The Mother's Milk of Politics

Anyone paying attention to politics over the years knows just how true that old saying is. Money is the mother's milk of politics. This years gubernatorial primaries in both parties are living proof that this old saw is as true as ever. But it's not just having money that you need to focus on - it's how you get that money.

There are several fundamental ways to make sure that your campaign has all the scratch, dough, cash, mother's milk, call it what you like, that you'll need. First, you can marry it; inherit it; win the NC Edukation Lottery; earn it (a really tough way to fund your campaign) or raise it. Now, the first four ways are the simplest in that the candidate has the money in hand and can figure out how much of it he/she is willing to commit to the race. But you need a pretty substantial chunk of personal wealth to make a difference and even then there is no guarantee that your willingness to part with personal wealth will result in victory.

Now, raising the money is the hard way but even if you work hard and are a good candidate it doesn't guarantee that you'll be able to raise what you need. (I can attest personally to that truism) So how do you successfully raise the needed millions. First, there must be a sense that you are going to win. (See Beverly Perdue) Everybody loves to back a winner and the "professional" givers aren't going to spend limited donation dollars on a lost cause.

Secondly, the candidate can facilitate the outpouring of campaign contributions if that candidate is in an existing position of influence. (See Richard Moore, Walter Dalton, and Pat McCrory) Again, the "professional" givers want to make sure that people in position to impact their wants and needs, are sufficiently supported.

Third, it helps to hold an existing political position so that you can raise money in an existing political committee, then roll that money over into a new political committee for the new office, thus enabling the candidate to "go back to the well" for contributions to the new committee. (See Perdue, Moore, McCrory, Dalton, and Smith)

Does all of this work out for the candidates for governor? You bet it does. Perdue had personal wealth, a perception of winning the governorship, an existing fund raising mechanism as Lt. Governor replete with a donor list built over the years and finally a position of power, particularly since she was backed by the state's most powerful individual Senator Marc Basnight. Moore also had personal wealth, a position of power (check out the NYC trips), a perception of winning, and an existing campaign committee as Treasurer.

McCrory had the position of power (Mayor of Charlotte, although I still question how powerful it really is), a perception of winning (at least the primary), and an existing political committee that had just spent large sums getting him reelected as Mayor and thus a large existing contributor list to hit again in the race for governor.

Smith had the personal wealth and an existing contributor base from his State Senate position but not near as large I suspect as Perdue, Moore and McCrory. While he raised a decent amount of money, he undoubtedly spent an equal or even larger sum, raising it (not a formula for success).

Graham had the personal wealth and a tentative contributor list from his gas tax campaign but it never translated into contributions to his gubernatorial campaign. And I had no personal wealth, a lot of nice friends who contributed, but no existing political committee or contributor base and no position of influence to leverage contributions. Plus, from the beginning the word on the street was - no personal wealth and unable to raise the necessary funds.

So, the pundits can rest easy in that their insights that money would drive the race for governor turned out to be correct. In his bestselling book "Moneyball" Michael Lewis describes how Billy Beane and the Oakland A's baseball team has been able to compete as a low budget team against the well-financed giants of baseball like the New York Yankees. It might work in baseball, but nobody's come up with a comparable plan for big time politics.

How McCrory Really Won the Nomination

I've followed the pundits' observations lately about how Pat McCrory won the GOP primary for governor. Now let someone inside the tent tell you the rest of the story. To begin with either the McCrory strategy for entering the race so late was both brilliant and Machiavellian or it was just extraordinarily lucky. Take your pick because I don't know if we'll ever know for sure. But take it to the bank, the way his strategy ultimately unfolded was absolutely perfect.

First, while Fred executed his 3 candidates strategy (Smith, Graham and Orr) and Graham, having parted with Fetzer-Stephens tried to figure out exactly what he did want to do with the campaign and I ran around trying to figure out how in the world I could raise some money, McCrory put together his run for re-election as Mayor. This allowed him to do several key things including raise over $800,000, spend a boatload of money running ads touting him as a mayoral candidate in the expanded Charlotte media market, and avoid putting himself out there as a target on issues in the governor's race. Winning the mayor's race with a big margin was another plus.

When McCrory finally did jump into the governor's race in January, he was able to have just come off a media campaign in the critical Charlotte market; roll over $400,000 from the Mayor's race into the Governor's race to jump start the campaign; and use the media to run weeks of "will he or won't he" stories thus preempting the other candidates with media coverage. Meanwhile, Smith was too far down the road on his 100 county BBQ tour and Lee Greenwood song fest to change strategies. Graham still hadn't figured out what he wanted to do but McCrory's presence in the race undermined any Charlotte media market plan he might have been contemplating. And what chance I had as the alternative to Smith and Graham to draw financial support out of Charlotte was eliminated.

McCrory (as all candidates did) then got a virtual free pass on substantive questions about his positions on the issues. He touted cutting the income tax but never had any specifics about how much, who would benefit etc. He campaigned on the need for anti-gang legislation and dodged a bullet when the Charlotte Observer's story on the gang legislation's limited value ran on election day. Mecklenburg DA Peter Gilchrist was quoted as saying in essence that the legislation really wasn't much value in the war on crime. McCrory campaigned on illegal immigration but no one in the media ever really called him to task on who should actually get credit for the 287G program in Charlotte or whether a detention center in NC really was a good idea. McCrory also touted his leadership but got another free pass from the press on issues like the water rate tax increase in Charlotte (no position taken), the Obama ad controversy (no position taken) or that the Charlotte Mayor's job really is pretty limited. Since none of his opponents were able or willing to aggressively take him on about these issues and the press played "love in", he got a free ride on the issues that he sold to primary voters.

Finally, Smith anticipated a GOP turnout of around 400,000. The 20% increase of an additional 100,000 plus voters caught him by surprise and played a major impact in McCrory's victory. These new 100,000 voters hadn't received a copy of Fred's book, been invited to a BBQ or had their hands pumped by one of us on-the-ground candidates. Most of these new voters were in the Charlotte media market and knew McCrory best from TV and figured he best could represent their concerns. While no one has done the research, I'd bet that of those 100,000 plus new voters, McCrory got 80% or his margin of victory.

So add all of this to the obvious points of Pat being a smooth, engaging candidate with a good public and media image and the fact that Charlotte can print big money faster than the US government. Did he plan it out this way? Who knows? But it sure worked like a charm.

A Big Win for Big Business

Tonight starts the new phase of More from Orr as I am no longer constrained by my position as a candidate (and since I haven't decided what I'll do with the rest of my life, I'm unrestrained by employment). This entry will mark the first of numerous postings reflecting back on the 2008 primary races, particularly the governor's race, giving readers my perspective on how it all happened.

My first observation is that the primary was a huge victory for big business in North Carolina. While businesses generally can be reasonably pleased, it's the mega-corporations both in and out of state that were smiling broadly on Wednesday morning. And for those folks interested in incentives, it's wide open in N.C. (Be sure and read today's Charlotte Observer article on the Bruton Smith $80 million incentives package)

On the GOP side Pat McCrory for governor and Robert Pittenger for Lt. Governor give the Charlotte big businesses a lot to crow over. Someone over at BlueNC described politics in Charlotte as having 3 political parties: Democrat, Republican and Chamber of Commerce. The poster noted that Pat's first loyalty is to the Chamber and I believe the same can be said for Robert Pittenger. Just follow the money to those two campaigns and that should verify the observation.

On the Democratic side, much to the dismay of the liberal - excuse me, the Progressive - wing of the Democratic Party, Bev Perdue and Walter Dalton are just as indebted and entrenched with big business as McCrory and Pittenger. They both are from the Mark Basnight school of politics and one only has to see how effectively big business falls all over (and funds) the Senator from Dare, to see the truth in this statement. Dalton raised over a million dollars for a position that has virtually no power (another topic down the road) and Perdue got her share of the $4000 loot from corporate North Carolina.

Despite Bev's "aw shucks, I'm all about the middle class", she will walk a fine line between taking care of the liberal wing of the party by throwing a few bones and sound bites their way, but ain't about to buck the big boys with the big checks and big clout.

Orr's first prediction: Either Perdue or McCrory will be Mike Easley on steroids when it comes to handing out big "incentive" packages and real tax reform will not happen because big business will make sure their interests will be taken care of. So, the political wisdom of the ages holds true again. Money drives politics and big business has most of the big money and big influence over the nominees for Governor and Lt. Governor in both parties.

Thanks for Reading

Ouch. It was a major league beating yesterday. As they say in the mountains, I was beaten like a rented mule. Oh well, the sun is out, the family is well, the trip to Great Britain is booked, and I have a tee time at 1:20. I never have to answer another inane question again from the press unless I choose to nor fain politeness to a voter with an irrational point of view.

So what happens with "More from Orr"? Well, frankly I've come to enjoy these mini-editorial sessions and plan to continue doing them. I may even start including some of those bells and whistles that Justin Thibault of the Cabarrus Cheap Seats has been after me to add.

I don't know how many of you out there in internet space have been reading this blog but thanks for doing that whether you supported me or not. I'll try to keep it going with my analysis of the campaigns - past and present - and a running commentary on how I view the fall election. I have only one regret and that is that my results allowed Public Policy Polling's Tom Jensen to avoid eating a live cockroach. He'd promised to perform that act if I won. Damn. Now that would have been fun to watch.

Conventional Wisdom or Wildcard Tuesday?

Throughout this campaign I have labored under the perception that I couldn't win because I did not have a personal fortune and couldn't raise a political fortune for the campaign. No matter how true the dollar implications were, it always irritated me that the conventional wisdom tended to become political truth. Several months ago I fell victim to using this same analysis in the GOP Lt. Governor's race by proclaiming Senator Robert Pittenger the presumptive winner based on his personal fortune and his opponents lack of money.

Greg Dority, one of the GOP candidates for Lt. Governor without the money took exception to my conclusion. I confess that Greg's point was well taken and I had fallen into the trap of assuming that money is the end all - be all of campaign victory. Greg reminded me tonight at the Johnston County Reagan Day dinner that I had promised to blog on the error of my ways. And I am.

Today's N&O ran an interesting, albeit painful, full page money analysis of the races for Governor and Lt. Governor. The chart pointed out that I will be outspent in aggregate by about 20 to 1 by my three main rivals for governor in the primary. Likewise, Greg and Jim Snyder will be outspent by about 200 to 1 in the race for Lt. Governor. So do any of us sans millions have any chance of winning on Tuesday? Maybe.

For all the talk about huge turnout, I don't see it happening in the GOP primary. My sense is that the only people voting in our primary will be those who've got a dog in the fight in either one of the statewide races or in a hot local primary. And that means that most will have some passing knowledge of who all the candidates are and a lot of that information will come from the media or free internet info - not the 30 second soundbites on TV, the robo calls from marginal celebrities, or slick mailings.

In fact, these races may be decided by the OWTH voters - a term I've recently coined which stands for "Oh what the hell." These OWTH voters in some indeterminate number will vote on Tuesday and while in the voting booth, look at a race and mutter: "Oh what the hell...I'll vote for...." What those voters base that decision on is anybody's guess. But they might be old hockey fans who recall fondly that Bobby Orr was the greatest hockey player ever or that Greg Dority was the guy who played and coached at Carolina (although Matt Doherty's coaching gig might cost Greg votes).

Regardless, we're less than 72 hours from finding out. But don't count out a surprise or two regardless of all the money. Elections aren't over until they count the votes.

So the Difference Really Is Leadership?

For the past several months Mayor Pat has been touting his leadership record and tagging at least one of his TV ads "The difference is leadership". Now some 5 days in to the great "Obama Ad" controversy, I'm still waiting for Pat, Fred and Bill to get off the fence. Prior to our debate on WUNC-TV last Thursday they once again all said they hadn't seen the ad so couldn't really comment on it. Bull. And of course our ever vigilant press has continued to let them all skate without getting some kind of answer.

It seems to me that there are three positions to take on the issue. (1) Defend Chairman Daves and the state GOP for running the ad (2) Follow the lead of Senator McCain and the national GOP (as well as yours truly) in calling the ad a mistake and asking that the ad not be run or (3) keep trying to duck taking a position and hope it goes away. It seems to me that taking a position on the issue one way or the other is what leadership is all about. Sure, it's a controversial issue. Sure, taking a position will alienate some people on the other side. But the bottom line is that either the state party made a good decision or it made a bad decision.

Whoever gets the party nomination and is elected governor becomes the titular head of the NC Republican Party. Yes, that's the same party castigated around the state and nation as "racist", "out of touch" and "irrelevant". When the NC delegation casts its votes at the National Convention, I have no doubt that television commentators will make reference to the "racist actions" concerning the ad. We have, and continue to do, irrevocable damage to the image of the NC Republican Party. It may not be a correct image. It may not be right. But it's the image that people are now and will continue to associate with the state party and we simply cannot afford that image to continue.

So over the next 8 days leading up to the May 6th primary this ad and the resulting fallout will be the defining policy position for our candidates for governor. I made my decision immediately after being informed of the ad and taking the time to go on line and look at it. The painful and unacceptable silence of my fellow GOP candidates for governor - all of whom tout their leadership qualifications - points to an abject failure of leadership.

Labels: Obama ad


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Great Obama Ad Controversy

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that the big political news of the day is the Republican State Party's upcoming ad linking Moore and Perdue to Obama and ultimately to Obama's controversial minister. If the purpose of the ad was to stir up controversy and as a result raise money from the party's conservative base then the ad is probably already a big success. However, if the ad is suppose to actually help the GOP nominee for governor beat Moore or Perdue in the fall, then frankly I think it's a big failure.

Allow me to explain. First of all, the ad is being run a week before the primary. So what's the political benefit of that? None that I can discern. Does it impact the democratic primary voters in choosing Moore or Perdue? Obama or Clinton? Somehow I doubt it but if it does so what. Does it advance the argument as to why the GOP nominee would be the better candidate in the fall? I doubt that also. There are a myriad of issues to take the ultimate democratic nominee on in the fall - or for that matter right now. For example, in Tuesday's WRAL-TV debate Moore and Perdue danced around the studio trying to avoid all sorts of probing questions. In particular neither wanted to answer whether they supported a fetal homicide bill. As it turns out after long efforts to filibuster the question to death, they ended up saying that they didn't. Now that's a real issue the GOP nominee (we all support the proposed fetal homicide bill) can run on.

In addition the ad unfortunately allows our political opponents and the media to continue stereotyping Republicans as anti-black and willing to use race to try and win elections. Having spent a political career spanning 35 years trying to reach out to the broader racial communities around our state and having some limited success, it's frustrating to see an unfair and inaccurate label continue to be applied to us. And frankly it hurts in the general election.

Finally, I have to clarify for an individual posting on the Under the Dome blog entry, the question he raised about my recusal in the redistricting cases back in 2001 and 2002 when I was on the Supreme Court. I participated in the first redistricting case (Stephenson I) agreeing for the most part with the majority but dissenting in part when the Court overstepped its constitutional bounds on a couple of points. (I believe in being consistent in my views about constitutional limitations regardless of the political consequences.)

However, as a candidate for reelection in 2002, the Democratic Party attacked me and accused me of not being impartial in the redistricting case. As a result when Stephenson II came up I recused (declined to participate) but filed the reason for the recusal and asked both sides if they were comfortable with me participating. The Attorney General's office said they were fine with me participating, but the plaintiffs lawyers did not agree. Thus I was recused in Stephenson II and III.

On a final note to that issue, I met Mr. Stephenson at a recent debate and he thanked me profusely for my work on the Court and for the Stephenson decision that I participated in. Enough said about all of this. I'm glad May 6th will be here soon.

The Gentle Magnolia Debates

Mark Binker hit the nail on the head when he described last Friday's GOP gubernatorial debate as less a steel cage smackdown and more of a steel - some would say aluminum - magnolia. Yes, as we took the stage for what I think must be the 12th debate I was convinced that this one would be different. I actually thought that tough, philosophical questions would be forthcoming...maybe opportunities to actually push our fellow opposing candidates. Nah........same old, same old. And it was boring.

Now in deference to the media on the panel and those in prior debates, the rationale for asking us "substantive" questions on dropouts, road problems, you get the drift, is that their listeners had not ever heard us expound on these important topics. So once again we answered the same essential questions with the same essential answers with only minor skirmishes.

I did get to push McCrory on just exactly what he was proposing when he proclaimed that he'd cut every one's income tax. Too bad that he didn't have a clue on any specifics and that my asking really irritated him. He and Fred tilted a little over one of Fred's ads but over the course of an hour and a half it was all stock answers to the questions without any real ability for us to give the audience or the public any real sense of what the candidates are actually all about.

I've about decided to come out with a campaign plan to eliminate all taxes, provide every citizen a high paying job and free health care and fix our schools, roads, mental health system, save our environment and solve all the problems with the
criminal justice system. And since I would simply act indignant if anyone asked how I planned to do it - and there's precious little chance that anyone would ask - I might get elected. It's a great system.

The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

The Good: Actually I should say the Great. Today's Winston Salem Journal editorial: they gave me a super endorsement in the GOP race. It's a badly needed shot in the arm as we begin the home stretch. Last night's WRAL-TV debate: while the pundits focused on Pat and Fred, anybody actually listening to the answers made a commitment to vote for me. My website at www.orr2008.com. Vision 20/20: the most thoughtful, creative and visionary approach to the long term economic development strategy for our state. Too bad it's also the best plan never read by the media or the public. My left ear: no more awkward bandage although there's a not-so-pretty scab (the Cary Skin Center trophy is now passed to Mark Johnson of the Charlotte Observer). The Knuckleballs: in first place where they belong.

The Bad: Poll numbers which continue to create a vicious cycle ie. bad numbers mean trouble raising money and less and less press attention which means bad poll numbers. Pollsters: a pox on them. Who knows who actually will vote in the GOP primary on May 6th? Pat McCrory's real record on immigration, property rights and leadership: Gonna be a long three weeks for ole Pat. This could be just like Memphis in the last two minutes...clunk...clunk...clunk. Voter registration numbers in NC since January: 76,000 Democrats, 54,000 Unaffiliated, 15,000 Republicans. Ouch! Houston to GOP...we've got a problem. WRAL-TV lighting for Fred Smith: one wag said it made him look like Lon Chaney...or was that Dick Cheney? The final round of the Masters: if you love golf it was tough to watch.

The Ugly: The Tar Heels first half against Kansas: I was driving home from a Lincoln Day dinner and turned the radio off with 10 minutes left in the half. The Moore - Perdue campaigns despite the pledge to "go nice": Yeh, unless poll numbers show the need to "go mean"...the ultimate in half-truth advertising. The N.C. Supreme Court's inexplicable dismissal of the Dell lawsuit: they are required by law to hear cases involving a substantial constitutional question. If there isn't substaantial constitutional question involved in that case, then I need to turn in my law license because I obviously don't know anything about the law. Friday night's upcoming Civitas Conservative Leadership debate in Greensboro: it's a cage fight and major smackdown event with predictions of blood being left on the Koury Center floor. The only thing missing will be Rick Flair. Wooooooooooooooooooooooo!

Finally, a tribute to Clint Eastwood and the spaghetti westerns. I caught the end of the Good, the Bad and the Ugly a few days ago. As Tuco soaked in the tub one of Angel Eye's henchman confronted Tuco. As the henchman waived his pistol around threatening to shoot Tuco, he suddenly spun around, gunned down by Tuco who had his pistol with him in the soapy bath. "If you're going to shoot, shoot." Tuco says. "Don't talk." Good advice, Fred.

Who Says Substance Doesn't Count?

Throughout the campaign I've raised the question about how relevant our efforts to raise substantive questions and address policy issues really are in this election. Well today, I made Under the Dome for winning the gubernatorial candidates' NCAA bracket challenge. Coming in a distant second was the Lt. Governor who undoubtedly will claim in a press release that she actually won.

Unfortunately our most recent effort to raise the level of debate in the campaign and actually offer real thought provoking solutions hasn't received near as much notoriety as my prognosticating powers. About two weeks ago we released our Vision 20/20 economic development plan with a press conference attended by one member of the media. Press releases were sent out to editorial writers and reporters and the response was deafening silence.

Ok, so we only proposed spending $20 billion between now and the year 2020 on expanded loans to small businesses; angel fund investments to help spark entrepreneurs in developing fields (particularly needed in rural areas of NC); and major commitments of funding to our universities and community colleges for additional doctors, nurses, and allied health professionals. A modest proposal perhaps but when you consider that none of the other GOP candidates for governor have any kind of economic development plan then maybe this one deserves a little attention.

And the flip side of this proposal is that if we would invest the money being given away in targeted tax incentives, the state wouldn't even have to go looking for the money to fund the proposal. I can't figure whether the proposal is too complicated; too simple; too unrealistic; too obvious; or just too much trouble to have to do a story on it.

So next time someone complains about a lack of substance in political campaigns just explain to them about what's really important. We all know that a candidate's ability to navigate the treacherous waters of the NCAA basketball tournament is the real test of leadership skills and creative thinking. But alas, I did pick my beloved Heels to win it all.