Driving liberals, dhimmis and illegal alien apologists absolutely insane since 2005...
video production in Manassas and Prince William County

Dems Abandon Jeanette Rishell Campaign

By Greg L | 19 September 2009 | Jeanette Rishell, 50th HOD District | 22 Comments

So how do Democrats view the chances of Jeanette Rishell this November?  The “Swing State Project” which is tracking targeted House of Delegates races has decided to drop the race from their list, saying “Rishell’s campaign is terrible.”  What, did they expect something different this year?

50th: Jackson Miller vs. Jeanette Rishell (Manassas, Manassas Park, Prince William)
Rishell has run for this seat twice before and lost twice, first 53-47 in a 2006 special election, then by 61-39 in 2007. This is a swing district, and Rishell is good at raising money, but that’s about it. Her campaign has been ineptly run, possibly since her campaign manager has been involved in a scandal and keeps making gaffes.

Perhaps ones like this?

Rishell paid over $41,000 in staff and consulting costs in the two months covered in her last campaign finance report, and all it really got her was a campaign manager with a sordid history, an ownership claim of used condom pictures in a copyright dispute that defies common sense, a dumb press release that ended up trashing the NAACP, and carloads of out-of-state kids who drive through neighborhood flinging campaign literature out the windows in their effort to substantiate their bizarre voter contact statistics.  The district has yard signs for her opponent everywhere, hers are nowhere, and to top it off, her fundraising for once as badgering the same people for money over and over again isn’t working like it used to.  It used to be that some folks might throw her a donation after the sixth call if she’d just promise to stop calling them, but now that’s not even working like it used to.

There’s no word yet on whether or not she plans on hiring a debt collection agency to phone-bank for campaign contributions in an attempt to pick up the pace.

It sure took Dems a long time to figure out how pointless her candidacy was this time around.  The chapter on this was closed two years ago when Rishell made all those bizarre claims about Jackson Miller, prompting the Democrat-friendly editorial board of the local paper to brand her as a liar.  Rishell can’t recover from something like that, even if she desperately tries to blame everyone but herself for her stunning lack of judgment last election cycle while she continues to demonstrate exactly the same lack of judgment during this campaign.  Voters have no reason to trust her, and plenty of reasons not to.

Now every die-hard Democrat but herself seems to recognize just how pointless the Jeanette Rishell campaign really is.  Doubtless Jeanette Rishell will pathetically soldier on to the very end, berift of allies, and irredeemably tarnishing the Democrat brand such that Bob McDonnell, Bill Bolling and Ken Cuccinelli will perform spectacularly in this district in November.

At least there’s something we can thank Jeanette Rishell for.



The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.

BVBL is not a charity and your support is not tax-deductible.

You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed. You can also pingback or trackback from your own site.

22 Comments

  1. Tom White said on 19 Sep 2009 at 10:42 am:
    Flag comment

    Greg, Kudos to you for recognizing what a horrible candidate Rishell really is. Even if the Democrats are not bright enough to thank you for the service you have done in exposing the truth behind her and her decisions, including her choice of a campaign manager.

    I only wish that Ms. Rishell’s campaign manager had been available when they were casting for the Acorn Busting tapes. She has the background and tenacity to play a roll like that in a more convincing manner than that sweet young girl that won the job. I just think she would have been far more believable. Not that either of the ladies are actual prostitutes, mind you. But the porn background and condom-gate would have been a plus.

    It’s a direction she may want to consider on November 4, or perhaps now.

  2. john said on 19 Sep 2009 at 1:43 pm:
    Flag comment

    I think it is halarious how republinuts claim they want to stop the mexican workers. Truth is the republinuts want the mexicans here more than anyone. Oh the cheap cheap labor, which causes wages accross the board to drop. The ability to keep prices high. The three republinuts running for control of Va would be a travisty for all citizens.

  3. Anonymous said on 19 Sep 2009 at 2:07 pm:
    Flag comment

    john said on 19 Sep 2009 at 1:43 pm: Flag comment
    The three republinuts running for control of Va would be a travisty for all citizens.

    Oh my, republinuts no less. How about the demoncrats like WARNER and MORON who voted to keep funding for ACORN. That other fine demoncrat CONNOLEY didn’t have the gonads to vote one way or the other. He did under his desk until the vote was over. My, my, my!

  4. Anon35 said on 19 Sep 2009 at 4:55 pm:
    Flag comment

    Remember: The demoncraps can’t handle the truth, anon….. you’re liable to cause John to run into a corner and have a little hissy fit……
    They know they made the biggest mistake electing the community guy into office and they are totally beside themselves!

  5. johnny longtorso said on 19 Sep 2009 at 5:45 pm:
    Flag comment

    I posted the write-up of House of Delegates races on SSP, and I just want to point out that the views are mine alone and not that of anyone else on that site.

  6. Greg L said on 19 Sep 2009 at 9:16 pm:
    Flag comment

    Well, in this race I agree with your views and I think your observations here are spot-on. Regardless of who you speak for, or don’t, I think it’s notable that Democrats are admitting that Rishell is a lost cause. You and Ben Tribbett both agree that Rishell doesn’t stand a chance, and to me, that’s noteworthy.

  7. James Young said on 19 Sep 2009 at 9:27 pm:
    Flag comment

    I’ll bet it’s “some Democrats.” PWC Democrats would probably be better advised to help Paul Nichols — as he is at his most vulnerable as a freshman — than waste their time and “filthy lucre” on Rishell. However, I’d be willing to bet that they’ll put a lot of effort in going after Bob Marshall, if for no other reason than he just ticks them off so much.

    Go Bob!

  8. Fairness in Media said on 20 Sep 2009 at 3:10 am:
    Flag comment

    The only real reason that Ms. Rishell could lose is due to the fact that this area is demographically predominantly Rebulican; has always been, but could start changing from the Independents and Democrats that are increasing in numbers from recent elections. Not too partisan in these parts, right?

  9. Anonymous said on 20 Sep 2009 at 7:41 am:
    Flag comment

    Fairness is right, historically this area is Republican. If you look at how Jackson Miller runs, he strives to portray himself as a moderate to many voters (I have heard the word moderate from his own mouth), and he does so well, stripping away independent and moderate Democratic votes. It also earned him the VEA endorsement.

  10. BattleCat said on 20 Sep 2009 at 10:17 am:
    Flag comment

    And that, my friends, is why they call it “going to the John”

  11. smurf said on 20 Sep 2009 at 12:58 pm:
    Flag comment

    for those that think rishell has no chance due to the republican presence here have you even looked at the fact that she is nuts? wouldnt that be a far better reason for her impending loss?

  12. district is not hard R said on 20 Sep 2009 at 4:32 pm:
    Flag comment

    If you think the 50th is a hard GOP district you are wrong. It’s always been a “swing” district. Delegate Miller has worked hard door to door and in Richmond to get results. Hard work and representing his district well will help him win re-election.

  13. GimmeABreaaaaak! said on 20 Sep 2009 at 5:12 pm:
    Flag comment

    “How about the demoncrats like WARNER and MORON who voted to keep funding for ACORN. That other fine demoncrat CONNOLEY didn’t have the gonads to vote one way or the other. ”

    Correct on Moran and Connolly. Wrong on Warner. He voted right.

  14. Big Dog said on 20 Sep 2009 at 6:45 pm:
    Flag comment

    This race was Jackson’s unless he did something totally crazy-
    like join the Taliban or become a cheerleader for Acorn.

    The VEA giving its endorsement to Miller was the final turn out
    the lights signal for the Rishell campaign. Everyone can
    go home - nothing to see here.

  15. Casanova Frankenstein said on 21 Sep 2009 at 12:15 pm:
    Flag comment

    Anyone know what Luke Torian is spending his campaign cash on in the 52nd Dist., because he has ZERO visibility. Meanwhile, Rafael Lopez has yard signs and 4×8 signs up all throughout the district. I know Greg said this district was leaning towards the Dems because of Torian’s cash advantage, but if he’s blowing his cash on who knows what, don’t rule out Lopez. Right now, Rafael has the edge in visibility.

  16. Big Dog said on 21 Sep 2009 at 4:22 pm:
    Flag comment

    Noticed Jackson Miller’s signs up around Manassas - estimate he
    has ten up for every one of Jeanette’s. And who says there is
    no diversity in the GOP? Jackson ’s signs are red, Marshal’s are blue -
    Jackson has no party ID, Marshal’s note he is Republican - in any
    event, they will both win - big.

  17. Greg L said on 21 Sep 2009 at 5:21 pm:
    Flag comment

    You’ve actually seen a Rishell yard sign this cycle? Aside from the one in front if Dexter Fox’s house?

    Man, you’re good. I’ve been looking, and they’re harder to find than foxes in the District.

  18. citizenofmanassas said on 21 Sep 2009 at 7:06 pm:
    Flag comment

    I think I have seen one Rishell sign and one bumper sticker.

  19. fed up said on 22 Sep 2009 at 9:59 am:
    Flag comment

    She’s been mailing her campaign lit to households with no registered voters.

  20. Big Dog said on 22 Sep 2009 at 10:58 am:
    Flag comment

    I’ve received several well done mailings from the Miller folks
    (all upbeat about Jackson - nothing negative about Jeanette),
    but zip from the Rishell campaign. Two years ago her people
    swamped my mailbox but, of course, the expensive and easily
    proven false attacks on Jackson’s integrity proved to be a big
    mistake and continue to hurt her in 2009.

  21. Ted said on 22 Sep 2009 at 12:06 pm:
    Flag comment

    Meanwhile I just got a piece from “Major” John Bell who is running against Bob Marshall. I guess we are supposed to be impressed by his rank.

    Note that there is a disclosure on the piece saying that the mention of his rank does not mean he is endorsed by DoD or the USAF.

    That’s a relief.

  22. fed up said on 22 Sep 2009 at 1:34 pm:
    Flag comment

    I think she’s been targeting addresses that are new move-ins..ie, people who weren’t here to see the crap she pulled 2 years ago.

Comments are closed.


Views: 1711