Tuesday, August 10, 2010

Zach Hall’s Response To A Nameless Campaign ‘Pro’

It appears that the top two of the top three campaigns in the 5th Congressional district have recently explained/complained about their loss. It would seem only fair that a member of the winning side should have a chance to chime in as well. Now, I don’t speak as an official representative of the David Hall for Congress campaign, just as a bystander that has seen the inner workings of multiple 5th District campaigns. I guess you can call this: Zach Hall’s Response To A Nameless Campaign ‘Pro.’

The Media's Failure:

We got some play online, but in retrospect it was futile to think the news media had the slightest interest in covering the race, much less making the coverage about issues.

I respect everyone that has ever worked for the Republican Party, trying to get conservative candidates elected, but I am surprised it has taken so long for them to figure out the media’s disinterest in conservative candidates, I assumed it was a given from the get-go. However, for certain individuals it took some months to find out.

The Tennessee Republican Party's Failure:

The Tennessee GOP tried early on to recruit a wealthy candidate to run against Cooper. When that failed, the party took a hands-off stance, doing nothing to try to narrow the field from 11 down to four or five candidates who both had a realistic chance to win and fit the electorate's mood on the issues.

Once again, I’m not exactly sure what makes me disagree with the supposed political ‘elites’, but my feeling on the matter is as follows: The fact is David Hall isn’t a wealthy man but it appears he was well off enough to fund his campaign with more money than any candidate could raise, and secondly the Republican Party would be in error to scourge the list down to 4 or 5. Personally, I would prefer 113 candidates over the initial 13. Why? Simple, once the primary is complete you would have a 113, or 13 unit army of support, if only the once foes would come together to support the clear victor.

Random Comical Rebuttals:
And so the GOP nominee is a guy who can't raise money, is in trouble with the FEC, and who avoids events and forums that candidates typically do.


Hartline: Lawsuit = L, Judgment = J, FEC Trouble = F, Salary = S,

Hall: FEC Trouble = F

Heil: Yard Sign Trouble = Y

:D, Let’s do some math, shall we? Back to school we go hahaha!

Hartline = L+J+F+S

Hall = F

Heil = Y

Now, for the sake of argument let’s say Heil’s Y = Jeff’s J+S.

Here is where it gets fun!

Hartline: = L+J+F+S - F - Y = L

What do ya know, Hartline beats em’ all with room to spare.

Now, for the record I have personally talked with the Hartline campaign and I believe all of his mishaps are explainable and have been blown out of proportion, but still were talking about public perception.
...and a story about David Hall, whom they covered as a novelty act because several Hall family members were running for every elected office in town.

Surely you jest Sir…..Every office, Really? How flattering!
Hall's low-information strategy - hide from voters and hope to win based on name repetition - worked because there were no candidates in the race who had high name recognition. Hall's strategy would have failed utterly if there had been a candidate with name recognition based on actual accomplishment in the public eye rather than mere repetition of a common, memorable last name - or if media had not abdicated its duty to properly cover the race and inform the electorate.

Ok, here’s my favorite part, “worked because there were no candidates in the race who had high name recognition.” What was your job again? OH, that’s right!! Generating name recognition via news media, which we’ve already decided was a bust to begin with.

If you had any problems with my math analysis you may want to sleep for a few hours and come back to his one J.

Let’s compare two quotes stated within the same article.
Hall's low-information strategy - hide from voters and hope to win based on name repetition - worked because there were no candidates in the race who had high name recognition.

Now, on the next line.
It was a cynical, hollow strategy based on name recognition while avoiding media or voter scrutiny.


Finally, my personal favorite, totally hypocritical yet oh so funny!
....avoiding any event where voters would have a chance to compare him to the other candidates.

Most of the previous quoted lines were comical stretches filled with laughable logical fallacies but this one is an even funnier untruth.

David Hall was at a total of 12 DCRP events, granted he missed 3 of the larger speaking events due to more valuable engagements that offered larger benefits to the campaign. At least, that’s what he thought at the time, turns out he was right…..Come to think of it, I’ve never seen you at ANY of the events….An epic, pot calling the kettle black moment!

Democrats Elected David Hall?!?!:

Some have speculated that David Hall received a large portion of the ‘swing-voters’, and I would have to agree….I’ll get to that later.

A standing argument is that the Davidson County Democrats picked the easiest candidate for Jim Cooper to beat and voted for him. One doesn’t even have to come at this argument with a fully functional thought process to laugh at this one. David Hall has more cash on hand than any other candidate, and reported more money than any other candidate. If the Democrats wanted to elect someone incapable of beating Cooper they would have voted for the Strauss character that has never been heard of by anyone. Secondly, they would have chosen CeCe Heil, as a local Democrat endorsed her before the primary.

Now, I would agree that David Hall received more Democratic votes than the average candidate. Why? Because our campaign knew they were coming out. Part of the ‘mysterious’ 200k went towards voter ID. Our campaign realized early on that the Republican vote was going to be made up of approximately 18% crossovers. Going after those votes JUST MAKES SENSE!! We were the only campaign actively campaigning to ALL voters and it showed in the polls.

What boggles my mind is that a respectable Republican activist and a respected campaign manager and strategist would A: Not know and plan for this, B: Would lower himself to attacking candidates within his own party.


Personally, I am tired of the fighting between campaigns. I would like for all of us to rally behind a candidate we can believe in. If not David Hall fine, but be dignified enough to hold your tongue and not lash out against your victorious opponent, because from on onlookers perspective it just looks like a bad loser….AND WE’RE BETTER THAN THAT!

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories


  1. Zach, some of your views are valid and I totally agree with them. But until the Hall camp explains their inncorrect and inadequate FEC filings, there will be very few voters on the Republican side coming out to vote for him. It's real simple if its an easy explination, just give it to us and let us decide if it is valid or not. If not, some of conservatives will have to look elsewhere to through our support.

  2. http://politics.nashvillepost.com/2010/08/03/india-err-ee/

  3. Zach, please quit giving us the same old thing from the Post Politics blog, that you sent.

    The filings still have not been ammended. The voters who want to support Mr. Hall, need to have some confidence that they are not replacing one person who can not be honest with thier voting record with one who cant be honest on his FEC filings.

    The treasurer for the Hall Campaign should be home from her "mission trip" in India to ammend the filings.

  4. How about Mr. Hall explain, "signing" up absentee ballots at nursing homes? Volutneers from whatever the groups name was that was started by his kids, went out and distributed "absentee ballots" to older citizens, who were not able to get out and vote.
    So are we to believe that the VAST majority of absentee ballots went to Hall because he was the best candidate or because the PAC, run by his kids, distributed, collected and filed the ballots. I wonder if they were wearing their, "Hall for Congress" buttons, hats and t-shirts when they did?