Talk Elections

The following article is by Bill Shipp, a political analyst who's been writing about Georgia politics for about 581 years.

I've posted the whole article because Shipp, who is rather conservative and often biased toward the GOP, has the guts to tell the story of Max Cleland like it really happened.

How delighted I would be for my political and personal hero to take on the dishonest scumbag that is Ralph Reed.


Is Max Ready for a Rerun?
Wednesday, July 20, 2005

Is Ralph Reed's bad dream about to come true? Have Democrats found a candidate to run against him, one with perhaps as much charisma, fund-raising power and political moxie? Is Max Cleland about to ride back into the Georgia political arena, this time as an aspirant for lieutenant governor?

Several Democrats are encouraging former Sen. Cleland to go for the office in next year's election.

If Max says yes, the Georgia contest for lieutenant governor could turn into one of the nation's most closely watched second-tier elections. Our state has never seen two more nationally famous figures vying for such a seemingly impotent post - but one that could open new doors for the victor in the future.

Reed's bid for lieutenant governor has already morphed into a magnet for national Republican campaign funds. Cleland could be expected to attract big sums from national Democrats, some of whom had written off the Georgia party - before they heard about overtures to Max.

Reed, 44, epitomizes the new face of the Georgia GOP, an urbane social conservative with solid national connections.

Cleland, 62, would be the Democrats' comeback kid, a fellow who lost the U.S. Senate seat in a 2002 election noted for a notoriously negative TV advertisement. The Republican video showed the Georgia senator alongside Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein and suggested that the disabled veteran Cleland helped America's enemies.

Once Georgia's No. 1 vote getter, Cleland never recovered his balance and political presence after the 2002 debacle. The "Osama ad" campaign left him bitter and depressed. To some national Democrats, winner Saxby Chambliss' battle against Cleland typified the GOP's dirty tactics.

The truth is, Cleland ran a dumb campaign. He adopted the Democrats' national agenda and wouldn't drop it, even when polls showed his Georgia constituents preferred a much more conservative approach.

Nevertheless, the Osama ad gave Georgia a black eye nationally and left many voters, even some opposed to Cleland, with a bad taste after the election.

To suggest he was less than a patriot is an outrage. Cleland lost both legs and an arm in a battlefield explosion in the Vietnam War and endured years of rigorous and painful rehabilitation.

He returned home to be elected to the state Senate, and was then appointed director of the Veterans Administration under President Jimmy Carter. He also served as Georgia's secretary of state before running successfully for the Senate in 1996, to succeed the retiring Sam Nunn.

Without Cleland in the race, Reed's main obstacles to election are: (1) State Sen. Casey Cagle, R-Canton, the only other GOP primary candidate for lieutenant governor, and (2) fallout from a congressional investigation into high-profile lobbyist Jack Abramoff's receipt of millions from Indian casino interests. Some of the Indian money apparently went to Reed to battle competitive gambling interests.

Cleland's candidacy would change Reed's strategy. Abramoff and Cagle would become secondary concerns. Cleland, a compelling motivational speaker, would quickly become the man - and the issue - to overcome.

The seasoned Democrat can match or exceed many of Reed's assets. If Reed calls on his evangelist-mentor Pat Robertson for help, Cleland can summon his minister-counselor Robert Shuler. If Reed brings in Christian Coalition forces, Cleland would undoubtedly mass his Vietnam veteran buddies.

A Cleland candidacy would force Reed to focus on his own political survival. The Republican strategist would have little time to dabble in other contests. A Cleland presence also shakes up the state Democratic Party's plans. Former state Sen. Greg Hecht would likely abandon his intention to run for lieutenant governor and announce instead for state school superintendent.

Also, former state Rep. Jim Martin, a liberal Democrat, would lose traction in the lieutenant governor's matchup. Martin is seen as the Democrat whom Reed would most like to run against. Whether Cleland could win another statewide election is yet to be determined. He has negative baggage left over from his Senate campaign and his later work in Sen. John Kerry's hopelessly inept presidential bid. Still, Cleland might inject vitality into a lethargic state Democratic Party.

There's just one problem: Cleland hasn't decided whether he's ready to dive back into the political pool. Without a lot of tugging from party regulars, he is not likely to make such a move. Strangely, some Democratic leaders are becoming much like old-time, complacent Republicans. Trying to win elections is too much hassle, especially if one has to actively recruit viable candidates.

Footnote: Cleland ran for lieutenant governor once before, in 1974, and was defeated by Zell Miller. Then Miller campaigned for Cleland against Chambliss in 2002. Now Miller is helping raise funds for Reed. Go figure.

why would a former us senator run for something as useless as lt. governor?

ph i forgot....this is max cleland we are talking about.  the man is crazy.  he is also a whiner.

If I remember, Georgia's Lt. Governor has alot of power, much like Texas. So, it wouldn't be much of a demotion.

Max Cleland is a great man. What the GOP did to him in the 2002 elections shows how disgusting and morally bankrupt that party really is.

I hope he runs.

Go Max!

Max to the Max!!! Max to the Max!!! Max to the Max!!!
Max to the Max!!! Max to the Max!!! Max to the Max!!!
Max to the Max!!! Max to the Max!!! Max to the Max!!!
Max to the Max!!! Max to the Max!!! Max to the Max!!!
Max to the Max!!! Max to the Max!!! Max to the Max!!!
Max to the Max!!! Max to the Max!!! Max to the Max!!!
Max to the Max!!! Max to the Max!!! Max to the Max!!!
Max to the Max!!! Max to the Max!!! Max to the Max!!!
Max to the Max!!! Max to the Max!!! Max to the Max!!!
Max to the Max!!! Max to the Max!!! Max to the Max!!!
Max to the Max!!! Max to the Max!!! Max to the Max!!!
Max to the Max!!! Max to the Max!!! Max to the Max!!!
Max to the Max!!! Max to the Max!!! Max to the Max!!!
Max to the Max!!! Max to the Max!!! Max to the Max!!!

Correct as usual, WalterMitty. Max Cleland is a nutty joke.

Not to distract from the issue at hand, but the constant bashing of the Kerry campaign is really starting to get old. His campaign was so "hopelessly inept" that he came within one state of victory against a wartime President in an election that observers a year before thought he had no shot at even making competitive. Sure, he made mistakes, many, but he was no Mondale, and no Dukakis.

Wartime incumbents are incredibly weak, historically.

If you think Kerry is what made it close, you're clueless.

Max Cleland needs to be back in elected office!

This is true, although only with unpopular wars like Iraq.

Good luck beating Ralph Reed. blah blah Abramoff blah... Reed designed the modern GOP on loose leaf paper in his office. Then he made it the party of the South. He's in a GOP state running from a party he literally built in Georgia.

Reed has always wanted to be President. Someone could well stop him, but it won't be Max Cleland, and it won't be in a race for frickin Lt. Governor of Georgia.

Save yourself, Max. If you didn't like the race against Chambliss, you will sure as hell not like running against the likes of Ralph Reed.

Pretty much any fullscale war.

War of 1812: Opposition party imploded

Civil War: Lincoln was expected to get slaughtered until a series of victories boosted his re-election prospects; even then, they didn't like Lincoln, and voted for him primarily because he represented Grant and Sherman

World War I: Wilson already re-elected, but his party lost control of the Congress in 1918, and the GOP landslided their way through the 1920s

World War II: FDR only got 54% against a young and untested opponent. Granted, I think this is more FDR fatigue than anything else.

Korean War: Truman declined to run for re-election. Maybe the, like, mid-30s approval rating got to him.

Vietnam War: Johnson ducks Nixon

The one thing I'd love to see Max Cleland square up against Saxby Chambliss in a re-run of 2002 - and beat him

However, in any other political endeavours, I wish Max well

Dave

No way he'd win anymore.  GA is a wannabe past-TX

I don't know if he'd win.  His reputation in Georgia may have been damaged by Chambliss' smear campaign (the worst of bad taste).  However, he most certainly is not crazy and is a very honorable human being.  Where was the draft-dodging Saxby Chambliss when Max was losing three limbs?  Remember folks, they like to think of themselves as the Party of morals.

chambliss smear campaign was only part of the reason cleland lost.

cleland's liberal voting record was waaaaay out of step with the average georgian.

to add to what was mentioned earlier, the Lt. Governor basically runs the Georgia State Senate. Why else do you think Zell Miller kept the job for 16 years?

Which war-time incumbents lost?

While I would be the first person to argue that the Republican campaign in the 2002 Georgia race was at times bordering on the despicable, Zell Miller was right when he said that Max Cleland voted in such a way as to make him a big fat target for the GOP, and Zell Miller stumped for Cleland throughout his campaign.

Cleland voted the liberal ticket on abortion, gay rights, affirmative action, genetic research, the list goes on… and his voting record on more substantive issues such as health, education and foreign policy was not much better.

Despite having good reasons to vote against some of the Bush administrations’ home land security measures, due to hidden clauses, in an election year it was a foolish thing to do with an already liberal voting record… that left him wide open to defeat.


The real surprise in the 2002 races in GA was Roy Barnes’ defeat a popular and effective governor was brought down largely thanks to an aggressive republican campaign across the state which was so successful that in bringing down Cleland it successfully brought down Barnes a more popular politician at the top of the ticket. If any Georgia Democrat deserves to be rehabilitated it’s the energetic and effective Barnes not Cleland who while a patriot of the highest order is out of step with his state and does not perhaps possess the greatest political instinct in the world.                       

I'd like to see Barnes run against Chambliss for Senate.

Truman and Johnson dodged the bullet. Wilson's party got demolished.

Ditto... what is Barnes up to these days?

He's working in a legal aid group in Atlanta.  Seems like he got in a mess of trouble for tampering with the Georgia state flag when he was governor.  Guess that was another reason he lost his race to Perdue.

It was the main reason; Perdue made a huge thing of it IIRC

ray barnes' people were openly encouraging 'roy barnes for president' talk as early as 01 and 02.

i dont think that helped his chances for reelection.

Barnes lost for three reasons.

Look at the map of the 1998 and 2002 races.  The big differences are all the sparsely-populated South GA counties, which switched to R for the first time in quite a while (perhaps forever) at the state level.  This was because of 1) the flag and 2) Sonny's hailing from Houston County in central GA.  Most previous (and always unsuccessful) GOP challengers for Gov were businessmen from the Atlanta suburbs and thus only preached to the choir.  Sonny is from an area that was increasingly vulnerable for the Dems.

The third reason was Barnes' perceived arrogance.  The vote totals were lower for Gov than for Senator and the other constitutional offices.  A lot of people simply abstained in the Gov race.  It wasn't just a Republican tide by any means that swept him out.  Lt Gov Mark Taylor, a Dem, managed to be reelected quite easily, as did all the other Dems - Sec of State, Atty General, Comm of Labor, and Comm of Agriculture.


I could see Barnes running for Congress some day, but I doubt he would challenge Sexby.  I can definitely see Rep. Jim Marshall of the 3rd district as a GA Senator some day.  And when John Lewis of the most urban Atlanta district retires, which could be as early as next year, someone powerful will win that one.  Perhaps Barnes or Cleland.

Max needs to knock off that scumbag chambliss and not even worry about Lt.Gov.

I doubt Cleland would run for Lt Gov.  Lt Gov is a position much lower in status than US Senator.  It would be like a Governor running for City Council.

I don't have a problem with the outcome i have a problem with Chambliss equating a war hero with Osama in order to try and win.

Hey, former Virginia Gov. Doug Wilder is now Richmond Mayor.  Former Maryland Governor Schaefer has been state comptroller for a while now.  That's kinda the same.

Cleland didn't lose because of any 'smear campaign.'  he lost because his voting record didn't match the mindset of today's GA voters. 

Props to Cleland for serving his country, but what exactly did he do to earn "war hero" status?   does blowing  yourself up while playing with a grenade (in a drunken stupor, i might add) qualify as war hero material?

I don't know, but that's not what happened to Cleland.  Why did you just make that up?

I really don't understand why they let you come back.

Segment of a great article from the Washington Post.  I'll have to find a link to an online copy:

"He graduated from Stetson with a history degree, earned a master's in history at Emory University, then returned to Washington in 1965 as a congressional intern. By then, war was raging in Vietnam, and Cleland, still fired with idealism, joined the Army.

"On April 8, 1968, during the siege of Khe Sanh, he stepped off a helicopter and saw a grenade at his feet. He thought he'd dropped it. He was wrong. When he reached down to pick it up, it exploded, ripping off both legs and his right hand. He was 25.

"He spent eight months recuperating at Walter Reed Army Hospital. On one of his first trips out of the hospital, an old girlfriend pushed him around Washington in his wheelchair. Outside the White House, the chair hit a curb and Cleland pitched forward and fell out. He remembers flopping around helplessly in the dirt and cigarette butts in the gutter.

"He returned home to Georgia in December 1969. 'I had no job, no girlfriend, no car, no hope,' he says. 'I figured this is a good time to run for the state Senate. And politics became my therapy, forcing me to get out of the house and be seen.'"



So I don't want to hear any more of this crap that has surfaced occasionally by rabid partisan hacks about what "really" happened to Max Cleland in Vietnam.  Go defame someone else.

Your sick if you think you can compare McVeigh to a real hero like Cleland.

How was calling Timothy McVeigh a war hero related to the discussion, Michael?

He's on probation...

the pc police will come get you if you dare say anything negative about the 'war hero' max cleland.

i think he is a horribly annoying person with a huge chip on his shoulder. 

What a load of bullsh!t.  That comment alone shows what kind of person you are.  How about making a constructive argument for once in your life?

I think that NixonNow means that prior to the Oklahoma City bombing, McVeigh was a decorated veteran having served in the Gulf War, where he earned a Bronze Star.  See Wikipedia Entry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_McVeigh).  Not that Cleland and McVeigh are comparable, the argument is a polarized example that a "war hero" does not necessarily translate into qualifications for other jobs.  NixonNow - the argument is stronger if additional data is used in conjunction with your statement.  Timothy McVeigh is not known for his war hero history, and therefore the one-liner could easily be mis-interpreted that this bombing in Oklahoma City was heroic to some fringe group.
Dave

Yeah, that's what it sounded like.  I just thought it was wrong to put Max Cleland in the same breath as a terrorist who also happened to be a vet.