It’s no secret that Tim Wooldridge is angry about some of the things that were said and done in the primary and subsequent runoff. Most of the things he’s upset about are probably the doing of those of us at Blue Arkansas. I don’t think he likes Chad Causey all that much, but my guess is that he still grumbles more about us than him, even if he is taking his anger out on Chad by withholding his endorsement. Still, while we did a lot to defeat Tim Wooldridge because of his position on gay issues, health care reform, the Employee Free Choice Act, the stimulus, etc., and those things did a lot to line up the Democratic base against him, the final blow to his campaign wasn’t delivered by us or any of the Democrats (though Bill Clinton’s endorsement helped a lot in this case). In the end though, it was information the Republicans dug up that gave Chad Causey the ability to tip the scales in his favor, which said, among other things:
Sensing a momentum shift as third-place primary finisher David Cook endorsed his runoff opponent, Tim Wooldridge launched remarkably personal attacks on Chad Causey last week.
First, Wooldridge attacked Causey for being too young.
“Wooldridge said he thinks his combination of experiences, including being a father and husband, will trump Causey. ‘My opponent isn’t married and doesn’t have kids,’ Wooldridge said. ‘I’ve changed diapers and put training wheels on a bike.’” (George Jared, “Wooldridge, Causey work toward runoff,” Paxton News Bureau, 5/22/10)
***
It’s true that Causey’s young – he was just a teenager in the mid-1990s. But at least he wasn’t voting in favor of higher taxes on our troops, like Wooldridge was at the time:
“Democratic lieutenant governor candidate Tim Wooldridge defends a vote against increasing a tax exemption for military service members as necessary during tight budgetary times…That is being targeted in a new television ad by Wooldridge’s rival for the party’s lieutenant governor nomination, Bill Halter…The ad cites Wooldridge’s vote in 2005 against a proposal to raise the amount of military pay exempt from state income taxes from $6,000 to $9,000. The ad also cited measures Wooldridge unsuccessfully proposed in 1993 and 1995 to cut the salaries of state employees while they are on National Guard duty.” (Andrew DeMillo, “Democrats blast at each other in Ark. Lt. Gov. runoff,” Associated Press, 6/9/06)
Then, Wooldridge attacked Causey for having “lived off the government” and not having “had real-life jobs.”
“As the primary season closes June 8, Wooldridge said he hopes voters choose someone like them — him. ‘I haven’t lived off the government for the last 10 years, I’ve had real-life jobs,’ he said.” (George Jared, “Wooldridge, Causey work toward runoff,” Paxton News Bureau, 5/22/10)
In 16-year politician Tim Wooldridge’s world, being a highly-paid lobbyist qualifies as a “real-life job.”
At the time, I said, correctly, that Republicans were trying to influence the goings on in the Dem primary and that voters should screen them out and vote for Causey on the merits. They no doubt thought that Causey would be the easier candidate to beat, especially if they could accomplish their dream of getting Wooldridge to get on board with the Republicans, something they’ve been wanting since the days of Mike Huckabee. I think they were wrong-had Wooldridge been the candidate, there would have been a lot of us Democrats that wouldn’t be enthused about the prospect of having to chose between Crawford and Wooldridge, especially with a Green Party option on the ballot to register a protest vote with. But when Causey ran with it, Wooldridge famously attacked the Blue Hog Report for making it up, when A) the stuff said in it was true, and B) the whole thing originated with the Republicans. So, Republicans gave Democrats an assist in the runoff to beat Tim Wooldridge and now they’re trying to coax him into endorsing Crawford. In other words, the Republicans are attempting to play Wooldridge like a fiddle. (One has to wonder if it’s a coincidence that his staff didn’t make it clear to him that it was the Republicans who put that out when now three of his former staffers are on the Crawford team.)
Now, personally, I’m not worried about who Wooldridge endorses or if he endorses at all. I think things like that only matter to the talking heads. I mean, think about it. Conservative Wooldridge supporters had even less reason to back Bill Halter in 2006 who is far more liberal than Chad Causey has ever claimed to be. It was Halter, after all, that first called Wooldridge to the mat over his hanging bill and was campaigning on the lottery that the conservative church going crowd hates so much. I don’t even recall Wooldridge endorsing Halter, or at least not doing it enthusiastically, but I could be wrong on that. Still, at the time, the fear was that Halter would be beaten by Holt and that Wooldridge was a better matchup. Halter not only crushed Holt, but he outperformed Mike Beebe’s victory in the Governor’s race. That, more than anything, should tell progressive minded Democrats not to worry so much about the conventional wisdom or what the talking heads say.
So yeah, let Wooldridge endorse whoever the hell he wants-in the end, it probably won’t matter much. But Republicans are clearly trying to manipulate him, so before he does this, maybe he ought to ask himself how much he enjoys being used.