Terri Bonoff has her first radio spot up on the air. Like Madia’s spot, which I reported on earlier today, Bonoff’s ad is only airing on Air America. Here is the transcript of the ad.
I’m State Senator Terri Bonoff. I’m running for Congress because your voices are not being heard. Career politicians are giving in to special interests, not making the tough choices. I’m not like that. We want change; we want it now.
As a lifelong Democrat, I’ve spent decades working in this community to bring about change. That’s what I’ll do in Congress.
Please caucus for me on February 5th. Visit TerriBonoff.com to find out more. I’m Terri Bonoff and I approve this message.
I said earlier that Madia was first on the air, but I honestly don’t know which of these two ads was on the radio first. I just heard about the Madia ad first (and it was only a matter of hours).
Loading ...
Madia’s has been on for roughly a week - possibly more. Bonoff’s came a few days later, and she’s also running a real brief 10 second spot introducing herself by name and asking that people come out and see her at this weekend’s Blue State Ball.
Bonoff’s delivery is not as polished sounding as Madia’s in these spots. She almost sounds like she’s forcing the words out - kinda’ weird. She also does little to introduce herself beyond the business person angle, and she doesnt offer any real explanation on why that really matters. Marc
As a sponsor of Blue State Ball, Bonoff gets some 10 second ad spots as part of the package deal.
Madia’s radio ad is on his website: http://www.madiaforcongress.com/multimedia.htm
Bonoff criticizes “career politicians” for “not making the tough choices,” and she then says that she’s “not like that.”
But in her campaign, Bonoff has refused to state whether she would vote to repeal the Bush tax cuts.
I’ve heard her dodge the question in a debate by saying that she wants to make the tax code fair. But that’s not an answer. It’s a tough choice, Senator Bonoff, but you claim that you can make the tough choices.
So would you vote to repeal the Bush tax cuts, or not?
Further evidence that Bonoff is dodging the question of whether to repeal the Bush tax cuts:
In a live blog on Minnesota Monitor this past Tuesday night, a questioner explicitly asked Bonoff whether supports repealing the Bush tax cuts.
Bonoff let the question sit there for 11 minutes and then completely ignored it.
And she wants the DFL’s endorsement? Unbelievable.
From http://www.minnesotamonitor.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=3072
“Question about tax cuts:
Yes or no, do you believe we should repeal the Bush tax cuts to the wealthy? Why or why not? (Thank you in advance).
by: megmeg @ Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 19:47:50 PM CST
[ Reply ]
Thank You
Thank you so much Minnesota Monitor and all those who posted. I really appreciate the opportunity and I look forward to doing this in the future.
by: Terri Bonoff for Congress @ Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 19:58:13 PM CST
[ Reply ]”
Not repealing the Bush tax cuts would serve her well in the General. This is a tough line to walk for her.
Is she going to cut an ad talking about the threat of wildfires and people worrying about their loved ones in Iraq, seems to me to be the same thing!
DantheMan, you say that “Not repealing the Bush tax cuts would serve her well in the General. This is a tough line to walk for her.”
Respectfully, I disagree. I think that all Americans — GOPers, DFLers, and Independents — are ready for politicians who call it like they see it.
For example, if America is going to fight wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, pay for the prescription drugs of seniors under Medicare Part D, pay the Social Security benefits of retiring Baby Boomers, invest in a green economy, and start paying off our crushing national debt, then we can’t afford tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans.
Voters in the general will support a candidate who describes that tough choice and then explains what s/he thinks is the best course forward.
What voters in the general will not support is a politician who refuses to take a stand on anything- for example, a politician who ignores a yes-or-no question on one of the most fundamental issues facing our elected officials today.
It’s politicians like that who are responsible for our country’s current mess. The last thing we need is another one.
Have to agree with DFLer here. She also did not answer another question that was posted to her during her live blog….
Education
As a “education candidate” what is your feeling about the reason that Ed Minnesota is not endorsing anyone in the 3rd CD? Does it bother you that they have endorsed elsewhere?
by: epvoter @ Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 19:12:50 PM CST
She was endorsed by Ed MN during her run for the state senate seat. She doesn’t want to discuss why they are not endorsing her this time around either. Pretty fundamental question.
I think everyone could run for office if they got to choose the platform, didn’t have to answer any difficult questions and didn’t have to defend any positions.
I hope she is held to account for actual positions.
DFLer: “Voters in the general will support a candidate who describes that tough choice and then explains what s/he thinks is the best course forward.”
Yeah, just ask President Mondale. Voters always embrace candidates who clearly lay out ugly medicine for America.
West Metro Dem: Why wasn’t she endorsed by Ed MN? “Pretty fundamental question.”
Really? That’s a fundamental question? That’s a question of no importance at all. Were you hoping she would piss on them in the response?
Asking a candidate to comment on not getting an endorsement, especially one that no one has gotten yet, is just silly. Let’s see they could say “I hope to win their endorsement. Improving this country’s education is one of my top goals.” or “I’m sorry I didn’t get it, I will do a really good job for our education system.” or “I’m working very hard to get their support.” Boring and not fundamental as afar as I can tell.
I also think don’t want think Mr Madia or Mayor Hovland responding to why they haven’t gotten endorsements that Senator Bonoff has received would be fundamental, but maybe I’m missing something.
I’d say a pretty fundamental question when you consider that she is running as “the education” candidate and her background that she touted to win her state senate seat is all of her Legislative Action Coalition work for Hopkins Schools. She also received Ed MN’s endorsement for her senate seat and now they are choosing not to endorse her……seems like “the education candidate” should be able to get the education endorsement.
I wasn’t hoping she would piss on anyone. I was hoping she’d answer the question. I also want to know whether or not she supports renewing Bush’s tax cuts.
I think everyone should have to answer where they stand on pretty common themes these days…..
So are you saying that she hasn’t said anything about education? Something that I think it’s reasonable to expect. Or are you saying that she should address a particular group’s endorsement that it has not yet conferred, which I don’t think it’s reasonable to expect.
Furthermore they have not “chosen not to endorse her.” they haven’t chosen to endorse anyone…yet. It’s like asking Hillary Clinton why the voters of South Carolina didn’t choose her. They haven’t voted yet so for her to comment on it would be silly.
Interest group endorsements are important, but they are complex and unpredictable in a primary with multiple good candidates. For any candidate to assume an endorsement (other than a woman for Emily’s List or a Veteran from a Veteran’s Group) would show bad judgment at this point and wisely, Sen Bonoff hasn’t done that, West Metro Dem has.
The only group that can really address their endorsement or lack thereof, in this race, is Ed MN. Anyone else is just stuck making stuff up.
Has Mr. Madia or Mayor Hovland addressed why Ed MN has “chosen not to endorse them”?
SPS - “Has Mr. Madia or Mayor Hovland addressed why Ed MN has “chosen not to endorse them”?”
Big difference. Here you have a candidate who crows about education and her ability to get things done. But as a voter we cannot get a straight answer in a democratic primary as to why she did not seek or did not get an endorsement from Ed MN.
“seems like “the education candidate” should be able to get the education endorsement.”
Why should we assume that an endorsement from a special interest labor union, in this case Education Minnesota, is synonymous with the “education endorsement”?
Did it ever occur to you that the best candidate for educational improvement and reform may not necessarily be the person who is simply assuming all the positions of a special interest group?
To answer the question you posed in your post, I think it is very possible that the best candidate for educational improvement and reform may be one who is not the puppet of one particular labor union.
Let’s not confuse the voice of education with the voice of a labor union.
The point was that a union that endorsed previously would be favorably inclined to endorse again - especially when that candidate is running on that specific platform plank.
My opinion is that the best candidate for education is not Bonoff….and that’s why she wasn’t endorsed this time.
Sorry SPS as much as you would try to potray EDM as “some labor union” , it is clear that EDM and the DFL are like peas in a pod.
For a “virtual incumbent” like Bonoff to loose that endorsement is significant. If she thought that she would be the puppet of the labor union, then state it or at least state what her differences were with the union positions.
“My opinion is that the best candidate for education is not Bonoff….and that’s why she wasn’t endorsed this time.”
My point is this: The best candidate for education and the best candidate for this particular Labor Union might not be one in the same!
If Bonoff took stances at the legislature that stood up to the powerful Union machine, then she actually is a step closer to getting my vote, not losing it!
Sen. Bonoff answered 2 key questions about education. “With regard to funding the federal government should keep its promise of funding 40% of special education costs.” If Bonoff can accomplish this one goal, third district schools will be significantly enriched, making up for the insufficient state funding of the last decade.
and “I would repeal the No Child Left Behind unfunded mandate, and would focus federal funding on providing states with the necessary resources to ensure every child is attaining educational excellence.” Achieving this goal will free up money spent on excesseve testing and allow teachers to quit teaching to the tests, giving the districts more say in their curriculum.
Dantheman is right — Bonoff and Ed. MN disagreed on mandatory statewide health insurance for all districts last session. Bonoff, and other reps in the west supported statewide insurance on a voluntary basis, as it would have been a huge cost increase for the schools within her district. She listened to her constituents and didn’t cater to the union. Doesn’t mean she won’t be endorsed later, either.
Voter - “With regard to funding the federal government should keep its promise of funding 40% of special education costs.” If Bonoff can accomplish this one goal, third district schools ”
Voter - “I would repeal the No Child Left Behind unfunded mandate”
this are standard Dem talking points…nothing new here