<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Friday Morning Open Thread</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ctlocalpolitics.net//2009/11/20/friday-morning-open-thread/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ctlocalpolitics.net//2009/11/20/friday-morning-open-thread/</link>
	<description>Connecticut politics and elections: discussion, analysis, opinion, news and maps</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2010 17:17:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Connecticut Bob</title>
		<link>http://ctlocalpolitics.net//2009/11/20/friday-morning-open-thread/comment-page-1/#comment-51166</link>
		<dc:creator>Connecticut Bob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 22:47:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ctlocalpolitics.net/?p=6041#comment-51166</guid>
		<description>Sarah, you were dearly missed at the event, but it was understandable.  I think we might be able to do something like this over the winter, maybe a &quot;CTLP mid-Winter Extravaganza&quot; or something like that.  Where we can eat, drink, and talk politics.  Kind of like we did the other night. 

Me, I love a good excuse to eat and drink.  The talking bit happens whether I have an excuse or not.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sarah, you were dearly missed at the event, but it was understandable.  I think we might be able to do something like this over the winter, maybe a &#8220;CTLP mid-Winter Extravaganza&#8221; or something like that.  Where we can eat, drink, and talk politics.  Kind of like we did the other night. </p>
<p>Me, I love a good excuse to eat and drink.  The talking bit happens whether I have an excuse or not.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gmr</title>
		<link>http://ctlocalpolitics.net//2009/11/20/friday-morning-open-thread/comment-page-1/#comment-51165</link>
		<dc:creator>gmr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 20:58:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ctlocalpolitics.net/?p=6041#comment-51165</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;Clearly this number was a factor in this backroom deal. What I don’t understand is why GOP Chairman Chris Healy would muddy the waters in the 5th CD for Justin Bernier, someone whom the NRCC has identified as being “on the radar”. Look how well that strategy worked for the GOP in NY-23. &lt;/i&gt;

NY-23 didn&#039;t have a primary: local Republican county chairmen chose the candidate.  The candidate they chose had basically no Republican credentials: she sided with the Democrats on most issues.  If there is a primary (and CT could choose the candidates with those ridiculous conventions) that should settle the rift.  Also, NY has a history of giving the Conservative and Liberal parties ballot access, which no other state really has.  The Conservative candidate there was unfamiliar with most local issues (local bridges, military bases, etc)  as well.  In other words, don&#039;t expect a big repeat of NY-23.    On the Democratic side, Moveon is raising money to challenge certain incumbent Democrats, so Republicans won&#039;t be the only ones with contested primaries.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>Clearly this number was a factor in this backroom deal. What I don’t understand is why GOP Chairman Chris Healy would muddy the waters in the 5th CD for Justin Bernier, someone whom the NRCC has identified as being “on the radar”. Look how well that strategy worked for the GOP in NY-23. </i></p>
<p>NY-23 didn&#8217;t have a primary: local Republican county chairmen chose the candidate.  The candidate they chose had basically no Republican credentials: she sided with the Democrats on most issues.  If there is a primary (and CT could choose the candidates with those ridiculous conventions) that should settle the rift.  Also, NY has a history of giving the Conservative and Liberal parties ballot access, which no other state really has.  The Conservative candidate there was unfamiliar with most local issues (local bridges, military bases, etc)  as well.  In other words, don&#8217;t expect a big repeat of NY-23.    On the Democratic side, Moveon is raising money to challenge certain incumbent Democrats, so Republicans won&#8217;t be the only ones with contested primaries.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gmr</title>
		<link>http://ctlocalpolitics.net//2009/11/20/friday-morning-open-thread/comment-page-1/#comment-51164</link>
		<dc:creator>gmr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 20:53:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ctlocalpolitics.net/?p=6041#comment-51164</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;Wow, political neophyte Linda McMahon isn’t as rich as I thought.

The Advocate says she’s only worth betweem $100-300 Million.

Were did I get the idea that she was a billionaire?
&lt;/i&gt;

As of March 9, 2009 (the last date available), the McMahons owned the following shares in the WWE:

Vincent McMahon owns 43.421 million shares of Class B stock
Shane McMahon owns 1.998 million shares of Class B stock
Stephanie McMahon Levesque owns 1.962 million shares of Class B stock
Linda McMahon owns 567K shares of Class B stock

Source: http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1091907/000120677409000522/wwe_def14a.htm

Class B stock is the same as Class A except Class B gets 10 votes.  Dividends and everything else is the same, and Class B can convert to Class A at any time.  

WWE stock is trading at $16.10 per share right now.   So Vince&#039;s 43 million shares are worth about $700 million.  Linda&#039;s shares that she owns outright is around $9 million.  Not sure how the others fit into the picture; I think they are her adult children.  This doesn&#039;t include any other holdings they might have, any real estate, or any debts owed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>Wow, political neophyte Linda McMahon isn’t as rich as I thought.</p>
<p>The Advocate says she’s only worth betweem $100-300 Million.</p>
<p>Were did I get the idea that she was a billionaire?<br />
</i></p>
<p>As of March 9, 2009 (the last date available), the McMahons owned the following shares in the WWE:</p>
<p>Vincent McMahon owns 43.421 million shares of Class B stock<br />
Shane McMahon owns 1.998 million shares of Class B stock<br />
Stephanie McMahon Levesque owns 1.962 million shares of Class B stock<br />
Linda McMahon owns 567K shares of Class B stock</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1091907/000120677409000522/wwe_def14a.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1091907/000120677409000522/wwe_def14a.htm</a></p>
<p>Class B stock is the same as Class A except Class B gets 10 votes.  Dividends and everything else is the same, and Class B can convert to Class A at any time.  </p>
<p>WWE stock is trading at $16.10 per share right now.   So Vince&#8217;s 43 million shares are worth about $700 million.  Linda&#8217;s shares that she owns outright is around $9 million.  Not sure how the others fit into the picture; I think they are her adult children.  This doesn&#8217;t include any other holdings they might have, any real estate, or any debts owed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: GoatBoyPHD</title>
		<link>http://ctlocalpolitics.net//2009/11/20/friday-morning-open-thread/comment-page-1/#comment-51156</link>
		<dc:creator>GoatBoyPHD</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:45:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ctlocalpolitics.net/?p=6041#comment-51156</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m thinking the messianic thing might play out in a state like CT in 2010 but won&#039;t work again in Pennsylvania, the Rust Belt and the retirement states in 2012.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m thinking the messianic thing might play out in a state like CT in 2010 but won&#8217;t work again in Pennsylvania, the Rust Belt and the retirement states in 2012.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bill Buckley</title>
		<link>http://ctlocalpolitics.net//2009/11/20/friday-morning-open-thread/comment-page-1/#comment-51155</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill Buckley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:37:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ctlocalpolitics.net/?p=6041#comment-51155</guid>
		<description>GoatBoyPHD:

As much as I&#039;d like to agree with you it&#039;s more likely that the Obama voters who may not turn out in 2010 will be back in force by 2012. 15 or 20 seats won&#039;t change things that much but re-taking the House would drastically improve their chances for the next Presidential race.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>GoatBoyPHD:</p>
<p>As much as I&#8217;d like to agree with you it&#8217;s more likely that the Obama voters who may not turn out in 2010 will be back in force by 2012. 15 or 20 seats won&#8217;t change things that much but re-taking the House would drastically improve their chances for the next Presidential race.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bill Buckley</title>
		<link>http://ctlocalpolitics.net//2009/11/20/friday-morning-open-thread/comment-page-1/#comment-51154</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill Buckley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:31:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ctlocalpolitics.net/?p=6041#comment-51154</guid>
		<description>Forbes listed the McMahons as billionaires ten years ago. Then a loss in the doomed XFL took them under that, according to Forbes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Forbes listed the McMahons as billionaires ten years ago. Then a loss in the doomed XFL took them under that, according to Forbes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: GoatBoyPHD</title>
		<link>http://ctlocalpolitics.net//2009/11/20/friday-morning-open-thread/comment-page-1/#comment-51153</link>
		<dc:creator>GoatBoyPHD</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:29:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ctlocalpolitics.net/?p=6041#comment-51153</guid>
		<description>Bill Buckley: 

If the GOP picks up 15 of the 21 seats it lost in 2008 and maintains the Senate seats it  has  now or gains 1 (there are 6 retiring GOP Senators) that&#039;s enough to form a meaningful coalition with moderate Democrats to block anything but deficit and job creation related legislation in 2011.  Along with the expected wins at state government that will be the momentum for 2012. The economy will take care of the rest in 2012.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bill Buckley: </p>
<p>If the GOP picks up 15 of the 21 seats it lost in 2008 and maintains the Senate seats it  has  now or gains 1 (there are 6 retiring GOP Senators) that&#8217;s enough to form a meaningful coalition with moderate Democrats to block anything but deficit and job creation related legislation in 2011.  Along with the expected wins at state government that will be the momentum for 2012. The economy will take care of the rest in 2012.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: AndersonScooper</title>
		<link>http://ctlocalpolitics.net//2009/11/20/friday-morning-open-thread/comment-page-1/#comment-51150</link>
		<dc:creator>AndersonScooper</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 17:31:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ctlocalpolitics.net/?p=6041#comment-51150</guid>
		<description>Wow, political neophyte Linda McMahon isn&#039;t as rich as I thought. 

The Advocate says she&#039;s only worth betweem $100-300 Million.

Were did I get the idea that she was a billionaire?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow, political neophyte Linda McMahon isn&#8217;t as rich as I thought. </p>
<p>The Advocate says she&#8217;s only worth betweem $100-300 Million.</p>
<p>Were did I get the idea that she was a billionaire?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: AndersonScooper</title>
		<link>http://ctlocalpolitics.net//2009/11/20/friday-morning-open-thread/comment-page-1/#comment-51149</link>
		<dc:creator>AndersonScooper</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 17:25:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ctlocalpolitics.net/?p=6041#comment-51149</guid>
		<description>You know I don&#039;t mind Gary Rose being a Republican shill, but has he ever come out and disclosed his affiliation.

I mean besides this quote where he says &quot;We’ve never had anybody that has had wealth like this campaigning”--in Connecticut.

Either Gary has completely forgotten about Ned Lamont, or more likely his &quot;we&quot; means &quot;we Republicans&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You know I don&#8217;t mind Gary Rose being a Republican shill, but has he ever come out and disclosed his affiliation.</p>
<p>I mean besides this quote where he says &#8220;We’ve never had anybody that has had wealth like this campaigning”&#8211;in Connecticut.</p>
<p>Either Gary has completely forgotten about Ned Lamont, or more likely his &#8220;we&#8221; means &#8220;we Republicans&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: eapoe</title>
		<link>http://ctlocalpolitics.net//2009/11/20/friday-morning-open-thread/comment-page-1/#comment-51147</link>
		<dc:creator>eapoe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 16:20:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ctlocalpolitics.net/?p=6041#comment-51147</guid>
		<description>TORRES FOR CONGRESS...http://www.connpost.com/ci_13826021

&quot;I am running for Congress,&quot; Torres said in a phone interview Thursday afternoon. &quot;All the paperwork is filed. I am officially a candidate.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>TORRES FOR CONGRESS&#8230;http://www.connpost.com/ci_13826021</p>
<p>&#8220;I am running for Congress,&#8221; Torres said in a phone interview Thursday afternoon. &#8220;All the paperwork is filed. I am officially a candidate.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bill Buckley</title>
		<link>http://ctlocalpolitics.net//2009/11/20/friday-morning-open-thread/comment-page-1/#comment-51145</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill Buckley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 14:46:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ctlocalpolitics.net/?p=6041#comment-51145</guid>
		<description>Arggh...excuse the messed up link above.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Arggh&#8230;excuse the messed up link above.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bill Buckley</title>
		<link>http://ctlocalpolitics.net//2009/11/20/friday-morning-open-thread/comment-page-1/#comment-51144</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill Buckley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 14:45:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ctlocalpolitics.net/?p=6041#comment-51144</guid>
		<description>The &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.nrcc.org/news/Read.aspx?ID=1020&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;NRCC list is notable for how many Republicans who were once in congress are fighting to win back the seats they lost. One would expect favorable election conditions for many of them in 2010. I was also struck by how young many of the &quot;on the radar&quot; are, many in their 30&#039;s. Will it be enough to take back the House? Hard to say at this point if that is plausible or not as it would take a gain of 42 seats.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The <a href="http://www.nrcc.org/news/Read.aspx?ID=1020" rel="nofollow">NRCC list is notable for how many Republicans who were once in congress are fighting to win back the seats they lost. One would expect favorable election conditions for many of them in 2010. I was also struck by how young many of the &#8220;on the radar&#8221; are, many in their 30&#8217;s. Will it be enough to take back the House? Hard to say at this point if that is plausible or not as it would take a gain of 42 seats.</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
