Talk:Tom Daschle

message: i noticed that this page is being vandalized - i just fixed two instances.Lurgis (talk) 02:40, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalism

message: Daschle joined the board of directors as Mascoma, a Cambridge, MA alternative energy company in early June.
15 June 2007
PS
Where is Tom Daschle now living?
24 May 2005.
Ed Cabaniss
:According to the Washington Post, has joined into the same Atlanta HQed lobbying group that Bob Dole works for. Keeping a home in South Dakota and one in DC still. Naraht 13:15, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent ongoings

message: Wouldn't "several" be a better term?  IIRC, it was just a handful, like four or five, not scores or dozens as this seems to imply.  Anyone care to fact-check this?  Rlquall 16:19, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Many" staffers 

message: The article says "To enhance his state's economy, Daschle also became the first U.S. Senator to be a full-time economic development director." Is the word "be" an error? I'm guessing this should say that Daschle was the first U/S. Senator to hire a full-time economic development director for his staff.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.178.128.206 (talk) 12:11, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Economic development director

message: I understand that this is controversial for reasons connected to the Obama campaign, but, as the links I've used show, TD's job at A&B *is* as a lobbyist. He accepted this title himself in an interview - linked! - with NPR, and Dole said publicly that he (a lobbyist at A&B) had recruited TD because their contacts in the Senate were complementary - ie Dole would lobby the repubs and TD the dems. Again, this is linked. If people don't agree with this reasoning, they should use the discussion page and contact me - just deleting "because I think you're wrong" is not good wiki practice, and in this case stinks of partisanship or a PR firm. I won't be afraid to make a fuss about this and appeal to Higher Authority. So if you disagree, ***discuss***.
"cleaning up refs, and you need a reference that says it's a lobbying firm, and that senior policy analyst = lobbyist"
-There were TWO such references. The first one contained a quote from Dole (a registered lobbyist) saying that he had hired TD to complement his own contacts - ie to do the same job with Dems as Dole does with Repubs. The second was an interview with NPR where Dachle had been booked to talk about his job with AB as a lobbyist. If you're going to "clean up" references, please read them, then, on a topic as controversial as this, unless the situation is VERY clear discuss .  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Umptious (talk • contribs) 15:16, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Who said "I think you're wrong?" No one. And I changed it to "he signed on as a lobbyist, with the title of Senior Policy Advisor." Before, it seemed like his job title was in scare quotes, like it was a fake job or something, then it said "(i.e. lobbyist)". By cleaning up refs I fixed a broken link (the one to the law firm), and I put them in Wikipedia:Footnotes style, (<ref>), as opposed to a [1] link. And anyway, the article says he's a lobbyist now, so what's the issue? --AW (talk) 15:49, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

text: Fair enough, thanks. --AW (talk) 15:39, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Dachle's current job = Lobbyist

message: Daschle is not a lobbyist and I've edited the article to reflect that. The word lobbyist only appears in the summary of the NPR article. Nowhere in the main article or the audio program does Daschle identify himself as a lobbyist. To the contrary, he unequivicoly states he is not a lobbyist. To quote Daschle in the audio program. 
*NPR reporter: "You're a lobbyist now."
*Daschle: "I've got a very clear understanding with Alston and Bird that I won’t be lobbying . . . that isn't my intention. I've indicated all along that I don't see a particular role for me as a lobbyist." 
Go to sopr.senate.gov, the official Lobbyist Disclosure Act site and search for Tom Daschle. His name is not listed. While some may use lobbyist in general terms, the word has an official meaning in federal statute. If you are not listed in the official disclosure rolls, you are not a lobbyist. His official title is Senior Policy Advisor. If Daschle ever registers as a lobbyist or someone can find a source where Daschle himself states he is a lobbyist, then feel free to add the term back.Dcmacnut (talk) 19:46, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough, thanks. --AW (talk) 15:39, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Daschle not a lobbyist

message: In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :) 
* "Alston" :
** Alston & Bird LLP
** Alston
DumZiBoT (talk) 06:07, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bot report : Found duplicate references ! 

message: I've edited the description of the law firm's health care lobbying clients to say health fraud lobbying clients. I expect some snake-oil supporter will revert this, but it's a matter of public record that all those firms have been caught out in the business of medical quackery and fraud.
Purely coincidentally of course, during his congressional career Daschle lent strong support to the quack industry.--Alkhowarizmi (talk) 11:27, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Post-Senate career 

message: Wikipedia's WP:LS guidelines on the introduction or lead section of articles states:
The lead should be able to stand alone as a concise overview of the article. It should establish context, explain why the subject is interesting or notable, and summarize the most important points—including any notable controversies that may exist. The emphasis given to material in the lead should roughly reflect its importance to the topic, according to reliable, published sources, and the notability of the article's subject should be established in the first sentence of the lead.
The lead should neither emphasize controversies nor contain excessive detail. As the article itself must be balanced and not give undue weight to any particular aspect of a person or that person's career, neither should the lead, which is to be no more than an overview.  Kablammo (talk) 13:17, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead section 

message: As with Governor Blagojevich, Wikipedia must report the truth and not become a spokesman for the subject of the article.  This doesn't mean that WP tries to smear the person.  BLP requires we be as accurate as possible and neither promote the person nor attack the person.
The previous version stated "On Tuesday, February 3, 2009, Daschle withdrew his name from nomination for the HHS Secretary position, saying that he did not wish to be a distraction to the Obama agenda"
This gives undue weight to the person's official explanation.  It does not portray the real picture.  The real picture is that he was forced out.  However, no newspaper is going to say "Congressman xxx forced him out".  But the British press reported "led to a swirling controversy that made his appointment politically untenable.  Mr Daschle had apologised abjectly for the "completely inadvertent" oversight and Democrats had enough votes to confirm him but the political cost to Mr Obama eventually proved too much. "
This is a very neutral summary of what happened.  So I've summarized that reference as follows: "On Tuesday, February 3, 2009, Daschle was forced out because, even though he had a sufficient number of Democratic votes for nomination, he became an untenable political liability for the President.  He withdrew his name from nomination saying that he did not wish to be a distraction to the Obama agenda"
Farewell, Mr. Daschle.  You will be successful in life and probably make tons of money over what you would have made as HHS Secretary. Chergles (talk) 20:57, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Withdrawal as candidate for HHS Secretary 

message: I have found this article by CNN on Daschle saying, that he was asked by Bush to limit the investigation on 9/11, because it would devert to much resources.
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/01/29/inv.terror.probe/
Should we not mention this at some point?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.206.200.47 (talk) 23:31, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: 9/11-Investigation

message: In case it's not obvious, I meant to say "subjective" here. – Hysteria18 (Talk • Contributions) 22:19, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Objective 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Tom Daschle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080305213055/http://www-personal.umich.edu/~steeles/gerrus/ to http://www-personal.umich.edu/~steeles/gerrus/
*Added  tag to http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/02/who-were-boeings-lobbyists
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111110154336/http://blumcenter.berkeley.edu/blum-center-developing-economies/blum-center-trustees to http://blumcenter.berkeley.edu/blum-center-developing-economies/blum-center-trustees
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110718105724/http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/01/bumps-in-the-ro.html to http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/01/bumps-in-the-ro.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:55, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Wikipedia has some politicians with their Electoral History, and other politicians they do not. 
It may be a good idea to include this to Tom Daschle on Wikipedia if the information is available.Easeltine (talk) 13:57, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: What do you mean  Electoral History, as we seem to mention the elections he had stood in.Slatersteven (talk) 18:57, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Electoral History