The Rather Polite Campaign For Governor
For some reason we haven’t heard a lot of talk about this, but with just over a month until Election Day, Johnny DuPree and Phil Bryant have run what has to be the most polite campaign for major office in recent memory.
Here’s the conventional wisdom: The candidate who is not the front-runner generally has to go negative to draw up the negatives of that frontrunner. Doesn’t matter if you’re a Republican or Democrat. Similarly, every one says they disdain negative campaigning and attack ads, but there is a reason we still see them: they are effective.
And as the frontrunner, you usually face plenty of attacks and must decide on how best to respond. During the primary, Bryant took hits from everyone- save for DuPree- but never responded to any candidates. He released a “you’re seeing a lot of negative campaigning” type ad in the lead up to the primary, but that was about it. This contrasts with at least one other competitive GOP primary this summer. Billy Hewes, who was long seen as the underdog to Tate Reeves, certainly had no problem going after the state treasurer- and Reeves responded making it the most eventful primary of the summer. And Delbert Hosemann felt the need to mention his opponent, Ricky Dombrowski, at Neshoba (and other places I’m sure), even as he was winning by 70 points.
At about this point four years, John Arthur Eaves was holding a Bible in his hand vowing to run the moneychangers (previous lobbying clients of Haley Barbour) out of the state while Barbour was digging up dirt on how Eaves and his law firm had previously sued the military. And Bryant, who hasn’t gone negative in the primary or general (so far), certainly wasn’t afraid to let Jamie Franks have it.
So far though, DuPree hasn’t- and from what I’ve gathered won’t- directly criticize Bryant. And I don’t see Bryant being the one to attack first. Now if the RGA or DGA start running their own ads, they will certainly be critical of their party’s opponent, but could we potentially have a major race where neither candidate releases a negative spot? When was the last time that happened?
What we’ve seen from Bryant and DuPree so far, via press releases or campaign speeches, is basically an “I’m the only candidate with this experience” or “I’m the only candidate who support that” type thing. We shall see if anything changes.
Don’t worry Brett, There are some straight forward anti-phil ads coming. What is different is that the Anti-Phil ads will be coming from Republicans who recognize Phil for what he really is, a politician who picks whatever position is necessary to get elected. Good govt, is not his goal. His goal is to reward big campaign contributors at taxpayer cost.
Really, Ron? Who is Phil going to reward? Which of his big campaign contributors are waiting for their payoff? I would think that someone with an anti-Phil agenda would be only too happy to provide the public with that kind of information. If you can’t be specific then you’re just taking up broadband.
I for one appreciate and respect Ron’s straight forward contributions on this blog. Keep the faith and continue the good fight.
Hey Bill,
Start with George Malvaney and USES. They hold a n o-bid contract with DEQ, Thats’ the one one coast rat accused me of making up, until he was able to confirm everything I said.
You look at your invitation, and do a little research, and you will see that I am correct.
I am not ant-Phil. I am anti crooked and corrupt Govt. that costs taxpayers money, burdens us with debt and jeopardises my childrens’ opportunity for a successful future in their home state.
I wiil put a bright and promising future for our children, ahead of party label, anyday
Once again Ron, you’re such a crybaby.
Nice personal attack. What do you think about the issues?. How do you suppose Phil will reward those big contributors? Can you dispute the fact that the top 5 sponsors ( big Donors ) on one of the latest invitations, all have No-bid contracts with various agencies of the State. In those contracts, the State pays more for their services than what the Free market values these services at. In other words, we’re paying more than we should. in order to support campaign contributors. Call me crybaby if you want, but in that conversation, tell me how this wasteful spending is Republican fiscal conservatism, or how it is good for the future of our state.
I love what seriousvoter wrote about Phil and the Republican Party. Seriousvoter, gets’ it. Unfortunately most of you don’t.
Of the choices,The best choice for Governor of Mississippi is Johnny Dupree.
Ron,
Let us be realistic here you say that you are spending one million dollars of your personal money on your campaign. Last time I checked millionaires would be considered successful, but i guess i am mistaken because apparently inly big political doners stand a chance financially in Mississippi I mean how are you possibly surviving with so few resources. Ron, I truly feel sorry for you. I just can’t imagine having to get by with just a million dollars. You should for sure write a book about living with few resources so the rest of us millionaires can get by. I have shown your post to others to get some second opinions and everyone agrees that you are running strictly in spite of your competition. Go tell your sad story to really mississippians living in poverty. Which I am sorry Ron is not millionaires, and see how much pity you are given. Also, last I checked you were running against Phil Bryant so I see no need to publicly state and slander the names of these men who are completely irrelevant. Lastly I see a jealous man who wants no bid contracts so that his company may receive more contracts and in turn make more money for himself. Ron you only managed to trick 9 or so percent of the voters that is almost enough votes to elect you mayor of Greenville and to that I congratulate you. Next time you are looking at giving away a million dollars give me a call I could really use the money.
I’m not a millionaire. I spent just about everything in pursuit of one goal; honest Govt., without crony capitalism.
I could have taken that money and , like many others, and bought State bonds with it. That way the further our State goes in debt, the more money I could make, while other Mississippians pay me interest.
Many people offered contributions to my campaign. I did not accept them for several reasons. One was that I knew my chances were slim and I could not, in good faith, take other peoples’ money.
The good ole boy, favoritism system prohibits a fair economic opportunity.. during the twenty years of our business. we have never done work for the State, that work is given out in no bids.
I didn’t run to get contracts, but you, like many others didn’t get it ( that’s my fault, I didn’t campaign long enough to gain confidence). I ran because we need politicians who manage the peoples’ (public) business. (period ) We don’t need politicians who use their authority to influence the outcome of private sector opportunity.
There was no trickery in my campaign. There was no ‘HIDDEN ‘ goal.
There are many other issues besides contracting, that need addressed in our State, but since you addressed contracting thats’ all we’ll get in to.
The bottom line is this, I did what I could, in pursuit of “honest” Govt. I was unsuccessful. The election is over and that’s that.
I believe in free and fairmarket competition. I thought that was an American principle.
Capitalism can only survive if all have opportunity.
I disagree with the occupy wallsreet people, but I understand them. Many of them legitimately feel “left out” of “opportunity”.
As political favoritism becomes the requirement for success in our Country, I am concerned about one issue. The “occupy ” people remembered Free speech, and Right to assemble. I just hope they never remember the 2nd amendment.
Thanks for the comment and good wishes.