McMurray stops in Batavia to criticize Collins for backing Trump on Helsinki statements
Congressional challenger Nate McMurray made a series of campaign stops in the NY-27 yesterday, including in Batavia at the Genesee County Fair, to call out Rep. Chris Collins for not calling out President Donald Trump over, what McMurray said, was Trump's false equivalency between the United States and authoritarian-ruled Russia.
Collins has stood by Trump following Trump's press conference with Vladimir Putin in Helsinki, which followed a private meeting between the two leaders, where Trump seemingly dismissed U.S. intelligence reports of Russian interference in the 2016 election.
"I’m disappointed our congressman didn’t come out boldly — I don’t care, if Donald Trump were a Democrat, I don’t care who he is — when someone gets up on a stage and compares America to an authoritarian state you have to stand up and say that is wrong," McMurray said. "As a kid growing up in this country and believing in the future of our country, I am saying that is wrong."
In the midst of bipartisan criticism of Trump's remarks, Collins issued the following statement:
“I share President Trump’s continued frustration as the left continues to try to nullify the 2016 Presidential election with claims of Russian interference. The fact is, any Russian meddling did not make a difference in the election and there was no campaign collusion. It’s time the Mueller investigation comes to a conclusion. I also urge the President to work with Congress to ensure any future Russian attempts to influence our elections are stopped at our border. Unfortunately, this is something the Obama administration failed to do."
McMurray said in the 48 hours after the press conference, his campaign was re-energized by new supporters and new volunteers signing up.
"Republicans, Democrats, and independents alike are getting involved in our campaign and they’re getting involved because they’re worried about the state of our country," McMurray said.
About 24 hours after the press conference, Trump said he misspoke in Helsinki.
"I thought that I made myself very clear, but having just reviewed the transcript ... I realized that there is a need for some clarification," Trump said. "The sentence should have been ... 'I don't see any reason why it wouldn't be Russia.' "
He said he meant to say "wouldn't" instead of "would."
McMurray thinks Collins has a job to do and he's not doing it: Being a check on executive power.
"A big part of being a congressman is you must be a check on the executive branch, even if you love Donald Trump," McMurray said. "We do not live in an authoritarian state like Putin has. We live in a country where people who go to Congress, people who fight for the people of Western New York, need to be a check on the executive branch so we don’t have an expansion of unwarranted power."
The Batavian contacted the Collins campaign and requested a response. Spokesman Bryan Piligra sent over the following quote:
“Residents of Genesee County know Chris puts their interests first in Washington, fighting for our farms, veterans, and small businesses. They also know he proudly supports President Trump and he won’t back down from that support because radical progressives can’t get over the 2016 election."
This guy McMurray ...!?!?!?! Really!!!!
He comes from a failing county, from a flailing city and he is going to criticize anything Trump or Collins has done.
I get it question all you want, to seek further understanding maybe, but come on.
This guy McMurray is completely vacant of any serious argument!
But as far as the left goes, thats all they have....
1st.... fake outrage and disgust
2nd... no real answers on how to handle the situation
3rd... blather to any open ear
4th.... down the road find out that it was handled correctly and the US prospers from the way it was handled, So we drop it and move on to the next FAKE OUTRAGE!
PLEASEEEEEE this guy!
Yeah I was leaning towards him as opposed to Collins but this guy either has his head in the sand or he's already been compromised by the swamp.
“I had hoped President Obama would use tonight’s address to apologize to the American people for his failed policies, which have weakened America’s standing abroad, failed to stop the expansion of ISIS, dramatically increased our national debt, and caused poverty rates across the nation to skyrocket,” said Congressman Collins. “But instead, what I heard was a refusal to own up to any mistakes, and a call to continue on a path that fails to find the solutions working families deserve.
“Americans are demanding a new direction. On the global stage, we need to stand up to our enemies and lead by example. Instead of befriending countries like Iran, who detained U.S. sailors and whose leaders still chant ‘Death to America’ and Cuba, which is holding onto one of our Hellfire missiles, we need to protect allies like Israel.
“When it comes to here at home, the president’s policies have failed to create an economy that can support the middle class. As a result, thousands of Western New Yorkers are still struggling to make ends meet. To get the millions of middle class workers on the sidelines back to work, we need to encourage an environment friendly to job creation through comprehensive tax reform, energy independence, entitlement reform and a patient-centered health care system.
“Unfortunately, the president has stuck his head in the sand, again. Instead of real solutions to the challenges we face, he chose to give us more of his failed rhetoric. America is the greatest country in the world, but if we are to stay the best, we need a leader who will make tough decisions, instead of trying to embellish his legacy.”
- Chris Collins, January 13 2016
I have to wonder based on that (emphasis mine of course), if Obama had done what Trump has done regarding Russia's current electronic warfare campaign, if he would be so quick to call it the work of 'bitter conservatives upset about the election'.
I feel most people already know the answer though I would think, since both sides are party over everything, do and say what you need to do to get elected.
Mike Nixon- Outrage is all anyone brings to the table whether left, center or off the map. How can those who are craning for a "serious argument" hear anything over the din of squawkers? There was eight years of squawking before Trump was elected and there will be (at least) four years of squawking after. Until the populace realizes that something other than squawking is required, the squawking will go on, because that's all those who choreograph this circus want- a distraction. It's not too difficult to figure out: essentially half the country is red and the other, blue. Pit them against each other, stir the pot every few days and voila! You can get away with murder; no one is the wiser. These politicians aren't in office for some high-minded purpose. They are there for privileges and connections that enrich them. Sure they throw a few bones from the table on occasion. Ultimately they serve at the behest of corporations. They don't care about any Second Amendment right to own an AR. They care about the industries that profit from AR sales- and only indirectly. The primary objective is the campaign funding that derives from that industry. Quid pro quo. Campaign contributions are protected speech. Issues like gender, abortion and immigration don't mean a darn thing other than easy buttons to push to rile people up. The last thing "they" want is for things to quiet down; then "they" know the pedestrians are on to something, and the jig is up.
AMEN!!!! C.M. Barons
I have never felt as strong as i do right now, about term limits!
I would love to have someone convince me otherwise.
If your a politician and you want my attention, you better talk about term limits!
I won't vote for anybody who supports term limits.
California has term limits. They've done nothing to fix the state's problems, and never will. Enacting term limits is totally and completely meaningless. The real power isn't with the politicians it's with the parties and the permanent political staff. Until you address those problems you aren't doing anything that leads to meaningful reform.
If you support term limits, you really aren't serious about political reform. You're virtue signaling.
Term limits is a great way to keep people interested and invested in the political process. When the same candidate becomes a fixture people feel that there is no sense even thinking about trying to buck them. Potential candidates feel the same. Also, new blood has new ideas and perspectives, as well as new energy. All sorely lacking in our corrupted system. The embedded politician can get away with more and more egregious abuse of power as their power grows.
Virtue signaling? Where do you come up with these psychobable terms of derision? I thought such terms were against your comments policy. I guess you have probably given me a little slack in that regard in the past so I won't whine too much. While I really have a difficult time grasping your application of the term, denigrating your opposition is certainly a form of your virtue signaling.
Mr Barons, I agree with your comments and feel that we are in a defining "moment" in our history. The current battle to clean up and clean out our justice system and it's obviously corrupted components needs to be encouraged strongly. There is little if any accountability for the embedded politicians even when busted red handed. See menendez, clintons, wasserman shultz, ad infinitum. With no accountability the whole system is doomed to the whims of evil.
Eliminating ballot access rules, party-affiliation voter registration, and government-funded primaries will do much more to bring more interest to the process and new blood into the process and make elections more competitive, even with incumbents, than term limits. Term limits are useless and meaningless.
While I agree with your points regarding the other avenues of change with the exception of the comment that these changes would "do much more" or even more than Term Limits. The candidate is the main focus of the campaign. As such, people will gravitate to or from the newness this person offers. Anything and virtually everything gets boring after a certain amount of time. That's why married couples do things to "spice things up." Too often even these attempts aren't enough to harness the desire for something new. I, as well as the vast majority (82% according to the latest polls) of Americans don't want to be married to our politicians. But thanks for asking. LoL.
No, the party is the focus of the election. Republicans reliably vote for Rs and Democrats for Ds. With gerrymandered districts, a guy in a clown suit would win his party-affiliated district.
That's why so many clearly under-performing incumbents repeatedly win.
If you want real change, you support breaking party power. It's not within keeping with what the founders wanted or how our system was designed.
Term limits will fix nothing. They have failed as real reform everywhere they've been tried. Change for change sake is not reform.
Yes but party affiliation/dedication is a symptom of a lack of choice. The voters vote out of loyalty because no one gives that new idea, perspective, or energy that it would take to oust the squatters. Like doing your marriage duties even though the thrill is gone, people go through the motions. Often times fantasizing about a new "candidate." lol
No, party loyalty is a product of the evolved trait of tribalism, our natural tendency to embrace "us vs. them" thinking. The candidates are irrelevant.
What you're not getting is the politicians are not the ones who run things in Albany or Washington. It's permanent staff. It's the party structure. The sole function of the party, for both political and legislative staff, is to preserve or obtain majority.
Change politicians as often as you like, nothing will change.
In fact, if we even grant some relevance to your case new candidates will generate new ideas and new perspective, things will only be worse because it will give more the illusion of change rather than actual change. There will be a lot of blather that sounds like change and then nothing will change. Legislatures will become permanent Obama presidencies.
Further, with term limits, the actual politicians will become even less relevant to the bureaucratic class. Each individual politician, even the leaders, will have less power and be less relevant to staff because eventually, each elected official will go away so they can be safely ignored in many ways.
Love the deep state? Institute term limits.
Promoting term limits crowds out other reforms and if enacted will give voters the false sense of security, "see, we did reform." The actual damage and ineffectiveness of term limits will take decades to manifest, further entrenching party power and permanent staff.