The release just hit the wires. It confirms what we reported an hour ago - AFSCME has endorsed Terri Bonoff in CD 3. Also picking up the AFSCME nod is El Tinklenberg in CD 6. This is a vindication for Tinklenberg, who lost the AFSCME endorsement to Patty Wetterling two years ago. Both Tinklenberg and Bonoff are the heavy favorites for the DFL endorsement.
The full release is after the jump.
Continue reading ‘Its Official: AFSCME endorses Bonoff and Tinklenberg’
Reliable sources have informed MN Publius that Terri Bonoff has won the AFSCME endorsement in CD 3. More later…
UPDATE: This is obviously a big get for Bonoff. AFSCME was the union that had the biggest problems with Bonoff and thus the most likely to go with someone else. At this point, I would expect that most of the other unions will endose Bonoff. Coming on the heels of the EMILY’s List endorsement and the endorsements of all but three CD 3 legislators, its clear that Bonoff has cemented her position as the frontrunner for the DFL endorsement. Madia and Hovland could still win, but their odds just got substantially longer.
I almost fell out of my chair when I saw this story today. Barack Obama meeting with Michael Bloomberg? Really? Its pretty ridiculous to speculate that this meeting has anything to do with running mate selection. It would be extraordinarily presumptive of Obama and I really can’t image Bloomberg being interested in the job.
But, speculating on the Veepstakes is fun. Admit it. So let’s explore the running mate question.
We’ll start with Obama, because two of the three writers here back him (I’ll let Sean disclose who he is supporting on his own time). Obviously, an Obama-Bloomberg ticket would the dream scenario, it would be a great example of his transcendental politics and would add managerial experience to the mix. Moreover, if Giuliani is the Republican nominee, having Bloomberg on the ticket would probably take New York and New Jersey back out of play (the current Mayor is more popular than the former Mayor). Setting that aside, who else makes sense? How about Obama-Daschle? Daschle adds experience, but he’s a lobbyist now and is the consummate Washington insider, which runs contrary to Obama’s message. Its worth noting, however, that many of Daschle’s former aides are working for Obama. An outside shot might be Obama-Kaine. Selecting the Virginia Governor could help put the still reddish-purple Commonwealth in play.
Moving on to Hillary, I see four strong possibilities; Clinton-Clark, Clinton-Strickland, Clinton-Bayh, and Clinton-Vilsack. Clark’s military credentials and non-traditional background would be a plus, but he doesn’t add anything in electoral math. Strickland would help in the key state of Ohio and his ministerial experience is a plus, but he’s been Governor for a year. Maybe we should give him a chance to do his job for a little while. Evan Bayh might put Indiana in play, but I think that’s a stretch (Indiana last went blue in 1964) and he would probably be replaced by a Republican in the Senate (unless a Dem unseats current Gov. Mitch Daniels in the 2008 election, which is possible). Vilsack would help in Iowa and he’s got a compelling personal story (he was an orphan), but lets face it, Iowa isn’t that big of a prize in the general election and, perhaps its just me, but Vilsack’s surrogate attacks on HRC’s opponents have seemed a little ham handed.
Finally, for Edwards, I think Obama is probably the best choice, though some would worry about number 2 outshining number 1 (as Edwards outshone Kerry in 2004). Other good choices might be Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas or Janet Napolitano of Arizona. Napolitano is probably better from an electoral math perspective (Kansas is not going to be in play no matter what) but then again, maybe Sebelius helps more in Missouri.
What do you think?
Nick Coleman has some questions for Carol Molnau:
1. Why do you need an assistant (Bob McFarlin) to answer basic questions about MnDOT practices and decisions?
2. What role has the governor played in managing MnDOT and the bridge crisis?
3. MnDOT paid a consultant to figure out how to fix the 35W bridge, then ignored the recommendations. Why?
4. What changes, if any, have you made in inspection and repair procedures since Aug. 1?
5. Why did you hire a private consultant to study the collapse (in addition to the National Transportation Safety Board)? Who besides you and the governor will see the findings before release?
6. Do you truly believe there is nothing you could have done to prevent the collapse and the loss of lives?
7. You say MnDOT decisions aren’t solely “engineer-based.” Not even when public safety is at stake? Please justify.
8. The governor says money was not an issue in the collapse, but you say MnDOT “looks at costs to maximize resources.” Reconcile, please. How did “looking at costs” limit work on the 35W bridge?
9. Many defects on the 35W bridge went un-fixed for years. Why are bridges repeatedly re-inspected instead of repairs being made as problems are discovered?
10. Sonia Morphew Pitt, the fired MnDOT manager, led emergency preparedness drills, and yet you say her presence wasn’t required after the collapse. Why not? What was your role in supervising her? When did you first receive complaints about her travels? If it was before the collapse, why was she still in her job?
11. Why did you pick a design for a new Wakota Bridge (years behind schedule and far over budget) that fails half of the time it is used? Finally:
12. Is it not best for Minnesota, and the employees and reputation of MnDOT, for you to resign immediately?
I like number 12. Thankfully, Minnesotans will only have to endure a couple more months of Molnau’s incompetance before Sen. Steve Murphy and the Senate DFL do what Tim Pawlenty should have done years ago and fire her.Â
State Senator Tom Bakk (DFL-Cook) endorsed Mike Ciresi today. During a light hearted moment last session, Bakk was crowned “King of the Range” by other the other “Ranger” lawmakers (a designation, by the way, which is not strictly geographical. Al Juhnke, who represents Willmar, is a Ranger). Bakk is the second fourth Iron Range lawmaker to endorse in the Senate race: Tom Anzelc, Loren Solberg and Tom Saxhaug endorsed Al Franken earlier in the year.
“Mike has spent his career improving people’s lives by either fighting for fairness in the courtroom or building an international business that provides good paying jobs with quality health care and pensions right here in our state … he has the judgment, experience and leadership to continue to improve the quality of life for all Minnesotans.â€
Bakk said he met with Ciresi last summer. “We talked about mining and logging and land use issues. I’m comfortable where he will fall on those issues in the Senate,†he said.
Bakk is a major player at the Legislature, where he chairs the Senate Taxes Committee. He is also considering a run for Governor in 2010.
It will be interesting to see if the other Rangers follow their King. Apologies to Franken supporters, it would seem that two more Iron Range legislators have endorsed Franken. I thought Anzelc was the only one so far. I went by memory and I should have checked.
Michael Barrett, Republican Party of Minnesota Vice Chair for District 7 and failed 2006 Congressional Candidate, was kicked off the conservative blog “True North” today for plagiarizing the work of “doubleplusundead”, another conservative blogger.
I attended a candidate forum last night at Angeno’s Pizza in Plymouth, hosted by the Plymouth Progressives it featured all three candidates, Jim Hovland, Ash Madia and Terri Bonoff.
This was the first time I was able to see all three candidates– and I was blown away, the candidates were all more well rounded and engaging than most of the candidates for the 5th CD seat last year. All of the candidates were given a few minutes to pitch themselves to the room of about 40 DFL’ers and then they answered questions from the crowd.
My very lengthy report after the break.
And this guy can be his running mate. He’s already endorsed him.
 DFL Chair Brian Melendez today called for Governor Tim Pawlenty to fire MNDOT Commissioner Carol Molnau for her mismanagment of that agency.
The full release is available after the jump.
One week ago, the Star Tribune published an article documenting MN GOP Chair Ron Carey’s press release calling on Secretary of State Mark Ritchie to resign. Will they cover this as well?
Here is a press release from the Bonoff Campaign– look for more analysis from me, and Zack, as well as my recap of last nights candidate forum a little later.
Zack Adds: I moved the full release after the jump. Here is the list:
Senator John Doll, District 40
Senator Ron Latz, District 44
Senator Ann Rest, District 45
Senator Linda Scheid, District 46
Senator Leo Foley, District 47
Senator Dan Larson, District 63
Representative Maria Rudd, District 42A
Representative John Benson, District 43B
Representative Steve Simon, District 44A
Representative Sandra Peterson, District 45A
Representative Michael Nelson, District 46A
Representative Denise Dittrich, District 47A
Representative Linda Slocum, District 63B
Talk about impressive, thats every single DFL State Senator who represents a district in the 3rd CD and all but three DFL State Representatives. This further cements the conventional wisdom that Bonoff is the heavy favorite for the DFL nod. Interesting that the campaign released this on the day of the AFSCME screening. Is the campaign trying to influence it or are they hedging their bets? Given the comprehensive nature of the list, its also interesting to ponder why the three State Reps who didn’t endorse held out. They are Ann Lenczewski, Melissa Hortman and Debra Hilstrom.
I wanted to follow up this morning’s primer on the AFSCME endorsement with a some insights into the nuts and bolts of the process. Here is how it works:
AFSCME divides the state into six “PEOPLE Districts”. Members of the West Metro PEOPLE District will screen candidates for the CD 3 endorsement, members of the West Metro, East Metro and Metro PEOPLE Districts will screen candidates for the CD 6 endorsement. The members of the screening committees are “politically active” AFSCME members chosen by the Board. They are not Board members. The screening committee will be about a dozen people in CD 3, but “significantly more” in CD 6 (because CD 6 has three PEOPLE Districts). The screening committee will make a recommendation to the Board tonight, which will probably make a final decision on the endorsement tomorrow.
Terri Bonoff, Ashwin Madia and Jim Hovland will be screening in CD 3. Erik Paulsen was invited to screen but (make sure you are sitting down before you read this) he didn’t RSVP. Bob Olson, El Tinklenberg and IP candidate John Brockberg will be screening in CD 6. Michele Bachmann was invited but she RSVP’d by sending AFSCME a dead fish.
Each candidate will get a three minute opening statement and a three minute closing statement. In between they will answer questions from members of the screening committee and an audience consisting of AFSCME members. All candidates have already filled out a questionnaire.
Sean posted an article from Atlantic Monthly yesterday and it struck me as perhaps the most eloquent and poignant analysis of why this nation needs Barack Obama yet put to print. If you care at all about 2008, please read this article. I know he already posted this yesterday, but I can’t help but put up another excerpt:
The paradox is that Hillary makes far more sense if you believe that times are actually pretty good. If you believe that America’s current crisis is not a deep one, if you think that pragmatism alone will be enough to navigate a world on the verge of even more religious warfare, if you believe that today’s ideological polarization is not dangerous, and that what appears dark today is an illusion fostered by the lingering trauma of the Bush presidency, then the argument for Obama is not that strong. Clinton will do. And a Clinton-Giuliani race could be as invigorating as it is utterly predictable.
But if you sense, as I do, that greater danger lies ahead, and that our divisions and recent history have combined to make the American polity and constitutional order increasingly vulnerable, then the calculus of risk changes. Sometimes, when the world is changing rapidly, the greater risk is caution. Close-up in this election campaign, Obama is unlikely. From a distance, he is necessary. At a time when America’s estrangement from the world risks tipping into dangerous imbalance, when a country at war with lethal enemies is also increasingly at war with itself, when humankind’s spiritual yearnings veer between an excess of certainty and an inability to believe anything at all, and when sectarian and racial divides seem as intractable as ever, a man who is a bridge between these worlds may be indispensable.
We may in fact have finally found that bridge to the 21st century that Bill Clinton told us about. Its name is Obama.
Again, in context this is an even more powerful passage and I implore you to read the entirety of the article.
Andrew Sullivan’s points about Obama’s potential bipartisan appeal are especially salient today as Zogby’s recent polling becomes a topic of national conversation. The short story: Zogby’s head-to-heads show Hillary losing to every single Republican candidate for President. How does Obama fare? He wins against every single Republican candidate for President. (Edwards is somewhere in between)
Some of the stark contrasts: Clinton loses to McCain by 4 points, Obama wins against McCain by 7 points. Clinton loses to Huckabee by 5 points, Obama wins by 6. Clinton loses to Guiliani by 3 points, Obama wins by 5.
Look, I’ll fully admit that putting too much stock in polls like this at this point is somewhat foolish; especially when the margins are so close. But I strongly feel that these polls are indicative of a larger factor that needs to be given a lot of thought before people go to the polls on primary day: Clinton is old news and Obama is the future. I don’t mean that in as grand terms as it may be taken. I think Clinton is an admirable politician and I’d be happy with her as President, but she is an extension of today’s (read: yesterday’s) politics. She is of a generation that’s been in power for 16 years, she carries with her the baggage of her husband, and she’s been (improperly) demonized by the right more thoroughly than anyone else in politics today. Obama on the other hand represents a leap forward. Sure, it’s unknown and that may make a few people timid but along with that uncertainty comes hope. The hope of a new chapter for America, the hope for a new style of political thinking, a hope for a fresh start for America. And right now if there’s one thing this nation needs it’s hope.
Obama is a fresh start. He’s a symbolic (in more than one way) mending of some of America’s deepest wounds. And I think he’ll fare better in the general because of it. People have yet to really know Obama in the way they (think) they know Hillary and McCain. And I’m confident that once people are given the chance to know him well the contrast between him and the competition will become so stark that this gap will only widen further.
We need Barack Obama. America needs Barack Obama. And Barack Obama can win. Need I say more?
MN Blue has a lengthy interview with 3rd CD candidate Jim Hovland. Near the end is this nugget:
He’s also beginning to build an organization. Julie Risser who ran as a Green for State Senate in Edina is working on his campaign. Wendy Wilde says she’ll help. David Lillehaug and John Schultz have agreed to advise him.
Risser picked up 15% of the vote in Edina in 2006 when she ran as a Green Party candidate. That is impressive, though its important to note that DFL candidate Andrew Borene withdrew from the race and was not actively campaigning.
Wilde, the former radio host and congressional candidate, should help alleviate any party switching concerns (I’ve said before that I think that DFLers should welcome former Republicans with open arms, but some in the party don’t share my hospitality).
Lillehaug is extremely well connected in DFL circles and was once rumored to be considering a candidacy himself. I asked him about his role with the Hovland campaign and he said he would have “no formal role” but was providing “free advice”. Lillehaug is in Amy Klobuchar’s inner circle and was a major player in her 2006 race, so that free advice is valuable.
I’m guessing the John Schultz mentioned in the interview is the Superintendent of the Hopkins School District. Being an Anoka-Hennepin boy myself, I don’t know anything about Schultz. But maybe some of our readers do…
AFSCME is screening candidates for endorsement in CD 3 and CD 6 today.
We’ve noted the political power of AFSCME in Minnesota before - its especially strong in endorsement battles because AFSCME members show up and they vote their union.
In CD 3, the AFSCME endorsement will be HUGE. Terri Bonoff won their support in her State Senate campaigns, but her vote against the tax bill during the 2007 session angered some inside the union and it is not inconceivable that they would go another direction. Meanwhile, Jim Hovland and Ashwin Madia, both outsider candidates with little ties to the traditional party apparatus, would benefit immensely from an AFSCME endorsement. It seems like everyone is cautiously optimistic about this endorsement, and there hasn’t been a clear sign from inside the union. It could go in any direction. If Bonoff wins the endorsement, it will be an affirmation of her frontrunner status and would advance the conventional wisdom that she is the heavy favorite for the endorsement. If, however, AFSCME endorses Hovland or Madia, it could blow this race wide open.
In CD 6, an AFSCME endorsement of El Tinklenberg would be a major get for his campaign because it would shore up his (vulnerable) left flank. AFSCME endorsed Patty Wetterling over El in 2006, so it definitely isn’t in the bag for him this time around. That being said, AFSCME has displayed a tendency to sign on with the candidate they think is a winner (this dynamic might also be at play in CD 3) so El has a fighting chance.
AFSCME is expected to endorse shortly after the screening, I’m not sure if that means we’ll know tonight or tomorrow. But we’ll obviously post as soon as we hear anything.
Mary LaHammer is reporting that Tim Pawlenty is appointing State Sentor Tom Neuville (R-Northfield) to a judicial position. This will trigger a special election for Neuville’s seat. I have a couple of quick thoughts:
1) Neuville is a global warming denier. Just sayin…
2) LaHammer is also reporting that former St. Rep. Ray Cox (R) will run for Neuville’s seat in the State Senate. I think Cox has to be considered the favorite. Neuville’s Senate district is comprised of Steve Sviggum’s old Laura Brod’s House district (which is solidly Republican) and David Bly’s House district (which is very competitive). Put them together and you’ve got a district with a GOP lean. Moreover, Cox represented the more DFL friendly half in the House for four years (surviving the thrasing the GOP took in 2004, but not the drubbing they took in 2006) so he should run ahead of the party index there. Provided Cox is able secure the party endorsement (which seems likely, but he is a moderate), he should do well.
3) If Cox won, it would preclude a rematch with freshman Rep. David Bly, which would substantialy increase Bly’s reelection prospects. Republicans will still target his seat, but Cox was definetly the strongest possible challenger.
UPDATE - I just realized as that the headline I put on this post could be interpreted to mean that Neuville “bought” his judgeship. That’s not what I meant, and I apologize if anyone took it that way. I just meant that Neuville would have to buy a robe now that he is a judge. Sorry for any confusion.
People are Shouting