Robinson’s Super-Sore Loser Strategy Backfiring, Ball Wins Big at James City Caucus
The Robinson campaign actually outdid itself this evening. If you thought that they couldn’t stoop any lower then they did on Monday, when they alleged that a “small” group of Krystal Ball supporters hijacked the caucus process in Stafford County, you would be sadly mistaken. So what is a campaign to do when they are so badly out organized?
If you’re Scott Robinson, you have 1 of the 4 delegates that actually filed for you in James City make a motion to amend the caucus rules that would disqualify any delegates/alternates that were unable to attend. This sounds like a play out the Bush/Rove handbook. These delegates/alternates followed the Call to Caucus and prefiled by the prescribed deadline. Talk about a super-sore loser!
The result was another brutal loss for the Robinson campaign. They did not win a single delegate. Krystal Ball captured 16 more delegates, bringing her total to 51. She is now more than half way to the magic number of 101, which would make her the Democratic nominee from Virginia’s 1st Congressional District. The remaining 3 delegates chose to be uncommitted and were elected.
The Robinson campaign should be ashamed at the way they have conducted themselves throughout this entire process. I suppose that they will send out an email tomorrow complaining that a “small” group of Krystal Ball supporters hijacked the caucus process in James City too. It’s clear that this sore-loser act is wearing thin with folks and is an absolute embarrassment to his campaign.
There really is only one option left for Scott to salvage his reputation and any dignity he may have left: get behind Krystal and exit this race. The longer he continues this charade, the more foolish he looks and the more desperate. If Scott is serious about wanting what is best for Democrats throughout the district, now is the time to show us; otherwise, these antics are likely to cause harm to our efforts to win over Independents and independent-minded Republicans.
Scott needs to understand that being the Democratic nominee in Virginia’s 1st Congressional District is not an entitlement, but a privilege. As Krystal has shown, it takes a positive message and a great field operation to win.
We can only hope that Scott does the right thing for himself, his supporters and the district. It’s time for Scott to get behind Krystal as our nominee.
Wheels Come Off Robinson Campaign, Introduces Sore-Loser Strategy
As I wrote on Saturday, Krystal Ball swept all delegates and alternates from caucuses over the weekend in Stafford and Fredericksburg. These were huge victories for Krystal and, in sweeping these caucuses, helped her secure slightly more than one-third of the number of delegates she needs to secure the Democratic nomination in Virginia’s First Congressional District. There is no other way to put it, these were devastating losses for his campaign and call into question his continued viability. So how does Scott deal with adversity? If you guessed by putting his nose to the ground and working hard to build up a currently non-existent field operation, you would be sorely mistaken. This is how he has chosen to deal with things.
This email is being sent with the intent of informing you of troubling events that have developed over the last few weeks involving a fellow Democratic Committee (Stafford County) and what actions the Robinson campaign intends to use to remedy the situation.
It is the opinion of the Robinson campaign that the caucus process in Stafford County was “hijacked” by a small group of Krystal Ball supporters and the democratic process was circumvented with the intention of ensuring that the Krystal Ball campaign not only won a majority of delegates but left the caucus with a “slate” of supporters for Krystal Ball.
As I write this I am quite certain that while you read this you will feel this email is bourne of frustration and written with my campaigns best interests in mind. No doubt that is true.
However, there are facts that are too egregious to ignore that point in the direction of an organized attempt by members of the Stafford County Democratic Committee (SCDC) to make the proverbial “smoky backroom deal” scenario seem all too real.
· The SCDC violated the Democratic Party of Virginia’s (DPVA) plan by not posting the Call to Caucus in a local paper.
· The SCDC did not inform the Robinson campaign of the Call to Caucus via phone, email, or United States Post Office mail.
· The chair of the SCDC did not inform the remainder of her own EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE of the Call to Caucus.
· The chair of the SCDC made the decision of the ‘who, what, when, and where’ of the Caucus without ANY input from the rest of the Executive Committee.
· The chair of the Committee chose to allow for a non-executive committee to take charge of the committee in her absence while on vacation in violation of the committee rules.
The Robinson campaign feels at the very least that the rules of the Caucus have been violated and election law could have been as well. Because of these facts and actions of individuals who are associated with BOTH the Krystal Ball for Congress campaign and the SCDC; the Robinson campaign intends to file a formal complaint with the Chair of the Virginia 1st Congressional District Committee.
My intention is to follow this email up with all of the county chairs of the 1st Congressional District individually. I appreciate your patience as we work our way through this process.
Best,
Gregory Richardson
Scott Robinson for Congress
804.238.2728
I’m speechless, well not really. The wheels have now completely come off the Robinson campaign. The allegations are quite serious; however, they lack any legal basis (federal or state party) and, instead, show a campaign that is spiraling out of control.
Why can’t the Robinson campaign just admit that they were out organized and lost badly this weekend? Instead, they come off as a bunch of sore-losers. You would think that Scott would have done his homework before leveling these ridiculous claims publicly, but that is clearly not the case. The fact is that this should come as no surprise to anyone, since he has shown a continued failure to do his homework and has made false statements before (see breeder reactors).
He clearly does not understand anything about the rules that govern party caucuses. To his point that “The SCDC violated the Democratic Party of Virginia’s (DPVA) plan by not posting the Call to Caucus in a local paper,” he is simply confused (as though this should surprise anyone by now). As Blue Virginia points out:
Those are some serious charges right there, up to and including possible illegality. The only problem, as 1st CD Democratic Party Chair Suzette Matthews points out, is that none of this is accurate. In fact, as Matthews points out, “Contrary to the second bullet of this message, local committees do not have to pay for expensive newspaper postings of caucuses.” In addition, Matthews writes, “Please note the last sentence of the following provision of the DPVA Party Plan, which permits posting of the caucus notice on web sites and press release to newspapers (we understand [1st CD City and County chairs] have no control whether the newspaper prints the notice or not).”
The provision that Suzette refers to is “Instead of a newspaper notice, a committee may provide notice by placing notice on the State Party website, its local website, and providing a press release to all relevant newspapers of general circulation.” In interpreting this provision, I would add that legally the word “may” implies discretion. That would imply that a committee could decide whether they needed to provide notification using all three methods or just one. As will be clear in a moment, the committee did meet this requirement.
To his second point that “The SCDC did not inform the Robinson campaign of the Call to Caucus via phone, email, or the United States Post Office mail,” there is simply no requirement beyond what was previously mentioned by Blue Virginia. The Call to Caucus was posted on the SCDC website (here) 2 weeks prior to the caucus, which is the maximum amount of notice that is allowed for within the party plan. An email also went out to all committee members, a few of which support Robinson, with the Call to Caucus attached. In an email dated February 27, 2010:
Please find attached the SDC Call to Caucus and the Pre-Filing Form for the 1st Congressional District. We will meet on March 13th in the Board of Supervisors Chambers at the Stafford Government Center. We will have our regular meeting after the Caucus. The information about caucus can also be found at http://www.stafforddemocrats.org.
Please forward this information to anyone you feel might be interested in participating.
Kandy Hilliard
SDC Chair
This is another example of a total lack of organization on behalf of the Robinson campaign. Instead of dealing with the fact that this is one of the worst campaigns I’ve ever seen run, they make up false claims and sound like a bunch of sore-losers. I’d imagine that they would also try to blame the government for not reminding folks to show up to vote for them on Election Day, to cover up for their ineptitude.
As to his third point that “The chair of the SCDC did not inform the remainder of her own EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE of the Call to Caucus,” this is not true. See aforementioned email from the Chair, which went out to every single committee member (including the executive board). This isn’t even a requirement.
To his fourth point that “The chair of the SCDC made the decision of the ‘who, what, when, and where’ of the Caucus without ANY input from the rest of the Executive Committee,” again this is incorrect. This was discussed in great detail at a February 20, 2010 meeting of all committee members. A ton of input was provided on when NOT to conduct the caucus, which did not include March 13, 2010. The Chair said that she would provide the Call to Caucus to members, based on their feedback from the February 20, 2010 meeting, the Call to Convention and the Party Plan. Not a single member objected.
To his fifth point that “The chair of the Committee chose to allow for a non-executive committee to take charge of the committee in her absence while on vacation in violation of the committee rules,” this is another untruth. The Chair was in complete control of the Committee and responded to phone calls and emails, during this period of time.
How Scott can claim the process was “hijacked” is laughable. His lack of understanding of the process is evident and very troubling, as is his candidacy. Krystal left the caucus with a “slate” of supporters because her field operation was superior to Scott’s. Slates were clearly advertised in the Call to Caucus:
Slate voting for delegates and alternates shall be permitted at this caucus. Slates must be filed no later than 5:00 PM on Wednesday, March 10, 2010, with Kandy Hilliard, Chair of the Stafford County Virginia Democratic Committee, 43 Town & Country Drive, Suite 119-129, Fredericksburg, Virginia 22405 or by email to info@staffordemocrats.org. Slates must be prefiled by the time and date specified above. There will be no exception to this rule for any reason. A properly filed slate will include the names of those persons wishing to appear on the slate, their candidate preference, who will serve as the 29 delegates and 15 alternates and who will be serving as the caucus chair. The fist slate filed will be designated as Slate ‘A’, the second Slate ‘B’, etc.
All properly prefiled persons will be listed on the ballot in alphabetical order. The ballot will also indicate the candidate preference for each individual who prefiles, or uncommitted; and it will include whether they are running for a delegate or alternate slot. Slates will appear at the bottom of the ballot and not show the names of the candidates included in that slate. It will be the responsibility of the slate organizer to have the names and candidate preferences of those comprising their slate available for distribution at the caucus.
I’m not really seeing their point on “slates.” In fact slates were giving the least amount of preference you can possibly give them on the ballot. They had ample opportunity to file and didn’t. You would think that given Stafford’s proximity to Quantico, he could have turned out more than a few supporters?
The best part of this email is the last part of it where it indicates that “election law could have been [violated].” What are they claiming has been violated, specifically? As Justice Antonin Scalia wrote for a seven-justice Supreme Court majority opinion, “A political party has a First Amendment right to limit its membership as it wishes, and to choose a candidate-selection process that will in its view produce the nominee who best represents its political platform.” The party manages the caucus process and they are allowed to specify the process by which a candidate is selected. No court is getting involved in internal party workings; however, there is one limitation. That is no party can exclude voters based on race (see “White Primary Cases”) or religion. I understand that the Robinson campaign likes to deal in generalities, but you can’t level serious claims like this without providing details (as they do with his positions or lack thereof).
I agree with Blue Virginia in saying that
…Robinson’s complains are completely and wholly without merit, not to mention hysterical and pathetic. The only question is how badly his super-sore loser routine will hurt him in upcoming caucuses. Starting with Gloucester tonight, followed by James City this Thursday, Newport News on March 25, etc.
This campaign is as good as finished. No one likes a sore-loser.
Catherine Crabill Collecting Signatures in 1st Congressional District
Why not? Republicans voted for her in droves last November, which throws Kool-Aid water on Virginia Virtucon‘s claim that she only appeals to the conspiracy theory crowd. She won Caroline and King George County, and only lost Northumberland County (site of her now famous “Bullet Box” speech) by a single vote!
In a letter to Allen Webb discussing her decision, Catherine Crabill begins:
I have started collecting signatures to run against Rob Wittman for the Republican Nomination. I was asked by three different people to consider it and I said I would have to seek the Lord’s Will about it. The Lord has sent His confirmation with many signs and wonders, so I have the peace I needed to pursue it. Why? You might ask. The primary reason is Wittman’s complete lack of character, leadership, and willingness to stand up and fight for our nation. His go-along-to-get-along position within the Republican party is evidenced by what he did to me last year.
Three people? Wow! That was the easiest “draft” movement in American political history. Catherine, consider me #4.
Krystal Ball Gains Support of Prominent Democratic Groups As Nomination Process Kicks-Off
As we approach the first set of caucuses in Virginia’s First Congressional District, to determine the democratic nominee, Krystal Ball continues to rack up key endorsements. Today’s press release:
FREDERICKSBURG, VA. – As the nominating process to select the Democratic candidate for Virginia’s first Congressional District kicks off, key Democratic constituency groups are making it known who they think will be best prepared to take on Rob Wittman in November’s election.
Today, Krystal Ball for Congress has announced the support of three additional organizations: AFSCME, the Farm Team, and the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC).
Adam Green of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC) said, “We are very impressed by Krystal, her positions, her willingness to fight, and the Krystal Ball campaign operation.”
“I’ve been so impressed with the Progressive Change Campaign Committee’s commitment to issues that are important to Democrats, especially their support of a strong public option,” said Ball. “Their support, along with that of AFSCME and the Farm Team, give us a sense of momentum going into this nominating process.”
AFSCME is the largest public employee and health care workers union in the United States.
The Farm Team (via their website) added the following about their endorsement of Krystal:
Not only does she represent “a fresh face” but believes passionately on changing the way business is done in Washington. She will work to get beyond partisanship and for the best interest of Virginians to keep our state the best place to run a business and raise a family.
Krystal continues to build up momentum in the race for the democratic nomination in Virginia’s First Congressional District. As we’ve said before, she is clearly the best candidate to take on Rob Wittman come November.
W&M Student Pens Open Letter in Support of Krystal Ball, Dismayed at Scott Robinson’s Continued Evasiveness on the Issues
The following is an open letter to Krystal Ball from a William and Mary (W&M) student named Leska Pravdic. She attended a Young Democrats meeting yesterday evening, which featured a visit from Scott Robinson. Scott and Krystal are both running for the democratic nomination in Virginia’s 1st CD.
Ms. Ball,
I’m a student at William and Mary and was at the Young Democrats meeting you visited several weeks ago. At tonight’s meeting, Scott Robinson visited us. I had been looking forward to this because I was interested to hear what his views on the issues were, especially considering his website touches only briefly upon three topics: internet coverage, education, and veterans’ issues. To my dismay, I was disappointed; Mr. Robinson took it for granted that we were all invested in helping him get elected and did not elaborate on his platform. Instead, he seemed to be most interested in getting our opinions on the best strategy for winning the campaign because “at the end of the day, this [electing democrats] is what it’s all about… I’m passionate about winning.”
Though I understand the importance of running effective campaigns, I guess I fundamentally disagree with Scott Robinson’s statement. To me, passing meaningful and progressive legislation is “what it’s all about;” winning elections is not an end but rather a means to an end. This is what I admired and appreciated about your visit to us. You specifically told us your viewpoints on all the major issues (as well as including them on your website), and made it clear that you would not sacrifice your values to party politics and petty bargaining. I think we need more politicians who see things this way, who aren’t willing to just say what they think sounds best.
To make a long story short, meeting Mr. Robinson tonight inspired me to get in touch with you and see if there’s any way I can get involved and help you win the democratic nomination. I heard through Young Democrats that you are looking for student interns to help you through November. Unfortunately, I will not be in Williamsburg over the summer (I will be in D.C.) and I will be in Argentina next semester. However, if there’s any way that I can get involved on a more short term basis in the Williamsburg area, I would love to. Please let me know if you have a need for this type of help.
Thank you very much,
Leksa Pravdic
It seems that everywhere Scott goes he leaves the same impression with folks. He simply continues to avoid “elaborat[ing] on his platform.” When he is forced to discuss issues, he simply bobs and weaves around them; or worse, he proposes ideas (e.g. breeder reactors) that are poorly researched and ill advised.
As the letter writer explains, “he seemed more interested in getting our opinions on the best strategy for winning the campaign” than talking about the issues. I’m going to give Scott some free advice, “talking about issues is what wins campaigns, not avoiding them.” The letter writer rightfully concludes that
passing meaningful progressive legislation is “what it’s all about;” winning elections is not an end but rather a means to an end.
I, like the writer, am inspired by the campaign Krystal is running: one based on a winning message and effective campaign strategy. She is clearly the best candidate to take on Wittman and win come November.
Money, Message and Mobilization Key to Ball Victory in November
Why do the Democrats running for the nomination in the 1st CD believe that they are the most electable? At the Stafford 1st CD Candidate Forum on February 20, Scott Robinson and Krystal Ball had the following to say:
We’ve spent considerable time over the last week plus dissecting the candidate’s stances on everything from health care to the environment. At the end of the day, it all comes down to who is best positioned to win in November. That candidate is clearly Krystal Ball.
Scott takes an oddly simplistic view of why he believes he is the most electable:
I personally believe that with my background, I was raised here, I was a waterman as a kid, my family worked on the water and I’m a veteran.
Note to Scott, Krystal was raised here too (King George). I don’t see his point. I also have great respect for waterman, but I just can’t see the waterman pushing Scott over the top to victory. To his last point, being a veteran doesn’t mean that other veterans are going to just support you. It is all about who has the better ideas. If being a veteran were a sure recipe for success, we would have beaten Wittman (R-Va.) in 2007. In 2007 a special election was held, due to the unfortunate passing of Rep. Jo Ann Davis (R-Va.). Wittman squared off against Iraq war veteran Phil Forgit (D-Va.) and he won in a landslide, defeating him with 63 percent of the vote.
Scott’s campaign has regularly shown a total disconnect from reality and regularly takes a very simplistic view of things, which in and of itself should provide many a reason to pause. Scott actually goes on to explain that he has a very “simple” plan to cut into margins and win in November:
…the places that I’m going to cut into margins are real simple. The Northern Neck and Middle Peninsula. Rob and I are going to split 50/50. Cause I’m from there and he’s from there. I’m pretty well known in the Northern Neck and Middle Peninsula…
Scott’s entire plan, if you listen to everything he has to say, relies on people voting for him because of where he is from, what he did as a child as a waterman and the fact that veterans will vote for a veteran. This sort of strategy may win you a popularity contest, but no way is this going to win you an election. An election is won on ideas and a successful campaign strategy. Both of which is severely lacking from his campaign.
The opposite can be said about Krystal and her campaign. Over the last week plus, I’ve indicated why I think Krystal is better on just about every issue from health care to guns to job creation to the environment. She gets it. She also understands what it will take to win. Her campaign strategy focuses on 3 areas: Money, Mobilization and Message.
As I noted when I endorsed her back in January, she has raised more money than the last 3 democratic candidates were able to raise, combined, throughout their entire campaigns for this seat. She has raised over $400 thousand and is on pace to raise the $3 million it is going to take to be competitive in this district. Krystal also understands that the way we are going to win this seat is through an “unprecedented field operation.” Her volunteer growth has been nothing short of breathtaking. At the current pace in volunteer growth, her campaign will be in a position to knock on every single door within the district. It’s this sort of effort that will be needed, if we have any chance at winning in November. Her message has also shown to be an appealing one to Democrats, independents and even some Republicans. As Krystal explains:
Now, I’m a small business owner, I work in education, I’m a CPA, I worked designing accounting systems with the federal government. This is a background that has been very appealing to independent and moderated minded folks who are so frustrated with what’s been going on in Washington. And the way that I know that this is an appealing message is because over 25 percent of my contributions come from self-identified Republicans.
Krystal’s message clearly resonates with folks from different sides of the political spectrum. She also understands the lessons learned from the 2009 election:
If I learned one thing from the Creigh Deeds campaign, it’s that we have to make sure in a year when the president is not on the ticket, that first and foremost, our people are excited about coming out and voting for a candidate, that our people are excited about going out to work and knock doors.
The base never showed up for Creigh. Krystal understands that you need to reach out to a broad base of Virginians to win, which she is clearly doing, but she also understands that it is just as important to get the base excited and make sure that they show up. That is a winning strategy!
Their closing statements also painted sharply different pictures of what a potential matchup with Wittman may look like:
Scott accused Wittman of stealing every idea his campaign has put forward and selling it as his own. He suggested that Wittman had put together a flier, which suggested that Scott was “the threat.” Now I have haven’t seen this supposed flier, but this totally contradicts what Scott later says when talking about the flier:
He knows what the threat is. What I can’t understand is why he hasn’t come after me. That’s what’s puzzling to me.
Scott, I’m going to let you in on a little secret. The only threat you pose is to our chances of winning this seat.
Krystal clearly makes the case on why Wittman is a bad fit for the district, let alone Democrats. As Krystal rightfully concludes:
…Rob Wittman is the worst type of incumbent. He is the type of person who takes money from special interests and votes exactly the way they tell him to vote, takes money from the banks and votes against basic consumer financial protections, takes money from the health insurance lobby and, forget about health care reform, he votes against health insurance for poor children. This is someone who has never created a job, he has not in his adult life worked in the private sector, he does not know anything about economics. This is someone who has not only a bad fit for us as Democrats. He is a terrible representative for this district and we have a chance this year, while he is new, while he is rated number 432 in terms of influence, while he is one of the 10 least effective members of Congress, while we are out fundraising him. This is the year to unseat him.
If all of this isn’t enough to convince you that Krystal is one heck of a candidate and is best positioned to “unseat” Wittman, look at a recent endorsement by Rep. Bob Filner (D-CA), Chairman, Committee on Veterans’ Affairs. In his endorsement he notes that
Krystal will be a strong champion of our armed service members and a fierce advocate for our veterans and their families, both inside and out of the district. I am impressed by her call to service and with her background as a CPA and small business owner. I believe she has a valuable perspective from which to legislate on economic issues, and will be the best voice for Virginia’s first district.
I’m proud to support Krystal and urge everyone else to do the same.
Stafford’s First Congressional District Candidate Forum: Health Care Reform
Where do the democrats running for the nomination in the 1st CD stand on the House health care bill that was passed and the public option? At the Stafford 1st CD Candidate Forum on 02.20.10, Scott Robinson and Krystal Ball had the following to say:
If you were hoping to get a direct answer on the public option from Scott, don’t hold your breath. He starts out by saying that
I’m a type of person that I personally do not get so wrapped up on what the term is. What I believe is cut the deal. We’re looking for the perfect plan and as a result we have no plan.
Scott, we do have a plan. We need a partner in the Republicans that are willing to stop playing politics with health care and who are willing to work across party lines for the good of the nation. The Republicans have disintegrated into the party of “no.” What’s their plan? To start over! Health care reform is fundamental to our economic growth and now is not the time to start over. Personally, I’m more than open to suggestions on improving the current plan; however, that’s hard to do with an unwilling partner. Haven’t Democrats given up enough in the plan already? If elected, you’d have us give up more?
Scott goes on to say:
My positions on health care are very simple: if it lowers the deficit, if it is available to all Americans and if it is affordable. If it meets those three principles, I will back it. The House bill did that and the Senate bill that. As a result I would have backed either one of those bills.
The public option is a critical part in attaining the competition that is needed to meet those three principles. His answer actually provided for one of the more testy moments in the forum. As you can probably hear, a member of the audience prods him to answer the question and stop evading it. When asked again on whether he supported the public option, he simply shrugged, put his head down and refused to answer.
According to recent polling by the non-partisan Research 2000, 61% of all Virginias overwhelmingly support the public option that includes 62% of independents, 78% of Obama voters and 84% of Democrats. Blue Virginia had an excellent piece on the polling results here. If all of these groups support the public option, why can’t Scott answer the question?
The contrast in leadership between Scott and Krystal could not be any starker. Krystal had the following to say about the public option at the forum:
I’ve been a vocal supporter of the public option from the beginning. And I would have absolutely voted for the health care bill that passed the House. I think that the public option is a critical part of reform because it is one of the most serious efforts that we have in the House bill to actually cut costs and increase competition. It’s the exact sort of thing that a responsible Republican should be for. It’s not a left-wing socialist government takeover. It’s a responsible way to increase competition. And I think it is an important part of reform.
One thing is clear, we all know where Krystal stands on just about every question that she has ever been asked. On the other hand, we have not idea where Scott stands. This election is too important to gamble with our future. The sure bet is a vote for Krystal Ball!
Update: Blue Virginia has an excellent post up now that provides great additional insight on this topic. Also as Blue Virginia points out, “we’ve seen this movie before.” I have no interest in seeing a repeat in 2010.
Twitter
Facebook
Youtube
RSS