Press access to Republican Linda McMahon tightened Friday as her Senate campaign ended formal media interviews and continued its policy of limiting information about her campaign schedule.
"She's spending all her time now on the trail," said her communication director, Ed Patru. "That's where she's going to be for the remainder of this race, meeting voters."
McMahon media director Ed Patru watches the candidate at an interview: No more
McMahon spoke to reporters after her first two debates with Democrat Richard Blumenthal, but she skipped the post-debate press conference after the third and final debate Tuesday night in New London.
Patru said the McMahon campaign hardly is imposing a media blackout. She will continue to answer questions informally before or after campaign events for "a few minutes here and there."
But finding her on the trail is not always easy. Aside from special events, such as Friday's rally in Stamford with New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, the campaign is reluctant to reveal her whereabouts a day ahead.
The campaign last issued a daily schedule on Sept. 16. Instead, the campaign asks reporters to request information about her events by email on a daily basis. The requests are not always answered.
On Thursday, the campaign limited access to McMahon to brief interviews with TV reporters at separate campaign stops about a Quinnipiac University poll that showed her trailing Blumenthal by 11-percentage points.
A request by The Mirror for McMahon's schedule Thursday was not answered.
Blumenthal's campaign does not routinely post his schedule, either. A part of modern campaigning involves trying to duck video trackers that each campaign dispatches to follow the other.
And his availability was limited for several weeks in May after the New York Times disclosed that he had falsely referred to service in Vietnam.
But Blumenthal's press staff, when asked, will let reporters know days ahead of events where he can be covered and questioned. He also still is granting interview requests, including a radio interview and a 90-minute newspaper interview Friday.
Patru said the decision to end formal interviews was a matter or priorities.
"We've got probably two dozen requests for a 10-to-15-to-20-minute, sit-down interview. She needs to spend her time on the trail," said Patru, who is the only aide authorized to speak for the campaign.
Blumenthal needs so-called "earned media," political-speak for coverage on TV and print, as opposed to the "paid media" of commercials. But McMahon, who is self-funding the most expensive campaign in state history, does not.
McMahon has had some rocky press conferences, which by nature are unpredictable events. Her failure to clearly answer questions about whether she would freeze, cut or eliminate the minimum wage generated a frenzy of bad press.
Another general press availability about an earlier poll turned into a extended back-and-forth on her approach to extending the Bush-era tax cuts. She said she was for an all-or-nothing approach, extending the cuts for everyone or no one.
She since has refused to say how she would vote on a bill that only extended the cuts for all but the richest two percent of taxpayers.
Patru complained that too much press attention has focused on her time as chief executive of World Wrestling and not enough on serious issues.
But he twice refused to make McMahon available for a telephone interview for an ongoing Mirror series of issues stories, one on health reform and another on social issues such as abortion and gay rights.
Earlier in the campaign, she did sit twice for extended interviews with the Mirror, once in March and again in August. She also did two telephone interviews with the Mirror for previous issue stories focusing on the economy and the environment.
Patru was unsure if McMahon would hold another press conference before election day.
"I am not ruling that out," he said. "I don't have anything scheduled."
It's obvious what kind of Senator Linda McMahon would be, -- completely unaccountable!
We still haven't heard how she's going to be able to close the budget gap while keeping the Bush tax rates for her and her ultra-wealthy ilk.
Which programs would she cut? If she can't give specifics, her posturing is really just one big lie.
It was bound to happen, and so it did.
What Ed means is that Linda needs to spend time on "the trail" where she can say whatever crazy, nonsensical stuff her base voters want to hear, but which wouldn't pass the policy sniff test when exposed to the cold, hard light of news reporting to the broader public.
Lower the minimum wage? I misheard you.
Cut Social Security and Medicare? What I meant to say was...
Totally transparent. And exceedingly disappointing. As expected.
Watching too much MSNBC or the Morons & Socialists National Broadasting Network? All politicians who are either in the lead or close lessen their access..including as mentioned in the article Blumenthal.
Oh..in case you weren't paying attention:
1. McMahon NEVER said a thing about lowering social security.
2. McMahon NEVER said she would look at decreasing minimum wage.
3. Blumenthal DID lie about his service in Vietnam.
4. The only reason Blumenthal is running is because Dodd was definitely going to lose. The DNC forced Dodd out of the race, and picked OLD Blumenthal for his name recognition. Blumenthal is
Now, why would a candidate want to tighten access for an openly hostile State-run media that operates as a brazen PR arm for the other candidate?
I just can't imagine...
Mark, nice piece of shading the facts in your article. I believe the media calls it "spinning," am I right? First of all, Linda has been more accessible to the media the whole campaign. Much more so than Blumenthal, which you acknowledge deep into the article with the "does not routinely" spin.
Secondly, it is an outright lie for you to say of Linda, "Her failure to clearly answer questions about whether she would freeze, cut or eliminate the minimum wage." You know perfectly well that Linda has made it abundantly clear, several times, that she has no intention to
Read MorePaul, you are wrong on several points.
McMahon left the press conference without clearly answering those questions about the minimum wage, which I mention in this story only to illustrate the trouble she has had in news conferences, not to suggest her position remains unclear. My original story noted she clarified her position. http://ww3.ctmirror.org/story/7881/mcmahon-accepts-nfib-endorsement-hedg...
(An irony in your criticism is that the McMahon campaign has quoted my reporting in her ads and during a debate to rebut an incorrect claim in a Blumenthal commercial that she called for Congress to consider cutting the minimum wage.)
As far as the Bush
Paul, Linda took an endorsement from a small business group that wants to eliminate the minimum wage.
To their credit, Connecticut's press corps asked Linda if she agreed with that portion of the NFIB's platform.
Linda rambled on about the burdens on small business...
When asked a follow-up question, basically "small businesses are having a tough go of it now, should we lower the minimum wage", Linda didn't reply "No". Instead she said we should "review" it.
Take from that what you may. I'd say the press was doing their job in that instance.
In the meantime, maybe you can
Read MoreIf Linda ended her "formal media interviews" and limited information about her campaign schedule, then I'm guessing that nobody told the folks at WFSB. I was at a taping for Better CT on Friday, where Scot Haney was promoting the fact that she was going to be on the show on Monday 10/18.
If her handlers don't want media people to know where she is going to be at any given time, I guess the cat is out of the bag.
I bet she is going to be a no-show.
I hope Scot has a quick replacement ready for Monday morning!!
As was the case yesterday and the day before, the McMahon campaign did not respond to a request for a schedule of her campaign appearances today.
So Mark, I'm guessing the campaign won't share a copy of their 3rd quarter campaign finance report, which had to be filed with the FEC by last Friday?
Of course it will eventually be scanned into the database, (the House has candidates report electronically, the Senate somehow does not). But that might not happen until sometime near the end of the week.
Any guesses as to how much Linda has spent to date? $30 Million? $35 Million? More?
In any case, on a per voter basis, her self-funded candidacy has got to be approaching an all-time high. The only race
Read MoreYes, the McMahon campaign declined to release its campaign finance filings for the 3rd quarter. So there's no way to tell how much she has spent so far, although it should be publicly available sometime this week.
Linda McMahon, what an empty dress? There is no way that WWE wrestlers are contractors since they are controlled by the WWE. The IRS needs to Audit this . She has no ideas, no experience and knows nothing about public policy. She did not even vote so why should anyone give her their vote. She thinks that she can buy a Senate seat for $ 50 million. So Brad Divis, you pick losers, Linda McMahon and the former felon Governor. Has the people of CT and the USA in twenty one months forgotten the hell Gorge Bush and Dick Cheney
Read MoreSusan Bysiewicz, Democractic candidate for U.S. Senate, during a debate with U.S. Rep. Chris Murphy.
"Susan has been using this tired line of attack for the last year and a half, and it hasn't worked."
Chris Murphy
Get the latest headlines right to your mobile
Visit m.ctmirror.org on your mobile device
FOLLOW US ON: 
CT Mirror is now well into its 3rd year. Since our launch on Jan. 25, 2010, we've published more than 4,000 stories and had 3.5 million web visits.
From the start, our goal has been to offer readers information on Connecticut policies and politics - and the personalities behind both - to help residents make the best decisions possible about their lives and those of their families.
PROUD SPONSOR
CT JOBLESS RATE
January 2011: 9.3%
February 2011: 9.2%
March 2011: 9.1%
April 2011: 9.0%
May 2011: 8.9%
June 2011: 8.9%
July 2011: 8.9%
August 2011: 8.8%
September 2011: 8.6%
October 2011: 8.5%
November 2011: 8.3%
December 2011: 8.1%
January 2012: 8.0%
February 2012: 7.8%
March 2012: 7.7%
April 2012: 7.7%
PROUD SPONSOR
Printer-friendly version
Send to a friend