September 2nd, 2010 • 7:46 pmThe Case For Chip Cravaack
This editorial tells us that voters in Minnesota’s 8th District are taking Chip Cravaack’s candidacy seriously.
Chip Cravaack is working the 2010 campaign — and working it hard. The GOP 8th District candidate got to know the Range well during the summer months while attending parades and festivals. He has also had several fund-raisers in the area, including one scheduled this evening at the Eshquaguma Country Club outside Gilbert.
He has also been quick to respond to issues of paramount importance to the Iron Range.
When Rep. Oberstar visited the proposed PolyMet copper/nickel/precious metals site near Hoyt Lakes last week to publicly demonstrate his support for the project Cravaack was quick to respond with a news release that pulled no punches in challenging the congressman on the issue.
“This project has been in the works since 2004, so I’m going to see Congressman Oberstar’s new interest as a good sign. Maybe he has figured out what Minnesotans already know: Oberstar’s failed formula of pork projects and deficit spending produces debt, not long-term employment.
“Of course he’s for ‘creating good jobs’ 67 days before the election, but where was he 400 days before the election? In Washington voting for Obama’s failed stimulus and corporate bailouts.
“If Congressman Oberstar was serious about getting this project up and running, construction would already be underway. His silence has been deafening, especially for the thousands of unemployed residents of Saint Louis County and their families. Actions speak louder than words. If Congressman Oberstar did something other than just talk about creating jobs, unemployment in our district wouldn’t be the highest in the state.”
Rep. Oberstar hasn’t paid serious attention to this district in years. He’s broght home the pork for his environmentalist friend but that’s about it. Now he sees that he’s in trouble for the first time in years & he’s suddenly taking an interest in something that’s important to the voters.
My hope is that voters will see through Rep. Oberstar’s election year conversion. I hope that they’ll see this for what it is: an election year attempt to look like he cares. This charade shouldn’t be taken seriously because Rep. Oberstar couldn’t care less about MN-08’s priorities. He hasn’t for years.
If Rep. Oberstar cared about MN-08’s priorities, he would’ve jumped on PolyMet’s cause 3 years ago. If Rep. Oberstar cared about MN-08’s priorities, he would’ve gotten government out of the job creators’ way so they could’ve created jobs for Iron Rangers.
Whether through letters to the editor, conversations at the newspaper’s front counter, personal e-mails to the editor or phone calls, Cravaack supporters are not shy in making contact.
And they are doing so not just because of their traditional GOP roots and beliefs. Nor is it solely because of the anti-incumbent, anti-Washington, pro-tea party sentiment that is rumbling like an angry thunderstorm across the country.
All those elements certainly play into a more visible and active Republican candidacy in the 8th District. But Cravaack the person, not just his stands on the issues, has clearly generated more zeal among his likely voters in the area than for any other challenger to Oberstar in the past 20 years.
Plain and simple, many voters like this guy from Lindstrom, Minn., who had a strong and decorated military career, private sector aviation background with Northwest Airlines that included being a union steward, and who is also comfortable volunteering time in the Chisago Lakes School District where his boys, Nick, 8, and Grant, 6, attend classes.
And so just as he is working the district hard, his supporters are working hard for him.
To be honest, I didn’t know much about Chip Cravaack prior to this year’s state convention. Since then, I’ve gotten to know quite a bit about him. He’s an impressive candidate, smart, a man of integrity & a man of private sector accomplishments.
In a recent conversation with Mr. Cravaack, I learned that he’s competing in areas that ‘traditional Republicans’ don’t compete in. What he’s finding is that there’s alot more people that agree with conservative principles than agree with progressive ideas.
I think that’s the secret to Chip Cravaack’s success. He isn’t afraid to talk about being a conservative & he isn’t afraid of talking about his conservative principles. I’d argue that Republicans can learn alot from Chip’s campaign.
Finally, I’d argue that Chip Cravaack is Rep. Oberstar’s worst nightmare. He relates to the people of the Iron Range. He’s a former union steward so he understands their way of life. Most importantly, he’s a very bright man. (You don’t get to fly jets commercially if you aren’t sharp.)
In any other year, Cravaack’s fight would a steep uphill fight. This year? Not so much:
Bookies would give Cravaack long odds to unseat Oberstar. And they would also likely install the incumbent congressman as a prohibitive favorite, given past electoral history, to once again top the 60 percent vote threshold.
But regardless the voters’ verdict on Nov. 2, Cravaack has made this year’s 8th District congressional race an interesting one, with voters paying more attention and the incumbent working harder. It’s impressive that he has not ceded any portion of the vast 8th District to Oberstar, a Chisholm native, including the congressman’s home turf.
It wouldn’t surprise me to see Oberstar get substantially less than 60 percent of the vote. I won’t predict a Cravaack victory at this point but I’m comfortable predicting a tight election.
Technorati: Chip Cravaack, Campaigns, Iron Range, Mining, PolyMet, Unions, MNGOP, Jim Oberstar, DFL, Election 2010
September 2nd, 2010 • 1:22 pmMore From Summer of Lies
This LTE is just the DFL’s latest lying contribution to the 2010 campaign. It’s so filled with lies that I’m questioning whether it was written by ABM’s writers:
Tom Emmer has been campaigning across Minnesota for almost a year now and all I have heard from him are insults and smears.
Mark Dayton has given voters a detailed proposal to fix our state’s huge budget deficit. Emmer gives us attack ads. Dayton has a positive vision for Minnesota. Emmer’s vision is limited to winning by attacking and smearing.
Tom Emmer is wrong. Minnesota voters know it was Emmer and Pawlenty policies that got us into a budget mess. We know we need a new, positive direction. On Nov. 2, I will proudly cast my vote for Mark Dayton.
I’m not certain that there’s a verifiable fact in this LTE. Saying that all a person has heard from Tom are “insults & smears” tells me that this writer is lying through her teeth. I defy her to list a single insult or smear that Tom has said. I’ve listened to the debates. I’ve heard Tom’s stump speech. They’re smear free. PERIOD.
Saying that Sen. Dayton has “given voters a detailed proposal to fix our state’s huge budget deficit” is a myth. A 2.5 page document isn’t detailed. Saying that Tom has given Minnesota attack ads is pure BS. The only TV ad that the Emmer campaign has produced is a bio that finishes by saying we need to get the economy going. If that’s the writer’s definition of an attack ad, then she’s warped.
It’s also galling. ABM, aka the Dayton family shadow campaign, has run a series of ads that have been nothing but smears that aren’t based on verifiable facts. The writer conveniently omits that fact. I wish I could say I’m shocked but I’m not.
Saying that Mark Dayton has “a positive vision for Minnesota” is laughable, too. He doesn’t. Sen. Dayton’s vision starts with a tax-the-rich scheme that Sen. Dayton has predicted will generate $4,000,000,000 in additional revenue. It isn’t likely that it’ll produce $2,500,000,000 in additional revenue. If it doesn’t produce the revenue, then Sen. Dayton will raise taxes well into the middle class.
I don’t consider that to be a positive vision for Minnesota.
Finally, saying that “Minnesota voters know it was Emmer and Pawlenty policies that got us into a budget mess” is more opinion than anything else. I’m betting that Minnesotans agree that spending is out of control & that Mark Dayton & the DFL is the party of out of control spending.
Serious arguments can be made that the DFL majority in the Senate, led by Linda Berglin, John Marty & Sandy Pappas, is an obstructionist majority. The joke is that the Senate is where reforms go to die. Berglin, Marty & Pappas haven’t considered a GOP reform this century.
If anything, the DFL obstructionist majority is what’s created the budget mess. Their refusal to consider common sense reforms has caused alot of money to be spent foolishly.
Expect to see more of these LTEs the last 8+ weeks of the campaign. The DFL doesn’t have a positive agenda to run on. What’s worse for them is that they’re stuck with a gubernatorial candidate with a significant charisma & gravitas gap.
Technorati: Editorial, ABM, Mark Dayton, Tax The Rich, DFL, Tom Emmer, Tim Pawlenty, MNGOP, Election 2010
September 2nd, 2010 • 2:32 amAre They Really Even?
The latest MPR polling that shows Sen. Dayton tied with Rep. Emmer isn’t good news for Sen. Dayton. Some lefty bloggers see this as proof of Sen. Dayton winning. I don’t know how they reached that conclusion but it’s the wrong conclusion.
One lefty post cited an oversampling of Republicans as a polling flaw. That’s a legitimate point if you’re basing it solely off of party registration. After filtering it through the enthusiasm gap currently favoring Republicans, that oversampling might not mean much.
Here’s MNPublius’ take:
First of all, it was a somewhat small sample of 750 people, with an estimated margin of error of 5.3 percentage points. That means one candidate could have as much as a 10-point lead, even if that is fairly unlikely. Even worse is the methodology: The poll was based on a “landline, random-digit dial survey.”
Landline? Are you kidding me? I wonder how many younger voters were missed. Not having a landline, I could never have been contacted for this poll.
Had this been 2008 & they were polling for President Obama, I’d say that the youth votes missed would’ve been significant. Since this is a poll measuring the 2010 gubernatorial race featuring Sen. Dayton, I’m betting that number is tiny.
I’d also argue that this shouldn’t be that close of a race considering the fact that Tom Emmer’s been badly outspent. The Dayton shadow campaign’s negative ads aren’t having the effect that the Dayton family was hoping for.
It’s my opinion that Mitch Berg’s exposing ABM as the Dayton shadow campaign has created a backlash against ABM & against Sen. Dayton. I’d bet that unafilliated voters especially don’t like that type of dirty tricks campaigning.
When Sen. Dayton called for keeping the campaign focused on the issues, the Minnesota Republican Party highlighted the fact that the Dayton family had funded the dirty advertising campaign against Tom Emmer. I’m betting that the Dayton campaign’s dirty tricks have created a backlash against Sen. Dayton.
It’s also worth noting that the Emmer plan for restructuring government will come out soon. When that happens, there’s bound to be alot of scrutiny of the plan. When people find out that Rep. Emmer is the only candidate that’s serious about keeping government costs down, that’s going to have a positive impact which will favor the Emmer campaign.
While it’s true that the horserace numbers show a tie, the undelying campaign indicators favor Tom Emmer. The Dayton campaign should be worried about this poll.
Technorati: Polling, MPR, Mark Dayton, Sorosphere, ABM, DFL, Tom Emmer, Mitch Berg, MNGOP, Election 2010
September 1st, 2010 • 4:16 amMedia Malpractice, Part II
During her Sunday interview of Tarryl Clark, Esme Murphy served as little more than the person who directed Tarryl to the next question in Tarryl’s infomercial.
Tarryl’s answers to the questions were almost identical to the things said by the 3 characters in Tarryl’s Jim the real voter commercial. Not once did Esme Murphy challenge Tarryl’s answers, though there was more than ample opportunity for that.
For instance, when Tarryl said that she’d fought hard to keep taxes low “for 95 percent of Minnesotans”, that was a direct contradiction to her voting for the huge regressive tax increases in the Transportation Bill:
I wrote in this post about all the regressive taxes Tarryl voted to increase. I’d love hearing Tarryl explain how voting for regressive tax increases while the economy is slowing is fighting for middle class families.
After the TV show, I submitted a question to Esme Murphy during her online show, asking why she didn’t challenge Tarryl on that. Murphy’s reply was that Tarryl had certainly voted to raise taxes but that she hadn’t voted for raising taxes for middle class voters.
I immediately responded, saying that I had a list of the regressive taxes that Tarryl voted for. I even offered to email them to her. Another person in the chatroom, DanH, said that I should stop talking about the user fees in the Transportation Bill.
My reply was that the language in the bill called them taxes, that Steve Murphy, the bill’s author referred to them as taxes, so I was going to refer to them as taxes. I further explained that it’s difficult to call a metrowide sales tax collected in Scott or Anoka counties that’s used to pay for transit in Hennepin County a user fee.
I’ll still argue vociferously that that fits the definition of a tax, not a user fee.
When Tarryl said she’d cut her staff & compensation, she was technically accurate. Her per diem compensation dropped from $18,000+ to $13,440. What’s missing is that Tarryl twice voted to increase per diem from $66/day to $96/day.
These are things that Esme Murphy should’ve challenged. They directly contradicted Tarryl’s answers.
I’d further argue that Tarryl saying that she cut her compensation was, to put it kindly, slightly inaccurate. Tarryl said that she was the fiscally responsible candidate. Why would a person need more than $66/day for meal money & incidentals? I’m having a difficult time justifying that. It seems like $66/day is more than ample compensation.
If journalists don’t ask the right questions, how can they inform us during the campaigns? I’d argue that this interview was the worst case of media malpractice of the campaign. If journalists are going to ask the candidates questions, it’s important that they have the facts down so they can challenge the answers. Otherwise, the interviews are little more than an infomercial.
Technorati: Interview, Tarryl Clark, Per Diem, Transportation Bill, Esme Murphy,DFL, Election 2010
August 31st, 2010 • 10:45 amNow He Cares?
After not caring about the Polymet permitting process for years, Jim Oberstar finally cares. Sort of:
It’s been in the works for more than four years, but when the environmental review came out last fall, the federal government blasted the report as inadequate.
Oberstar says he wants a thorough review, but it shouldn’t take so long.
“The red tape, the slowdown, the lack of full attention by federal and state permitting agencies has dragged this process out much too long,” said Oberstar.
Oberstar said the No. 1 issue people talk about in northeastern Minnesota is jobs. And the Polymet mine promises 400 jobs.
“I’ve heard some concerns, ‘Be careful about our environment. We love this land, we don’t want our waters to be adversely affected.’ And I’ve assured people that corners will not be cut, there will be no exceptions made, but we have to do this in an expeditious manner,” he said.
It’s been 4 years since the permitting and inspection process started. Finally, it’s got the attention of Rep. Oberstar? Why didn’t he take interest before this? There’s a simple answer for why it’s finally got his attention: Tom Emmer has made this a focal point of the campaign and Sen. Dayton is looking like he doesn’t care about job creation.
Enter Rep. Oberstar to cut the red tape. Enter Rep. Oberstar so jobs can be created. What a great guy Rep. Oberstar is. For that matter, what a great guy Sen. Dayton is.
There’s just one problem with this picture. If Rep. Emmer hadn’t brought it up, and if the issue hadn’t gained traction, it’s likely that this project still wouldn’t be getting attention. Let’s remember that Sen. Dayton wasn’t worried about streamlining the permitting process during the final DFL debate before the primary.
As for Rep. Oberstar, why didn’t he take an interest in the process long before this? Polymet’s been run through the ringer for 5 years. Suddenly, he cares? Why didn’t he care before the MNGOP candidate brought it up at a debate? Why didn’t he care prior to Tom Emmer making this a major political issue?
Mining is the bread and butter of the Iron Range economy. Creating hundreds of jobs should’ve been Rep. Oberstar’s first priority. Iron Rangers now know that it wasn’t Oberstar’s top priority.
Chip Cravaack is the MNGOP-endorsed candidate for MN-08. Unlike ‘Lord Oberstar’, Cravaack will represent the district. That’s because he’s actually listening to the people of the Eighth District. Had Rep. Oberstar listened to his constituents, he would’ve taken an interest in Polymet sooner.
Instead, he jumped into action when his political ally, Sen. Dayton, got into political hot water. That’s just what I’d expect from the guy whose highest priority many years is getting bike paths built with highway Trust Fund money.
Sen. Dayton and Rep. Oberstar won’t represent Minnesota because they’re too busy catering to their political allies in the environmental movement.
Technorati: Polymet, Mining, Jobs, Tom Emmer, Debates, Permitting, Reform, Chip Cravaack, MNGOP, James Oberstar, Mark Dayton, Special Interests, Environment, DFL, Election 2010
Entries RSS2 Feed
