As much as Cassidy, who has led
head-to-head compared to Landrieu in every of nine polls since the end of
the Tour de France, would like to win outright on Nov. 4, increasingly it
appears he will not because of the presence of Maness, who claims he is more
and genuinely conservative than Cassidy and not a creature of Washington, D.C.,
with enough voters buying that to look as if a runoff will be forced between
Cassidy and Landrieu on Dec. 6. Except, what if Maness is not what he claims?
That’s the assertion
made by his former campaign manager in a note
sent to activists but then forwarded by the Louisiana GOP, and denied by his
current campaign manager, but nevertheless adding fuel to the rumor that he is
a “Maness-churian
Candidate” in the race to aid Landrieu. The left’s idea is that his conduct
during and after his campaign will be one to impugn Cassidy among conservatives
in the hopes that they consider him a Landrieu clone and won’t vote at all, in
enough numbers to hand Landrieu the win. The note stated that Maness really was
not an anti-big-government advocate but figured he needed to appear that way in
order to win support.
The plot thickened when a young
but already becoming a perennial candidate Parker Ward in Caddo Parish, this
time running
for school board, denied he had switched support for Maness to Cassidy at
the behest of the state Republican Party. At one time running for office as a
Libertarian, Ward said Maness’ opposition to medical marijuana use and
Cassidy’s support changed his mind, but a social media message to a Maness
supporter Ward claimed was doctored indicates he changed his mind to entice GOP
support in his present campaign – and his claim seems credible in that the race
in question has all GOP candidates including a longtime incumbent, so it seems
very unlikely that the party would get involved at all, much less against an
incumbent who has been a reliable party supporter.
The Maness forces allege this was
an orchestrated attempt to discredit him, but the fact remains that much is not
widely known about him that feeds a perception that he is a Landrieu plant.
After his entire adult life in government employment in the Air Force, last
commanding a wing group in New Mexico, at the end of 2011 he suddenly drops
from the skies into Louisiana, where he had been stationed some years earlier,
within a year begins organizing a campaign, and within 18 months of retirement,
because of (pick one or more) boredom, ego, or genuine feeling that Cassidy
somehow was inadequate to quell the fear he had for the country (as he
related in the first statewide televised debate), he formally announced and
started running.
All voters can do is take Maness
on his word, as there’s little independently-verified and public evidence of
actions of his from the past that would corroborate what he says he is, which
is in contrast to what his former campaign manager said. By contrast, one of
Maness’ two major narratives, that Cassidy isn’t “conservative enough,” is
directly contradicted by a large body of evidence, Cassidy’s voting record in
Congress.
The two most venerable
comprehensive scorecards for congressional voting, the American Conservative
Union’s and the Americans for Democratic Action’s, which mirror each other,
display high inter-coder reliability in their rankings of both Cassidy and
Landrieu. The ACU scores Cassidy lifetime above the House GOP average at 85
(higher scores are more conservative, 100 maximum), while Landrieu gets a 20.
The ADA doesn’t report lifetime scores, but in 2012
it had Cassidy at 5 (here, lower is more conservative, 0 minimum) and Landrieu
at 65.
Lesser known, younger and more
specifically-attuned scorecards bear out that Cassidy is conservative, even
extremely so, and that Landrieu is liberal, even extremely so. Heritage Action
only goes back two years, but rates Cassidy lifetime at 60,
just around their House GOP average, and Landrieu at 7.
Gong back somewhat farther, FreedomWorks gives Cassidy lifetime 72 and
Landrieu 15.
Just three years into doing these, FRCAction scores Cassidy lifetime at 90
and Landrieu a goose-egg.
And these are groups or prominent members of which who have made favorable
mentions, if not outright endorsements, of Maness.
More? Planned
Parenthood Action for the past six years overall has Cassidy at 0, Landrieu
at 92. National Right to Life scores Cassidy lifetime as 95, while Landrieu gets scored
at 27. The AFL-CIO
rates lifetime Cassidy at 11, Landrieu at 86. The Club for Growth puts
Cassidy at 76,
Landrieu at 15.
And the left-of-center publication National Journal for 2013 scored Cassidy as 15.8 or 49th
most conservative in the House, while Landrieu was scored 58.3 or 44th
most liberal in the Senate.
You get the point. Two painfully
obvious conclusions are in order here: Cassidy
is a solid conservative, while Landrieu is a solid liberal. Regarding the
former, the Maness campaign and its supporters simply are off-base to question
that fact, as much as it damages their narrative to admit it. Regarding the
latter, by supporters of Landrieu whether directly
such as by the New Orleans Times-Picayune
editorial board (who laughably call her a “moderate”) or whether indirectly
such as by T-P columnist and liberal
former Democrat operative Bob Mann (who evades by terming her “one of the
Senate’s most conservative Democrats”), they are loath to admit the reality of
her record for the negative impression it will create among the electorate.
But they join forces with Maness
also by trying to deny Cassidy’s conservative credentials, going hand-in-hand
to try to create that impression to turn off conservatives from voting for
Cassidy. It’s no skin off their noses to spend time trying to make Cassidy seem
like Landrieu, because few if any Landrieu supporters would abandon her over
this.
No comments:
Post a Comment