Nevada Democrats’ desperate tactic

By Jon Ralston

Wednesday, Sept. 1, 2010 | 2 a.m.

State Democrats have long lamented their gubernatorial contender’s last name, which has wounded him (perhaps fatally) and surely will be used in GOP media starring their U.S. Senate candidate.

So now they are doing what any righteous political organization would if such shameful guilt-by-association tactics were used by the opposition: They are doing it, too.

Faced with an overwhelming deficit in the governor’s race and close contests for U.S. Senate and Congress, the Democrats are employing one of the few tools they have to try to score political points: A GOP triumvirate that has slightly less potency than Obama-Reid-Pelosi, but may have marginal utility.

Angle-Ensign-Gibbons, a three-headed albatross with a combined disapproval rating in triple digits, has become quite useful to Democrats. Or so they think.

The GOP brand here is more like a branding iron with a searing impact that, theoretically at least, could leave a mark because of the travesties of Gibbonsworld, the ongoing sordid saga of Ensign’s web of conspiracies and cover-ups and the rising negatives of Angle thanks to Reid the Elder’s campaign.

The ironies abound, which is ironic in itself because Harry Reid certainly didn’t want Rory Reid on the ballot, and the sins of the father have all but killed the son. Whether Rory should have run this year — as I have said we’d have to exhume Freud to figure out that dynamic — Harry’s “hold your nose and vote for me” campaign may have been the proverbial final nail in his son’s campaign coffin.

One Reid? Maybe. Two Reids? Anyone take the temperature in hell lately?

But if the electorate’s guilt-by-association and dynasty aversion make Reid the Younger’s candidacy stillborn, the Democrats have been actively using the technique to try to save Reid the Elder, pump up Reid the Younger and keep Rep. Dina Titus competitive in a nationally watched race.

Here’s what they are up to:

• U.S. Senate: Angle’s negatives are so high now that she is being used in other campaigns. But the Democrats also delight in linking her to Sen. John Ensign, who has obliged by calling ex-Rep. Barbara Vucanovich and urging her to endorse Angle and this week telling conservative talker Alan Stock that his potential colleague is wrong about those calls Reid made to banks to try to save CityCenter.

I’m not sure whose negatives are higher these days — Angle’s or Ensign’s. The senator is still relatively popular with the base, though, so barring any indictment or ethics panel hearing between now and Nov. 2, maybe the Democrats actually are helping Angle with the GOP faithful.

• Governor: Reid the Younger has been attaching Gov. Jim Gibbons to Sandoval from Day One, suggesting he simply dresses better but is the same empty suit. Perhaps nicer, too, but still weak, Rory might say.

But there is one slight problem with the Democrats’ guilt-by-association technique here: Sandoval left the federal bench, where Rory’s dad placed him to be out of his political way (but, apparently, not out of Rory’s), to try to knock out Gibbons.

Rory tried another Angle during Sunday’s debate, tying the Senate nominee to Sandoval in his opening statement. Sandoval has said he supports Angle, but he has never said he backs her position to abolish the federal Education Department, and he wanted no part of any Angle questions in the post-debate Q and A.

The poll numbers say none of this is having much impact, as Sandoval is crushing Reid the Younger. And during what is shaping up as a Republican year across the country, it may be Sisyphean to try this tactic against a candidate such as Sandoval.

• Congressional District 3: Titus could well be seen as a slight underdog to Joe Heck in her swing district, having been pulled across the finish line in 2008 by the Obama wave. It’s clear she and her allies think they have to tarnish him by morphing him into Angle at every opportunity, especially on the issue of Social Security.

Heck’s position on Social Security is for voluntary withdrawals. That may be unworkable — if people pull out, how does the fund stay solvent? — but it’s not what Angle has proposed, despite AFSCME ads to the contrary.

So will any of this guilt-by-association nonsense work?

Although it’s clear Rory didn’t help Harry, and Harry may kill Rory, the Democratic tactics are unlikely to yield anything of that magnitude. They do display desperation as they try to save candidates who don’t have much to run on by invoking questionable linkages.

But my guess is the Democrats don’t associate any guilt at all with what they are doing.