May 16, 2005

Don't Blame Me, I Voted For...

A long time ago , way back in 1987, a wealthy healthcare executive whose only political experience had been losing a race for a seat in the Massachusetts legislator set out to become Mayor of Nashville.

He lost. Big.

Four years later, after four years of lousy leadership by Mayor Bill Boner (yep! his real name!) that ranged from incompetent to embarrassing, that same wealthy healthcare executive ran again and won as voters' remorse kicked in.

In 1994, still a first-term mayor, that same wealthy former healthcare executive ran for governor of Tennessee.

He lost. Big.

But eight years later, after eight years of lousy leadership by Gov. Don Sundquist that ranged from incompetent to arrogant, that same wealthy healthcare executive ran again and won as voters' remorse kicked in.

He won two offices after first losing them by a wide margin because voters watched their first pick turn out badly and, recognizing the wealthy healthcare executive's apparent smarts, calculated that they had made a bad choice eight years earlier and now had a chance to rectify it.

Today, that same wealthy healthcare executive is approaching the end of his first term as governor of Tennessee, and polls show his disastrous handling of the TennCare mess is cutting into his popularity even among his core base of support.

He is now widely seen as politically vulnerable, and the guy he beat four years ago is still around and interested in political office.

But Gov. Phil Bredesen isn't facing a second campaign against former U.S. Rep. Van Hilleary.

Why is that?

There are no "Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Van Hilleary" bumper stickers for a reason: Voters in the 1994 governors race and the 1987 mayoral race regretted not having voted for the challenger, but you'd be hard pressed to find a Bredesen voter from 2002 who now wishes they'd have voted for Hilleary.

To put it another way, voters in the 1987 Nashville mayoral race and in the 1994 gubernatorial race had high regard for Bredesen's capabilities and experience and intelligence even though they voted for Boner for mayor and Sundquist for governor.

Bredesen voters in the 2002 race do not have the same high opinion of Hilleary.

Now, Van Hilleary may be an intelligent and capable man, but he isn't perceived that way. Truth be told, Hilleary is perceived as being not exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer.

That truth - one Tennessee Republicans know but tiptoe around - is why Hilleary is not running for governor today.

Anyone who knows Hilleary knows Hilleary would much rather be governor of Tennessee than a U.S. Senator. But even if Bredesen is vulnerable, Hilleary knows that Hilleary isn't likely to beat him. There would be no voters' remorse trend for Hilleary.

And if there is no sentiment to fuel sales of "Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Hilleary" bumper stickers, you have to wonder whether there's enough pro-Hilleary sentiment across Tennessee to put him in the U.S. Senate.

I rather doubt it.

UPDATE: Rob Huddleston, who campaigned for Hilleary in 2002, says Hilleary is a victim of lousy campaign staffers, and should be running against Bredesen instead of trying to win the GOP nomination for the U.S. Senate.

When Van loses this primary, he's done politically. Finished. Over. So why put all of your political fortunes into a primary where you aren't the most conservative candidate (Ed Bryant is), you don't have the most money (Bob Corker does), you haven't been working for and living amongst Tennesseans since 2002 (Bryant, Corker, and Harwell have), and you don't have the best campaign team (Bryant again)? Meanwhile, he has once again surrounded himself with the same cancerous elements that cost him 2002. It's beyond strange, and his campaign looks to be in disarray compared to the Bryant, Corker, and Harwell campaigns.