The campaign's goal this month is to raise $2,000 through the website via online donations. This is of course in addition to fundraising that will be done traditionally.
$20 given by 100 people is all it takes, this goal is well within their grasp. Step up to the plate by making a contribution today.
Take a second and visit the campaign website at http://www.brockwayforassembly.com/ -- or click on "the bat" on the right side of the page to donate.
Thanks for your help towards reaching April's goal, they have reached 10% of the $2,000 online goal in the first five days. Please consider making a donation, and, most importantly, passing this link and encouraging your friends in the online community to donate $25 or $50. $25 can pay for one radio spot on WIRY, and $50 can purchase 100 yard signs.
16 comments:
Has the Demacratic Party given him the nod to be the candidate of choice and if not would this fundraising be a little early? And will he turn these funds over to the choice of the Party?
Well, he has been fundraising since Febuary as far as I know. I think a successful fundraising campaign might influence the party's choice. Since Nichols doesn't support Dr. Johnson and the taking back of the congress should be the goal of all good democrats I know I wouldn't be contributing to any Nichols campaign.
If the Party heads made the mistake of not endorsing Andy I would hope he would send his camapign funds to Dr. Johnson. I think it would be Andy's choice what to do with these funds.
When running a campaign you need to fundraise PRIOR to the primary. In fact, primary candidates often spend more on a primary than the general election.
In this case, either the party will pick one internally, or if they can't decide there will be a primary contest.
I hope Brockway gets the nod as well. Nichols seems mean-spirited. He also seems to be in it for himself rather than for the good of the North Country. Andy seems sincere.
Mr. Nichols spoke to the County party last week, and 90% of the people said hands down that the Brockway fellow was head and shoulders above him, he talked about issues not his family.
I too feel as though Nichols is in it for himself, and if he doesn't get the nod he will force a primary to ruin the party.
Click "News Link" for the correct link to this article.
Thanks for this info on the phone-jamming scheme in NH by Bush, I'm going to delete the first two comments you made about it 'cause they made the sidebar appear too low on this post..
why are you folks so agog at Dr. Johnson's candidacy. I have to assume you are just so enthralled with anyone who runs for office that your thought process just shuts down.
2 years ago, Dr. Bob ran for Congress the for first time. He was a registered Republican when he sought to be a Democratic candidate.
He was not just a republican. He was (and still is) a right wing Republican who advocated the outlawing of a woman's right to choose. Go ahead ask him if he advocated outlawing abortion 2 years ago. Now he states he "will not advocate a constitutional amendment outlawing abortion" If you believe a woman has the right to choose to have an abortion without government interference, nail him down with specific questions. If he is honest he will admit that he advocated outlawing abortion. Then after you get an honest answer from him ask him more questions so that you KNOW what his position is.
You can bad mouth this message and ignore this information. if you do you deserve what you get. Don't fall for just any person who wants to use your organization to achieve their own ends.
No real Democrat, no real Progressive , no fair and honest person who looks out for Working Families advocates closing Courthouse doors to innocent people injured by the rich and well-to-do. Dr Johnson does just that. Don't be fooled by someone who claims to be a member of our Party and then promises to take away your rights to use our justice system. when you start advocating taking away the justice system from innocent working people, register Republican and leave it the Democrats to fight for justice
Actually we HAVE asked him about his position on Abortion and you have misrepresented it. He will not support ANY LAW to overturn Roe v Wade, he is personally opposed to Abortion, but you may recall a candidate in 2004 that personally opposed abortion but supported the right to choose... John F. Kerry.
As far as your comment opposing tort reform, he has said those that validly are involved in malpractice deserve what they get but frivolous law suits are a part of the health care problem, though he himself contends it is not the major part, that would be the undue influence of Prescription Drug companies.
He may have gotten more progressive with time, but many are reevaluating the influence of the right-wing with the obvious failing example set by Bush and his cronies like McHugh.
A Democratic Congress in 2006 is essential in 2006 if we are going to stop Bush, and we will need every seat we can get. Bob Johnson recognizes the grave threat we face in Bush foreign policy and the critical need for Health care for All.
We have done our research, and Dr. Johnson will make a fine Congressman. It will be a very good day when we can get rid of the right-wing war-monger McHugh!
Dr. Johnson for Congress!
Andy Brockway for Assembly!
Victory for Democrats 2006!
Dear Bob,
My friends have been telling me about your bloging. So, i just had to stop by and see for myself. i see at least one friend has stopped by here to articulate the issue on Dr. Johnson. I thinks its proper that i personally clarify that position myself.
First, I have no "personal" issue against the doctor. I do, however, have a political issue with the doctor. I see from your latest post that Dr. Johnson has backed away from his position that abortions should be made illegal. That is different from his previous position; it is the exact opposite of what he advocated 2 years ago. I see he has altered his position on abortion again since february when he made the vague statement that he would not pursue amending the constitution to outlaw abortion. Now you have reported his position as one where he will not support any law opposing abortion. Again, thats different then it was 2 months or so ago. I am glad he better understands the freedoms our Party must stand for. I suggest that his evolving position on this subject is the direct result of debate between opposing views freely expressed by people with strong views. I am glad he has altered his view and i sincerely hope that if he is elected he holds true to his newly modified position. Upon hearing this I have a newly formed opinion of him on that position and I am glad he changed his mind.
I am still concerned however on his position regarding the so-called "tort reform" issue. The most visible elected official who uses that term is George Bush. Tort reform is a right wing term for taking away the rights of innocent victims. As Dr. Johnson articulated to me, he wants to cap damages at the popular Republican figure of $250,000. No elected Democrat that I know of in this Country takes that stand. Dr. Johnson says "economic damages" would still be allowed. But "pain and suffering" of human beings regardless of however badly one suffers only has a value $250,000.
Economic damages are lost wages and medical bills. "pain and suffering is a calculation that the litigants either agree to or one that a Jury of our neighbors determines. The vast majority of medical malpractice cases settle between the parties. That means that the defendant doctor, his lawyer and his insurance company all agree to settle the lawsuit with the injured party before a Jury is asked to decide.
Under Dr. Johnson's proposal for tort reform consider the following.
A 38 year old stay at home mother is negligently diagnosed as having breast cancer. Her husband works and has health insurance. She does not have breast cancer. The way they determine that she does not have cancer is that doctors examine all her breast tissue after they remove both her breasts and that tissue is cancer free. The doctor read the breast cancer diagnosis from another woman's file.
Economic damages in this case = $0
The medical bills are all paid by the insurance company. She has no lost wages because she chose to stay at home to raise her children.
Now the question becomes Do you want the Republican cap of $250,000 dollars to compensate her for this horrible loss? Or, do you want your neighbors who sit on a Jury to decide the matter?
I choose our neighbors, Dr. Johnson chooses the Republican cap of $250,000.
My hope is as it has always been, that Dr. Johnson will change his view on this matter so I can vote for him.
The Iraq war is a terrible consequence of Bush's election. I see it as just the begining of a long and painful immoral expenditure of our nation's men and women in our military. I fear that my 13 year old son faces a future of war that could consume and snuff out his life for nothing more than the corporate greed of oil companies.
Why should Democrats be faced with the choice that in order to get out of this war, we have to give up our basic constitutional right to have a jury decide our disputes? Why should we all be subjected to doctors who are immunized from the same negligent standards the rest of us face? There is no connection between providing quality health care programs for all of us and medical malpractice lawsuits. In fact, negligent docors (about 10% of them or thereabouts account for 70% of medical malpractice cases) drive up the cost of health care.
Please persuade Dr. Johnson to denounce the Republican "Tort Reform" plank from his platform so that i can support him.
We debate issues to persuade candidates to do the right thing. These are my reasons I did not support Dr. Johnson. I am glad he evolved his position on abortion. We are halfway home. I appeal here to Dr. Johnson to similarly evolve his position on "so called tort reform" so that we don't have a Democrat closing the doors of justice to innocent victims and their hard working families.
Some people, like Dr. Bob, can look beyond the narrow vies of their profession. He can see the needs of the people overall and is willing to reach compromise positions that benefit the people while remaining true to his values. Obviously Mr. Nichols the concerns of the Law profession weigh the heaviest in your mind, and your obviously disdainful tone toward a candidate with the integrity of Dr. Johnson shows your true nature.
Anyone who one seeking the office of Assemblyman who would put the narrow needs of his profession over the needs of the North Country people is someone who does not deserve the support of any North Country voter. Thank you for making this clear.
wow, so much for looking out for the people. you are just blinded by the heady politics of your time. Is this the first time in your life somebody as important as Dr. Bob has ever spoken to you? He must be your Svengali.
You should just say you don't give a rat's behind about working families. Just come out and tell us you have stock in insurance companies. I guess in your mind its the corporate insurance companies that are the victims.
Do you think before you type? A DOCTOR is running on the issue that we have to stop medical malpractice lawsuits to protect us!!! The you come back and curse a lawyer for saying we have to keep the doors of justice open.
Lets see, Dr. Bob wants to run for congress and protect his collegues from being sued for maiming, killing and causing terrible injuries to people and you say "Some people, like Dr. Bob, can look beyond the narrow vies of their profession".
You should really spend some time thinking for yourself. You can't stand up for the people by saying we have to protect bloated corporate companies. Whats next from you seeking donations for the beleaugered Exxon Mobil corp? I hear they've been victimized by an MBA's retirement package.
You don't care about working families. You only care about getting your friends elected.
Tell us please!! How is a doctor running on a platform of denying people a right to sue anyone in his profession,looking "beyond the narrow vies of their profession"?
I can't wait for your silly slavish response to that question. Apparently personal integrity and credibility mean nothing to you since you just don't have any.
Okay brainiac maybe you should look a couple comments up an notice that Dr. Bob's central plank is that the huge corporations are the problem not lawsuits. Even Mr. Nichols post didn't make the ridiculous assertion that Dr. Johnson is "running on a platform of denying people a right to sue anyone in his profession." Dr. Johnson has said that those that validly commit acts of malpractice should be punished and those affected should be compensated.
I don't own any stock, heath insurance or otherwise, like many people my age I've never had enough free money around to invest.
I care very much about working families, that is why I want to get rid of the Bush rubber-stamp congress, why don't you?
The idea of some reforms to the law suit system is a very minor part of Dr. Johnson's campaign, and he acknowledges it is a very small part of the health care issue. Your focus on it shows who cares about it more.
I know you feel I have maligned your hero Mr. Nichols, but that is the way politcs works. I know Andy Brockway will be a better Assemblyman, and I know Dr. Johnson will make an excellent Congressman.
I'm sorry you are wrong, but that is just the way it is.
I think Kevin Nichols is really the "Anonymous" person leaving all the comments --- nobody else in the North Country seems to support him...
Post a Comment