Sorry these are a day late, but we had a lot going on yesterday. Both the Madia and the Bonoff campaigns released statements about the anniversary of the Iraq war:
Bonoff:
“Five years ago President Bush waged a war on Iraq under false pretenses without a clear plan for withdrawal. Today there is still no end in sight even after nearly 4,000 U.S. troops have lost their lives, another 30,000 have been seriously injured and billions of dollars have been diverted from the pressing issues facing middle class families here at home. Once we stop spending billions in Iraq, we can work to get our economy back on track so Minnesota families can afford health care, college tuition and their home mortgages…”
Madia
“Five years ago this evening President Bush led our nation into its biggest foreign policy disaster since the Vietnam War.
“But he didn’t do it alone. He convinced a bipartisan majority in Congress to cede its constitutional oversight authority and follow him blindly into a wasteful tragedy that should have—and could have—been prevented.
“Never before have so many in Washington done so little at such a pivotal moment in our history. When given the opportunity to derail this preemptive and unnecessary war, scores of politicians betrayed America’s proud legacy of leadership, courage and vision…”
Full statements after the jump
STATEMENT BY TERRI BONOFF REGARDING 5-YEAR ANNIVERSARY OF IRAQ WAR
WAYZATA – Today State Senator Terri Bonoff, candidate for Congress in Minnesota’s Third Congressional District, issued the following statement regarding the five-year anniversary of the Iraq War:
“Five years ago President Bush waged a war on Iraq under false pretenses without a clear plan for withdrawal. Today there is still no end in sight even after nearly 4,000 U.S. troops have lost their lives, another 30,000 have been seriously injured and billions of dollars have been diverted from the pressing issues facing middle class families here at home. Once we stop spending billions in Iraq, we can work to get our economy back on track so Minnesota families can afford health care, college tuition and their home mortgages. We have been embroiled in this conflict for five years and we are no closer to a resolution, no safer here at home, and no more respected around the world. It is time for our elected leaders to come to the conclusion that people of the United States came to long ago and the opinion General David Petraeus shared with Congress recently – ‘there is no military solution to a problem like that in Iraq.’ This war has cost the American people too much – cost us in lives, stretched our military thin, damaged our reputation in the world, and taken needed dollars and attention away from critical issues we need to solve here at home. We must begin the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq now and redeploy our troops as quickly as possible in a responsible manner. Once we start we can bring our sons and daughters home within 16 to 18 months and send the all-important signal to the Iraqi government that it is time to take control of their own country and give them additional time to reach political reconciliation with the specter of dwindling U.S. involvement in the background.
“I am the one candidate in this race that has committed to leaving no permanent military bases in Iraq. We must leave a requisite force to guard our embassy, but any further presence will only signal to the world that again we are disingenuous in our intentions. We must signal to the region that it’s time to turn our focus in Iraq to rebuilding. The people of this district, who have been hit by the loss of the lives of 58 Minnesotans and contributed more than $1.8 billion dollars to this effort, believe that this conflict cannot be solved with our military might, but will require a diplomatic solution. I want to go to Washington to represent the interests of this district and bring an end to this war.â€
###
Five Years Later: ‘This Wasteful Tragedy’
MAPLE GROVE—Ashwin Madia, a DFL candidate in the 3rd Congressional District, released the following statement marking the fifth anniversary of the start of the Iraq War:
“Five years ago this evening President Bush led our nation into its biggest foreign policy disaster since the Vietnam War.
“But he didn’t do it alone. He convinced a bipartisan majority in Congress to cede its constitutional oversight authority and follow him blindly into a wasteful tragedy that should have—and could have—been prevented.
“Never before have so many in Washington done so little at such a pivotal moment in our history. When given the opportunity to derail this preemptive and unnecessary war, scores of politicians betrayed America’s proud legacy of leadership, courage and vision.
“This wasteful tragedy has cost America 3,991 soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines—some of the very best and bravest we have to offer.
“This wasteful tragedy has cost America half a trillion dollars—and even more when the long-term cost of caring for wounded veterans is included.
“This wasteful tragedy has cost America its credibility and moral authority—our most important assets in a complex and changing world.
“As your next congressman, I will never take marching orders from the so-called experts who got us into this mess.
“As a Marine Corps and Iraq War veteran, I will never vote to send troops into battle without a legitimate cause, a strategy for victory and an exit plan.
“As an American, I will never place political considerations ahead of my values and my best judgment.
“Our country deserves nothing less.”
###
“Five years ago this evening President Bush led our nation into its biggest foreign policy disaster since the Vietnam War.”
And they did it on purpose; they did it based on ideology.
Oh - and some of ‘em did it for personal financial gain, too - which is why I call ‘em:
“Boy Blunder And The Plunderers”
Domain name registered, by TPT.
No permanent bases. Thank God. Oh, and here is just a sample of the Ash Madia when it was cool to be a Republican. Now that its not, its no wonder he’s changed. He talks about how his parents came to this country with only 19 dollars, why on earth then would he be a republican, even when he was young?
November 4, 1996
Dole would bring integrity, leadership to highest office
By By Jigar
Bob Dole has always been a soldier, from his trying World War II days to his dedicated years on Capitol Hill. This old soldier has come back for a battle on behalf of his country, and is deserving of the opportunity to do what he does best — serve the United States. Dole is the man who will fight on behalf of our generation, our communities and our nation….
Edited by Sean for content, but I’m sure that if you looked hard enough you’d find one of the other 30 bajillion times someone has posted this 12 year old article.
Some Democrat! Sounds like good ol Norm Coleman, but the other way around. Should we ask Ash Madia which way the wind is blowing?
I don’t speak no other languages so I don’t know how to put this — DO NOT POST ENTIRE ARTICLES.
Your post has been edited my me. Sean
Michael,
I just answered this exact post on the other thread on this blog. Apparently you have only one mission - to trash a Democrat. Not acceptable, frankly.
I am saddened that you belong to a very small tent party - must be the democrat party. I personally belong to the Democratic party that allows people to change their minds, doesn’t have a time limited litmus test, doesn’t hold opinions against people that they had when they were 18, and expects people to grow and become more active.
I’d suggest you find another drum to beat. This has been hashed and rehashed here. Apparently your marching orders didn’t include reading previous postings and discussions prior to posting garbage. Quite a shame. What respect I had for Terri and her campaign is sadly flying out the window. Instead of winning over supporters to her side, her campaign supporters are so incredibly negative and vicious toward other Dems who do not agree with them that they are turning people off from her forever. I wouldn’t be surprised to see her have a challenger for her senate seat this next time around and possibly loose it. She barely won her own senate district in these conventions two weeks ago. It can’t be comforting….and yet her “supporters” are doing everything they can to further alienate those she will desperately need to win re-election. An interesting strategy to say the least.
It’s really sad.
When it’s fourth down, and many, Many, MANY yards to go, the pro’s always punt. Especially when even though there’s time on the clock, for all practical purposes it’s “game over.”
And let’s be clear: for Terri Bonoff, it’s game over.
It’s time for Team Bonoff to join in the celebration for this game’s winning team, and help that team win the next game.
It’s what the pro’s do.
So we are back again with the tired old Ash was a republican in 1996?!
And Sean, you threatened yesterday to REMOVE posts that violate your rules, not just abridge them.
It is obvious that Michael is a very disgruntled Bonoff supporter who is not listening to our leadership tell us that we need to be civil and engage in discourse about issues instead of waging personal attacks.
This is insulting to all of the good and loyal democrats out there who are reformed republicans, and all of the new people who came out of the woodwork to support our party because they were looking for change.
All Michael is looking for is a fight over a nonissue because his candidate is losing over the legitimate issues and he doesn’t know how to deal with that fairly and intelligently.
If there were litmus tests for belonging to the Democratic party, I daresay an attitude like the one Michael portrays would prevent HIM membership!
By the way Michael, the way to change hearts and minds is NOT to copy your very worthy opponent’s wording and views about the Iraq War. Guess Madia’s views are good ones, or else Bonoff would not be copying them. Want proof? There is video of her original views, and now her words yesterday changing all of that.
It also shows a great lack of integrity to send emails to committed delegates asking them to back out of the promises they made when they were elected to represent large groups of people at the congressional district and state conventions. Let’s talk about that, why don’t we?!
It also shows a great lack of integrity to make campaign calls telling people that Ashwin Madia has never held a job. He was a United States Marine, and worked for a major law firm!
It shows a willingness to subvert process to have people on the various committees for the conventions try to change all of the fair and balanced rules to favor your candidate because that is the only way she could win the endorsement. The rules committee is trying to change rules for undorsements and the credentials committee is top ended with Bonoff people in charge.
Look in the mirror, Michael. Where is your integrity and that of Bonoff supporters?!
And Michael, you must LOVE Norm Coleman since he used to be a lifelong democrat?!
How can we possibly believe that Norm is really a republican now?!
People change. Get over it.
“And Sean, you threatened yesterday to REMOVE posts that violate your rules, not just abridge them.”
I’m working on being cuddlier. Sean
Ah, the warm and fuzzy Sean…..should we just call you cuddle bear?
“I am the one candidate in this race that has committed to leaving no permanent military bases in Iraq. We must leave a requisite force to guard our embassy, but any further presence will only signal to the world that again we are disingenuous in our intentions. We must signal to the region that it’s time to turn our focus in Iraq to rebuilding.”
I’m having a difficult time reconciling how Terri thinks we can completely pull out (but for a minimal protecting force for the embassy) but nonetheless focus on reconstruction. Isn’t reconstruction one of the primary missions of the current military force? Certainly the embassy can’t do the reconstruction. And, I’m guessing not too many Americans are going to volunteer to start building up Iraq without some force there to protect them.
I was a little surprised to read that new Terri comment, too. Seems to me that she obviously has no clue about what a war zone looks like nor how safe one would be without any force for protection. It’s obvious she has articulated this previously, though, because some of her supporters seem to have the misunderstanding that Ash’s service in Iraq as an attorney wasn’t service at all and isn’t “combat” related. I wonder if she would like to sign up to go over and rebuild hospitals or schools without any protection? Not thinking so.
She obviously is trying to find a far left position on Iraq and it isn’t making any sense.
“she obviously has no clue about what a war zone looks like nor how safe one would be without any force for protection.”
Hmmmm…Who might know what a war zone looks like?
Erm…Perhaps, Ash Media would.
Agreed, lojasmo…..although some of her supporters have been on the blogs contesting that. Weird.
His service in a war zone is one reason why he isn’t for pulling all of the troops out of Iraq and leaving our embassy and rebuilding efforts unprotected. Funny how experience over pontificating makes a difference.
“As an American I will never place political considerations ahead of my values and my best judgement”
“Our country deserves nothing less”.
Ashwin Madia has said the exact same thing about the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars since the first day of his campaign. He has never waivored in his support of our troops and our country. His message is strong, informed and decisive.
The other candidate keeps changing her message to try and gain some support.
Who do you think really has the strength of his convictions, and who thinks only of personal political considerations?!
I really don’t have a dog in this fight, but I can’t believe some of the things I am reading here. My first issue is with the idea that the American presence in Iraq is helping the situation. If anything, that presence is destablizing Iraq. Why are people here repeating the Bush administration’s lies.
And rebuilding efforts? We aren’t rebuilding jack shit in Iraq. Even the Bush administration isn’t putting that one out there anymore.
I can understand the call for a phased withdrawal, as opposed to an immediate one, to make sure the withdrawal is safe for our troops and gives the Iraqis in time to adapt to our absence. But we need to get completely out, and that includes dropping the idea of permanent bases. Bonhoff is 100 percent right on no permanent bases there. I certainly hope Madia agrees with that position.
Madia has never called for permanent bases in Iraq. He does call for responsible phased withdrawal. Bonoff is new to the “responsible” position on Iraq. I’m glad she finally got there. It’s the same place that Hillary and Barack have been for awhile.
Actually, to correct you, we are build structures in Iraq. We had over 180k contractors in Iraq as of Aug. 2007.
http://usliberals.about.com/od/homelandsecurit1/a/IraqNumbers.htm
There are 140k US soldiers in Iraq and approx. 180k contractors in Iraq. You can’t just poof and time travel these people out. It will take time to get a 1/3 of a million people out of a country with virtually no infrastructure.
More importantly, my point is not that reconstruction is good or bad. My point is that Bonoff can’t play it both ways. You can’t claim you are going to completely pull your force but then someone be delusional enough to think we can still commit to reconstruction.
I also think it’s entirely ridiculous to say “We aren’t rebuilding jack shit” in Iraq. There is clearly some rebuilding going on. 180K troops aren’t engaged in day to day live combat.
“My first issue is with the idea that the American presence in Iraq is helping the situation…..Why are people here repeating the Bush administration’s lies.”
Nobody here said that. Nor is anybody here (Nor Media, in fact) calling for prolonged presence in Iraq.
There are, however, people here calling for Terri to do the right thing, and throw in the towel.
At the national level, Nancy Pelosi said the delegates must respect the will of the people.
Locally, they need to do the same.
While this petty bickering is draining time, resources, and good will, The Hustler is sneakin’ ‘round raisin’ dough and rilin’ up the GOPer base.
Enough, already!
It’s over.
Team Bonoff needs to put the good of the party over the good of Team Bonoff.
“At the national level, Nancy Pelosi said the delegates must respect the will of the people.”
You mean you are calling for a primary to settle this?
I did hear the rules committee had quite an interesting night.
I am a member of the credentials committee and don’t have a problem with two Bonoff alternates co-chairing the committee. First, you
want alternates in charge because you want delegates in the room.
Second, our meeting was quite civil and I don’t anticipate people behaving inappropriately. Thirdly, there will be members of each campaign looking over our shoulders to be sure we are fair. Fourth,
the committee votes on challenges as a whole with recommendations going to the convention as a whole to vote them up or down.
I was under the impression that basic services in Iraq are still worse now than they were before we went in. WestMetroDem’s link appears to bear that out, but I suppose we could get into a “prove it” argument. Our military is not trained to rebuild the country.
That’s why we have contractors making big bucks on no-bid contracts ripping us off.
History lesson: it was Iranian Shia who took American hostages in the late 70’s. It was Shia who committed 911. It was Sunni’s who controled Iraq. We supported them in their war against Iran. 41 had the good sense to leave them in power. We wanted them there because they are far more moderate as a whole. Most of the Islamic world is Sunni, however most of the Middle East is not. Anybody with half a brain would have known that if we took out that government, the Shia would take control and extract revenge. Now the fact the we as a country were dumb enough to create that mess, creates a moral obligation on our part to try not to leave it in chaos. We are not seen as the good guys over there. We are imperialist pigs who want to steal their oil. Staying only worsens that and I dare say creates as many new enemies as we kill. I don’t know that anybody has a good solution. If it were my call, I’d be on my hands and knees in front of the U.N. begging for them to help - but then we no longer have control, a terrible thing to try to be a good world citizen.
One thing I have never heard addressed with respect to the surge is that the U.S. drop in casualties coincides with Sadr’s cease fire.
I personally don’t believe the surge is working on any front. I despise the $$ we are throwing into this war. I believe either candidate would serve us well in that arena.
My concerns are: lobbyists and corporate America are calling the shots in this country. I do have problems with legislators subsidizing private corporations (love the Twins but let them build their own stadium) and supporting their own version of the Bush tax cuts, while imposing regressive sales and gas taxes. The vast amount of damage to our roads is caused by weather and semis. The brunt of the fix should be on the shoulders of corporate America and let their trickle down economics pass the oost on to us (i.e. the big buck people who spend more will pay more). And finally, this warrantless wiretapping, the abuse of prisoners, the choice to hold them outside of U.S. borders so that our laws do not apply to them, the refusal of this administration to comply with subpeonas from congress, etc. appalls me.
So, let’s get away from the Jigar era when Norm was probably still a Democrat and talk about these candidates relative merits with respect to some of these things.
The one qualification - bin Ladin is a fanatical Sunni, not a Shia.
I don’t know if I’d really call him a Sunni, that’s like calling a Methodist a Catholic because the reformation broke off from the Catholic Church.
Dan, you’ve tried to make that argument before. It didn’t work then, why do you think it will work now?
Because the truth prevails.
“I also think it’s entirely ridiculous to say “We aren’t rebuilding jack shit†in Iraq. There is clearly some rebuilding going on. 180K troops aren’t engaged in day to day live combat.”
Its entirely ridiculuous that someone is still stupid enough to believe that we are rebuilding Iraq. The contractors are their to support the military occupation (and to steal from the government) and the only building is our embassy and our bases. The infrastructure of Iraq continues to crumble and we aren’t (and can’t) do anything about it. Do you remember how the Bush adminstration used to talk about all the schools that have been fixed? Even they don’t do that anymore. I don’t know why you are peddling several year old Bush lies.
Jack Shit is what it is.
“Actually, to correct you, we are build structures in Iraq. We had over 180k contractors in Iraq as of Aug. 2007.
http://usliberals.about.com/od/homelandsecurit1/a/IraqNumbers.htm”
Well, that link doesn’t say anything about “we are build structures.” There are 180K contractors there, but they are doing Jack Shit about rebuilding Iraq.
“There are 140k US soldiers in Iraq and approx. 180k contractors in Iraq. You can’t just poof and time travel these people out. It will take time to get a 1/3 of a million people out of a country with virtually no infrastructure.”
Wow, thanks Karl Rove. That is about the most dishonest argument there is. No one is saying that the troops should be “poof” withdrawn. That is a sleazy Republican strawman used to avoid even beginning a phased withdrawal.
No, it’s not. It’s the basis for both Obama and Clinton’s “responsible phased withdrawal” plans. It is the open reality that the US cannot do another “Vietnam-style” withdrawal with helicopters leaving from roofs of our embassy. There is even less infrastructure in Iraq through which to extract our contractors and troops.
As to rebuilding. We are actually rebuilding some social institutions in some areas of Iraq per our troops who are over there. My cousin is a heli pilot (3rd tour so far) and he has confirmed this. Hospitals, schools and community housing as well as updating electrical and water systems are underway in some areas. Much effort has been made in the Kurdish areas because it is calmer. The “surge” isn’t working but it is providing more protection for contractors as well as security after buildings are rebuilt.
Definitely not any “sleazy Republican strawman” but basic reality. The new president - whomever it is - will begin an immediate phaseed withdrawal per both of their plans. The Republican plan is to stay there - check McCain’s website.
The “surge” is the PR spin BushCo. used, rather than admit the switch from conventional to unconventional warfare tactics.
BushCo. didn’t want to admit it was the switch that worked, because someone might ask them why it took them so long to figure out conventional warfare tactics weren’t working.
Everyone knows BushCo. is loathe to admit anything they did is wrong.
The increase in troops is “escalation”. Calling it the “surge” is PR - nothing more; nothing less.
Dan, if you wanted your vote to count, you attended caucus.
You didn’t.
The people did; they have spoken.
Get over it.
West Metro Republican:
Sorry, but your post was so dishonest and so full of Republican talking points, I think you need to change your name.
“As to rebuilding. We are actually rebuilding some social institutions in some areas of Iraq per our troops who are over there. My cousin is a heli pilot (3rd tour so far) and he has confirmed this. Hospitals, schools and community housing as well as updating electrical and water systems are underway in some areas. ”
Well that’s just bullshit, and bullshit the Republicans have even stopped using. You even linked an article upthread that talked about how bad the electricity and intrastructure situation is now.
“Much effort has been made in the Kurdish areas because it is calmer.”
Saddamn didn’t even control the Kurdish areas before the invasion. Its basically a different country.
“It is the open reality that the US cannot do another “Vietnam-style†withdrawal with helicopters leaving from roofs of our embassy”
Boy, you really like the strawmen. Maybe John McCain can find an internship for you.
Too funny! I’m a veteran, raised in a military family and have family currently serving. I’ve been a Dem for over 35 years. You should read more…..and speak to veterans of the Iraq conflict.
If you are such a good Democrat, why do you keep repeating Republican lies?
“Dan, if you wanted your vote to count, you attended caucus.”
I looked, and looked, and looked. I could not, anywhere, find the independent voter caucus. I saw a DFL one. I’m sure there was a Republican one. I even think there was an Independent (capital I) Party one.
But where was the one for all of the independent voters? I guess I missed it.
Wait! I’ve got it! It is called a primary! A place for independent voters’ voices to be heard is the primary!!!
One problem — nobody wants a primary too occur. Back to the drawing board….
You’re right! No primary because the accepted process for this cycle that has been paid for (and explained ad nauseum) is the caucus/convention process. If we change to a primary, let’s do it for next cycle. I think you would find quite a bit of support for it. I’d be there in a minute.
Does anyone think at this point that Bonoff will be able to block the endorsement, and take it to a primary, or is this race over! Gavin Sullivan thinks Bonoff’s staff is just humoring her at this point.
Anyone who disagrees? Anyone who thinks she has any shot
I’ve had several phone calls today from delegates laughing at the fluff piece DVD sent to them from Bonoff. I don’t think she’s changing minds, that’s for sure.
Did she send that just to elected delegates or more broadly? The question is will she fight to hold for a non-endorsement, or will she see that Ash has 58% to her 42% and an endorsement will take place on second, third ballot.
I’d be curious to hear from any Bonoff supporter whether they are serious about taking this to a primary, or whether they are just buying time so, as Gavin Sullivan puts it, Bonoff’s folks can collect paychecks for another month
“or will she see that Ash has 58% to her 42% and an endorsement will take place on second, third ballot.”
This is where it makes no sense from an outsider’s perspective. If in late October, it is 58% Paulsen and 42% Madia, will you all be encouraging Madia to exit the race? I know, it sounds crazy. So why shouldn’t Bonoff have every right to hang on as long as she can?
I’m not saying we should change the system now. I am saying that let’s call this what it is: A Partisan Endorsement. Not the will of the people, because most of the people don’t identify with the Democratic party (by my count, about 35% do, and most of them didn’t attend the party conventions).
I have to agree with you, DTM. This isn’t “the will of the people” any more than a closed partisan primary would be. It’s a partisan endorsement battle - just as the GOP has when they have multiple candidates for office.
I’m not calling on Bonoff to exit. I am just wondering whether they have any hope of hanging on and forcing a primary. Not clear to me that they have a real strategy. I’d be curious to hear from any Bonoff person.
It shows the momentum in this race that almost all of us bloggers are pro-Madia. Does Bonoff not have anyone to defend her other than Union Man.
Is there no one who can offer a credible strategy for how she takes this to a primary.
DantheMan:
Madia will beat Paulsen by at least 5-6 points in a Dem year in Minnesota.
I’m interested in, and would love to hear, Bonoff’s mindset and thought process behind holding on in the face of this loosing situation. I’m not being obnoxious. I really would like to hear.
My thoughts are: she has sent out lit pieces - several - touting her support for Obama, her early endorsement of Obama, her son working for Obama’s campaign as staff. She has touted Obama in her speeches with adoration when she does. Obama-ites are calling for Hillary to get out because she is tearing the party apart and keeping it from uniting behind their chosen one - calling to stop the process before it plays itself out in the prescribed method. How can Bonoff justify these two divergent views? It’s one thing for Hillary Clinton’s race but another for hers.
Just asking…..
Dan,
I’m sorry, but it’s not EVERYTHING in Iraq is a disaster. The whole thing may be a failed policy, a whole lot more bad than good, but, its simply bad form to say troops are doing NOTHING in Iraq. And, for democrats to take that position plays directly into the Republican attack machine which will tag such comments as naive and ill-informed.
There are plenty of neighborhoods that are safer, many that are being rebuilt, where commerce is returning, and where American support is actually somewhat up-ticking.
Do those achievements mean its a successful foreign policy? No. Does acknowledging those advances mean we support Bush, No. Does it mean we shouldn’t get out and try to rebuild our international image? No. Does it even mean the surge is working? No.
But, if you take the extreme position that everything in Iraq is getting worse by the day and American troops are doing no good anywhere in Iraq American’s will generally laugh and the Democrats will be marginalized as out of touch with reality. People see the few upbeat, positive news stories. They aren’t stupid.
Re West Metro Dem’s post that delegates were “laughing at the fluff piece DVD sent to them from Bonoff,” word on the street is that Bonoff is making multiple calls to delegates, putting on a really hard sell.
There’s going to be backlash from that- just imagine- you work your tail off to be elected a Madia delegate and then Bonoff calls you again and again in the span of a few days to try to change your mind. If anything, she’s going to make delegates even more entrenched.
Have to agree, MinnVoter. I’m hearing from delegates that they are really angry over her pushing and asking them to repudiate what they were elected to do. Not too much integrity there.
“Madia will beat Paulsen by at least 5-6 points in a Dem year in Minnesota.”
Maybe. Maybe not. It is all about the economy. If the economy continues to falter, this is all Democrat. If we see a bounce back in the late summer, it could be enough to keep this seat Red.
Plus, McCain will bring out the Moderate Republicans for the first time in many years.
DTM….could be….could be. Time will tell. This will be a good race to see if this cd is truly turning blue or not.
Yes. The numbers prove it has been TURNING blue for a decade. We’ll see with this and the next few elections if it has actually TURNED. Should be fun.
McCain…..moderate republicans?????????????
Haven’t you seen that photo of Bush and McCain hugging each other?!
Let’s not start talking about who our candidates associate with……:)
Yes, McCain, Moderate Republican. That shouldn’t be news to anyone.
It certainly will be to my very Republican mother who has informed me, very seriously, that McCain is crazy. Sorry, that dog won’t hunt.
Yes, we’ve heard about your very Republican mother before. I’m sure she is a wonderful lady.
And that dog does hunt. Of all of the Republican candidates back in October, McCain is the only one who has consistently polled even or better than Democratic contenders. And that ain’t because he appeals to the Christian Conservative base. Quite the opposite. He is Republican enough to not be Democrat, but not so much that he alienates the Moderate.
I’m sorry your mother disagrees.
DTM, you posted: “Yes, McCain, Moderate Republican. That shouldn’t be news to anyone.”
Eight years ago, yes. That was then. This is now:
http://www.WaterBoardExpress.com
Domain name registered, by TPT.
Bonoff has the right to do what she wants to do.
But everything has a cost/benefit. Taking it to
a primary is easy, just hold the fort on 4/12.
She wants the job.
Ponder this:
“In the absence of any direction to the contrary by a convention, a central committee of the proper geographic area may endorse candidates between conventions. An instruction by a convention vote of 60% of the delegates that the central committee shall not endorse will be effective through the general election unless otherwise stated by the convention, or unless the endorsed candidate withdraws or is incapacitated.” pg. 25 of the 2008 Official DFL Call
dmc8301
Yes, but how can she hold the fort? Don’t you think she will be abandoned on a second or third ballot if she’s barely breaking 40%.
If she forces a primary, which is unlikely, I bet she loses the primary and secondly she loses her State Senate also. Bonoff had a lot of goodwill going for her. Now that is in the mud.
LGR - that’s the point, hold the fort. these 60 some people committed to her, all she has to do is keep them there. One of the scenario’s I’ve heard about is just having them all get up and leave right after the thing begins.
RM - I agree, and if the convention cannot reach 60% to endorse, and cannot reach 60% to tell the Central Committee to do nothing, then the Central Committee does something on their own, like endorse Bonoff -remember, all the party insiders seem to be behind her - the DFL will lose it all. If the CC pulls something like that, I know I’ll never vote for another Democrat in this state.
“I’m not saying we should change the system now. I am saying that let’s call this what it is: A Partisan Endorsement. Not the will of the people, because most of the people don’t identify with the Democratic party (by my count, about 35% do, and most of them didn’t attend the party conventions).”
Lets distinguish between the “wish of the party” and the “will of the people”.
A party endorsement is not the will of the people. It is the wish of the party. Anyone who wants the “will of the people”, they can run in the general election, nobody is stopping them
DanThe Man, it IS the will of the people.
They can choose to go to GOP caucus; they can choose to go to DFL caucus, they can choose to participate in whatever the Indpendents/Greens did, or they can choose to stay home.
Apathy IS a political position.
You chose to do nothing but sit on the sidelines; that’s your choice - that’s your will.
The people that chose to attend DFL Caucus in CD-3 spoke loudly; they’ve made their will know.
It really doesn’t matter that you refuse to recognize it for what it is; it’s still the will of the people.
I have heard that there is no way delegates will walk out. But Ive also heard she has persuaded some of the undecided delegates, and that shes 100% committed to forcing this to a primary.
NBTT
Your line is old and anything but the truth. The two major parties have stacked the deck to ensure that it is almost impossible and or pointless to challenge them. Their message is for us to pick between one gang of thugs or the other or shut up. It is not that everyone who doesn’t follow one party or the other isn’t involved or doesn’t care. It is in part because neither party represents their beliefs. Nobody should be forced to join forces with either of the major party disasters to be involved. When the two parties change the system enough to allow independents and minor parties to compete on a level playing field you can start to talk about the “will of the people”.
“When the two parties change the system enough to allow independents and minor parties to compete on a level playing field you can start to talk about the “will of the peopleâ€.”
Bingo.
Let’s not confuse a Party Endorsement with a free and open election. The former happens in Feb - April, while the latter occurs in the fall.
KH - no one is telling you to “shut up”. Quite the opposite. Obviously, it doesn’t work as well in the GOP, but you and DTM and other libertarians could work to force changes through. One change is preferential ballot, which is used in many places to encourage 3rd-party viability.
But, you don’t get organized. And you don’t work to make change.
That’s your choice. It’s your will. The will of the people that did choose to get involved is clear. If the super delegates choose to ignore the will of the people, there will be consequences.
NBTT - Do you think the delta between the 7% of 3rd CD voters who engage in the endorsement process and the 65-75% who vote in November represents those who are apathetic? Does something magically occur after April and before November that snaps people out of apathy?
Or could it be that it represents independents who prefer to make their decision on a longer, public campaign between a variety of candidates?
No way either wins the general if this goes to a primary. It’s too late in the process, would be an incredibly nasty fight, and would keep the candidate from communicating to the general electorate how they are superior to Paulsen. Why do you think DtM is so aggressive in pushing a primary? He, like the entire GOP, knows that that will allow them to punch their ticket to Washington.
At this point Bonoff needs to recognize that the party’s interest in taking the seat is more important than what candidate is the nominee. She may think she’s the best candidate, but, its a suicide pact for the DFL to take that individual belief and force a primary. She had her chance to convince the party (not just the party leadership) that she is the best candidate. She couldn’t get it done.
This is an incredibly dangerous move for a sitting senator who barely won her senate seat. She can’t afford to cause SD-43 DFLers (myself included) to turn their backs on her and not show up two years from now to support her. John Benson, a super delegate, also can’t make that mistake. Unfortunately for him, the impact could come this year. For that reason, I’m still confident that the super delegates, at least the elected ones, will bolt for Madia in the second vote.
PD - “At this point Bonoff needs to recognize that the party’s interest in taking the seat is more important than what candidate is the nominee”
This quote is a case in point. This is a party endorsement, not the will of the people. Again, I’m not saying we should change mid-stream. Let’s just call this what it is.
Dan, if you’re “independent”, what makes you think you have the right to influence partisan party politics?
It’s your choice to be independent - it’s your will.
You’re trying to have it both ways, and it doesn’t work that way.
So if I’m independent, I have to bend over and take what the parties give me?
And you wonder why fewer and fewer people are identifying with a party these days. I wasn’t a fan of Jesse Ventura the Governor, but it is no wonder he had the electoral success he did. People were thirsty for a non-partisan candidate.
Too many people assume that being independent equals a lack of passion on the issues. That couldn’t be further from the truth. We simply have beliefs that don’t neatly line up with one camp or the other.
DtM,
I don’t get how one can wait around until they have “a variety of candidates” during a general election but then complain that the candidates that others, who put in the effort to pick them, aren’t good enough.
It’s fine to be independent, but, if you want better candidates get involved in putting them forward.
So who do I sign up with? The Democratic machine or the Republican machine? Which side should I sell my soul to?
And I’m not complaining that the candidates aren’t good enough. I think we had 4 candidates in this race that all had merit.
What got me going off on this tangent wasn’t the candidates who were going to be put forth; it was the assertion that this is somehow “the people speaking”.
It’s not. But it is the way the system works and I can live with it. But when I hear someone invoking the phrase “the will of the people” in what essnetially is a party endorsing process, I’ll take issue with that assertion every time.
The invocation of “the will of the people” necessarily, however, adopts its context. No one means to say that the DFL nominee is the will of the people in the general electorate context. It’s the will of the people who have chosen to participate in the DFL endorsement process. No different than the will of the people in the context of 10 co-workers picking where to eat lunch takes no more meaning than the majority of those 10 people wanting to eat at Taco Johns.
Both parties have systematically and legally disenfranchised millions of voters. The systems at the state and national legislatures are set up in part to keep any independent from having a voice even if they were to win an election. An independent legislator would get no committee assignments of importance and and a fraction of the staff support of legislators from the major parties. Those facts reduce the incentive for people to elect an independent or minor party candidate.
I alway caucus with one party or the other and have always worked more than the average citizen to make my voice heard. The real truth, unlike what NothinButTheTruth writes, is that the parties have tried to force everybody to pick one side or the other to have a voice. The two-faced response to independents is one person like PlymouthDem saying we should join a major party in order to have input while NBTT says that being independent means we shouldn’t get a say in their party. As long as their are parties that put themselves above the will of the people I will do what I can to influence them without promoting them. That is my will. The will of Democrats is to support a party that promotes a system which disenfranchises of a majority of the countries citizens.
KH,
Sorry but that’s bs. You have every right to get involved with whichever party you wish and work within that party structure to push a candidate that supports your views. You have the Green Party, Independence Party, the GOP and the DFL at a minimum. It isn’t the problem of either the GOP or the DFL that these other parties are not organized or effective in the 3rd congressional district. If you really want one of them to be effective, get involved in it and work to make it so. Complaining that no one represents you is a strawman.
So, in the 3rd you have effectively 2 choices. Please, don’t expect anyone here to believe the DFL is the only party that is going to pick a nominee that doesn’t reflect the “will of the people” by the 7% who showed up. That’s garbage, too. Both major parties have put in place their own procedures for choosing their candidates. Candidates choose to run in their party nomination processes as set the year before. They know what they are getting into and if they don’t, it’s their own fault.
The GOP self-selected Erik Paulsen because….it’s his turn, apparently. The DFL is selecting a nominee right now under the process put in place last year. Both candidates are making their cases for the nomination.
Your choices are: GOP with their nominee of Erik Paulsen, the DFL with Madia (if Bonoff accepts the fact that she is out of it or looses on the first or second ballot) or David Dille who is running as an independent because he can afford to.
If you don’t want to work to create a 3rd party that represents you, you have to choose among those who are willing to do so.
So, consider it “disenfranchisement” of those who don’t bother to work the system or those who have other commitments in their lives or those who just want to complain because their pet issue isn’t pandered to but it’s the way it is.
I don’t want to speak for KH, but I think what he (or she) is saying is that as long as the current party structure is in place, the candidates we are presented with each November will be products of a very partisan process rather than active, informed citizens asking for thier community’s vote.
The days of the feel good story of a citizen becoming an inspiring populist candidate are gone. Today, you have to play the party game.
In 1998, Jesse Ventura won the Gubernatorial General Election with 37% of the vote. He defeated formidable party names such as Norm Coleman and Hubert Humphrey III.
The will of the people was for Jesse to be Governor.
Now, lets suppose Jesse had gone to the DFL or GOP conventions asking them to support his candidacy? Would he have been welcomed? Would he have garned 37% of the support from those attendees?
What is sad is that while the Independent who wants to make a difference has usually been more accepted in MN than other states, they still have a tidal wave of odds against them.
DtM - That’s why I love this state. Best in the country at voting the bums out, from Wendy appointing himself senator to Rudy good Jew, bad Jew. I’m afraid I agree with KH on this one. The 2 major parties have made it nearly impossible, unless you have Bill Gates $$ and name recognition, for entry of a third party. I believe this country would be far better off if we did have three major parties, forcing compromise between two to get anything done.
Can we get off this “will of the people”. Given our system, it’s usually about $$. By the time one gets to November, you probably have a minority of people who’s first choice is the winner. Take the Presidential race, we originally had what 10 Democrats and 8 Republicans? That is when one truly has a choice. But good people get lost for lack of $$ and name recognition. As KH said, get involved then. Sorry, but ya gotta pick one of the two major parties to have any impact. I voted for Jesse, not because I thought he would be a good governor, he didn’t have a prayer to be that because both parties worked against him, so it was him against the world. I voted for Jesse because I knew he had a shot at it, and I wanted to express my displeasure with both political parties. Did it do any good? I don’t think either party really heard us. KH has the best idea given the constraints we have to work in. Green party et. al. will never have a prayer because the 2 in power have legislated it almost an impossibility for them to be viable. Madia is the will of the people who chose to get involved at this level. If you don’t want to show up until November, then your will of the people will be limited to those who are left standing.
PS Jesse was not the will of nearly 2/3’s of Minnesotans.
“The 2 major parties have made it nearly impossible, unless you have Bill Gates $$ and name recognition,…”
You want to ensure that money is the overriding factor, dump the caucus and go to a primary.
And regardless of what the sideline sitters and Monday Morning Quarterbacks here are saying, “choice” is “choice” and those whom are chosen by the most are chosen by the will of the people.
Doesn’t Ashwin’s campaign disprove the $$ argument? He started with little to nothing, and, only rhrough hard work raise anywhere near the established candidate.
Madia took in a lot of $$ early see:
http://www.minnpost.com/ericblack/2008/01/10/546/dflers_bonoff_madia_raise_sizable_sums_in_3rd_district_race
Yes, going to a primary certainly ups the ante. Then it becomes name recognition and short blurbs on TV/radio. If we were doing a primary it would probably be Franken - Cerisi now rather than Franken - Nelson-Pallmeyer. And I personally think Franken - N-P is a better “will of the people”.
And, we still could have a primary. Two years ago the DFL endorsed Andy Lugar for Hennepin County Attorney over Mike Freeman. Freeman took it to primary, won the primary and won the general election, so it’s not necessarily a killer.
He took in a lot of money in his first quarter, but, that doesn’t change the fact he started with nothing, had very few big contributors (I think he got a sum from VoteVets, that’s about it in terms of PACS).
Further, he more or less won with about half the cash on hand as the established candidate.
Of course it’s not solely about $$.
I think that speaks well of his viability in November,
to go from zero to a lot and not have any real big
contributors - more will of the people? :)
I’ll be very interested to see what kind of money he had raised through the March quarter. An endorsement like VoteVets immediately gets you national attention and contributions. I think that was a huge pickup for him. Unless you’ve made teh decision to self-fund, all candidates essentially start with nothing — Madia’s fundraising essentially vaulted him into being a factor in this race.
“Jesse was not the will of nearly 2/3’s of Minnesotans.”
Wellstone never got a majority, either. I’d be careful with knocking the plurality point.
But dmc, your longer post up above (where you give the reasons you voted for Jesse) is right on. In today’s political world, you first need to pander for a party endorsement before you can take your message to the constituency.
Yep, $$, a good stump speech, and what got me was the first time I ever heard of the guy, HE was on the phone with me talking as long as I wanted about any issue I wanted.
The DNC will pump big bucks in here to get this seat.
Yes again unless you win the lottery when it goes over $100 mill.
“The DNC will pump big bucks in here to get this seat.”
Amen. When it is all said and done, it is not going to be the $100 from Mr. Teacher in Bloomington who will get him over the top, but the party machine and contributions from people in places like Alexandria, Virginia who wouldn’t know Madia if they saw him on the street.
And in all fairness to him, much of the same will hold true for Paulsen.
So is the state of politics today.
And ya know what, the DNC could probably care less if it’s
Bonoff or Madia as long as they have that D with their name.