Bruce Poliquin Steps In A Hornet’s Nest On Guns
At the most recent candidate forum, hosted by the Associated General Contractors, candidates of both parties had an opportunity to try out their debate chops, and go on record on a number of issues.
(Editors note: this is an updated paragraph to clarify the description of the questioning section) One of the more interested parts of the forum was what was known as the “lightning round”. The rules for these questions were that you may only answer “yes” or “no”. Everyone had to answer every question. All of the questions were prepared by the moderators – no candidates got to ask any questions.
One such question has stirred up some trouble for one candidate – Republican Bruce Poliquin – “Do you support mandatory background checks on the purchase of a firearm?” The answers from the field were as follows:
Democrats
- Pat McGowan – No
- Rosa Scarcelli- Yes
- John Richardson – No
- Libby Mitchell – No
- Steve Rowe – No
Republicans
- Paul LePage- No
- Bill Beardsley- No
- Steve Abbott – No
- Matt Jacobson- No
- Bruce Poliquin – Yes
- Les Otten - No
- Peter Mills- No
Independents
- Eliot Cutler – Yes
Only Cutler, one Democrat – Rosa Scarcelli – and one Republican – Bruce Poliquin – answered that they would in fact be in favor of mandatory background checks for the purchase of firearms.
Guns are an interesting political wedge in the state of Maine. It is one of the backbone issues that has given credibility to Democrats in the second district (indeed, this was McGowan’s question), by separating their image from the more traditional limousine liberal appearance of Democrats in the first district.
So it comes as no surprise that the Democrats were just as opposed to mandatory background checks as the Republicans, who have universally hated the idea from day one, decrying it as a restriction on the second amendment.
Still, a Democrat or Independent is given a lot of leeway to answer yes to a question like this, because their electoral base is far more forgiving of somebody stepping out on that particular limb. I do not believe, for example, that either Scarcelli or Cutler will really be hurt by their answer to this question – either in the primary (for Scarcelli) or the general.
But in the case of Poliquin, this does in fact cause him significant trouble, particularly in the Republican primary.
Gun rights are a sacred cow to Republicans nationally, but in the state of Maine the issue is even more hyperbolic – again, due to the nature of the state. For many primary voters, being perceived as “anti-gun” is a litmus test issue that will immediately disqualify somebody. Poliquin, as the only Republican answering yes to this question, has exposed himself to that criticism.
If there was any doubt, note the reaction from the activists in the As Maine Goes forum. While not exactly representative of the entire electorate, it should at least give you an idea of how important this issue is to a lot of Maine Republican voters:
What an IDIOT…He might as well pack it in now…It is OVER for him….
I will not vote for him based on this.
Poliquin is one less candidate we need to concern ourself about in this HUGE field of hopefulls.
WHOA! WHOA! WHOA! — Showstopper!
Man, he’s dead to me before he ever got out of the gate!
Note to Mr. Poliquin: Nice going, Dumbass!
Unbelievable. There’s no hope for this state.
Get a certain talk show host fitted for a dress. Poliquin needs a fat lady to sing. As a gun owner, I won’t be voting for him.
I’d say I support him less now, but I was already at zero.
Game over man.
Stick a fork in him he is done.
It goes on and on and on [and on] from there. The reaction was immediate, and very negative. It should be noted there were a couple defensive comments made, but they were very weak, and immediately attacked.
Now, I tend not to cite As Maine Goes as a barometer of conservative grass roots opinion, because 9 times out of 10 it really isn’t – but in this case, I think it does show the general reaction of most Maine Republicans on this issue.
Poliquin’s answer to this question is not a surprise, however.
In December of 1989, Poliquin donated $500 to an organization known as “Handgun Control, Inc.”, which has since (June of 2001) morphed into the organization now known as The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.
In its most simple terms, it and its predecessor organization advocate further gun regulation. So, given Poliquin’s previous support for this organization, it really doesn’t come as any surprise that he would answer yes to this question.
The organization’s mission is stated:
“…to reform the gun industry by enacting and enforcing sensible regulations to reduce gun violence, including regulations governing the gun industry. In addition, we educate the public about gun violence through litigation, grassroots mobilization, and outreach to affected communities.”
Additionally, the Brady Campaign’s website states the following:
“As the largest national, non-partisan, grassroots organization leading the fight to prevent gun violence, the Brady Campaign, the Million Mom March and the Brady Center are dedicated to creating an America free from gun violence, where all Americans are safe at home, at school, at work, and in their communities. The Brady Campaign, the Million Mom March and the Brady Center believe that a safer America can be achieved without banning all guns.”
Though the growth of the organization over the years has undoubtedly lead to a modification of goals and strategies, it should be noted that in 1976, Pete Shields, the founder of what was then Handgun Control, Inc. stated the overall strategy for his organization, and the gun control movement in general:
We’re going to have to take one step at a time, and the first step is necessarily — given the political realities — going to be very modest. . . . [W]e’ll have to start working again to strengthen that law, and then again to strengthen the next law, and maybe again and again. Right now, though, we’d be satisfied not with half a loaf but with a slice. Our ultimate goal — total control of handguns in the United States — is going to take time. . . . The first problem is to slow down the number of handguns being produced and sold in this country. The second problem is to get handguns registered. The final problem is to make possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition-except for the military, police, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors-totally illegal.
I imagine the rancor caused by Poliquin’s statement at this candidate forum will not be helped by his donation to this organization twenty years ago, especially given the strategy outlined above.
Still, it was twenty years ago, and I myself spent some rather considerable time blasting “guilt by association”. I, for one, do not believe that Bruce Poliquin really has any active interest in banning all handguns simply because he donated to an organization that apparently did.
That, of course, does not change the fact that many voters will still find the donation objectionable.
Poliquin’s campaign gave me a statement on the issue in response to this most recent storm of criticism. The following statement is from Bruce Poliquin:
“I think our campaign just takes it in stride, knowing that everyday we’re out growing the grassroots, communicating our message, and doing the things it takes to win the support of voters. Some campaigns look at our early success and see that we are going to be very competitive. It’s natural to target someone who’s out in front. They’ll take words out of context, push conspiracy theories, and try to mislead others about your positions. I think we’re prepared for that and we’re going to continue to run our race. This campaign will be about who has the experience and background to best manage the problems Maine’s economy faces. I have been dealing with these financial issues my entire professional life. It has caused us to receive a lot of early attention – both good and bad, apparently.”
So, is this a big deal?
I leave that to the reader, and the voter.
It should be noted that this is hardly the only conservative plank that sees a candidate standing out of step with the primary voters. There are pro-choice Republicans running, a pro-tax form Republican, some have expressed support for (or voted for) gay marriage, and there are a host of other issues that see divergence.
Still, this is the topic we are talking about right now, and I think it is an issue which could be damning to the Poliquin campaign, especially in the second district, where (especially among Republican primary voters) guns are sacred, and restrictions upon them are fought tooth and nail.
Here is the raw video of the question and answers, for any who may want to watch:
Popularity: 16% [?]
From Bruce’s bio:
“I have started, invested in, and managed a number of businesses that have provided hundreds of jobs to Maine workers. These companies have introduced millions of dollars into the state economy. One of my recent businesses, an environmentally-sensitive housing development, has provided good work to more than 200 Mainers. So far, it has injected $4 million into the state economy.”
Does anyone know the names of these businesses or developments?
Hint: They weren’t businesses that involved voting for the Democrat’s tax shift plan, unlike some candidates.
He gave money to an organization that wanted to ban all hand guns.
Goodbye, Mr. Poliquin.
What a hack.
So he tries to purchase the nomination, then is stupid enough to actually tell the truth about wanting to regulate guns. Awesome.
With Republicans like Otten and Poliqin, who needs Democrats?
Wow. Good way to separate the wheat from the chaff…and Otten voted “No” twice according to this list.
[Editors note: Smartass...
]
I am a hunter and strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment as giving us the fundamental right to bear arms. Reading some of these comments, I’m not sure if some people here have amnesia or if they just disagree with the NRA (or, cynically, support another candidate and are simply taking a cheap shot at a rival).
If you’ll recall, the NRA strongly opposed the ridiculous waiting periods created by the Brady bill. The NRA strongly SUPPORTED instant background checks as a commonsense measure to help keep guns out of the hands of criminals. In case you forgot, here you are. http://bit.ly/cnpeVs
Garrett is right the NRA did support background checks for licensed dealers, however the NRA does not support background checks for private sales and tranfers between family and others.
Poliquin probably is not a rabid anti-gunner, but his contribution to Handgun Control speaks volumes.
Also Poliquin probably is for big government with his support of background checks. He believes, apparently, that government involvement in our lives is useful and important for the better of the collective.
I don’t see Poliquin as a small government politician, he is a Snowe/Collins politician, one willing to throw away trillions of dollars down a rat hole. (in the case of Maine it would only be billions)
Bruce has made it clear that he is not running a campaign on social issues. His expertise is in Economics and Finance exactly the places we have major issues in this state. If we refuse to vote for someone cause they fail to match every social issue one agrees with then this state will continue to have the issues it does and young people, like myself, will continue to leave the state.
The second amendment and related issues are not social issues.
And you can’t be seriously arguing that just because he is RUNNING on an economic agenda, that when in office he will not be faced with non-economic issues?!?!
Now, none of that means his position is wrong – I’m leaving that to you all to decide… I am just saying, it is nonsensical to say that he is running on economics, so that is all we should pay attention to. A governor will be faced with a number of different challenges, many of which he or she did not foresee in their campaign.
Of course I know that a governor will be dealt with issues they never expected. But my point is some of us, myself included, do not vote on “non-wallet” issues. I find both parties to be hypocrites on “social” issues and that is why I do not vote on them. Therefore, my point stands that Bruce is running a campaign on the issues that are most pressing to the state the current time, economic issues, and why I could care less as to his position on gun laws or any other “social” issue.
If anyone would care to research Mr. Poliquin’s stand on the gun issue, they’d discover that he is and always has been a staunch supporter of the 2nd Ammendment and our right to bear arms. One of the reasons that this country is in such a state is due in no small part to
the fact that we don’t research the FACTS OURSELVES! In this era of advanced technological means to easily
access accurate information, there really is no excuse for ignorance and allowing ourselves to be misinformed. Some have always found it so much easier to simply and quickly slam the door shut on real knowledge. Too much work? Afraid we cannot comprehend? Just going to stick with the party? Whatever the reasons, this us shameless behavior. Being an informed voter is truly where it’s at. In the case of Mr. Poliquin, Ms. Scarcelli and Mr. Cutler, who all responded with “Yes” to the question of whether or not they’d support background checks is NOT, I repeat, NOT a vote for ANTI-GUN, nor is it in conflict with current legislation already on the books. Enough said! Now let’s get on with the business of the citizens of Maine and who best to govern this great state of meat hunters, non-meat hunters, trophy hunters, non-hunters, gun carrying, non-gun carrying, anti-gun folks, animal rights activist, children too young to carry guns and frankly those who quite frankly, don’t care either way.
I am in support of the NRA’s quick background check proposals. Their views serve to ameliorate crime in the United States by deterring the use of guns by criminals and promoting gun usage of lawful citizens. Of course mandatory background checks can be misconstrued as a long and futile process, but I believe this is the fault of the moderator and the impreciseness of the question – a further explanation was needed.
I am also under the impression that Bruce is almost in full accordance with NRA policy. Furthermore, I believe he opposes background checks at gun shows, although I am not entitled to any of these statements.
If anything the vagueness of the question is at fault.
Poliquin is not against the second amendment and firearm rights. This was a quick on your feet “lightning round” he answered yes to background checks. The question was “do you believe in Background Checks for Firearm purchases..” He said “Yes” in fact the NRA “the liberal association that it is” officially position is for background checks. A recent poll in Dec. 2009 shows 85% of firearm owners are for background checks. The organization he donated to in 1989 was responsible for instituting background checks which prevented 1.8 million firearm sales going to criminals. Since 1989 this organization has become a radical anti-firearm organization. Hence, that is why he has not donated since 1989
“Mandatory background checks on purchase of firearms?”
Last time I checked, with the exception of private sales, there already IS a mandatory background check on the purchase of firearms from FFL dealers. Was the question supposed to specify private sales?
All I know is that when it comes to defending the 2nd Amendment, Senator Peter Mills is a straight A student. See for yourself:
http://www.votesmart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=6583&type=category&category=37
Mike, I was not attacking Bruce. I honestly am interested in his Maine businesses. Do you know what they are? Matt? Garrett? Anyone?
We have alot bigger problems in Maine than worrying about
candidates views on handguns. I guess when you are leading
everyone’s out to get you, right Derrick and Stephanie?
Poliquin should do the honorable thing and drop out of the race. So should Les Otten. Peter Mills is a candidate that can actually hold the base and win Democrats.
If you’re anti-gun and weak on crime, cut a check to Chellie Pingree. Oh wait, Les Otten already did!
I think asking for a little background info on the leading candidate is a fair question. It’s pretty easy to learn most everything you need to know about Leslie, Paul, Peter, Steve and just about everyone else in the race.
There’s nothing out there about Bruce. Nothing, nada. Just the constant stream of statements from the campaign: competent management skills, starting successful Maine businesses, etc., etc. These success stories should not be impossible to verify independently. If he’s hired so many people and built successful Maine businesses where are those stories? Are we all just supposed to drink the cool aid and take his word for it?
The only thing I’ve ever been able to learn about Bruce ’success’ is that his latest condo development couldn’t pass the town’s zoning rules. There’s simply nothing else out there to support his claims. There’s apparently lots of money but nothing to confirm the success. A little substance would be great and could really solidify Bruce’s leadership position in the race.
I think Bruce misunderstood the question. Unlike those other idiots on stage, he’s not a politician.
I don’t find this to be an issue. I can’t necessarily say that I will vote for Poliquin, but this certainly doesn’t persuade me against it.
I can’t imagine that there are a ton of small-minded people that would vote solely on this issue that seems largely blown out of proportion.
I’ll leave you whack jobs to debate this crap back and forth. Last time I heard, the economy was the top issue. Not some fabricated gun issue.
Which is it? Did Bruce say he supports instant background checks, as the videos shows, or, does Bruce not suppport them as he states on an AMG discussion? or, as Garrett says, hell yes Bruce supports them or, now, we get “Bruce didn’t understand the question”…huh? If Poliqin becomes the nominee forget it – the Dems will hand him his head.
JJB the issue goes beyond handguns, it’s getting to know a canidate’s integrity. If you can’t trust a canidate’s word before he/she are in office, you sure as hell aren’t going to vote for them.
And ZDT, like Matt said, there’s a whole lot more to being governor than economics. No one is saying that isn’t the most pressing issue now, but there are a lot of issues that are important to people’s lives. When a canidate’s stance is different than your own, how can you vote for them? Even if a canidate says “Let the people decide” there will always be his own stance lurking behind the scenes. I have heard every canidate talk about the economy and the jobs, let’s talk about other things that matter.
Dell,
The lightning round questions, as I’m sure you know, leave a lot to be desired. Bruce clarified that he, like the NRA, supports existing law, which requires checks, but that he is a strong supporter of 2nd Amendment rights and sees absolutely no reason to expand any gun regulations.
This position is consistent with the NRA. Also, interestingly, a recent poll conducted by Republican Frank Luntz found that 69 percent of NRA MEMBERS support checks, and an even higher percentage of gun owners support them. Instant checks do nothing to violate our 2nd Amendment rights. And supporting them doesn’t make one vulnerable to Democrats in the least. In fact, the other candidates seem to have been acting like regular politicians–once one or two said they didn’t support the NRA position, the rest got scared and followed suit.
This whole fuss is being manufactured largely by supporters of other candidates trying to create a controversy where none exists. You, for example, are on board with Mr. Abbott. Others trying to cause trouble here are on board with other candidates.
I speak for no one but myself here, but I grew up in a NRA family, I hunt and I am a fervent supporter of our Constitutional right to bear arms, and I think instant background checks protect all of us and don’t impede my 2nd Amendment rights.
I volunteer for Peter Mills because I respect him and think he’s the most qualified candidate for the job. That does not preclude me from respecting other candidates. I don’t understand why asking which businesses Poliquin has been involved in is viewed by his supporters as a contentious question. Perhaps I could grow to respect him as a businessman if I had any idea what he’s done in Maine. Why can’t anyone answer the question? It seems a basic thing to ask of a candidate running on his business record. I’m not trying to cause trouble. I honestly would like to know about Poliquin’s work in Maine.
Garrett, you obviously know him well. Can you please share Bruce’s Maine business ventures?
I’ve disclosed my support for Abbott. Who do you support Garrett? Come now, we all know you are a Poliqin guy. No problem – civic debate is virtue. So, you cite a poll indicating broad support for gun laws. Well, you’d better hope all those folks move to Maine before June because, as you heard, even Libby Mitchell had the where-with-all to answer the question right. This – along with his history of donating to an anti-gun organization and board membership to the radical left-wing NRCM, simply show Poliqin as not a fit with average Mainers.
Take a look at Matt Jacobson’s Facebook page. It lists his entire resume. I like that. Concise and honest about the experience he brings to the table. Why can’t we get something like that from Poliquin? If he can’t be honest about his background then how will he expect to win a general election? He must think Republicans are stupid and don’t need to know who he is in order to earn their votes in a primary.
Marc and Stephanie that fact that you are working for Peter Mills, You really should make your comments “inginous”. Bruce Poliquin is a successful businessman, he has owned Dirigo holdings for many years. (He is the LLC principal,General Manager and Managing partner) Well if you didn’t know Dirigo Holdings is a holdings company and by definition it means that they own many other companies. All this information is on zoominfo, which you can get by there website or if you just google it. The research done by some that have commented. Must have not been very thorough. Maybe some should acutually do the search before trying to make Bruce Poliquin seem like he is pulling tricks on the Maine people. He is running for the Maine People, not as a politician, all of you should remember that.
Actually, Mr. Bouchard, I disagree. The role of government is simple: protect the rights and freedoms of the individuals it serves.
If Mr. Poliquin does not understand and endorse the plain language found in Article I of the Maine Constitution which states: “every citizen has a right to keep and bear arms and this right shall never be questioned”, he is absolutely unfit for public office.
The job of Governor is to protect, defend and enforce the Constitution of this state. If he wants to amend this basic Constitutional provision, he ought to run for the legislature and drum up support among the people as to why our basic rights and freedoms ought to be suppressed.
Dell and Steph,
I know one of you supports Abbott and one of you supports Mills. I’ve been more than open about supporting Poliquin.
Let’s cut through the BS. Do Mills and Abbott actually oppose the NRA on this? I grew up in a house full of guns, love them, but as responsible gun owners we were taught not only gun safety but also that if we were to maintain our right to possess them we better make damn well sure we don’t let our rights facilitate arming criminals. The Brady Bill was a God Awful disaster. Instant background checks are sensible. An overwhelming majority of gun owners support them. They’re not just good for safety, they’re good for us, because while they don’t impede our 2nd Amendment rights, they protect us and protect us from the loony toons who want to take away our rights (by denying them the argument that any criminal can go to a store and get a gun).
The more I think about it, the more it seems the other nominees had a knee-jerk reaction to this question. Almost everyone, regardless of party, supports background checks to protect innocents. I don’t fault for the other candidates for their answers, which basically said they didn’t support current law, because the question was faulty. But still, I think Bruce stood out as not pannicking and not giving in to what others perceived as a “gotcha” question (even after every other candidate had voted), and he took the high road.
Ask around with your Republican/Independent/even Democratic friends. We hated the Brady bill, but we support instant background checks that don’t violate our rights but keep guns out of the hands of violent people who have destroyed their right to possess them, and who, if they kept having them, would eventually jeopardize all of our rights to keep and bear arms.
Garrett, why do you always answer the questions with stories of your childhood? The question here is about Poliquin, not you.
And you’re wrong about the question. Bruce was asked if he supported mandatory background checks for the purchase of a firearm. Mandatory in this construct applies to everything- as in, if you buy a firearm, it’s mandatory that you get a background check. No exemption was specified, thus the question, practically, applies to ALL gun purchases. That’s why everyone else said no.
I don’t get why you support this guy, Garrett. You don’t even live in Maine, which is not a big deal, but it’s weird to see such strong support from a guy that doesn’t even have a stake in the game. Poliquin has shown layer after layer of dishonesty, and has no identifiable record of ‘competent management’, despite his rhetoric.
Show a concrete example of what Poliquin has done other than collect insurance money, and maybe I’ll change my mind. For now, the only thing the people of Maine know about him is that he’s financially benefited from a few unfortunate situations. Oh, and the fact that he’s hired an ex-con from Tennessee to run his campaign.
You’re a smart enough person to recognize he won’t be accepted by Maine voters without being straight about his background. He’s spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on marketing himself, and still we have to ask these questions?
Frenchy,
Nice use of of Abbott supporters talking points going after Poliquin. What next, setting up a Twitter and YouTube account pretending to be a Poliquin supporter trashing Otten? Yeah, word gets around, pal.
I’m home all the time but I would love to be back living in Maine some day, preferably running a business. The climate for that right now is dismal, as I’m sure you know. There’s no silver bullet, but having a solid Republican governor would be a good start.
We need a candidate who can win. I’ve already laid out why I don’t believe Otten can. I also think this is the worst of years for an establishment candidate like Abbott (however good a guy he may be, which I hear he is), no matter how many dead turkeys he holds up or however many times he says he loves Maine. Are you deaf to the political climate? Poliquin is the only other candidate who, in my opinion, stands a chance of winning the nomination and winning the general. And his message will not only be in line with Republicans but also win thousands of Independent votes in November.
I liked Bruce tons the first time I met him. Over time, I’ve seen how much others love him. Three of my best high school friends played baseball for him at St. Joe’s. They can’t say enough good things about Bruce. Everyone who knows him well loves him. It’s not even able to be categorized. He’s just a great guy, very unusual in someone running for public office.
It’s becoming apparent supporters of other candidates are feeling a need to attack Bruce. Fine. That’s how it goes. I’ll leave it to Bruce and his campaign to defend themselves. But I wanted to let you know why I support his candidacy so strongly. Great person, great message, principled, organized, likeable, viable. Maine would be lucky to have him as Governor.
The NRA supports mandatory instant background checks for the safety of the people. I don’t understand the problem of instant background checks to deter criminals from receiving guns. You guys are obviously taking this out of proportion and distorting Poliquin’s answer by saying he supports increases on gun regulation. Let’s stop the polemics, for all these comments have been derogatory and unsubstantiated. Moreover, Bruce has always been open about his past.
If you could take the time to research Bruce and read his Bio one would see this:
“After college, the first company I helped build was an asset management firm. Our privately owned company, Avatar Investors Associates Corporation, managed nearly $5 billion of worker pension funds for corporations such as Bath Iron Works and International Paper. The three of us who managed the company were entrusted every day with the safe and productive investment of more money than our Maine state government spends in a year.”
Also, as CC above states, he was apart of Dirigo Holdings for several years. Now rather than trying to skewer Poliquin by making erroneous comments maybe everyone should do their own research. Everything is available on the web or through his website.
Also, where is this layer upon layer of dishonesty and how can you prove that he has been incompetent in his management? Not only are these unsupported, but they are just mean. I have seen nothing but Bruce’s love for Maine and it’s residents; he is not trying to mislead them. And remember that success is not a negative trait; it means that one has a strong skills set in his or her specific area. Bruce’s skill set that made him successful is asset management and business executive strength. Now, I want a governor who has these qualities and can therefore ameliorate the current fiscal crisis in the state.
@Reid – thanks for the info. It certainly helps.
I think I read on Bruce’s site that he left Avatar Associates in 1989. He formed Dirigo Holdings on April 1st, 2005 a few months after he approached the Phippsburg Planning Board about a cluster-home subdivision he wanted to develop on some property he owns there. There’s a big gap in the timeline between 1989 and 2005. Since 2005 what projects have been developed to fruition under Dirigo Holdings? It appears that there are a few still in the planning stages five years years later but none that have broken ground.
I do recognize that Bruce has a very thorough and unique understanding of the burdens of Maine’s regulatory system as a direct result of his projects. That is indeed valuable experience. I won’t deny that fact.
However, I’d love to see some evidence of at least one successful business venture since 1989 from the leading Republican candidate. It really shouldn’t be that difficult to find one.
@ Rufus
I’m not exactly sure what he was doing business-wise, post-1989 and pre-Dirigo Holdings. I know that his wife died in 1989 and he chose to take care of his son who was 1 year old at the time. And I do know from his bio that he worked in the community. He states: “In addition to my financial and business management experience, I have a passion to help my fellow Mainers. I’ve served on the boards of a number of non-profit organizations. One is the Natural Resources Council of Maine, the largest environmental advocate in the State. Another is North Yarmouth Academy, an independent middle and high school, where I presided over the board. For 17 years I coached baseball/softball players at Maine colleges and high schools, and in Little League. In 2003 I was flattered to receive the Portland Press Herald’s High School Baseball Coach of the Year Award. I appreciate our pristine natural environment; understand the importance of education; and enjoy helping Maine kids.”
I’m sure a Poliquin staffer could inform us both of any business ventures during that period, but I don’t believe I am in a position to answer that questions.
I found this from zoom info:
Bruce Poliquin is at the center of two of the largest potential developments in the area. Already approved by the Phippsburg Planning Board, the Popham Woods subdivision will be the largest in town history once its last phase is completed in about five years. In Bath, Poliquin is hopeful to get city officials to change their minds about shifting the zoning from commercial to residential for the former site of the Stinson cannery, which burned down on May 4.
http://pophamwoodsmaine.com/pdfs/specsheet.pdf
It also states on his website:
“One of my recent businesses, an environmentally-sensitive housing development, has provided good work to more than 200 Mainers. So far, it has injected $4 million into the state economy.”
I believe one of Bruce’s story of the red tape prevalent in our state is about either a land use regulation, or planning regulation that ensued for two years before he could develop.
I’m sure there are more examples, but here are a few.
Thank you for the info and help with this.
I’ve been reading this thread and I still didn’t see an answer from the Mills/Abbott people about why their candidates oppose the NRA on background checks. Please enlighten us.
Frenchy- Could you please elaborate on the “layers of dishonesty”
Lets see the facts! Who is the ex-con from Tenn.? Which candidate
told you to come out and trash Bruce Poliquin, if you dare tell me!
John,
Most of the commenters trying to trash Bruce on this site are Abbott supporters. Same goes (but to a lesser extent) on another site, As Maine Goes. For the most part, supporters of other candidates have engaged in respectful debate.
Creating jobs is all well and fine, but that hardly qualifies someone to be Governor. Poliquin sounds like he’s doing his best Mitt Romney impression. Many Democrats and independent voters are going to be wary to support someone who has zero legislative or public sector experience.
Garrett, you’re right – there are a ton of Abbott supporters out here
Popham Woods is Bruce Poliquin’s environmentally sensitive housing development. He’s only sold 1 or 2 the last 2-3 years. The resistance that ensued started from local residents and abutting neighbors who opposed the project because vernal pools were in danger, setbacks couldn’t be met, and suddenly imposing hundreds of additional people on his neighbors at Popham Beach.
He got his way, but it wasn’t well received by TRUE Popham lovers.
The Stinson Cannery site is the last working waterfront parcel in Bath, so City Council/Planning Board are hesitant to re-zone. They were/are hoping that a working waterfront business would buy the cannery and use the building and create jobs.
Poliquin has repeatedly exaggerated the number of donors he has, and the amount of money he has raised.
The ex-con from Tennessee is named Tyler Harber, he runs the Poliquin campaign through his company, Wilson Strategies. He is a former employee of Public Opinion Strategies, who has been caught repeatedly lying about his work with that company. So much so, that POS had to issue statements clarifying Harber’s lies. His legal trouble stems from an incident at the Knoxville Mayor’s office, where he allegedly hacked into the GOP chair’s email account, and ran a political operation with city resources.
You can read more about his legal problems by doing a google search on him. Here is a link to start with:
http://knoxvilleunwrapped.blogspot.com/2007/09/tyler-harber-lies.html
I’d take the Tenn guy over Mike Leavitt who is a soon-to-be former RNC staffer who has been trying to get on the Abbott campaign by creating that stupid ad against Otten.
This has been very entertaining from a reading standpoint.
First off, who in this group really wants your run of the mill psychopath to walk in to Kittery Trading Post and purchase a firearm without a background check? If you propose that should be allowable then I hope said psychopath is hunting you and not me. I believe this was the actual reason for this particular debate (please refer to above headline)although it has come full circle into a debate about candidates.
Secondly, ALL people running for political office have their own agenda. It is up to us to choose a candidate who we want to support based on their agenda. If you find a single person who shares every single one of your own convictions, good for you. Vote for that person. I do support Bruce because I believe in MOST of what he is presenting. I do believe that this state needs to be run from a managerial standpoint and NOT a political standpoint (for now).
This state, among many others is in a financial mess. Go take a look at the Piglet Book (mainepolicy.org) and tell me we do not need to curtail the waste. I want to support a candidate that has the cajones to stand up to despartment heads and tell them to run their department like a business. By doing so we may be able to eliminate the financial crisis which will allow us to afford the social agenda.
625 state employees accounted for 7.74 million dollars worth of overtime. Cut that overtime by 90% and you would have almost 7 million to fund social issues. No, Bruce’s platform does not weigh heavily on the social side. He has centered his efforts on the economy. Here’s a novel concept – - Get your financial house in order so you have the financial ability to attack the other issues. Plus, I think we have a legislature for tackling the social issues. We are not voting in a omnipotent power.
Well that puts Hard”Knox”vol in a new perspective. Either someone is trying to make it look like this guy is related to all that ad mess or Tyler Harber actually is. Of course I have no proof of either. I just thought I’d throw that out there for debate.
Popham beach is still in the construction phase. Only one unit has been sold. I believe Phase 2 will be opening soon. In the end there will be almost 70 condominiums on over 180 acres with access to the Popham Beach club. There was a compromise with the residents of Popham Beach area – at least that is what the realtor has explained.
Lee says, “Creating jobs is all well and fine, but that hardly qualifies someone to be Governor. Poliquin sounds like he’s doing his best Mitt Romney impression. Many Democrats and independent voters are going to be wary to support someone who has zero legislative or public sector experience.” I don’t understand how legislative experience serves to prepare someone for executive experience. Bruce does have executive and managerial experience in the private sector that would serve him well as the governor of Maine. Poliquin is not attempting to be someone else (Mitt Romney). He is a businessman with executive experience, not a politician.
“Poliquin has repeatedly exaggerated the number of donors he has, and the amount of money he has raised.” Maybe you should actually read his announcement of the report before you make assumptions like this. He has never lied about the number of donors, or the amount of funds he has raised. Just go to his website.
I think that some people’s definition of “raised” when applied to political donations implies something very different than the Poliquin campaign has portrayed. Yes, the Poliquin campaign has a lot of money. That isn’t up for debate.
Take this statement from Bruce’s website as an example: “In addition, Poliquin received $129,765 through in-kind donations, making his total for the last reporting period $355,233.”
At face value that seems very impressive. Then if you look at the actual campaign finance report he filed with the State Ethics Commission you realize that all of those in-kind contributions came from Bruce himself. (If you don’t believe me go look yourself: http://www.mainecampaignfinance.com/netCrystalReports/CandidateCombinedReport.aspx?Params=76450;Jan%202010%20Pre-Election%20Semiannual%20%28July09%20filers%29;NNNYNNNNN&GUID=public&Year=2010&MCEA=0)
That’s a half-truth. The statement should have been “Bruce also provided $129k to his campaign through in-kind donations.” I don’t know if the intention was to be deceitful but it certainly has that feel to it. Whoever is crafting the message is doing Bruce a disservice when they put out stuff like this. Mainers don’t like it when someone tries to BS them, IMO.
Will he go to the next Phase of building if he hasn’t yet sold the condos in the first phase? Why build another 15-20 condos when the first ones haven’t sold yet? And there was no compromise between Poliquin and the Popham residents. The Popham residents were not happy about his development or beach club and they fought it.
As a NRA lifetime member and certified rifle instructor, I am disgusted by this blatantly biased article and that this issue has even gone this far. I was there at the AGC meeting and I can whole heartedly say that I would have answered yes to the question and my answer would have been in line with the NRA’s official position. Now could a “yes” answer be misconstrued as a vote for mandatory background checks for all firearm’s purchases, yes I can see that. The question was not clear and as Peg said three people said yes all them being the only candidates with no political experience. Do you think this is a coincidence? I certainly do not.
Now onto the issue of Mr. Poliquin’s donation in 1989 (in bold for emphasis) it was 1989 in New York City. I don’t think you could walk down a side walk and not get mugged or held up by some thug with a firearm. This organization was crucial in getting a federal background check for all new firearms purchases. Which at the time the NRA was vehemently opposed to but since 1989 the NRA has come around. They have realized that there have been 100 million firearms sales and only 1.3 million were denied by the background check. These 1.8 million firearms didn’t get into the hands of Murderers, Child molesters and Rapists. If anything the instant background check has helped our cause and not hurt it! Anyone who denies this is not rational.
Now I would like to respond to Tom G. you seem to be a steward of the State Constitution as am I. Article 1. Section 16. “Every citizen has a right to keep and bear arms and this right shall never be questioned” Could you please explain as such a steward of the Constitution how a background check that does not prevent a law abiding citizen from owning and possessing a firearm is a violation of section 16? You forfeit your right when you chose to harm another human being. This is in accordance with both English Common Law and Roman Civil Law.
Ben- If you know anything about real estate you would know
that we are in a recession and home sales are down. This project
will be finished and will sell out in a matter of time, as the economy turns around. Every project has people against it. So Ben who are you supporting?
Poliquin is getting hit by wingbats that are afraid that his money will shut out Abbott from even having a chance. That’s all this is.
Well, currently the financial crisis has damaged the real estate market creating a surplus of available homes. I assume that once the housing market turns around then there would be some success. Only a few houses have been constructed at the moment.
As for the compromise, I believe that the houses can not be seen from Popham beach.
Here is a statement from the realtor:
“I have to say that I think the developer did an excellent job accommodating both sides. The development is set well back and not visible from the Popham Road. It also has an incredible amount of untouched land that will never be developed. The developer also took great pains to ensure that the beach club blends with the surrounding cottages. In the end, I guess it depends on how you feel about development in the area. I have to say, I would not want to see the beauty of Popham spoiled with beachfront condos, but to each his own.”
As for in kind donations, I was always under the impression that they were mostly purchased by the campaign. Bruce, has not attempted to hide the fact that he donates (not loans) money to his campaign to show that he is financially vested in the campaign. He also, stated that since the beginning of the campaign he has received approximately 250,000 dollars in donations from over 1000 individuals. But he has never lied about or exaggerated any claims about his funds and the number of contributers as stated by Reg.
That “1000 individuals” claim is another area where Bruce’s message folks are doing him a disservice. I’ll bore you a little further with a debunking of this claim.
The data is on the Ethics website for anyone to analyze if they want. He’s received 701 donations from 568 individual donors that are greater than $50. Many of these donors were kind enough to donate in both reporting periods and reached their maximum contribution of $750. He’s done a great job reaching out to these people. (BTW, Individuals do not include corporate donations of which Bruce received 47 donations.)
When you filter for donations from Maine residents the numbers drop to 349 donations that where >$50 from 296 people. So a little over half of his individual donations are from Maine residents. It would be interesting to know what percentage of them are likely Republican primary voters.
A candidate doesn’t have to report the names of people giving less than $50 but you can infer a minimum number of donors by taking the total and diving it by $50. This means there’s at least 200 people that gave less than $50. To get up to more than 1000 individual donors that would mean that at least 432 people donated less than an average of $23/each. I’ll admit that it’s possible but I consider it unlikely.
I would agree that Bruce has received more than 1000 donations from individuals but not from over 1000 individual donors. Are his campaign’s claims deceitful? People can decide for themselves.
A “staunch supporter of the 2nd Amendment” would have answered NO on this question, PERIOD. You cannot answer YES to that question and be a supporter of the 2nd Amendment to any degree.
Background checks are anti-gun. None of our other constitutional rights are subject to background checks. Gun ownership shouldn’t be either. If you support gun control at any level you are out of touch with the people you are trying to represent. The current laws are anti-gun and any additional regulation would be even more anti-gun.
Answering YES to that question MEANS you are against the second amendment and gun rights. There is no murkiness on this issue. Misunderstanding the question is no excuse – that means you are simply not competent to be governor. Misunderstanding is even worse, in my opinion.
If you don’t care about gun rights, that’s fine. Then you can go ahead and support Bruce. But if you do care about gun rights, you can’t justify your support of someone who is more liberal on this issue than Libby mitchell and Steven Rowe.
I guess what I’m getting at Reid, is that this $4million environmentally friedly development is being presented as one of Mr. Poliquin’s success stories and it’s much too premature to view it as a success. It only sold one house.Did he spend $4million to build it? Apparently so. Did it go into back into the State economy, I guess it did and that was very generous of him. Has it turned out to be a good business decision? Not yet.
No, you do not see the condos from Popham Beach. They are 2 miles away from Popham Beach, but he is hoping to sell those condos and have the beach club available to them. The building is fine, it’s the amount of people he wants to funnel on to that property and on to the beach that the upset the community. He had a parcel with 2 cottages, now it’s a club for 150 household memberships. Will this affect the quality of life for the neighborhood? Without a doubt. His gain, their loss….
You Poliquin supporters are seriously the lamest bunch of excuse making, kool-aid drinking zombies I have ever seen.
There was a reason that basically everyone, including the Democrats, said “no” to this question. It is because it was VERY obviously asking about an extension of the background check beyond what we currently have. If they were asking “do you support the current law that basically everyone, including the NRA, supports”, not only would it be pointless, but they’d have said so.
He can claim ignorance if he wants, but everyone on that stage knew what the question was about – extending background checks to ALL guns.
He might have been able to claim it was a “mistake” to say that, but now we have proof he actually gave money to a group who wanted and still wants to go WAY further than that, and ban all guns. Kudos to Matt for doing the digging that none of the reporters in this frigging state seem to want to do.
Anyway, this excuse train is pathetic. It was a bad answer, admit it and move on.
Mike, no offense, but you’re out of touch with gun owners on this. While a few like you may oppose instant background checks, the vast majority of gun owners (and NRA members) support them as a commonsense way to keep guns out of the hands of criminals without violating their 2nd Amendment rights. Sorry, but you’re just wrong on this one.
The responses on this topic from the crazies shows that Bruce Poliquin is the frontrunner. Notice that everyone is attacking Bruce for not being a supporter of the Second Amendment and trying to discredit him. Bruce is in line with the NRA on this issue but all of the crazies don’t want to accept that. This just shows that Bruce is the candidate to fear. Mark Smith, “Rufus” is trying to discredit the number of donors he has and saying that it is deceitful. Mark and his wife Stephanie Dunn, have been on here taking shots at Bruce because they know he is lightyears ahead of their guy, Peter Mills. If people on this blog want to talk about people out of touch with Mainers how bout Peter Mills. He has voted to raise the sales tax and meals tax, he voted for homosexual marriage as well. That is out of touch with the people of Maine. Instead of focusing on this people are trying to discredit the frontrunner. It is shady politics and something we do not need here in Maine
Oooh, great sleuthing there on outing me. Impressive. (Not really.)
I stand by the facts on the number of donors Poliquin has. I’ve also tried to be factual in all of my posts here. I don’t feel that there’s a need to lie about these things. You can choose to ignore the facts it but you can’t deny deny them.
I do truly believe that whoever is crafting Bruce’s message is doing a very poor job. He is a great candidate, I will not deny that fact, but when his message is littered with half-truths written by others on his behalf they do him no good.
BTW, The reasons that you cite for Peter being “out of touch with Mainers” are actually the reasons why people like myself and many others are volunteering for his campaign.
60 comments (it is a hornet’s nest).
I’m also a Yes.
I’m not anti-gun, but I am anti-crime, and I believe that this is both an important and meaningful distinction.
I believe advocating for background checks on gun purchasers to be a prudent measure.
Self-correct – Support would be a more accurate descriptor than advocate
Garrett, try reading. I didn’t use the word “instant”, and neither did Pat McGowan in his question. He was not referring to current law, either – only I was. Nor was he referring to laws governing Federally licensed firearms dealers. Anyone with half an ounce of sense would understand that. You seem to be as confused about this issue and out of touch as Bruce is.
Background checks have shown little to no ability to stop criminals from getting guns. They simply buy them through purchases not covered by background checks. You know what IS a good way to keep guns out of the hands of criminals? Keep criminals in jail.
MMR, the question was about extending background checks to cover private sales. The NRA does NOT support this; that’s a flat-out lie.
If tearing up the Bill of Rights and ignoring the Constitution puts you ahead, I’d rather be behind. Again, from the Maine Constitution:
“Every citizen has a right to keep and bear arms and this right shall never be questioned.”
You don’t like that? Move.
Nobody who supports additional gun control measures is a great candidate for anything. Having answered “Yes” to this question, Bruce cannot win a statewide general election in Maine. You think Libby Mitchell and Steven Rowe said “No” because they’re big fans of gun rights? Of course not. But they do have half an ounce of political sense.
Maine has one of the highest gun ownership rates in the nation. Maine has never elected a governor who favors additional gun control measures, and that will never change. If Scarcelli or Poliquin were to win their nominations they’d lose the general because of their answer to this question.
Even nationally less than half of Americans support stricter gun laws, and this number has only been dropping over the last ten years, not rising. Why do you think Obama has basically ignored the issue? It’s a toxic issue nationally, and it’s only more so in Maine.
“Mandatory Backrground checks on purchase of firearm.” I don’t see how tat is extending Maine law. NRA supports instant background checks, but instant is irrelevant because it is a form of background check. Bruce is supporting present Maine Law and the position of the NRA.
“Background checks have shown little to no ability to stop criminals from getting guns. They simply buy them through purchases not covered by background checks. You know what IS a good way to keep guns out of the hands of criminals? Keep criminals in jail.” – Does that serve as an excuse to let criminals buy guns? The background check is to make sure past criminals don’t receive guns; law-abiding citizens receive guns.
“Nobody who supports additional gun control measures is a great candidate for anything. Having answered “Yes” to this question, Bruce cannot win a statewide general election in Maine. You think Libby Mitchell and Steven Rowe said “No” because they’re big fans of gun rights?” – They don’t support support additional gun control measures. If you ask me, Eliot Cutler and Bruce are the only candidates who understand the purpose of instant background checks. Their views coincide with those of the NRA and Maine Law. This debate is becoming redundant. The question was whether you support mandatory background checks. Well, who doesn’t support instant background checks. “Instant” background checks are background checks, no?
Oh, no! Of course, bring out the constitution, just don’t understand that other are in jeopardy by giving gun rights to a past criminal. The constitution is not perfect for every situation… there are extraneous variables in which one action can affect two areas of the constitution. We need to then determine what is more important…
Rufus, I never said I did any great detective work to find out who you are. As for Peter being out of touch with Mainers, yes that is true. Just because you and your wife are Ron Paul supporters and No on 1 fans does not mean that Mills is looking out for all of Maine. So your candidate has sided himself with something that lost 63/37 IN HIS OWN DISTRICT. That doesnt mean he is looking out for the state, it means he is looking out for what he wants for himself.
Reid, Maine does not currently have mandatory background checks on all firearm purchases. If Bruce supports that, he is not supporting Maine law or the NRA position, he’s supporting the anti-gun, anti-constitution nuts.
McGowan’s question was covering extending current law; it was not referencing current law. The fact you fail to understand that, I suppose, explains how you can continue to support Bruce.
The constitution is, indeed, perfect for every situation. Nothing is more important than following the constitution. Allowing politicians to ignore the constitution in favor of their own priorities leads to tyranny. You want that, we might as well just call this whole democracy thing off.
Maine is a low-crime, high-gun ownership state. There’s no need to further restrict gun rights in Maine. The actions of criminals are not an excuse to ignore the constitution. That’s twisted, undemocratic logic.
Again, for those of you who fail to understand, here is current Maine law:
* Those purchasing guns from a Federally licensed firearm dealer are subject to background checks, whether they buy the gun at a show, in the shop, or at an Applebee’s.
* Individual sales are not covered by the background check requirement. A bill to require this was introduced in the first session of the 124th Legislature. The National Rifle Association, the Sportsmen’s Alliance of Maine, and a variety of other groups came together in opposition. It was shot down unanimously in committee.
* While not specific, it was clear to me (and most others) that McGowan’s question referred to expanding current law to cover individual sales.
* Maine has an extraordinarily low violent crime rate, and an even lower gun crime rate, while having a very high gun ownership rate.
* Very few guns used in crimes can actually be traced back to gun show sales, from a dealer or an individual.
* Many gun shows do not even allow private sales in connection with the show anyway.
After reading this thread, I just had to comment. I haven’t voted for a Republican in a very long time, and I’m not sure whom I’ll vote for in the next governor’s race. What I do know is that Bruce is indeed the nicest, most genuine person, with no hidden agenda except to help Maine. Any negative comments about his hiding anything or not being forthcoming are laughable. This is not the guy you need to criticize for something like that. Bruce is what he is, and says what he means. His businesses are transparent and there’s information out there. Thank goodness he worked so hard and did so well earlier in his life that he is now in a position to run this race and donate some of his own money to getting his message across. Someone has to be really cynical to question Bruce Poliquin’s integrity or sincerity. As for the background checks for gun ownership? He did not say he was against gun ownership, for heaven’s sake. He said he wants background checks. In this day and age, that’s not a bad idea. Again, that doesn’t mean one can’t own a gun. (Unless one is found to be a felon or mentally unstable.) Let’s not overreact. The NRA doesn’t even overreact to that. This guy’s the real thing, and may be just what Maine needs.
First off, the question was, “Do you support mandatory background checks for ALL firearm sales in Maine?”. That is not an ambiguous question. No confusion there. It was a simple direct clear question. And I am certain the words were chosen correctly in order to ask it. So, please, knock it off. The question is the question. His answer is his answer.
Secondly, the criminals are not lining up to follow the law. Law abiding citizens follow the law.
Does anyone remember the proposed bill last session to address ‘the Uncle Henry’s loophole’?
And in regards to the NRA…it is an organization that supports gun control.
Most current example: The NRA has hired as their head counsel for McDonald v. Chicago, Paul Clement, the attorney who advocated against our gun rights in Heller.
Clement: “The Second Amendment talks about “the right to bear arms”, not just “a right to bear arms”. And that preexisting always coexisted with reasonable regulations of firearms.” Yup…THIS is who the NRA hires to fight the McDonald case.
Here is a link that illustrates: http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2010/01/26/nra-cares-more-about-nra-than-gun-rights-liberty-professional-courtesy/
Now, as far as Bruce is concerned, and my perspective: my right to self-defense is not to be gambled with or traded in for a possibility that a wizard, yeah, some biz-wiz, will fix our local economics. I don’t care how great a business manager a person is, if you believe that ‘reasonable’ restrictions whether they be background checks, ammo limits or trigger locks etc..are acceptable, there really is no limit to the outcomes. The definition of ‘reasonable’ has been known to change in other States across our Union and if one studies history there is plenty of info to educate on how gun-control evolves into total disarmament of populations. Each ’small’ encroachment leads to another.
Everyone and their brother needs to know that Bruce Poliquin allows for this. Again, gun laws only restrict the law abiding.
Without the right of the individual to bare arms, all other rights are not secure. Period.
The guy gave 500 bucks to Handgun Control Inc in 1989 that says it all.
This is not about the NRA, it’s about the 2nd amendment, Maine’s constitution and Poliquin’s potential election to the head seat.
He might make a viable democrat candidate, because dems love the heavy hand of government upon our lives.
I discuss and expand on Rosa’s challenge on this gun background checks issue on my WGAN interview yesterday. http://bit.ly/9mP3×4
[...] brings me to the AGC forum that I wrote about previously. Missed in all the fuss about Bruce Poliquin’s answer on background checks was a [...]
[...] for example, the tone of conversation here on Pine Tree Politics. Go to really any article about one of the candidates, and watch unfold the bloodbath. What you will see is any number of the supporters of one [...]
Leave a comment!
The Town Hall »
Mainers Calling for Competent Management
The jaw-dropping victory by Scott Brown in the Massachusetts Senate race completes an I-95 trifecta that started in Virginia, headed north to New Jersey, and landed in the Bay State. Where does the momentum go …
Commentary »
Maine Needs A Governor Like Chris Christie
Republican Governor of New Jersey Chris Christie has been making a lot of noise lately for doing something that was entirely unexpected: being blunt, speaking truth, and pragmatically dealing with problems that his state …
...So Goes The Nation »
Things, They Are A-Changing In The Republican Party
Few would have believed it possible only a couple years ago, but the Republican Party is increasingly being made less hospitable for culture warriors.
I’ve been arguing since my days in college – which, looking back, …
Media Appearances »
Matt Gagnon on Drive Time Bangor 2.10.10
Last Wednesday, Matt Gagnon of Pine Tree Politics called in to Drive Time Bangor to talk about the Washington D.C. Snowpocalypse, party caucuses in Maine, and the curious campaign of Jason Levesque.
Every Wednesday, Matt talks …
Fan Us On Facebook
Authors
Most Popular Articles
Recent Comments
Democratic Politics
Government
Maine Political Blogs
Media
Republican Politics
Archive
Tag Cloud
2008 Election 2010 Democratic Gubernatorial Primary 2010 Gubernatorial Race 2010 Republican Gubernatorial Primary Announcement Bill Beardsley Bruce Poliquin Campaign Finance Chellie Pingree Democratic Politics Drive Time Bangor Election Day Eliot Cutler Gay Marriage Gubernatorial Interviews Hannah Pingree Healthcare Reform Jason Levesque John Richardson Kevin Raye Les Otten Libby Mitchell Maine's First Congressional District Maine's Second Congressional District Maine House Maine House Legislation Maine Presidential Leadership Series Maine Republican Party Maine Senate Matt Jacobson Mike Michaud New Media Olympia Snowe Pat McGowan Paul LePage Peter Mills Republican Agenda Republican Politics Rosa Scarcelli Steve Abbott Steve Rowe Susan Collins TABOR Tax Reform US SenateRandom Posts
Latest Video Post
Most Commented
Most Popular