Here's a quick reference list of MN Progressive Project interviews with the various DFL gubernatorial hopefuls, going all the way back to early 2007. No, that's not a typo!
Joe Bodell's Interviews with Candidates for Governor:
The first call that I received this morning was a friend in a true huff. She does not like going to the State Fair bathrooms to do her business only to have the "smiling" face of "Peeping Tom" Horner peering down on her. She wrote the campaign. She is calling her political friends. So I am wondering how long before tape is put across the Tom Horner face on the picture or the graffiti of "Peeping" Tom shows up. For a candidate who specializes in media, this seems like a media blunder to me.
"I am a moderate" Horner claims.
It's the left and the right that he blames.
If 'none of the above!',
is your druthers for guv,
it's at you that his rhetoric aims.
Since statehood (1858), Minnesota has been led by 26 republican governors; since the formation of the DFL the current 20-year streak is the longest period without a DFL governor. The field seems more polarized than ever, with dialogue seemingly more fit for an episode of Maury than within the 'Minnesota Nice' mantra. Following in Pawlenty's footsteps, Tom Emmer also doesn't appear to believe that leadership is about compromise, but about taking credit for wins and loses.
Which other former republican governors will Emmer look to for inspiration?
Following up on What went wrong with Margaret's campaign, what about the other two? Like I said in the piece about the MAK campaign, I devoted the most pixels to that campaign because it's the one I volunteered for and knew best, but Dayton's is even more important to look at right now because it's the going concern rather than useful lessons for the future. Yes, we want to get better at this long-term, but right now, I really really really want to win the election for governor (next up in what makes me unique: I breathe oxygen).
I'm applying my own advice to get past the assumption that the winner did everything right and losers did everything wrong. Even a distant third place campaign might have done something right.
So on that note I'll take Matt Entenza first, and it seems from outside (those of you who were inside the campaigns will I hope chime in with corrections and details, and likewise Dayton supporters) that the Entenza campaign did a whole lot right. I'm going to look at two things most worthy of notice.
TwoPuttTommy suggested an after action report, like was routine when he in the service, and I agreed with the concept. I just didn't agree with the timing, the morning after the election. With results just in and reactions raw, it seemed a bit like starting the after action report as soon as you stick your head up out of your foxhole. Now however, it's been a few days, and hopefully heads are clearer and more facts are at hand. It's possible none of us have changed our minds from Wednesday, and I'll admit that my opinion of the core error in the campaign hasn't since I formed it even before election day.
From what I observed, there was one problem from which others flowed, one that might have changed the result.
What I do find weird is I haven't seen it stated anywhere else. I've seen it hinted at, and smaller mistakes identified that struck me as too little to account for the loss. Margaret's supporters, me included, point out that she was up against two wealthy candidates, one with huge name recognition, but that doesn't explain the mistake, just the disadvantages she was up against.
Critics of the endorsement pounced of course, but the endorsement process had nothing to do with how the campaign was run, nor did it hurt her. In fact, without the endorsement, and with the same disadvantages, Margaret would have been a minor candidate. The endorsement is why she nearly pulled off a huge upset, which indicates it's pretty potent; more potent, I suggest, than when Dayton defeated the endorsee for senator in 2000. It's possible the endorsement is the only way a non-millionaire candidate can run statewide, at least if a millionaire is among the candidates.
Let's also be aware of what makes up the box we're trying to think our way out of.
Al Franken, Keith Ellision, Chris Coleman and assorted legislative dignitaries joined the raucous MAK rally in the 95 degree heat in front of the venerable Fitzgerald Theater before the MPR DFL Debate hit the airways.
To get comments from a bunch of people go to:
http://theuptake.org/2010/08/0...
This page has links to the other stories on the debate. Trivia question: What did I ask Dave Kelliher?
Duluth. The final ballot of the DFL state convention. There I was on, the floor, crushed. So close. All the work I had done to get RT Rybak the endorsement, finished.
It took me a few days to get over that moment.
I have never been one to dwell on defeat. Far more useful to learn from mistakes than to worry about them.
Why had Margaret won the endorsement? Ultimately, I came to the conclusion she had built a stronger, broader coalition, a skill with which she excels.
At the end of this eleciton adventure, we will have a new governor, and I can think of few people I would rather have as my governor than Margaret Anderson Kelliher.
OK, I can read polls. I even pretend to be able to interpret them. And yes, Survey USA just came out with one that shows Dayton 16 points ahead of MAK and 25 points ahead of my favored candidate, Matt Entenza. We haven't seen full internals, but from what the poll's sponsor, KSTP, has trickled out it looks like Dayton has sewed up the DFL demographics most likely to show up and vote in an august primary. Yep, it's pretty obvious- unless the pollster has really blown the screening of their sample Dayton is probably going to be the DFL's nominee for governor.
Under normal conditions I'd get behind MAK and suggest other Entenza supporters do likewise. Now, I can forgive and forget that MAK and her campaign have treated me and other Entenza supporters badly- I asked for an apology for her calling me "astroturf" on tuesday and she refused. And her attacks on Matt were so dumb and counterproductive that no apology is required.
But back to the demographics of each candidate's support... Dayton hardly needs to do GOTV- his supporters are the seniors that don't need to be reminded to vote, they'll be right there in line waiting for the polls to open at 7 a.m.. MAK's supporters will be out this weekend phoning and knocking on the same old lists of long term faithful DFL voters.
But Entenza is doing something daring- daring as in daring to bring new voters to the polls. I just got home from a hip hop rally and doorknock for Matt and Robyne. The house was packed with over a hundred young supporters, including Minnnesota's hip hop all stars who are backing Matt and Robyne. They filled four busses and are out doorknocking the low turnout precincts in the hoods- the precincts that MAK's campaign won't even bother with.
This didn't happen by accident. The Entenza campaign made a point of hiring organizers from all of Minnesota's diverse communities. Those communities are united by a common language, hip hop. While MAK's campaign has been milking the same old lists of DFL voters, Matt and Robyne are expanding the base by bringing thousands of new DFL voters to the polls. So while Entenza (and MAK too) may not win tuesday, thanks to Entenza's efforts, the DFL is winning thousands of new voters.
And that's why, win or lose, I'm still backing Matt and Robyne!
The "battle" is about to commence... For those wanting a "play by play", I'll refer you to Sally Jo Sorenson who is tweating on her most excellent Blue Stem Prairie blog. That is assuming the overpriced Wi-Fi doesn't crash again.
Margaret, you got it all wrong... I'm one of the died in the wool DFLers you just called "astroturf". Just like I've done in years past, this election cycle I've been all over the state supporting my favored candidates. And this cycle I'm supporting Matt Entenza and Robyne Robinson, the best qualified candidates, regardless of their financial status. And Minnesotan's for Matt hasn't paid me a cent for my services, and I haven't asked for any- I'm supporting Matt & Robyne out of my own pocket because, again, they're the best candidates in the field.
And I'm not the only one- Matt and Mark Dayton have no shortage of honest to goodness volunteers giving their time to the campaigns. Meanwhile, you might want to look at your own campaign- a campaign so short of volunteers that they seem to be trying to co-opt every DFL event in the state and turn it into a MAK door knock or phone bank.
About now whoever reads this at MAK HQ will probably reply with a nasty comment about Matt and Robyne's small army of paid staffers. Well, take a look at your campaign finance report and compare it with the other campaign's. The folks on Minnesotans for Matt's payroll are pretty much overqualified for their jobs and could make a lot more elsewhere. And unlike some of your staffers, Margaret, they don't expect reimbursement for their morning coffee, etc.. Clearly Matt & Robyne's staffers ain't in it for the money- they believe in Matt & Robyne and being paid staff simply allows them to work full time on the campaign.
Margaret, I could go on at length, but I've got to get on the road and get on down to FarmFest. And yes, this "astroturf"er for Entenza is doing the whole trip on her own dime!
There are many interesting angles to the latest Tom Emmer foot-in-mouth fiasco regarding his statement that servers and bartenders make $100,000 or more per year. Here's the latest twist: The Eagle Street event was set up by special interest lobbyists who, in a scene straight out of Thank You for Smoking, swooped in to smooth things over.
In fact, Geisen [co-owner of Eagle Street] said, "lobbyists" who set up the Emmer appearance were on their way down to smooth things over and correct his quote, something that seems to be a full-time job these days.
(Star Tribune)
Let's review.
Tom Emmer is not on working people's side -- He thinks the business owners need more money while some of the lowest paid workers in our economy deserve a $3 an hour pay cut.
Tom Emmer thinks wait staff and bartenders are getting rich - He claims many earn $100,000 a year. Which is obviously complete hog wash.
Is this the Tom Emmer job creation plan?
As I pointed out in an earlier post, How extreme is Tom Emmer? Part II: jobs and the economy, Emmer has offered no concrete jobs plan. All we get are bumper sticker statements about shrinking government and bunk about how the magical hand of the free market will solve everything.
Well ... I suppose I could let Emmer say it for himself. Here's the latest:
"Government may be the most important employer in Saint Paul, but it is the rest of the state that pays the bills. We will talk to manufacturers and employers of all stripes this week asking what they see as critical to get our economy moving again.
"We will ask them how government hinders their efforts, and how government can help. Not through phony 'stimulus,' but through enabling them where we can, and getting out of the way when we must."
(emmerforgovernor.com)
He created such a furor that his campaign felt the need to release a statement clarifying what he meant. In typical Republican fashion, he doesn't admit that he lied or misspoke.
Mr. Emmer, did you mispeak when you asserted that wait staff and bartenders make in excess of $100,000?
