In the days post the victory in Pennsylvania’s 18th district, a lot has been said about different strategies and spending efforts that may have helped Connor Lamb secure a victory. Over the last few days, too many talking heads though bring up one point in particular — Lamb’s open statement that he believes in a change for the Democratic leadership, as being some sort of magical string of words that helped now Rep. Lamb win in Pennsylvania’s 18th district.
It’s a convenient talking point for those who dislike Leader Pelosi; or those who are looking to replace Democratic house leadership with another white guy. The problem with the talking point: it completely ignores reality.
In an interview with McClatchy, I pointed out that the party has no power as to what a candidate says or what they believe about the leadership race in the house. What should also be noted: most of us who follow the contest of leadership in the house as well as campaigns know that very few voters give a darn about internal party decisions in this way; and if I photoshopped in anyone else to replace Leader Pelosi, Republicans would drop the exact same mail, run the exact same ads, and say almost the exact same things — just with a different person photoshopped in.
www.politico.com/...
A campaign manager for a Democratic candidate in a Republican-held district, granted anonymity to candidly discuss party strategy, said there’s a “100 percent chance that we’ll see more rejection of Pelosi from [Democratic] candidates going forward.”
“Two things will happen: More Democrats are going to say they don’t support Pelosi, and Republicans will keep airing these Pelosi TV ads,” predicted another Democratic strategist who works on House races. “The ads are unavoidable, but the question is, do they work anymore?”
But does this “hot take” strategy really work? Or, frankly, does it even matter? What we’re discovering from data and the reports of field workers is that far more Democratic voters are coming to the poll at higher turnouts, and they are the tide — not flipping Republicans. More than that, we are also seeing a general opposition to Speaker Ryan; and while Republicans ran with postcards of Obama/Pelosi to good effect among their base — Democratic voters are equally responsive if not more so to attacks on Republicans choosing to stand behind the Trump/Ryan agenda.
Does saying you won’t vote for Pelosi make you an independent maverick, as some contend? Is it political calculation? Or is it a belief in change? I’ve had time to talk to some of the candidates who have embarked on this, and for many, it is a belief they have over what they think will be good for Congress — and they are free to that opinion. But as a political strategy, am I in any way convinced this neutralizes them from Republican voters? Not in the slightest.
thehill.com/...
“When it comes to personal ambition and having fun on TV, have your fun,” Pelosi said during a press briefing in the Capitol, referring to her detractors making the cable news rounds.
“I love the arena; I thrive on competition; and I welcome the discussion. But I am honored by the support.”
The fact is, very few in Democratic leadership have managed to get more accomplished, legislatively for the country, and as a party leader, providing resources to the party, period. Leader Pelosi has, for the most part, provided a strong whip support against Trump in the house — and her leader’s minute, an eight hour speech to stop the clock for Trump and his anti-immigrant agenda — stood out for many Democratic activists as the kind of effort we only wish for in many of our leaders.
Talking heads and campaign consultants have decided that dissing the current leader may be a path to success — but I’d be wary of believing that will make any movement in the polls, or that it will help you get elected.
Conor Lamb didn’t win because of his stance on Pelosi — he won because of his stance on local issues, his state party effort to turn out voters, and the unpopularity of House Speaker Ryan.
Republican voters have long been attracted to the message of retention of leadership; but Democratic voters are attracted to the perception of REAL leadership, by the candidate running, and their ability to use it in addressing the issue there in district voters care about.
Some free advice to candidates who think this may be the hot new way to get elected: it isn’t. If you honestly believe it; fine, the part is not empowered to stop you. But, just remember: no matter who you pick next? They’ll be on the next postcard just as fast, with a message eerily the same, and at some point, you’ll find that you’ll either be constantly renouncing Democratic leadership or you’ll come to the realization that Democratic voters? Really do not care nor vote on this issue — and PS, quite a few of them may be pretty happy with current leadership as well.