Retired Captain Sam Brown is running for a Senate seat in Nevada. I know little about the man but am often curious when people with limited or zero political experience run for office. To start with a Congressional Senate run is aggressive, but good for him. I wish him the best. As I was listening to the radio the other day, I heard that current Sen. Cotton (R-AR) was “stumping” for ex Nevada Attorney General Adam Laxalt. It was at a fund raiser where Laxalt was prohibited from announcing anything (due to campaign finance rules), so Cotton did it for him.
I don’t live in Nevada, but I do recollect 2018 was a bit of a political mess. Laxalt has a history as AG that created some problems (apparently) in his bid for Governor in 2018, he lost. I don’t know the man and since I don’t live in Nevada, I’m not wasting my time trying to find out about him. I find it odd that Sen. Cotton endorsed him and not Capt. Brown. I wonder why? I have no problem with anyone stumping for anyone else, but it seems to me that if a party member is going to stump for one party member, it is important to explain to the general public why they are stumping for one candidate over another. Since both Laxalt and Brown are both veterans (as is Cotton), it shouldn’t be that. Could be that since Laxalt is a lawyer (so is Cotton), that is the link, but who knows. Neither Cotton or Laxalt have explained.
I see that is a problem.
I don’t like most politicians, but I like recycled politicians less, and recycled lawyer politicians least of all. In the five minutes I spent looking into Lexalt, I wouldn’t vote for him for dog catcher. If a current Senator, or other party official, is going to promote a candidate, I would like to know why. What characteristics do they bring? Why is his/her platform superior to other candidates’? I want them to commit to the candidate. The hope is this will encourage incumbents and/or party leaders to do some due diligence before promoting any candidate. If you stump for a candidate, you should at least have some idea what he/she stands for, support the proposed platform and done some background work. If something bad comes out about a candidate, after an endorsement, it should reflect poorly on the endorser.
Another issue, and maybe they warned Capt. Brown when he told them he wanted to run, is why does the party back a particular candidate. If the Republican Party told Brown, if you run, we won’t support you, I suppose it is on Brown to make the call. I suspect they did not. For him to find out a sitting Senator was going to endorse his opponent has to be a slap in the face. I suspect it is worse since my guess would be Sen. Cotton never even talked to him. Like I said, I don’t know any of them, but the whole thing seems a mess and perhaps a bit underhanded. If a Party has no intention of supporting a candidate running under its “banner”, it seems only fair it let everyone know.
I thought we (the citizenry in general and the Republican party specifically) are seeking upstanding citizens to run for public office? What message does this send when people step forward to take on the task only to get discounted and slapped by the party it was trying to help. It is important to do your own due diligence on prospective candidates and find out what they represent (and what they have to gain). Nevadans made it clear they had no interest in Laxalt in 2018, what makes the Republican party think they want him in 2022; they should tell us so voters understand. This issue exists elsewhere too.