Decision time: We need Brownlee for AG
As I sit here in my hotel room taking care of the little details on-line that need my attention I noticed that it’s now less than 12 hours to the start of tomorrow’s session of the RPV Convention. We have some important decisions to make. One of the more contentious will be who the RPV sends to the November general elections as their nominee for the Attorney General. I pause this evening to make a final attempt to persuade my fellow delegates that John Brownlee is the man we should choose.
Unfounded rumor and baseless accusations aside, there is no doubt that Brownlee holds core Republican values as his guiding principles. The reasons being floated that Brownlee should not be chosen, in fact, center around the notion that he’s never run for office before and that his large advantage – having actually done the job of prosecution – isn’t really that big of a deal.
Every elected official ran for office a first time, without exception. If having never run for office were that insurmountable a problem, we’d never see incumbents lose to newcomers. We have seen that on many occasions. To suggest that it’s something we should use as the criteria to make this decision only works if the newcomer has no other advantage over the other available candidates. We’ll get to that in a moment, but let’s deal with a collary to this “no previous elected office” complaint. The other item I keep hearing is that one of the other candidates, by virtue of their success in running for office in blue-trending districts, will be able to bring more votes in for the other members of the ticket, Bob McDonnell and our Lt. Governor nominee. (Yes, I do think that’s going to be Bill Bolling.) Seriously, folks, does it really make sense that someone disposed to vote for the Democrat candidate for Governor will suddenly switch over to the Republican candidate just because of the AG candidate? And even if they would, would that dynamic work for any generally-Democratic voter outside of the districts won by Foster or Cuccinelli? Would someone from, say, Lynchburg or Jonesville, VA even know these guys, let alone alter their voting habits for them?
Another point I’ve heard is that Brownlee’s having been a prosecutor is, for some reason, not that big a deal when it comes to the office of the Attorney General. I’ve head the rationalizations for that – that the AG doesn’t actually prosecute anyone, that he’s really just the chief partner of a big law firm that happens to be the prosecutorial branch of our law enforcement here in the Commonwealth. I’ve already dealt with the latter. The former, regardless of whether it’s technically true or not, isn’t perceived by the public as true. Take, for example, the office of Sheriff. Sheriff Steve Simpson in Loudoun County isn’t out there nightly busting down doors and slapping cuffs on gang-bangers. He’s running a department of deputies who do that work. That’s the absolute truth but do you honestly believe the voters would put a guy into that office who had never been a cop or a deputy himself? It’s time to set aside the rhetoric, my friends. The answer is: no, they would not. The experience of having been a cop is key so far as the voters are concerned. The exact same dynamic is at work when the voters think of the AG’s position and we have actual election results to prove it.
It’s not a matter of Dave Foster or Ken Cuccinelli being unqualified for the job, it’s that John Brownlee is more qualified and the voters will think so, too. Given a choice between a candidate with prosecutor experience, such as Democratic candidate Shannon, and one without it, such as ours will be unless Brownlee is nominated, they’ll vote for the guy they perceive to have the experience. I ask you, I urge you to vote to nominate John Brownlee for Attorney General.
Search the web:
RSS Feed
Ric's Twitter