Quist Will Take Bachmann’s 50% out for a Test Drive

It was reported recently that Michelle Bachmann has a 50% approval rating statewide across Minnesota. Many were somewhat surprised that she is that popular in Minnesota outside her Congressional district.  Allen Quist’s plan to challenge Tim Walz in the First Congressional District, which stretches across the length of Southern Minnesota will put that popularity to the test.  Quist has strong ties, both actual and philosophical, to Michelle Bachmann – Quist’s wife Julie is employed by Bachmann as her District Director and he embraces the same Tea-Party principles as Bachmann.

Quist has gotten a fair amount of attention on his plans to run – he is a well known figure in Minnesota Politics having managed to garner the party endorsement for governor against then-incumbent governor Arnie Carlson (Quist lost heavily in the pimary, though).  Momentum-wise, he seems to be off to a slow start – with, reportedly, no members of the media attending his Rochester press conference and, even more significantly, no GOP party leaders or elected officials standing by his side during the event.

His campaign will attempt to capitalize on public concern/tea-party anger over three issues that will be his priorities - opposition to health care reform, opposition to cap and trade (reduction of greenhouse gases), and opposition to the federal economic stimulus plan.

My view is that Quist is probably too conservative for the 1st District.  Walz fits the district well with his military background, popularity as a teacher/football coach, confidence, and energetic campaigning.  He perhaps leans a little to the left of the district as a whole, but I think it would take an equally moderate, but right leaning Republican to have  a chance of unseating him.

Quist will energize the DFL in the first district, and scare off many moderates.  The DFL will be more than happy to tie him to Bachmann and remind voters of some of his previous gems . . .  such as his assertion that men are genetically predisposed to be head of household, his opinion that the highly regarded International Baccalaureate high school program (embraced by George W. Bush among others) is  Communist/Marxist, and his unyielding viewpoints on creationism and abortion.

It will be interesting to see if Quist will manage the republican nomination (given the lack of early enthusiasm) or whether the party will embrace a more moderate candidate.

Crickets Chirping . . .

. . . is about all you hear following the first election using Instant Runoff/Ranked Choice voting in Minneapolis.  The implementation of this new and (some say) controversial method of voting has resulted in . .well . . .an uneventful election.  The people came, the people voted, the people went home, candidates got elected, the people were happy.

The gripping headlines have been things like, "New Voting System Runs Smoothly on Election Day" and "56% of Voters Prefer Instant Runoff Voting."  Not exactly the "Sky is Falling" headlines that opponents of the system were no doubt hoping for.  By all accounts the whole process, including the hand counting of ballots, went smoother than expected and was free of confusion or controversy.

This, combined with approval in St. Paul of the system, bodes well for IRV advocates who plan to carry on the fight and implement the system statewide.  Theoretically, the biggest benefiters of the system if it goes statewide would likely be The Indepence Party - a party which seems to be on a long slow march to becoming a historical footnote.  IRV could stand a chance of helping them move beyond the spoiler role that they seem to be stuck in.  Time will tell, though, if the rural areas of Minnesota are ready to change the way voting is done in the state.

Maureen Hackett's Political Contribution Problem

Polinaut reported on Maureen Hackett officially entering the race to unseat Erik Paulson in the Third Congressional district.  She will be going up against PTA President/Optometric Association Executive Director Jim Meffert in the DFL primary, and possibly Terri Bonoff (who is still deciding). Tom Sheck asked Hackett about previous contributions she had made to Ralph Nader.  She responded that she likes to "reward good ideas".  With Nader receiving only 4% of the vote in the the Third District in 2000 . . .there might not be a lot of voters there who agree with her on that point.  With donations to Nader as late as September 2005, she will probably have some explaining to do to the delegates at the nominating convention

Harder to explain, though, will be her January 2004 donation of $1,250 to the National Republican Congressional Committee.  That's an increase $950 over her $300 donation in March 2003 to the National Republican Congressional Committee.

Now, granted, she has donated to lots of Democrats as well.  Nader is liked by some Democrats so, hard feelings aside from the Gore/Bush debacle, that one can likely be forgiven.  But giving money to the organization that is working to defeat the office for which you want to be nominated will likely be a deal breaker for many delegates.

I do have to say, though, that she has the coolest job title in politics.  I have no idea what a forensic psychiatrist does, but it definitely sounds like it would belong to the lead character in a very hip crime-drama show.

Anyway, contribution information can be found at Open Secrets.

A Tale of Two Tims

In 2006, after the governor's election I noted signs of a "new warm and fuzzy T-Paw." The newly (narrowly) re-elected Guv was acknowledging global warming, advocating extending healthcare and working constructively with unions. Well, no surprise that with T-Paw now in the Republican presidential primary field he is becoming a lot less warm and fuzzy and making a clear shift to the right. Here's a snapshot comparing things I pointed out in 2006:

Global Warming
2006 - T-Paw introduces his bold "Next Generation Energy Initiative" which he signed into law in 2007 - and included aggressive goals for reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in Minnesota.

2009 - T-Paw backs away from any acknlowedgment that human activity contributes to climate change and says Cap and Trade plans to reduce greenhouse emissions would wreck the national economy. (Think Progress and The American Spectator note the change)

Healthcare Reform
2006 - T-Paw does "about face on health care" . . . says he wants to extend health insurance coverage to all Minnesota children.

2009 - T-Paw shifts his healthcare rhetoric from helping ininsured children to . . . I don't know . . .he sounds more like Palin. Here's how he's describing the current care reform proposals

“It’s rare for Congress to work on weekends, but even rarer that a bill this anti-freedom comes along, it’s anti-freedom because it raises taxes, it’s anti-freedom because it explodes bureaucracy. And it’s anti-freedom because it puts government in charge of health care decisions.”

Making Nice With Unions
2006 - T-Paw gives state employees, an unprompted, a one-time health insurance premium "holiday" due to an excess surplus in the Minnesota . . ."

2009 - T-Paw (in 2008 actually) vetoes resolution backing Employee Free Choice Act.

These things are really no surprise . . it's common for presidential candidates to have to move toward the more extreme parts of their party to secure a nomination, but it's still important to hold them accountable when a change in position is due to political pandering rather than a thoughtful consideration of the issues. You can make your own decision on T-Paw's motives . . . just don't expect T-Paw to be warm and fuzzy anymore.

Norm's "Center Right America" .. oh and btw, I won the election

Last two times I heard Norm on the radio he was talking about "Center Right America." It sounds like an effort to brand independents and/or right leaning moderates and claim them as his own. He has always had a skill for sensing which way the wind is blowing, so his twenty minute speech at Harvard on the subject is worth a listen.

Interesting side note. In answering a question after the speech Norm claims that he won the election. The questioner asked about the trend of moderate Republicans losing elections. Norm responded, "I gotta tell ya . . . I got more votes. I got more votes on election night. When it came to counting the absentee ballots, they counted more of the other guys'."

It's the first time since the election I've heard him strike a note of sour grapes or make any sort of claim that he was robbed of the election. This strikes me as sort of a slip up on his part - getting off message from the image he seems to have beeen trying to convey of himself to public.