top of page

Pennsylvania Primary Recap

Partial Transcript:

David Bozell: G-o-o-d morning, everyone. ForAmerica headquarters, David Bozell here, your conductor. It is the day after the Pennsylvania Senate Primary. Bummer about Barnette. Though, I think she did a terrific job up until about the last 24 to 48 hours or so.

We had endorsed her, but if I had a criticism... Defeat has many fathers. You can maybe point to the Trump robocalls that were pretty gnarly against her and gnarly against McCormick. So, maybe that's a wash.

You could maybe point to the attacks by Hannity. Though, I think that it galvanized some of her supporters even further. So, probably that's a wash.

And I think if I had to pick a couple of reasons that I'm sort of subscribing to... One, the mail-in system in Pennsylvania stinks. It kind of reminds me of the college football playoff, like a preseason poll. In the preseason, if your name is number one or top five in the country, it's tough to get you off that list, unless obviously you lose. But you can get back in a little easier. Whereas, the team that was picked to finish 25th or lower, it's demonstrably harder to get into the playoff system coming up the board than starting at the top. So, it favors the front-runner. I guess what I'm really trying to say - a mail-in system just favors the front-runner. So, if you mailed your vote in before Kathy Barnette caught your attention, you would be out of luck.

The other thing, I wasn't a huge fan of her closing arguments. She was tweeting and doing a lot of interviews about Oz and globalism. I think she already had that crowd. I didn't think she even needed to go there. I think her story could have been...that was the best part of her candidacy. And it would've been a kind of a... What a terrific opportunity for the Republican party in Pennsylvania to nominate a black woman with her story. And I think she could have doubled and tripled down on that a little bit more in the closing hours.

What should she do? Get that question a lot. Well, I hope she stays in politics. She should be a little transactional. She should not say that she's not endorsing who ends up winning, McCormick or Oz. But she should be a little transactional. I mean, that's what Trump would do. She had 25% of the Republican primary vote in a purple swing state. She deserves a seat at the head table. And so she should expect nothing less.

I'd also try to narrow her issue focus, if I could give her some free advice. Be a national spokeswoman for a particular set of issues. I think social issues, that lane was probably her best lane. Life issues, maybe she wants to get into educational school choice issues. I think she'd be a terrific force for that, for change for that issue. So, try to be a national spokesman, advance one or two causes before her next foray, her next election.

Raise money, she can be a terrific fundraiser for all sorts of candidates nationwide. Sign letters, do speeches, go to fundraisers, go to those dinners. People pay money to go see the up and coming talent within the party.

So, she should do all of those things and then endorse the winner whoever it may be.

I mean, this is going to be crazy. McCormick and Oz are sitting, as of now, 31.2%, almost dead even. Couple hundred votes separates the two of them. I guess what it does is if either one of them had been out, then probably Barnette would've won, but it's no sense in crying over spilled milk.

So, the two of them are probably going to have to get... I mean, it's going to be lawsuits, recounts. They're already talking about recounts, hanging chads, cats and dogs living together. It's a mess.


Related Links


Rated 0 out of 5 stars.
No ratings yet

Add a rating
bottom of page