It’s not quite "he pulls a knife, you pull a gun"...but according to a highly entertaining piece in Politico, New York Congressman Steve Israel’s decision to forgo a Senate challenge to Democratic Senator Kirsten Gillibrand might have been as much about Rahm Emanuel’s iron fist as it was about Barack Obama’s velvet touch.
According to Politico’s account, (which, for what it is worth, the Israel camp is denying) Emanuel played the bad cop to Obama’s good cop, making the following threats to Israel should he follow through with a primary bid:
Emanuel threatened to send President Obama into black New York City neighborhoods on behalf of Gillibrand, said he would cut off funding from downstate donors, and promised to lend the full White House operation behind Gillibrand's campaign.
Obama, according to the report which first appeared in an absolutely incredible piece in the local publication City Hall News, then followed with a phone call to Israel, who had requested a personal conversation with the president before formally agreeing to drop his plans for a primary challenge.
Now, again, it must be noted: Team Israel is denying the report, emphasizing that Congressman Israel and Rahm Emanuel (himself, of course, a former Congressman) are good friends. Of course, anyone who has read Natali Bendavid’s "The Thumpin" would have no trouble believing that Emanuel would lay that kind of conversation out on even his closest of friends. It is exactly that pugilistic characteristic about him that admirers cannot help but praise and detractors cannot wait to criticize.
Also worth noting: the City Hall News is standing by their story.
Politico--and others--have wondered if this will be the last time Obama (or Emanuel) will be making one of those phone calls. With the probable entry of Chris Kennedy into the race within the next week, and open questions about whether Illinois attorney general Lisa Madigan will make a bid, there is the potential for a very large and very messy Democratic primary in the land of Lincoln. Seeing as the seat in question was Obama’s prior to his promotion, and seeing how both men are Illinois natives, it does not seem out of the realm of possibility that the White House might try to shape the field there as well.
The phone calls, in all probability, become a likelihood if the Republican Party can manage to clear the field for Congressman Mark Kirk, a comparable moderate in his party that has demonstrated impressive fundraising chops in his most recent re-election campaigns against Democrat Dan Seals.
Of course, it is an open question FOR WHOM the White House will seek to clear the field. State Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias, already in the race, is an Obama friend who was a regular in Obama’s basketball runs back in Illinois. Kennedy has already hired David Axelrod’s old firm, and (from some media reports) was being hyped by none other than Rahm Emanuel himself. Madigan might be the candidate with the most general election firepower: a report Thursday in Swing State Project hinted that Kirk’s indecision on the Senate race is based on Madigan. If she gets in, he may very well stay out, which exponentially improves the chances of the Democrats to hold the seat.
Of course, the basic value of White House intervention in Democratic primary politics can be debated as well.
Whether or not the White House CAN do so is not in question. Any president, especially one as popular as Obama is right now, can impact a race by a mere show of preference. Surely, Steve Israel understood this. Just as surely, it was the primary consideration in his decision not to run against Senator Gillibrand.
The question is whether the White House SHOULD do so.
To be certain, there are some benefits. A cleared primary allows the candidate to save up valuable resources, allows the candidate time to define himself or herself without worrying about BEING defined, and it allows the party to coalesce early enough that bruised egos and hurt feelings are unlikely to persist into November.
An additional bonus for the White House: clearing a primary for a House or Senate candidate is an incredible expenditure of political capital. It would be awfully hard for the beneficiary not to have a rather large debt to repay to the president in that event.
However, cleared primaries present potential liabilities, as well. For one thing, contested primaries are the best form of vetting known to a candidate. Any political professional worth his or her salt would rather have negative messages lobbed at the candidate in June, rather than in October. In a contested primary, the attacks are battle-tested early, and have often jumped the shark by the Fall.
Furthermore, there is something to be said for the effect of a contested primary in sharpening the candidate. Few would argue that Barack Obama was a much more skilled debater in October of 2008 than he had been in October of 2007.
Like so many things in politics, there are no absolutes on this question. There are times in which it is completely appropriate for the White House to use its political capital on clearing a primary. New York could well be a prime example—it is an incredibly expensive media state, and there is a persuasive argument to be made for having one candidate save resources for the general election. Also, there are a number of heavy hitters looming on the Republican side (most often mentioned are former Governor George Pataki and Congressman Peter King) who would benefit from a compromised Democratic nominee. Bear in mind, unlike a lot of big states (Texas, Illinois, and California spring immediately to mind), New York comes fairly light in the primary season. There may be precious little time to rebuild the campaign treasury, and to let the wounds of a bloody primary heal.
It should not, however, be standard operating procedure for all downballot candidates to get the official White House seal of approval. Clearing the field for a particular candidate is powerful political stuff. As such, it should be used as sparingly as possible.
