Comments on: Evidence of blog influence: Anonymous comment leads Ohio politician to withdraw from race

By: SanJose

SanJose — Fri, 23 May 2008 14:56:36 +0000

College isn’t the place to go for ideas.

By: Detroit

Detroit — Fri, 23 May 2008 04:21:51 +0000

We are what we repeatedly do.

By: Chicago

Chicago — Tue, 20 May 2008 11:23:41 +0000

A good man would prefer to be defeated than to defeat injustice by evil means.

By: Remains of the Day | Writes Like She Talks

Remains of the Day | Writes Like She Talks — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 02:56:32 +0000

[...] Evidence of blog influence: Anonymous comment leads Ohio politician to withdraw from race (15) [...]

By: Jill Miller Zimon

Jill Miller Zimon — Tue, 18 Sep 2007 23:21:21 +0000

Scott! I’m giving you a side-wise You’re talking to a mom look. If you were mixing it up, then, even if the point remains, really – it is significant that Brown made the decision for whatever reasons, SEPARATE FROM a newspaper actually outing him. The method of the outing is absolutely significant in this story. I just don’t find it to be the most compelling aspect.

By: Scott A. Pullins

Scott A. Pullins — Tue, 18 Sep 2007 20:28:12 +0000

Yep, I probably was mixing. But the point remains, he got out of a race, admitting his sexual orientation, over an anonymous blog comment, which all was then picked up by the media.

Just amazing.

By: Jill Miller Zimon

Jill Miller Zimon — Tue, 18 Sep 2007 19:57:25 +0000

Jeff addresses the comment here.

Point of order:

The blow-up, from what I’ve read, wasn’t from the blogs to the media, Scott. It was from the blogs, to Tim Brown via a Republican he knows to Brown then withdrawing from the race. From what I’ve read, Brown chose not to run BEFORE any newspapers wrote about the blog comment (not post btw – though I gather you’re using post and comment interchangeably).

By: Scott A. Pullins

Scott A. Pullins — Tue, 18 Sep 2007 19:31:35 +0000

I’m not anonymous, and I didn’t post the comment. I didn’t even know who Tim Brown was or that he was thinking about running before I got some emails along the line of holy @#$% did you see this?

I got some good confirmation that it was true. And wrote my post. I also sent my post around to the SOB Alliance and some other blogs to provoke some discussion.

I’m with Jill, I am just blown away that this anonymous post could blow up this fast from the blogosphere, to the 527 media, to a point where Tim Brown admits he’s gay and decides not to run.

I allow anonymous posts on my blog but am forced to approve the comments because of spam and a little cyberstalker problem I’ve had over the last year. I likely wouldn’t have allowed that comment to go up on my site until I could have verified the info.

At the minimum I would have commented on it, stated there was no proof at this point etc. Bottom line, I think this one was more powerful than some accusations on political blogs because it mostly turned out to be true.

By: Jill Miller Zimon

Jill Miller Zimon — Mon, 17 Sep 2007 01:43:25 +0000

MW Territory – you’re absolutely right. Obviously the way the outing happened on the blogs is what caught my attention and what I’d much prefer to hear others reflect on. Thanks for the link to your post and I’m sorry I didn’t find it before. I embedded it too – I hope you don’t mind.

By: Jill Miller Zimon

Jill Miller Zimon — Mon, 17 Sep 2007 01:42:16 +0000

Tom – that comment of mine is directly related to what Brown is quoted as saying in the Sentinel-Tribune piece about how, now that his sexual orientation is known, he doesn’t believe that he could ever raise enough money to run a competitive race.

I read between the lines, do definitely correct me if you think I’m wrong. But so long as people who run for elected office have to rely on who likes them and which special interests think they can get something from which candidate, an individual’s preferences – regarding sexual orientation or anything else – are going to play into how much money they can raise.

I went from there to saying that if candidate’s didn’t have to worry that funds would be dependent on those issues, but rather be made available, the same, to all who run (and meet whatever criteria we all decide must be met to be a viable candidate), then we can have candidates who run on their ability and whom we can judge on ability.

Sure, most of us may do that anyway – but I’m a huge proponent of taking the money issue out entirely.

And reading what Brown said made me think, immediately, that if we had publicly financed campaigns, his sexual orientation, as a factor in his running for office, would be neutralized significantly.

That’s a guess. I don’t know for sure, of course.