HoCo Executive Survey – Topline Observations

As a pollster/strategic communications counselor, I will probably be writing about survey research frequently this year.  Here are my thoughts on this new HoCo Exec Poll. 

-          If Calvin Ball (D) is down only 3% against Allan Kittleman (R) on an initial head-to-head ballot test, despite Kittleman leading on Name Identification by a whopping 41% margin (87% to presumably approximately 46% based on the data reported), then Ball is quite well-positioned to expand his electoral base.

-          Statistically, they are in a dead heat right now.

-          This poll indicates that Kittleman (at 42%) is far closer to his ceiling than Ball (at 39%).

-          It would have been better to release the results in mid-December.

-          I am not a huge fan of automated phone surveys conducted for political campaigns. I greatly prefer live interviewer studies.  Yes, they are more expensive, but they are worth it, especially if the interviewers are well-trained in data collection methods and best practices.

-          Sean Murphy, HoCo’s answer to Stephen Miller, tried to launch an attack, but he stumbled. Not exactly an A-game message.   Sade was not singing about him, as he is not a Smooth Operator.

-          I would love to see the geographic breakouts.  Assuming the study was conducted proportionate-to-probability, the subsample sizes for that race from each of the Council Districts are large enough to yield statistically significant data, albeit with a high(er) margin of error compared to the overall MoE (4% at the 95% level of confidence).

-         Would be great to see how the 19% Undecided broke out (by ideological affinity, by partisan affiliation, by geography, by gender, by race, by age, and by voting propensity and/or interest in voting in the upcoming 2018 elections).

-         As I said in 2013 – 2014, the County Executive race is one where the Democratic candidate can win with up to 58% of the vote, and the Republican candidate can win with up to 52% of the vote.  His path was narrower but Kittleman ran in a favorable GOP cycle.  Despite the increased Democratic registration since then, Kittleman enjoys incumbency in a (generally but far from universally) OK economy.  And 2018 (like 2014) is a non-presidential election cycle, where Democratic turnout tends to be lower. Perhaps frustration with Kittleman’s Republican Party will help send more Ds to the polls and lead more Unaffiliated (read: Independent) voters to vote D.  That said, I will stick with that 58% D – 52% R range from the last cycle.

-         Putting myself in their shoes, I would be mildly pleased with the findings if I was Ball and I would be slightly nervous if I was Kittleman.  In short, it was a good day for Dr. Ball.

In solidarity.

Withdrawn

The title seems fitting, in light of the number of individuals who filed to run for public office in Howard County in the 2018 election cycle but, for one reason or another, withdrew.  Reviewing the candidate lists, the differences between HoCo and MoCo again leap to the fore.

Barring significant shakeups and with a handful of notable exceptions, most of the action will occur in the General Election with the County Executive and First County Council District races head-lining the local contests.  As of this writing, the only question in the Democratic CE primary is: can Harry Dunbar top his 21.5% showing from 2006 when he ran against Ken Ulman for the D Nomination? On paper and in the present environment, someone running on an anti-incumbent, “slow growth” platform could pull 30% - 35% of the vote in the Democratic primary but the current author does not believe Dunbar is the ideal vehicle for anti-development sentiments.  In a head-to-head, it is challenging to envision Dr. Ball securing less than 75% against Dunbar.

The Third County Council District is interesting as four top-flight Democratic candidates are in the field.  One made an unfortunate college choice, and another still reads more Annapolis than anything else, but I am nit-picking. This will be the local race to watch on Primary Election Night, with a winner likely to emerge with around 35% of the vote, none of the four should finish with under 15%.

My home County Council district, the Fourth, is again the scene of a contested primary.  Alphabetically, the legitimate Democratic candidates are Cynthia Fikes and Deb Jung.  There is someone named Ian Bradley Moller-Knudsen who filed but this person may not exist in any recognizable dimension.  I will, most likely, write about my choice on or around March 1.  It is imperative for these candidates to focus on salient issues:  most notably Education and Quality of Life (insofar as the two are distinct).  Yes, the former is a given and the latter encompasses many facets (infrastructure, environment, jobs, safety, social justice, etc…).  The candidate who wins will have a narrative that best reflects and addresses these concerns and will offer up reflective, practical, progressive, and accessible solutions.

Turning to the state legislative campaigns:

I will write about District 9 later.   In the meantime, there is no Primary action in D12 (somewhat disappointingly) and while there is much that could be said about D13, the only item of immediate interest is the emergence of someone who reads like a perennial candidate.   

So there is the wisdom – conventional or otherwise – as I see it.  I will close the blog for 2017 with some words from Robert Burns:

“Then let us pray that come it may,

(As come it will for a' that,)

That Sense and Worth, o'er a' the earth,

Shall bear the gree, an' a' that.

For a' that, an' a' that,

It's coming yet for a' that,

That Man to Man, the world o'er,

Shall brothers be for a' that.” 

In solidarity.

Monumental Lunacy

The Howard County Times, taking the concept of "on-the-other-hand-ism" to its illogical apogee, penned a horrendously ill-thought out and terribly crafted editorial, which can be found here.

Choosing to conflate a repository of knowledge (a library) with a celebration of traitors who fought for the Confederacy (the monument on the courthouse grounds in Ellicott City), the scribbler who penned that piece appears to have lost the thread immediately after the byline.

The call for a "modulated" response is nonsensical.  The Civil War ended (spoiler: The South lost) 152 years ago, why is additional time needed to ponder the fate of something which should never have been installed in the first place?

Employing the same kind of reflexive anti-reasoning that calls for "bipartisanship," even when one side is clearly in the right while the other is demonstrably wrong, the HoCo Times has embarrassed itself with an editorial that appears to claim that opponents of this marker are attempting to "rewrite history."  Rubbish.  The people on the monument simply do not deserve to be remembered, on public grounds, as those who "fought for their beliefs in a vastly different era." This phrasing almost sounds romantic and the rest of the sentence, which almost grudgingly acknowledges that they were on "the wrong side of history by allowing and condoning slavery" is not nearly damning enough.  They turned their back on country and picked up arms to preserve the abomination of slavery, and all of the suffering that came with that evil institution.

The only proper response is for the marker's immediate removal.  Anything else is unacceptable.  For the Times to not recognize this is not a sign of a struggle against "political correctness," it is a sign of their failure to perceive moral correctness.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

A Waste of Time

Two thoughts on a theme – National first and Howard County-specific second:

-        The 2020 Democratic presidential field should be bereft of candidates who sought the office previously.  Invigorated blood is what is needed. Sorry Joe, Hillary, and Bernie.  Grab a seat, Martin. The last three Democrats to win the White House were all first-timers when they sought the nomination (’76, ’92, and ’08). Most of the folks who ran before (and whose names are bandied about as possibilities in 2020) are hauling about heavy baggage, fairly acquired or not.  We can’t waste time fighting old wars.  That said, I am certain we will see a doomed-to-failure sequel from someone.  Unfortunately for them, and the electorate.

-        Turning from national to HoCo news, I am getting more than a little irked at the namby-pamby-ness of the Invisible Campaign for County Executive.  I recognize that September is the time when this battle is likely to be joined but I am seeing Kittleman dominate the earned media space this summer.  It reminds me of how the Clinton re-election effort, oh, excuse me, the DNC spent the entire summer prior to the ’96 GOP National Convention beating the ever-loving tar out of the Dole campaign, defining the Republican nominee before he had a chance to establish his own narrative.  Folks can’t expect to win in ’18 just because they have a D next to their name.  Democrats in HoCo need to roll out a progressive platform, provide a solid rationale for their candidacy that appeals to voters, and show an ability to frame a debate. Right now, it feels like an opportunity was lost.  As former British MP Dr. David Owen said about the struggle over the direction of the Labour Party, “it will have to be a fight of passion and of conviction…we are fed up with the fudging and the mudging, we are fed up with slush and mush, we want courage, fight, conviction, and hard work.” 

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

So What's Next? '16/'18 Edition

Now that Maryland’s 2016 Primary Election is in the firm and unforgiving grasp of the past, shrewd Howard County political observers are now focused on the Long Slog to the General Election…not only for the importance it has in and of itself, but also as a harbinger for 2018 (and beyond).

At the precinct level, there were some quirky voting patterns evident in the 2014 returns.  Were they the by-product of a weak Democratic gubernatorial candidate? Second presidential term, mid-term fatigue with the party that holds the White House?  A local Republican Party that is showing signs of life in not just the West but in the swing First County Council district and generally reliably Democratic Columbia?  Was 2014 a once in a decade (or generation) event, or a sign of votes to come?

Thought experiment.  Trump is so idiosyncratic, it would be difficult to construe a Trump victory in Howard County in November to mean that we are on the precipice of a local liberal/conservative realignment.  Even if he obtained a majority of the local vote, and managed to win election to the Presidency, Trump would have plenty of time between January 20, 2017 and November 2018 to completely wreck the GOP brand.  In such a scenario, the over/under for County Executive Allan Kittleman to call for a 2020 primary challenge to the Donald would be June 30, 2018.  But I am getting ahead of myself.

That said, with the County Exec up for re-election, multiple state legislative and Board of Education races of interest, and four open County Council seats in the ’18 cycle, you better believe that local operatives, activists, and power brokers will spend many chilly November nights pouring over the ’16 Official General Election Results data, searching for portents that will inform their decision-making processes.  

Amidst all of this uncertainty, all we can rely upon is mercurial human nature itself. 

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

Nanny State Bull$#!&

From a political perspective, Howard County Executive Allan Kittleman  - that still sounds weird - did the right thing when he “officially overturned a ban on the sale of sugary drinks and high-caloric snacks on county property and at events sponsored by the county,” (as originally reported by the illustrious Amanda Yeager of the Howard County Times).

The title refers to my reaction when I first heard about the proposed ban on such sales.   Now, I am not an expert on public health policy and Lord knows that all of my friends are Clean Living adherents, ingesting only the purest, quadruple-filtered H2O and the healthiest, organic, locally sourced free-range flaxseed.  

But I do know something about human behavior and how voters perceive, and react to, actual or potential laws and regulations.  The so-called “soda ban” was a classic example of Democratic over-reach.  It so easily fed into the infuriating but persistent narrative of Democrats imposing restrictions on what people can or cannot do with their hard-earned money because “we know best” (i.e., you can't be trusted to do the right thing, so we will deny you the opportunity to make such a decision).

Now, I sympathize with those who want to promote the consumption of healthier foods and beverages.  There are several avenues to bring about this end. 

First is by embracing a culture of healthier living.  When I got serious about getting into shape, I switched from pop to water and greatly curtailed eating “junk” snacks.  Real food with nutritional value tastes better and I have saved money in the process. I know this may be more of a challenge for families with children and/or those with tighter budgets or less time to explore different food and beverage options, but I believe greater mindfulness regarding wellness practices combined with smart grocery shopping can help combat obesity and related diseases - and far more effectively than the now defunct ban. 

Another way is by purchasing healthier options from vendors who are peddling their wares on county property and/or at county-sponsored events.  The market will react to changes in buying patterns. If Frescas don’t sell, they are less likely to be carried. Space is everything for such merchants.  If water or fruit juices move, they will stock those items instead of sodas.

And the soda ban was so memorable too.  Such an easy thing to run against.  Subtext: "Can you believe those arrogant, know-it-all, pointy-headed jerks?  They don’t even want you to quench your thirst on a hot August day with a good old American Coca-Cola because they know best.  How out-of-touch are these folks?" 

I know I have some friends who think differently on this subject.  Was his decision good public policy?  That can be debated.  But this article is on the politics of the matter, and on that point, given where the electorate is, Kittleman made the best move available.

On another note, and perhaps the topic for another post, I think Kittleman’s emphasis on “trust” as a key factor in his hiring decisions is being applied in a way that will cause short and long term problems for the County and its residents.  There are some smart, talented people who are being pushed out.  Is it because of their well-known service with Ken Ulman? Affiliation with the Democratic Party?  I was not present when these personnel decisions were being made, so I have no idea what is in the hearts and minds of the “deciders” beyond their public pronouncements.  That said, the new Administration is asking several individuals with a great deal of valuable knowledge and institutional memory - and exemplary records as public servants - to move along and that isn’t sitting well with this writer.  The Kittleman folks need to have some outsiders at the table.  We see that in the U.S. Cabinet and the County Government should be no different. 

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

Figuring Out a Way to Work Together

The Howard County Board of Education General Election returns revealed some interesting outcomes.

Based on the still unofficial results:

1. Cindy Vaillancourt obtained the highest number of votes of the eight candidates on the ballot in 57 of the 118 Election Day precincts.  She finished second in another 39 precincts…and in the top four in 117 (all but one of the smaller ones).  She performed well countywide and crushed in Board of Elections Voting District 6 (southeast HoCo: Laurel, Columbia, Jessup, a bit of Ellicott City and Fulton) where she won 27 of the 35 precincts.

Bottom line:  This election served as a vote of confidence in the oft-embattled Vaillancourt. Even with lower turnout, there is no other way to read this outcome.  The other Board Members need to take note, and I am assuming they have already.

2. Sandie French garnered a plurality of the vote in 43 precincts and placed second in another 30.  She also banked the greatest number of early votes (9,721 compared to 9,561 for Vaillancourt).  She fared best in Board of Elections Voting District 2 (Ellicott City) where she won 15 of 26 precincts and also ran well in Board of Elections Voting Districts 3 (primarily West Friendship, Marriottsville, and a slice of western Ellicott City) and 4 (western Howard County) where she won five of six and four of six precincts respectively.

Bottom line:  French capitalized on the strong name identification she has built up over her years of service, a good organization and solid forum performances.  As I noted earlier, incumbents are tough to defeat and this race was no exception.

3. Bess Altwerger won four precincts and finished second in 30.  She was a fine candidate and a prime example that the Howard County Education Association’s backing is important in BoE general elections.  She banked 8,274 early votes, which helped propel her to a third-place finish overall.

4. Christine O’Connor ran away with Voting District 1 (Elkridge, the eastern part of Ellicott City) where she placed first in 13 of the 21 precincts and second in four others.  Overall, she won 18 districts and obtained a second place showing in another 16.  Her strength was concentrated in eastern HoCo but she performed well enough countywide to place in the top four, approximately 200 votes behind Altwerger.  Her 7,426 early votes were 650 more than Dan Furman’s tally.

  

5.  51.95% of the votes cast for Board of Education candidates were cast for candidates supported by the HCEA.  They backed four candidates, two of whom were elected, with the others finishing with respectable fifth and sixth place showings.  It would have been extremely difficult for the full slate to have been successful, given French’s presence on the ballot.  The HCEA would have helped elect a third but O’Connor (an educator) ran a smart campaign and took the fourth position.

Shifting away from numbers for a moment, it is my hope that the two new Members will help usher in a new Era of Good Feelings on the Board of Education.  No one is asking for hand-holding and exchanges of “You are my BFF” texts but the corrosive environment has not been healthy for the Board, for the Howard County Public School System, or the County as a whole.  Now is the time to begin a new dynamic, one that is productive but also conciliatory, respectful and civil. 

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

"And You Give, and You Give"

Katy bar the freakin’ door because it is about to get real…and personal…real personal to the point of over-sharing. To the max. I can’t stress that enough, or can I?

[Insert local TV news awkward story transition] Speaking of sharing…I know we are all looking for different ways in which we can engage in our local communities.   This Wednesday offers a prime opportunity to hear from the Super Friends of Howard County’s Non-Profit Community.  Just look at this line-up:

Bita Dayhoff: President, Community Action Council of Howard County

Beverly White-Seals: President and CEO, Community Foundation of Howard County

Joan Driessen: Executive Director, Association of Community Services of Howard County

Mickey “#AllDogs” Gomez: Executive Director, Volunteer Center Serving Howard County

This is promising to be a fascinating night of panelist insights and Q & A.  If you want to get a handle on what is happening in our local not-for-profit scene, there is no better place to be than the Jeffers Hills Neighborhood Center (at 6030 Tamar Drive in Columbia) on November 12 (again, this Wednesday). The Columbia Democratic Club is hosting the event although this panel discussion is not focused on electoral politics.  It will be centered on: “The State of Nonprofits in Howard County: Perception, Challenges and Opportunities.”  Which is excellent news because that is also the title of the program. 

The meeting should kick off at 7:00 pm with the panel discussion commencing at about 7:30 pm.

Seriously, these are some awesome people doing great and important work in our community.  Come hear what they have to say, share your ideas, and let’s make connections and take steps to make our County an even more amazing place to live.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

Immoderate Inclinations

1)        In a county with an active conservative/Tea Party contingent, if Senator Allan Kittleman were really that moderate, don’t you think he would have been primaried from the right?  Yet he was not.  What does that mean?

2)        To answer that question, I recommend reviewing kittlemanfacts.com.    The facts reveal a disappointingly conservative voting record on education, on guns, on economic issues, on the environment, and on women’s health issues.

3)        When a seemingly moderate persona comes in conflict with an actual right wing voting record in Annapolis, what is more important…a “nice guy” personality or a County Executive who shares your values and vision for Howard County…and who has, and who will, deliver real-world results? 

Facts matter. On Tuesday, vote for Courtney Watson for County Executive.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

The Sun Missed Their Own Point – Watson Is the Better Choice

The Baltimore Sun showered Courtney Watson with praise in their recent editorial on the Howard County Executive race.  They referred to Watson as “an immensely gifted and dedicated public servant.” They “hope she [Watson] will find many more opportunities to share her talents with the community.”

Yet, they endorsed Allan Kittleman.  Let us examine their rationale for doing so.

They appear to give a great deal of weight to the importance of having something equating to a relative degree of parity between the two parties.  I can understand the innate appeal such a proposition would have among self-described adherents of a good government philosophy.  For such voters, it sounds inherently “fair”…something that might promote moderation and compromise. However, there can still be a “competition of ideas” within a political system where one party is stronger than the other.  Moreover, many states that have more competitive two-party systems than Maryland still witness highly divisive, highly partisan political environments.   

Frankly, their argument would have more merit if Senator Kittleman had decided to run for Governor.  First, he would have been a stronger candidate for that office compared to Larry Hogan. Second, even the Sun editorial stated that “Maryland is stronger when it has two viable political parties…” Note that.  Not “Howard County” specifically but “Maryland” in general.  Kittleman is not running statewide.  At least not in this election cycle.   

It has been established that Senator Kittleman’s voting record is more conservative than his persona.  How, precisely, is his “kind of independence” going to work out with a Democratic County Council and a Democratic state legislature?  Further, wouldn’t a Republican County Executive be cross-pressured by his base to pull to the right on economic issues?  On some social issues?  It seems to be more of a recipe for stagnation and deadlock than a path to move Howard County forward.

By labeling Kittleman a “relatively liberal Republican” and Watson a “relatively conservative Democrat,” the Sun missed two critical points:

First, both are running as progressives.  The key distinction is that Watson is closer to being a true progressive while Kittleman is highlighting certain policy stances in an effort to position himself as one…when he is really fairly conservative on a host of issues (Right to Work, education funding and assault weapons leap to mind).  Second, one can infer from their description of her that Watson is a different kind of Democrat.  Perhaps distinct enough from Mr. Ulman to provide a “fresh approach to leadership of the county?”  I believe so.

The Sun seems to accept the belief that Ken Ulman will be viewed as a good County Executive, “whose legacy will ultimately be seen as having left the county better than he found it.”

And then they use language that might be found in a classic political science tome.  They state that Kittleman isn’t running “as a repudiation of the incumbent.”  Maybe, maybe not.  The point is that if you believe that Ulman’s legacy should be built upon, why would you endorse someone from the opposing political party?  That invites the politics of “preemption,” to use Professor Skowronek’s typology.  If you want to extend his legacy, it makes far more sense to practice the “politics of articulation” and elect someone distinct from, yet affiliated with, the identity of the incumbent. 

The good news is that there is such a candidate.  Her name is Courtney Watson.

In short, I suggest that the Sun editorial board re-read their own endorsement.  Perhaps they should re-think their conclusion.  A careful review of their own editorial might prompt a new one beginning with the phrase: “On second thought….”

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

Breaking Campaign News: Oops Indeed!

Looks like the so-called "disputed" Allan Kittleman quote in the Team Howard Slate mailer was, in fact, properly sourced and completely accurate.  

In short, Kittleman said it.  Moreover, the Watson campaign and allies - contrary to claims otherwise - used the corrected story.

Based on the original Baltimore Examiner print article (dated 10/7/2006), it appears as though the Kittleman quote used in the now famous mailer (a JPG of which can be found here) was indeed 100% on point.  The quote language from both the original print article and the corrected article, which can be found online, is identical.  

The quote, as written by the Examiner Staff Writer, reads:

“ ‘I think that allowing people who are responsible, like teachers and principals, to carry concealed weapons would make individuals think twice about attacking someone,’ said Howard County state Senator Allan Kittleman, R-District 9.”

That sentence appears verbatim on one of the KittlemanFacts.com mailers, the one with the quote from a mother from Ellicott City who asked: "What was Allan Kittleman thinking?”  A picture of the piece appears at the end of this post.

The only difference between the original print article and the corrected online article exists not with Kittleman’s quote, but with the preamble leading into his remarks.  The mailer uses the language found in the online, corrected article that was published on October 7, 2006:

“At least one state senator said arming educators with guns in response to a string of national deadly school shootings is an idea worth considering.”

[Source: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/senator-open-to-weapons-for-administrators/article/55189]

The original print article features a harder-charging lead-in paragraph:

“At least one state senator said teachers should start arming themselves with guns in schools to protect themselves and others from violent acts.”

The key point here is that, in both versions of the article, original and corrected, the Kittleman quote is the exact same.  And yes, the mailer used the corrected version.

This raises several questions…

1. Did the Kittleman campaign know that his quote was, in fact, accurate?  If so, when did they know this?  If they didn’t know, that is poor due diligence on their part.  If they did know, then why did they falsely accuse the Team Howard Slate of putting out misleading information? 

2. Does Kittleman still stand by his quote? If yes, why? If not, why not?

3.  Does Kittleman also stand by the position, appearing later in the same article, where he states that, “I am currently a supporter of reducing the restrictions on people who carry concealed weapons.” If yes, why? If not, why not?

4. Will the Kittleman campaign apologize to the voters of Howard County and/or the Team Howard Slate for stating, non-factually, that the quote in the mailer was inaccurate?

 

So there you have it.  The quote stands as yet another example of Senator Kittleman’s more conservative stances.  One that I am certain his campaign would rather not discuss, as it would add to the perception that some of his beliefs are out-of-step with the majority of Howard County voters.  Definitely not a topic they would like to touch during the same week fellow Republican and current GOP gubernatorial nominee Larry Hogan received the endorsement of the National Rifle Association.

A JPG version of the original print article can be found here: 

The quote from the corrected article can be found here, on the mailer:

 

Stay tuned, as more will follow.