Tennessee Senate race: the morning after

Democrate Harold Ford Jr. ran one of the best campaigns in the modern history of Tennessee politics to make this race so close (Corker 51% v. Ford 48%), but his Republican opponent Bob Corker's campaign was better by just enough. Few would have expected this way back in April when State Sen. Rosalind Kurita (D-Clarksville) dropped out of the Democratic primary leaving Ford unopposed.

Turnout was key for both sides -- low turnout for Democrats, and big turnout for Republicans. Republicans had an extra hurdle because many in their ranks are dissatisfied with the current crop in D.C. and either crossed over or abstained. But the well-oiled GOP machine worked, as usual. The anti-gay marriage amendment probably helped, too.

The mainstream media and the liberal blogs will likely point to the results and say that Tennessee is a backwoods racist enclave. If they were from Tennessee, though, they'd realize that for a black man, from Memphis, named Ford no less, running a statewide campaign as a Democrat with a ten year Congressional record against a well-funded opponent with no record to defend, to get nearly 875,000 votes is quite an accomplishment.

Race was only one "obstacle" to overcome, yet Ford got 150,000 more votes than Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate Bob Clement in 2002, and nearly as many votes as the now senior Tennessee U.S. Senator Lamar Alexander in that same election. Race likely played some small role, but only the bigots know for sure.

So what happened?

Some point to the "Memphis Meltdown," when Ford confronted Corker in the Memphis airport parking lot as Corker arrived for a press conference. It could have gone both ways, with the MTV crowd reacting favorably to the "in your face" attitude v. more mature and serious voters being put off by it. In that sense it should have been a wash, but unfortunately the MTV crowd doesn't vote.

The negative attack ads against Ford seemed to be a factor. The nastier they got the better Corker's numbers got in the polls, so everyone generally agrees they work. Maybe Ford should have hit back harder.

And perhaps Ford should have attacked the generic GOP record harder, especially on Iraq and foreign policy. It worked in other states, even against incumbents. He was fairly effective on this in the debates, but that was early on and two of the debates competed with UT football games, so in the end it was all about the ads. From that point on, there wasn't much talk about the issues.

The Ford campaign must also wonder if running so hard to the right cost him some votes among the Democratic Party faithful. Likely so, but it's doubtful that it cost him 50,000 votes. It may have cost the Democrats some turnout, though.

Ford's reluctance to support State Sen. Steve Cohen (D-Memphis) as the successor to Ford's seat in the U.S. House of Representatives from the 9th district likely cost him a few votes there, too. (Ford's brother Jake was running in that race as an "independent Democrat" after losing in the primary. He lost again to Cohen, who is white, single, and Jewish, 60% to 22%.)

At any rate, many Tennessee Democrats were going along with the program for the greater good of a Congressional majority. There probably won't be any true liberal Democrats elected to statewide office in Tennessee for another generation or two. And as many pundits noted, when faced with a choice between a faux-Republican and the real thing, Republican voters will go for the real thing every time, and they will get out to the polls.

So there isn't any one thing you can point to, except that Ford ran a great campaign and almost pulled it off against all odds.

Elsewhere, Democrats are looking at a majority in the House and are one ballot recount and a lawsuit away from a majority in the Senate. And who knows? Maybe some of the national attention focused on Harold Ford Jr. in Tennessee helped Democrats in other states.