(Chuck Muth) – A few days ago, I wrote about how badly Republicans blew opportunities to pick up more seats in the Nevada Legislature…
“The donors who were directed to give to those campaigns did not get a very good return on investment. They should be furious.”
To which somebody named Barry Lindemann responded…
“To correct Chuck, there is no such thing as a ‘poor return’ on a loss. A loss is a loss – period. Donors lost their money. I suggest that Chuck avoid equating incongruent concepts such as donations with investments.
“That said, it begs the question: Who ‘directed’ these donors to give? What cabal operates behind the scenes funneling money to ‘preferred’ candidates? And how does one even become a preferred candidate?”
The ignorance is palpable.
A “win” does not necessarily mean outright victory at the polls. Winning is determined by the campaign plan’s objective.
A GOP candidate in a hopelessly Democrat district can “win” simply by boosting their overall Republican vote total in their district, which helps candidates up-ballot.
For example, Republican candidate Kelly Chapman increased the GOP vote total in her Assembly race by 3,591 votes despite not “winning” the election. That helped Republican State Senate candidate Lori Rogich win her election by just over 1,000 votes.
You gotta look at the big picture and go into a race with eyes wide open in the face of political reality. And that is NOT “incongruent,” as long as the donors know what they’re investing in.
Now, as for Mr. Linemann’s closing questions, which taps into a personal pet peeve of mine.
He doesn’t know who the “cabal” is that directs donors to certain races, or who decides who the “preferred” candidates are, or how to become a preferred candidate. Well, here’s why…
Mr. Lindemann – who’s never run and won so much as a race for dog catcher – felt he was perfectly qualified to run for the United States Senate in Nevada this year and expected the rest of us to take his candidacy seriously.
He got crushed in June’s Republican primary, garnering only 852 votes out of 171,350 cast and came in 9th out of 12 candidates running. In addition, he reportedly raised less than $66,000 for the race.
By comparison, Sam Brown, the GOP nominee who won the primary, raised over $17 MILLION!
The fact that Mr. Lindmann wanted to start right at the top and not lower himself to run for a local or even state race is why he doesn’t know who the players are and the process necessary to earn their support.
The real problem isn’t the “powerbrokers” or the candidates.
The real problem is “professional” political consultants – such as Woody Johnston – who threaten and coax unprepared, untested, inexperienced, and underqualified candidates to throw their hats in the ring – especially in primaries – just to make a buck rather than do the right thing for the party.
For example, why did California transplant Richard “Cali-Dick” Frederick-Auchmoody run in the primary against incumbent Sen. Carrie Buck for a seat that was critical for Republicans to retain in order to stay out of a super-minority?
He paid Corey Gibson Consulting over $67,000 for a race he had no chance to win.
The other big problem is incompetent consultants who mismanage winnable races and end up costing the candidate and the candidate’s donors a victory.
To borrow an analogy from the movie “War Games,” maybe Mr. Lindemann and candidates such as he, should decline to play Themo-Nuclear War when they’re not ready for prime time.
Instead, “How about a nice game of chess?”