Both the DFL and GOP will have hard-fought, bruising conventions, that will eventually end up with a single candidate endorsed. After that, though, the two parties will diverge. Several well-funded DFLers will commit to an even-more-bruising primary fight, while Republican kingmakers will step in to threaten all non-endorsed Republicans that they’ll never work again if they contest the election.
From the convention until the September primary, the DFL candidates will spend millions of dollars attacking each other. Finally, one candidate will emerge victorious. Cash depleted and exhausted from the primary battle, he or she will then have about 7 weeks to raise a new war chest, introduce himself to the voters, and draw distinctions with his opponent, who will have been steadily building support and raising money for about 3 months already.
In theory, I think the idea of a contested primary is a good thing. It gets more people involved in the political process and allows a party to pick stronger candidates. I say “in theory” because when your state holds its primaries in early September, there’s never enough time to actually run a general election campaign. A party that can avoid a primary fight is instantly favored to win in the general election, because 7 weeks just isn’t enough time to catch up. Republicans, having a more top-down organizational structure than Democrats, are more likely to accept the decisions of party kingmakers and avoid a primary.
This past legislative session, there was a bill that would have pushed the state primary up to June, providing plenty of time for both a hard-fought primary and a hard-fought general election. In today’s climate, that’s a crucial change. 7 weeks just isn’t enough time for a general election campaign; the current system just doesn’t work. Admittedly, it works better for Republicans than Democrats, but both parties would benefit from having enough time for a proper primary election.
That bill was first watered down to change the primary to August. Then, it was vetoed by Tim Pawlenty. Pawlenty specifically noted in his veto message that he was opposed to moving the state primary. That’s not surprising, really — why would Republicans want to give up a major advantage?
It does provide quite a Catch-22 for the DFL, though: A DFL governor would have a major incentive to sign the bill to ease the way for future DFL candidates, but first a DFLer actually has to make it into office!
Well, there could be infighting. It doesn’t have to be Norm vs. Al within our own party, however. Hopefully we learned that Minnesotan’s don’t like negativity. We like ‘message’ and to be sure of what we’re voting for…
The extra time could be used by some candidates (especially ones who aren’t as rich as others) to meet and greet, listen to and learn from constituents, etc. But now that I think of it, I guess the richest one has a huge advantage in the longer run.
Never mind.
Holly,
I would agree that money matters, but the money is the fuel, the candidate is the product. Money won’t be able to sell a candidate if there are other candidates that are more appealing and enticing to the party.
Let’s just make sure that she/he is electable, ok?
I was thinking in terms of name recognition (which takes money). I think in statewides name recognition is very important. Yes, electable. I agree.
I’ve never liked the idea of moving the primary to the summer. It’s a great way of driving voter turnout even further into the basement. It also doesn’t stop primary candidates from nuking each other if they choose to. California’s 2006 primary for Governor was held in June, and the two Democrats tore each other apart and ruined the general election anyways. In some cases — Mark Dayton in 2000 comes to mind — a civil primary late in the game generates a lot of media interest and gives the primary winner a boost in the polls. Would the DFL have been better off if the field had been cleared for the unknown and under-funded Jerry Janezich? I rather doubt it. Likewise, there was a lot of talk after the 2002 DFL Convention about how the party was more united than it had been in years, what with only the State Auditor’s race facing a real primary. The DFL ended up with the Minnesota Massacre Part Deuex.
The one argument in favor of an earlier primary that I find sorta convincing is, what happens if there’s a recount? It took two months for the State Canvassing Board to reach a result in Franken/Coleman. That’s not enough time to resolve a protracted primary dispute. Of course, a primary election would probably have a much smaller pool of votes to recount than a general election would, and the canvassing process was slowed down somewhat by lawsuits and Supreme Court orders, so a primary recount might take less time to clear up.
If all DFLers are required to skip around three times while reciting the alphabet backwards at the convention to win the gubernatorial contest in 2010 I’m for it. What ever it takes to put a DFL governor in St. Paul should be done. Enough with the inter-party inside baseball BS… start by saying that anyone running for endorsement that refuses to accept it as final at the convention should not be supported. This state NEEDS a Democratic Governor.
Enough with the inter-party inside baseball BS…
I’m feeling that way, too. Sometimes I wonder if we forget what the people really hear and see, and want.
“start by saying that anyone running for endorsement that refuses to accept it as final at the convention should not be supported”
Right there is the reason the DFL hasn’t elected a governor in 23 years. The DFL endorsement process needs to be kicked to the curb.
The last three gubernatorial contests have been determined by the appeal of the Independence Party’s candidate.
A nasty primary only helps the IP candidate.
Ask yourself, did Priscilla Lord Faris have a chance to win the US Senate DFL primary ?
Follow-up question, considering her attack ads on Al Franken, how many voters did she push to Dean Barkley ?
The date of the primary may be inconsequential versus the “tone” of the primary and the relative strength of the challengers. The MN-GOP has figured it out. They will have a straw poll in October that will cement who the leaders are (Marty Siefert, a SueJeffers-type to appeal to the Ron Paul crowd, and an also-ran.) By January, MN-GOP candidates will be announcing the termination of their campaigns and the party faithful will start calling Siefert as the “Governor-elect” as their message to the base will be clear and motivating – appeal to the MCCL/NRA crowd, “veto” the DFL-controlled legislature, and Coleman’s “stolen election”.
I am an independent voter and am not pleased that “Governor-elect” Siefert will win.
One thing that the DFL could do as a game-changer is to WITHHOLD the endorsement at the endorsing convention. Having a primary which challenges the party-activist’s nominee does not help the party. At the endorsing convention, just vote to accept whoever the primary winner is. It will be a lot easier for the losing candidate’s supporters to accept the nominee. Yes, the party would have a nominee that does not have a clear majority, but that will make rallying the troops easier as the enemy will not be who won but Siefert.
Otherwise, the nomination will be decided by Dayton and Entenza — - do they pull a Lord Faris and become the nominee via a primary only to lose to Siefert ?
The MN-GOP will remain firm and every vote that shifts to the Independence Party only hurts the DFL … so forget the endorsing convention and go with the primary winner.
Just a suggestion.
I agree, except that instead of forgetting the endorsing convention, could we please just not have an endorsement at all?
I am sick of watching a tiny band of DFL insiders with no apparent outside demands on their time pick our candidates every year. Lets have a primary and get it over with.
Oh yeah, and the general should be an Instant Runoff election. Let everybody compete.
I agree with Bob T. Either choose the candidate at an endorsing convention or have a primary. Not both. What is the point of having both? I have never understood that.
Bob T: We need an endorsement. One candidate backed by us, the DFL party, is the best. Even if they endorse a wild card, like they did with Madia.
Holly, why do we need an endorsement at a convention? Why can’t we just have everyone campaigning and volunteering for their candidate in the primary. Then it comes down to who does the best job of turning out voters, which should really be the standard by which we choose our candidate, not who does the best job turning out activists.
as I understand it the endorsement process is needed because the average person doesn’t pay attention to politics as much as they should (but they suffer the consequences anyway).
What do you think, John Lewis, or anyone else?
The September primary is insane. Not only does it crunch the general election and force a depleted candidate and campaign structure to pivot fast, as the post says, it also means the bulk of the primary campaign occurs during the summer when no one is paying attention. A May or early June primary would solve both problems. Both the primary and general, campaigns and elections, should occur when people pay attention and turn out.