By Jarret Liotta
WESTPORT — Republican Board of Education candidate Robert Harrington took the gloves off against his own party Thursday night with direct claims that local GOP leaders — including Second Selectperson Jennifer Tooker — have censored his opinions.
In a virtual televised candidate forum organized by the League of Women Voters of Westport, Harrington closed out with what he called “a very strong message to my local Republican party” criticizing its response to an anonymous local website attacking the school administration, and stating that his own opinions have been censored by the GOP.
“Top of the Ticket”
“Right up to the top of the ticket,” he said, “throughout the Republican party, I’ve been told or been asked to shut up, sit down, stop campaigning and cancel your events.”
“My party’s response to the Westport CRT signs going up is not okay with me,” he said. “Their response to this anonymous website has not shown leadership throughout our party.
“This goes beyond the people, beyond the website,” he said. “They have full right to freedom of speech. There’s no issue with that. But it’s how we respond to that message.”
“Our local party sadly is acting like the national Republican party,” he said. “For the sake of our party, for the sake of our town, please Westport Republican Party, please change.”
Candidate’s Social Media Muted
Harrington said his joint social media accounts with other GOP have been frozen and his past comments deleted. He said he has also been barred from emailing voters directly.
“Without my knowledge, without my approval, the Republican party and the campaign have deleted my comments,” he said. “It is not democratic. It certainly isn’t transparent, for a party that talks about transparency.”
Though Harrington emphasized that his criticisms didn’t extend to his running mate, Dorie Hordon, Friday morning the other Republican candidate for the Board of Education contacted Westport Journal with a scathing letter criticizing Harrington for his behavior on social media, which she said included personal attacks against her.
Hordon Rescinds Comments
When asked Friday evening to elaborate on her claims and comments, which included harsh words about Harrington, Hordon asked that her letter now not be printed.
She then would not provide any details on her concerns, nor respond to questions about what transpired.
The Republican Town Committee volunteered a statement this morning still standing by Harrington, but explaining that his concerns were unfounded.
“Connecticut State law requires that campaign communications contain specific attribution language, and the WRTC has sought to assure that candidates comply with these rules,” it said.
GOP Stands by Harrington
“Understandably, Robert may not be fully familiar with these regulations,” it said. “We continue to believe that Robert’s passion, focus, and willingness to speak out will allow him to make a significant contribution to the education of Westport’s children, and to our Town, as a member of the Board of Education.”
Reached later, RTC Chair Joseph Sledge, who is also running for reelection to the Board of Assessment Appeals, said Harrington and Hordon “have had communication conflicts, or differences of opinion.”
“There has to be some agreement between the two of them to give instructions to the webmaster,” he said, regarding a shared candidate social media account, “and I think that’s where the conflict came from.”
Harrington said he posted one social media comment relating to a post by Hordon about the parent group, in which he said she failed to offer “a single word of criticism.”
“I get that it’s tough when you say anything critical about a running mate during an election,” he said. “I struggled doing this. However, I felt very strongly on this issue.”
“Who would we speak to?”
Asked why the GOP has been mum on the anonymous group, Sledge said, “We’re not speaking out about it because it’s an anonymous group. Who would we speak to?”
“And it’s their point of view,” he said, “and everyone has the right of free speech.”
Tooker, who did not provide any comment when asked about the website Friday evening, shared a conciliatory quote about Harrington.
“In political campaigns, candidates often disagree on strategy,” she said. “The important thing is that even when you don’t see eye to eye, you can come together again to work together productively.”
“We look forward to working with Robert and every member of the Board of Education to support our excellent schools and find common ground on the issues that impact our community,” she said.
Can someone please provide clarification? What does this mean: “Connecticut State law requires that campaign communications contain specific attribution language”
Can you provide specific examples of attribution language?
Can you explain how this is pertinent to the current conversation?
Thanks
I too would like to know the answer the Jill Greenberg’s question.
Many residents called on Jen Tooker to make a statement about the distortions fabricated by this group. She was silent for a month. Jen Tooker didn’t even address the fact that these reactionaries used Town Hall as their address. Regardless of her position on the topic, Jen Tooker demonstrated an alarming lack of leadership by not addressing the rupture in our community. Instead of standing up, Jen Tooker and Andrea Moore sat down and hoped this issue would go away. Their (in)actions have revealed what type of selectmen they would be. I don’t know how any moderate or anyone who wants a united Westport could vote for them now.
For me, Robert’s most important action was to be critical of the Trump Republican Party to the behavior of the Trump Republican Party as to items such as “stop the steal” and the events on January 6th. All local Republican should join with Robert in that criticism. It would not cause our local elections to the turn on national issues but, to the contrary, would clear the air and cause voters to focus only on local Town issues.
Robert Harrington has created a false narrative about being muzzled regarding his political opinions.
I posted a statement on social media Friday because I felt I needed to call out the distortions Robert told during the debate. I sent those comments to Westport Journal as a Letter to the Editor. As the article notes, I did not feel the need to push it further by the time Westport Journal got back to me, since the comments were already widely shared. I do not “rescind” them. I completely stand by them.
The reason Robert’s campaign has been muzzled has nothing to do with his views on any topic. It is because Robert does not have his own campaign as a Republican candidate. He is running a JOINT campaign, with me. The decision to end certain campaign activities, such as social media communications, was mine and entirely mine. I felt his behavior towards me was unacceptable, as he was using his voice to undermine me and attack me personally. The RTC was well aware of this problem and supported my decision to cease campaign activities. Robert has always been free to comment on whatever he wants through his personal social media accounts and other venues. He can, and clearly does, say whatever he wants.
No campaign activity can occur without the approval of both of us. I made the personal decision to end our joint campaign activity based on my objections to his conduct towards me. It was my right as a candidate to make that call. This had nothing to do with national politics.
It is my hope to leave these matters in the past after the election and move forward constructively towards a focus on our schools.
“The reason Robert’s campaign was muzzled” is not a statement we should hear or read about in any democratic election at any level local, state or federal. This is what the national Republican Party acts like at times.
If I had acted improperly as a candidate (which I have not) then the Republican Party in Westport should have removed me from the ticket and retracted their nomination of me. If I have acted improperly the Head of the Republican Party should come forward and say so.
I said nothing negative about my running mate in Thursday’s debate, and plenty that was constructive.
There was nothing false whatsoever about my narrative:
The decision was not my running mates’ alone – it was done in conjunction with the local Republican Party.
I was told there was no interest in doing a joint statement about the WP06880 website as I had made it clear that I wanted it to be critical of their message and tactics of the website and their signs (not their right to free speech, which of course they are fully entitled to). I submitted my own statement to the campaign and was told by the party and my campaign that it would need to be posted elsewhere – such as “Backporch, Savin website (that was the term used) or your own Facebook page”.
I was also told by my campaign before I posted my personal statement about WP06880.com that there was concern that it, “Could impact Jen and Andrea, and put pressure on them”.
After this WP06880.com / anti CRT discussion no other policy content was posted on the BoE campaign Facebook page. I was allowed to send out a campaign email highlighting a bi-partisan event on School Facilities. That was the last email and post that was allowed. The top of the ticket pulled out of an event with 50 residents shortly after I publicly disagreed with my running mate over her response to the WP website.
Over a week after I had published my personal statement about the WP webiste I was offered a chance to sign a joint BoE campaign statement. I politely declined as it contained zero criticism whatsoever of the website. I did however make it clear that the statement could be posted on our campaign Facebook page etc. The statement was never published.
This was all related to the WP website / Anti-CRT issue – to suggest otherwise is a smokescreen.
I was also not made explicitly aware by the local Republican Party that they and Dorie were in agreement about “ceasing campaign activities”. I was continuing to submit requests on a topic by topic case for social media and email on a range of emails such school buses, CRT & equity study, facilities.
I have not been able to put out a personal candidate statement on our campaign email or facebook page like my running was permitted to do. I was told my personal statement was unacceptable and the top of the ticket didn’t want it going it out. It contained a section on addressing the “elephant in the room – being a republican”. In the draft I outlined my stance on the future of Trump, my response to Jan 6th on Jan 6th and my thoughts on the “Big Lie”. This was really important to me. I was never allowed to publish or email that personal statement.
Why is there no content whatsoever on Hordonharrington4BOE Facebook page? Isn’t that odd?
Also remember the situation did change when a 5th candidate entered the race as a write in candidate. It is a contested race, our competition is clearly currently campaigning but I was not allowed to use any of the traditional campaign tools like campaign email, social media etc.
Moving forward – it’s ok to disagree when you are in a political party. I’m running to be on a board to focus on kids’ education and that ALWAYS comes first. In reality you have to run as part of a major political party to get elected – so you should be free to say where you agree and disagree.
In conclusion I have made it clear elsewhere that despite my disagreement with my running mate on this issue – and despite the personal attacks on my character contained here, I think she’ll be a real asset on the board.
She is an independent thinker, is passionate about the schools and has years of dedicated service. I am confident I can work well with her. We can disagree on somethings along the way, but I will still be voting for my running mate,.
This situation makes clear it’s time to get rid of the limitation on board membership by party.
Robert with all due respect isn’t it time to stop with the “I said, she said” back and forth. You have made your points. You have been praised by so many, Amy Kaplan, ( who has shared you comments of FB I think 7 to 10 times) Michael Kaplan, Wendy Batteau, the list of DTC and Progressive Democrats loving your statements is unprecedented for a former Trump supporter by a group that loves you only if you agree with their left agenda. These same people are bashing Andrea Moore and Jen Tooker because they didn’t LIKE their response to this website.
Let’s go back to where it all started and how this website came to fruition. Remember back in the day when our “Rio Bravo” group a mix of Democrats and Republicans all were so critical of Candi Savin and left side of the BOE for their lack of transparency and proper vetting of doing such and equity study? Remember no one was against the study, put process and NYU Metro a radical questionable vendor of doing such a study?
Guess what residents of this community where not happy, and were NEVER properly heard. You got your 3 minutes a thank you and good bye at podium at BOE meetings remember that?
These residents decided they wanted to be heard. The BOE didn’t want to hear them remember? The love fest at the meeting “This is wonderful Dr. Bruno” or have you forgotten how this slid by 27,000 residents with the vote of 4 or 5?
So this group took their First Amendment rights and created a website. My only issue is the absence of ownership and names. Their goal is to have a voice at the table. Is that so wrong? Right away the far left brings in the “race card” the “bad people card” because they don’t want a town meeting because you actually have to HEAR BOTH SIDES.
Guess what Jen Tooker and Andrea Moore are about the discussion why is everyone afraid of it? I backed you and Dorie because I believed in what you stood for, transparency and open dialogue with BOE, Town, and citizens of our community. Shouldn’t every parent have a voice in our children’s education ?
You had said in your interviews with RTC that your goal was to help “Jen and Andrea” get elected right? Your race was “uncontested” until about a week and a half ago correct?
The good things in our community that Jen and Andrea have done to make Westport the thriving community it is seems have been forgotten, as has the incredible irresponsible votes on Jonathan Steinberg in Hartford that has undermined the safety of our children and residents on the legalization of Marijuana, Police Accountability bill and 8-30g.
I applaud you for supporting Dorie but are you going to support Jen and Andrea who have STOOD UP for Westport for 20 plus years?