Amy McGrath’s Blah-Boring-Beshear-Biden-ish Campaign--Round 2

From the start of her Senate campaign last July, it was clear that Amy McGrath was going to run a cautious, safe (read blah) campaign to try to defeat Mitch McConnell---constantly attacking the unpopular incumbent as a symbol of the problems of “Washington,” invoking universally-held values like bipartisanship and patriotism and taking few interesting, bold or particularly-liberal stances. Blah/cautious/safe can be boring and uninspiring. Blah/cautious/safe can also be good electoral politics--it’s basically how Andy Beshear beat Matt Bevin last November and the approach that Joe Biden has taken with success so far against President Trump. As Charles Booker surged in the polls in the Democratic primary during the spring and summer by exciting liberals and activists, McGrath stuck with her cautious approach, saying nothing particularly compelling amid the local and national protests over racial inequality. 

And now, in her general election campaign against McConnell, McGrath is sticking with this formula. She still isn’t saying anything particularly interesting or compelling on racial issues---or really any other issue. Her policy ideas are similar to those of Biden, Nancy Pelosi and others in the more center-left wing of the Democratic Party. Her general campaign message is basically, “Mitch McConnell is bad and has been in Washington for way too long--so vote for me.” Her campaigning itself is kind of dull--a combination of tv ads and small events around the state where she often meets with 15-20 voters. COVID-19 means that she shouldn’t be holding big rallies, but it’s not like McGrath is creating cool viral content or giving major speeches over Zoom either. (I should note that some of McGrath’s campaigning, while perhaps not exciting, does address important issues. For example, the candidate attended an event in Louisville yesterday in front of TARC headquarters, meeting with and then speaking to bus drivers who were protesting. The bus drivers say that Louisville’s government should be paying them more because their jobs put them at a significant health risk and that the city should adopt a rule that limits buses to at most 10 passengers at a time.) 

Probably because of her cautious approach, McGrath’s outreach to those who really liked Booker hasn’t been particularly effective. Booker himself endorsed McGrath last week in a five-paragraph statement in which he didn’t mention McGrath’s name until paragraph four and emphasized that she needed to “earn” the votes of his supporters. Ricky Jones, a Booker supporter who is the chair of the Department of Pan-African Studies at the University of Louisville, wrote a recent column saying that he would not vote for McGrath in the general election. Other more liberal voices in Louisville, such as state representative Attica Scott and city council-elect Jecorey Arthur, have also suggested that they are unsatisfied with McGrath. 

But journalists like me finding her approach dull and liberals not being enthused is perhaps a feature, not a bug, for McGrath and her team. I would be very surprised if Arthur or Jones declared that he is excited to vote for McGrath--and I would assume some kind of mishap, like one of her staffers mistakenly suggesting that she favors reparations. In terms of winning the election, I think McGrath is probably correct in not trying too hard to woo Kentucky’s most liberal people. She probably needs to appeal to a lot of independents and even some Republicans to win this race---and those voters aren’t necessarily looking for bold ideas. And I tend to doubt that people who are super-active in liberal politics would really decline to support McGrath if this were a 50-50 race and it seemed like the defeat of Mitch McConnell actually hinged on their votes. (It’s a lot easier to express more purist views when your vote ultimately doesn’t matter.) 

But there are two parts of McGrath’s campaign operation that are not as blah. First, with the more than $46 million that she has raised, McGrath appears to be trying to build a big get-out-the vote operation reminiscent of a presidential campaign. She has hired a ton of “field organizers,” including more than a half dozen who worked on Pete Buttigieg’s presidential campaign and even more who worked on the campaign of basically the political opposite of McGrath: Sen. Elizabeth Warren. (Staffers on unsuccessful presidential primary campaigns are often encouraged to work for the party’s general election candidate or in major congressional races.) 

Many of these field organizers are in their 20’s and not from Kentucky. That might seem like an unwise approach at first glance---Kentuckians can be skeptical of outsiders. But these organizers are borrowing from a strategy used by the Obama 2008 campaign and other (sometimes winning) Democratic campaigns. The organizers, who are being paid $4,000 per a month, are assigned to a region or county in the state and supposed to build up teams of essentially super-volunteers--strong supporters of McGrath. Those volunteers, who are not newcomers to their communities, are then the people making phone calls and other contacts with people in their personal networks to build support for McGrath. 

Why does this approach matter? Because it’s likely that for McGrath to win, she needs A. Some people who often don’t vote to turn out and support her (particularly liberal-leaning parts of the electorate like people of color and people under age 30) B. Support from some people who usually vote for Republicans. So having a big team of her supporters trying to connect with people in their networks is probably a smart approach. 

Secondly, McGrath and her campaign are spending a lot of money and time in the suburban/exurban areas of the state: counties like Hardin and Oldham in the Louisville area; Madison, Woodford and Scott in the Lexington area; Boone, Campbell and Kenton counties near Cincinnati. This mirrors Beshear’s approach and that of Democrats like Biden on the national stage--trying to woo voters, particularly white people with college degrees, who might like a John Kasich-style Republican but be uncomfortable with Trump and wary of politicians who have allied with the president like Bevin and McConnell. A big reason Beshear was elected governor was that he won traditionally-Republican Campbell and Kenton counties and lost by less than other Democratic candidates in Boone County. 

It’s not that McGrath is writing off Louisville or Lexington--she regularly appears in both cities. But her campaign is correctly assessing that she can’t just carry those big cities and win. 

This all seems like a fairly-sound strategy to me. Is it working? I’m not sure. A Quinnipiac University poll that was conducted July 30-August 3 showed McGrath in a tight race with McConnell, trailing 44-49. That’s pretty good in a state where Democrats often lose by double-digits. But polling by the firm Morning Consult conducted July 24 to August 2 found McConnell with a 53-36 lead. 

Whether his lead is 17 or 5, McConnell is ahead and remains a very, very heavy favorite to win. It would be one of the biggest upsets in modern political history if McGrath won. But this race is worth watching closely--since McGrath has a chance (if a very small one)  of dethroning one of the most powerful people in America. 

But it’s worth watching closely even if McGrath loses as expected. If a blah-centrist campaign really only works in Kentucky if your name is Beshear and McGrath loses by 17, the takeaway from Kentucky Democrats will be that McGrath-style moderate candidacies aren’t that useful. So the path for Booker and more liberal people might be easier in future Democratic primaries, since a more moderate candidate wouldn’t be able to argue that he or she is meaningfully more electable than a liberal. A McGrath loss by five points or less would in some ways vindicate her current approach and that of future moderate Kentucky Democrats. 

Thanks for reading. 

This is an occasional newsletter focusing on government and elections but really power in Louisville and Kentucky, helping explore who has it, who is gaining it, who is losing it and why. You can subscribe here. 

1. If you have tips or suggestions for future stories, please email me at perrylbacon@gmail.com 2. Feel free to share this with friends or post online. 3. I am doing this without an editor, so please email me if you see typos and/or errors so that I can correct them, at least for the online version of this newsletter.