Email Print

Brown v. DeWine on Meet the Press - Debate Analysis

A Narrow Win for Brown over DeWine

by Steve Mancuso and Mike Maffie
Miami University

In a "Meet The Press" debate (video) (transcript) that highlighted national issues over local economic concerns, Representative Sherrod Brown (Dem.) narrowly defeated incumbent Mike DeWine (Rep.).  Brown and DeWine are locked in a close race for DeWine's Senate seat in Ohio.

We judged that while Senator DeWine had an edge on the issues of Iraq and bipartisanship, Representative Brown pulled ahead on the issues of trade, corruption, independence, and local appeal.  We judged the issue of the "War on Terrorism" to be a tie.

Issue #1 - Trade/Jobs  

Sherrod Brown signaled his strong opposition to NAFTA and the PNTR deal with China, a position that resonates in Ohio. His signature line that "Ohio's number one export is jobs" was a direct refutation to Senator DeWine's claims that these trade agreements help Ohio's export industries such as agriculture.  Brown also scored with his specific references to Ohio cities that were hurt by the trade agreements.  Mike DeWine fought back by saying "we can't build a wall around Ohio" and identifying a few areas where he had worked with Democrats in the Senate to modify trade agreement to protect Ohio.  Overall, Brown maintained his advantage on this natural issue for Democrats in a rust belt state like Ohio. Edge Brown.

Issue #2 - Corruption  

Brown also capitalized on another issue that particularly resonates in Ohio, government corruption.  Outgoing Republican Governor Bob Taft's administration has been found guilty of numerous ethical and legal violations, causing his approval rating to drop below even Dick Cheney territory.  Combine those home-cooked scandals with the troubles that disproportionately plague the GOP nationally, such as the Abramoff trial, and this issue is quite ripe for Brown.  

DeWine, to some extent, was at a disadvantage in the way this played out on MTP by having to speak first.  DeWine said what anyone would expect him to - that he wasn't involved in any of these problems directly, and that Ohioan's knew him and would judge him on his own.   Brown countered with specific charges about DeWine, describing his connections to the national and Ohio scandals.  DeWine did not respond directly to either of these specific accusations, allowing them to linger and possibly stick.  No equivalent assertions were even alleged regarding Sherrod Brown. Edge Brown.

Issue #3 - Iraq  

This issue had several components.  In terms of the wisdom of the decision to go to war initially, Brown stressed his opposition.  Senator DeWine admitted that "if he knew then what he knows now about Iraq's WMD" he would not have supported the war.  This position makes DeWine seem reasonable and moderate in comparison to other more stubborn members of his party.

In terms of the "where do we go from here" issue - neither Brown nor DeWine offered much in terms of concrete suggestions for how to improve our current situation.  Surprisingly, Representative Brown did not make much effort attempting to tie Senator DeWine to President Bush's "stay the course" strategy.

Brown did have one strong argument in defense of future deadlines. He alleged that if the US looks like it is going to remain in Iraq for a long time the Iraqi's will have less incentive to get their act together, make compromises and take control themselves. On the other hand, Brown failed to provide any evidence or other warrants for this claim.  DeWine scored heavily by providing evidence of three Generals who have testified in front of Congress recently, each of whom was critical of the Bush policy, but who also thought it would be a mistake to set a fixed time for departure.  DeWine also stressed how the world is better off without Saddam Hussein.

Brown missed an enormous opportunity when DeWine inexplicably said that "we really aren't in the war for Iraqi's, we're in the war for us."  This opened the door for Brown to say something like "I thought we were in the war to help the Iraqi's establish a democracy."  But instead Brown missed this fat pitch. Edge DeWine.

Issue #4 - The War on Terrorism

Again, we felt that Brown missed an opportunity to offer a clear and concise statement for why he voted against the Patriot Act - something along the lines of "Well, I didn't find parts of the Act to be so patriotic.  Is it patriotic to snoop through someone's library records or email?  Is it patriotic to listen in on phone conversations of innocent people without a warrant?" etc.  He could have tied this answer into an opposition of "big government" that would appeal to Ohio's many rural voters and perhaps related it back to the corruption issue.  He did none of that.  

On the other hand, Brown did score substantially on the issue of how the war in Iraq had made us "less safe" because we "took our eye off the ball in Afghanistan" both of which are recent talking points for Democrats.  

DeWine aggressively pressed Brown on the issue of the Patriot Act.  Less persuasively, he made two conflicting statements about terrorist motivation.  He claimed that terrorists hate the United State, and that no matter what we do in Iraq, they have so many other motivations our occupation doesn't really matter.  He then said, in virtually the next breath, that if we pull out prematurely that it would increase the terrorists' motivation.  We think it's fair to point out the inconsistency of these views.  Sherrod Brown failed to do that, however. Edge - Tie

Issue #5 - Bipartisanship

Mike DeWine had a nice list of areas where he had worked across the aisle to write legislation.  He twice charged that Representative Brown was on the fringe of the Democratic Party, citing specific examples where Brown had a voting record to the left of well-established liberal icons such as Ted Kennedy and John Kerry.  Brown never successfully responded to these points. Edge - DeWine

Issue #6 - Independence

We were surprised at how little this debate focused on Senator DeWine's loyalty to President Bush - especially given the large number of paid commercials we've seen on that particular point.   President Bush in increasingly unpopular in Ohio, a state that he carried in both 2000 and 2004.

Tim Russert, the moderator, helped raise the issue by outlining statistics of how frequently DeWine had voted with Bush over the years.  Surprisingly DeWine didn't offer any examples, as he had done in previous debates, to show important areas where he had voted against the President's wishes.  He also could have pointed out how his percentages of support for the President were far lower than most GOP Senators.

Sherrod Brown has a very effective argument on this issue - namely the number of times that he "voted against the President of his party" during the Clinton years on issues such as NAFTA and the line-item veto. Edge - Brown


Issue #7 - Local Appeals and References

We were impressed by Sherrod Brown's repeated use of specific references to the State of Ohio.  He listed several Ohio cities that had been adversely affected by trade deals.  He mentioned I-70 and the I-90 corridor as possible terrorist routes.  He also talked about the ways in which government policies affect average people, like flying on airplanes.  We did not notice a single reference by Senator DeWine to Ohio. Edge - Brown


Sleeper Issue - The Foley Page Scandal

We doubt that many Ohioans care about this issue in terms of Representative Foley himself.  After all, Foley is from Florida not Ohio, and neither DeWine nor Brown had any direct connection to the situation.  On the other hand, yesterday's startling revelation that GOP House leaders may have known about Foley's behavior a year earlier and did little or nothing about it may create a potentially explosive situation for DeWine.  In this debate, Brown was willing to state unequivocally that he though any leader who knew about Foley's emails and did nothing, should step down.  DeWine waffled.   This may turn out to be a huge mistake by Senator DeWine in this debate, particularly given his reliance on support from cultural conservatives. We'll see where this goes over the next few days.
Edge - Too soon to tell

Overall we judged that the issues added up to a win for Sherrod Brown, although a narrow one.   Brown also likely benefited from simply appearing on the same platform as DeWine, since DeWine is well known across the state.  For many Ohioans it was probably their first direct exposure to Brown.  Futher, the ultimate impact of the debate will depend crucially on the relative importance that Ohio voters place on the competing issues - for example, how do the issues of trade and corruption resonate in comparison to the war in Iraq and terrorism.

< More media on Brown Dewine Debate | Theory of the GAFFE - The Nevada Governor Debate >
 Display:
On Meet the Press Sunday DeWine Said: We're not in Iraq primarily for the Iraqis. We're in Iraq for us.

How can we ever help a country, especially installing our western style democracy, if their needs are not paramount? Doesn't his talk just inflame the Iraqis against us and out our troops in further harms way?  Why would we tell any country citizens that our needs are first, and that their needs are second (or lower).

Senator DeWine, if they want us out, and they're in favor of attacking us, why are we still there?

SEN. DeWINE: Tim, I was shocked by that as well. But you know, on reflection, this is their country. There's a lot of things going wrong. You blame someone who is there. Still does not change that we're not in Iraq primarily for the Iraqis. We're in Iraq for us. We're--have to do what we have to do, and it goes back to what the three generals--three military leaders said. It would be a total disaster for us to leave. It is in our self-interest, the interest to protect American families, that we are in Iraq.  That's why we're there.

DeWine seemed to have several personalities in the debate such as: a) school yard bully, b)teacher pet/school boy with the right answer to every question (all the questions not just his questions), and c) tattle taler.

DeWines answer vs. Browns answer on "if the leadership knew about Foley should they resign (my paraphrase actual words below), couldn't have been clearer. DeWine - no, Brown - yes.

MR. RUSSERT: Senator DeWine, Congressman Chris Shays, Republican from Connecticut, says that if anyone in the House leadership knew about these e-mails they should step down from their leadership role. Do you agree?

SEN. DeWINE: Tim, I--it's a horrible situation. You know, Fran and I have eight children. I think this could've been one of my kids who was out serving as an intern or serving as, as a page. It's a horrible, horrible situation.  I think there has to be a full investigation of who knew what and when they knew it.

MR. RUSSERT: But should anyone in the House leadership step down, like Congressman Shays recommends, if they knew about this?

SEN. DeWINE: I think you have to look and see what they knew and what they did about it. I would want to know what they did about it. And, you know, this is reprehensible. I mean, these kids are entrusted to us when they come out here, they're either our pages or they're interns, sometimes they're college students. And, you know, they do magnificent work, they do wonderful jobs, it's a great program, but this is horrible, horrible.

MR. RUSSERT: Have you spoken to Congressman Boehner of Ohio about this?

SEN. DeWINE: I have not, sir.

MR. RUSSERT: Let...

REP. BROWN: Tim, I think anyone should resign, any leader that knew about this should resign, absolutely.

MR. RUSSERT: Should resign.

REP. BROWN: But, see, he's forfeited any public trust. The leader of the House of Representatives that, that knew about a situation that jeopardized the safety of 15- to 16-year-olds in the government's custody, in the, in the custody of the House of Representatives, if they did nothing to protect those children, they aren't fit to be House...

Still cannot be helpful (to our TROOPS)to rub it in the Iraqi's faces. Is he goading the Iraqi's into attacking us?

by ca democrat on 10/01/2006 08:03:12 PM EST

Is there a reason why corruption really resonates with Ohio voters? Is there a particular history of corruption (a la Jim Trafficant) that makes Ohio voters more vary of corruption than most?

Ideally we'd like all voters to be heavily critical of corruption of course........

by Paul Johnson on 10/02/2006 04:46:08 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Ohio's had some pretty salient experience with political corruption of late.

Soon-to-be-former Representative Bob Ney (Ohio 18th) has been prosecuted in the wake of the Abramoff scandal. [As an aside: Those following the Foley resignation might find it interesting that Foley was not the first of his party to go into rehab this fall on the heels of a political scandal.]

Meanwhile, Gov. Bob Taft's 2002 landslide was evidently forgotten when the Coingate scandal and his ensuing conviction on ethics charges took his approval down to an unprecedented 6.5% in a Zogby poll.

On a related note, during the debate, Senator DeWine said:

But Ohioans know me. I've served Ohioans starting as a country prosecutor in 1976 for, for 30 years. I think they know my integrity, I think they know my honesty, I think they knew who, who I am. So in the end, Ohioans are very discerning. They pick and choose among parties and they, they will make a decision on an individual basis, but I think they know me.

Is this persuasive? Did Ohioans think they "knew" Rep. Ney and Gov. Taft, who have also been in Ohio politics about 30 years?

What does it mean to "know" a politician these days?

Adrienne F. Brovero Debate Coach University of Mary Washington

by Adri on 10/02/2006 11:23:04 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Corruption has heavily figured in Ohio politics in the last few years we have the venerable Ney, Trafficant and not to mention the fact that our current govenor was heavily linked to alot of corruption and was convicted while in office of some minor offenses. I guess it would be bad if we had more of the same.

by springse on 10/02/2006 08:28:16 PM EST