Why Does Bush Hate Katherine Harris?
Well, okay, not "hate," but it is becoming harder and harder to understand the stubborn hostility of the White House to her announced Florida senate candidacy:
Loyalty isn't the emphasis I would make. After all, when Harris was Florida Secretary of State, she wasn't fixing the 2000 election for George Bush, but simply applying state election law as it was written. One does not attribute loyalty to the impartially administered rule of law.
Perhaps they question the judgment she showed in being SecState and also remaining a higher-up in the Florida Bush operation. But surely the Bushies knew of this arrangement before the post-election Gore insurrection erupted and could have prevailed upon Ms. Harris to exercise some recusal in order to avoid the appearance of conflict of interest. And to cite something like that would be petty and vindictive, neither a trait generally associated with Dubya.
Certainly there doesn't appear to be much White House strategic thinking involved vis-a-vie next year's senate contest. Name recognition, base-energization, and fundraising ability are, last I checked, the core trio of important factors in successful senate challengers; Ms. Harris enters the race with gobs of all three, as well as the track record of having won statewide races before.
By contrast, and no offense is meant by the following, but who the hell is Allan Bense? I readily admit that I'm not a Floridian, and I don't know how high a profile Speaker Bense has in the sunshine state, but, as big a current events geek as I am, I would have to do a little research to remember who the House speaker is in my own state, and I'm guessing the same would be true of most Florida voters. So a Bense candidacy would have had to devote a far greater portion of time and resources (drawn from a smaller pool) just to build up his notoriety level to where Ms. Harris is already starting out.
As to base enthusiasm, from what I've read of Speaker Bense, he's a "moderate" Republican, which means he would be bland, amorphous, "inoffensive," and completely uninspiring. Standing for little or nothing, he would not (so the thinking goes) frighten off swing voters and, supposedly, be more capable of capturing the fabled "center" against the unpopular Democrat incumbent. In reality, as the electoral performance of Rockefeller Republicans (outside "blue" states, anyway) repeatedly shows, a Bense candidacy would have done no better amongst "independents" and perhaps a great deal worse given the greater ease with which moderates can be hostiley defined, without the offsetting core GOP turnout necessary to overcome that shortfall.
By contrast, there can be no doubt that Katherine Harris will fire up the Republican base. Ditto the Democrat base, of course, but given the form Donk energy has taken since 2000, I'd wager that in a state as "red" as Florida, that would be a net plus.
But if one wants to get back to the loyalty question, it seems to me that Ms. Harris showed that to the Bushies by stepping aside and allowing Mel Martinez (another "moderate" Republican) a clear shot at the other Florida senate seat a year ago, which was only just barely successful on the strength of the President's presence at the top of the ballot and Martinez' own name recognition as Bush's HUD Secretary (and Martinez fell five points short of Dubya's performance). Now it's her turn, and their turn to get out of the way. And they're not doing so.
Given the President's current standing in the polls (even adjusting for Extreme Media bias), antagonizing "the GOP political community in Washington" to try and prove a dubious point doesn't seem like a very good idea.
But it may help ensure that Senator Harris gains a new reputation for "independence" - at least from the Bush White House.
Continued White House hostility to Representative Katherine Harris as the prospective Republican nominee against Democratic Senator Bill Nelson in Florida is antagonizing the GOP political community in Washington.
The national Republican establishment, led by President Bush's aides, have made no secret of opposition to Harris as a polarizing candidate who could not win a general election. What is surprising is a continued negative attitude toward Harris even though she is now the only apparent GOP candidate after Florida House Speaker Allan Bense said he would not run. Bense was the choice of both President Bush and Florida Governor Jeb Bush.
Keeping up the anti-Harris front was seen in Republican circles as running counter to the Bush tradition of loyalty. Harris became a prime target of Democrats after her aggressive role, as Florida secretary of state, in the 2000 presidential recount that saved George W. Bush's election.
Loyalty isn't the emphasis I would make. After all, when Harris was Florida Secretary of State, she wasn't fixing the 2000 election for George Bush, but simply applying state election law as it was written. One does not attribute loyalty to the impartially administered rule of law.
Perhaps they question the judgment she showed in being SecState and also remaining a higher-up in the Florida Bush operation. But surely the Bushies knew of this arrangement before the post-election Gore insurrection erupted and could have prevailed upon Ms. Harris to exercise some recusal in order to avoid the appearance of conflict of interest. And to cite something like that would be petty and vindictive, neither a trait generally associated with Dubya.
Certainly there doesn't appear to be much White House strategic thinking involved vis-a-vie next year's senate contest. Name recognition, base-energization, and fundraising ability are, last I checked, the core trio of important factors in successful senate challengers; Ms. Harris enters the race with gobs of all three, as well as the track record of having won statewide races before.
By contrast, and no offense is meant by the following, but who the hell is Allan Bense? I readily admit that I'm not a Floridian, and I don't know how high a profile Speaker Bense has in the sunshine state, but, as big a current events geek as I am, I would have to do a little research to remember who the House speaker is in my own state, and I'm guessing the same would be true of most Florida voters. So a Bense candidacy would have had to devote a far greater portion of time and resources (drawn from a smaller pool) just to build up his notoriety level to where Ms. Harris is already starting out.
As to base enthusiasm, from what I've read of Speaker Bense, he's a "moderate" Republican, which means he would be bland, amorphous, "inoffensive," and completely uninspiring. Standing for little or nothing, he would not (so the thinking goes) frighten off swing voters and, supposedly, be more capable of capturing the fabled "center" against the unpopular Democrat incumbent. In reality, as the electoral performance of Rockefeller Republicans (outside "blue" states, anyway) repeatedly shows, a Bense candidacy would have done no better amongst "independents" and perhaps a great deal worse given the greater ease with which moderates can be hostiley defined, without the offsetting core GOP turnout necessary to overcome that shortfall.
By contrast, there can be no doubt that Katherine Harris will fire up the Republican base. Ditto the Democrat base, of course, but given the form Donk energy has taken since 2000, I'd wager that in a state as "red" as Florida, that would be a net plus.
But if one wants to get back to the loyalty question, it seems to me that Ms. Harris showed that to the Bushies by stepping aside and allowing Mel Martinez (another "moderate" Republican) a clear shot at the other Florida senate seat a year ago, which was only just barely successful on the strength of the President's presence at the top of the ballot and Martinez' own name recognition as Bush's HUD Secretary (and Martinez fell five points short of Dubya's performance). Now it's her turn, and their turn to get out of the way. And they're not doing so.
Given the President's current standing in the polls (even adjusting for Extreme Media bias), antagonizing "the GOP political community in Washington" to try and prove a dubious point doesn't seem like a very good idea.
But it may help ensure that Senator Harris gains a new reputation for "independence" - at least from the Bush White House.
posted by JASmius at 9:52 AM
<<< Home