23 February 2006

ODP Meeting Reveals More Demthink

Chris Geidner at Law Dork wrote up his own minutes from the ODP Executive Committee meeting where the endorsements were decided. Here’s a peek into Demthink in Ohio:

Pat O’Malley, Cuyahoga Recorder: We have limited funds and we’re going to eat each other up in the primary. What I’d like to know from the candidates is: If they don’t get the endorsement, would they continue to run and divide us?

Candidates take note: only those with endorsements should run. If you run without an endorsement, you’re hurting the Party- and that’s what’s really important, not whether you’re helping the state. Either you’re with the ODP or you’re against the ODP. Please also note that no one should support third parties, since that destroys the two-party system which is perfect.

There are many raised eyebrows over ODP’s endorsements, but the endorsements of Richard Cordray over Hugh Quill for Treasurer and Marc Dann over Subodh Chandra seem to be obvious cases of choosing the weaker candidate. Why?

Priscilla O’Donnell: None of us want somebody who can’t win. We have Richard Cordray, who is known and has run, and has more than three times the war chest of his opponent.

Aah yes, the importance of the war chest. How ironic to read that just after I posted the entry below this one.

And the AG race? This one is very disappointing. Subodh Chandra has been impressing people everywhere he goes. His rhetoric is personal and practical, not political and partisan. And it can afford to be; he has a record of effective and diligent public service that stands on its own. He understands what makes people’s lives better and what he can do as AG to make lives better. Here’s what one member said:

…Of all of the candidates, I heard more excitement about [Chandra’s] candidacy than anyone else other than Strickland.

On the other hand, Marc Dann spent most of 2005 making noise about GOP corruption and made sure he was a thorn in Jim Petro’s side all year. He filed a lawsuit over Petro’s pay-to-play tactics but withdrew the lawsuit because it would be too costly. He made a lot of noise that amounted to nothing, and that’s just the kind of thing that gets establishment Democrats hot (remember Camp Casey?). By the way, the ODP did nothing to help raise funds for Dann’s lawsuit, which was their best chance of exposing GOP corruption. Nothing.

Chandra makes a better AG but Dann is a better Democrat. Which is more important to the ODP?

CJ Prentiss: This guy [Dann] has taken us to the dance. He has been on top of them, articulating and point out all the wrong that is done. On top of that, he has put out recommendations of what we can do right.

Pat O’Malley, Cuyahoga: I’ve got a couple of issues about this race. This is a race where we have to make a stand. I come from Cleveland, where Subodh is from, and I’ve been active for years. I’ve never seen him at a political function. I’ve never seen him help a candidate in Cuyahoga County. He’s not even known in Cuyahoga County.

Gwin: I really take exception to Mr. O’Malley’s comments. The problem I have in this race is electability. How do we elect Dann, who has a reprimand from the Ohio Supreme Court in the past three years?

Varner: Opposition to this resolution. Dann is a team player and has been -- and would be even if he weren't in this race. Chandra, on the other hand, was the only candidate who wouldn't tell the screening committee on Saturday that he would support the entire ticket in the general election no matter who wins the primary. We want a team player in this race, and that is not Subodh Chandra.

What does Chandra bring to the table? Superior qualifications for AG.
What does Dann bring to the table? Attendance at Party events, name recognition in Cuyahoga County, vocal partisanship, and a Supreme Court reprimand.

Well done, ODP, well done indeed.

UPDATE: Law Dork points out "that a solid quarter of those committee members present supported dual or no endorsements should be seen as a good sign for those of us who do not support pre-primary endorsements. Susan Gwin was among those who most strongly and consistently enunciated that position. It shows there is a real base of people in the Party structure already to work with on this issue."

1 comment:

Wes said...

WestEnder -

E-mail me. I have something I'd like to bounce off you.

(The e-mail address is on my blog - I won't print it in case the E-mail Harvesters are out there.)