A Kentucky Blogger’s Manifesto
Matt Gunterman November 25th, 2007
This week in the Kentucky blogosphere, mainly on the left but also on the right, controversy erupted around the political jockeying that’s taking place at this very moment to become the Democratic candidate to challenge Sen. Mitch McConnell (R) in 2008.
Whatever the behind-the-scenes reality, appearances are that some people with power and influence in Democratic circles in the state and national party and the state and national blogosphere are lining up behind State Auditor Crit Luallen (D) in an attempt to muscle out other potential candidates from a Democratic primary, namely Attorney General Greg Stumbo (D) and Lt. Col. Andrew Horne (D).
As one insider told me in a Friday-night conversation, it’s generally understood that a few Luallen supporters are out there making “assholes” of themselves and in the process, in my opinion, are doing a disservice to their favored candidate among the state’s grassroots.
So, in the context of the workings of these aforementioned and institutionally recognized assholes, came earlier this week the rather odd coincidence that, when reporting on the freshly released and newsworthily dismal approval ratings of Sen. McConnell, national bloggers Kos of Daily Kos and Jonathan Singer of MyDD, simultaneously chose to highlight the draft movement for Crit Luallen while entirely ignoring the far more official candidacy of Greg Stumbo and the strong grassroots movement to draft Andrew Horne.
Again, whatever the reality, it very much appeared that Kos and Singer were participating in a coordinated effort to paint Stumbo and Horne out of the picture.
Add to the Kos and Singer episode the fact that Liz Fossett, a northern Kentucky native and student at Georgetown University who is coordinator of the Draft Crit website, appears to have been participating in a trolling operation that targeted the comments sections of neutral or non-Crit aligned blogs using the handles Kim, Katie, and Kati.
The principle outlets were this blog, PageOneKentucky, BlueGrassRoots, and Rural Democrat. The principle targets of the trash talking were Andrew Horne and Joe Sonka of BlueGrassRoots and DitchMitchKY, who was accused of being a “bought” blogger.
Now, trolling and vindictiveness in the comments of blogs has been with us since the beginning and I predict it will be with us until the end, but if you are a person leading a draft movement for a candidate, it’s wisest not to participate in that behavior.
When confronted with the evidence of the trolling efforts, Ms. Fossett wrote a mea culpa of sorts in a diary at BlueGrassRoots. While Ms. Fossett admits that the various inflammatory comments did come from a single IP address that is a computer in her family’s home in northern Kentucky, she denies that she wrote the comments. Instead, it is her contention that other people in this household participated in the digital flogging. I myself find this scenario difficult to believe.
I personally want to say that I like and respect all the potential Democratic candidates for this race. I deeply admire the fight within and political conviction of Greg Stumbo and am thankful for the personal encouragement he gave him in my own campaign for county judge/executive in 2006. For me Stumbo appeals to my working class roots, and I believe he has a strong and guiding sense of fairness.
I have never met Andrew Horne in person, but I have many good friends who are his die-hard supporters. Many people in his extended political network have helped in nurturing this blog along and have aided efforts across the state to highlight the miserable record of Mitch McConnell.
I met Crit Luallen at Fancy Farm this August, where she gave two invigorating and rousing speeches, one at the Democratic breakfast and the other on stage at the picnic itself.
All three of these people would make fine candidates against Sen. McConnell.
I believe that if one looks at the field objectively and takes into consideration what is likely to be the political environment and national mood of 2008, then one is forced to admit that, on the whole, none of these candidates stands measurably above the rest in his or her potential against McConnell.
Each has his or her strengths and, likewise, weaknesses. Yet, there are examples from 2006 of Democrats very much like Stumbo, Horne, and Luallen all defeating Republican incumbents in the Senate. In Rhode Island former state attorney general Sheldon Whitehouse (D), whose tenure in that office had not been uncontroversial, defeated Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R). In Virginia former Marine Jim Webb (D), who had never before held elected office, took down George Allen (R), and in Missouri state auditor Claire McCaskill (D) defeated Jim Talent (R).
While none of our potential Democratic candidates in Kentucky are perfect, it’s important to keep in mind that not even the perfect candidate is guaranteed to beat Mitch McConnell, who himself is about as far from perfect as a human being can be.
We aren’t striving for perfection in our candidate. We’re striving to find a candidate and a message that we can rally 50 percent plus one of the voters around on November 4, 2008.
I see no problems if all three candidates run. I think the eventual nominee would be stronger for having gone through a competitive, issue-based primary.
Kentucky Democrats have proven over the course of the last two years that they can indeed run against one another in primaries and rally around the eventual winners.
Horne and his supporters were enthusiastic supporters of Rep. John Yarmuth (D) in November 2006. The 2007 Democratic gubernatorial primary was generally well behaved, and Stumbo was gracious in coming up short of victory there. For Luallen, having to run a competitive statewide primary would help her demonstrate that she can campaign hard to corners of the grassroots that see her 2003 effort as weak and her 2007 contest as far from baptism-by-fire.
In the end it will be much easier for Kentucky Democrats of every stripe to rally around the eventual nominee if each knows his or her candidate was beaten fair and square at the ballot box. It does more harm than good to pressure potential candidates out of the Democratic primary because the supporters of those candidates would rightly feel cheated.
They would rightly feel cheated because allowing that to happen would be an example of Democrats with much individual power and influence stopping Democrats with little individual power and influence from exercising what little power and influence they do have. For the latter category, the ballot box serves as their chief means to express political will.
It’s naïve to think that people with power and influence will ever stop trying to use their advantages to game the system, but the rest of us can better organize to resist them.
And that’s what’s going on.
- 2008 KY U.S. Senate Race , Andrew Horne , Crit Luallen , Greg Stumbo
- Comments(11)
Why does it have to be an intentional slight? Maybe, just maybe, it could have slipped their minds.
May I suggest that you post a contact so that we can write Kos and the other guy so they can amend their posts?
Besides, completely on my own, when I first thought about “Who?”, the first person that came to my mind was Crit. Like others, I don’t like Stumbo’s Lunsford baggage. I like Horne a lot but haven’t ever shaken his hand.
John, to answer your first point, that’s why I used the qualifying statement, twice, in fact and to paraphrase, ‘whatever the reality.’
I don’t know the reality, but I certainly do know what was the effect of perception within wide swaths of the grassroots in Kentucky. Whatever the reality on true intentions were, it doesn’t change the fact that people got angry. And we both know that perception is as powerful or more powerful than reality in politics.
The best way to get Kos and Jonathan Singer to amend their posts is to leave comments on those posts which I’ve linked above. I don’t have their emails, and judging from the sheer volume of email I receive, I doubt at their level of blogging that they even have time to read all theirs. However, comments do get responses generally because they’re far more public.
Regarding your second point, whatever our many differing opinions about Stumbo, Horne, and Luallen, each of those candidates has his or her following, and there’s no clear and obvious reason to anoint Luallen. In fact, from an activist’s standpoint, I think it’s irresponsible to do so. Moreover, Greg Stumbo has actually gone forward with an exploratory effort and, if the national bloggers should be highlighting anyone, it should be Stumbo. Luallen hasn’t even stepped forward yet in any official capacity.
Thanks for your comments.
“It does more harm than good to pressure potential candidates out of the Democratic primary because the supporters of those candidates would rightly feel cheated.”
Now, play nice, and discuss those issues! Who is our best? Crit? Stumbo? Horne? Other? WHY?
Ditch Mitch…… and replace him with who? Ditch Mitch, the Blog, should have some ideas on the subject.
Inform the voters, don’t turn us off with more petty in-fighting among the blogs for christ sake!
Opinions are like assholes, everybody has one. (grin)
C. Wash, I will gladly spell out what I see as the strengths and weaknesses (real and perceived) of each candidate, but I truly don’t feel there’s a best candidate among them. I think they’re all pretty well matched. Now, that said, Luallen would be the preferred candidate by the establishment and would likely be able to raise more money, but money’s not going to beat McConnell. McConnell will have more money, but there were VERY few instances in 2006 of incumbent Republicans who fell to Democrats who did not outspend their Democratic opponent by significant sums.
Let’s set up some scenarios here.
Scenario 1 (Stumbo defeats McConnell):
Mitch McConnell spends millions of dollars on smearing Greg Stumbo with accusations from his personal life and political career, but voters generally tune out the extreme negativity because:
a) they’re coy to the fact that McConnell’s political smearing machine works this way and the reality of McConnell’s Republicans governing (e.g. Ernie Fletcher) is far from all the promises they make.
b) they are so fed up with the miserable condition of the country, the sputtering economy, and DC establishment ineptitude that they just want change and Mitch McConnell is the face of the status quo. In other words, Mitch has got to go, it’s time to vote Stumbo!
Stumbo’s populist style works extremely well in the environment of a poor economy. Some people complain that he’s used the same stump speech for years, but his style connects with average Kentuckians. People get the feeling he’s one of them. During the debates, the juxtaposition of Stumbo and McConnell on stage is profound: you have the weak, aging, effete McConnell against the fiery, down-to-earth, look-you-straight-in-the-eyes style of Stumbo.
Stumbo defeats McConnell 51-49 percent.
Scenario 2 (Horne defeats McConnell):
In 2008 the American people find their government paralyzed in the face of fiscal, economic, diplomatic, and environmental disaster. It seems that George W. Bush and his cronies are hoping the Second Coming of Jesus saves them from the mess and disasters they’ve inflicted on the nation. Kentuckians are eager to vote for Democrats who offer leadership, frankness, and honesty in the face of all-around Republican fecklessness. Horne is the perfect candidate, the antidote to what ails the Kentucky electorate. He’s a political outsider, whose demeanor instantly makes Kentuckians understand his sincerity. He’s not a charismatic man, but his character is apparent. As a former marine and a person with no political footprint, McConnell has a very difficult time going extremely negative on Horne.
Horne defeats McConnell 50.5 percent to 49.5 percent.
Scenario 3 (Luallen defeats McConnell):
Same economic and political environment as in the previous two scenarios. McConnell spends millions smearing Luallen with her ties to the Patton administration and its scandals, but the only scandals that are in voters minds are those more recent ones of the Fletcher administration and those on Capitol Hill, where McConnell says he has some influence (why can’t he keep his caucus within the limits of the law, then?). In fact, what Kentuckians remember about the Patton years is that governance wasn’t that bad, no matter what the personal failings of Gov. Patton were, and the economy sure was a lot better.
Riding the coattails of a Democratic presidential landslide, Luallen defeats McConnell 52-48 percent.
John: Follow the history of all of this and you’ll understand it wasn’t an unintentional slight.
Well, tell the truth I don’t care. What I care about is getting out some candidates and picking the best one.
I also don’t understand why all of the scenarios have the country in a tailspin as if a victory is dependent on that. It isn’t.
No, I guess it’s not “dependent” on that, but it certainly is far less likely without it, and it’s not as if the situation has to change much from where it is today. We’re in sour condition as a nation today. It’s extremely difficult to make the case for change to the average voter when the average voter is doing quite well under the status quo. Add to that the fact that McConnell is at the center of the Washington political establishment, and without layered turmoil it becomes very difficult to defeat him. Quite frankly, if it weren’t for the absolute bungling by the Bush administration of the nation’s foreign and domestic policies and McConnell’s blind loyalty to those failures, I doubt we’d be speculating too much today about McConnell’s vulnerabilities. The turmoil that we’re in today is a direct result of Republican policies, and that’s it’s important to the equation of defeating McConnell.
Thanks for this post Matt. I tend to agree with you that Stumbo is a very good candidate. I don’t have anything against the others and will definately support them if they run against MM, but I think Stumbo is our best shot.
He has shown he can raise money. He is not afraid to take a stand on things such as the FISA bill. We could have definately used him in the Senate on that one, when many current Senators from our party stabbed us and the Constitution in the back.
As you point out too, Stumbo is the only one of the lot that has actually taken the step of WANTING to run. Nothing personal, but if I have to CONVINCE a candidate to run, evidently they don’t want this race or seat too bad. Stumbo has the initiative and fighting spirit to defeat McConnell!!
Stumbo has his exploratory committee and is trying to raise a certain amount of money. Has he reported how his exploratory committee is doing, or whether he has met his goal in raising campaign money?
I’m happy for the guidance and in addition hope you recognize what a powerful job you happen to be undertaking instructing many others thru your site.