A Prefatory Open Letter To Chad Campbell


Posted by Bob Lord

Chad, I don't know you as well as Tom does, but please listen anyhow.

In deciding whether or not to run, look first to the goals you are passionate about. If you can't identify those goals readily, you don't have the passion to run, so forget it. But if you can, consider above all else whether Fred shares your passion towards those goals. If he does not, then run. If he does, then, and only then, consider Tom's advice. But also consider whether, once elected, who you feel would be more likely to achieve those goals, you or Fred. If the answer is you, then run. If the answer is Fred, then don't run. If the answer is "unclear," then revert to Tom's advice. 

There's nothing wrong with Tom's analysis. It's just too clinical for my taste and, I suspect, quite a few voters.


  1. Bob – you nailed it. And those aren’t my objectives. I’m not going to run for office simply to run for office. That’s just ridiculous (see CD9 of last year for examples of well that works out for those types of candidates). If I run for Governor, it’s because I am the best candidate with the best vision for our state. I’ll stack my experience up against anyone in this state – including Mr. Duval. The last thing this state, and Democrats for that matter, needs is more of the status quo. It’s a recipe for disaster. I love how some people are trying to claim that I’m the one running simply because I have nowhere else to go and I just have to be in elected office. Ha! I would respectfully suggest people take a closer look at the two potential candidates (and their histories) and then reassess the situation… And if anyone thinks a Primary is a bad thing they also need to reassess the situation. I’m not afraid of a Primary. People who are usually have a reason to be. I’ve won 3 primaries over the last 4 election cycles. I’m the only person thinking about running for Governor who has ever won a Primary. In fact, I’m the only person thinking about running for Governor who has ever won an election. So, if I run, bring on a Primary. The Democratic voters of Arizona deserve to know who the candidates are, what we stand for, and what we’ve accomplished (or haven’t accomplished).

  2. I agree that we need to focus on the end goal. All three (or any others who have yet to be named) can win and all can lose. That being said, Greg Stanton would anger a lot of activists if he jumps in at this point. Plus, didn’t he just get elected mayor?

  3. I’m not sure that John Edwards really cared deeply about the rich versus the poor. At least, I have a hard time reconciling his rhetoric with his hedge-fund employment.

  4. I think Dems in Arizona tend to be overly conflict-averse and over-estimate how much voters are actually paying attention to political campaigns at any time other than right before an election. If Stan Barnes’ prediction on Sunday Square Off was right, Greg Stanton will jump in the race. His people insist at this time that he won’t but if he changes his mind, which is in the realm of possibility, everything changes. IMO our most pressing issue has nothing to do with inside baseball campaign stuff. It’s the fact that our voter registration numbers suck. I’m a big proponent of Occam’s Razor, otherwise known as the “simplest explanation is usually the correct one”. Democrats lose in competitive and statewide races because we don’t have enough Democrats.

  5. Brian, the trouble I have with the analysis is that it doesn’t take into account why someone would run and what they stand for. If you forget about John Edwards’ subsequent foibles, his 2008 Presidential run is a great example. A clinical analysis said he didn’t have a prayer. But he cared deeply that we had two Americas, rich and poor, and that nobody was speaking about poverty in America. So he gutted it out. We need candidates who are willing to do that.

    Having said that, if Chad is just looking to advance his career, he should heed Tom’s advice.

  6. Bob, you have been a business and tax attorney for nearly 25 years. It surprises me that you would object to Tom’s analysis as “too clinical” for your taste. Speaking as a fellow Democratic lawyer, I think a careful and reasoned (i.e., “clinical”) approach in deciding whether to run for Governor is appropriate under these circumstances.

  7. That would be a good, solid plan, provided Chad’s objectives are winning an election, securing a paycheck, and advancing his political career.