Sen. Chuck Schumer, the head of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, charged with electing Democrats to the United States Senate, asked State Sen. Kay Hagan to run. She initially showed interest in challenging Elizabeth Dole, but she stepped aside when the DSCC decided to favor prospect state Rep. Grier Martin. When Martin didn't bite, the Dems were left without anyone to field against Liddy Dole, a weak, ineffective tool of the Bush Administration.
In jumped businessman and NC native Jim Neal. In the process he also announced matter of factly that yes, he was gay, and that he was running on the issues and was ready to sweep Dole out.
The first sign something was afoot at the DSCC is that two weeks after Neal announced, his presence was nowhere to be found on its site as a challenger.
Hagen then miraculously announced last week that she had a change of heart and was getting in the race. Suddenly, the same day she announced and her web site went live, the DSCC web site was updated with all announced challengers.
The PC reason cited for Hagen getting in was that Jim Neal's chances for beating Elizabeth Dole were slim because he's a political newcomer (though he is a proven fundraiser), and he has little name recognition. That is completely disingenuous (Hagen doesn't have name rec either). We're not talking about a conspiracy; we're talking about strings being pulled because pols here didn't want to back an openly gay man already out there running. From the Southern Political Report:
The inside story, according to one Raleigh source, is that both Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chair Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and ex-Gov. Jim Hunt (D-NC) had asked Hagan to stay out of the race in favor of state Rep. Grier Martin (D). Hagan agreed to step aside for Martin. Then Martin, son of popular former Charlotte congressional candidate D. G. Martin, backed out, leaving Neal as the only significant contender.Some people. You know, the unnamed people that never seem to want to go on the record. More after the jump.Schumer and Hunt then went back to Hagan, an influential member of the state senate, and asked her to get back in the race. Moreover, given that Neal, 50, though a North Carolinian by birth and education, had lived in New York and Los Angeles until a year ago, there is some doubt about whether he would be a strong nominee even were he not gay. (Neal has, however, raised money for Tar Heel Democrats in the past.)
Another informed Raleigh source tells essentially the same story, but adds that once Martin bowed out and some Democratic powers-that-be found out that Neal is gay — which was known to his friends and family but not to the public at large — “they intensified their pressure on Kay” to get back in the race, “for fear that [Neal] would bring down the rest of the ticket.” A Charlotte source adds, “I’m sure that some people see [being gay] as a non-starter in North Carolina.”
Primary voters will ultimately decide on the issues; it's clear that those who wouldn't vote for Neal under any circumstances because of his orientation, would probably vote for Dole again anyhow.
This behind the scenes PC dance shows the two-faced nature of the Democratic party – the complete lack of institutional respect for Jim Neal's candidacy based on his orientation. Would they be making moves to ensure a “mainstream” (re: white) candidate got into the primary race if the only announced Dem candidate for the U.S. Senate was Latino? Less than 5 feet tall? Had a pierced ear? What other characteristics completely irrelevant to the candidate’s message or qualifications requires an “intervention” by people in the party that don’t ever set foot in the state?
The real question for the DSCC is when will it ever be time to back an openly candidate in North Carolina, if the party preaches in public that one’s orientation has no bearing on his ability to hold office? The message telegraphed is that this one quality alone is sufficient to deep-six a candidate, so why bother fielding one at all.
Let the Republicans defend their homophobia, why enable it? Or even worse, ape it under the guise of “electability” even at the primary level? What are they afraid of, hmmm? The people will decide.
BTW, I have nothing against Kay Hagan, other than she's allowing herself to be a participant in this game. No surprise; she's a politician. For those complaining that progressives are calling Dems out on this, too bad; take responsibility for the plain truth of the political game that is being played. Own it.
As I said in my earlier post:
The fact of the matter is that Jim Neal's orientation will be made an issue by the GOP no matter what. For a gay pol these days to deny it and attempt to remain professionally closeted, given the fear and smear tactics of the GOP is, in my mind, futile, particularly if he or she is socially out.
…Mrs. Dole's heterosexuality clearly gave her no advantage in this vein — she has done zero for the state as she rubber-stamped the destructive policies of this president, so clearly one's orientation has no bearing on the ability to serve the people. If the GOP wants to go there, fine — they are going to have a dickens of a time defending Liddy's record and its impact on this state.
Jim Neal's official campaign web site is here. His ActBlue page is here.
21 Responses to “Report: DSCC scrambled to find hetero challenger to run against Elizabeth Dole”
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Unfortunately it’s not terribly surprising given how Schumer more or less pulled the same stunt on Paul Hackett.
“Schumer” may one day be a verb. As in, Bill Maher and Michael Moore schumered Ralph Nader on Maher’s show just before the 2004 primaries in an attempt to keep Nader from again siphoning off Democrat votes in the presidential election.
The lack of institutional respect you reference is not orientation based. It’s more based upon who Schumer wants to run, party primary voters be damned. It’s asshats like Schumer that to me truly make the Democrat party merely the lesser of 2 evils, not an inspiring force in whom we can really trust to run the country.
It’s what cues you in that the “Dems are spineless” meme is in fact disinformation. They’re not spineless: they have a great deal of backbone when it comes to protecting the interests of the wealthy and corrupt. And those interests cannot be protected without a lot of gay- and women-bashing.
It’s asshats like Schumer that to me truly make the Democrat party merely the lesser of 2 evils, not an inspiring force in whom we can really trust to run the country.
It’s “Democratic.” Only wingnuts and idiots who listen to Rush Limbaugh call it the “Democrat” party. Insisting on calling it the “Democrat” party (twice!) makes you sound like a concern troll who headed over from Free Republic.
My apologies, mnemosyne. No coffee yet.
I’m guessing Pandagon doesn’t observe new and improved DST?
While I can sympathize with the desire to definitely and for-sure get a Democrat into a seat formerly occupied by a Republican, homosexual candidates aren’t going to somehow magically become more electable if the party refuses to enthusiastically back them. Hell, even the most promising of campaigns can be hamstrung by internal dithering and a perceived lack of support.
If anything, stunts like this confirm what the confused and the wafflers suspect either about the candidate in particular or gays in general, and piss your own base off something fierce–none of which are desirable outcomes for a party that purports to embrace equality and progress.
The DNC recruited then state Treasurer Bob Casey, Jr, to run against Senator Rick Santorum in Pennsylvania in 2006, precisely because Mr Casey is strongly pro-life — and the DNC wanted to take the abortion issue off the table. It turned out to be a winning strategy.
In the process, the DNC and DSCC actively worked against two pro-abortion candidates in the primary.
It really is all about winning.
By the way, Mr Casey’s father, then Governor Robert Casey (D-PA) was denied a chance to address the 1992 Democratic National Convention because he, too, was pro-life.
No, it was because he refused to endorse the presidential candidate.
And being anti-abortion has nothing whatsoever to do with being “pro-life”. Being opposed to abortion means more dead women in back alleys.
You’ll be happy to know that part of your article is up on Mr Neal’s site, and that it ends with a link to read the rest on “Pandragon.”
Does Jim Neal’s site pic remind anyone else of a certain vacuum mogul? I think it’s the half-smile.
That’s why we have a primary. If Neal is a good candidate, he will win. If Neal can’t win a contested primary, he won’t be able to win the general election. I want a strong candidate, someone who has actually been tested rather than someone who walks to a nomination.
Look, call it what you want, but Neal is not only not “mainstream” but is an outsider and a political neophyte. His opponent is a political insider, well-connected and influential. I’m not a huge fan of having the political establishment select a nominee, but I can certainly understand it if they want to actually run a candidate in the primary.
Personally, I don’t think being gay is a reason to vote for or against someone and I am looking forward to watching the campaign and seeing who the stronger candidate is.
I don’t know anything about Jim Neal but I’m guessing the strength of party apparatus opposition is also coming from financial concerns. Unless Mr. Neal is independently wealthy, it’s going to be tough to fund the campaign of a candidate the Republicans will immediately smear as immoral, godless and perverted because of his sexual orientation. No doubt Schumer thinks he’d have to funnel a lot of money into that race (which is probably correct) to offset direct campaign donations lacking from the public or to balance out any support the Republican candidate might get purely for being straight.
Lie. He was refused a spot on the platform because he refused to endorse the ticket.
That’s silly; if *Idaho* can have a gay senator, there’s no reason North Carolina can’t.
Hell, even *South* Carolina might already have one…
I wonder if there are any gay people in New York who might want to ask their senator about this…
(and props to human and MAJeff for dispelling the “Casey was silenced because he was pro-life!” canard; it’s sometimes followed by the argument, “Well, Kathleen Brown didn’t endorse Clinton, and *she* got to talk!” which is refuted, persuasively I think, by the retort, “True, but *she* was supporting her *brother*” (Jerry Brown, who’d lost in the primary to Clinton).)
In addition to being a vicious homophobe, Schumer has just openly endorsed torture. I will never vote for that scumbag and will never give him or any organization he runs a dime.
I tend to agree w/ preying mantis. A few years ago there was a traveling exhibit called “Out and Elected”:
http://www.carrboro.com/outandelected/
Which to me, proves that gays can be elected to office. And after all, look at Barney Frank…
Barney Frank doesn’t live in North Carolina. Those eastside pinebarren shitkickers that elected Jesse Helms for all those decades arn’t just gonna go “Gay? Well, that’s okay by me!!!”
Even if you didn’t start out with the gay issue, Jim Neal doesn’t exactly sound like a dream canidate.
//but then, neither did Mark Warner. Who, it yet remains, is not gay.
///he just wins because he has the Chin of Doom on his side.
Fair enough about Barney Frank. Here in NC though we do have Mike Nelson, and Joe Herzenberg (RIP). Yes yes, liberal Carrboro/Chapel Hill/Orange County, not like the rest of the state, blah blah blah, I know. Still, we have to start somewhere, n’est pas?
Plus, anyone who voted for good ol’ Jesse is probably not going to vote for a Dem in any event, gay or not.
I’m hoping everyone else is as pissed off about Dole’s complete neglect of NC as I am. Any candidate who isn’t Dole is a dream. Jesse was a horrible person, but he knew how to bring home the pork, Dole can’t even say that. Besides, aren’t all the women voters going to vote for Neal, just because he’s handsome?
Having poured my blood sweat and tears into the Kissell campaign, I’m certainly no fan of the Schumer/Emanuel cabal in DC. Honestly, though, my reaction upon hearing Jim Neal had declared for Senate was “Jim who?” Before moving to Chapel Hill last year, he hadn’t lived in NC in 25 years. I have no doubt that Neal would make a better senator than Dole. But I’d rather go with a candidate who has a track record winning elections and representing her constituents than a candidate who has never run for any political office before. Neal’s sexual orientation is irrelevant, IMO, compared to his tabula rasa record.
“if *Idaho* can have a gay senator, there’s no reason North Carolina can’t.”
Well, Idaho didn’t elect an openly gay senator, they elected a guy who swore he wasn’t gay.
I have no doubt that a gay senator can be elected– from Massachusetts, maybe Oregon, or possibly Vermont or New Hampshire. I live in NC, and North Carolina will NOT be open to electing an openly gay senator, it’s just a fact, and Schumer is wrong on most things but he’s right on this. He will win Orange County and Durham County and that’s it, most likely.
If the Dems want to win, they have to put up a candidate who can win. It’s not discriminatory or anything, it’s just smart.