[Speed Gibson,
Monday January 7, 2008 at 12:12pm]
More Thoughts on SD 25
I'll confess right now to babbling given my inexperience, but I'm wondering if there is some misconception as to the role of the state party, what's expected of its local units, and of course, the voters. For the record, I will be attending my first party caucus next month, so while I vote at least 90% Republican, I have no official connection to date. And I also did nothing in regard to SD 25.
On "The Final Word" (Saturdays 3-5 pm on 1280 The Patriot) we heard Michael Brodkorb lashing out at those who didn't somehow get involved with the Senate District 25 special election, lost handily and unexpectedly to the DFL. Brodkorb says it was a lack of GOP effort, statewide. Drew Emmer contends that we were bested, even blindsided by a clever DFL.
It's a fact of life that the DFL is going to cheat. That's the whole purpose of same day voter registration, giving driver licenses to illegal aliens, instant runoff voting, and the like. Also, as Emmer noted on the broadcast, the DFL has paid volunteers. Worse, we now have a corrupt Secretary of State who has no trouble with any of this, nor do the print and TV media. We have an Attorney General who admitted she isn't up the job by hiring Mike Hatch. Our State Auditor is still wondering why the rows have numbers and the columns have letters. The more important the election, the more of a safety margin we'll need. So yes, vote for vote, we have to work harder.
That said, an election was held by the rules and the DFL won. The voters of that District elected who they wanted. Those that didn't vote can't complain. Is that so terrible?
Brodkorb thinks so, for now the DFL has the 2/3 majority to override vetoes. Pogemiller unchained! The Governor powerless! He neglected in his emails to mention that the House is not yet veto-proof. In fact, had I received one of those "call to action" emails, I would have been skeptical. Why is it necessary to over-state the situation in order to bring out the troops?
I have another question. Is it ethical for outsiders (for either party) to make phone calls and go door knocking if it is just a local election?
Yes, it shifts the balance of power in St. Paul more so than if the Senate were 34-33 or 60-17. But this is buzzer shot thinking. Exciting as such finishes are, basketball games are never won or lost solely on the last shot. A hundred or more other scoring or defensive opportunities set up the final seconds. Similarly, the 2006 election results set up this special election's importance. Had we won or lost 2 more seats then, this discussion wouldn't be happening.
So back to the original question: what is expected? Are all other SD units supposed to swarm, dare I say overpower the opposition in a special election like this? I ask that of both parties. By what moral right? Aren't we at least annoyed by all the out of state money (and candidate) flowing into the 2008 U.S. Senate race against Norm Coleman?
What is appropriate is support from the state party organization, to help the local organization with advice, training, and certainly a share of the expenses. Residents in neighboring districts can certainly volunteer to help if the First Amendment still applies to elections. But for the state party organization to demand such efforts before or shame the lack of such efforts afterward crosses a line in my opinion, again, for either party.
On "The Final Word" (Saturdays 3-5 pm on 1280 The Patriot) we heard Michael Brodkorb lashing out at those who didn't somehow get involved with the Senate District 25 special election, lost handily and unexpectedly to the DFL. Brodkorb says it was a lack of GOP effort, statewide. Drew Emmer contends that we were bested, even blindsided by a clever DFL.
It's a fact of life that the DFL is going to cheat. That's the whole purpose of same day voter registration, giving driver licenses to illegal aliens, instant runoff voting, and the like. Also, as Emmer noted on the broadcast, the DFL has paid volunteers. Worse, we now have a corrupt Secretary of State who has no trouble with any of this, nor do the print and TV media. We have an Attorney General who admitted she isn't up the job by hiring Mike Hatch. Our State Auditor is still wondering why the rows have numbers and the columns have letters. The more important the election, the more of a safety margin we'll need. So yes, vote for vote, we have to work harder.
That said, an election was held by the rules and the DFL won. The voters of that District elected who they wanted. Those that didn't vote can't complain. Is that so terrible?
Brodkorb thinks so, for now the DFL has the 2/3 majority to override vetoes. Pogemiller unchained! The Governor powerless! He neglected in his emails to mention that the House is not yet veto-proof. In fact, had I received one of those "call to action" emails, I would have been skeptical. Why is it necessary to over-state the situation in order to bring out the troops?
I have another question. Is it ethical for outsiders (for either party) to make phone calls and go door knocking if it is just a local election?
Yes, it shifts the balance of power in St. Paul more so than if the Senate were 34-33 or 60-17. But this is buzzer shot thinking. Exciting as such finishes are, basketball games are never won or lost solely on the last shot. A hundred or more other scoring or defensive opportunities set up the final seconds. Similarly, the 2006 election results set up this special election's importance. Had we won or lost 2 more seats then, this discussion wouldn't be happening.
So back to the original question: what is expected? Are all other SD units supposed to swarm, dare I say overpower the opposition in a special election like this? I ask that of both parties. By what moral right? Aren't we at least annoyed by all the out of state money (and candidate) flowing into the 2008 U.S. Senate race against Norm Coleman?
What is appropriate is support from the state party organization, to help the local organization with advice, training, and certainly a share of the expenses. Residents in neighboring districts can certainly volunteer to help if the First Amendment still applies to elections. But for the state party organization to demand such efforts before or shame the lack of such efforts afterward crosses a line in my opinion, again, for either party.