OH-Sen: NRA Could Pull Support For DeWine

This is some interesting news out of Ohio from this morning's edition of The Hill. The gun lobby, typically no friend to Democratic candidates, has indicated that it may be willing to support a Democratic candidate for Senate against Mike DeWine, who the Gun Owners of America give an F rating. The NRA is apparently open to the idea of backing Democratic House member Tim Ryan if he decides to run.
"Personally, as an individual and an ardent Republican, I would love to see anyone run against DeWine, especially Ryan," said Rick Kaleda, the National Rifle Association's (NRA) election-volunteer coordinator in Ryan's 17th District. The NRA endorsed Ryan in his successful 2002 Democratic primary bid against then-Rep. Tom Sawyer.
. . .
"The feeling I get from a lot of gun owners statewide is there are a lot of folks who have a loyalty to one party or another [who] are starting to look at that a little differently, with the Tafts, the DeWines, the Voinoviches," Kaleda added, referring to Ohio Gov. Bob Taft and Ohio Sen. George Voinovich, both Republicans. Now, a willingness to back Ryan does not mean that the NRA will support any Democratic candidate for any seat in Ohio. For example, likely Senate candidate Rep. Sherrod Brown isn't a favorite of the NRA, with a 2004 rating of 0%. And Ryan is a Democrat, but he's a pro-gun, anti-choice conservative Democrat. However, the NRA's negative comments about "the Tafts, the DeWines, the Voinoviches" suggest that they might be thinking of just sitting out upcoming races in the state, if not fully endorsing Democratic challengers.

Many of you are obviously thinking back to the recent special election in OH-2, when the NRA ditched Paul Hackett, one of their own members, to endorse Jean Schmidt. But consider their comments when they did it. Their reasoning for the endorsement was that Schmidt had a record of voting for NRA-backed legislation and Hackett had no such record, for or against. In fact, the group's director of public affairs, Andrew Arulanandam, went out of his way to clarify that the endorsement "shouldn't be construed as casting aspersions on her opponent."

I'm not suggesting that any Democrats go out of their way to seek NRA support. But open hostility from the NRA and their politically active voting members is something that we can do without. And with Democratic prospects in Ohio looking pretty good, we're going to need as much help -- or at least as little opposition -- as we can get.

Tags: Senate 2006 (all tags)

Comments

16 Comments

Ryan needs to step up
And say if he's running or now.  The same goes with Sherrod Brown.
by jkfp2004 2005-08-10 10:51AM | 0 recs
Re: Ryan needs to step up
Is there a good reason for Sherrod Brown to be wasting time at this point?

Sherrod, are you in or not?

Tim Ryan, I like you, but you better be ready to answer the question promptly after Sherrod Brown.

Cuz, if you are kinda equivocating and unsure give Hackett a shot.

by Carl Nyberg 2005-08-10 11:24AM | 0 recs
shades of the NARAL
fight only from the otherside.  single issue groups loyal to their issue not party and does that actually work...
by juls 2005-08-10 11:09AM | 0 recs
Re: shades of the NARAL
I thought the same thing.  I wonder if a rightwing blogger somewhere is blasting the NRA like Kos did to NARAL after they crapped all over the RI Senate 06 race.
by freedc 2005-08-10 12:15PM | 0 recs
Re: shades of the NARAL
The NRA will endorse pro-gun Democrats from time to time, even over pro-gun Republicans.

In 2002, NRA endorsed Democratic incumbent Jim Hodges for Governor of SC over Republican challenger Mark Sanford.

Sanford's 'A' rating just wasn't as good as Hodges' 'A+'.

by wayward 2005-08-11 02:50AM | 0 recs
why sick of 'em?
Why are you sick of Voinovich and DeWine?
by Carl Nyberg 2005-08-10 12:10PM | 0 recs
Not all downside?
Mightn't some moderates appreciate that DeWine has had the cojones to poke a Neanderthal outfit like the NRA in the eye?

(By the way, the kicker in the Hill piece suggests that the NRA isn't the only group open to shopping around!)

by johnsmith0903 2005-08-10 12:11PM | 0 recs
opprotunistic
I think these groups smell blood. They want to be on the winning side so they can boast to other Senators. "We helped take-out an incumbent that crossed us."
by Carl Nyberg 2005-08-10 12:28PM | 0 recs
Re: As a gun owning Ohio Republican...
Agree with you, the Gun issue lost so many so many votes for the Democratic Party. The party needs to stress an anti-big brother pro-privacy message. Which means we will not go into your personal lives and dicate what you can and can not do.
by NJDEM1 2005-08-10 12:12PM | 0 recs
I wonder who the NRA will endorse in PA. . .
At this point I'd guess Casey since interest groups usually like to be on the winning side.
by Painter2004 2005-08-10 01:10PM | 0 recs
Re: I wonder who the NRA will endorse in PA. . .
I'd say Santorum, since Santorum is farther right on the guns than Casey.
by jkfp2004 2005-08-10 02:35PM | 0 recs
Re: I wonder who the NRA will endorse in PA. . .
In the 2002 Democratic Gubernatorial primary in PA, the NRA intervened with radio spots slamming Ed Rendell. The ad never used Casey's name, but it was clear that he had their support. Meanwhile, Santorum has only a 50% rating from Gun Owners of America. I wouldn't be surprised at all if they backed Casey in a matchup with Santorum.
by Scott Shields 2005-08-10 02:51PM | 0 recs
Re: I wonder who the NRA will endorse in PA. . .
Question: How much of a difference does the NRA endorsement really make?
I dont mind that Ryan is pro-gun. To me, you take the good with the bad, and people just have to vote their consciences. If he doesnt believe the government should interefere with guns then I respect that, and I dont endorse gun-control people coming in and screwing with his campaign. But make no mistake about it, I dont think being pro-gun is a positive. At all.
It probably has a lot to do with where you grew up. Rural citizens are more likely to symapthize with the pro-gun people and urban or suburbanites (like myself) always think hard about gun control.
To me, gun control isnt government interference, its common sense. There should be safety locks so kids dont blow the thing off on accident. There should be background checks on guns, because if you cant responsibly handle a deadly weapon, then it shouldnt be in your hands. We're not talking about just any old item here, we're talking about something that kills Americans at a horrendous clip. There shouldnt be assault weapons on the street. "Assault" is the exact opposite of "defense", which- along with hunting- is what guns are for. We dont live in 1780s America, and to me, thinking about the 2nd Amendment today the same way as back then is not smart. Its a different day, homocides are a tremendous problem, and handguns are rampant. So I'm gonna get off my soap box now, but it makes me nervous when so many Dems start waving off gun control like fleas.
by AC4508 2005-08-10 03:53PM | 0 recs
Come on Scott.
This is the NRA we're talking about not NARAL.  They see the bigger picture and their is no way that they'll endorse Ryan over DeWine.

This is a message to DeWine.  Nothing more, nothing less.

by alexm 2005-08-10 08:56PM | 0 recs
Primary Challenge Boost
This is all just to give a boost to a challenge to DeWine in the primary. A lot of Ohio GOP forces are moving against DeWine and the only time to deal with it before a general election.
by ignatzmouse 2005-08-11 06:47AM | 0 recs
Re: As a gun owning Ohio Republican...
that is Hackett
by Liberal 2005-08-16 12:41PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads