Ken Ulman won (big) because:
It was a bad year to be a Republican.
The Ulman /O'Malley campaign did a fantastic job, except in the local free media.
The GOTV effort was superbly conceived and executed.
Ken was a much more substantive and sincere candidate.
Merdon's message was flawed: he had a number of pro-growth votes in his own record, while Ken lead the effort to save Meriweather and to create the Charette process.
The Growth issue didn't sway a lot of votes.
Ken had the all important Fineline endorsement!
Fox, Sigaty and Ball all were safe seats for their parties. Terrasa and Watson each ran superb campaigns!
Jim Robey rode both the blue wave and his excellent performance as County Executive and Police Chief to the Maryland Senate. Of primary importance, he had the ever-important Fineline endorsement.
1 comment:
Umm, no. Ken Ulman won because this was the worst year to be a Republican since 1974. Exit polls showed that people voted Democrat to send Bush a message. What Ehrlich and Merdon have to do with Bush is beyond me. If they had run the same race in 2004, it would be a different story.
To say that Ken Ulman is the more substantive candidate is to ignore Merdon's 2 terms in the Council, compared to a single 1 term for Ulman.
You forget to mention that Ken Ulman is connected to Lou Ulman, who pulled out all the stops to make sure his son pulled out the election. This election also proved that negative campaigning works!
Truthfully, both candidates were pretty weak. It will be a very long 4 years.
Post a Comment