I recently wrote a post in which I at least half-seriously suggested that the Cornerstone ad Shockingly Liberal, which attacks Republican Senate hopeful Bill Binnie, could have the unintended consequence of making Binnie actually sound more appealing to moderates and independents in the general election. But Binnie of course has to get through a Republican primary first, so now we have a new ad from his campaign called English Language. In the ad, Binnie says that if elected he will insist all immigrants learn English, and concludes that Americans should have allegiance to one flag and to one official language, English. If you’ve spent even just a few minutes listening to conservative talk radio lately, you know that immigration (and its implications for American culture) has become perhaps the single biggest flashpoint for conservative anger.

 

So, this new ad represents an interesting bit of issue triangulation by the Binnie campaign. The question is whether it is a sign of fear within the campaign that the Cornerstone ad could do some real damage, hence this rightward tack by the candidate on immigration. On the other hand, with former New Hampshire Attorney General Kelly Ayotte now entertaining possible revision of the 14^th Amendment on birthright citizenship, this stance on language still puts Binnie somewhere to the left of Ayotte, and closer to the median voter in our state. What we don’t really know yet is how far to the right past these fairly safe language and flag positions Binnie is willing to move.

When the second district Democratic primary between Anne Mclane Kuster and Katrina Swett heated up recently, some political observers pointed to the Swett campaign’s attack on Kuster’s lobbying background as the initial salvo in that skirmish. The Swett campaign argued that Kuster has profited handsomely from representing the special legislative interests of a variety of corporate entities, particularly pharmaceutical companies. The Kuster campaign has countered that their candidate actually focused on beneficial public policy work in areas about which she genuinely cares, like providing free prescription medication to senior citizens. At the time, I took a wait-and-see attitude about whether the Swett attack would have political legs.

 

Well, with the news that Katrina Swett has herself been a registered lobbyist, it now appears that the Swett campaign is actually the one being undercut by this issue. Swett is claiming that although she was a registered member of her family’s lobbying firm, she never actually lobbied on behalf of clients. I think she is probably telling the truth here. I know plenty of family businesses in which various members are listed as officers of the corporation, but aren’t actually involved in the day-to-day operations of the firm.

 

But what a tactical blunder by the Swett campaign! I can’t think of a better way to muddle their core negative message against Kuster than with the news that Swett has herself been a registered lobbyist. It doesn’t matter that she may not have been actively engaged in the profession. For anyone paying casual attention to the race (which most people are in August), this disclosure will simply be seen as more evidence that politicians and would-be politicians are in the pocket of corporate America. If the Swett campaign has to get into a debate with the Kuster camp about which candidate was a bigger lobbyist, then the potential impact of the original negative attack is essentially lost.

Back in October 2009, when I first started thinking seriously about former Republican Rep. Charlie Bass’ emerging bid to reclaim his second district Congressional seat, I suggested that his optimal strategy would be to turn the Republican primary discourse into an argument about viability in the general election.  The objective would be to make a persuasive case to primary voters that he is the Republican best positioned to win the seat in November, given the increasingly moderate political demographics of the second district. The major caveat with this strategy of course was whether he would hit a roadblock of conservative opposition in the primary. Bass’ status as a former six-term incumbent and a moderate are not necessarily the kind of resume-builders that make for a popular candidate in Republican primaries these days.

 

Fortunately for Bass, tea partiers and social conservatives have largely turned their attention elsewhere, and as a result, he seems increasingly comfortable with talking about viability in the general election. Witness this recent YouTube clip in which Bass discusses the necessity of winning in November with a coalition that cuts across party lines (hat tip to the Concord Monitor for mentioning the clip). Talk like that in some of the other Republican primaries being held around the country this year would be a recipe for conservative ire and certain defeat.

 

Note: Back posting on Wednesday. -Dean