Barry Rascovar is Intellectually Lazy

Longtime Red Maryland readers know our opinion of Barry Rascovar. In an August piece, our former colleague Mark Newgent had this to say about Rascovar and fellow liberal traveler Laslo Boyd:

Barry Rascovar and Laslo Boyd are pyromaniacs in a field of straw men.  As columnists and pundits they offer nothing more than recycled liberalism wrapped in morally bullying prose, in which they—our enlightened, non-ideological, pragmatic betters—scold the rest of us benighted ideologues, who dare hold differing opinions. 

Rascovar’s latest piece at Maryland Reporter shows again that he is willfully ignorant when it comes to Republican Politics in the State of Maryland. Rascovar’s piece “examines ” the state of play in the Republican field for U.S. Senate in next year’s election in the wake of Barbara Mikulski’s retirement. In determining whether or not it was possible for a Republican candidate to win next year, he first dismisses Governor Larry Hogan’s victory last fall as, basically, a fluke. Yet, when it comes to the biggest reason why a Republican can’t win, he writes:

The problem for Maryland’s GOP is that the presumptive candidates aren’t following the winning Hogan formula. They are very much right of center and outspoken in their conservatism. In liberal Maryland, that’s a distinct turn-off for general election voters.

Trending: Red Maryland Radio: The Final Episode

None of this actually makes a lick of sense because none of the candidates are even in the race, and most of the candidates who are seriously considering the race are individuals who share Governor Hogan’s fiscally conservative views.

Rascovar’s piece then examines the candidates that he believes are the only ones who are being “mentioned” as possible Senate candidates: Bob Ehrlich, Kendel Ehrlich, Andy Harris, Michael Steele, and Dan Bongino. Of those “candidates” only two have even mentioned publicly that they are considering it (Harris and Bongino) and one has said he’s not running (Bob Ehrlich). There is absolutely no buzz around any of the candidates but Harris and Bongino, as insiders don’t seriously believe the Ehrlich’s or Steele would run. So why does Rascovar include them?

Even his “analysis” is fundamentally flawed. His noted bias against Dan Bongino is on full display as he, and I quote here, “ran against U.S. Sen. Ben Cardin in 2012 and got clobbered, winning just a quarter of the votes” without noting the entrance of wildcard independent candidate Rob Sobhani who entered the race seemingly just to siphon votes away from Bongino. Nor does he mention Bongino’s national fundraising network and the experience of having run for statewide office before.

Even more damning about Rascovar’s “analysis” is the fact that there are two candidates who are publicly exploring bids that he didn’t even mention. Chrys Kefals, who has worked both for Bob Ehrlich and Eric Holder, is considering the race. And of course former Anne Arundel County Executive Laura Neuman is also actively considering the race as well. Why did Barry Rascovar leave those two potential candidates out of his “analysis?”

Rascovar would’ve been better served by reading my piece from two weeks ago or Jim Burton’s piece earlier last week before he ever sat down at the computer.

Barry Rascovar’s absolutely terrible piece is further showing what most of us already know: that after forty years of being a reporter in the state of Maryland he has become intellectually lazy and would rather fall back on his liberal biases than actually talk to a Republican who might have a clue as to what is actually going on. Rascovar’s “analysis” of the potential field of Republican candidates next year does absolutely nothing to advance the conversation and shows he’d rather regurgitate liberal talking points aimed at Republicans.  He continues to suffer from the “pretense of knowledge” that his writing has suffered from for years and his “analysis” (if you even call it that) of Republican primary politics should not be taken seriously by anybody.

Send this to a friend