October 12-14, 2010
Oct 14 14:41 Oberstar Scrambles after losing MCCL endorsement Oct 13 21:11 That's Forsakng Ideology? Oct 12 18:34 Dayton's Biggest Debate Blunder Oct 12 20:32 DFL, AFL-CIO: Tax Cuts Trigger Tax Hikes Oct 13 00:17 Oberstar Upset When MCCL Endorses Chip Cravaack Oct 13 14:24 Why I'm Voting for King Banaian Oct 13 16:15 Dayton: Laws Apply to Thee, Not to Me Oct 13 18:15 Flailing Tarryl's Publicity Stunt Oct 14 21:14 Chip Cravaack: Is victory within his reach?
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009
Oberstar Scrambles after losing MCCL endorsement
When the MCCL endorsed GOP challenger Chip Cravaack over Rep. Oberstar, his team whined that MCCL had gone political:
Oberstar campaign officials say the incumbent is one of several Democrats targeted by anti-abortion groups because of his support for health-care legislation, because the groups opposed any health-care reform. According to Oberstar's office, the new law does not provide federal funding for abortion except in cases of rape or incest or to save the life of the mother.Oberstar was stung by not getting that endorsement. MCCL is the pro-life gold standard in Minnesota. After losing their endorsement, Oberstar called in a favor, getting a Democrat pro-life group to endorse him . See if their endorsement doesn't sound like sour grapes:
"While Republicans are ramping up their misinformation about Jim's record, he continues to lead and stay consistent to his pro-life principles," said Kristen Day, executive director of Washington-based Democrats for Life of America.First, MCCL is nonpartisan. That's why it's wrong to say "Republicans are ramping up their misinformation" against Rep. Oberstar.
Second, Republicans, including myself, have criticized Rep. Oberstar for voting for Obamacare because it allows federal funding of abortions. The DFL's whining notwithstanding, President Obama wouldn't need to sign an executive order banning the federal funding of abortion if Obamacare included language that banned federal funding of abortions.
What the DFL and Rep. Oberstar want people to believe is that everything is fine because President Obama signed the executive order. Any lawyer will tell you that an EO can be rescinded a minute after it's signed. It doesn't have the force of law. Had they codified the Hyde Amendment into the bill, there wouldn't be a discussion on this.
Here's what Sen. Ben Nelson, (D-NE), said about the Senate language :
Today, Nebraska's Senator Ben Nelson praised provisions in an abortion compromise adding new teen pregnancy initiatives and tax credits for adoption, while saying that the language working to ban public funding of abortion is not sufficient at this point.As one of the only Democrats that read the bill, Sen. Nelson knows what he's talking about. That he caved later is only proof that the White House is an intimidating place when they need the votes.
Senator Nelson said today a proposed compromise he's studied does not yet ensure that a longstanding federal standard barring public funding of abortion would be maintained in the Senate health care bill the Senate has been debating this month.
Nelson said without further improvements the compromise is not sufficient.
"The compromise adds important new initiatives addressing teen pregnancy and tax credits to help with adoptions," Senator Nelson said. "These are valuable improvements that will make a positive difference and promote life. But as it is, without modifications, the language concerning abortion is not sufficient."
Neither the Hyde Amendment nor the Stupak language was included in the Senate bill. Let's remember that the House approved the Senate bill without amending it because amending the bill would've sent it to a conference committee. Had that happened, Scott Brown promised to cast the 41st vote to continue the filibuster, thus killing the bill.
Rep. Oberstar's objections and protestations are understandable. His statements, though, aren't based in reality. They're said in the hopes that people will believe that he hasn't let Washington corrupt his principles.
Oberstar always has been considered an anti-abortion Democrat but lost the endorsement of Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life because he voted for health-care reform legislation this year. MCCL said the legislation could allow public funding of abortions. Nonpartisan groups say the law allows for abortion funding only in the case of rape or incest or to save the life of the mother.Democrats are right that MCCL has endorsed more Republicans recently. That doesn't mean they're predisposed to supporting Republicans, though.
Some Democrats say MCCL has become a Republican-leaning group in recent years.
It's just that the DFL has become more stridently pro-choice over the past decade. There's another reality worth noting: that Democrats set the bar lower than Republicans do in who is or isn't pro-life. For instance, supposedly pro-life DFL legislators have, until recently, gotten a pass when voting for a pro-choice Speaker Kelliher.
In DC, Bart Stupak is still considered pro-life even though he switched his vote after abandoning his pro-life principles because passing historic health care legislation meant more to him than fighting for the sanctity of human life.
The choice that MCCL faced was rather simple. They could endorse a man who gives every indication that he'll ALWAYS vote for life issue or they could've voted for a politician who votes life when it's easy and votes the party line when push comes to shove.
Jim Oberstar will have live with the consequences of casting his vote for Obamacare instead of for life.
Posted Thursday, October 14, 2010 2:41 PM
Comment 1 by Taz Vike at 14-Oct-10 07:55 PM
I applaud the MCCL in their decision! It's too bad that the Washington based group is not in your voting district Jim! MCCL has the voice of your constituents, not the other clowns. Take all your special interest group funding and retire.
Comment 2 by The Lady Logician at 15-Oct-10 12:28 PM
Gary - I hate to do this but I simply must correct you.
"It's just that the DFL has become more stridently pro-choice over the past decade. "
That is not correct. The Democrats are more stridently pro-abortion! If it were about choice, they would respect those who CHOOSE not to abort. It is more correct to say that the Democrats are more stridently pro-choice...AS LONG AS YOUR CHOICE AGREES WITH THEIRS!
LL
Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 15-Oct-10 01:31 PM
I hate to recorrect you but doing things their way is the DFL's version of choice.
That's Forsakng Ideology?
The DFL posted this tweet regarding Tim Walz's supposed independence:
Rep. Walz: "I've approached this from the perspective of trying to solve problems, never letting ideology trump facts."
The DFL will say anything or repeat anything to cast their candidates in a positive light. Unfortunately for the DFL, this Washington Post article utterly demolishes Rep. Walz's quote:
Rep. Timothy Walz (D-MN)
Representing:Minnesota, District 1
Voted with Democratic Party: 97.2 percent of 1543 votes.
I'm betting that Minnesotans wouldn't agree with Rep. Walz. Voting 97.2 percent of the time with the most radical Speaker in U.S. history isn't proof that Rep. Walz didn't let ideology trump facts. In fact, I'm betting that voters in MN-01 would say that that's proof that Rep. Walz is Speaker Pelosi's tamed lap-puppy.
It wouldn't be difficult to make the argument that Rep. Walz will ignore the wishes of his constituents without hesitation if Queen Nancy gives the orders. In fact, it appears as though she's got him so House-trained that she doesn't have to bark out commands anymore.
Stunningly, Walz's 97.2 percent mark puts him in a tie for 146th most liberal House member, along with such lefties as Barnie Frank, Carolyn Kilpatrick and Edolphus Towns. I'm sure most people reading this blog don't know much about Rep. Towns or Rep. Kilpatrick. Suffice it to say their percent would be much higher if they didn't vote against Obamacare amendments that weren't sufficiently liberal enough.
Another bit of proof that Rep. Walz votes ideology over his constituents' interests is his voting for Cap and Trade, Obamacare and the stimulus. It's impossible to cast more ideological votes than that.
When he was paired with King Banaian on the Final Word, Michael Brodkorb loved saying that "The only thing conservative about Walz is his haircut." This Washington Post article verifies that.
Posted Wednesday, October 13, 2010 9:11 PM
No comments.
Dayton's Biggest Debate Blunder
I was following the MPR gubernatorial debate on Twitter when I read this tweet from the Strib's Rachel Stassen-Berger about Sen. Dayton:
RachelSB Miller goes after Dayton: Do you think your lack of private experience is a problem. Dayton: I'm the only one with gov't experience & skills.First off, Rep. Emmer has some government experience, too. Secondly, this isn't an election where having government experience is rated as a high priority with voters.
Actually, voters are looking for people who don't have tons of government experience because, in their minds, government is the problem. In fact, Dayton's experience with government is either ancient or embarassing .
On his own website, Dayton tells us that his jobs plan consists mostly of things from the 1970s and 80s:
As Minnesota's Commissioner of Economic Development in 1978, I implemented the state's new tourism initiatives. As Commissioner of the expanded Department of Energy and Economic Development from 1983 through 1986, I led the new jobs programs that encouraged businesses to locate or expand here and to create thousands of new jobs for Minnesotans.I'm confident that Minnesotans are looking for someone who isn't wedded to ancient government initiatives from a bygone era. They'd prefer someone forward-looking, someone who's got fresh ideas for today's problems. I'm pretty confident that they'd prefer someone who's signed the front of a paycheck AND who won't raise taxes, too.
That statement is proof that Dayton isn't in touch with Minnesota's priorities. In a year when voters are on the verge of booting incumbents out of office by the dozens, Sen. Dayton is touting the fact that he's the proponent of antiquated government.
It's time to choose a leader who has set the right priorities for government, who's run a business and who won't think of voters as an ATM.
Posted Tuesday, October 12, 2010 6:34 PM
No comments.
DFL, AFL-CIO: Tax Cuts Trigger Tax Hikes
In the latest outrageous statement, the DFL and the AFL-CIO are arguing that cutting taxes results in tax increases :
Proposals by gubernatorial candidates Tom Emmer and Tom Horner to balance the state budget would result in massive tax increases for the middle class, a tax expert asserted Monday.First, in the interest of full disclosure, Jeff van Wychen works at MN2020. That doesn't disqualify his opinions as invalid. It just means that his opinions come with a progressive slant.
At a news conference organized by the Minnesota AFL-CIO, analyst Jeff Van Wychen said both Republican Emmer and Independence Party candidate Horner would raise taxes for average Minnesotans.
Van Wychen's research shows that Emmer's $1.15 billion in cuts to property tax aids and credits would result in at least a $700 million property tax increase. Horner's plan calls for an estimated $2.75 billion expansion of the sales tax base to clothing and other services like haircuts, oil changes, and funerals.
Wychen's opinions don't take into consideration the fact that county commissioners, mayors and city council members have the ability to say no to spending initiatives. Here in St. Cloud, Mayor Dave Kleis and the city council have dealt with LGA cuts without raising property taxes.
In short, van Wychen's opinions aren't based on facts on the ground. They're based on the theory that there's no wasted spending at the city or county level and that there's no way to say no to lower priority budget items.
Askelin said cuts to local government aid have already meant $100 million in property tax increases in Rochester. "Statewide, that's over $3 billion that's been shouldered by the middle class...," she said.Wrong. Again, most of the property tax increases have happened because city councils, mayors and county commissioners didn't set the right priorities and because they didn't find new ways to spend the taxpayers' money smarter.
Too much of Wychen's predictions are based on status quo thinking than anything else. It's time for Minnesotans to demand that their city councils and their county commissioners (a) identify items in their budgets as either needs or luxuries, (b) set priorities based on community input, not special interests' recommendations and (c) see what needs can be done differently in an effort to cut costs while maintaining services.
It's intellectual laziness to hear that cutting spending will lead to tax increases. It's also an indicator that people like Wychen think of funding government first. It's an indicator that the people's budgets come in a distant second.
The people are smarter than the DFL, the AFL-CIO and Mr. Wychen give them credit for.
Posted Tuesday, October 12, 2010 8:32 PM
Comment 1 by Rex Newman at 12-Oct-10 11:17 PM
It's too easy to simply say that property taxes are a local matter. The situation varies greatly city by city. My city wouldn't have to raise taxes as much if we were to get more LGA, but given the economy and other factors, we will be raising them again slightly next year.
Minneapolis however tells a great fib when claiming they must lay off police etc unless they lay off police. They haven't begun to do the kind of cost cutting most of the surrounding suburbs have done the past several years.
Oberstar Upset When MCCL Endorses Chip Cravaack
Today, the MCCL announced that it was endorsing Chip Cravaack rather than Eighth District Congressman Jim Oberstar:
Because Oberstar voted in favor of the health-care reform act this year, the group Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life has backed Oberstar's opponent, Republican Chip Cravaack. The endorsement was announced today in Duluth.Chip is staunchly pro-life, which is why MCCL endorsed him. This year, we learned that there's a difference between the Democrats' definition of pro-life and a real pro-life person when Bart Stupak flipped his support for Obamacare because President Obama promised to sign an executive order stating that he wouldn't permit federal funding of abortions:
"Chip Cravaack exemplifies everything the people of Minnesota's 8th District look for in a candidate for Congress," said Scott Fischbach, MCCL executive director, in a news release. "Cravaack has a passionate dedication to uphold the constitutional right to life and to protect our country's most vulnerable citizens, the unborn.
On Wednesday afternoon President Barack Obama signed the promised executive order that had secured the health care votes of Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) and a half-dozen pro-life Democrats. Unlike the signing of the health care reform bill itself, the executive order signing took place in a private ceremony in the Oval Office without reporters or television cameras.Any constitutional scholar, and probably many other people, could tell you that an executive order doesn't have any weight in court. Any honest observer could tell you that President Obama's promises come with a deadline. It's just a matter of time before he backtracks on this promise, too.
Rep. Oberstar's campaign wasn't filled with happy campers after the announcement:
Oberstar campaign officials say the incumbent is one of several Democrats targeted by anti-abortion groups because of his support for health-care legislation, because the groups opposed any health-care reform. According to Oberstar's office, the new law does not provide federal funding for abortion except in cases of rape or incest or to save the life of the mother.If Obamacare doesn't allow federal funding of abortion, why did President Obama sign an executive order? Legally speaking, the Constitution trumps legislation and legislation trumps executive orders.
Those are the same rules that have applied to Medicaid coverage for years. The new law states specifically that federal funds are not to be used for coverage of any other kinds of abortions, and that only premium dollars paid by individuals out of their own pockets may be used to pay for coverage of other kinds of abortions.
The reality is that Rep. Oberstar understands that not being considered pro-life on the Range is potentially troublesome politically. I know a little about that region. There's a significant devout Catholic population on the Range.
Posted Wednesday, October 13, 2010 12:17 AM
Comment 1 by Bruce at 13-Oct-10 12:56 PM
I agree Gary.
I would also add that the majority of Lutherans, Methodists and other denominations, are also pro-life.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 13-Oct-10 01:53 PM
Bruce, It wasn't my intent to suggest that Catholics & evangelical Christians were the only denominations that are staunchly pro-life. It's just that I knew more about evangelical & Catholic churches on the Range.
Comment 2 by eric z at 13-Oct-10 04:26 PM
Anti-choice is a less biased term.
Oberstar holds his belief set, with which I disagree, despite who does or does not endorse him.
I see no irony, nor cause to celebrate - two anti-choice opponents, one being endorsed by an anti-choice group that has every right to endorse anyone or no one, in each and every race.
To me such endorsements help flag somebody who might be publicly waffling, but who I'd be tipped off on considering an "against" vote if on other dimensions I rated two choices largely equal.
From my small segment of the Sixth District I see Clark having strength in off-highway lawn signs. People not getting the candidate a lot of drive-by name exposure, but showing a commitment to neighbors who can respect of disagree with the homeowner's opinion.
I know you've published being confident about a Bachmann victory.
It might be. It might not.
When you get to local - municipal, county, other seats besides federal or in the legeslature, I will not know the names or anything, but do take the time to look down ballot.
Every candidate puts energy, cash, and effort into running. Think about endorsements and coverage fully down-ballot.
It does not have to be now, or get top billing. Just think it over.
Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 13-Oct-10 05:23 PM
I've been focused on all levels of races. It costs money to cover these things, whether it's a campaign event or a candidate forum. Help me provide a more informative alternative to the crap we're subjected to in the Strib or other papers by dropping a tip in my donate jar at the bottom of the page.
Why I'm Voting for King Banaian
Tuesday afternoon, I wrote an LTE to the St. Cloud Times explaining why I'll be casting my vote for King Banaian the first Tuesday this November. Without repeating the content of my LTE, here's why I'll enthusiastically cast my vote for King:
1. King understands what makes an economy tick. At a time when Minnesota's economy is struggling, there's no better time to put an economist of King's talents to use in St. Paul.
Simply put, it's been painful listening to the DFL in past legislative sessions because their understanding of basic economic principles is all but non-existent.
King understands that capitalism is nothing more than relying on time-tested principles like rewarding a specific, whether good or bad, behavior produces more of that behavior. Another time-tested principle that capitalism employs is that punishing certain actions will produce less of those actions.
2. Through hours of conversations with King over the past 5 years, I know that King will set sensible priorities that limit the reach of government while still funding the things that government is responsible for doing.
After years of watching the DFL adopt budgets filled with items from their special interest allies, it's time to actually start saying no. I know that King is capable of dealing with budget details while maintaining a clear understanding of the big picture.
3. King's devotion to limited government will send a signal to businesses that spending will finally be put under control. That means they'll know that spending will stabilize, which will undermine the DFL's cries for raising taxes.
SIDENOTE: That doesn't mean the DFL will stop proposing tax increases. It just means that, when they do, King will set them straight.
4. King is committed to implementing zero based budgeting, which says that government agencies will have to justify the spending of every dollar they ask to spend.
This is how businesses budget. Government, both state and federal, start with last year's budget plus inflation, then start tacking on goodies. As King likes to put it, bureaucrats will have to justify every penny of spending rather than haggling over the size of the increase they're requesting.
5. King knows that there are tons of regulations that don't serve a useful purpose. That's why he's proposing a sunset commission to examine regulations that have been on the books for a decade or more. If the commission determines that a regulation isn't useful anymore, they'd get put on a list, much like the base closing list, which then would be voted on as it's prepared by the commission on the House floor.
Simply put, I'm not voting for King just because he's my friend. I'm voting for him because his policies (a) will get Minnesota's economy back on the right track and (b) will eliminate the overregulation that's strangling Minnesota's businesses.
The fact that he's my friend is just a great bonus.
Posted Wednesday, October 13, 2010 2:24 PM
Comment 1 by eric z at 13-Oct-10 04:14 PM
I am happy to see you doing this now.
Anyone not already decided in every race on his/her ballot, already, with the full range of opportunity to become informed, is too indecisive to take seriously.
I understand that such "undecided" voters can swing an election. But why in the world have they no opinion this far along? What's wrong with them?
And - you can vote absentee and be done with it already, so why not? What will happen to alter any cogent person's mind? Zippo.
And - however, whenever you vote, the Secretary of State site has a fully nonpartisan feature -- you can put in residency info in subsequent online pages to pin down voting place and obtain a downloadable sample ballot. Not doing that before voting is irresponsible. Everyone should.
On my ballot, judicial elections side, there was one District 10 seat in Washington County with 24 candidates, each per law a lawyer licensed and in good standing.
I tracked down online info on candidates with websites, and on those without sites I found Strib had a page for each.
I studied. I thought. Then I went with the one of about five or so very sound candidates, in my view, that I ultimately thought best.
No ballot spot need be an enigma.
Thank you Gary, for taking the step of starting your posts now.
One thing you might do, as I did, and will do again closer to election day. I posted my sample ballot and showed all my decisions.
People can disagree, but it's either a secret ballot, or one you can publish.
That's the good thing about freedom. Freedom to maintain something private - same freedom - to make it public.
Gary. Good job. In that district, were I residing there, I might vote differently than you. But, good job.
Dayton: Laws Apply to Thee, Not to Me
According to this post at the Minnesota Lawyer blog, Mark Dayton's argument was that laws that citizens are required to obey don't apply to him:
Hanson sued under the Family and Medical Leave Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Labor Standards Act. Dayton responded with a motion to dismiss, claiming immunity under the Speech and Debate Clause of the U.S. Constitution. Dayton claimed that because Hanson's duties were directly related to Dayton's legislative functions, the decision to fire him could not be challenged.
How dare Mr. Dayton say that he'll stand up for the middle class after arguing that Mr. Hanson wasn't protected by the same laws that we're protected by.
The Speech and Debate Clause wasn't meant to exempt politicians from the laws they write:
The clause states that members of both Houses of Congress
" ...shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony, and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their attendance at the Session of their Respective Houses, and in going to and from the same, and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place. "
In other words, the Speech and Debate Clause wasn't codified into the Constitution to protect politicians from prosecution when they broke the law.
After reading this Strib article , I'm questioning Mr. Dayton's voracity:
In the 2003 suit, Brad Hanson alleged that Dayton wrongly dismissed him from his job as the Minnesota office manager for Dayton after Hanson asked for time off to deal with a medical condition. Dayton had said Hanson was fired because of poor job performance.
In his appeal, Dayton and U.S. Senate lawyers asserted that congressional members are protected from legal actions arising from official duties. A federal appeals court rejected that argument and said the case could proceed. It was later settled in February 2009, a month after Dayton filed to run for Minnesota governor.
What's bothering me is that Dayton first claimed that Mr. Hanson was fired on performance issues. If Mr. Hanson wasn't doing his job, terminating him should be easy enough.
Start with documenting Mr. Hanson's performance failures. Once they reach critical mass, terminate him. It's relatively straightforward if you've documented an employee's failures.
That's why I'm curious why Sen. Dayton justified his terminating Mr. Hanson by saying that employment laws don't apply to congressmen and senators.
It shouldn't be difficult to uncover the truth on this dispute. if Mr. Hanson filled out the application asking for leave under the FMLA and if there's proof that Mr. Hanson was treated for heart problems shortly thereafter, then Mr. Hanson's credibility is intact.
Likewise, Mr. Dayton's reputation of playing by one set of rules while demanding that others play by different rule would be enhanced. Let's remember that Dayton has pushed his tax-the-rich scheme on the basis of "the rich" not "paying their fair share" while hiding the Dayton fortune in tax shelters :
UPDATE: Sen. Dayton claims the trusts are now in Minnesota. As recently as January, 2007, they weren't:
2007 Senate Financial Disclosure Report: Dayton Has Business Interests In Cayman Islands. According to Mark Dayton's most recent Senate Financial Disclosure Report dated January 27, 2007, he reports as an asset China Renaissance Inc. which is described as a limited partnership based in the Cayman Islands. (Mark Dayton, United States Senate Financial Disclosure Report for Annual and Termination Reports, Page 17 , January 27, 2007)
The more Sen. Dayton says about the laws not applying to him with respect to Mr. Hanson, the more Minnesotans will understand that Mr. Dayton thinks he's entitled to ignore the laws he's imposed on others. That isn't a flattering portrait to paint of yourself.
Finally, Sen. Dayton's lawyers employing the Speech and Debate clause means that Dayton was fine with mangling the meaning of that part of the Constitution. It's shameful that a then-sitting senator would mangle the Constitution in an attempt to hide his contemptible behavior.
It speaks volumes that Sen. Dayton would terminate a staffer whose health was failing.
What we know about Sen. Dayton is that he doesn't care about his employees and he doesn't think that the laws that apply to everyone else apply to him.
That's my definition of disgusting.
Posted Wednesday, October 13, 2010 4:15 PM
No comments.
Flailing Tarryl's Publicity Stunt
I'll give Tarryl credit for not giving up even though this race is lost. Because she's trailing badly, Tarryl is left with pulling PR stunts to becoming irrelevant to the Twin Cities media :
Sixth District Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party challenger Tarryl Clark has a few appointments she wants Republican Rep. Michele Bachmann to keep.
Upset over the limited schedule of debates Bachmann has agreed to, Clark on Tuesday announced her own series of eight town-hall meetings, calling on Bachmann to meet with her and answer voters' questions directly. She also asked Bachmann to meet her for a handful of other events organized by third parties.
A Bachmann spokesman said the incumbent, who has agreed to three debates, has no plans to engage her rival beyond what is already planned.
Bachmann previously agreed to a debate before the St. Could Area Chamber of Commerce as well as on Minnesota Public Radio and KSTP-TV.
All three debates are slated for the week before the Nov. 2 election.
Tarryl can whine all she wants but it won't change the dynamic of this race. Frankly, this is purely desperation time for Tarryl. There was a ton of hype surrounding this race from the moment that the rumors started about this possible matchup. It's a race that hasn't lived up to the hype.
There hasn't been a poll in months showing that it's competitive, though the Leftosphere made a bid deal out of the first poll showing Michele with less than 50 percent :
If the election for U.S. House of Representatives, were today, would you vote for...Republican Michele Bachmann? DFL candidate Tarryl Clark? Independence Party candidate Bob Anderson? Or Independent Aubrey Immelman?
Bachmann 48, Clark 39, Anderson 6, Undecided 5, Immelman 2
Two months later, the race hadn't changed :
Today, it's Bachman 49%, DFL State Senator Tarryl Clark 40%. Compared to an identical SurveyUSA poll released 2 months ago, little has changed: each candidate is up 1 point.
Tarryl knows that she doesn't have a chance without a gamechanging event. That's the other motivation behind these PR stunts. That won't happen.
With all of the hype and the hyperbole about Michele being a loose cannon, something's been lost. Michele has improved as a campaigner since her first congressional campaign.
When I attended the Bachmann-Palin rally , I noted that Tim Pawlenty delivered a great speech and that Sarah Palin was a great crowd-pleaser but that it was Michele that was the show-stopper.
I can't blame Tarryl for pulling this PR stunt but I can say that it's a desperate ploy by a desperate candidate.
Posted Wednesday, October 13, 2010 6:15 PM
Comment 1 by J. Ewing at 13-Oct-10 07:01 PM
Still, anything can happen in a debate, and an incumbent has more to lose giving the challenger exposure and an opportunity. Especially the week prior to the election, something serious can happen, and libs will do everything to pretend something DID happen, even if it doesn't. I think MB will do well because TC is one turkey short of a Thanksgiving dinner, but I worry.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 13-Oct-10 07:29 PM
Jerry, Michele has a great campaign team & they're giving her great advice. I can't argue that anything's possible but in this instance, it isn't likely.
Chip Cravaack: Is victory within his reach?
I've said before that the Sorosphere bloggers were missing the point on the Cravaack poll showing it to be a tight race. Other warning signs indicate that Rep. Oberstar is in trouble. This information is surely causing Rep. Oberstar alot of heartburn:
I talked with Chip shortly after this endorsing meeting. He said that the vote was 28-25 in favor of Oberstar. That's a 53-47 percent margin that gives Oberstar 80 percent without him working on it.
Steve Biondich, a 29-year-old maintenance mechanic at the ArcelorMittal Minorca Mine near Aurora, said the United Steelworkers local usually endorses Oberstar as a routine matter. It did again this year, but the August vote was closer than expected after Cravaack visited the mine.
"That was shocking in itself," Biondich said.
Local 6115 President Ray Pierce downplayed the tally, saying some of Oberstar's supporters weren't paying attention.
Mr. Pierce's statement that "some of Oberstar's supporters weren't paying attention" simply isn't credible. The meeting was called for the purpose of endorsing either Rep. Oberstar or Chip Cravaack. This wasn't a long meeting with an extensive agenda.
UPDATE: Michele Bachmann just sent out this fundraising letter:
Based on Michele's fundraising ability, I wouldn't be surprised if Chip's coffers fill up fast. If Chip can start running ads about Oberstar's voting for Cap and Trade and his indifference towards getting the PolyMet mine running, rest assured that Chip will cast Rep. Oberstar in an extremely negative light.
As you may have heard, our neighboring Congressional district has become an exciting race. A recent poll showed conservative challenger Chip Cravaack statistically tied with 35-year liberal incumbent Jim Oberstar. We have the best chance we've ever had of taking back a seat the liberals have held for 63 years and we need your help.
Last week at a press conference in Minneapolis, Newt Gingrich said the race in Minnesota's 8th District was, " going to be one of the great upset stories in the country this year."
Referencing a poll showing the race in a dead heat Gingrich said, "I was startled by the poll numbers. I suspect Oberstar is startled by the poll numbers."
Today, Chip has launched his first campaign ad.
On the other hand, Oberstar is a typical big-government entrenched liberal politician. He failed his constituents by voting for Obamacare, Cap and Trade, and a stimulus bill that will burden our children and grandchildren for generations. He claimed he was pro-life and then voted for the pro-abortion Obamacare.
Chip Cravaack needs to get his message out to defeat this entrenched liberal. Will you click here and contribute as much as you can today, whether that be $25, $50, $100, $500 or the maximum contribution of $2,400? We desperately need more constitutionally sound conservatives in Congress, and Chip Cravaack won't let us down.
Please help me get Chip the resources he needs to defeat entrenched Jim Oberstar. The wind is at his back, now let's pull together to push him over the finish line!
Michele Bachmann
In fact, I'll take a big step here. If Chip gets the money to run those ads on Oberstar's voting for Cap and Trade and his indifference toward getting PolyMet up and running, Chip will win.
That doesn't mean Chip's team can coast the rest of the way. They can't. They'd better keep knocking on doors and making the phone calls and running commercials until a minute after the polls close.
Liberal pundits like Ember Reichgott-Junge who have scoffed at the possibility haven't paid enough attention to what's happening on the ground in the Eighth District. They're ignoring the fact that a healthy portion of the district's population is the exurban territory just north of Michele Bachmann's district.
They're ignoring the fact that unions, traditionally the margin of victory for Rep. Oberstar, have turned against him over his industry-killing vote on Cap and Trade.
This is the IRON RANGE, people. There's only 2 major industries in northern Minnesota: mining and shipping. Oberstar alienated people in both industries with his Cap and Trade vote.
If you ask how I know this, it's because I've gotten emails from unionists saying that they're upset with Oberstar and that they've marched in parades for Chip.
I can't blame them. Rep. Oberstar is supposed to represent their interests and look out for their interests. Instead, he voted with Speaker Pelosi in flushing the mining industry down the toilet.
Rest assured that those miners are taking this VERY PERSONALLY. Their representative sold them down the river. People thinking that won't fire up these people is kidding themselves.
There's a huge buzz about this race and rightfully so. Oberstar and his liberal pundit friends can ignore the warning signs if he'd like but that doesn't mean they aren't there.
I won't be surprised to wake up Nov. 3 and find that Eighth District voters fired him and told him to go back home to Maryland.
Originally posted Thursday, October 14, 2010, revised 27-Oct 8:35 AM
Comment 1 by MplsSteve at 15-Oct-10 03:37 AM
I was in Duluth over the weekend. As most people do, I drove up there on Highway 35.
While realizing that lawn signs don't vote, they can sometimes be an accurate gauge of a candidate's support.
I saw a fair amount of Cravaack lawn signs along 35 and in some of the small towns I stopped at along the way. Up in Duluth, Oberstar lawn signs were in stronger evidence - although I did see a stronger than usual number of Cravaack signs in Duluth.
I didn't watch much TV up there so I couldn't say who was winning the battle of the airwaves.
I see the Iron Range/Duluth Democrats as so reflexively locked into voting Dem that unfortunately, I can't picture them voting against Oberstar.
On a side note, I am perfectly willing to be proven wrong and in fact, would like to be proven wrong.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 15-Oct-10 01:52 PM
Steve, You're right that Iron Range Democrats usually reflexively vote for Oberstar. That won't be the case this time because he voted to kill their industry when he voted for Cap & Trade. About a third of the volunteers for Chip's GOTV operation are self-described conservative Democrats. I've gotten emails from a couple of union workers who were irate that Oberstar voted, in their minds, to kill the mining industry.
Comment 2 by eric z at 15-Oct-10 05:07 PM
Gary, being a carpet bagger did not hamper Kline too much, and it may not hurt this guy.
Your theme was part of Strib coverage:
http://www.startribune.com/politics/local/105001184.html?page=1&c=y
Have a look. Both Kline and this guy are ex-military, and each did move to Minnesota as if given marching orders. But Kline's set himself up well in a conservative district, and Oberstar's district is, like Oberstar, conservative.
It will be a race. Certainly it will keep Oberstar at home, not going to do fundraising for other DFL people elsewhere in the state.
It's good you are following the contest.
Comment 3 by eric z at 15-Oct-10 05:12 PM
One other thing, Gary, Emmer at the head of this off-year GOP ticket will not energize many Iron Rangers to switch from generally DFL. The women up there do vote, and Emmer's biggest weakness is with women voters, who probably view him as someone whose son they'd not want their daughter to marry.
Comment 4 by MplsSteve at 16-Oct-10 04:38 AM
Regarding Eric Z's previous post...
Other than his money, I look at Mark Dayton and frankly can't see much there in terms of wanting my daughter to marry someone like him.
Response 4.1 by Gary Gross at 16-Oct-10 07:38 AM
I've tried being polite about this but let's be honest. Mark Dayton hasn't proven that he's mentally stable enough to handle the job. Between his recent problems with alcoholism & depression, there isn't proof that he can handle the stress of being chief executive.
Comment 5 by Paul Starkovich at 26-Oct-10 08:28 PM
When you see Oberstar up here in Ely meeting secretly with the tree huggers,not the Ely people that voted him in,year after year,id say he's worried!Him and Dayton are so pathetic,there at the junior colleges druming up votes from kids that dont even live in ourstate or district. As a vermillion junior college alumni,it is sad to see certain teachers,hauling kids to vote on our tax dollors. I will never support or volunter to help vermillion junior college again! Paul Starkovich
