Swing State Project

« OH-06: Trusting Republicans With Money Dept. | Main | Weekly Open Thread: What Races Are You Interested In? »

Friday, March 17, 2006

OH-13: Capri Cafaro, Are You Kidding Me?

Posted by DavidNYC

This is unreal:

The National Rifle Association has endorsed Capri Cafaro for Congress at a time when the 28-year-old Youngstown shopping mall heiress says she is thinking about packing heat.

Cafaro, a Democrat, who says she is a dedicated defender of the Second Amendment, opposes the assault weapon ban and favors Ohio's concealed-carry law. She also plans to take a class to learn how to fire a handgun, and might carry a weapon after she completes the course.

"As a woman who comes from means, I'm in some tough neighborhoods sometimes," she says.

If you're gonna support gun rights, fine. But this is just extremely naked pandering. And that last line? What the hell is that even supposed to mean? As a woman from extremely wealthy means, you are NEVER in tough neighborhoods, Capri. Or are you saying you might get mugged walking around your district because people know you're super-wealthy? Whatever she means, it's either snobby in the extreme or totally senseless.

Cafaro, for those of you who don't know, blew $2 million of her personal fortune (she's a shopping-mall heiress) to get 37% of the vote against Steve LaTourette in neighboring OH-14 last cycle. Now she's decided to try for something a bit safer (OH-13 is Sherrod Brown's seat). Frankly, I'll doubt she'll win the hotly contested, zillion-candidate primary. I just wish she'd spend her money more wisely.

Posted at 06:34 PM in 2006 Elections - House, Ohio | Technorati

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.swingstateproject.com/mt/mt-track-ssp.cgi/2232

Comments

Just wait until she makes an appearance in the "Women of the NRA" calendar

Posted by: RBH at March 17, 2006 07:17 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

I would love to see an independent poll that studies:

How many "pro-gun" GOP voters would switch their vote

to ANY pro-gun Democrat under any circumstances

particularly one who was:

A) pro-choice
B) pro gay rights

My impression is that "single issue" gun voters are mostly pro-evangelical, pro-life, anti-gay etc.

In other words, no Democrat can take a pro-gun stance and expect to pick up any significant number of voters UNLESS he or she is also willing to take the "Full Dobson" on policy matters.

Yhewwwww...

There was a GREAT West Wing where some consultant throws in Bartlett's face that "73% of Americans support a Flag Burning Amendment."(Which is true BTW) Marilee Matlin's character blows that up by pointing out than when asked to RANK their concerns in order of importance, it comes out really, really low. (Which, BTW, is also true.)

I THINK that's the sort of the deal with "pro-gun" voters in Ohio. A SMALL number are just rabid about it, but they won't vote for ANY Democrat come hell or high water- UNLESS the Democrat just completely sells out on social issues.

Increasingly, I see a polarized and deeply divided electorate where special interest groups aren't "honest brokers" and voters won't change sides based on policy positions or even self interest. (I.e. poor to middle income evangelicals who vote GOP even though they're getting screwed economically every day of the week and twice on Sunday.)

In my experience, to win in Ohio a Democrat must do EXTREMELY well in the urban areas and with African-American and Hispanic voters. Not just "OK" but GREAT. I think that voter turnout in the cities is the most critical "diagnostic imperative."

guns are just the sideshow

Posted by: Ohanon at March 17, 2006 08:44 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

I will note that while I am in the center on guns, this does seem a bit like pandering.

Cafaro's platform also includes the idea of withdrawing from CAFTA, NAFTA, and the WTO.

Posted by: RBH at March 17, 2006 09:33 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Absolutely!

It's a very crowded primary field and I guess her plan is to:

Spend large truckloads of money

Try ANYTHING to get attention.

Another Ohio candidate tried to assert "I'm pro-gun, therefore I will do well with GOP voters."

Which I don't buy for a minute, but without good poll data I'm just talkin'.

Posted by: Ohanon at March 17, 2006 09:38 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

I dunno. Libertarians are pro-gun, pro-choice and pro-gay rights in general. Many people vote GOP because they think a Libertarian has no chance of winning. If a Democrat expressed his or her pro-gun, pro-choice, pro-gay rights stand in libertarian tones I think a lot of Republicans would be sympathetic. How about a "Pro-G.G.C." candidate. One who's pro-Gun, pro-Gay and pro-Choice. Why not a candidate who'll stand up and say: "I don't care what you do in your bedroom, what procedure you pay your doctor to perform or what your carry in your pocket."

"Those that would give up essential liberty to gain a little temporary security deserve neither liberty or security." - - - Benjamin Franklin

Posted by: NVR2FST at March 17, 2006 09:39 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

As for the OH-13 race, it'll take less than you'd expect to really win.

Cafaro has her flaws. Sawyer has the flaw of voting for NAFTA.

Betty Sutton might be a contender to win.

William Grace doesn't have anything that is negative, from what i've read.

It would really figure if Cafaro ended up winning with something absurd like 28% of the vote.

Posted by: RBH at March 17, 2006 09:46 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Many people vote GOP because they think a Libertarian has no chance of winning.

I seriously doubt that claim. I bet that no more than 10% of voters - if that high - could even identify the Libertarian Party off the top of their heads.

Posted by: DavidNYC at March 17, 2006 09:54 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

This chick is a banana boat. That last quote could just as easily have come from the mouth of Leona Helmsley. Why do I get the feeling that Capri Cafaro hasn't made too many appearances in the blue-collar neighborhoods of Akron unless she's surrounded by security?

As for RBH's point, I think the NRA sees an opportunity to feminize its image with Capri Cafaro as their new poster child. I bet if Tom Sawyer would have taken a similar position a month ago, the NRA wouldn't be endorsing him.

I disagree with ohanon. Growing up in rural Minnesota, I can assure you there are tons of otherwise progressive Democrats who see red every time the Democrats talk gun control. The issue is probably less relevant now than it was in the 1990's since the Dems have backed away from gun control, so they'd be wise to let sleeping dogs lie on this issue IMO.

Posted by: Mark at March 17, 2006 10:25 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Capri is a sideshow. Sutton is polling even worse- she's definitely not a contender to win. And yes, I know plenty of libertarian-type voters who are pro-gun but not anti-choice or anti-gay. And some of those people, while not voting for a candidate strictly because of this issue, would probably NOT vote for a candidate they felt was too anti-gun. I think Mark is right about this. It will come up in the gubernatorial race, I am sure, because Ted Strickland, the Dem, is pro-gun, and he keeps getting asked about it in urban areas and in front of progressive groups. I think it will help him in the rural areas. I think it would have been a plus for Hackett, too.(Sadly, Sherrod Brown's campaign is tepid at best. Even people I know who are dyed-in-the-wool supporters are even starting to admit he's not stirring up a lot of excitement outside the core. I predict a 15-20% margin loss here. Sigh.)

Posted by: Ansatasia P at March 18, 2006 01:32 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

So, who is polling well with the Dems in the 13th? if you know.

Posted by: RBH at March 18, 2006 02:09 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

The poll I saw had Sawyer and (Gary) Kucinich in the mid 20s, Cafaro and Sutton both in single digits, with Sutton, if I recall correctly at 5% (I think Cafaro was at 7 or 8%). I didn't save the poll as this isn't my district. I'm in the totally uncontested 11th (ain't nobody gonna beat Stephanie Tubbs Jones and she's unopposed in the primary)

Posted by: Ansatasia P at March 19, 2006 02:40 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Good. I'll take her votes on everything else if I have to sacrifice gun votes. We're not going to get everything we want from Democratic politicans but we'll get NOTHING from Republicans.

Posted by: jkfp2004 at March 19, 2006 12:15 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Ohanon,

Guns are a big deal to many voters, especially in an exurb district like the 13th. I can not tell you the dozens of time's I heard people tell me "Kerry's already, but he wants to take my guns away." People see the Democrats as the weak, anti-gun, "I know what's better for you party" and we desperately need to shake that image.

Posted by: jkfp2004 at March 19, 2006 12:18 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment