I just got done watching Almanac’s 3rd District DFL debate, which you can find online here, and I wanted to share my initial reactions:
- All three of these candidates are plausible nominees. They all have articulable rationales for their candidacies and they all seem ready for prime time.
- I’ve been hearing a lot of buzz that Bonoff has a tough time with debates, but I thought she did really well overall. There were a couple of rough moments (she needs to remember where the mic is and not touch it) but the larger criticisms of her are off the mark.
- For me, the major moment of the night happened when Madia was asked about his position on Iraq. After Madia answered the question, Bonoff jumped in and it looked like she was going to go on the attack. It was an odd moment, however, because she basically said that any plan put forth by a Congressperson is meaningless because the President is the Commander and Chief and will ultimately set the course. This comment puzzles me, because I’m not sure what Bonoff stood to gain by making it. It felt like she was trying to cast Madia as naive or foolish for having an Iraq War plan, which is a tough sell in my book. Is she really trying to say that candidates for Congress shouldn’t (or even needn’t) have a plan for Iraq? In any event, Madia had his best moment of the night (and probably one of his best in the campaign so far) when responding to Bonoff’s attack (if that’s what it was). Madia came back and said that Bonoff’s answer was indicative of a larger problem; namely that Congress had abdicated its responsibility for oversight in the War. It was a great moment for Madia and a bad moment for Bonoff.
- Bonoff had a good line when she said that she could stand up to Larry Pogemiller and walk out of the room still being friends. While I’m sure Pogemiller isn’t a household name in the 3rd District, my guess is that the average Almanac viewer knows exactly who he is. Talk about playing to your audience.
- I thought it was interesting that Hovland claimed he is the “most progressive” candidate in the race. Is the former Republican planning on attacking from the left?
Loading ...
Excellent analysis. I posted on a different thread regarding my capsule — I had neglected to mention Hovland’s claim that he was the most progressive candidate in the field. I found that odd and will be interested to see how he backs that up.
I agree that Madia had a great response on the Iraq question (Madia’s weakness is not on Iraq - Bonoff should learn to find a different issue to spar with him on). Bonoff’s “toe-to-toe with Pogemiller but still walk away friends” was an angle she needs to really emphasize. Voters in the 3rd like someone who represents them in a civil and collaborative (Ramstadian?) manner.
You really get the sense that if given 3 minutes to respond, Hovland’s answers would strengthen signficantly, but he isn’t as succinct as Bonoff or Madia on his 30-second answers.
Hovland has been fighting the good fight on transportation needs for several years. He had a commentary published in the Strib about two years ago - came out against Pawlenty quite clearly. He’s been logging hours at the Minnesota Capitol on behalf of the public good. He’s gets energy, global warming, and the need for strong public schools. I really don’t think it’s that far out there for him to claim he is the most progressive..
Bonoff looked like Sally Struthers on meth. She was about as wound up as a 14 year old at a slumber party. It wouldn’t hurt to look at the camera from time to time too.
Madia needs to cut down on the gel, and stop sounding like a poli-sci professor. He needs to be someone that voters see as a regular guy, someone who knows more about beer and football than the GDP of Freedonia.
Hovland needs to see a barber, and showcase his successes. His family along side of him will translate into votes.
I know this sounds “catty”, but curb appeal (sadly) is important to a victorious candidate.
And all candidates need to have something more than “get out of Iraq” as their exit strategy. Voters are a lot smarter than they think, and are looking for real solutions. Bonoff said she was against it, Madia said it was wrong, Hovland almost said what he would do to get out.
By the way, the answer to this week’s index file question is “Alan Alda”. Forget about answering it, I already did…..
I think Hovland can make the case he is the most progressive of the group. During a debate yesterday in Brooklyn Park he came out for single payer health insurance.
“she basically said that any plan put forth by a Congressperson is meaningless because the President is the Commander and Chief and will ultimately set the coarse.”
sigh…it is the third leg of government that our founding fathers so carefully put in place…and has been missing in this war debate….this is what happens…..
Thank you for making the debate available online.
Tim Waltz won in a very conservative area and won the hearts of progressives. What Terri is doing, is degrading to the DFL and to herself. Speaking to the core values of ones district is the way to win hearts.
What exactly is Terri doing?
Debate performance rankings.
1st - Madia
2nd - Hovland
3rd - Bonoff
If I’m Madia, I make DVD copies of this debate and send it to every prospective DFL caucus attendee in the 3rd district. Bonoff didn’t come across well.
The debate didn’t do a very good job of drawing out differences between the candidates. The format was so rushed. Someone would get two or three sentences out, then Eskola or Wurzer would say, “Okay, thanks” and move on to the next candidate or topic.
[…]
Bonoff’s point on Iraq won’t help her with delegates, but it’s factually correct, as last year’s events should have demonstrated. A freshman member of Congress isn’t going to dictate a specific withdrawal plan. They get to vote on a compromise plan the leadership cooks up that tries to satisfy both the Progressive Caucus and the more conservative rural Democrats. Then, unless you’ve got a 2/3rds majority to override, Bush (or a president committed to Bush’s goals in Iraq) is just going to veto the plan, and nothing will change.
Or, you could get a Democrat in the White House, either Clinton or Obama at this point, both of whom have virtually identical withdrawal plans that call for removing one or two combat brigades a month, which would get them out by spring of 2010, while leaving behind a small number of U.S. personnel for various purposes. The choice for a freshman member of Congress at that point, since this will require Congress to approve at least another year of funding for the war, is not, “Do I vote yes or no on my plan?” It’s “Do I vote yes or no on the President’s plan?”
There is, of course, the other option of just not passing any additional funding for the war, or “cutting off funding for the troops”, as its been successfully framed in the public discourse, but I didn’t hear any of the candidates endorse that approach.
So, yeah, all this stuff about people’s specific withdrawal plans is pretty much horseshit. They’re not running for President.
[…]
Beyond that, Bonoff needs to be a little cleaner on her “helping the middle class” message. Patty Wetterling spoke mostly in vague generalities on this kind of stuff but got tripped up on specifics. Amy Klobuchar could tie specific points and knowledge in with a general “I feel what you’re going through” emotional pitch. Bonoff needs to be more like Klobuchar and less like Wetterling. She’s got the energy, but not the polish.
Madia needs to learn how to smile. His intensity is a little offputting if it’s not accompanied by some friendliness.
I think Hovland looks and sounds too Rotary Clubby to pass muster with DFL delegates in a “change” mood. None of them seemed to be looking at the camera.
Overall, I’d say it’s a race between Bonoff and Madia for the endorsement at this point, with Bonoff probably the safest bet for November.
Voter - “A freshman member of Congress isn’t going to dictate a specific withdrawal plan.”
Heard of James Webb, Joe Sestak…all of these are freshmen. Both of them are getting rave reviews for putting a spine in the Dems voice on Iraq and Iran
“So, yeah, all this stuff about people’s specific withdrawal plans is pretty much horseshit. They’re not running for President.”
Its called standing up to the president. It was done in the later years of Vietnam…
DM - “What exactly is Terri doing?”
Amen. This proves my point i have been making all these days. Her “business experience” does not correlate with her performance. People have pissed and moaned at me about that, but have not been able to show any aspect of her work to even try and contradict me.
We get a once in a decade chance to compete in an viable open seat. Rather than put our best foot forward the party thinks someone symbolic like Terri would sneak past. They have not learned from Judi Dutcher, Roger Moe etc….you cannot be a pez dispenser of policy and hope to win in a district that gets to darker shades of red as you go west and north west from Minnetonka and Edina
rm - your right on some of that but not right on some stuff. Jim Webb has a pedigree that gave him the clout. I for one was impressed with him when he was my boss (Sec. of the Navy) in the 80’s.
rm - “your right on some of that but not right on some stuff.”
thanks…point taken IM. but what Bonoff is saying is simply incredulous, that congress has no role in the war debate because the President decides everything.
Yikes- I just found this: http://www.minnesotademocratsexposed.com/2008/01/13/coming-soon-bonoff-bombs-on-almanac-debate-interrupts-and-attacks-madia/
3 points: 1) Madia needs to tone down the Brylcreem, 2)Hovland needs a professional haircut, 3) Terri Bonoff needs to find the camera with the RED LIGHT on (Almanac directors didn’t do her any favors). Fairly good substance, Madia was spot on about Iraq, Bonoff followed the Pelosi spin. I thought all 3 performed well, Madia seemed to do the best, but appeared uncomfortable at times. Hovland needs to amp up the energy level a little. Should be a fun race to observe from the socialist bastion that is SD 59.
I agree that if every delegate saw this debate they’d go for Madia. Not that he was perfect, but he was the best one. Also agree heartily on his hair gel, her microphone banging, and the dumb format.
And I also agree it seemed like Bonoff was trying to say Madia was naive for having an Iraq position. But he *would* have a stronger voice on Iraq than any old freshman Dem — the national party would want to have Iraq vets up front speaking for their position. And anyhow, if you really want to take her jab (if that’s what it was) to a logical extreme, then since House freshmen can’t pass any of their own bills unilaterally, talking about any substantive issues at all must just be pointless. So, we should be voting based on who can do the best job naming local post offices and helping us get passports? Of course not. That whole line of argument just seemed silly and evasive. Candidates elaborate their positions so we know what they think and what they will fight for and negotiate for in the give-and-take of a legislature.
I just read this- very interesting: http://centrisity.blogspot.com/2008/01/mn-3rd-district-congress.html
the fact that MDE hates her so much and wants madia as the candidate, certainly has me leaning toward bonoff.
MDE hates Bonoff - true dat. But MDE hates all Dem front runners and I think MDE and the rest of the GOP establishment still sees Bonoff as the “real” competition. Maybe MDE and the GOP are right that Hovland and Madia can’t touch her - but they all agree on one thing - if it’s Bonoff, GOP wins in a cakewalk.
I’d suggest that MDE thinks Madia is best because the GOP are looking at our candidates quite closely….recognizing that it is entirely possible (probable) that one of them will be the new congressperson from the 3rd. Paulsen is not a strong candidate.
The painful thing about the Pogemiller comment is that Pogemiller is on her side and the leader of her party in the Senate. He was her friend when she walked into the room, and if it’s her job to make sure the that’s the case when she left. I think the issue here is whether you can work with your political opponents to get things done. People are tired of endless wrangling which nothing is ever achieved. There are problems out there and I think people want someone who can say to the other side and let’s find a solution, that maybe neither side is completely happy with but at least does begin to address the problem.
If Bonoff could be convinced to wear a yellow chicken suit, I think she’d be a bad ass debate opponent.
Hovland? Now you know why he had to leave the GOP; his asshat outed him years ago and he was tired of having to get at the end of the buffet lines.
Madia; a nice guy that I could enjoy having a beer with and listening to his story. Legislator? Unless the DFL is short of lengthy fillibuster materials, not so much.
Klobuchar is NOT endorsing anyone, and I just read this article about Bonoff trying to make it look like Amy Klobuchar is supporting her-
FALSE ADVERTISING: http://www.minnesotademocratsexposed.com/2008/01/17/sources-tell-mde-that-klobuchar-will-remain-neutral-in-3rd-cd-endorsement-race-bonoff-website-mailings-give-false-impression-that-klobuchar-has-endorsed-her-campaign/
MB - “Klobuchar is NOT endorsing anyone, and I just read this article about Bonoff trying to make it look like Amy Klobuchar is supporting her- FALSE ADVERTISING:”
The “inevitability” has disappeared. Thank God for the existance of blogs like this where citizens like me have been able to openly question her prepardness. Else we would have just been subject to the same form letter campaign in Pravda (oops I meant Sun Sailor) as to how wonderful she was and her “depth of experience” (whatever this means).
This same website is also reporting that her fundraising has been a huge disaster. I believe due to his excellent ideas, performance and qualifications, Mr Madia is bringing new blood and money into the party. This is all new territory for the Bonoff campaign.
“I believe due to his excellent ideas, performance and qualifications, Mr Madia…” qualifications?
No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.
These are all the qualifications necessary. Now it’s up to the voters of the district to either say yay or nay.
Amy won the 3rd with almost 60% in 2006. Every Democrat running for any seat in that district should find a way to get her on their lit. Kudos to Senator Bonoff for being smart enough to figure that out. Perhaps Mr. Madia could put his endorsees on some literature…oh wait, no one in the 3rd CD has heard of any of them. Rather — he has nothing more than blog quotes on his debating skill. Perhaps the delegates will see through the smokescreen and realize this.
Voter - “Perhaps Mr. Madia could put his endorsees on some literature…oh wait, no one in the 3rd CD has heard of any of them.”
So all the “Inevitable Mrs. Bonoff” has going for her after crashing thru almost every public appearance is her endorsements. No wonder everyone is shaking their heads at her.
Voter - “Rather — he has nothing more than blog quotes on his debating skill.”
You mean all those blog reviews of his ideas in the debates are simply wrong ? You must be hearing voices.
Voters may not have heard of Madia or his endorsees before. But they sure have heard of him now.
rm - Did I say that’s all Bonoff has going for her? She has won two elections in a Republican district and served her constituents well as a state senator. Relevant experience for serving in congress.
Richard - “No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.
These are all the qualifications necessary.”
Ahh, I see. The ‘least common denominator” approach to assessing candidates’ qualifications. Thats why we love running against you Dems.
Voter - “Did I say that’s all Bonoff has going for her? She has won two elections in a Republican district and served her constituents well as a state senator. Relevant experience for serving in congress.”
Sorry Voter. Its a big leap and she has fallen flat. Her so called “business experience” simply does not correlate with her debate performances.
DM - “qualifications?”
Yes those virtues (Marine, top law school, top law firm) that are used in the “real” private sector to qualify a candidate for a position. See saying ” I knew a friend of a friend of a friend” who thought someone did a great job may not work in the real world.
“top law firm”
So he can get a job at a good law firm. Good for him. If that is the bar you are using for being a candidate for Congress, then there should be, oh, about 1,500 good candidates living in the area.
How has he performed in the private sector? I’d like to hear it from others. And is there even enough run time in his law job to draw any kind of conclusion? What has he been there for - 9 months?
DM “then there should be, oh, about 1,500 good candidates living in the area.”
Sorry not that many associates in the top 5 law firms in the cities. And that number would come crashing down even faster when you add in his Marine corp experience….
And yes some of his peers at the firm are supporting him….more objective guideposts than you have set up for Bonoff
I want to hear from those people who are supporting him. I want to hear real endorsements of his ability.
Yes, I’m skeptical of someone who “interviews” well but doesn’t have references who speak up strongly on his behalf.
U.S. Rep. Mike Honda, D-Calif.
State Sen. Mee Moua
State Sen. Satveer Chaudhary
State Rep. John Lesch
William Davis, DFL state treasurer, co-chair of African American Political Caucus, former chair of Minneapolis NAACP chapter
Mary Markwardt, chair of Senate District 46
Kim Kang, chair of Senate District 33
Sharon Bahensky, associate chair of Senate District 32
Norbert Gernes, chair of Senate District 42
Jim Emery, chair of Senate District 40
Dottie Gilkeson, chair of Senate District 63
Maryanne Bryndal, DFL Feminist Caucus member, DFL Veterans Caucus member and a Senate District 42 director
Cheryl Poling, treasurer of DFL Feminist Caucus and a director in the 3 rd Congressional District and Senate District 42
John DeSantis, chair of Senate District 32
Jodi Wolk, Senate District 33 affirmative action officer
Lin Myszkowski, Osseo School Board member
Dan Ryan, Brooklyn Center City Council member
Daniel Weinand, DFL Executive Committee
Bruce Sanders, Maple Grove city assessor
John Sullivan, former member of National Human Rights Campaign Board of Directors
DFL Veterans Caucus
eQualityGiving.org
VoteVets.org
Asian American Action Fund (AAA)
U.S. India Political Action Committee
Minnesota Asian Indian Democratic Association (MAIDA)
Don Skoglund, Vietnam veteran, VFW member, Vietnam Veterans of America member and American Legion member
Lou Ellingson, U.S. Navy veteran, VFW member
Tim Carlson, former State Senate candidate
Pakou Hang, community organizer and former St. Paul City Council candidate
Yep, just what I thought.
Where are the people who have actually WORKED WITH Madia, not merely been campaigned to?
I want references of those who really know the guy, not people who have been swept away by one good interview.
Some of Madia’s former co-workers from the law firm are working on his campaign, so their names are not included with the list of endorsees.
DM - “I want to hear from those people who are supporting him. I want to hear real endorsements of his ability”
Go to a Madia event.
DM - “I want references of those who really know the guy, not people who have been swept away by one good interview.”
Most people could possibly be swept away once. But in repeated appearance such probabilities quickly vanish.
As a corporate crum… i give more credence to my personal evaluations of someones abilities, than some third party reference. That is why in major corporations like MSFT and ORCL and GOOGLE they give more credence to your personal interviews rather than some third party referrals.
DM, you claim you were some big corp. mucky muck. But your evaluations of a candidate seem to the contrary.
My criterion:
1. Proven track record
2. Everything else
I am still very disappointed that Bonoff would be dishonest in trying to make it seem as though she was endorsed by Amy Klobachar when in fact, SHE HAS NOT been endorsed by Amy. This clearly gives the public a false perception. To me, that is simply dishonest.
No frontrunner: http://gavinsullivan.blogspot.com/2008/01/precinct-caucus-convener-training.html