I've been thinking about the DFL endorsement battles, and the battle to get elected in general. It's what I do. I think about elections, and how to win them, and how to organize to win them(among other things, I think about music, good books, and long walks on the beach). We all know that it really is a battle sometimes, elections can be rough.
We, as members of the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party have the same general outlook on the issues. We are a big tent, so there is a wide array of viewpoints, a wide array of ideas, and a wide array of how to implement those ideas that flow through the veins of the DFL. It's good to offer a strong defense of one's candidate. It's good to be excited about someone who you think can do all the things you want them to be able to do. But what else do our candidates really need from us and us from them?
I believe, as supporters, our candidates need us to ask them the hard questions, and to tell them the truth rather than painting a rosy picture if the horizon is darkening. Our candidates need us to ask them what they want from us, and we need them to ask for our help. We need to trust our candidates and their staffers' framework for the volunteer work that they ask of us. We need to know that they need us, and remember that they need us so that they can know about that particular thing (issue), or that particular person ("Tiffany, the DFLer from down the road?" "Yeah, she'd be a great volunteer! But don't call her on Tuesday until after 3pm.").
We're the candidates' local connection. Our candidates need us to be a mouthpiece (or keyboard, as it were), but our candidates need us to represent them in an honorable and non-politically damaging ways. I say this in particular to remind everyone that the internet can be unforgiving (there are snipers everywhere). Our candidates need us to listen, and our candidates need to let us in on their strategic thinking at least a little bit, (if we can be trusted (how do we measure that? I'm not sure.)) so that we can understand. We need to level with one another to understand what we want from each other. They need to set our expectations, and we need them to surpass ours. Our candidates need us to be able to think about the "big picture." Our candidates need us, uncommitted and committed alike, to tell our neighbors now why a DFLer is a better choice in a generic general election match-up in the fall.
After the endorsement/primary battle is over, our candidates need us all to work together again to make the phone calls, to walk and knock on those doors. Our candidates need us to come together and drink the wine of a united front rather than sipping on our sour grape juice alone in the corner. They need us, and the party needs us to go out and talk to our neighbors about why it is so important to vote in any election. They need us to help drop "off-year" from the presidential/occasional voter's vocabulary.
These are the things that we need from one another in order to ensure success.
Ten of our DFL candidates for Minnesota governor attended the recent December 5, 2009, DFL Latino caucus forum. While they talked, a packed room of my neighbors and fellow Minnesotans often nodded their heads in agreement and whispered to each other in both Spanish and English.
I read the forum questions and figured it would be the most informational forum of this entire political season. We were going to hear about family values, living wage jobs, worker rights, discrimination, health care, immigration, education, the housing crisis, and the American Dream.
For the audio, separated into opening statements and questions, go to http://bit.ly/6gEmx9
"Former" Governor Tim Pawlenty (who abandoned Minnesota some time ago to concentrate on his 2012 campaign for President) has recently been attacking President Obama for the current federal deficit and debt. On CNN last Sunday, Pawlenty said, "This nation has got a debt load and a deficit load that is unsustainable."
That's a valid observation, Tim, albeit in bad English. However, where have you been for the past eight years? During all that time, when a Republican President and a predominantly Republican Congress were running then-record budget deficits and adding a whopping $ 5 trillion to the national debt, Tim's grave concerns were nowhere to be heard. During all his meetings and appearances with President Bush, not once do I recall a single word of deficit criticism from the (former) Governor's mouth.
Facts, which are considered irrelevant by Republican politicians of the Karl Rove era, are still, in the words of President John Adams, "Stubborn things." The fiscal facts are that President Bill Clinton left office in January 2001 with the federal budget running a surplus and projected to continue annual surpluses for the following decade. When I arrived in the Senate that month, we discussed how completely the national debt should be paid down with those surpluses. (Then-Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan counseled to leave $ 1 Trillion remaining, so as not to disrupt the bond markets.)
In his first months in office, President Bush proposed to demolish those future surpluses with the largest upper-income tax cut in history, and the Republican-led House and Senate happily complied. Even after the disaster of 9/11, the commencement of wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the return of federal deficit spending, President Bush and the Republican Congress proceeded in 2003 with another enormous tax cut, which also heavily favored the rich. They enacted what the non-partisan organization, The Concord Coalition, headed by former Republican Commerce Secretary Pete Peterson, called "the most reckless fiscal policy" in our nation's history.
That recklessness, however, did not provoke a murmur of protest from Tim Pawlenty.
The current federal fiscal year began on October 1, 2008. At that time and for the next four months, George Bush was still President. Congress had already passed, at his urgent insistence, an emergency financial rescue package, totaling $700 billion. In October, the non-partisan Office of Management and Budget projected that the federal deficit for this fiscal year would be $482 billion. And on January 20, 2009, the day President Barack Obama took office, the national debt stood at $ 10.6 trillion, $4.9 trillion higher than it was eight years ago.
The former Governor is correct that continuing federal deficits at the level President Obama inherited and their cumulative additions to the national debt would be unsustainable. However, the blame for this serious predicament belongs to his Republican friends in Washington. They shared Tim's penchant for favoring the rich with unfair and unsustainable tax cuts, which he has protected, to the detriment of Minnesota, as foolishly as they have, to the detriment of the country. What a disaster it would be, if they ever got together in Washington.
One of my standards for a politician is: "Who campaigns the best?" Part of that is: "Who works the Gay Pride event the best?"
The best most innovative feature was these arrows pointing at Mayor Rybak. Frequently, the people cannot tell who the politician is among the followers. Mayor Rybak was also working the whole parade very well. I confused him with my picture taking, so he gave he a picture of him and me, standing side by side. He did not realize that this was the picture that I wanted.
I really would recommend that campaigns consider doing this.
The question is how many of the DFL candidates for governor enter my sphere of contacts, with all of the diverse political functions that I attend. How often do I get a personal contact? I am a good test case for if DFL candidates for governor can reach out to activists across different groups. Reaching out to activists will ensure endorsement and a great base for a grassroots campaign. The DFL candidates that have the most parties, attend the most events and persuade the most activists win. So read beyond the fold for the insider report!
Mark Dayton was already successfully a US Senator, elected in a year when people would have given any Democratic candidate long odds. Yet he captured the hearts of Minnesotans and won enough votes. It is true that his opponent, Rod Grams, was very poor on constituent service. Yet the many foibles of Norm Coleman did not make Norm Coleman an easy candidate to defeat. Yet still political opponents tend to discount Mark Dayton.
Mark Dayton listens more than any other candidate. He wears his heart on his sleeve, you can see that he cares. He obviously is an introvert. Yet it is hard to spend any time around him and not trust him. How many politicians can you say that about? I trust him because I read online his many speeches on the war, when taking a peace stance was not popular.
On the issues, Mark Dayton is golden with well stated Democratic views. In fact, he has traction on the tax fairness issue, for he is rich. So when Mark Dayton is talking about the top 10% of earners paying their fair share, he leads and has high credibility.
One of the reasons, that Mark Dayton is so trustworthy is that he spent his own money on the campaign, so he was beholden to no other interests other than the voters. This campaign, he says that he needs to raise money. One of the greatest reasons to have money is to spend it the way you want. I think it would be a great use of money to fund ones own campaign. For me, it would be way better than those expensive yachts.
For every candidate, I try to ask a different surprise question. For Mark Dayton, I asked what his favorite political hero in history? His answer about Robert Kennedy is incredible and totally sincere. We had to pause the interview, so people in the room could cheer! I thought that his critique of Pawlenty's fatal flaw is the best yet!
(Congrats to Jeff for posting a "real" story :P - promoted by MNCampaignReport)
Acting US Attorney Rachel Paulose gained the support of Sen. Mark Dayton (D-MN) on Thursday, but it was not immediately clear if it would be in time for her to be confirmed this session.
Paulose, who has been serving as Acting US Attorney since March, was nominated to the permanent post by President George W. Bush. Her nomination has been in limbo, however, as Sen. Dayton had not agreed to support her, primarily because she had not sought a meeting with the him. Traditionally, the Senate will not move to confirm nominees to the post of US Attorney until both Senators from the nominee's state sign off.
Paulose had already secured the support of Sen. Norm Coleman (R-MN), who called her "an extremely competent and capable professional."
Despite the endorsement by Dayton, it may be too late for Paulose to be confirmed this year. She would have to get through the Senate Judiciary Committee and the full Senate before the body adjourns for the year. If Paulose is not confirmed before then, her nomination would die with the Congress, and would have to be resubmitted to the next Congress in January. Bush could also make a recess appointment of Paulose, which would be effective only through 2008.
One of my standards for a politician is: "Who campaigns the best?" Part of that is: "Who works the Gay Pride event the best?"
