Posted on 07/13/2006 4:58:13 AM PDT by zerelda
Five senior staffers quit the U.S. Senate campaign of Republican Katherine Harris on Wednesday. The departures struck a blow to a campaign that has already seen a revolving door of top managers, communications directors and consultants.
Two Harris staffers confirmed that campaign manager Glenn Hodas; field coordinator Pat Thomas; communications director Chris Ingram; political director Brian Brooks; and deputy field coordinator John Byers left the campaign. Jim Dornan, who was Harris' Senate campaign manager before he left last fall, said he confirmed the resignations through a close contact within the campaign.
The Harris campaign released a statement just after 7 p.m. Wednesday saying that Harris had accepted Ingram's resignation. But the statement denied "earlier reports" that more staffers had left. The contact listed on the release couldn't be reached for comment.
"My campaign appreciates the effort and energy Chris brought to the job," Harris said in the statement. "He served in an important role in my campaign and he did a great job, and I wish him well."
Gerry Fritz, the spokesman for Harris' congressional office in Washington, declined to comment, saying he could not speak about campaign matters.
The latest exodus of staffers is a case of deja vu for the Longboat Key Republican, who has already had to fill the reopened positions once after previous staff, including highly regarded GOP names like Dornan and adviser Ed Rollins, left because they felt Harris' campaign had no chance of success and were dismayed because Harris wouldn't listen to them. The campaign has had at least 23 staffers since it officially began in August 2005.
The two staffers who confirmed the resignations did not wish to be named, but one hinted that it was Harris' disrespectful behavior that led to the latest departures.
(Excerpt) Read more at bradenton.com ...
This is the second entire staff that has been fired or quit on her.
All these people SHE HIRED bailing out ..... why? I think she's unbalanced.
And at this point the burden of proof is on those who think everything's a grand conspiracy against her and she's perfectly normal.
That's why Jim Dornan and Ed Rollins quit her campaign?
Wow. Evidently, I don't just have to "learn how to read", but I also have to learn to read minds like you evidently can. Actually, it looks like you're still figuring that bit of magic out, since you have interpreted my statements completely wrong.
If you go back and examine my posts, you'll see that I clearly never said that Harris was completely blameless; I merely pointed out two much larger factors.
Ergo, it's quite obvious that you're the one who truly needs to "learn how to read".
Cheers.
That's my take, although those two I have not dealt with personally. Those two are both long-time GOP operatives, and when they see their longstanding careers being jeopardized by helping someone whom the RNC has marked for termination, they're going to get out of there.
I was able to find an article that tacitly deals with this. Click HERE to read it. In this peice, Karl Rove is directly named as one of the Washington insiders most vehemently opposed to her Senate bid. As you know, Rove has been instrumental in helping the GOP attain it's current position of power; conversely, it is not unreasonable to say that he is probably just as effective in ensuring that individuals he doesn't favor stay out of power.
Dornan was actually acting as a consultant for her campaign for a while after he left the day-to-day operations, but I don't know if he's still involved at this point. You will note that both of these individuals have sort of disappeared off the radar since they left.
Back to work now. Cheers.
Mr. Brower: I refer you to post #39.
For all of your demands for evidence, you cannot show evidence that she is "marked for termination" or that any staffers that join her campaign will be blacklisted for life.
Even if Harris was not the RNC's candidate of choice, the filing deadline has already passed. The party really has no reason to sh@t-can the only real candidate in the race at this point. The problem is Harris, plain and simple.
Just a note...Both of the newspapers with the story and quotes are Liberal rags...She has a tough time here getting her story out...It would be like the NYT reporting on this story...I live in her district and will continue to support her...She never ever has had this problem in any of state race or local race...My personal beleif is they wanted her to move to the middle..I do not think that is the direction she wanted to take..Long time employess still work for her so if she was so bad then why are they there...I posted allot more on another thread and want repeat it here..I have voted for her in every election since moving here and will continue to do so...The Bradenton Herald despises her and will do anything to undercut her...The other newspaper that quotes those leaving is no different..I take issue with anyone who worked for her coming out and bad mouthing her...Who had her best interest at heart to begin with...She is a conservative, supports our military, a gun owner and supports our 2nd Amendment rights all the way...Figured out what is right when it comes to immigration and deserves conservative support...Those of us in her district who know her will continue to support her...We know how hard it is down here to get her side of the story out....Some higher up Republicans down here have wanted her out for along time...They had a chance to put someone up including Jeb Bush who would walk all over the other side...He chose not to get in and she should have gotten the support she deserved...She was there when they needed her..I am not saying she may have made some mistakes but do not beleive all you read in the two papers being used here...
Harris is prone to tantrums, wants to be treated like a princess, micromanages, fixates on minutia while ignoring the big picture, and sometimes does exactly opposite of what advisers tell her with bad results that they have to clean up later, staff members said.How about Harris' primary district newspaper, the Sarasota Herald-Tribune? Are they against her, too? Just another "liberal rag"? Amazing, if true, since they are the newspaper of choice in a heavily republican and conservative district. And yet, here's their article about the Harris campaign staff departures.It's a story that's been told before. When her first campaign staff left in April, the same description of Harris was given by those who quit the effort to unseat Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson.
"That's exactly like what happened," said Ed Rollins, a strategist that left the campaign in April "Everything is someone else's fault. If there's not a Starbucks coffee house within distance, it's someone else's fault."
Campaign manager Glenn Hodas - the third to work for Harris - confirmed Thursday he and four other key staffers are leaving this week, including communications director Chris Ingram, who Wednesday he was leaving. In addition, field director Pat Thomas and two of her assistants are also leaving. Two others are also walking out the door, including a fundraiser, another campaign staffer said speaking on condition of anonymity so as to not look disloyal.
Hodas, who will return to his Illinois political consulting business, Hodas & Associates, didn't want to talk about his decision, saying he wanted his departure to be amicable.
But leaving staff members speaking on condition of anonymity described a work situation that became intolerable. Sure, they had heard that Harris was tough to work for, but they said they thought it couldn't be as bad as described. They ended up finding it worse than they imagined.
This didn't come as a surprise to Rollins, who served as President Reagan's political director and ran Ross Perot's presidential campaign in 1992.
"Katherine is probably the worst micromanager I have ever seen and her instincts are 100 percent wrong," Rollins said. "After a while you say, 'Why am I putting up with this crap?'"
He said Harris was condescending and abusive to Hodas', Thomas' and Ingram's predecessors - Jamie Miller, Megan Ortagus and Morgan Dobbs. She constantly complained about just about everything, Rollins said. Campaign crowds were too small, Nelson was getting more press and speeches weren't right.
"Katherine has her own guest worker program. No one will ever be able to live up to her expectations because it's not a team effort, it's all about her," Rollins said.
There's obviously something terribly wrong here, and it isn't the media or undermining from the PTB of the republican party (although I'll grant you that neither has been kind to Katherine Harris). I sincerely hope that, for her own (apparently fragile) mental and physical health, Katherine Harris steps away from this campaign. Her pending surgery and recovery period provides her with a provident opportunity to do so with dignity and understanding. While it is too late for her to make a claim on her incumbent congressional seat, it is not too late for her to reclaim her life.
50 posts and not one call to see the "horsee" picture. I think the most ardent supporters now finally realize the party is over. I hope she reclaims her health.
The Sarasota Herald-Tribune is another liberal rag (it's owned by the New York Times). Its editorial page in no way, shape or form reflects its readership's political leanings.
That said, its reports about the causes of the Harris campaign's downward spiral seem to be accurate.
"That's why Jim Dornan and Ed Rollins quit her campaign?"
Rollins probably figured he had done all the damage that needed to be done and had other conservatives to scuttle.
Over the last 40 years i've seen that SOB scuttle a lot of good candidates.
He's a real snake.
I was thinking the same thing, gratefully. :-)
I think the most ardent supporters now finally realize the party is over. I hope she reclaims her health.
Yes, I also hope that her surgery on Monday goes well, turns out to be minor, and her recovery is blessedly quick and troublefree.
RNO1 Since Jul 13, 2006
In what way is the GOP actively undercutting her campaign?
***
FReeper "Non-Sequitur" wrote:
"People are bailing on her like crazy, a sure sign that they have no faith in her ability to win the election."
Yes, or so it would seem. The media sure likes to give that impression, and has spared no effort in doing so. But that's to be expected of them, really. Ever since she played such an instrumental part in getting GWB "selected, not elected" in 11/2000, the left has wanted to simply see her dead. Lacking the guts to actually give that a go, character assassination will do.
What is different this time around is that the GOP seems to share similar sentiments. The state GOP and RNC have not just shown a decided lack of support for her Senate bid, but have actively worked to undermine it. Karl Rove was among the first (back in November of last year), but certainly not the last, to speak out in public against her campaign, knowing this bad talk would be absolutely gobbled up by the press. And when Karl Rove speaks, party animals listen. That is, if they want to keep their careers. Rove has proven to be extremely effective in getting Republicans elected. Conversely, it's not a large leap to assume that opposite is also true. I have postulated this elsewhere, that many of these staffers have been told in so many words by the party elite that, "If you work for Harris one more day, your career in politics is over". How many people would stay, given such an ultimatum? Damned few, I'm afraid.
The errant and widespread bad-mouthing of her from ex-staffers after they leave is also quite unusual, and all of a common kind, which makes one think that this also is part of the GOPs approach in deliberately torpedoing her campaign. In all my years as a citizen activist, I have never seen the like, and there's been way too much of this for too long for it to be coincidence. There is a plan at work here, and that plan is to keep Harris from the U.S. Senate.
Many of the complaints against her rail against her "micromanaging" and "acting like a harpy", and so on, stories that the leftmedia are more than happy to take wholesale and then give the full front-page treatment. Red meat for her enemies, for certain. But these complaints did not exist in her 2002 and 2004 campaigns; not in the slightest. So what changed? And why now, all of a sudden? I have yet to hear any answers to these questions.
Some folks here on FR keep hitting her over her makeup (a la the “Cruella de Ville” remarks made in late 2000), or her misstatements (never mind that GWB himself still stumbles occasionally), or her “preening” behavior one night when she appeared on Hannity and Colmes. Regarding that last, I saw it myself, and I must have missed what many people rant about. My perception on that particular was that she was too unguarded and let her hair down a bit, which unfortunately seems to offend some and other have completely misinterpreted. Some have actually called her “the next Cynthia McKinney”, which is completely over the top and belies nothing so more as complete ignorance of Ms. Harris actual self, and betrays the fact that six years of media assaults on her looks, her character, her behaviors and her political efforts have yielded the desired amount of brainwashing among the electorate at large, despite their protestations to the contrary.
I have met Ms. Harris on several occasions, participated with her in rallies, parades, meet-and-greets, etc., and she never was anything but a lady in all respects. She behaved properly both on-stage and off, behind the scenes. So, from these personal experiences, I find it very hard to believe all this "shrill and controlling" talk. Having known and seen her as a real person for several years now, I consider these allegations to be mostly agitprop, plain and simple.
If she has changed, and the pressures of office can do that to some, I believe that it's nowhere to the degree being promulgated. Her father died recently, and she herself is due for surgery, so that has to add some stress in addition to the non-stop backstabbing. But at most I attribute this to maybe 10% of what is really going on, with 40% being the never-ending media attacks on her for the last six years, and 50% being the GOP's own subversion this time around.
Having made my assertions that the GOP itself is mostly behind the chaos evident in her campaign (note that I said “mostly”, not “completely”), the question becomes, “Why would the GOP be actively engaged in sinking Ms. Harris?”. Two things come to mind:
1) Katherine Harris has been a lightning rod for leftist hatred ever since her role in the 2000 Presidential elections. Let’s face it, folks, if she had the spine of say, Senator Majority Leader Bill Frist, we’d have had Al Gore for president until 2004 -- wouldn’t that have been a joy! And it’s possible that the GOP is weary of such “baggage”, never mind that Ms. Harris stood fast for a full month in the face of rabid adversity.
2) A larger factor in the GOP’s subversion of her campaign is more likely, and less honorable: She is too conservative for the current administration, particularly on matters relating to illegal immigration. She has adamantly refused to “play ball” on occasion, and say “how high?” when the GOP elite say “jump”, and now they seek to replace her with someone who is more, shall we say, “compliant”. On spending she appears no better than the rest of the drunken sailors in Congress, but in her four years in the House she has ruffled feathers a few times because she would not relent on issues she deemed important. Conservative issues.
One thing I must point out (if you’ve read this far, and for that I thank you! $;-), is that (and please excuse my bold) the GOP has quite obviously spent much more effort in derailing Ms. Harris than in finding a suitable alternative. Ultimately, our goal here is to get conservatives elected to positions of high power, or so it is proclaimed. Yet what has the GOP offered us instead? Three no-name candidates who were dredged up at the 11th hour. Maybe they’re good people, maybe they’re not so good, but who knows? Harris has name recognition, where the competing three, well, who can recite their names here and now, without having to Google them up first? The GOP in this regard seems more desperate to get rid of Ms. Harris than it is to get rid of the liberal democrat Bill Nelson. Something is very, very wrong with that.
In any case, that’s my two bits. I have to get to work now, which has been suffering of late as I’ve spent a good deal of time trying to make these points to people who have simply bought the unending stream of negative “news” hook, line and sinker. I just wanted to offer my summation and overall point of view on this ongoing and frustrating story.
Let me just say that, before anyone continues to judge Ms. Harris so harshly, that they actually meet here once before simply regurgitating what they’ve read in the NYT and it’s myriad affiliates. It is indeed ironic that those same people consider themselves “too keen” to fall for the constant propaganda of the leftmedia, yet on this subject they buy whatever the Harris-haters have to say without a seconds’ hesitation. And without ever once meeting her in person. How many other candidates would we tolerate being treated this way?
Cheers.
The Sarasota Herald-Tribune is owned by the New York Times Company. The Bradenton Herald was owned for many years by Knight Ridder; as of 6/28/06, it is owned by the McClatchy Company, which acquired Knight Ridder. There is no common business ownership between the New York Times Company and the McClatchy Company. It appears that your "facts" are flawed.
Interesting juxtaposition of these two phrases:
First you say, "Fortunately for me I have friends who know her quite well."
Then you say, "I live in her district and know her quite well."
While those statements are not mutually exclusive, the second would certainly 'trump' the first, so I'm curious why you would invoke the insider knowledge of "friends" before you would assert your personal insider knowledge. Heh.
If the Republican party had wanted to run someone else they had the chance...Now they should support her now...
There are four republican candidates in the Senate race...Harris, McBride, Monroe, and Collins. Primary on September 5th. Are you suggesting that the Republican party should "support" Harris over the other three republican candidates before she is the chosen nominee?
She is one nice person...Thank goodness she sticks to her principles.. Would this be an example of "nice" Katherine Harris' "principles"? Story of 'Joe's dead intern' began Harris' slide, insiders say
This wasn't any old Joe.It was Joe Scarborough, host of the prime-time MSNBC show Scarborough Country and a former Pensacola Republican congressman who was courted last summer by national Republicans to run against Harris. But before he could announce he wouldn't, Harris called major donors and suggested Scarborough would have to answer questions about the strange death of a former staff member in 2001, according to two former high-level Harris staff members, a GOP donor and Scarborough.
''That was the first clue that something wasn't right with Katherine Harris,'' Scarborough told The Miami Herald in a recent interview, noting that a medical examiner found his staff member's death was natural and not the result of foul play.
Harris, through a spokeswoman, denied Scarborough's account, saying she ''would never insinuate publicly or privately'' that he did anything untoward.
..
...Dornan said Harris had been erratic, temperamental and sometimes unfair -- and tried to blame him for the ''Joe's dead intern'' story when a furious Scarborough called, demanding to know what happened.
''This [story] encapsulates everything wrong with her as a candidate,'' Dornan said. 'She reacted without thinking. She made stuff up. She called people she had no business calling. And when confronted with the insanity of her -- I use this term lightly -- `strategy,' she denied it and tried to blame someone else.''
..
Scarborough, Dornan and Rollins gave the same account: The TV personality called the political aides privately to say he wasn't running -- his son didn't want him to -- though he needed a few days to tell supporters personally of the decision before it was publicized.
Not fast enough for Harris, who called donors like Pensacola developer Collier Merrill. Merrill told The Miami Herald that Harris suggested Scarborough was going to have trouble when ''they start asking questions . . . about that dead girl,'' Fort Walton Beach staff member Lori Klausutis.
Dornan said he overheard Harris tell more than one donor: ``I don't know what he's thinking when he's got this whole issue of a dead intern on his hands.''
Sleazy slander and vicious gossip-mongering...those are some admirable "principles." Oh yeah.
Her problem is one of perception.
She has been her own worst enemy and teh PERCEPTION of late is a fact of her political life.
Unless Nelson makes a mistake, and he will not, she has no viable chance to break the perception and be elected.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.