Lessons in strategies
Published May 11, 2014
by Scott Mooneyham, Capitol Press Association, published in Greenville Daily Reflector, May 10, 2014.
Two big races; two very different lessons to learn from each.
When the tallies came in from Tuesday night’s primary election, Republican state House Speaker Thom Tillis had done something that didn’t look so likely a couple of weeks earlier. In a crowded field, he surpassed the 40-percent threshold needed to avoid a costly and time-consuming runoff.
Just down the ballot, Supreme Court Justice Robin Hudson withstood a barrage of negative attack ads and emerged as the top vote-getter in a three-way primary. She and Superior Court Judge Eric Levinson advance to the November general election.
The Tillis win should be seen as particularly good news for Republicans, and not solely because he represents the best chance to defeat incumbent Democratic U.S. Sen. Kay Hagan.
His conservative positions are not dramatically different from those of tea party darling Greg Brannon or Charlotte pastor Mark Harris, but Tillis was the “establishment” candidate.
After all, Karl Rove bolstered his campaign.
Two years ago, Democrats were able to take advantage of the rifts between the tea party crowd and the GOP establishment, even influencing the selection of a weaker tea party-backed candidate in a Republican U.S. Senate primary in Missouri.
Hagan and national Democrats tried to play the same game in North Carolina.
It didn’t work.
Tillis, his campaign and his Washington backers deserve some credit, making smart moves down the campaign’s stretch designed to show voters that he had momentum.
His win, though, also suggests that Republican voters are becoming more sophisticated and aware of current circumstances. Even those closely aligned to the tea party movement, or some portion of them, may be recognizing that the ability to win can trump lock-step belief.
That is not to suggest that Tillis will go on to an easy win over Hagan.
Hagan has money and ammunition that includes Tillis’ legislative record and a few ill-advised, public comments made over the course of his three years as state House speaker.
Still, he was always the best bet to unseat Hagan.
Hudson’s race, meanwhile, would be nice to interpret as a refutation of nasty attack ads.
It is more likely a lesson in idiotic political strategy hatched by Washington consultants who are better at collecting five- and six-figure donations than spending them.
In a three-person race that is ostensibly non-partisan, the ads attacking Hudson, who is a Democrat, and those supporting her two opponents, Republicans Levinson and Jeanette Doran, drew attention to the candidates’ partisan leanings.
The ads also fired up Democratic voters.
So, in a three-candidate race with one Democrat and two Republicans and in a state where Democrats are still a plurality of voters, the Democrat got the most votes. What a shocking turn of events!
Oh, did I mention that more North Carolina voters cast ballots in an uncompetitive Democratic U.S. Senate primary than in a competitive Republican U.S. Senate primary?
Somewhere in Washington, a few consultants needed some of that Common Core applied to their math lessons.
http://www.reflector.com/opinion/mooneyham/mooneyham-lessons-strategies-2475215
May 11, 2014 at 1:55 pm
Norm Kellly says:
This doesn't mean that Hagan will easily win. It doesn't even mean that Hagan can win.
Let's not forget that Tillis has Hagan's legislative record. Tillis has Hagan's comments also. Like the one where Hagan had 2 complaints about Obamacancer before it was passed. First she thought the name should be changed to imply it's true nature. She suggested something with 'single payer' in it's name. Second, she said that Obamascare didn't go far enough. Both comments indicating that K stands FOR a complete take-over of the health care system in our country. Libs know it as 'single payer' health care. The rest of us know it as socialized medicine.
Then there's going to be K's voting record and her stand on all the scandals in this administration. Her carrying the lie about keeping our health insurance and doctor and hospital is a biggie. Where has she stood on getting to the bottom of the IRS targeting political enemies of the administration? Where has she stood on getting to the truth of the Benghazi attack? You know, what is her explanation for the lies told to the American people to protect the occupiers re-election bid. How has she voted on the budget since getting to Washington? Has she voted to expand government spending and deepen the national debt? Has she voted to increase regulation of private business and private lives? Please keep in mind that the Senate has neglected it's duty for 4 of the past 5 years (or is it 5 of the past 6 years?). The Senate, led by the Demoncrat party, has refused to pass a budget most of the time K has been in Washington. How does K react to this? Does she believe she has earned her pay anyway?
See, I believe that K is vulnerable, regardless of how the media spins Tillis. Regardless of the dumb things Tillis may have said in public, K's record is so much worse. But, then again, more thought from me may be necessary on this. Lib voters tend to disregard their candidates shortcomings. I know for male demon candidates, the more outrageous their behavior, the more electable voters believe that person is. Does the same hold true for female demon politicians? Will K's record not matter to lib voters because she's a demon first, NC resident further down the list? Or will the average lib voter give K the same type of pass they give to male demon politicians? Consider Billclinton and Johnedwards before you answer this. Consider the Kennedys, consider the mayor of DC before you answer this. Lib voters have a history of giving their male politicians wide latitude when it comes to their voting record, personal behavior, policy positions, etc. But do they treat their female politicians the same way? I doubt it since the demon party is waging a war on women in the US. Even lib women are thrown under the bus routinely, if it benefits the demon party or the male demon politician. The war on women is well waged on the left side of this country. It shows no signs of slowing either. If lib voters do give the same discretion/ignoring facts to female politicians as they give to male politicians, then K still stands a chance of winning. Which will be bad for everyone in NC specifically, and bad in general for the country. But I also expect the demons to bring up the war on women as a reason to get out the vote for K. Voting against K will be described as being against women's rights. Of course, this will be the platform of the left and carried without question by their media buddies. Without question.
