Below are my impressions for each candidate:
Steve Kelley: Kelley didn’t show me anything new in this debate. That’s not a criticism, just an observation. He’s the same candidate he was in 2006. He did have a couple of odd moments. He took a question about the state budget deficit and ended up talking about the public option in the national health care bill. Later on he stumbled a bit when asked how he would deal with Pawlenty’s disastrous record with the Department of Human Serives. Kelley said he has not decided on whether to abide by the DFL endorsement.
R.T. Rybak: Came right out of the gate strong and was the feistiest candidate by far. I already mentioned his hit on the legislators, but he also took a direct shot at Dayton at the end of the debate when all of the candidates were asked whether they would abide by the DFL endorsement. Dayton had called the endorsement process undemocratic and said he would not abide on principle. Rybak responded, “I will absolutely abide. No games, no equivocation. I don’t get this baloney that a party endorsement process isn’t a democratic process. I don’t get that.”
Mark Dayton: This was Dayton at his best, passionate and articulate. He had a great line when asked about jobs, “Pawlenty believes the solution to the jobs problem is to furlough [AFSCME members] from their jobs and then not show up for his own.” Zing. As previously noted, Dayton will not abide.
Matt Entenza: He opened up the debate by noting that he is from Worthington, which is so far south that he “doesn’t like Iowa jokes.” I’m not sure I can support a candidate who doesn’t like Iowa jokes. On a more serious note, Entenza did a great job of using his compelling personal story to his advantage. It was a strong performance from Entenza. When asked about the DFL endorsement, Entenza gave his standard answer, which is that he will abide if everyone else abides. Of course, he said this just minutes after Dayton said he would not honor the endorsement and would run in the primary. Pretty obnoxious. Closed circuit to Matt, just say you are not going to abide. You are not scoring any points by playing this little game.
Tom Rukavina: Was entertaining as always. Described himself as “the love child between Paul Wellstone and Jesse Ventura” and then bragged about his union made underwear. He had a great moment later when talking about Norman Borlag. Said Borlag only graduated from the U because of financial aid. Asked, “how many Norman Borlags are we cheating?” Said he would abide by the DFL endorsement.
John Marty: What struck me most about Marty was that he is clearly stuck in the past. He took every question and used his time to talk about budget votes in the 90s and was also the only candidate to bring up the Time “the state that works” magazine cover. Get into this decade Marty. Will abide (and said if he didn’t get the endorsement he’d return to the Senate).
Paul Thissen: If you are wondering why everyone has been talking about Paul Thissen, you should listen to this debate. Thissen sounded sharp, engaging and fresh. Had a nice moment talking about his kid’s struggles with the health care system. Will abide.
Susan Gaertner: Did a nice job using stories from her time as County Attorney and her personal life. My favorite line of hers was, “I’ve raised three teenage girls, you think I’m going to have a hard time making the hard decisions? I’m not.” Will abide.
Tom Bakk: Spent the whole debate touting his union credentials. Maybe not a bad strategy given this was a union audience. Otherwise, he was pretty forgettable. Said, “my plans are to abide by the DFL endorsement.” Does that leave the door open just a bit? UPDATE: Sen. Bakk’s campaign emails to say “Sen. Bakk will abide by the endorsement. The door is not open.”
Margaret Anderson Kelliher: This was not the same MAK I’ve seen in dozens of Capital press conferences. She was very strong, sharp and showed some passion. (that’s not to say she isn’t good in the pressers, she just usually doesn’t show a lot of passion). She had a great answer when asked about the deficit. A very nice performance. Will abide.
The Bottom Line
Top performers: Kelliher, Thissen, Entenza, Dayton, Rybak
In the middle: Rukavina, Gaertner
Not very good: Bakk, Marty, Kelley
Thissen demonstrated why he's the favorite of so many. Entenza makes me sick with his Worthington b.s. - he's from California and is worth tens of millions of health care insurance dollars — not exactly small town Minnesota.
Please tell me more about how Matt is from California. What do you mean?
Rough Rider, if Matt Entenza is from California, how did he manage to represent a St.Paul district in the legislature for a decade?
Do you understand what the word "from" means? As in, he was from California before he moved to St. Paul. But don't take it from me, go look at Entenza's own website:
"Worthington provided a home for Matt when his father's alcoholism drove his family to near-bankruptcy and the loss of their home in California."
Frankly, I am more concerned about his bigger lies, and (as Rough Rider points out) that Entenza is worth tens of millions of dollars in health care insurance dollars. Matt Entenza is a fraud, and it will be a very dark day if the DFL nominates this scumbag.
He didn't start representing a St. Paul district until he was 33. Check your facts. Matt is a fraud - no big surprise.
These candidate forums are important… especially if we want a DFL governor for the first time since God was a boy.
Below are the details of another forum around Armistice Day. (sends youthful right-wingers to wikipedia)
Veterans Caucus/SD61 DFL Governors Candidate Forum
Saturday, November 14, 2009
2:00 - 4:00 pm
Center for Changing Lives
2400 Park Ave. S
Minneapolis, MN 55404
Free and Open to the Public
As an Independent, I have to say I like Thissen. He strikes me as being smart, energetic, and not particularly wed to alot of the promises he's made as a legislator or mayor. That is purely an opinion formed from a little exposure and reading a few news clips. But then again, that is about all the information the average voter will use to make their decision.
I disagree with Dayton's politics normally, but completely agree with his viewpoint of endorsements.
Rough Rider, is that the best muck you got to throw at Matt Entenza? Matt moved to Minnesota back around the time Ford turned over the presidency to Carter. He's lived here for over three decades now, save for time spent at Oxford, which ain't nothin' to sneeze about. And over the last couple decades Matt's worked for Hennipen County, Minnesota's Attorney General's office, as a Minnesota legislator, and founded Minnesota 2020… Kinda hard to do all that from California. You might want to note also that we are indebted to New York for giving us back Al Franken, the Carolinas for giving us Paul Wellstone, and last but not least South Dakota for giving us Hubert Humphrey.
And, BTW, Rough Rider… Are you a NoDak?
You don't need to throw muck at Entenza. His sleazy record speaks for itself.
I take great insult at being called a NoDak. Entenza's fictious story about being a southern Minnesota guy is just the tip of the iceberg.
Nothin' wrong with NoDaks, great folks they be. So you have lesser muck to throw at Matt? After your laughable attempt to tie Matt to California, what other crazy claims have you to amuse us?
Dyna for the win. I personally think Matt is a big phony, but rough rider is full of shit.
"Matt's mother, Georgia, was raised in Rushmore and Worthington but moved to California after the war to work as a nurse. Matt was born in 1961 in Santa Monica, Calif. His father suffered from alcoholism and was never able to provide stable financial support for the family, putting them heavily in debt and eventually abandoning them. When Matt was 15, his family’s home was foreclosed on, leaving him, his mother, and younger brother and sister homeless. With nowhere else to turn, the family moved back to Worthington and into Louise's house on Clary Street." Source: http://entenza.com/about/Meet_Matt
Just as I said
Why is he full of shit? Entenza's own website says he grew up in California.
Entenza's probably my least favorite candidate, but I have to admit, he did have a good line about the "Too Good to be Taxpayers League".
I think most of the candidates were in "feisty" mode. It's just that Rybak has a way of talking very fast.
Thissen seemed pretty forgettable to me.
In terms of ability to deliver results, I think Rybak and Rukavina had the most convincing examples (Rybak talking about jobs training programs, and Rukavina about getting the minimum wage bill through a GOP House.) Entenza tried to take the credit for the 2005 budget settlement (sorry, Matt, that was Dean Johnson.) MAK walked a fine line between talking about the 2008 veto override, while avoiding the words "gas tax increase".
Dayton used his "Only Minnesotan on Richard Nixon's Enemies List" line again. Where does he get this from? I've looked at Nixon's Enemie's List, and Dayton's name isn't on it. Walter Mondale's name was.
Maybe he meant Matt Entenza's enemies list. Its not hard to get Entenza confused with Nixon.
I get annoyed with the way Marty keeps excusing his 1994 loss by saying it was the Gingrich Era and he was too principled in calling for single-payer health care. First off, Newt Gingrich didn't force Marty to go through five campaign managers in the last three months of the race. Second, the DFL Senate candidate that same year also supported single-payer, and she lost by only five points, while Marty lost by 30. Third, 2010 could be a repeat of 1994 if health care flops and the economy doesn't pick up. And fourth, Marty ran for Governor again in 1998, and dropped out of the race because he was in single digits.
Rukavina didn't handle the question about privatizing nursing homes very well. I think the issue was that he had sponsored a bill to split St. Louis County in two to a referendum, and Duluth said it wouldn't be able to afford to keep some nursing homes open if it passed. It was a show bill that had no chance of passing the Lege and was intended to provoke a debate. Rukavina didn't explain the situation at all. He just got mad and blustered.
Rybak was slick, but disingenuous in his last two answers. Asked why he gave large raises to upper management in Minneapolis while keeping rank-and-file salaries flat, he spoke persuasively about the process he had used to work with city employees in tough budget times, but completely avoided the part about the upper level raises.
Rybak's passion about abiding by the DFL endorsement was a little disingenuous too, since he was campaign manager for Tony Bouza when he ran as an unendorsed candidate for Governor in 1994, he declined to abide by the DFL endorsement in his runs for Mayor, and earlier this year, he was dodging this same question from Eric Black with his "I'm focused on running for Mayor" answer (*rolls eyes*). It's nice that he's committed to it now, but this is a pretty recent development for him.
This is why I am an RT supporter:
“I will absolutely abide. No games, no equivocation. I don’t get this baloney that a party endorsement process isn’t a democratic process. I don’t get that.” Says it like it is.
We need to abide by the endorsement process. It is those delegates that make our strongest core of door knockers, phone bankers, and much more. Sticking your finger in there eye and asking them to work for someone that their peers did not endorse is not a good way to go about things. Money does not win elections! It is boots on the ground to squeeze out that last 1-2% out to the polls election day that win elections.
Despite his past failures in pursuing major offices and the perceived struggles in the Senate, I wouldn't underestimate Mark Dayton in a statewide primary. I do worry about how he'd play in the media, his speeches, and what the attack machine would do to him. But if political races were about sincerity and real people skills, Dayton is the candidate.
I hope Rybak is in because he might be the only DFLer who can knock off MAK in Duluth, and 'm not much of a Rybak fan. Her candidacy gives me visions of the 2nd coming of Ann Wynia. I don't understand why Tarryl Clark didn't get in governor's race. The Bachman district is a slice of Alabama in Minnesota. Clark would be a better statewide candidate than MAK.
Entenza is doing a good service with his PAC and I wish he'd stick to that and writing checks.
For all the party purists worrying about an endorsement and who'll abide by it… It ain't gonna happen, and all the candidates know it. We'll probably see a repeat of the 1993 Minneapolis mayoral endorsement battle, when dropped candidates threw their delegate's votes around in carefully calculated ways to insure that an endorsement never happened. We'll be going into the convention with at least 8 candidates and probably 10, with none getting to even 20% on the first ballot. After a couple ballots Dayton and a few other candidates will be dropped, but their delegate pool will still be throwing their zombie ballots in a pattern that will insure that no candidate gets anywhere near the 60% endorsement threshold. Sometime sunday morning, with no candidate even making it to 50%, the delegates will give up and a handful of candidates will hold pressers to kick off their primary campaigns.
Dayton is still the one to watch. I think MAK will win the endorsement and then get to face-off between Matt and Mark.
The delegates are hungry for a win and will be anxious to step out of the box. MAK, being a woman, a leader and being able to, theoretically, map a path to raising enough money to compete with Matt and Mark and possibly win the primary. Any candidate that can't articulate how they are going to beat the multi-millionaires in the primary, will be sent home.
We've lost cycle after cycle in this position. The delegates are not going to endorse the underdog, the next in line, or the one who is most right-sounding on the issues we've been there and done that.
Dayton is the one to watch, not just because of his money and name recognition, but because he is the most experienced with the voters statewide of anyone running in any party. He's run statewide four times and came out as the DFL candidate three times and won the elections twice. Matt Entenza has run statewide, kind of. Sure he got the endorsement in 2006 but, that was the nod from the delegates, he didn't get a chance to campaign to primary voters before dropping out. Being on the big stage if tough. MAK is a woman, young, Speaker, and have access to millions through groups like EMILY'S list. All pluses in eyes of delegates looking to win.
I like RT and Rukavina. Actually I think the both of them together would be a great ticket for Minnesota bringing in the interests that in the past, made this state great. Convincing delegates they can take this to Mark and Matt and then to whatever lightweight the extremist Republican nominate is a another issue. Thissen is doing everything right and smart, he's only being hurt because of the lack of name recognition.
Kelly, Gaertner and Bakk are lagging behind for different reasons. Although, I'm sure with more funds to get her name out there, Susan Gaertner would be back up in that very competitive tier.
I won't waste my time or money by going through the delegate process this year. It won't be worth the minimum investment of 3 Saturdays and at least $500.
Rukavina is DOA. I like Thiesen, but Dayton is the guy
Those who will go to the mat to defend the endorsement process are out of touch with the General Election voter.
Endorsements are important to about 30% of citizens. That is, the 15% of activitists on either end of the poltiical spectrum swear by it. Why? Because it is their way of ensuring that a candidate with a prounced enough partisan bent to their liking can actually become Governor.
The other 70% of Citizens, on the other hand, would like to see someone elected who would be a good leader, can work with both sides, and demonstrates an ability to be independent and objective on the issues. To a party insider, this bickering about who will "abide" by the endorsement is a pivotal dialogue. To an outsider, it is silly and makes it look like you all are afraid of letting the public decide the candidates. Why? Why be afraid of fellow citizens overuling your little club?
I bet a candidate who goes to the General via a Primary rather than an endorsement, from either side, wins the Governor's seat.
Dan - that's an amazingly well put post. Totally agree with this. Let the public decide vs. the hard core party hacks - this is maybe even more of an issue on the IR side.
Dan and Moose, Political parties are not run for or by independents. Independents are important and certainly are courted by both political parties… well all political parties. But if you do not play the game you can not win… those that show up decide the candidates.
Sorry for my poor spelling. Note to blog operators - would love to have an edit button back.
Just think about the phrase "abide by the endorsement."
Abide means, according to Webster, "To accept without objection," and "to Conform to". Is that really what we want in our politics? A bunch of sheep who will let a small faction of voters tell them who can move on with their campaign and who cannot? Do we really want our potential Governor of this entire freakin state being someone who will "Conform."?
Hell no. Give me someone who carries their beliefs past the endorsement club and actually brings them to the voters. Let's let the voters decide. If MAK and RT want to accept without objection, let them. I want someone to be the Governor of the state, not simply the leader of the Democrats. The same goes for Siefert and the GOP.
I dislike Dayton's politics, but I'm gaining more respect for him by the day. My favorite Governor of my voting lifetime was Arne. Zero endorsements. Tons of accompolishments for Minnesotans.
Arne started his political career off by hijacking an endorsement after realizing he wasn't going to get the DFL (his party) endorsement.
His run for offices leading up to the 1990 Governors race was with the republican endorsement. As a matter of fact, in 1990 when he didn't get the endorsement for Governor, he dropped out of the race- because he said he would ABIDE by the endorsement. The endorsed republican dropped his family values and his pants and went swimming with teenage friends of his daughter, there was a scramble to find a September replacement and support from DFL AG and SecState to let them do so and up comes Arne with a special endorsement.
1994 was the only time he didn't abide by the endorsement but, he was the incumbent Republican governor in the year of the Republican Revolution- real stretch there.
Seeing that our party endorses candidates like Ellison and Peterson or even Klobuchar and Franken kind rejects the argument that you try to make about it being a small narrow minded few. The delegates who take the time to endorse are not only representative of the DFL but the voters in their area. Our candidates show that..
Don't know what happened to my last post but, to sum it up, the only time Arne ran without an endorsement for governor, auditor or Minneapolis City Council was in 1994 as the incumbent Republican governor in the year of the Republican Revolution.
In 1990, he dropped out of the race after not getting the endorsement. He was brought back after the endorsed candidate was caught in a scandal and had to drop out. Arne was the post endorsement post primary fill in.
The only reason you have a political party is to endorse and assist candidates for elective office. Your party is supposed to have a solid foundation in a platform and the candidates agree to support that platform in exchange for endorsement and all the work and money that brings. If your candidates have no loyalty to the party, why should the party have loyalty to them? I'm a party guy and do not enjoy the cult of personality that is so prevalent in politics.
And if you think that only a few Democrats get together on these things, you have never been to a city or state convention.
"I'm not a member of any organized political party. I'm a Democrat." Will Rodgers
If your candidates have no loyalty to the party, why should the party have loyalty to them?
The best Governor would be loyal to the citizens of Minnesota. Not to a political party. That is precisely what I am trying to say.
I agree, Clark might have had a shot on the state level, she doesn't have a chance in MN-06. Luckily Maureen Reed is still in that race and so Democrats still have a good chance at that seat.
Anyone in Rochester two summers ago would attest to the fact that MAK is the darling of the DFL elites. I'm guessing the Lowry Hill and Mac gang will be writing checks on her behalf. They might be able to get her the nod in Duluth amongst the other activists, but she'll be on her own after that. Unlike Amy Klobuchar, I just don't see her playing well outside with the white suburban/rural male. That will lead to a Wynia-Style spanking if they can deliver in Duluth for her.
MAK is certainly a Wynia in the making.
The endorsement process lets candidates without all the cash to actually have a chance. If Iowa had a primary and not a caucus, we wouldn't have President Obama. I'd rather have a nominee who didn't have to buy the election, regardless of how good of a DFLer they are. Entenza and Dayton are decent enough guys, but I want a candidate who can win on their merits, and not just through a million ads.
I've observed the last couple presidential year Iowa caucuses, and the campaigns spend more on the caucus than they would on a primary here.
It's not a perfect analogy because of the different fundraising scale, but the principal of face to face campaigning still applied in Iowa, especially during most of 2007.
I apologize for the paginated comments — I hate this and I have no idea how to turn it off…
And the basic principles, policies and methods of a political party are what you are voting for with each candidate from that party. A political party is just a pragmatic or social choice if you are Norm Coleman, most people share basic beliefs within a party… and those fellow party members and shared beliefs is how government works.
Dan maybe you are a "GDI"?
While that may be true - I think the DFL has a much better chance of winning with a more centrist candidate than what they might get out of nomination. While the progressives have carried the national spotlight - the truth is that a lot of Minnesotan's like Pawlenty's goal of putting a lid on taxes.