Archive for the 'MN 2008: Senate' Category
Here’s Franken speaking at a press conference yesterday about what’s important to Minnesotans. As Vin Weber has said, I think Minnesotans will be pleasantly surprised by Franken.
[via MN Progressive Project]
Franken teared up when he talked about people’s concerns that the protracted Senate race was taking an emotional toil on him and his family.
“What we’ve been through is just nothing, especially when compared to what so many Minnesota families have been going through during this same period. When you win an election, what you really win is a chance to go to work for working families who need a voice in Minnesota,” he said.
Al invoked Paul Wellstone and his philosophy to explain how he would work for Minnesotans:
“Paul looked at his job as improving people’s lives and that’s what I want to do,” Franken said Tuesday
Read more here.
This was a nasty campaign on both sides. But Al seems to be humbled by his opportunity to serve Minnesotans, concerned about the challenges we are facing right now, and aware that he has a lot of work to do to win the support of all the Minnesotans who did not vote for him. I hope all Minnesotans will give him the chance to earn their support.
Will they be able to overcome a filibuster on climate-change legislation? They’ll have to convince Arlen Specter (D-PA) to vote with the Democratic caucus. How about a filibuster on a national security bill? They’ll have to struggle for Joe Lieberman’s (I-CT) vote. They’d better make sure their proposals aren’t too liberal, or they’ll lose Evan Bayh’s (D-IN) vote.
The point is, 60 Democrats (counting independents who caucus as Democrats) are still not going to be enough in many cases. The Democratic party is simply too fractious — and Harry Reid is too weak a leader to whip them into line. Of course, every vote counts, and Franken’s vote will help Democrats get more bills through Congress. But on the most important legislation — cap and trade, for instance — the Senate is still likely to be a black hole.
After eight months of waiting, Minnesota will finally have full representation in the US Senate. The Minnesota Supreme Court ruled today in favor of Al Franken, confirming that he won the recount and is entitled to the Senate seat once occupied by the late Senator Paul Wellstone. Today we start the process of moving forward, of tackling the work of governing this state, starting a new day of progressive values and protection of our most needy citizens. Today we can rest easy knowing that our election system was tested and came through shining. Today we can let out a collective deep sigh, and know that the waiting is over.
Congratulations Al Franken, and congratulations to all the staff, interns, volunteers, voters, donors, lawyers, students, moms, dads, first time voters, absentee voters, college students, folks from Albert Lea to the Northwest Angle, from the north side to the lakeside, from the Iron Range to the Twin Cities - congratulations Minnesota.
We did it.
Republicans know they’ll need every last dollar in next year’s campaign if they want to keep Democrats from topping 60 seats in the Senate.
So with potentially better Senate investments on the horizon, is it worth continuing to pour money into Norm Coleman’s long-shot Senate campaign if the race keeps going on and on?
Everybody in the country has given Coleman up for dead, except for one man:
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, insists the Coleman challenge is money well-spent, and it won’t hurt his 2010 coffers.
“I don’t think it’s a factor on 2010,” Cornyn told POLITICO. “Norm has been raising a bunch of his own money, and the RNC and the NRSC [have] been helping some too.”
Read more here.
The fundraising committee for Senate Republicans has invested heavily in Norm Coleman’s ongoing battle in Minnesota, including about $938,000 last month alone.
Considering that Senate Republicans have another rough election year ahead of them, you’d think they would recognize the writing on the wall and start saving that money for Senate candidates in 2010. It’s absolutely sick to me that they’re willing to throw away $1 million per month just to keep Franken out of the Senate for another month or two.
I flew back to MN from DC today and, as we’re taxiing into the gate at MSP, there’s an obnoxious younger guy talking loudly on his cell phone.
In the course of his convo, he identifies himself as a former Coleman staffer and mentions that he’s in town for a “pre-concession bbq” that a bunch of former/current staffers are having…
This - along with the news that the last of the Coleman staffers are getting new jobs - is a sign that the end is near.
In a complete lack of any type of scrutiny or fact-checking, nor even examining that the story is simply a publicity stunt, the Star Tribune, more-or-less reprints Brodkorb’s meaningless and fruitless endeavor — and treats it as news. Way to go, Pat Doyle. What an incredible disservice to all Star Tribune readers.
Anyone involved with the “Save the Strib” campaign needs to first scrutinize the political writing and the editorial board at the Strib over the last year. It is seriously disgusting.
As Jeff pointed out earlier today, Michael Brodkorb is at it again — trying to make a press story out of nothing. Rachel Stassen-Berger called him out on it yesterday and killed the story:
But even [Brodkorb] admits that any count he gets, if he gets the data, would come accompanied by a “giant asterisks.” That’s because, without the envelopes, he wouldn’t be in a position to know whether the individuals who cast the ballots comported with even the most basic requirements of absentee ballots. He could not check, for instance, whether those who cast the ballots were registered. Without that information, it’s not clear to this reporter what practical value the information would have — except for spin purposes.
Exactly. The only reason Brodkorb is doing this is for spin and media coverage. Over in the comments in MinnPost, Alan Paulson says:
The elections officials will refuse [Brodkorb’s] request. He would be wasting his time to sue. Opening the ballots would require an act of the Legislature.
While Mr. Paulson is sound in his logic, Brodkorb is absolutely not wasting his time. The whole point is to get media coverage, not to actually accomplish anything for the voters of Minnesota. Brodkorb’s the same guy that started the rumor that Mark Ritchie is a communist, harassing female DFL staffers by posting photos of them online and asking his readers what “skinny bitches for Madia” meant, called the exploitation of an 8-year-old girl “hilarious”, stalked a woman in a Perkins Restaurant parking lot outside a campaign office after placing illegal lawn signs, and now, naturally, he’s running for deputy chair of the Minnesota GOP. The whole point here is media coverage for Brodkorb and his allies, not to do anything relevant or helpful for anyone else.
This is what I don’t understand, though: the Star Tribune has traditionally published Brodkorb’s stories and tips. For example, he was going to sue over alleged double-counting of ballots and the Strib gave him an entire article. He never actually sued anyone — it was just for press coverage, as far as we can tell.
Has the Star Tribune finally learned to not fall for his traps?
Sources close to Coleman say the former Senator would likely give up his legal battle and accept defeat if the Minnesota Supreme Court decides in Franken’s favor. That’s because Coleman anticipates that Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R) would ultimately sign Franken’s certification papers.
…sources say Coleman, who is vying for a second term, does not have the same appetite to pursue his case in federal court as he did for his state court battle.
“He will be done” if he loses at the state Supreme Court, one Republican predicted.
So I’m going to punt and open it up to you, dear readers. What do you think will come from yesterday’s Supreme Court hearing? Will the ruling for Franken be unanimous, or will it be 4-1? Will Pawlenty be ordered to sign an election certificate? Will he sign it? Will Coleman appeal to the Supreme Court?
Discuss.
- At first, I didn’t think any votes should be counted — even if the ballots were improperly rejected. Now, I think we should count as many votes as possible — even if the ballots were properly rejected — if it will make me the winner.
Coleman’s problem has always been the extreme shift in his argument. Early in the process, he pushed desperately to end the election without having all votes counted. Then, once he fell behind, it was suddenly of the utmost importance to ensure every vote was counted, no matter how long it took.
The time is finally here for the Supreme Court to ask why Coleman’s position has changed so drastically, rule that he lost the election, and order Franken to be seated.
People Are Shouting
RSS