CASE STUDY: Research Contributes to Biggest Upset in 2002
“... major upset … the state’s biggest
upset in history.”
—OU Daily (Nov. 6, 2002)
“…the closest governor’s contest in
32 years…”
—AP (Nov. 6, 2002)
“We were the heavy favorite and the underdog won.”
—GOP nominee Steve Largent
Stanford Research has played a role in several successful statewide races, but few were as satisfying as the 2002 Oklahoma Governor’s race. The state party hired Stanford Research to research Republican nominee Steve Largent, once considered a lock for Governor. Democratic state Sen. Brad Henry came from more than 20 points down to win the biggest upset in the country for the Democrats.
Stanford Research is proud to have played a role in winning the Oklahoma Governor’s race. Most observers considered the former Seattle Seahawk a sure thing. Charles Cook called it the second-safest Republican Governor’s seat in the country up for election that year. Roll Call’s Stuart Rothenberg wrote, “I didn't even give half a second of thought to the possibility that Oklahoma Republican Steve Largent would lose his bid for governor.”
Our research helped write a different story. We discovered that Steve Largent had an extreme record that favored the abolition of Social Security, the federal minimum wage, and Medicare. The state party used our research in an aggressive earned-media strategy, while the Henry campaign told the story in television ads.
Brad Henry won by a few thousand votes.
CASE STUDY: Silver Bullet Beats Millionaire in Swing District Primary
“This guy can dig up more dirt with a pencil than any farmer can with a shovel.”
—Rep. Lincoln Davis
Since 1996, Stanford Research has won several top-tier congressional races, including Tennessee’s 4th District in 2002 for Lincoln Davis, who first needed to overcome a wealthy opponent in the Democratic Primary.
Our work played a vital role in Lincoln Davis’ win in the 2002
Democratic Primary for Tennessee’s 4th congressional district. The
race pitted him against a wealthy NASA subcontractor who opened her checkbook
in an effort to defeat our client, a longtime state lawmaker and small
businessman.
Fran Marcum spent twice as much in the primary as Lincoln Davis did in
the entire campaign, but Stanford Research turned her wealth against her
when we discovered that NASA had caught her company submitting $7 million
in “dummy invoices,” resulting in a large fine. It’s
as close to the mythical “silver bullet” as they come.
“The ad practically bristles with outrage. ‘It was the perfect ad at the perfect time.’”—Washington Post (Jul. 31, 2002)
“Political Play of the Week”—CNN
The campaign used the documentation we uncovered in an effective corporate-fraud attack on TV and in direct mail featured in the Washington Post and on CNN’s “Inside Politics,” which called it the “Political Play of the Week.”
Lincoln Davis won the primary with 57 percent despite his fund-raising disadvantage and went on to pick up the Republican-held open seat in the general election.
Case Study: Research Gets Sierra Club Endorsement, Primary Win
Stanford Research does more targeted state legislative campaigns than perhaps any other research company in the Democratic Party. In 2002, we helped Juan “Chuy” Hinojosa win an open-seat senate primary in South Texas.
Our client, state Rep. “Chuy” Hinojosa, had a problem heading into his bid for an open senate seat against lawyer Barbara Canales-Black. He had experience with more than a decade in the state House and respect as one of the 10 Best lawmakers, but thanks to her powerful family connections, Canales-Black had millions to spend on the race.
Breaking all previous local campaign finance records, Canales-Black spent more than $2 million. Chuy Hinojosa didn’t spend half that much, but he did hire Stanford Research.
Our research turned up a wealth of information about Canales-Black, co-owner of an oil company, including the drilling rights she won on environmentally sensitive South Padre Island, endangering a bird habitat.
The Sierra Club endorsed our candidate and campaigned artfully against
Canales-Black, parking a dump truck outside her fundraisers to demonstrate
how the drilling would disturb a fragile bird habitat.
And the campaign used the information to define Canales-Black, a political
novice, as someone who used family connections and political contributions
for personal enrichment over the public good.
Despite the 2-1 campaign spending disparity, Chuy Hinojosa defeated Canales-Black
in the runoff, 55.6%-44.4%.
CASE STUDY: Flip-flop Sinks GOP Challenger in Conservative District
In 2000 and in 2002, Stanford Research helped re-elect U.S. Ken Lucas to the most Republican seat in the country held by a Democrat.
“We’d heard a rumor that Don Bell had flip-flopped on abortion,
but you hear rumors like this all the time on campaigns, and they’re
almost never true. I was happy shocked that Jason Stanford was able
to find such a needle in the haystack, but that’s just the kind
of thing that I have come to expect from his team.”
—Bob Doyle, GC to Ken Lucas
Facing re-election for the first time to Congress in northern Kentucky, Ken Lucas had to reach out to socially conservative voters in an overwhelmingly conservative district.
Ken Lucas hired Stanford Research to look into the public-records background of the Republican nominee, a candidate in four previous elections. Though the Republican lacked adequate campaign cash, danger was that he voiced support for the socially conservative positions that linked him to an active Republican base. Simply put, any conservative Republican is dangerous in that district.
Our task was to find a wedge between a socially conservative politician and his most faithful supporters.
In 2000, the Republican said he was pro-life with an exception only for the mother’s life. We were able to find a 10-year-old quote on abortion rights he gave to a weekly newspaper in which he firmly embraced a pro-choice position that left those decisions up to “those involved, plus the religious leader and physician, not the government.”
This flip-flop contrasted sharply with the solidly pro-life record of Ken Lucas, who won the endorsement of the Kentucky Right to Life Association.
Ken Lucas won re-election with 54 percent of the vote even though George W. Bush won the district with more than 60 percent.
CASE STUDY: Research Blunts Attacks in “Bitter Matchup”
After the 2000 census, the GOP-led Pennsylvania legislature redrew the congressional districts, placing several congressmen in member-versus-member campaigns. One such race pitted our client, Rep. Jack Murtha, against Rep. Frank Mascara.
The 2002 Democratic Primary for Pennsylvania’s 12th congressional district matched Frank Mascara and Jack Murtha. Geography gave the former a slight advantage; 52 percent of the primary voters came from Mascara’s old district.
Mascara started the campaign on the offensive and became more offensive as the primary dragged on. Posing as a leader for reform, Rep. Mascara attacked Rep. Murtha as a business-as-usual politician corrupted by his 13-plus terms in Washington. Mascara’s attacks defined the campaign in its initial stages with the Murtha campaign deflecting his attacks.
Nevertheless, Mascara had made a strategic error by defining himself
exclusively as the “anti-Murtha.” This left Mascara vulnerable
to charges of hypocrisy.
The campaign hired us to research Frank Mascara’s entire public
record, not just as a congressman but also as a county commissioner for
several years before that.
We found that Frank Mascara was guilty of everything from voting for repeated pay raises to tax breaks for his cronies to one of the largest campaign finance fines in FEC history.
In a comprehensive counterattack, the campaign labeled Mascara a “typical politician,” rendering his negative campaign benign in the final weeks of the primary.
Despite the even geographical split and Mascara’s negative attacks, Jack Murtha scored a decisive win, beating his rival by 28 points.