How Larry Grant Handed Bill Sali a Big Break

If Barack Obama wins the Democratic Presidential nomination and then goes on to win the Presidency, the person whom he should thank this most ... is Hillary Clinton.  Obama's nomination is likely but by no means certain, much less his election, but over time, we have seen him grow and mature politically because of his hard fought campaigning against Clinton ... not in spite of it.  There is no evidence in the polls or Obama's fundraising that this highly competitive race has hurt him.  The evidence is it has helped him.

I felt the same about Bill Sali two years ago.  Sali came out of nowhere in a 6 candidate field to win the Republican nomination for the 1st Congressional District, then beat Democrat Larry Grant in a tough race to claim the seat.  Sali's reputation heading into the race was not a good one.  We all remember the 'idiot's idiot' characterisation.

But Sali proved himself in a crowded field to be a good campaigner and an able enough debater to win over the confidence of a majority of voters.  There are many, including fellow Republicans, who argue the campaign tactics of Sali's supporters thrived on distortion and underhanded tactics, but that would not have been enough to get Sali elected if voters weren't comfortable enough with his overall performance and demeanor.  Those were skills Sali honed in a tough campaign.

So Sali must be thanking his lucky stars that Larry Grant has dropped out of the 1st Congressional Race and endorsed Democratic opponent Walt Minnick.  I understand why Grant did it.  He was being outraised by Minnick, and Democrats face a tough enough road in Idaho without trying to beat each other.

But that's old political thinking.  A vigorous Grant/Minnick primary would have raised the profile of both, kept Democrats energized, focused media attention on an interesting contested race, and if Minnick were to be the nominee, given him some needed battle-testing before he took on a tough opponent in Sali.  It also would have given Democrats a clear choice and helped insure the best man to take on Bill Sali would be the one chose to run against him.

I understand the money argument.  The mother's milk of politics is a precious commodity that Idaho Democrats rightly feel they must spend exceptionally wisely against Sali, not each other.  But Minnick's problem isn't money.  It's visibility.

Recently, I randomly asked some people to name the two Democratic candidates for Congress in the 1st District just to see if people were paying attention.  All could name Grant.  Most could name Minnick, but it was always "Grant/Minnick" in that order.  I'm told Minnick is planning an aggressive ad campaign, but with no contested primary, Minnick has lost the chance to increase his visibility through the so-called 'free media' that carries more weight with voters.

What a break for Bill Sali.

Comments

[Greg Smith KIVI/Today's 6 Political Analyst]

I was interviewed for tonight's story on this subject on Today's 6 this evening, and just read the News Director's blog that you've just read. To this end, I'd like to briefly comment.

Like the News Director, I typically feel that a primary helps, not hurts, the eventual winning candidate. However, in this case, I respectfully disagree.
1) Walt Minnick has run before in Idaho, against Larry Craig (unsuccessfully) for the U.S. Senate in 1996, so knows the personal and campaign dynamics an Idaho election features, and has some residual profile as a result.
2) He is sufficiently wealthy that, with his money alone, he can (if he chooses) to finance a attention-getting, high profile campaign in a race that already promises to be the most watched in Idaho this year.

I'd be interested in your comments -- agree, disagree, whatever. Please feel free to respond within this blog, and I look forward to your comments.

[Greg Smith KIVI/Today's 6 Political Analyst]

I was interviewed for tonight's story on this subject on Today's 6 this evening, and just read the News Director's blog that you've just read. To this end, I'd like to briefly comment.

Like the News Director, I typically feel that a primary helps, not hurts, the eventual winning candidate. However, in this case, I respectfully disagree.
1) Walt Minnick has run before in Idaho, against Larry Craig (unsuccessfully) for the U.S. Senate in 1996, so knows the personal and campaign dynamics an Idaho election features, and has some residual profile as a result.
2) He is sufficiently wealthy that, with his money alone, he can (if he chooses) to finance a attention-getting, high profile campaign in a race that already promises to be the most watched in Idaho this year.

I'd be interested in your comments -- agree, disagree, whatever. Please feel free to respond within this blog, and I look forward to your comments.