Sack on Recount

by Matt Martin | 62 Comments

Seems about right

November 8, 2008, 1:34 pm | Category: General | Tags: .

62 Responses to “Sack on Recount”

Feed for this Entry Trackback Address
  • south metro dem
    November 8, 2008 at 4:04 pm

    With a better process for endorsing/nominating in DFL party, a Senate candidate with broad appeal could have been chosen, thereby avoiding this whole recount mess. Clearly the race was the dems to lose.

    Recap of flawed process as I experienced it and evidence that Franken was a weak candidate:

    Feb: 150 voters attend my precinct caucus results - attendees strongly favor Obama. Senate straw poll not taken

    Apr: 5-10 voters from my precinct (100 from house district) attend district convention to vote between Al and Jack (Ciresi, my choice has already dropped out) results 3 delegates for Al, 2 for Jack, and 1 uncommittted are selected to attend state convention

    June: 1200 delegates endorse Al, including the 6 representing the 100 voters that attended my district convention and, in theory, representing the 20,000 voters in my house district.

    Sept: Al wins a worthless, barely contested primary election

    Oct: while canvassing I talk to several voters who intend to vote for Al despite dislike for him, as dislike for Norm is greater (my point- Al’s support is weak even from some of us who voted for him)

    Nov: Obama wins my precinct by 15% (receives 1100 votes), My dfl rep wins by a whopping 59% (gets 1500 votes), underfunded Sarvi approx ties Kline (has support of 950 voters), and Franken loses by 2% (chosen by 775 voters- only half as many as my rep)

    With a strong field, hopefully we’ll do a better job picking a great candidate for Governor, as it has been 20 years since the dems have put up a winning candidate for that office.

    That’ll be my last gripe and I’m still hoping for a Franken victory.

  • lojasmo
    November 8, 2008 at 10:08 pm

    Thanks for sharing, SMD. Helpful doesn’t begin to describe your contribution. In fact, it is antithetical to helpful.

  • Another Chris
    November 8, 2008 at 11:15 pm

    Steve Sack didn’t draw enough “furrowed brow” lines on Coleman’s forehead.

  • amuseinc
    November 8, 2008 at 11:36 pm

    Funny at my caucus of about 250… Cirisi 3, Franken 125, JNP 122. Similar at my Senate District convention other than Cerisis had dropped out by then.

    Franken was blind-sided by other Democrats as much as he was attacked by Norm. This race would not have been close if they did not have the public displays of of Party dis-loyalty from some. I’m still aghast at how some treated the endorsed candidate. Some of those politicians will have real trouble with state wide party support in the future.

    He was a good candidate and I think anyone else you can mention would have been steamrolled by the amount of money put into the race by Coleman vote-owners, Chamber of Commerce, National Republican moneys. The fact is Frankens ability to bring in outside money and support is one reason this race is so close now.

    I chalk this more up to lack of party discipline than anything else. Either way we win… Franken elected, Coleman elected and thrown out for ethics charges or Coleman the opportunist in a Democratically controlled Senate… you Republicans honestly think that Norm is going to tow the Republican line now?

  • Anonymous
    November 8, 2008 at 11:38 pm

    south metro dem: I was a long-time skeptic of the idea of Franken as a Senate candidate, but it’s not fair to compare him to some mythical perfect DFLer who never ran. The alternatives in the real world were Mike Ciresi (abrasive, standoffish, kind of a know-it-all, a guy who, in 2000 lost an endorsement to a weak candidate like Jerry Janezich and a primary by 20 points to a weak candidate like Mark Dayton despite having a lot of money and institutional support) and Jack Nelson Pallmeyer (a guy who was too liberal for 5th District activists in 2006, who had opposed military action in Afghanistan after 9/11, who had written a book entitled Jesus Against Christianity, and had a few hundred thousand dollars in his campaign treasury). I know you said you supported Ciresi, but both these guys would have had their own troubles in a general election. As for Priscilla Lord Faris, dear lord, don’t make me laugh. Just listen to her Midday interview in July. She had no familiarity with any issues at all, frequently beginning her answers with statements like, “I’m kind of befuddled by that…” followed by about five minutes of disjointed, muddled rambling. She made Sarah Palin sound like Einstein.

  • Matt Martin
    November 9, 2008 at 10:07 am

    The endorsement/nominating process in the DFL is an antiquated POS

  • Mockingbird
    November 9, 2008 at 11:27 am

    Matt - while maybe these processes need tuning up:
    What other candidate that actually went through the caucus process had a better, or even STRONG showing?

    Franken wasn’t a bad candidate.
    Norm’s attack machine & the fact that he is an incumbent worked. That doesn’t make Norm a better,
    or even ADEQUATE candidate, just a nasty one.

    Maybe Minnesotans aren’t so much “above average” any more & that accounts for some of the Coleman support.

    Please refer to amuseinc immediately above for further corroboration.
    The annoying Betty McCollum turning tail didn’t help. Lord’s daughter didn’t help.

    Norm’s Elmer Fudd deliberate crackle & knit brow must be credited with a little of the stage makeup.

  • Mockingbird
    November 9, 2008 at 12:49 pm

    Does Norm get slapped & kicked out of the senate for his Ethics violation
    or can he actually get jail time on this?

    One has to wonder what his tax filing shows.

    When its all said & done, Norm may have to take a job as ELMER FUDD’s stunt double!!!

  • Mubert Mumphrey
    November 9, 2008 at 2:24 pm

    I think Mockingbird and amuseinc are right on the money. Franken was a good candidate, and easily the best within the primary pool. In-fighting within the party only helped the GOP paint Al Franken as a far-left extremist.

    I think another problem Al faced is the tendency of the news media to portray political attacks of any type as morally equivalent. Coleman smeared Franken’s character with libelous personal accusations and out-of-context quotes from news media and Franken himself. Franken’s accusations were far more honest and related to Coleman’s job performance, whether it be his voting record or habit of corruption. Coleman’s campaign was morally egregious, Franken’s was nasty but fair. The media made no distinction.

  • Dan
    November 9, 2008 at 2:38 pm

    The media wasn’t fair? The Republicans and indpendent groups played dirty? Oh I’m sorry, but was this election for some reason different from every other election everywhere else?

    In the real world, candidates with a ton of baggage who do a terrible job getting on top their own baggage are, in fact, bad candidates. I thought Franken finished strong and he obviously may still pull this out. But despite his incumbency, Coleman was an easy target and in a huge Democratic year like this there is no excuse for having a Senate candidate running so far behind Obama.

  • Julie
    November 9, 2008 at 2:51 pm

    I think the biggest issue we have in the DFL is not finding pristine candidates, party discipline, or even the media but rather how to run in a three way race. The common denominator in our toughest losses (Senate, 3rd CD, and 6th CD) were Independence Party candidates. We are clearly doing something wrong that Republicans are doing right in these situations.

  • Mubert Mumphrey
    November 9, 2008 at 3:24 pm

    “The media wasn’t fair? The Republicans and indpendent groups played dirty? Oh I’m sorry, but was this election for some reason different from every other election everywhere else?”

    My comment on the media’s treatment of the campaigns was not a comparison of this election to every other. The news media’s tendency to regard negative campaigns with moral equivalence is widespread. That said, Minnesota was home to one of the nastiest senate campaigns of 2008, so it was exceptional in that respect.

    You seem to believe that Coleman carried a lot of baggage heading into the election, which may be true, but take a look at this:
    http://www.pollster.com/polls/mn/08-mn-sen-ge-cvf.php
    Norm Coleman was never all that unpopular. From the beginning of 2008 up to August, Coleman’s poll figures remained steady with an approximate 5% lead and above the 50% mark. Now, if you believe he had a lot of baggage, you can chalk up these figures to two things: A) The news media did a poor job covering Norm or B) Minnesotans didn’t care. Either way, Al Franken faced a mildly popular incumbent in a purple state and had the up-hill task of familiarizing his political-self to voters. Coleman, on the other hand, had the advantage of familiarity. It was only within the last month or so of the campaign that Franken pulled ahead, and the trend line suggests that the Franken would have claimed a clear victory had there been more time before the election. Given Coleman’s recent scandal, which had little time for media exposure pre-Nov 4th, Franken almost definitely would have pulled ahead with more time.

    Franken did a good job given the difficulty of his task.

  • Dan
    November 9, 2008 at 3:38 pm

    The media coverage and the Republican smears were worse only because Franken gave them so much to work with. It didn’t happen to Amy Klobuchar because there was nothing wrong with her, but it would have if there was. The only thing that is exceptional about this race is that the DFL picked such a bad candidate. Franken allowed the media and the smear artists to reach their full awful potential. You can blame them, but they will always be there. It does no go good to complain about the game. You need to find a player who can succeed in the game that is already being played.

    You talk about “the up-hill task of familiarizing his political self to voters” as it was some other external factor. The fact that Franken had to go through this uphill task is yet another reason he was not a good candidate. They guy hadn’t lived in Minnesota for 35 years and came back to run for office.

    Aside from the gross incompetence of not finding and fixing his tax and work comp problems before the campaign started, I thought Franken did run an ok race. But that’s grading on the curve. He did the best he could despite his flaws as a candidate. The trick is to find a candidate without the flaws. The trick is to find a candidate that doesn’t start with a 10 point handicap.

  • lojasmo
    November 9, 2008 at 4:04 pm

    If you’re grading on a curve, the limiting factor is an incumbent senator who couldn’t close the deal against a decent candidate who had exceptionally high negative numbers throughout the campaign…for no legitimate reason.

    Coleman is a litigious, whining failure.

  • Mubert Mumphrey
    November 9, 2008 at 4:05 pm

    The other primary candidates were no more familiar than Franken. I don’t disagree that Al was a candidate with many flaws to overcome, but I am convinced that he was the best choice among the primary contenders. At any rate, my point was that Franken did a good job given his disadvantages, and you apparently agree.

    How should Al Franken have “played the game” differently? Do you suggest he should have put up more ads defending himself against the smears? Should he have lowered himself to Coleman’s level and smeared back with vitriol? Aside from the snarky talking fish ads, I think he struck a good balance.

  • Alec
    November 9, 2008 at 4:14 pm

    On the face of it, the caucus system seems to limit participation and be confusing and weird, to be honest. When I think about it though, if there wasn’t a caucus system, Franken would have been the only person the public knew. The caucuses give candidates a built in meet’n’greet with a large mass of voters, for free. Without the caucuses, do you think Pallmeyer could have afforded that type of exposure and Ciresi generated that kind of enthusiasm? In my opinion, if there were just a primary, I only would have ever heard of Franken. Part of me thinks that in a year when the Republicans just wanted to lose, all we had to do was put up a (D) behind someones name as long as they had no negatives and we would have sailed. Maybe, maybe not.
    thanks,
     Alec

  • Mubert Mumphrey
    November 9, 2008 at 4:21 pm

    Alec, you may be right about anti-Republican sentiment this year in MN, but if the Democrats had nominated someone with no apparent negatives, Coleman’s smear team would have surely invented some good ones for them.

  • Kerosene Hat
    November 9, 2008 at 4:28 pm

    Franken was by far the worst candidate out of those in the primary. He just had the recourses to buy the DFL nomination. He was able to convince enough Democrats that his fund raising ability would be enough to overcome the fact that he supported the invasion of Iraq, he only moved to Minnesota to run for senate, on top of the tax and history of blue and insulting humor. In many was he was the anti-Wellstone within the DFL. Given Obama’s large margin of victory it is hard to imagine either Ciresi or JNP giving up as much ground as Franken did. People voted for Barkley in part because they really disliked Franken but still wouldn’t vote for Coleman. JNP and Ciresi wouldn’t have offended as many people and would have been much harder target for the GOP to go after.

  • amuseinc
    November 9, 2008 at 4:35 pm

    The major benefit of a caucus system is that it brings in people to the Party who either then volunteer or donate or just get involved. As a practical manner of presenting “a candidate with no negatives” it doesn’t work so well.

    I think Franken has many things he could have done better. His early campaign was weirdly esoteric and not about Minnesota bread and butter issues. He never really got in front of Coleman’s crap spreaders and took the lead of the discussion until very late in the campaign. He was not the perfect candidate but they only exist in the movies or Karl Rove’s fever dreams.

    I insist that the number one problem with the Franken Campaign is that the Party didn’t back him and “force” the other politicians to do the same. McCollum’s weird nee ignorant attack, in public no less, gave every DFL hack with an ax to grind permission to go after Franken. Lord’s daughter’s ego driven weird last minute eruption of fluff and feathers only caused more confusion. There was obviously problems between the “old” party activists and the Franken campaign… the problem is that it should have been settled somewhere besides Norm Coleman’s campaign ads.

    Personally if Coleman prevails, I’ll start referring to Betty McCollum as Norm Coleman’s new sexy girlfriend. After all it is her insane delicacy about old writings that became a campaign issue out of proportion to its’ importance. Don’t be surprised if Republican’s use her Norm Support against her also.

  • south metro dem
    November 9, 2008 at 5:10 pm

    I’d just like to add a couple of thoughts to my whiny rant at the top of this thread. It’s looking like Al could still win (see 538.com) and I do think he would (will) be a good senator. Despite his weaknesses as a cnadidate and inexplicable tendency to annoy the hell out of me, I do view Franken favorably for hard work, knowledge, intelligence, integrity, and looking out for interests of middle income families like mine.

    I stand by my earlier point that 0.1% of dem voters selecting nominee is not very democratic nor effective process (that would be about about 1% if those who attend district conventions are included.) I don’t really have any suggestions other than consider a primary at an early enough time to make it real. Also Chris Bowers assessment of Franken as a candidate from way back in May 2007 was quite insightful and is interesting to review. At that point there were many viable candidates that may have run a stronger race.

    “Al Franken’s entry into the race, along with his strong fundraising, appears to have scared off other Democrats from challenging highly vulnerable Republican incumbent Norm Coleman. However, as much as many of us might like Al, there are reasons to be worried about this. Polling has consistently shown Coleman hovering either just above or just below 50%. At the same time, it has also shown a fairly name recognition for Al Franken, who trails Coleman by 10-20%, depending on the poll. More worrisome are Franken’s favorable numbers, which are actually slightly negative according to both Rasmussen and the Mason-Dixon. That is not a formula for making up ground on a right-wing Senator in a bluish state would is very beatable. If Franken’s favorables remain in negative territory, there is no way he can win this race.”

    http://mnpublius.com/2007/05/dfl-senate-field-we-got-hated-on-by-mydd/#more-516

  • lojasmo
    November 9, 2008 at 5:39 pm

    KH-

    That last comment should go on page one of every democratic strategist and wonk. Seriously, your pearls of wisdom shine like those of no other.

    Really.

  • Dan
    November 9, 2008 at 6:05 pm

    “Democrats had nominated someone with no apparent negatives, Coleman’s smear team would have surely invented some good ones for them.”

    “He was not the perfect candidate but they only exist in the movies or Karl Rove’s fever dreams”

    The implication from these statements is that the amount of a candiate’s baggage doesn’t matter, and that is completely false. Yes, the Republicans will invent smears for any candidate, but they won’t stick if there is nothing to them. That is what happened with Klobuchar. With Franken they didn’t even have to make things up - they just used Franken’s own quotes against him. And while there may not be a perfect candidate (although Klobuchar was pretty close), that does not mean that they are all equal, and Franken was among the worst.

    MM - the answer is that Franken should not have played the game at all. He should have let someone else play. Again, other than failure to do opposition research on himself and get his finances together, he ran a pretty good campaign. Giving what he was starting with, that may not have been enough.

    And while you can blame Betty McCollum, anyone who thinks she caused Franken to lose is kidding themselves. I know lots of people who voted for Obama but not Franken who have no idea what McCollum did. Its total inside baseball. You can be mad at Betty for sitting on her ass at the end of the campaign, but what she said about Franken at the time of the convention is just what a lot of people were thinking. And for anyone who can’t let go and wants to primary Betty, the only way she loses that seat is if they put her house in the 6th after redistricting.

  • Mubert Mumphrey
    November 9, 2008 at 6:38 pm

    Dan,
    You mischaracterize my statement. I never implied that a candidate’s baggage doesn’t matter, only that no candidate is safe from smears. Other candidates probably would not have been hurt as badly by Coleman’s attacks as Franken, but I don’t think any of them would have compensated for the positives Franken brought to the table, such as the enthusiasm he inspires in base voters, his fundraising strength, and, yes, his likability (for those who aren’t convinced he’s a porn-writing, tax-evading, baby eater). This is not to say that Franken is a highly electable candidate, but the alternative candidates were no better.

    But I also believe that Franken would be a much more effective senator if elected. He’s funny, has the courage to take a strong stand, and, like Wellstone, has a strong sense of moral duty through politics.

  • Anonymous
    November 9, 2008 at 8:31 pm

    Let’s not forget what a wonderful asset to the party Betty McC is/was to this whole Senate race. I wish she’d go away. What a bitch. With friends like her in the DFL who needs enemies?

  • Matt Martin
    November 9, 2008 at 8:42 pm

    Whoa. My comment wasn’t really directed at Franken but the endorsement process in general.

  • Dan
    November 9, 2008 at 9:36 pm

    MM - I understand what you are saying. I guess I disagree that Franken’s positives compensated for the baggage, and I think that is reflected in the fact that he ran so far behind Obama. I was talking to a couple of my neighbors tonight, and while they all voted for Franken they were pretty indifferent about it. I think that a lot of “the base” voted for Franken while holding their nose. The left side of the base certainly wasn’t excited about him given Franken’s enthusiastic support for the Iraq and his subsequent waffling about withdrawal. I met Al Franken a couple of times during the race and he was likeable and actually very funny. But 95 percent of the 3 million voters in this race did not connect with him that way.

    I don’t know if Ciresi and JNP were better candidates - JNP was too liberal and kind of goofy, and Ciresi just didn’t seem to have his heart in it. Farris was just a joke. But at the start of the race a number of state legislators were talking about getting in and were ultimately deterred by the money of Franken and Ciresi. You might be able to knock of one millionaire, but not two. We didn’t need an out of state savior to beat Norm Coleman - a Minnesota candidate could have done it.

  • Dan
    November 9, 2008 at 9:40 pm

    Betty McCollum, who was the first woman elected to congress from Minesota in however many years, was concerned because sexism and misogynistic statments were not being taken seriously.

    “I wish she’d go away. What a bitch.”

    Glad to see that Betty had nothing to worry about.

  • Josh
    November 9, 2008 at 10:25 pm

    Look, enough with the Betty-bashing, ok? First of all, if not for Betty speaking out, this garbage about Franken’s writings wouldn’t have hit until September instead of May and Coleman would have cruised to victory on a sea of slime that Al wouldn’t have had time to recover from. Second, Franken should have gotten out front of this ahead of time and dealt with it himself before anyone else had a chance to make an issue out of it and control the story. Third, Betty stepped up and worked hard for a lot of DFL candidates this cycle, harder than a lot of the MMQBs who dropped out of sight as soon as their preferred candidates didn’t move forward. (And y’all know who y’all are)

    BMC stepped up for Al, too. I was there at more than one rally where BMC made the hard sell for Al and did it without reservation. Take your petty BS insults and arguments and cram them where the sun don’t shine.

  • amuseinc
    November 9, 2008 at 11:03 pm

    When Democrats pretend to be Republicans twisted out by Free Speech and old jokes, it makes me question their sanity. The only reason the vast majority of Minnesotans didn’t ignore the stupid charge of 9 years ago this guy wrote a comical article in Playboy was a major sin is because the support given to this pretend issue by Betty McCollum. She obviously thought it was important enough to make sure that no other person who has the audacity to joke about issues she thinks are beyond humor ever tries to run for office around her.

    The characterization of bad, old jokes as pornographic was neither true nor valid use of the terms. The attack on an American writing for living adult themes in an adult magazine, available for purchase legally anywhere in Minnesota that magazines are sold, is beyond the pale. This was an act of intimidation by Betty McCollum for anyone who ever writes anything she deems as “indecent” and has the audacity to run for office. I wonder what she would have had to say about Obama’s drug usage and sexual history outlined in his books. Was he also indecent and doing sexist things that preclude her support for him? Oh that’s right, Cerisi wasn’t in Obama’s shadow.

  • Julie
    November 9, 2008 at 11:04 pm

    Betty should be more careful about how she intervenes in races though. She helped push Patty Wetterling to get into the CD 6 race against El Tinklenberg in 2004 after Patty had promised many of us she wouldn’t get back in. Betty helped lose us our best shot at Bachmann for a candidate that was clearly not up to the challenge.

    She went after Franken when her chosen candidate was no longer in the race and not about to jump back in over a single article and a joke that never aired.

    Her timing was weird and her approach short-sighted in both of these situations. If she doesn’t watch herself, she risks coming off like a loose cannon.

  • Anonymous
    November 9, 2008 at 11:07 pm

    And if Josh is concerned about Betty Bashing, sound like a porn name, perhaps he could have suggested she privately take her concerns to a fellow Democrat rather than take things public and end up in Norm Coleman’s ads. This is not Betty Bashing when all you are doing is talking about real events that happened… no fiction, no spin, just Betty going public with her sensitivities and Norm Coleman using her as a cats’ paw. (Useful Idiot)

  • amuseinc
    November 9, 2008 at 11:10 pm

    And if Josh is concerned about Betty Bashing, sounds like some porn name, perhaps he could have suggested she privately take her concerns to a fellow Democrat rather than take things public and end up in Norm Coleman’s ads.

    It is not Betty Bashing when all you are doing is talking about real events that happened… no fiction, no spin, just Betty going public with her sensitivities and Norm Coleman using her as a cats’ paw. (Useful Idiot)

  • Disco
    November 9, 2008 at 11:38 pm

    It would have been a tough battle even if we’d run someone better than Franken. People forget that it’s harder to flip incumbent seats in a presidential year. That brings out more moderate voters. Had Coleman run in 2006, he’d have been a dead duck.

    I’m also so god damn sick of these fucking third-party candidates. I don’t care if “the two party system is a failure.” You know what? Minnesota’s Independence Party is an ABJECT FAILURE. They haven’t won a race in TEN YEARS. If all they do is spoil things for the Democrats…let’s see…Pawlenty in 2002 and 2006, they probably gave us Bachmann at least once, Erik Paulsen…and now this.

    At least their party chair acknowledged that they’re complete fuck-ups.

  • Mockingbird
    November 10, 2008 at 6:56 am

    Disco what’s all this whining after the fact?
    Realize that its an open primary. No one was prevented from running.

    Well, maybe YOU should have run then, as the ultimate candidate!!!
    Its silly to run in circles crying “somebody should DO something!”

    As for the “Independence Party” — - is that even a party at all? Or just a ragtag “catch-all?
    I agree that its mostly just a spoiler & thorn in the side. Especially when the “party” can endorse Tinklenberg
    yet still have some unknown guy run AS a member of said party.

    I wouldn’t be at all surprised if it were a designated spoiler wing of the Republican Party.
    When they can’t “Man UP” & win on their own merits, its about creating diversions. And now, its about undermining
    the process of counting the votes!!!

    Voter suppression is not even remotely pro-democracy.

  • Josh
    November 10, 2008 at 9:48 am

    Julie: don’t blame Betty on Wetterling getting in against El two years ago, she was hardly the only person encouraging Patty to run again. Especially since Patty had promised a hell of a lot of donors that she would run more than once for the seat the first time in 2004! What is this anyways, bring up old grudges against McCollum night?

    Amuseinc, I know for a fact that BMC DID bring up her concerns privately, and did so more than once.

    This is a classic DFL circular firing squad going on right now. MBB is LAUGHING his ass off at everyone, because this is exactly the sort of crap he and his GOP buddies try to stir constantly, whether it’s during the nomination, the primaries, the general, or whenever. The GOP had an epic failure on Election Day; how’s about we hold it together and stop pointing fingers? the GOP is drowning in a sea of their own incompetance and intellectual bankruptcy. Don’t throw them a rope by blaming fellow Democrats, toss them an anvil of their own making and relegate them to minority status for a generation…

  • Dan
    November 10, 2008 at 10:12 am

    Anyone who thinks that this only came out because of Betty is an idiot. Most people probably have no idea that she weighed in on this. If anything, Franken should be grateful that she called him out because that led to his apology and probably ensured his first ballot endorsement. Bashing that “bitch” Betty is both misplaced and sexist.

    “It would have been a tough battle even if we’d run someone better than Franken”

    People need to stop saying things like this. We picked up at least 6 Senate seats this cycle, including beating three incumbents. If Franken loses, it will be by the slimmest of margins. With a better candidate, Coleman would already have his stuff packed. This was an easy Democratic pickup, and Franken may have blown it for us.

  • amuseinc
    November 10, 2008 at 10:52 am

    So Dan who would have been this “better candidate?” Cersisi? McCollum? JNP? Or some undesignated player to be named later.

    Along with a generational battle between the young to take over the Democratic party was a concerted effort by the proverbial “powers that be” to control the DFL. This is the group that has people stand in line to run for office and demands fealty to thm without returning the favor to others. You can call it a circular firing squad if you want but in many SDs the party is dysfunctional and totally removed from its’ constituents.

    And if a private discussion went no where about Ms. McCollum’s delicate concerns, do you suppose it might be because there was no “there” there until she blew it up in public? There is no difference between a progressive going off the deep end about “sexist writings” and a Right-wing religious nut going off on “sex education.” Her adding to the flames of false outrage was neither helpful to her “feminist” cause nor to equal rights in the long term process. It simply presented “political correctness” as not the important issue is but rather as an out of touch political club, this tim from the left and the right. I much prefer when real issues are discussed and real problems are addressed than Freedom of Speech is impugned. Will she be so concerned when the Right takes her anti-war comments out of context to “prove” how much she “hates” the troops?

  • Dan
    November 10, 2008 at 11:39 am

    “do you suppose it might be because there was no “there” there until she blew it up in public?”

    If you really believe that, you need to go back on your meds. It had already blown up in public. Betty’s role in this was miniscule.

    Again, if anything, Betty did him a favor. Up until that point, Franken’s attitude was that if his material offended you, you had a problem. Well, a lot of would-be Franken supporters were offended, and Franken telling them to f*** off wasn’t going to get their votes. Betty got him to see that there actually might be a problem.

  • amuseinc
    November 10, 2008 at 11:54 am

    Dan at no point did Franken tell anybody to “fuck off” as you so delicately put it. Rather the campaign waited for the end product of it to arise… a recognition that this was Republican false outrage. The comment was, “I wrote comedy for a living. Comedy is often kind of over the top. It was never meant as anything pornographic nor to suggest that it be followed as a way to liv.” I mean sheesh, lets keep eating those Irish children to solve the Famine. Any body who read this material and did not recognize it as satire was intentionally obtuse. To call it pornographic was just plain silly.

    Is there any place that the absurd, adult and daring are allowed to be expressed? Are we sooo delicate that all communications must be six grade readable? That is patently foolish. “Bad jokes” or not, this was a tempest in a teapot until DFLers made more of it than Republicans. You can insist that a fictional article in a magazine, purchasable in every city, town and hamlet legally, precludes a candidates nomination all you want… I just don’t think it passes the smell test. It is neither honest, pragmatic nor following the actual community standards of Minnesota. Certainly in my long life in Minnesota I have heard worse “sexism” from everyone from ministers, hunters and bowlers. This was a manufactured outrage as surely as you insist it have validity.

  • Dan
    November 10, 2008 at 12:38 pm

    The point is that it wasn’t just a manufactured outrage. Some people, including some people otherwise inclined to support Franken, were genuinely concerned by it. And by calling it a manufactured outrage, Franken was, in effect, telling those people to f*** off, just as you are doing now.

    “Is there any place that the absurd, adult and daring are allowed to be expressed?”

    Yes. From political candidates who want to win elections.

  • Mubert Mumphrey
    November 10, 2008 at 1:13 pm

    There’s a difference between genuine outrage, and concern for political consequence. Democrats were not genuinely outraged by Franken’s writings, they knew it was satire and did not reflect on Franken’s character. They were concerned, however, that the GOP would be able to exploit the issue and feign outrage. Ironically, by publically questioning Franken’s viability and making a hoopla during the primary, these fellow democrats propped the door wide open and invited the republicans to seize the controversy. McCollum and others’ concerns became self-fulfilling, and they are mostly to blame.

  • Dan
    November 10, 2008 at 1:41 pm

    I don’t know why this is so hard for people to understand. Some Democrats were genuinely outraged. You can pretend its not true, but it is. You can call them stupid for being outraged, but if you want to learn anything from this election, that isn’t particularly helpful.

    I also think outrage is the wrong word. I doubt too many potential Franken voters were outraged, as opposed to just being turned off. Franken’s playboy article wasn’t offensive - it was just stupid.

    The claim that Betty was mostly to blame is just simply idiotic. The Republicans didn’t need Betty’s help to get that out there, and most people were unaware of Betty’s role. People want to blame Betty because no one wants to deal with the fact that Franken sucked as a candidate.

  • amuseinc
    November 10, 2008 at 2:16 pm

    So the lesson of this election is that only Sunday School teachers and those who spend their lives completely in the political arena are sufficiently pure to be candidates? You would seemingly prefer a delicate hothouse flower than a tough prairie weed… to make sure that no one would ever bring passion and principles to politics. Minnesota wasn’t founded that way nor was the DFL.

    I find this particularly galling as my favorite Founding Father was Benjamin Franklin, who under this kind of program, would not be allowed anywhere near a Democratic nomination because of prior writings and a wayward eye for the ladies. You do not feel that Franken or Franklin would be proper candidates? I also do not like the idea that a Norm Coleman, spending his life hiding in politics only, would be judged a better Democratic candidate than Franken who made his successful life on the hard work of writing.

    I have no idea why the attacks on Franken came public nd from his own party… I just know that DFLers should support other DFLers. You don’t support your party washing dirty laundry in public.

  • Disco
    November 10, 2008 at 2:26 pm

    I agree with Dan: Franken sucked as a candidate.

    However, we support(ed) him because he was the BEST candidate, not an ideal candidate. There was not a plethora of big, shoe-in Dems from which to chose. I actually think Betty McCollum should’ve run for the seat. She would’ve destroyed Coleman and we wouldn’t be in this mess.

  • Kerosene Hat
    November 10, 2008 at 2:33 pm

    Franken’s past writings did actually offend some people that are fairly loyal Democrats. Not out of some simple minded knee-jerk reaction to something mildly smutty but because of more thoughtful reasons then many are willing to give them credit for. It seemed to me to be based on a couple fundamental things. One is that people who we are trusting to do the work of a senator shouldn’t be know for a communication style that borrows so much from that of a junior-high cafeteria. The other was that Playboy might be mild by today’s standards but it is leader and a strong symbol of an industry that some, not all, people who appreciate feminism view as systematically exploiting women.

    Simply rejecting any criticism as groundless or stupid because you don’t share the conclusions is incredibly arrogant. Nobody that I heard claimed that Franken should not be allowed to write what he had written or that Playboy should not be allowed to publish. Just that Franken’s involvement reflected negatively on his understanding of women and the pornography and entertainment industry. It seemed as though his defense of his jokes and writings that he was more concerned with not offending his past colleagues and money sources than the opinions of the people he was hoping to represent. Adding to his carpetbagger persona.

    This was no more a free speech issue than it was when people said how upset they were at Betty for voicing her views. Nor was it simply an issue of prudish Democrats who gave in to the Republican attacks. Democrats who are so immediately dismissive and insulting of other Democrats that dare be critical of a fellow Democrat are leading their party down the same path that put the Republicans where they are right now. Hypocritically, many of them are the same people that tossed insults at Ciresi and JNP during the primary. It seems that there are a number of Democrats who would be much happier if they could eliminate all dissent from either inside or outside of their little cabal.

  • lojasmo
    November 10, 2008 at 2:48 pm

    I still support Franken…strongly.

  • Dan
    November 10, 2008 at 3:48 pm

    “So the lesson of this election is that only Sunday School teachers and those who spend their lives completely in the political arena are sufficiently pure to be candidates?”

    WTF? Are you four years old? Am I arguing with George Bush? Its either black or white? You are either with us or against us?

    No one is perfect and no political candidate is perfect. No one expects perfect, and I don’t know why that strawman keeps getting thrown out there by the Franken apologists. The fact that no candidate is perfect does not mean that all candidates are equal in their imperfections. At some point when you have too many “imperfections” like Franken does, you are going to run into problems.

    I was very critical of Franken early on, but once the nomination was secure I stopped criticizing him. I even sent him money. But now that the votes are in, criticism of Franken can’t hurt. And whether he pulls it out or not, we need to talk about what happened so we don’t make the same mistakes again.

  • Dan
    November 10, 2008 at 3:55 pm

    “I have no idea why the attacks on Franken came public nd from his own party… I just know that DFLers should support other DFLers. You don’t support your party washing dirty laundry in public.”

    And that is the very reason that this blue state keeps electing Republicans. Maybe if everyone hadn’t pretended that Roger Moe and Skip Humphrey and Ann Wynia were credible candidates and pointed out that they sucked, we could have run someone else. The DFL should unify after the candiate has been picked, but the primary and endorsement process are for sorting out the differences between DFLers. If a candidate has dirty laundry, we should air that dirty laundry before we decide the nominee. The republicans are going to find it anyway.

    I know its fun to call Betty McCollum a bitch. But anyone who thinks that she had any affect on Franken’s dirty laundry getting disseminated to the public is smoking crack.

  • amuseinc
    November 10, 2008 at 4:09 pm

    Dan so far you have complained about Franken as too flawed to have been endorsed… you want to tell me who else would have made a better candidate? The fact remains that the guy is or was no more flawed than Cerisi who couldn’t get the caucus goers to support him or Jack who came close but no cigar.

    At least you finally admit there is no such thing as a perfect candidate.

    And while I have never used the “B word” for McCollum you have to be smoking crack if you think her as a Democratic Congressional Representative did not do major damage because of her public stand. We already knew that the Republicans were going for the shriek of “immorality.” What wasn’t known was that the DFL did not have enough discipline to keep from supporting Normy in public and justifying the Republican attacks. She is as much to blame as Judge Lord’s daughter in this debacle.

    (Personally I think Franken wins by a few hundred votes… and still party discipline needs to be stressed.)

  • Disco
    November 10, 2008 at 4:13 pm

    But why did Franken run in the first place? The answer: a power vacuum. McCollum would have been a much better candidate, but she made it clear she wasn’t running. So Franken jumped in.

    Who else would we have nominated? There wasn’t exactly an abundance of high-profile DFLers ready for this race. No one else stood out.

  • Dan
    November 10, 2008 at 4:25 pm

    DFL party discipline is what made the carrer of Tim Pawlenty. We need more Democrats like McCollum to step up and point out that the emperor has no clothes when that is the case. I bet if they polled it, most people would never even have heard of what McCollum did. Her role was beyond insignificant.

    And while Ciresi didn’t get any traction with the delegates, that is meaningless. If the DFL is smart, it should figure out what the delegates want and do the exact opposite. The process is just awful. Ciresi doesn’t have anywhere near the negatives Franken did. He would have absolutely crushed Coleman if he were the nominee.

    Betty would have crushed Coleman, and Walz would have as well. There were a number of legislators - Steve Murphy, Joe Atkins, etc. who were talking about running. Those guys would have beaten Coleman. Basically, generic Democrat with minimal baggage beats Norm Coleman. There were no shortage of those. There was no power vacuum. Franken just let his ego get in the way of his judgment.

  • Dan
    November 10, 2008 at 4:30 pm

    “At least you finally admit there is no such thing as a perfect candidate.”

    I never said there was - that is your strawman. We just needed a candidate that doesn’t completely suck. And we didn’t get that with Al Franken.

  • lojasmo
    November 10, 2008 at 4:51 pm

    Dan-

    Franken is a decent candidate. He is likely to topple a sitting senator, infrequent enough in it’s own right. Given his strident detractors, and relatively high negatives, his candidacy was pretty strong, IMO.

  • Dan
    November 10, 2008 at 5:13 pm

    Lojasmo, given all the problems he had, he has run a pretty good campaign. It shouldn’t have been this hard, but if he wins, all will be forgiven. Believe it or not, I really want Franken to win. And I wouldn’t be re-hashing Franken’s flaws if it wasn’t for the completely bullshit attacks on Betty McCollum.

  • lojasmo
    November 10, 2008 at 5:18 pm

    Congresswoman McCollum should have kept her mouth shut. Message unity is an asset in politics. Betty, Keith, and Tim should have all said “no comment” until the endorsement process was complete. Endorsements are fine, attacking fellow democrats in an endorsement race is not.

  • Josh
    November 10, 2008 at 5:26 pm

    amuseinc, you may not have called BMC a bitch, but it was said in this forum. Unless you’re directly addressed, maybe you shouldn’t consider every comment posted to necessarily mean you personally, eh?

    Franken didn’t suck as a candidate. He did a lot of very good things as a candidate: working the entire state, having an aggressive field operation, and consistently standing up for what he believed in stick out in my mind. He past as a satirist and comedian was a problem because A) for some people inclined to otherwise vote for him, it was a problem, and 2) the GOP exaggerated it to try and make it a problem for more people. I don’t know that there’s another candidate out there that would have done as well as Franken, for all that people rhapsodize over various paragons they prefer. With a 3rd party candidate in the race, it makes things an unpredictable crapshoot. And while Obama increased turnout in the state and it went resoundingly blue for the presidential, like the rest of the country there’s no real indication of coattails down-ticket.

    Candidates predominatntly rose or fell on their own races this year. Kay Hagan didn’t win the NC senate seat because of Obama (she actually out-performed him), but because she ran a strong race and people thought Liddy Dole was a DC hack who did nothing for the state, so screw her. You know what I’m sayin’?

    But this gets me off my original point, which I will repeat again for emphasis: Stop pointing the finger at BMC for the Senate race being what it is. It’s not her fault or her responsibility.

  • south metro dem
    November 10, 2008 at 5:43 pm

    All of candidates’ negatives should come out prior to endorsement so the best choice can be made and negatives will be old news in the general. Franken’s writings were offensive to me, but mostly insignificant in my ongoing dislike for him as a candidate. My objections were primarily just listening to his speaking style on the issues during the debates, his tone and mannerisms just grated on me. He seems smug, condescending, or irritated to me at times.

    We will never know if another candidate like Ceresi or a lesser known legislator would have done better. I think Betty would have won easily. It is looking like Al has a good chance to win this, so perhaps all’s well that ends well. I will be happy to follow his senate career in print rather than soundbites.

    I think Bowers prescient assessment of Franken’s weakness as a candidate way back in May 2007 is pretty amazing (linked up thread). Al was viewed unfavorably more than a year before Betty expressed her reservations, so she is not fairly blamed for Al’s difficulty winning. His sincere sounding apology is really what gave him a chance at all.

  • Mubert Mumphrey
    November 10, 2008 at 6:50 pm

    The simple truth is that Betty McCollum and Priscilla Lord Faris gave Norm Coleman’s campaign the fuel he needed to make his smears stick. Would Coleman have smeared Franken just the same? Most likely. But they lent his attacks an aura of legitimacy. I have no doubt that had McCollum and Lord Faris not made such public criticisms, Franken would be the the senator-elect right now.

    As for whether their outrage was genuine, I don’t believe so. I think their attacks were selfish political opportunism. But if they were genuinely offended by Franken, then they are either morons who don’t understand his humor, or uptight puritans with social views unworthy of respect.

    Franken was up against an incredible smear campaign and he countered it well. Do not be so certain that the other DFL candidates would swept Norm.

  • Dan
    November 10, 2008 at 7:54 pm

    “Message unity is an asset in politics. Betty, Keith, and Tim should have all said “no comment” until the endorsement process was complete. Endorsements are fine, attacking fellow democrats in an endorsement race is not.”

    Message unity comes after the nominee is picked. Ignoring a candidate’s flaws during the endorsement/primary process is recipe for disaster. Again, if more people had spoken up like Betty did, the Republicans would not have dominated Minnesota politics they way they have the last 20 years.

    “But if they were genuinely offended by Franken, then they are either morons who don’t understand his humor, or uptight puritans with social views unworthy of respect.”

    That was Franken’s message: if you don’t get my jokes then you are stupid or uptight. What an arrogant ass. Again, I think Betty did him a favor by, if not convincing him that maybe some good people were offended, by convincing him that some of these morons and uptight puritans might vote for him anyway and he probably shouldn’t tell them to f*** off.

  • lojasmo
    November 10, 2008 at 8:52 pm

    “Message unity comes after the nominee is picked.”

    No. Message unity involves not attacking democrats for bullshit non-issues.

  • Julie
    November 10, 2008 at 9:08 pm

    When I was working the state DFL convention for Al, one of the things that surprised me most was the source of delegates’ outrage over that Playboy article.

    As a former feminist activist (the former is in the activist part, not feminist), I was asked often if I found the article offensive to women in general and I’d say no, crude certainly, but not offensive. In fact, I thought it was funny - not his best stuff, but funny. Then the next question was inevitably, “What did the article say?”

    NO ONE HAD READ IT!

    The Republicans had tried to get some play out of the story the week before and it just didn’t stick. It only picked up steam when McCollum brought it back to life. We had the current president of the National Organization for Women of Minnesota, a former MN NOW president, and even Gloria Steinem on board for God’s sake and we were being told his writing was sexist. If you want to argue that the article was tasteless, I get that, but offensive? Particularly from those who have only heard a few phrases? Please. I was nicer about it on the floor because the directive from the Franken team on message was far from “f*** off.”

    It was really ironic when feminists who have historically been chided for being humorless, have to tell people “Relax, it’s just a joke.”

  • amuseinc
    November 10, 2008 at 11:01 pm

    Republicans have long used the hand wringing outrage card at the slightest of things. No John Kerry, decorated war hero while George Bush was snorting cocaine and getting drunk in Texas, does not hate the troops, spit on veterans or any of a dozen weird accusations. But as soon as Democrats act like it is the truth, it becomes “common knowledge.” The only way these weak sisters get any play is when Democrats fall for it.

    Betty McCollum fell for it hook, line and sinker or she was following directions from a pissed off Cerisi.

Leave a Reply