The NRSC’s new ad, “Fellow Democrats” contains portions of 4 of the 5 quotes from the top of the “Frankly Franken” “Unfit For Office” page. It is clear that “Fellow Democrats” was created using “Frankly Franken” as a resource.
Then check out the header of FranklyFranken.com:
The end of that same ad, “Fellow Democrats”:
ANNOUNCER: Character matters.
ON SCREEN: Character matters.
ANNOUNCER: Al Franken is unfit for office.
ON SCREEN: Al Franken, Unfit For Office.
ANNOUNCER: The National Republican Senatorial Committee is responsible for the content of this advertising.
Norm Coleman hasn’t asked that “Frankly Franken” be taken down, yet proclaims he’s going positive. Team Coleman can coordinate with that portion of the NRSC. “Frankly Franken” is a resource that the IE side of the NRSC uses to create their TV ads. In other words, this is a “legal” way of coordinating negative ads and it is clear that coordination is exactly what they are doing.
Norm Coleman’s promise to go fully positive is FranklyFraudulent.
There’s a reason Coleman goes to such great lengths to proclaim that he “can’t force independent organizations” to take down negative ads. He’s trying to play good cop and hope nobody realizes he’s feeding the bad cops their lines.
I have to admire one aspect of the Coleman switcharoo tactic… if he had this planned all along, he and his campaign are pretty smart. Start with a negative approach, wait for reaction, and then switch to the opposite. To a low information voter it looks like Norm the Weasel is the more moderate and sensible candidate while benefiting from the early negative ads. Campaigns are so time sensitive that if this tactic is used close to the actual voting day, many people will not have it figured out. In this tight of a race the close in bump up of favorability could result in victory.
As a partisan I can admire the cold, callous and cynical aspect of this… if it works. I think they may have pulled the trigger too quickly because Franken has ads outlining the BS of this. The magician should never reveal the strings attached to the floating magic wand.
If this election is all about CHANGE, then why is the Star Tribune endorsing all incumbents and no challengers to incumbents? Oh..never mind…because they are Democrats.
Star Tribune Endorsements
37A - Madore (DFL)
37B - Sterner (DFL)
38A - Masin (DFL)
40A - Morgan (DFL)
41A - Erhardt (Ind)
41B - Rosenthal (DFL)
42B - Loon (GOP)
49B - Newton (DFL)
51A - Sanders (GOP)
53A - Gardner (DFL)
56A - Bunn (DFL)
56B - Swails (DFL)
Um, I live in district 41B and Rosenthal is not the incumbent. Nor is he from the party of the incumbent (who is not running). Please engage brain before opening mouth.
Max -
There are 12 seats they are endorsing in. In all 7 races where there is an incumbent, they endorse the incumbent….none of the challengers.
In the 5 open seats they…of course… don’t endorse an incumbent.
Get your facts straight before you start talking about stuff you don’t understand.
Um dumb shit, that’s not what you said in your first post. Either clearly comment or don’t get snippy when your miscommunication is the problem.
It’s called reading folks. Get a clue. Here is my quote in case you are too lazy to scroll up and look at it.
If this election is all about CHANGE, then why is the Star Tribune endorsing all incumbents and no challengers to incumbents?
Clearly I am referencing that the Strib is endorsing all incumbents and no challengers to incumbents in the races where an incumbent is running again. In a race where the incumbent is running, there are no challengers to endorse…hence…it is not an option.
Interesting that you won’t argue the point. That in an environment for CHANGE… you really want the status quo.
Then I make a typo and goof up..ugh. Obviously it should read. “In a race where the incumben is NOT running, there are no challengers to endorse…hence..it is not an option”.
Now that I am done displaying my more typing skills, I’m curious on how people think supporting the status quo is really change.
PF4AWG - Are they all white? Maybe it’s cause they are all white.
And if the moron could get it through his head that it is a Republican administration that the word “Change” is being referenced it might help. May I note that the “Change” message is coming from both Presidential campaigns and not from the state campaigns. We like a DFL legislative branch and look forward to having DFL governor in the next election.
It’s called writing folks and when you do it right there is confusion.
Sorry, didn’t mean to have you step in a trap of your own words, like MB.
PF4aWG-
This election is not about kicking out incumbents. It is about changing the direction of our nation, which has been hijacked by a republican band of thugs over the last eight years.
PF4aWG-
Your list of endorsements has already been posted by others on MNPublius and MDE. I’m sure it has been posted elsewhere. However, no one has posted documentation as to how to get this information.
There are people who are very interested in how this list got out. Particularly, those at the Star Tribune. In a discussion I had with a candidate last night, the candidate contacted the Star Tribune and found out that they had not made any decisions about endorsements for those races yet. The candidate said those at the Star Tribune were unhappy.
I would like an end to this confusion.