going to have a reliable foot soldier for the cause.”
At this point in time, I’m fresh out of “assurances” about anyone! I’ve been disappointed by the best of them. When Arnold the Awful ran for governor here in California when we recalled Gray Davis, I wanted to have Tom McClintock replace him. But when Arnold walked in and stole the show, I was pragmatic and voted for him. Talk about a dumb SOB. The only thing he did was knock out a kid with his maid!
All Roberts needs is an ad with Bob Dole endorsing him, and all he can expect is victory. KS people are incumbency-friendly too.
He’s not a turd, AT ALL, he’s a conservative Senator. WOLF, may be a turd, can’t know for sure because he’s a nobody with no record.
These are not the droids you’re looking for. I suggest you turn you attention to the race is in Tennessee.
Hey, I was right here on FR 11 years ago warning the alarm bells on that fiasco known as the Austrian Socialist. I knew he would be dreadful, only that he exceeded my expectations in execrableness. I said if McClintock wasn’t to be elected, better just to keep Off-White Davis, since Ah-nold would end up making Davis look like a Conservative.
That’s why I’m always warning folks that when you’re wanting to replace somebody with someone else, NEVER say the phrase, “ANYONE but...” because you’re likely to be in for a shock. There’s always someone worse than the incumbent, especially if you don’t know much about the challenger.
Try telling that to Sheila Frahm.
“Thats why Im always warning folks that when youre wanting to replace somebody with someone else, NEVER say the phrase, ANYONE but... because youre likely to be in for a shock. Theres always someone worse than the incumbent, especially if you dont know much about the challenger.”
So just what is it about Wolf that puts a burr under your saddle? That seems to be where you are with this issue. You know what you will get with Roberts. He doesn’t give a $hit about Kansas, other than kissing your butts right now so he can keep his seat. As you say, with Wolf, there is no demonstrable track record, but are there issues on which you disagree with his stated positions? And if so, what are the specifics?
Well, I’m not in Kansas, so it’s not like I have a say... I’ve basically said repeatedly that Wolf simply hasn’t met the threshold to support him beyond “I’m not Roberts.” I don’t much care what they say, people will say anything to get elected, I want to know what this guy has done. Nobody has ever answered that question here.
“WOLF, may be a turd, cant know for sure because hes a nobody with no record.”
So does that make him “ineligible” for public office in your view?
“Well, Im not in Kansas, so its not like I have a say...”
Me neither. I’m just interested is seeing what it takes to get people to vote for new blood when it’s so obvious that a change is long overdue. It’s either that, or the “interested parties” here on FR who seemingly do live in KS, for whatever reason, still “love” Pat Roberts. Here we are, part of a blog that is supposed to be in favor of Constitutional Government, and yet there are many who are unwilling to part with “political leadership” that by it’s very existence, mocks the intent of the founding fathers. Thus far, all I’ve heard from them is that “Pat deserves our continued loyalty.” I guess it makes the case for the notion that all those in congress deserve replacement except my guy, he’s the lone member who should stay on.
Like I said, I tend to lean more towards dumping incumbents, but not just for dumping’s sake. If someone known in Conservative circles or with an established reputation, something, anything, or even friends of those folks who could vouch for the challenger... it’s not happening in this particular contest.
It’s a perfectly simple question, “Who IS Milton Wolf ?” Some are satisfied with the answer, “He is not Pat Roberts.” I and many others aren’t. Milton’s cousin, Zero, ain’t Pat Roberts, either, and we ain’t gonna support him in a GOP primary.
I appreciate challengers to tired incumbents, I do, but I want to know who they are, what they’ve done, and have others (known individuals) who can vouch for their character, integrity, et al. Talk is cheap these days, anyone can say anything to get elected (look at the fools who bought the lie that Willard was a Conservative based on his rhetoric and promises, none of which ever matched his record of leftism in Massachusetts). If they don’t walk the walk, anything else doesn’t matter.
Would you vote for your doctor if he posted a video of your colon-oscopy on you-tube?
Not necessary, but it certainly doesn’t make him someone I’d back over a proven conservative Senator who doesn’t need to be removed at all.
Proven conservative incumbent > Cipher
I don’t care how long Roberts has been there, he’s no Thad Cochran, he’s in top third of Senate Republicans I’d say, that’s not something to throw away for some random guy who thinks Robert’s has been there too long.
OTOH, Lamar Alexander has been there only since 2003, and HE needs to GO.
Yes, he shares DNA with BHO!
And still we wonder why things never change.
I again find it odd that no one here yet can outline anything substantive about Roberts.
Well you know for a fact that Roberts does not meet your requirement, so what is your suggestion?
Roberts’ record is there. What is Wolf’s ? Every response in support of Wolf is boiled down to, “He’s not Roberts.” Tell me what Wolf’s record is.
That was my quote, not Vette’s.
Works for me. You people could have learned something from your flirtation with Sibelius, but guess not.
Voting for someone simply because they’re not someone else is naïve.
Voting for someone in the hope that they will change for the better is naive.
Effective, how ? You’re betting on an unknown quantity. It’s not logical, but reckless. Look at the country voting for Carter, Clinton & Zero because they weren’t the Republican incumbent (”hoping” things would “change” for the better). If Wolf had a record (a la McDaniel in MS), it would be a lot easier to support him.
We already tried it your way when Reince Prebius became Chairman of the RNC because "he's not Michael Steele" and "Steele MUST go" so "anybody" would magically, somehow, be better.
Well, Prebius was NOT better once he got in. In fact, many conservatives now realize he's probably worse.
You people could have learned something about "anyone would be better" mentality from your flirtation with Prebius, but guess not.
If the GOPe insists on palling around with the Amnesty pimps and Gay lobby then there is little hope. Prebius was a stick in the eye from the very people you seem to think we should hold on too.
Maybe you should start building a golden calf.