Last month a friend of mine from Las Vegas dropped by for a couple of days, and we did what we always do...we sat around and played video games. He brought home a game called "Godzilla: Save the Earth." Stay with me! This is a killer analogy! It's a `fighting' game like Mortal Kombat or Tekken, and I really suck at those kinds of games. But I'm all about Godzilla, so I thought I'd give it a try.
So you start the game by picking which rubber-suited, sweaty Japanese dude you want to fight with. There's plenty to choose from: Mothra, Jet Jaguar (my personal fave for MST3K reasons), Megalon, King Ghidora, etc. But then you could also choose from two different kinds of Godzilla--Godzilla 90s, and Godzilla 2000. The differences between the two characters are subtle, (one has a slightly different breath weapon, but the other is slightly faster, etc.) but the end result is two completely different characters.
Where in the hell this is going...below the fold...
Recently I got some polling data on the upcoming Senate race in my home state (Tennessee) in 2006. It's a foregone conclusion that Harold Ford, Jr. will be the Democratic nominee. In fact, it's more than a foregone conclusion, it's a polling conclusion.
Democratic Primary Vote Preference
If the Democratic primary was held today and the
candidates were [ROTATE] Harold Ford, Jr. and Rosalind
Kurita, for whom would you vote?
Likely Voters
Harold Ford, Jr.............. 62%
Rosalind Kurita ............. 15
Undecided.................... 23
While I'm glad he won't face a difficult primary, I wish they would have asked a slightly different question: "For whom would you vote if your choices were Harold Ford, Jr. 2000, Harold Ford, Jr. 2002, or Harold Ford, Jr. 2004?" As with Godzilla, the difference between those three characters is subtle, but at the end of the day HFjr2004 is a completely different guy from HFjr2000! H2k is against a Federal Marriage Amendment. H2k4 supports it. H2k2 believes in the right to choose. H2k4 believes in the "Sanctity of Life."
I know Harold Ford, Jr. I've met him, I've had conversations with him, and I like him. My first official welcome to the Democratic Party came from the congressman at a Germantown Democratic Club meeting, and I have a handwritten letter from him framed on my desk. He's my guy, but sometimes he makes me nuts.
After my experience with the Shelby County Young Republicans I understand how the sausage-making process works. I understand how and why it's politically advantageous for him to score `Red State' points in a Red State. And aside from lending some small amount of legitimacy to some ill-fated `bipartisan' legislation, he hasn't really sold us out in a way that's come back to hurt us. If I'm wrong on this, someone please tell me, but I don't believe Congressman Ford has been the sole swing vote on any of the more egregious legislative actions we've been fighting against.
That's not to say I like it. I don't. But it's part of the process, and in the 2006 Senate race it's going to be a battle between the Devil you know, and the other Devil you know. Here's how the Republican primary is shaping up:
Republican Primary Vote Preference
If the Republican primary was held today and the candidates
were [ROTATE] Bob Corker, Ed Bryant, and Van Hilleary,
for whom would you vote?
Likely Voters
Ed Bryant .................... 35%
Van Hilleary ................. 26
Bob Corker................... 15
Undecided.................... 24
Good news for us as Van Hilleary and Ed Bryant are likely to knock the stew out of each other in the primary process, while H2k4 will only have his family to deal with (hey...I said `good news,' not `GREAT news'). Plus Bob Corker's been stirring up all kinds of stink about both guys. This primary will be ugly! Ed's up nine points early, but I still think Van Hilleary wins this primary come Election Day. More on Hilleary's campaign strategy in a moment. First, let's take a look at the theoretical head-to-heads:
General Election: Ford vs. Corker
Likely Voters
Harold Ford, Jr.............. 28%
(Lean Ford, Jr.)............. 11
Bob Corker................... 24
(Lean Corker) ............... 10
Undecided.................... 27
General Election: Ford vs. Hilleary
Likely Voters
Harold Ford, Jr.............. 29%
(Lean Ford, Jr.)............. 9
Van Hilleary ................. 32
(Lean Hilleary).............. 9
Undecided.................... 20
General Election: Ford vs. Bryant
Likely Voters
Harold Ford, Jr.............. 30%
(Lean Ford, Jr.)............. 8
Ed Bryant .................... 30
(Lean Bryant) ............... 10
Undecided.................... 22
Since Bob's already losing to Ford it's a safe bet he's not going to win the primary. Right now in a head-to-head Hilleary does the best, and he will likely use that as a wedge against Bryant. For his part Bryant is using Hilleary's 2002 loss in the Governor's race as a wedge. Like I said, this primary is going to be ugly. For those unfamiliar with Tennessee's 2002 Governor's race, here's my recollection of it.
When I first saw a poster that read "Van Hilleary for Governor," I thought he had an as yet undisclosed first name. In fact, I was pretty sure it was "Steve." I don't know why. I just thought "Steve Van Hilleary" sounded like a great name. But no, unfortunately his first name was actually "Van." Jokes abounded that he was named for the place where he was conceived. Hence my REAL first name, "InthebathroomatBennigans." But "advisorjim" is a lot shorter than "advisorinthebathroomatBennigans," so I went with that to save time logging in. Despite the name change I should still be able to get a day pass to the White House Press Corps. I've stopped talking about Van, haven't I? Let's get back on task.
Sherman, set the Wayback Machine TM for March of 2002. If you've read my diaries before then you know at that point in time I was still a dittohead. The Governor's race was ultimately won by a New Yorker named Phil Bredesen who graduated from Harvard. His opponent was a locally born Gulf War veteran named Van Hilleary. As a Republican, I voted for Bredesen.
So, great news, right? I mean, Bredesen must have one heck of a strategy to defeat a local Republican war hero in a `Red State' race. Let's bottle that up and ship it around the country! Not so fast. Because at the end of the day Bredesen didn't win the election. Van Hilleary lost it.
If you ran this race on paper, Van Hilleary wins with 157% of the vote...sorry, Diebold makes our voting machines. In a legitimate theoretical election Van Hilleary wins with 90+% of the vote. But this race wasn't run on paper. And that's a bad thing when your candidate is basically a cardboard cutout.
If you remember, the Republican strategy in 2002 was simple. Run on "the war." You either supported every word that came out of the President's mouth, or you were a spineless commie traitor, and likely a spy for Al Qaeda. Representatives did it, Senators did it, and even local politicians got in on the act. It was a very successful strategy, as effective as it was insidious. So, again, how did Van Hilleary screw this up!?
He screwed up by not changing the message to fit the race. For those of you who don't know, Tennessee has this nightmare Medicare program called TennCare. It didn't start out that way. It was supposed to be model legislation, but the thing just exploded. That caused the state budget disaster we're now facing, and the limited options we have to correct it. See, Tennessee has a sales tax (9.25% in most counties), and a pitiful little state income tax (called the Halls tax) that only applies to out-of-state investment income over a certain amount. So we could either raise the state sales tax even higher (which is basically the same thing as kicking poor people in the nuts), or we could try to get a state income tax. There does not exist a government on this Earth that is willing or able to `cut spending', so let's just quit pretending like that's even an option.
So Phil Bredesen runs his ads, and (paraphrasing) says, "Look, this state is a mess. I've got a background in health care. I used to manage a large health care company, and I think I can come up with a solution to save TennCare. I'm used to dealing with multi-headed hydras like state government. I've got the business experience to run a large, bureaucratic entity, along with a working knowledge of the ins and outs of the health care system." That sounded good, but he was still a yankee liberal. So long as Van Hilleary said something similar, he was still going to get my vote.
Van Hilleary ran two ads. The first said, "I was a Gulf War pilot" with a big American Flag TM in the background. The second said, "I will support the President" with a big American Flag TM in the background. That's it. I swear to you I'm not kidding. Two ads for five or six months. Nothing about TennCare, nothing about the budget crisis. Just "I'm a vet" and "I'll support the President."
Now don't get me wrong. I'm all about the big American Flag TM. I'm all about Gulf War pilots. And at the time I was even all about supporting the President. My problem was I didn't understand what in the hell any of that had to do with being GOVERNOR! Last time I checked, Governor's don't declare war (at least not in a literal sense). And his piloting experience, while laudable, wasn't going to come in very handy as the state's chief executive.
While these traits are totally inappropriate for a Governor, they're positively perfect for a Senator. Which is why, despite conventional wisdom regarding Ed Bryant, I'm convinced Van Hilleary will be the GOPs choice to run against Harold Ford, Jr. in 2006. All he has to do is change `Governor' to `Senator' on his 2002 campaign signs and he's ready to go.
If I'm going to be a realist I have to say that Bryant or Hilleary will likely win this race. Given the choice between a conservative Democrat and a conservative Republican, I think this state will choose the Republican. Both Bryant and Hillary are solidly Evangelical Republicans who will run on a `support the President' platform. But come 2006 the Volunteer state might not respond so well to someone who says they will `support the President.' That message seems to be wearing out its welcome.
That having been said, I'm going to go ahead and say it's a good sign that against all three opponents Harold Ford, Jr is statistically tied with a lot of `undecides' still out there. Bredesen aside this state runs pretty darn Red. At the end of the day I'd rather vote for the guy who will probably vote for Democratic issues over the guy who will never vote that way. But if I may, on Election Day I'd like to cast my ballot for Harold Ford, Jr. 2000. I like that guys positions the best. That and he's got a better breath weapon...