Wednesday, October 26, 2005

Fortuitous Failure

Yet again, Sen. Dole has failed to recruit the best, nay, best remaining candidate for a Senate campaign. Vermont Lt. Gov. Brian Dubie has decided against a primary challenge to businessman James Tarrant. When Jumpin' Jim Jeffords announced his retirement, the GOP quickly turned its attention to Gov. Jim Douglas, a liberal Republican whom most thought offered the Party its only real shot. Like almost every other strong non-incumbent, Douglas opted against a bid.

After that, attention quickly turned to Dubie. Dubie is a fairly popular, fairly conservative Republican who could do well in Vermont politics for years to come. The race against popular Rep. Bernie Sanders would have been an extremely tough test for Dubie. Coming into the race, Sanders brings with him a decade and a half of experience working for the extreme left-win in the US House. This is not to suggest that Sanders is insincere, but Karl Marx would have been proud. Such a record serves him well in Vermont politics, and it gives him numbers in the mid-50s against any Republican challenger.

Having said this, Dubie's decision hands the nomination to James Tarrant, who is likely to finance his own campaign. Tarrant's bid is a long shot, but, as Jon Corzine has proven, it is possible to buy viability, and Vermont's size makes viability cheaper than it is in New Jersey. More importantly, though, his ability to self-finance makes it possible to force Democrats to spend precious resources in the state, thus taking money from their pick-up opportunities in the semi-vulnerable GOP seats in Arizona, Tennessee, and/or Mississippi. Especially in mid-term elections, these resources are critical for GOTV operations.

In short, Tarrant is unlikely to win the seat, but the departure of Dubie and subsequent Tarrant nomination increase the likelihood that Democrats will have to spend some time and money in Vermont that they would rather spend elsewhere.

1 Comments:

At 1:02 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Your comments about candidate recruitment (overall, not just here) are generally on-target, but on the whole, you needn't be so pessimistic!

I'd like to see a running comparison of predictions. Scoring predictions made a week before the elections isn't a lot of fun. How about you track predictions each month from now until election day. You could include yourself, Tim Saler, myDD, polipundit, Cook, Todd. I'm sure there'd be plenty to participate. Given the volume of comments you get, this might be a welcome way to drive traffic here.

For my part, my November 2005 prediction would be this:
AZ: R
FL: R+
MD: D
MI: D
MN: R+
MO: R
MT: R
ND: D
NE: D
NJ: D
OH: R
PA: R
RI: D+
TN: R
VT: D
WA: D
WV: D
Non compete: CA, CT, DE, HI, IN, MA, ME, MS, NM, NV, NY, TX, UT, VA, WI, WY
Balance: 56-44

 

Post a Comment

<< Home