One of the lessons in the aftermath of the U.S. Senate race is this: candidates matter. The GOP fielded a strong one, a two-term senator with a down home North Carolina demeanor and a powerful position as head of the Senate Intelligence Committee. The Democrats fielded a kooky ultra-liberal who as former lobbyist of the state ACLU took a number of kooky positions that alienated voters.
For months, even as Deborah Ross picked up momentum, GOP strategists assured worried observers that once they shined a light on her ACLU record, Deborah Ross’s candidacy was finished. They were right.
Yet, for a brief time it appeared the strategists might have been wrong. After Burr’s campaign released the first ad attacking Ross for opposing the North Carolina Sex Offender Registry, Ross countered with a powerful ad of her own featuring the lead sponsor of the sex offender bill, Fountain Odom, who said that Ross helped strengthen the bill. When the dust cleared, it looked like Ross had survived. Republicans panicked.
But the Burr campaign was far from finished. The fact-checkers also went to work. They made clear that Ross had repeatedly raised “concerns” about the legislation, and took a number of positions where she put sex offenders first. This narrative – reinforced through television ad after television ad – was too much for one counter-ad to be effective. Voters were left with the (correct) impression that yes, Deborah Ross had a history of fighting for some very unsympathetic characters, from sex offenders to folks who wanted to burn the American flag.
In the end, the race wasn’t all that close. Burr won by 6 points, a larger margin than his first race against Erskine Bowles in 2004, and a landslide by North Carolina standards. Ross won the Democratic floor of 45%, winning the votes of blacks and liberals in the Research Triangle and Charlotte. She failed badly everywhere else.
This is not to say that Ross ran a bad campaign. In fact, she ran a very good campaign. But her work for the ACLU made her a very poor candidate. Maybe voters in California or Connecticut would have appreciated her left-wing politics, but North Carolinians rejected them.
For months, the DSCC tried and failed to recruit a number of potential challengers to Richard Burr. In a year like 2016 with a Republican wave crashing across the nation, it’s unlikely that any of them could’ve beaten Burr. But a winning race starts with a strong candidate, and Ross had too much baggage to make her one.
In the final analysis, the race was not won on Election Day, but in the recruiting process, when the DSCC inexplicably put their chips on Deborah Ross, despite warnings that her ACLU background made her unelectable. The DSCC should have heeded those warnings instead of going with a candidate radically out-of-step with North Carolina values.
John Wynne is the “conservative voice” at PoliticsNC, where he also provides polling analysis and commentary on legislative campaigns. When not writing about politics, he enjoys gardening and listening to opera. Contact: johncwynne@gmail.com.
Ugh. Would you please turn off the Republican slime machine now that the election is over.
The ACLU defends our freedom. The ACLU defends extreme Republicans, including Nazis and the KKK, to protect the free speech of all Americans. This post twists the truth to make false accusations about a candidate that was buried under an avalanche of slime.
Evidently, Mr. Wynne thinks that working for the ACLU is “kooky,” but cracking a “joke” about waterboarding in a Senate committee meeting isn’t, and “joking” about painting a target on the face of his political opponent isn’t. If such behavior isn’t “kooky,” at least call it “pitiful.”
I agree but have to assume that Mr. Wynne thinks anyone who works for the ACLU is “kooky” — which reflects a strange lack of respect for the civil liberties so important to the founding fathers that they were addded to the governing structure from day one.
You make a good point. But the deeper problem is that the Democratic bench in NC has been so thoroughly gutted over the last few years that there aren’t a lot of moderate, country-fied Democrats left in the lower offices.
I am not clear on precisely what you mean by “kooky”. You used the word twice, once in reference to Ross herself and once for her multiple positions. Now, I know what “kooky” means. But as a blanket epithet you could have used any adjective:
kooky ultra-liberal, kooky positions
textbook ultra-liberal, textbook positions
low-fiber ultra-liberal, low-fiber positions
Other than calling someone a name your usage is meaningless. You mention one past association, the ACLU, and argue that. But that doesn’t explain why her person is “kooky” as well as her positions.
Could you please explain to this non-partisan voter precisely what about her person makes her “kooky”?
What specific positions which Ross took on the campaign trail were “kooky” in your estimation?
I agree but have to assume that Mr. Wynne thinks anyone who works for the ACLU is “kooky” — which reflects a strange lack of respect for the civil liberties so important to the founding fathers that they were addded to the governing structure from day one.
Burr is an incumbent, which is always an advantage.
In addition, he gave a soft embrace to Trump, which helped him.
And as usual the DSCC strategy was flawed since it focuses on turning suburban, GOP-leaning women to its candidate as opposed to growing the base and pushing turnout.
Yes, but I couldn’t help but notice that a fair number of pro-Ross ads went out of their way to tie the not-so-popular Burr to the quite popular Trump. Huge strategic mistake.
Mr. Hood, you need to check your facts. Deborah Ross was never a lobbyist for the ACLU: she was a litigator, working primarily in the areas of First Amendment and juvenile justice issues in North Carolina. She also served our state in the NC House and was in her 6th term there when she decided to run for the US Senate. If you want to know more about her factual employment history, you could simply Google her: but I doubt that accuracy is a major concern for you.
As for Burr, I generally refer to him as “the stealth Senator”, since he interacts with his constituents (at least those who don’t donate to him) as little as possible. I have written to him on numerous occasions regarding issues affecting North Carolinians and have yet to receive a response or even an acknowledgement. (Even Sen. Tillis acknowledges having received letters or e-mail; but Burr is apparently above the concerns of NC’s hoi polloi.) Since Burr is clearly uninterested in my concerns, I’m equally uninterested in legitimizing him via my vote.
Burr beat Ross (and greatly outperformed McCrory) because he hugged top-of- the-ticket Trump in an “outsider” election.
Fountain Odom had zero to do with anything. That waste of an ad was complete inside baseball.
The Ross forces could have played to the year’s outsider environment better *and earlier* but they didn’t.
Ross or any other low name recognition person could have easily run against Washington and won if they simply played the hand that was dealt this year.
Burr and his handlers ran vicious ads that misrepresented Ross statements, and record. They twisted her positions and words, taking them far out of context. The most egregious of them criticizing her good efforts to make legislative bills better for all, and to make certain that the accused had the best defense possible. Caring about that important American civil right was portrayed by Burr as somehow un-American.
But we’ve come to learn that this is how GOP rolls, from Trump down to town sewer director. Lie and lie about your opponents, and then lie some more.
Since when is defending the constitutional protections for individuals, our civil liberties, a defect? You need to listen more carefully in law school. NC had a chance to upgrade a low-mediocre politician to a first-rate one, as energetic as the Incumbent is sluggish. And at a time when Raleigh politicians and their gerrymandered counterparts in DC have soiled and sullied our State’s reputation, or “brand,” we could have altered that image with a smart new face in DC.
Instead, we got a torrent dark-money campaign ads paid for by the reprehensible folks whose greed and manipulation has done so much to damage our nation. In other words, more of what we’ve come to expect from those your side who want to keep their pet senator by riling up those they see as rubes.
Finally, give me a single example, in his House or Senate tenures, when Burr has ever been able to raise himself up to cross his puppetmasters.
Burr won by 6. So John since you’re saying that as despicable as Ross’ politics were to the Republican base and North Carolina, then, I guess Sir Richard would be damaged goods against someone that had a good rapport with the decent folks of the State. Someone that wouldn’t be lobbying to cut Medicare and Social Security and attend more than a third of his prestigious committee meetings.
But I guess this is all for naught. In six years it will be Patrick McHenry for Senate. That is if Burr finally does something he says he’ll do and retire; all safe and secure with his benefits intact.
People who refused to understand why Ross and the ACLU often defend the apparently indefensible have no understanding of how our criminal justice system works.
You mean people with consciences and morals?