Bennett May Run as a Write-In
[Guest post by DRJ]
Utah Senator Robert Bennett was recently ousted in the GOP nominating convention but he’s considering running as a write-in candidate:
“What’s next for Sen. Robert F. Bennett (R-Utah), the first scalp of the “tea party” movement, who got crushed at his state’s GOP convention last week? The senator tells “44” that while he hasn’t made any decisions, he is seriously contemplating running as a write-in candidate.
“That’s one option on the table,” said Bennett, whose base — fueled by a movement that aims to cut Washington off at its knees — denied him the GOP nomination for a fourth term.
But would it really make sense for Bennett, who clearly was repudiated by Republican voters in Utah, to make another go of it?
“There are all kinds of mixed messages,” the 76-year-old senator told us. “People are showing me polls that show I win the primary handily if I run as a write-in. Others say, ‘Forget the primary, run as a write-in in the general, then you can use the money you’ve raised for the general.'”
Still others, he said, “say, ‘Ah come on, you don’t want to be seen as a… as a… sore loser.'”
What did Bennett learn from his bruising experience?
“The senator, who has until October 10 to decide whether to run as a write-in candidate in the general Utah Senate election, said his best advice to other incumbents who face a similar possible fate is: “Spend time with your constituents. Be in touch with your constituents. We thought we were doing very well until we realized the delegates were not showing up at my meetings.”
For a three-term Senator, it’s pretty amazing he has to be reminded to be in touch with his constituents.
— DRJ
dude: you’re 76 AND 86’d…. hang it up.
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 5/15/2010 @ 1:03 amAnother example of an out-of-touch politician in love with his own PR and believing what his fawning, sycophantic, boot licking advisors tell him. It is apparent that the person(s) running the typical congress person’s office is also running the person he or she supposedly works for. The representative loses his job and the office manager goes back on the market run the next schmuck into the ground.Remember Palin’s problems with her appointed entourage?
It is all about the process and the process stinks to high heaven.
vet66 (4e0dda) — 5/15/2010 @ 6:05 amRepubs like Bennett, Crist and Specter need to disappear permanently.
HeavenSent (a9126d) — 5/15/2010 @ 6:58 am“Out of touch” pretty much describes the rest of the Senate.
GeneralMalaise (fc86d7) — 5/15/2010 @ 8:25 amHm, do I read this as he defines his “constituents” as the “delegates” who didn’t show?
Interesting interpretation, and IMO what is wrong with political parties in general.
rtrski (c69273) — 5/15/2010 @ 8:47 amVet66 – Your comment reminds me of the old story about a senior bureaucrat at the State Department who would bring in young foreign office staffers heading out for their first overseas assignments . He would show them a large globe in his office and ask them to show him the country they would be working for. Many would be overtly proud of being able to immediately find the, often small and obscure, country they had been assigned.
The point of course being that the county they were working for was the rather large one squatting between Mexico and Canada.
To many office holders, Dems and Republicans, think they work for Washington.
Have Blue (854a6e) — 5/15/2010 @ 8:49 amDoes Utah law make it difficult or impossible for him to run as an independent, like Lieberman?
Nels (3e56d7) — 5/15/2010 @ 9:04 amWhat makes this even more galling is that when he ran the first time he promised to ONLY serve 2 terms.
Perhaps, if he had been overwhelmingly renominated, he could say the magic words “Will of the people”.
Since he was not, all he can say is “Greed and avarice”
John Henry
John Henry (b32906) — 5/15/2010 @ 9:12 amDuring thier first term they remember that the people back home sent them there.From thier first day they are surrounded by sycophants,paid accolytes,fawning press,and professional lobbyists plying them with dinners, parties,trips and sex.when they are re-elected the conversion is complete.They now feel every thing they have done showed solomonic wisdom and the position is a devine right with tenure.Human weakness keeps showing thier feet of clay they do not see with thier heads in the clouds.the addiction to power has withdrawal symtoms.
clyde (69f2e8) — 5/15/2010 @ 10:52 amHe’s seen polls telling him he wins a primary as a write in but he lost under standard fair and square rules?
That’s odd.
I know this isn’t necessary, but this action vindicates the GOP for ousting him simply for lack of character. He loved huge spending bills, and often it turns out those congressmen who do have family or friends making tons of money at the trough. He perhaps wants to make more, by running as a spoiler. For many years he happily took the aid of the RNC, but now that he lost a primary, he will thwart the party’s efforts. He knew he could ask the party to support him if he won the primary, and is unwilling to treat others as he wishes to be treated.
As we finally clean out the party the way Palin cleaned up Alaska, we will run into many who take that last deal to split the GOP vote and help the democrats win. It’s a short term strategy and perhaps a necessary feature of fixing our party. Let’s roll up our sleeves and beat this asshole.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 5/15/2010 @ 11:13 amDustin, I think the distinction is that he lost at the Republican convention, at which about 3,400 votes were cast, but the upcoming primary is open to all Utah Republicans. Also, only a few percentage points separated him from the winner in the initial vote, so it’s not as though he was blown out.
While I’d think there’s little chance he could win as a write-in candidate, because some (probably significant) percentage of voters will only pick from among names printed on the ballot, you never know.
Nels (3e56d7) — 5/15/2010 @ 2:54 pmFrom The Liberator Today, 70 percent of the delegates were first-timers, many were chosen specifically for their anti-Bennett vote (which would allow for a first-vote Bennett closeness as the anti-Bennett votes were spread among more candidates), 68 percent are TEA Party supporters (not necessarily the same as being in a TEA Party), GOP national was persona non grata at UT GOP convention.
John Hitchcock (9e8ad9) — 5/15/2010 @ 4:25 pmDude sure has a death grip on the public treasury. He promised his “constituents” that he hasn’t been listening to that he’d do two terms and out. They might not have been listening either, but they do remember hearing that.
That he didn’t see it coming reminds me of something Nassim N. Taleb wrote in The Black Swan: One characteristic of a “Black Swan Event” is that it is unexpected. This can depend on your point of view. The event that is a Black Swan for the turkey is not, for the butcher.
To Mr Bennett: Welcome to retirement. Turkey.
Kevin R.C. O'Brien (82fba3) — 5/15/2010 @ 6:48 pmNels, well, I certainly exposed my ignorance there.
Actually, this really changes my opinion of Bennett. Of course he should run as a write in, assuming this is the GOP primary. I don’t understand why the incumbent wouldn’t be able to appear on the primary ballot. These processes are stupid, if they exclude candidates with serious levels of support from the ‘real’ primary.
I assumed he was doing as Crist had. Mea Culpa X100
Dustin (b54cdc) — 5/15/2010 @ 10:20 pm