Web Search powered by YAHOO! SEARCH
Which party will prevail for Missouri’s top office?
St. Louis Post-Dispatch
  • Email this
  • Print this

With last week’s announcement by Missouri Gov. Matt Blunt that he would not seek re-election, the field of potential candidates has widened with several state officer holders either throwing their hat in the ring, or they’re seriously considering a run.

U.S. Rep. Kenny Hulshof, Lt. Gov. Peter Kinder, Treasurer Sarah Steelman, have all taken the leap to declare their intentions. But other high-profile names are also considering a run.

Names like U.S. Attorney Catherine Hanaway of St. Louis, Senate Majority Leader Charlie Shields of St. Joseph and House Speaker Rod Jetton of Marble Hill — are also considering a run.

Monday’s story by Jefferson City bureau chief Virginia Young points out that no matter how much Republican leaders want to avoid a costly primary battle in August, several candidates are headed for a slugfest for the GOP nomination for governor.

“For the first time in a long time, there’s no heir apparent to the Republican mantle in Missouri,” said one longtime GOP activist.Behind the scenes, aides to Blunt and U.S. Sen. Christopher “Kit” Bond are trying to build a consensus around Hulshof, party activists say. Hulshof almost ran for governor in 2004 but was nudged out when party leaders favored Blunt.

On the Democratic side, Attorney General Jay Nixon still has most of the momentum, but others are also considering a run. In any case, it’ll be a wild political year in Missouri as November’s election approaches. Will Matt Blunt’s dropping out of the governor’s race be helpful for his fellow Republicans or the Democratic candidates vying for the top state office?

reader comments

COMMENTING RULES: We encourage an open exchange of ideas in the STLtoday community, but we ask you to follow . Basically, be civil, smart, on-topic and free from profanity. Don't say anything you wouldn't want your mother to read! And remember: We may miss some, so we need your help to police these comments. Please identify the comment, the story and why you think it's objectionable. Read the commenting guidelines

Comments are closed.

22 Comments

  1. suzyjax  January 29, 2008 at 3:12 UTC

    The Missouri Savings for Tuition program (MOST) is a savings tool for “the little guy” with its low minimum initial investment–$25–and relatively low management fees. The MOST plan was one of the best in the nation for the investors. I think the Missouri’s bankers and brokers saw that too–and demanded their piece of the action.

    I worked in the financial industry when they suggested these changes. We employees were barraged with requests to support these changes because of the money it would make for the firm.

    That’s greedy, not doing what is best for the citizens.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  2. Amazedbythelunacy  January 29, 2008 at 10:56 UTC

    There is nothing wrong with our 529. There are more options now and one of them is to pay a broker. The opportunity still exists to do-it-yourself with the MOST program and many intelligent people choose to do so.

    If we reduced government by half tomorrow, we would all be better off for it.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  3. lf  January 28, 2008 at 9:29 UTC

    Sarah Steelman soiled our 529 state college savings plan. The fact that she can be influenced by the money-grubbers makes her a poor choice for governor.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  4. Cathy-M  January 28, 2008 at 4:45 UTC

    #17, Sorry Ryan, but I think everyone in this state is a bonafide hoosier, with the possible exception of St. Louis and Kansas City. It drives me nuts to hear Mizzourah……It is Missouri (miz-ouree) folks. The Baby Gov (Blunt) was a joke. This is the Democrats to win….and they better win both the national and state elections this year, or we are toast.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  5. suzyjax  January 28, 2008 at 2:55 UTC

    tsquare
    I know it’s easy to get all of us Dems confused. We look alike right?
    Anyways, maybe I really, really hope for a Nixon victory. But have never bragged it was to happen.

    Ryan,
    I used your Missouri vs Missouria at one point. Except there’s been elections where all of them mispronounce the name of the state.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  6. Ryan On The Euphonium  January 28, 2008 at 2:31 UTC

    I’ll vote for anyone who knows how to pronounce “Missouri” (miz-ur-ee), not “Missourah”. Not everyone in this state is a bonifide hoosier!

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  7. Teresa  January 28, 2008 at 2:14 UTC

    A cardboard cutout of Al Gore could have beat Matt Blunt. With young Mr. Matthew stepping aside, the Reps can pull their usual shenanigans — they knew they were toast with Blunt running. If the Dems know what is good for them, they will NOT run Robin Carnahan — there are plenty of us who voted for her for sec of state, where she seems to have done a decent job, but are leery enough of the whole female nepotism thing this year that we won’t vote for her for Ms. Governor, nor for Ms. Hillary for Pres, although a person does have more choice of spouse than choice of parent.

    I’m not a big fan of Jay Nixon, but hey, he wants this so badly (and has ever since he ran for state senate upteenth years ago) let him show his stuff. As long as whoever becomes gov isn’t from the Springfield area, I can probably live with it.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  8. Petey  January 28, 2008 at 1:56 UTC

    It really doesn’t matter if the repubs or dems win. They are all corrupt, and it’s just a matter of when the US populace grows some nads and throws the mutha of all revolution parties. Back years ago, we had the idealistic young. Too many of the young have come into cushy lives and have turned republican to protect their interests. I can understand that. I just can’t understand the Wal-Mart shopping lower middle class, largely uneducated, fearful people who fell for that terrorist boogymen story and voted a party in that cares little about their sorry, endlessly breeding butts.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  9. tsquare  January 28, 2008 at 1:05 UTC

    Suzyjak:

    You wound me my lady… If I am mis-remembering then I am… but still I find all the new found fear on ‘your side’ funny.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  10. Slugger  January 28, 2008 at 10:34 UTC

    I would assume the democrats would if they put up folks like Robin Carnahan. It just seems the republicans are running around trying to unstick things from their various orifices. See tonight\’s Bush speech for great examples of that. My poor cat! Am thinking he\’ll have me yelling at the TV screen again and scaring the poor creature. Perhaps he will tell us why more liberal lending standards and a raise in the gov\’ment loan limits (now some are around $400,000) is something we should be underwriting. If you can get a $400,000 loan, you don\’t need my tax money to protect your bankers. I suppose I should be happy he is placating the people and not mentioning the crooked lending practices that prey on the poor and uninformed. If he doesn\’t mention criminal proceeding against some of these crooks, I have no respect happening for any of the folks in power. Hey Rob, you want to foreclose on me to fund your campaign? Nah! You don\’t have to own my debt to do that. I\’ll only be all too glad to help you gain power by whatever means necessary. Here, some chads for you my man. You may need them. You\’re welcome.
    (Kurt…the blog is hosed! Threw me to an error page, then took half the post off when it reloaded. Just tell me to hush next time)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  11. suzyjax  January 28, 2008 at 10:27 UTC

    Tsquare
    Quit putting words in my mouth. I never said such a thing. I’ve never “talked smack” when it comes to elections.
    Tsquare—You are a liar!!!!!

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  12. Slugger  January 28, 2008 at 10:26 UTC

    I would assume the democrats would if they put up folks like Robin Carnahan. It just seems the republicans are running around trying to unstick things from their various orifices. See tonight’s Bush speech for great examples of that.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  13. tsquare  January 28, 2008 at 10:24 UTC

    Boy Boyd, one wonders why you stay here… doesn’t seem like there is much that you like about ol’ “Muh-zou-ruh”

    For the last year, at the very least folks like our friend Suzyjax has been telling us just how badly Nixon was going to beat Blunt.

    Now, she’s not so sure he can win in this “wild political year”.

    I find that horribly funny…

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  14. Boyd  January 28, 2008 at 9:47 UTC

    This would be hard to call. Traditional wisdom would suggest that the incumbent Governnor’s dropping out would strengthen the candidacy of a well-known and presumably solidly funded Democrat like Nixon. But, as Suzy points out, we can never know — too many wild cards.

    And although the Republican side of the ledger would appear to be left weakened, especially after the pitiful performance the last four years of smarmy little Matt, but then, who would have predicted that a totally unqualified nothinghead like him would have gotten in, anyway? Well….the answer would be those who know how the dirty machinery in this state work. All Roy’s Boy had to do is put on a tie and say as little as possible, so as to appear something other than stupid. So if this debacle is possible, I think you could sell the average “Muh-zou-ruh” voter pretty much anything. Right on, Suzy — count no chickens….

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  15. 7dez7  January 28, 2008 at 9:28 UTC

    Neither, frankly, deserves to.

    While Blunt has been uninspiring and inconsistent as Governonr, no Republican said anything to suggest s/he would demand improvement or accountability, or offer an alternative until Blunt announced he would retire from public service following his present term.

    Despite Blunt’s weak performance, Democrats were content to let Jay Nixon (who, it seems, has been running for Governor for eleven years) to be their standard-bearer until Blunt’s announcement.

    Blunt’s announcement and Jim Talent’s decision to not seek the governorship have caused a number of uninspiring suspects to show interest in the job:
    – Robin Carnahan, whose father created many of the budget woes that doomed his elected successor Bob Holden to the name “one term Bob”
    – JoAnn Emerson, who is now not only married to a Democrat political consultant, but also speaks as if she gets from him the same political strategy and advice that he sells to his Democrat clients
    – Rod Jetton, the House speaker who despite having the largest Republican majority in generations, has done precious little to promote Republican ideas or unity
    – Debra Steelman, who apparently still can’t decide which statewide elected office she will pursue

    A pox on all their houses.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  16. larry  January 28, 2008 at 9:13 UTC

    I can’t say that if either party takes over it will be much different at all. Business as usual in MO politics. The real question of what will happen should come from who is the biggest lobbiest this year. It is the people with the money that control the government, not us lowly citizens who don’t donate to campaigns and are always complaining about paying more taxes.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  17. Donna Loren  January 28, 2008 at 8:38 UTC

    Not sure. I’d ask Leslie Gore for her thoughts. It’s HER party, after all.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  18. Tom  January 28, 2008 at 8:32 UTC

    Who know’s who or what party will be running the state. It all depends on who keeps their name out of the mud. Know one know’s what information will pop up about the canidates between now and the election. They can only hope that they used the right kind of soap and drink the right kind of beer. You know it does make a difference when it comes to politics.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  19. Ryan On The Euphonium  January 28, 2008 at 8:21 UTC

    First, there’s more to the Blunt story. Let’s all stay tuned.

    Second, although Nixon appears to have benefitted most from the Blunt announcement, Nixon is just another seasonal rainfall. I think, like the rest of the country, Missourians are now looking for an opportunity to elect a new governor who can effect dramatic change. I sense that a fresh face will soon emerge.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  20. suzyjax  January 28, 2008 at 7:50 UTC

    On the surface, it would seem that Blunt’s bow-out would embolden the already strong Nixon candidacy. However, this is politics and it ain’t over ’til it’s over. I’ve learned not to count my chickens until their hatched.

    For example, at this point in 2004 it seemed that any Dem would be able to beat George Bush. Instead, we have a Bush second term.

    I think the only thing we can really predict is that it will indeed be a “wild political year”.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  21. AJ  January 28, 2008 at 6:54 UTC

    This conversation will only be fodder for the extremists on the right and the left. Those who live in the middle know nothing much will change.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  22. robsmyth  January 27, 2008 at 11:43 UTC

    Yes, this will make a big difference! Why????????????

    Because I have decided to run for Governor of Missouri!!!!!

    (Ok – let’s face the facts: are Missourians ready to accept an existentialist Anarcho-Libertarian drug dealing womanizing instigator as their leader? YES! YES! YES! Here is why: if American citizens are brave enough to let a similar kind of guy become the First Lady…..errrr….First Man of the USA then it is a moot point here in ‘ole Saint Louie!)

    So, Vote For ROB SMYTH in 2008!

    (This advertisement paid for by Project Mayhem)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0