LAURA KNAPEREK (left) AND HER DEMOCRATIC STALKER (Knaperek campaign photo)
Tribune writer Gary Grado has reported this afternoon on a new low in Arizona politics – the partisan candidate stalker.
The state Democratic Party has hired someone named David to follow and videotape every step of Laura Knaperek, a Republican candidate for the East Valley’s Congressional District 5. David showed up outside a Paradise Valley home Wednesday where Knaperek was holding a private fundraiser, apparently hoping to catch someone like Jack Abramoff or Charles Keating going inside.
David deserves credit for being honest about who he was and what he was doing. And Knaperek has been classy in how she handled the situation, by offering David some relief from the sweltering heat and sending out a light-hearted news release about it today.
But Knaperek told me she finds the whole situation a little creepy and I have to agree. Do Democratic Party officials really think they are going to find out something relevant by stalking Republican candidates even at private homes, do they hope to intimidate the opposition, or a little bit of both?
I’m aware that journalists have been known to hang outside private fundraisers, but usually that’s because a very special donor is expected to drop by (like the president or Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger) or the candidate has been unavailable for comment. We don’t normally linger in private neighborhoods trying to identify every donor to walk through the door.
One other thought, just how much money does the state Democratic Party have to spend this year that it can hire someone to stalk a congressional candidate widely considered to be an underdog in a really crowded Republican primary? The answer to that question might be just as nerve-racking for Republicans across the state.
Twitter
Lee
Time to change the title of your blog. Seriously.
A new low in politics?
Finding out what candidates are saying, publicly and privately, is as old as campaigns themselves. It is not limited to Republicans or Democrats, in Arizona or anywhere else in the United States or, for that matter, other nations where Democracy is practiced.
It is certainly not new.
While the technology has changed, and websites like Youtube have allowed easy access to video information, tracking in one form or another has always been with us. For young volunteers (and in the cases of well funded campaigns and parties, staff), checking out what the other side is saying is as old as stuffing envelopes and phone banking.
Since my first involvement with campaigns over a decade ago, I have been asked to cover dozens of events held by opposition candidates, who in turn sent spies to ours.
Has it come to this? People who professionally cover politics and profess to inform the public know less about campaigns than any high schooler who has volunteered on a race for one week.
It’s the responsibility of every campaign to find out what the opposition is saying and, if they believe it contrary to the public interest, make it known.
Kudos to the Knaperek campaign, such as it is, for getting you guys to bite at something that’s so old and so commonly done. Laura has raised less than the average traditionally funded state senator, and it’s not fair that her campaign staff will probably not be paid for the political equivalent of selling ice to Eskimos.
On a side note, with a candidate (Knaperek) who publicly voted to make rape the same as littering, what is it the Democrats think this woman will say privately that is any crazier than that? That may be the real story here.
Breathlessly asking, for dramatic effect, “has it really come to this?” does not make it new, or newsworthy, or wrong.
I look forward to your next blog, perhaps on the advent of phone polling, signs made of chloroplast, or perhaps candidate literature mailed directly into the homes of voters.
First off, Democratic spy David wasn’t in Paradise Valley Wednesday to try to see what Laura Knaperek had to say to her supporters. He made no attempt to get into the fundraiser until she invited him in the house. He was there to record faces and license plates from the street, apparently in an attempt to identify potential donors. So the underlying point of the previous comment is simply off-base.
Besides, I can understand the rationale of tracking what candidates are saying. But I’m not sure about the morality of sneaking into someone’s private home under false pretenses. Just because it might happen a lot doesn’t make it right.
Secondly, I was aware that individual candidates assign campaign workers to follow and to record their opponents. But I never have heard of a state party assigning someone full-time to follow another party’s candidate when he or she haven’t even won a contested primary yet. That’s what I consider to be a new low.
Finally, the reference near the end of the previous post to Knaperek’s record as related to the crime of rape is a flat-out lie and reflects on the general lack of credibility of this anonymous commenter.
Snap! Le just slam dunked this commenter! Perhaps you should go crawl back into that hole you slithered out of “anonymous” commenter.
Nice going Le. His activities were a little bit creepy, as Knaperak said. And I’ve got to question the decision-making process of the state democratic party in sending an operative out to monitor a candidate who has already been beaten twice by Congressman Mitchell in the past. Strange indeed.
I think that the traction that Laura is getting will only help her campaign. She is an honest, hard-working, conservative that will be a great Congresswoman.
Peterson- Susan who is a Pro-Choice Rino has lost this race already and David Schweikert is 0 for 2 funning for Congress. So I guess that all 3 should just give up, right?
I believe that Harry is more than beatable than everyone thinks and that Laura will win the Primary.
Laura Knaperek’s response to this is so typically Laura. She is a kind hearted soul. She is the same way with her constituents, caring and helpful.
CD 5 will be very blessed to have her as our Representative. Go Laura!
Well said Le Templar and petersen! Typical moral relativity that is so common of liberals.
Laura must not be a threat, that’s why they are putting so much energy into finding out what she’s doing. Something tells me that Harry knows that Laura is a real contender.