First, all I have to say about the results on the Republican side is that sometimes I envy the Republicans. They’re now down to two candidates, with a clear frontrunner in Marty Seifert. Man, is that going to be a lot easier to narrow down than the DFL’s options. Once again, the GOP will have their choice early while the DFLers attack each other going into the primary.
On the DFL side, a few thoughts:
- This looks like a big win for RT Rybak. I don’t know if the percentages will hold, but with 77.04% reporting, he’s on top with 21.8% of the vote. Going into the straw poll, all the discussion was how much MAK would win by, so if Rybak can hold on, it will be a bit of an upset. Perhaps more importantly, MAK has to worry about her performance during the legislative session, while all Rybak has to worry about is campaigning. (And, you know, governing Minneapolis, but given our weak mayor system that’s unlikely to get in the way too much.)
- It looks like we’ll have a primary full of folks who got 7% or less in the straw poll. Although I have to wonder if Gaertner, who was the first one into the race, is really going to stay the course up until the primary after receiving 2% of the vote.
- I can’t help feeling bad for Steve Kelley, who is most likely done after receiving 4% of the vote last night. I thought Kelley was a strong candidate in 2006, and I thought it was a great loss when an unfortunate series of events left him without an elected position following the 2006 elections. After 4 years out of the public eye, though, it doesn’t look like he’ll be mounting a comeback.
Here, once again, are the standings so far. What are your thoughts on the results?
| Candidate | Totals | Pct | Graph | |
| TOM BAKK | 1290 | 6.13 |  |
|
| MATT ENTENZA | 1444 | 6.86 | |
|
| SUSAN GAERTNER | 441 | 2.09 | |
|
| STEVE KELLEY | 878 | 4.17 | |
|
| MARGARET ANDERSON KELLIHER | 4216 | 20.03 | |
|
| JOHN MARTY | 2052 | 9.75 | |
|
| FELIX MONTEZ | 17 | 0.08 | |
|
| TOM RUKAVINA | 1517 | 7.21 | |
|
| R.T. RYBAK | 4589 | 21.80 | |
|
| OLE SAVIOR | 21 | 0.10 | |
|
| PAUL THISSEN | 1541 | 7.32 | |
|
| UNCOMMITTED | 3045 | 14.46 | |
Good, competitive race. I wouldn’t read too much into Siefert’s easy win on the GOP side. I’m still not sold on him as a General Election candidate.
The biggest surprise in the numbers is John Marty’s 3rd place showing. Is that basically the liberal wing of the party making their wishes known, or did he have broader support?
If Marty were somehow to win the endorsement or primary (I don’t see either happening), I would throw my hands up in sheer exasperation. Nonetheless, he’s about as good and honorable a man as we could possibly see running for governor. I don’t think Wellstone’s votes were from people who were as liberal as he was, but (thankfully) just being decent and honest will win you some votes.
It’s the healthcare meltdown. A LOT of progressives and liberals are rightfully pissed off at the axeing of the public option from the federal bill.
I’m not very surprised at this. As I’ve said many times before in this blog, the DFL is coming back with a vengeance. The republican presence in the legislature has been steadily shrinking since 2002. I would not be at all surprised if the DFL achieved a veto-proof majority in the house this fall.
Now, if they could just get a decent governor candidate (and Marty ain’t it)…
“I would not be at all surprised if the DFL achieved a veto-proof majority in the house this fall.”
Really? I expect the DFL majority to shrink. It will still be a strong majority since it is nearly veto-proof now so it could diminish quite a ways and still be a majority, but I would be very surprised if it grows.
The candidate who exceeded expectations is John Marty. The prognosticators anticipated 3 - 6% but he garnered 9.75%, beating Entenza, Thissen and Kelley.
I think Marty benefited from the splintered field and last night was his high water mark. Outside of RT, Rukavina in my mind is the big winner because he can grow and has a case to make during the next three months. He is in a great position for a Commissioner job if he plays his cards right. I don’t see MAK gaining much traction either, she was the presumed frontrunner and barely cleared 20%. She made a big mistake in giving up her seat to focus on this run - she lost a ton of leverage and the caucus results show that she is not resonating with delegates the way she needs to. I look for a major overhaul of her stump routine and outreach in the coming weeks. Entenza also took a hit last night and he needs to get his act together to be a factor, regardless of his resources. My money is on RT for the endorsement now - this result shows he has a good team and the delegates love an energetic candidate, even if he is from Minneapolis.
I have said this before. MAK is our Martha Coakley — the smart, capable, next-in-line candidate with little ability to capture peoples’ imaginations. I respect her. I think she would be a great governor, but I don’t think she is a great candidate.
As one of those of us unaware of the minutea of Minneapolis politics, I see Rybak as our Scott Brown in that he is dynamic, smart, articulate and has some sizzle. I know many Minneapolis activists disagree.
My Republican neighbor randomly commented that he respected RTs commitment to Urban Homeworks, with which my neighbor volunteers via his church. My Repub coworker randomly said “While I don’t agree on all his politics, RT Rybak sure catches one’s attention.” I am quite sure they are FB friends.
I will work hard for whoever gets the endorsement, but I will work enthusiastically if the endorsement goes to RT.
That’s a very interesting take that I hadn’t thought of before, but it seems to fit. Rybak did win the mayor’s race against Sayles-Belton, which I thought was no mean feat. True, he might have disadvantages in the outstate, but even in the sandbox of Minneapolis politics I think that he was a real underdog yet he overcame some real challenges to win. I’m feeling more resolved about supporting him but I’m still in wait-and-see mode.
I caucused for Rybak, but what was really interesting was that “uncommitted” got the highest total of votes at my precinct location.
I’m not surprised at the high “uncommitted” percentages. There’s still a large pool of candidates often overlapping each other’s bases, so I think I’m far from alone in the “wait-and-see” strategy. Hopefully poor polling added with the possibility of poor fundraising will start to thin the herd.
Is it more that RT did well or that expectations were too low? RT was the only “name” candidate on the ballot last night and even though it was the party faithful last night, there were still a lot of low info folks in the room.
THe DFL side has several candidates with the resources to win.
Emmer releasing his campaign finance report the day of caucuses clearly hurt. When you announce 8 hours before the caucuses that you don’t have any money in your campaign, people begin to walk away.
Let’s see … if the splintered field explains Marty’s strength, does it explain Thissen’s, Entenza’s and Kelley’s weakness? Why was it good for one but not for the others? Maybe something else is at play, like voters’ response to proposed solutions to their problems?
Maybe because they divvied up the more pragmatic caucus-goers while Marty had the far left nailed down.
I’m really excited about how strong Marty performed! This is the guy who has done the most work for progressive issues here in the MN legislature! He’s the author of the single-payer bill, the author of the marriage equality bill, and the best the DFL has for ethics reform. While MAK is good on all these issues, Rybak seems more willing to accept lesser outcomes (see Obama?).
That is a perfect description of why Marty cannot and should not be the DFL candidate. “Accept[ing] lesser outcomes” means being principled but also recognizing political reality.
and the political reality in MN is huge DFL majorities in both the House and the Senate. It’s time to get something done.
“Lesser outcomes” to one part of the voting public means disaster averted to another. Let’s not confuse an ideological favorite with someone who can govern a state.
I wouldn’t get too excited - the difference between his 9% and the others bunched around 7% is about 500 votes. Not exactly a tsunami.
I’m not a poll or horse race kind of guy, so I have more questions than answers:
Overall, it feels like 4 candidates split a couple of different DFL bases. Namely:
Doesn’t it seem that either Bakk’s or Rukavina’s #’s would’ve been higher if only one of them were in this race?
And doesn’t it also seem like Marty and Thissen might’ve split a base? Anecdotally, I talked to folks who seemed sympathetic to Marty’s politics who nevertheless decided to support Thissen. Again, if one of them were out, would the other have benefitted?
Mayor Rybak is in excellent position, but if the citizens of Minnesota had to drive on residential streets in Minneapolis this winter … forget about it. At the state fair last year, I saw a couple of young people staffing a booth with a sign that read: “Draft R.T. for Governor.” They had no takers. Laughingly unlike the genuine “draft” which propelled Ventura’s 1998 upset.
As for Speaker Kelliher, it doesn’t look like all the endorsements she lined up actually materialized into significant support. There were what — 1400 people — in her silk-stocking legislative district who caucused, which was light-years beyond the typical caucus attendance anywhere else, and probably distorts her low poll numbers a bit HIGHER than they would otherwise have been.
Seems like her pitch is, “Time for a woman.” Didn’t work for Ms. Gaertner, either. Perhaps the voters, even the dyed-in-the-wool DFL-ers, realize that gender alone is not a sufficient qualification … e.g., Palin, Bachmann, Sen. Lincoln, Ms. Coakley . . .
Which isn’t to dismiss Speaker Kelliher, who IS qualified and must have some superior abilities, to have become speaker and to be the favorite of so many of MY favorite politicians.
But she is dismal in debates even in front of friendly crowds — -can’t talk TO people but seems to talk over their heads, larding her answers with governmental jargon and in-group expressions decipherable to the cognoscenti but sounding like gobblydegook to the public at large. She may have grown up on the farm, but she has left it far behind her. She strikes no sparks, and that bodes ill for the general election!
Contrast with Tom Bakk, who does know how to speak plainly and to the point and I think could appeal to the blue-collar voters who are so alienated from too many DFL candidates. Yet I’m too much of an environmentalist to back Bakk … and I might have more points of difference with him than just the mining matter.
If that sounds like a “litmus test” approach, so be it. The national administration has left in the lurch the people who voted Democratic hoping for “change we can believe in.” Once burned, twice shy.
Bush and Cheney could take office after losing the 2000 election by a half million votes, and facing a Democratic-controlled Senate, and still get every radical thing they wanted! Now the Democrats have the White House and both parts of Congress and all they can do is sell-out, cave-in, whine, and roll over.
If this year is a repeat of 1994, it will be the Democrats’ own fault. The leadership has left the base disillusioned, disenchanted, dismayed, disheartened, and disgusted. Without an enthusiastic base, the impressionable follow-along voters who make up the middle (they are conformists, not “moderates”) won’t be swept up.
And whoever the candidate for Governor is, he or she had better bear in mind Harry Truman’s 1952 advice to act as a real Democrat and not shift with the wind to try to be a phony Republican. I think John Marty’s surprisingly strong showing is a tribute to the fact that DFL-ers realize John Marty won’t sell out and won’t back down on matters of principle. He does have that political liability of usually being 5 or 10 years “ahead of his time.” And yes, he got creamed in 1994. But notice that even after that disaster, he could hold his head up because he did not resort to mudslinging, demagoguery, and other demeaning tactics of desperation.
John this year has been strikingly outspent and out-organized by four or five of the candidates who apparently finished behind him … while the pundits, the analysts, and the pooh-bahs all wrote him off. Maybe those UNCOMMITTED voters … if they really were undecided … would do well to listen carefully to Mr. Marty’s message. We don’t need to flock sheep-like behind anyone at this time, we need to let the process evolve so that the candidates for Governor and Lt. Governor are the ones who genuinely are LEADERS in every sense and not merely FRONTRUNNERS.
Interesting caucus last night. I convened my caucus in the 3rd. Not one guber was around, had any lit or signage around nor any presence at all - didn’t even see a button. I was a little surprised how little interest there seemed to be. Of 21 delegates allowed in my precinct only 7 people volunteered to be delegates. Time to thin the herd and have candidates actually campaign on positions. Tell us what you want to do…what needs to be done….how to pay the bills.
My only conclusion from last night is that the DFL needs to thin this herd and fast. All of the inside politics talk on fundraising numbers and messaging (something I and others have helped along online) is boring and confusing the hell out of the rank and file DFLers, even the activists. Like many of you I live for this garbage and even I walked into the caucus last night uncommitted. Not because I don’t have favorites but because I am genuinely worried about A) the bad feelings I’d get from friends in the camp of another person I liked and would OTHERWISE support, and B) the futility of it being likely that there’s a 1 in 5 chance that whomever I choose will end up losing on the convention floor and I’d have to do the walk of shame to get the new t-shirt before the after party. Both of these problems are utterly meaningless to a November voter (and for good reason) which is why all these guy/gals need to respect the winds that will come blowing out of the county conventions. But I know they won’t because everyone thinks they’re Rocky. The state convention can’t come soon enough and I’d rather the primary was in June, too. Regular voters don’t pay attention until the playoffs; just like how I watch basketball.
Good post, though I think you mean 4-in-5 chance, not 1-in-5. If in fact there’s an 80% chance of your choice winning, don’t keep it from us, for gosh sakes.
Regular voters don’t pay attention until the playoffs; just like how I watch basketball.
And only caring about the final 2 minutes of the game at that. I totally agree. We’re the nerds who follow this stuff. Most people don’t even realize an election is coming up.
Reading the comments I just found myself feeling a bit ticked about the endorsement process already (again). With more than 25,000 voters attending the dfl caucus why should only 1200 party activists be able to cast their 10 ballets at the state convention and choose which candidate to endorse. Sure, there’s the primary, but by then many good candiidates will have been eliminated.
I’ll go to my senate district and vote for a delegate who says they’ll support my favorite candidate, but who knows how that person will be voting by the fourth or even first ballot at the convention. They should open the convention to as many dems as want to attend. I would prefer a primary to current exclusive caucus/convention process.
I don’t like the caucus/convention system as it is unrepresentative of state-wide democrats on the whole. However, it is a necessary evil in order to winnow the field, and it also allows lesser-known candidates to compete in the primary. If MN was strictly a primary state, the contest would probably be automatically narrowed between Dayton, Entenza, Rybak, and Kelliher. There would be some also-rans, but none of the remainder of the DFL field has the cross-party support or fund-raising/self-financing ability of these candidates.
The caucus/convention process allows these lesser-known candidates to build a bit of name-recognition and maybe become a dark-horse against the established party figures. A strong showing in the caucuses or at the convention, or even an endorsement, allows other quality candidates to compete, so we don’t have to just settle for a series of well-funded but flawed candidates at the primary.
The caucus/convention process is not a “necessary evil” — almost all states do without it. The field probably is going to be narrowed to Dayton, Entenza, Rybak, and MAK *anyway*, even with the caucus. But it will divert time and energy and encourage candidates to play to the unrepresentative set of political junkies and super-activists instead of crafting a more broadly appealing message.
Rukavina gets pretty short shrift here. He raised only 135k and beat Entenza. I agree with almost everything that has been said about the candidates. One wild card scenario hasn’t been considered. What if the left base acts in concert at the State Convention? They not only comprise a sizable percentage of delegate votes, but, also contribute more in the way of committed volunteers and support than any other faction percentage wise. These people are angrier and more militant than they have been in recent memory. They feel as if they have been betrayed and taken for granted for too long. They are tired of back-room deals and underhanded dealing from their supposed friends. They don’t respect the favoritism and ethics of the leadership as experienced under Chairman Melendez. Whether it is MAK, Entenza, R.T. or whomever comes out on top, the DFL cannot win without the support of their left base. If the progressives ever realize this, unite and decide to be willing to withhold their support unless they receive a seat at the table, it will be a new ballgame. Rahm Emanuel makes this ever more plausible. Democrat lite is an endangered specie. The winds of change are gathering.