Pat DeWine, son of Ohio Senator Mike DeWine, gathered only 12% of the vote in yesterday's special election primary to fill an open seat in Congress, and finished fourth on the GOP side of the ballot. Given the size of his loss, it is difficult to argue that his father's decision to join the McCain Caucus on the judges' 'deal,' cost DeWine the chance to move to D.C., but DeWine the Elder's defection on judges clearly did not help DeWine the Younger. Senator DeWine, facing re-election in 2006, and Senator Graham, up in 2008, have to ask themselves how badly they miscalculated in throwing in with McCain et al and undercutting the GOP leadership.With all due respect to Hugh, I think he's got this wrong. I just wrote him the following:
Hugh:One point I should have made with Hugh that I make here: Riffing off of Tip O'Neill, almost all elections are local. That was certainly true here where Jean Schmidt, with her fairly solid local organization, won. Her win is the bigger story than what Pat DeWine's campaign did to lose.
Take it from one who lives in the Second District, DeWine's loss had more to do with these factors than with his father's participation in the judicial filibuster compromise:
(1) The small turnout. Only about 11% of the eligible Republican voters showed up for this special election. McEwen, Schmidt, and Brinkman all did superb jobs of getting their constituencies out, magnifying their showing in a small-turnout election.
(2) Poor campaigning. DeWine's organization was seemingly non-existent, turning out no mailers, as far as I can remember. McEwen sent two, Brinkman sent at least two, and Schmidt sent at least eight to Republican voters in the district.
Furthermore, DeWine made the mistake of "going negative," violating Reagan's Eleventh Commandment, "Thou shalt not attack a fellow Republican." He went after Schmidt and more especially, McEwen. He did so, I believe, because of his own personal problems, trying to get voters to focus on something else.
(3) DeWine's personal problems. Pat DeWine left his wife for another woman and allegedly, secured a position with a major corporation for that woman. In the larger turnout primary of last year's county commissioner race in Hamilton County, there were sufficient numbers of "mainstream Republicans" that he wasn't hurt by this. Such behaviors turn people off in Clermont County, where I live, and the other counties of the district. The "turn off" factor was heightened by the low turnout and the high percentage of "values Republicans" voting in this special primary.
(4) Schmidt had a strategy, one I had underestimated. Its first component was keeping all other Clermont Countians out of the race. The county is nearly as important in the overall composition of the district as Hamilton County is. It was akin to the old single-shot voting ploy. She also understood that in the daylight savings hours when people spend more time outside and less in front of the TV, the best advertising was to be done through the mail. Only McEwen, with his old name recognition and shrewd use of ads on the radio featuring James Dobson, came close with a wise strategy for this one. DeWine didn't realize--as I hadn't fully realized--that a special primary in June could not be won with tons of money and high name recognition without a strategy that would get voters out for him.
(5) In Hamilton County, this was DeWine's third consecutive year on the ballot. He ran for city council in 2003, county commissioner in 2004, and congress in 2005. More than a few voters, interviewed at the polls expressed disgust with his spending so much time running for office, believing that in doing so, he was neglecting his duties.
As to your contention that DeWine's loss represents a repudiation of his dad's participation in the deal that has resulted in a clean sweep for six of Mr. Bush's judicial nominations since it was struck, I would say two things. First, among the small contingent of ardent values Republicans who showed up at the polls yesterday, that deal may be unpopular, although I know of no polling indicating that. Second, Pat DeWine specifically repudiated what his dad did in the compromise, emphatically, repeatedly. I heard from some voters who didn't like this, seeming opportunistic and disloyal.
Bottom line: Pat DeWine took his Cadillac name and ran it into a ditch. When his dad runs for re-election in 2006, I predict that, barring his being tarred, along with other Republicans, by Governor Taft's problems at the State House, he will win by a landslide in this district and throughout the state.
Of course, I could be completely wrong about all of this. But then, so could you.
Okay, I've got to go: I'm preparing the bulletin for our daughter's wedding on Saturday.
Mark
As always, my predictions are to be taken with a grain of salt.
2 comments:
I agree with all that you wrote and would like to say that DeWine's negative TV campaigns were a turn-off.
His father's betrayal further tainted his already tarnished reputation.
Clermont County was instrumental in getting out the vote for Bush. Schmidt was the key for the passion displayed at the last election. That passion did not die for this primary. She ran a clean campaign - no negativity. She was a class act and it is BELIEVABLE that she will continue in Rob's footsteps.
I am from District 2 also. We are very glad that Schmidt won! Happy Wedding!
Perhaps I shouldn't respond to anonymous comments.
First of all, I appreciate your visiting the site and for your affirmation of my analysis of the election.
But I must say that I disagree with your characterization of Senator DeWine's part in the judicial filibuster compromise as a "betrayal.' In fact, I feel that the compromise has boosted Mr. Bush's judicial nominations: Since the deal was forged, six Bush nominees, who would otherwise have been ignored, forgotten, or withdrawn, have been confirmed. Basically, the seven Republican senators involved with the deal, as I see it, gave the Democrats an face-saving "out," while at the same time, winning the day for the President's agenda. It seems to me that Republicans should not pine for a resounding loss when, through a compromise, they can gain a resounding victory.
To your other point: Any fair-minded observer will agree with you that Jean Schmidt conducted herself positively in this campaign. In fairness, I think that Tom Brinkman, one of the other four top-finishers for whom the temptation to "go negative" must have been great, did as well.
I'm proud and happy to say that Jean serves with me on the board of the Boys and Girls Club of Clermont County, having recently joined us. She has always cared about the community and the board gives her another great opportunity to express that commitment.
Finally, thank you for your happy wedding wishes for our daughter.
Post a Comment