Georgia Senate race debate — the Democrats
April 3, 2008 at 10:11 am by Ken Edelstein in News
Photo by Brian Z. Danin
Dale Cardwell, Rand Knight and Josh Lanier showed up last night for a debate at Emory Law School among Democrats fighting for the chance to take on Republican Saxby Chambliss.
The two guys who’ve actually won elected office before and who have got to be considered the favorites for the Democratic nomination, Vernon Jones and Jim Martin, weren’t there. The primary is slated for July 15.
Like a lot of underdogs this year, Cardwell and Knight evoked the experience-ain’t-such-a-big-deal insurgency of Barack Obama, while Lanier — a former congressional aide and lobbyist — talked a lot about restoring the Senate to its traditions of civility.
Although each was pretty good at articulating a populist message, I can’t help but wonder whether shooting for the Senate the first time you run for public office is a bit delusional. It’s like thinking you ought to do brain surgery while you’re still taking your first First Aid class.
I was on the panel, and I asked essentially that question (albeit more politely): Might it be better for people who want to see Chambliss defeated if you dropped out of the race, threw your support to a more experienced candidate, and proved yourself by running for lower office?
Lanier, who now lives in Statesboro, said my question in itself was an example of “what’s wrong with American politics.” I shouldn’t assume fund raising is the be-all-end-all, he said. He got a lot of applause for that — but unfortunately fund raising, experience and connections do matter. Nobody’s going to crank up a bandwagon for the nomination or against Chambliss without a couple of million dollars.
Cardwell, who quit his job as a WSB-TV reporter to run for the Senate, said he was irked that Martin came to his office in September and told him he wasn’t going to run for the Senate. (I’ve alerted Martin’s folks that I’m posting what Dale said and inviting Martin to comment below if he remembers the meeting differently.)
The most impressive one of the three on the issues was Knight. He’s an earnest 30-something with no political experience. But he’s well-versed in environmental issues and has made the environment central to his campaign. He’s spent a lot of time networking among Democratic organizations across the state, and he’s gotten some union backing.
Cardwell’s name recognition and publicity stunts (he’s the guy who spent part of January on a 320-foot chimney tower to draw attention to his campaign) may give him an edge among the second-tier candidates. The ex-TV guy also seems to have taken a page from Lou Dobbs, mixing economic populism talk with advocating harsh treatment of illegal immigrants. That last part could hold contrarian appeal among some, but anti-immigrant platforms usually don’t produce winners in Democratic primaries.
It’s important to remember that not all these guys are necessarily running. None will officially qualify for the contest until later this month. Qualifying ends May 2.
All three had announced their intention to jump into the race when it looked as if Jones — the controversial DeKalb County CEO might be the lone Democratic bigwig. But Martin’s March 19 announcement that he’s running foils the alternative-to-Jones strategy.
The former state rep from Atlanta and one-time state Human Resources commissioner ran a strong campaign for lieutenant governor in 2006 against Republican Casey Cagle, losing by a much smaller margin than did the Democrat for governor. Though Martin’s late entry into the Senate race will force him to convince people that he’s really committed to running hard against Chambliss, he was recruited by national Democrats, which should give him a nice jump in fund raising.
Chambliss could be vulnerable. Six years after getting swept into office on the 2002 post-9/11 tide, Georgia’s senior senator is most famous for: running a campaign ad that compared war hero Max Cleland to Osama bin Laden, being the most obsequious of Bush lackeys and nakedly flip-flopping on immigration reform. Plus, huge African-American turnout in the March 5 presidential primary has many local Democrats salivating at the thought that so many blacks could turn out in the General Election (especially if Obama’s nominated). Chambliss’ favorability ratings seems to hover around 50 percent — higher than sitting-duck territory but not great for an incumbent.
Still it’s a long shot. Chambliss has at least $4 million in the bank, and a Democrat caught in a tight nomination fight before the July 15 primary and an August runoff will be forced to spend time and money defending himself instead of redefining the Republican. Just ask Barack and Hillary how much fun that is.
Thanks to the Emory Law School Democrats for sponsoring the debate and for inviting me.
UPDATE Martin confirms Cardwell’s account, raises $346,000.
Send to a friend:
April 3rd, 2008 at 12:39 pm
Yet another Vernon Jones scandal:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOGBKAEdtQ0&feature=related
Now he has judges doing his dirty work.
April 3rd, 2008 at 12:39 pm
Funny thing about this piece is the claim that Martin lost by “a much smaller margin” than Taylor did. Didn’t know that losing in a landslide by 12 points is something to be proud of.
The numbers of votes Martin got compared to Taylor do not speak to Martin’s abilities to win. They show how hard it is for a Democrat to win in Georgia and that Martin is unable to do so.
April 3rd, 2008 at 3:15 pm
What a condescending view of people who run for public office. Do you mean “delusional” as in first-time candidates like Senators Webb, Biden, Akaka, Baucus, Cantwell, Leahy, Hatch, McConnell, etc. etc. and on and on?
Who’s delusional?
April 3rd, 2008 at 3:27 pm
If “Nobody’s going to crank up a bandwagon for the nomination or against Chambliss without a couple of million dollars,” then I guess Saxby’s potential opponent is named “Nobody,” since none of the Dems has $2m to crank a nomination bandwagon.
April 3rd, 2008 at 3:38 pm
I read a “bit delusional” to mean that, of the hundreds of people who have made first time runs at the US Senate, only a handful have won. The incumbency advantage in the US Senate and House is almost insurmountable, especially combined with inexperience and no tested machine for election.
Also, given the performance and prioities of many of our elected leaders, especially well documented in CL, condescension is a perfectly appropriate response.
April 3rd, 2008 at 3:43 pm
“I agree that Rand Knight was the most impressive of the candidates on the issues. While Lanier did a good job of telling stories, and Cardwell repeated the same old Democratic clichés, Knight was able to provide innovative and logical solutions to the issues we are currently facing and the problems we will undoubtedly face in the future. Knight’s strong stance on education, ending the war in Iraq, job creation and energy independence provided a welcome change to the stagnant rhetoric which we’ve become accustom.
I was also impressed with Knight’s organization. It seemed like Lanier and Cardwell both came alone, without supporters or any campaign info. But Knight had numerous signs outside of Emory and inside was table with campaign literature, buttons, stickers and signup sheets. Most importantly Knight had what looked like a small army of supporters, exactly what’s needed to compete against Saxby and his Republication nation.”
April 3rd, 2008 at 4:19 pm
Nice photo there at the top. But I didn’t realize Fred Thompson was running.
April 3rd, 2008 at 6:53 pm
Ahem, SND: Akaka spent seven terms as a congressman before the Senate. Baucus: Montana House, 1973-1974, then Congress 75-78. Cantwell: U.S. House, 1992-1995, Washington House 86-92. Leahy: State’s Attorney, 1966-1974. McConnell: Jefferson County Judge-Executive, 1978-85. Of course it takes a bit of delusion to think you’ll win a U.S. Senate seat without prior elected experience. That doesn’t mean it’s impossible to win — just very, very unlikely.
April 4th, 2008 at 7:35 am
Well, ahem, Ken: so you draw a keen distinction between House and Senate as regards your argument on the delusion of running for federal office without have run before? Ok, I’ll give you back Akaka, Baucus and Cantwell on technicality. Leahy, however, was a state prosecutor in Chittenden County, VT, a non-elected office, before running for the Senate. McConnell a near ceremonial position. Your commenter above reminds me also of Fred Thompson - first run, Senate. Ditto John Warner of Virginia. Frank Lautenber, yep. Mel Martinez, same.
We simply differ on your view that Georgians would be best served by a limited choice of either bought-and-sold Saxby or a big-money-machine Democrat. I’m more interested in who would be a good Senator.
April 4th, 2008 at 9:04 am
Whoa, SND. Wrong again! Before he was named HUD secretary, Mel Martinez was elected Orange County chairman in 1998 — kind of the equivalent in Florida politics to DeKalb CEO in Georgia.
Nobody said there weren’t exceptions to the previously-elected-official rule (guideline?) for successful US Senate candidates. But even they almost always are either wealthy enough to run self-funded campaigns (John Warner, Corzine) or very high profile public figures (Webb was Navy secretary; Fred Thompson former Watergate committee counsel and actor). Cardwell, Lanier and Knight just don’t meet those criteria.
You mischaracterize my “view,” by the way. An honest reality check isn’t the same as promoting an agenda.
June 5th, 2008 at 12:45 pm
When it comes to having experience in Washington, Josh Lanier is heads and shoulders above the rest. Josh Lanier worked as a congresional staffer in the U.S. Senate and in the House, and, ran a PAC, as well.
A U.S. Senator needs to know much about Washington, and Josh Lanier certainly has the experience to know more about Washington than any other Democratic U.S. Senatorial Candidate.
To find out more about Josh Lanier’s experience in Washington, as well as in the military, please visit http://www.joshlanier.com.