Another Candidate Jumping into the Ring?

World Wrestling Entertainment CEO Linda McMahon is “seriously considering” a bid for the GOP nomination for U.S. Senate, according to the Washington Post’s The Fix blog:

A source close to McMahon said that she is “seriously considering” the race and touted her as a serious candidate based on a résumé that includes leading a $1 billion publicly traded company based in Stamford, Conn. The source also noted that McMahon would be willing and able to spend significant sums on the race, an x-factor that could make her competitive in a primary against former representative Rob Simmons, former ambassador Tom Foley and state Sen. Sam Caliguri.

Is McMahon ready to rumble – or rather, are Rob Simmons, Tom Foley, Peter Schiff, and Sam Caligiuri ready for a cage match with McMahon in the ring?

McMahon was appointed to the Connecticut State Board of Education by Gov. Jodi Rell earlier this year, which raised some eyebrows.  But as a successful female CEO of a billion dollar company, McMahon could run as a business professional at a time when government seems to be neither businesslike nor professional.

With 280 days remaining until Connecticut Republicans assemble in Hartford next year to nominate a U.S. Senate candidate, the possibility of yet another candidate highlights just how fluid the race is.  Whatever happens, it is assured to be very interesting, at least.

Update: Linda McMahon speaking at the 2000 Republican National Convention:

Advertisements

48 responses to “Another Candidate Jumping into the Ring?

  1. Rell helped create this Frankenstein by appointing her to the school board.

    Anyone see Dinardo’s dig at Rell over the $28 million Brookfield quarry lawsuit? Lender at the Courant got the story:

    The chairwoman of the state Democratic Party asked Gov. M. Jodi Rell on Thursday to explain the role she played years ago, as lieutenant governor, when she met with transportation officials on the routing of a Route 7 bypass through a quarry in her hometown of Brookfield.

  2. Anyone see Dinardo….?

    Exactly – *has* anyone see Dinardo?

    Are the PETP people (People for the Ethical Treatment of Plastics) still chasing her around?

    The poor dear desperately needs a gift card for Talbots.

    Adam, could you handle that for her?

  3. The poor dear desperately needs a gift card for Talbots.

    She needs much more than that.

  4. Oh please please please do, Ms. McMahon! Is DraftLinda.com up and running yet?

  5. Bruce Rubenstein

    Will Ms McMahon be assisted in her campaign appearances by the very skimpily dressed female WWE wrestlers?

  6. This will be on interesting race. Will there be debates?

  7. Will Ms McMahon be assisted in her campaign appearances by the very skimpily dressed female WWE wrestlers?

    Either that or this guy… Talk about “voter intimidation”!

  8. This will be on interesting race. Will there be debates?

    Yes. They should look something like this

  9. She needs much more than that.

    A decade or so in charm school wouldn’t hurt either I guess.

    Will Ms McMahon be assisted in her campaign appearances by the very skimpily dressed female WWE wrestlers?

    I would suspect her daughter Stephanie to take an active interest in her campaign should Linda run.

  10. Wow, a candidate more pathetic than Peter Schiff. This campaign gets worse every week.

  11. AndersonScooper

    The CT GOP is an utter joke.

    Ms. McMahon fits right in with Schiff, Caligiuri, Merkle, Novak, Boaz, Daly, Bernier, Fedele, Gregory, Visconti, etc.

    And someone told me that unlike DiNardo, Chris Healy actually gets paid for his miserable results. Anyone know how much? (Because he’s got to be the most over-paid clown in all of Connecticut.)

  12. The CT GOP is an utter joke.

    Really?

    We didn’t lay anyone off earlier this year and considering how you guys mopped the floor with us last November, I think it’s rather amazing that you folks came up short.

    Further – We don’t have to cringe every time our Chair speaks.

    Anyone know how much?

    We pay Chris just a little under a million a year; sometimes if after I tithe, er donate to the party he let’s me carry his briefcase for him.

  13. We didn’t lay anyone off earlier this year and considering how you guys mopped the floor with us last November, I think it’s rather amazing that you folks came up short.

    We pay Chris just a little under a million a year; sometimes if after I tithe, er donate to the party he let’s me carry his briefcase for him.

    Sort of tells the whole story — Democrats don’t want to pay people who succeed, Republicans insist on paying people who fail.

    By the way, as you’re someone who threw multiple hissy fits over how unchivalrous it was for someone to not remove their hat indoors, I’m surprised you can so casually mock the appearance of a woman just because she happens to be a Democrat.

  14. AndersonScooper

    IOKIY ACR.

    Republican sons of welfare moms are allowed special rules.

    Does anyone know where to find Healy’s salary? It must be public.

  15. Weicker Liker

    Anderson….

    CT GOP files monthly reports with FEC.

    http://www.fec.gov

    Might be good place to start.

  16. Ms. McMahon fits right in with Schiff, Caligiuri, Merkle, Novak, Boaz, Daly, Bernier, Fedele, Gregory, Visconti, etc.

    You must really hate Al Franken being a senator, right?

  17. AndersonScooper

    Hey, everyone loves a winner. Unless your Bill O’Reilly!

    Franken, btw, is simply brilliant. A true genius. Did you ever watch the early days of Saturday Night Live?

  18. Hey, everyone loves a winner. Unless your Bill O’Reilly!

    I don’t own a Bill O’Reilly…

  19. Scoop, Franken unfortunately had his funniness amputated back in the early 90’s, when he started writing truly unreadable (I know, I tried!) books about politics.

    She’d be an OK candidate, she certainly would get a ton of attention from the media.

    A winner? Maybe not. But it would be interesting. As if it isn’t already.

    For all you non-GOPers out there, I have no horse in the race, but I think Simmons is the favorite at this juncture.

  20. AndersonScooper

    Simmons might be Vincent’s conventional wisdom pick, but he’s also in third place in the money race, (and fading fast btw.)

    Put your money on Tom Foley, the guy who says he’s ready to run a $10-12 Million campaign.

  21. I know nothing about her but what is in the short article in the OP. That she sits on the state board of education doesn’t bode well for her small government credentials.

    She’s rich, so she will make this race even more expensive should she decide to run. Current top fundraising candidate Peter Schiff has estimated it will take $20 Million.

  22. Also, here’s a clip of Kane giving Linda McMahon the tombstone piledriver:

    Kane (Glenn Jacobs) is a Peter Schiff supporter.

    Haha

  23. Simmons, Caliguri, Foley, McMahon or Schiff, it doesn’t matter. Thanks to Barack Obama and Chris Dodd, anyone of them will win. It’s 1984 again in Connecticut.

  24. Turned off my Blackberry for a day and missed one of the best stories of the year – no the decade – Linda McMahon for US Senate. I had a chance to look into her background a bit when Rell nominated her for the State Board of Education. Some truly amazing stuff.

    We’ll leave some of the best stuff for another day… but here are a couple of tidbits.

    As some of you know, her very successful fundraiser for Rell earned her a place on the state board of education. But here are a few of her other less well know donations….

    Their recent contributions also included:

    Chris Shays: $5,000
    Joe Lieberman $2,000

    and then to make sure she plays the field…

    Democratic Congressional Campaign Com: $15,000
    Republican Leadership Council: $11,500

    and the list goes on and on….

    But the best stuff can be found in Congressman Henry Waxman’s Congressional report on steroid use. In fact – the Democrats should hope and pray McMahon gets into this race.

  25. Oh…if you’ve seen the picture of her Greenwich mansion (I think you can google it if you haven’t do remember that the WWE Board of Directors is made up of close friends of the McMahons and includes Lowell P. Weicker, Jr. who has been on the board since board since 1999 and is Chairman of the Compensation Committee.

  26. meanwhile, to the issue raised by ACR about layoffs….

    STAMFORD, Conn., Jan 09, 2009 (BUSINESS WIRE) —

    World Wrestling Entertainment(R)today announced a 10% reduction of its staff across all areas of its global operations. This reduction will result in annual savings of approximately $8 Million in compensation and benefit costs. Additionally, the Company will incur an approximate $3 Millionone-time restructuring charge in the first quarter of 2009.

    “These efficiencies will help position the Company for the long term, by placing it in a stronger, more flexible position,” said Linda McMahon, CEO, WWE. “With these actions, we believe we can execute our key strategic initiatives, including our digital strategy and international expansion, in a more profitable manner.”

    [at the same time the WWE was one of the largest users of the CT movie tax credit program…. so Linda was taking CT taxpayer money while laying off Connecticut taxpayers…

    Nice move Linda!

  27. meanwhile, to the issue raised by ACR about layoffs….

    LOL – he was talking about the gop & dem state central committee offices genius, not every “republican” or “democrat” company.

  28. yah….but the humor of her taking CT taxpayer funds and then laying off CT taxpayers was such a typical republican approach that I couldn’t resist using his comments as a “bridge”. ACR, I’m sorry if I was a little “liberal” in the effort…

  29. yah….but the humor of her taking CT taxpayer funds and then laying off CT taxpayers was such a typical republican approach that I couldn’t resist using his comments as a “bridge”. ACR, I’m sorry if I was a little “liberal” in the effort…

    If the Democratic Speaker of the House spearheads a film tax credit through the Legislature – knowing full well that it will go to companies that sometimes have to lay people off during lousy economic times – and the inevitable happens, how is that a “typical republican approach”?

  30. If the Democratic Speaker of the House spearheads a film tax credit through the Legislature – knowing full well that it will go to companies that sometimes have to lay people off during lousy economic times – and the inevitable happens, how is that a “typical republican approach”?

    Dude, wait… what?

    It’s a typical Republican approach because she is a Republican and it’s something that she, as a CEO, not only did but bragged about.

    And the Democratic legislature (minus the brain-dead Jim Amann) are trying to stab the stupid film tax credit in the heart. It’s biggest defender at the moment is Jodi Rell.

  31. And the Democratic legislature (minus the brain-dead Jim Amann) are trying to stab the stupid film tax credit in the heart. It’s biggest defender at the moment is Jodi Rell.

    In what bizarro world, “dude”?

    Rell is trying to limit the tax credit (the current proposal, IIRC, is a $25 million cap); an entire rogue’s gallery of Dems have streamed into news conferences during the session to piss and moan about her original proposal to cap it at at even l0wer level.

    BTW, it’s is a contraction for it is, not a possessive.

    Other than that … nice effort, Sammy.

  32. The film tax credit was stupid. It allowed the legislature and the governor to pick a favorite industry at the expense of all other industries. Sure, people took the money while it was being offered, but that doesn’t mean that they’re permanently going to locate here to shoot movies. Governments do a lousy job choosing industries to favor.

    As far as the WWE laying off workers in a recession, what’s so odd about that? I just checked their most recent financials. Total revenues were actually up, from $129.66 million in last year’s second quarter to $138.79 million this year. However, I don’t know how many people they’ve added recently, and if they added a lot of people anticipating even more growth. I also really don’t know much about the way their business works: for instance, do they pre-sell their TV packages, and now they are coming up for renewal and will be at much lower prices than previously? I could probably figure out all this stuff, I’m just not motivated enough to do so.

    Most recent quarter report for WWE is available at http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1091907/000120677409001527/wwe_10q.htm

  33. Back to Linda McMahon, Senate Candidate extraordinaire, for a moment.

    When she was nominated for the position on the State Board of Education her official resume (posted on the WWE website) and Rell’s press release said she had a degree in English…

    Ah, but oops, when a reporter checked into it —- it turned out that here bachelors was in French….she said her resume and public comments were a mistake…and she changed her bio accordingly… as you can now see if you go to her bio on the WWE website.

    Lying about your resume – priceless!

  34. Lying about your resume – priceless!

    Oh? Like Tom Harkin?

    Harkin has gotten elected and re-elected, in part, by claiming to have served in Vietnam. During his service in the Navy, Harkin told Washington Post reporter David Broder, “One year was in Vietnam. I was flying F-4s and F-8s on combat air patrols and photo-reconnaissance support missions. I did no bombing.” But as the late Senator Barry Goldwater (R.-Arizona) was first to notice, nothing in Harkin’s military service file showed that he ever served in Vietnam. Challenged by Goldwater, an Air Force General, to explain why he was awarded neither the Vietnam Service Medal nor the Vietnam Campaign medal (decorations given to everyone who served in the Southeast Asian theater), Harkin changed his story. Harkin claimed that he instead had flown combat sorties over Cuba during the 1960s.

    This was another Harkin lie. Harkin actually served as a ferry pilot who flew aircraft in need of repair between the Philippines and his base in Atsugi, Japan. Harkin at last acknowledged that he never flew air patrols in Vietnam. He began describing himself in speeches as “a Vietnam era veteran.”

  35. The importance of Linda McMahon getting into this seems potentially big to me.

    The more the field gets divided up, the fewer votes needed to win. That helps either of the two candidates I’d love to support in the general – Caligiuri or Schiff.

    Schiff is easy – he starts at 5-10% of the general and tries to work his way up… it’ll be extremely difficult for him to do so… but it’s unlikely he loses any of those votes.

    Caligiuri has two issues – if people know him, he has the Roe vote sewn up. And considering I’ve heard that’s up to 1/3 of a GOP primary vote… Sammy could very well get that 1/3 and win a five-way race. The unknown for Sammy is if Foley / McMahon / Schiff espouse similar views. If they do and they can convince the primary voters of that… then they could win… and the money makes the difference. But frankly, Sammy is making the rounds – quietly. And so I expect that likely GOP primary voters across the state will learn of his actual votes and support him… regardless of the what other candidates say… because actual votes do matter.

    I still think Sammy will win the primary, if he continues making the rounds to all the RTCs, gun clubs, etc. And now that I’m thinking about it… when there were the votes on Plan B… I think Sammy was speaking at all those rallies… and that says to me he’s already seen throughout the state as an opponent of Roe.

    Have there been any GOP primary polls yet? Quinnipiac could do something using a variety of low turnout election results around the state – referenda, 2006 GOP primary in the 1st CD, my 2006 GOP primary, etc. It wouldn’t be perfectly scientific. But it could certainly give a good glimpse of where everyone currently stands.

  36. Oh? Like Tom Harkin?

    Wow, good thing he’s not running for anything in Connecticut.

    Rell is trying to limit the tax credit (the current proposal, IIRC, is a $25 million cap); an entire rogue’s gallery of Dems have streamed into news conferences during the session to piss and moan about her original proposal to cap it at at even l0wer level.

    I stand corrected — my legislators are trying to stab it in the heart, as are liberal interest groups. Looking up the details, the Dem budget did scale it back, but less than Rell’s proposal.

    BTW, it’s is a contraction for it is, not a possessive.

    And “rogue’s gallery” should be “rogues gallery” or “rogues’ gallery.” Plus, the word “lower” customarily doesn’t have any numbers in it. So stop being such a douche, dude.

  37. Caligiuri has two issues – if people know him, he has the Roe vote sewn up. And considering I’ve heard that’s up to 1/3 of a GOP primary vote… Sammy could very well get that 1/3 and win a five-way race.

    I think it’s unlikely to remain a 5 way race by primary time, though. And 64% of Connecticut Republicans think abortion should be legal all or most of the time. So if it’s down to 3 people and 2 of them don’t take the hard line on abortion that Caligiuri does, then that issue loses its impact.

    I still think Sammy will win the primary, if he continues making the rounds to all the RTCs, gun clubs, etc.

    S. B. No 728. Caligiuri introduced that bill increasing penalties on people who commit a crime with a firearm without a license or with an unregistered gun. That means he supports permit requirements and firearms registration. That’s not going to go over real well in the gun rights group I belong to.

    regardless of the what other candidates say… actual votes do matter.

  38. And “rogue’s gallery” should be “rogues gallery” or “rogues’ gallery.”.

    Maybe so, maybe no. But let us say you’re right for the sake of CLP harmony.

    So stop being such a douche, dude.

    There’s that hope and change, shining through.

  39. 64% of Connecticut Republicans think abortion should be legal all or most of the time.

    Last I knew it was 68% in some instances.

    The majority of Pro-Lifers, including Peter Wolfgang who is rather clearly the leading voice for that group; tend to agree with the majority of scenarios I put forth the 1st time I met him.

    Further – abortion is a single issue and not of a Constitutional nature such as the 2nd.

    The GOP can not afford the “luxury” of squabbling over anything as that’s a recipe for failure.

  40. My point about Roe was that in a race with a lot of candidates, Sam (and Schiff for the libertarian strain of Rs) will have certain voters that will not sway (I don’t see such support among the other three candidates… though Simmons will have many personal friends in the 2nd CD… and friendship can be more important than issues)… and those are also voters who will almost certainly go to the polls without any prompting.

    If candidates drop out, then it changes again. But the point of this post was the impact of Linda entering the fray.

    And while CT is a blue state, it’s a referendum on Dodd. And I don’t believe many general election voters will say no to someone because of his/her stance on Roe. A number of issues could move significant voters. But Roe is only one issue.

  41. My point about Roe was that in a race with a lot of candidates, Sam (and Schiff for the libertarian strain of Rs) will have certain voters that will not sway (I don’t see such support among the other three candidates… though Simmons will have many personal friends in the 2nd CD… and friendship can be more important than issues)… and those are also voters who will almost certainly go to the polls without any prompting.

    Does anyone know if McMahon is pro-choice? If so, her entry would clearly cut against Simmons. I wonder if she entered the race at Rell’s urging.

  42. Does anyone know if McMahon is pro-choice? If so, her entry would clearly cut against Simmons. I wonder if she entered the race at Rell’s urging.

    Most Republicans won’t vote on that issue alone, the only way it might be relevant is in a very tight contest.

    Most of us will vote according to who we suspect has the best chance in the general election as taking the seat is far more important than any non- constitutional issue.

  43. The GOP can not afford the “luxury” of squabbling over anything as that’s a recipe for failure.

    A Republican who wanted to run for Board of Education in my town was told that she wouldn’t be nominated if she wasn’t pro-life. She was so mad that she’s now the treasurer for one of the Democratic campaigns.

    It’s nice for you to declare the GOP to be neutral on the issue, but people are getting turned away before they can even get in on the ground floor.

    Further – abortion is a single issue and not of a Constitutional nature such as the 2nd.

    Definition of a “person” isn’t a Constitutional issue? And it’s only a single issue if it isn’t your rights to control your body that’s being debated.

  44. Weicker Liker

    Sounds like a backward town that nominates its candidates with that kind of litmus test!!

  45. famillionaire

    The more the field gets divided up, the fewer votes needed to win. That helps either of the two candidates I’d love to support in the general – Caligiuri or Schiff.

    I think it’s unlikely to remain a 5 way race by primary time, though. And 64% of Connecticut Republicans think abortion should be legal all or most of the time. So if it’s down to 3 people and 2 of them don’t take the hard line on abortion that Caligiuri does, then that issue loses its impact.

    What I find most interesting about what’s going on with the R Senate field s that it is made up of real inside players (Simmons of the CT variety and Foley of the ultimate DC insider variety) and a bunch of people who seemingly have no party loyalties. And I mean ‘party loyalties’ to mean they seem to not care about ‘waiting their turn,’ ‘paying their dues’ if you will – not really a bad thing, not necessarily a good thing.

    This cast of characters does not lend itself to the inherent party power structure to be able to thin the crowd and/or bring the factions back together after a primary. This is very good for Dodd – obviously.

    What should be worrying Republicans of every variety in CT is the huge differences between the candidates for US Senate. I know a lot of lifelong and dedicated R’s have wondered what their party has become in recent years and lamented the ‘with us or against us’ mentality of those traveling fast to the right. Will Schiff be the sole messenger of Republican values from Connecticut in DC? Will Linda McMahon be the face of your party within the Beltway? Will Foley be the face of…well he has a CT address, but he is more DC than CT anyway.

    What will the message, the driving force of Republican party politics be in 2010? Obviously it will not be Rell that drives the message – one only need look at the apparent rift between her and the legislative R’s to know that and any attempt by Rell to say ‘I am Rell. I am Republican. Hear me roar!’ would be rather silly and beneath the intelligence of her handlers.

    Will 2010 US Senate be a good race? I’m thinking not. Will it be entertaining? You betcha!

  46. Sounds like a backward town that nominates its candidates with that kind of litmus test!!

    I’ll say.

    I do wonder; where it is, and if it’s entirely true.

    If it is; I wonder if and how a state party would go about de-certifying a town committee – or if that’s even possible?
    It would seem fitting.

    Burning the village down and plowing the earth with salt might be a little over-kill; but you get the idea.

  47. I don’t think it matters too much who gets the GOP nod. As I’ve said, it’s a referendum on the incumbent… and four of the five GOPers would all end up getting the anti-Dodd / GOP vote. The only exception is Schiff who has some radical ideas that may both lose some anti-Dodd votes and attract some (otherwise) non-voters… though I’m assuming that Foley & McMahon fall into the very wide category of “conventional candidates” (like Sam & Rob).

  48. Last I knew it was 68% in some instances.

    That may be true now, or maybe it depends on how the question is worded. I used this 2003 Quinnipiac poll as my source. It’s question #33.

    http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1296.xml?ReleaseID=317

    The GOP can not afford the “luxury” of squabbling over anything as that’s a recipe for failure.

    If you were just refering to abortion, I can agree with that. It’s not an issue that can be changed one way or the other in the immediate future, and there are some very pressing issues that can be addressed instead.

    But if you really meant ‘anything’, well, I can’t agree with you there. There are two very distinct philosophies in the Republican Party right now. The big-government Republicans like Simmons have had all the power for a while now and I can never support them. The Republican Party will remain in the doldrums as long as they sometimes espouse the rhetoric of small government, but continue to empower big government. That’s an issue that desperately needs to be addressed. I really see absolutely no difference between people like Simmons and Foley and people like Dodd. Myself and many others only vote on principle, not on party lines and until the party starts walking the walk, it will be fighting with one hand tied behind its back.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s