Last week, we discussed the media flap over what amounts, in the end, to Tom Emmer’s not releasing details on how he plans to change Minnesota government until he actually has an opponent.
Politics In Minnesota Weekend summed up the details:
On Monday, Tom Scheck reported a piece for MPR that digs into Emmer’s publicly stated plans to downsize state government.
The Emmer campaign responds via an “Emmer Truth” section of its website, implying that claims made by Sheck’s story are inaccurate and cherry-picked.
Enter Dave Mindeman (mnpACT!) and Eric Black (MinnPost), who call EmmerTruth “pretty weak” and “winging it.” Jon Tevlin at the Strib also gets his two cents in, basically repeating the cries for Emmer to get specific.
Mitch Berg (Shot in the Dark) and Gary Gross (Let Freedom Ring) hit back, generally with two points: Scheck’s and Black’s reports wereinaccurate/mangled the context, and it’s a legitimate and sensible strategy for Team Emmer not to give up the “master plan” so early in the campaign season.
Charlie Quimby (Across the Great Divide) comments on Berg’s blog: “I think if you put Emmer’s full statement in front [of] 100 voters, not many would find it definitive or conclusive or clarified.” And Berg in reply: “As to how 100 random users would perceive Emmer’s statement … I don’t disagree; presentation counts … But is it the media’s job to relate the actual facts, or to reinforce confusion?”
A terrific question, if a little antagonistic in the wording.
Antagonistic? Moi?
The piece, by…well, I never got the name, but it’s someone on the Politics In Minnesota staff – summed up the issues pretty well, so far.
But perhaps more to the point, there was nothing confusing in the MPR piece. In fact, both EmmerTruth and the conservative blogs skip the entire point of Scheck’s reporting while digging around in the semantics: Emmer, as a candidate, has promised major redesigns of government, but the programs and agencies he’s highlighted so far are playing with thousands or millions of dollars, not billions. The “could not should” distinction is sort of absurd.
To be fair to Gary and I, we were reacting to the presenting issue; we had leftybloggers and the media chanting “Emmer said he’d hack a third of State Government!”.
But the real issue is the beef.
Now, to most of the Twin Cities media, that question is…:
If the media’s job is to relate actual facts, then it’s perfectly reasonable — no, responsible — for the media to ask Emmer, the candidate for Minnesota’s highest office, what he would do if elected. If the answer is, for now, that he’s not sure, then it’s the media’s responsibility to say so.
True.
But it’d be useful for the media to also note that Dayton (and Kelliher, Entenza and Horner’s, not that it matters) plans are no more articulate; if Emmer is saying “Cut Cut Cut!”, as John Tevlin wrote, then the Four Stooges are responding “Tax Tax Tax!”, with no more articulation.
I hate to repeat myself, but I think I summed up my most serious response to this in my response to Erik Black last week:
Black: And [Emmer] owes the voters of Minnesota some straighter talk, not about what he could do, but what he would do to balance the budget. (Not to say that all the other guv candidates have been clear abut how they would do it. They haven’t.)
Let me get this straight: the DFL candidates have been “unclear”, but Emmer “owes” everyone an explanation now …?
Why does the MinnPost hold Republicans to a different standard than the DFL?
When Mark Dayton and the other three soon-to-be-chum contenders appear on Midmorning with Keri Miller, will Miller press any of them for details on how their “Tax, Baby, Tax!” agenda is going to lead to more (non-public-employee union) jobs? How they lead to recovery? How they will defy history by actually improving the economy?
Will Nick Coleman and John Tevlin and Lori Sturdevant demand more details amid their inevitable victorian vapours?
Will Erik Black and Tom Scheck write pieces noting how vague they’re being?
So there are two questions for everyone that’s demanding answers from Emmer, the Tom Schecks and Erik Blacks and John Tevlins and Charlie Quimbies:
- Where is the scrutiny of Dayton and the other three? The double standard was plain as day in the Black quote above; why do you, as a group, observe it? Or does supporting the status quo (only more of it) get one a pass with the media?
- I asked this before, I’ll ask it again: What is in it for Emmer to put his entire platform out there six weeks before the DFL has a candidate, for the DFL-leaning media to spin and soften up while the DFL goes through its primary contortions? How would that benefit Emmer and the MNGOP in their quest to win the race? Because this race isn’t about making the media’s job easier, or making the DFL’s job easier; it’s about saving Minnesota. Why does Emmer “owe” Minnesota any more than his opponents do?
A listening tour is a fine populist idea, but with Minnesota accumulating red ink in Deepwater Horizon-like volumes, a candidate — from any party — should be able to talk state finances in real terms. We don’t buy the idea that campaigns for office build policy proposals around a master plan that remains absolutely secret until the last possible moment.
“Last possible moment?” Of course not. What’s unreasonable about waiting until he faces the real opponent, as opposed to the opponent’s legions of ringers? Because Mark Dayton isn’t his only, or even his most serious, opponent in this race.
The Tea Party and the avalanche of dissatisfaction that are at Emmer’s back are driven by a fairly articulate demand for real answers; if Emmer doesn’t do better than the “Tax Baby Tax!” crowd, that’ll be a big problem.
I”m pretty comfortable he will have the goods on August 11, when Mark Dayton finally starts his campaign.
I agree with you that Emmer shouldn’t be required to present a detailed plan until he has a general election opponent. But that’s not the argument Emmer has been making. If he’d just say that, I’d leave it alone. Instead, he sounds outraged that he’s being asked to provide a detailed plan at all.
Also, Emmer will not “have the goods” on August 11. He has said he’ll release a plan in October. That’s simply too late.
By the way, here’s the source for that last point: http://www.startribune.com/politics/blogs/96666384.html
“Emmer, who does not face a serious primary challenge, has said he will release his plan in October.”
‘Mark Dayton and the other three soon-to-be-chum contenders ”
God I liked that!!! Soon enough there’s going to be more Dem blood in the water that oil floating around in the Gulf. Let them sort out their specific stand on what they think the issues should be. And then go out and gain support for those issues. Why in the hell should Emmer have to go first? Because the Dem lib press says so? pfft.. Qu’ils mangent de la brioche
That’s simply too late.
Why?
Why?? Because I think we should have more than a couple of weeks to evaluate the policy proposals of our next Governor. That doesn’t strike me as particularly unreasonable.
“Because I think we should have more than a couple of weeks to evaluate the policy proposals of our next Governor.”
There’s a hanging curveball, if ever I’ve seen one.
I agree with Jeff. The Strib should be really pushing hard on Dayton, Entenza, Big MAK, and Horner to release their plans (in great detail) so they have the opportunity to really get into the nuts and bolts of the plan of each the candidates. Surely they consider this to be EQUALLY as important as Emmer revealing his plan, OR MAYBE NOT.
Generally an early release of details just gives your opponents more time to bash you. It seems reasonable to wait until we have two major candidates before we get into specifics. As for now, those TV commericals for Entenza and Dayton, so far the only thing I can tell is that they both want to raise taxes to stick it to the successful (unless you inherited your money) and spend more money without accountability.
Most likely the DFL wants to change the primary from a fight between three Big Gov’t liberals, and into a fight between the DFL and Emmer (and therefore, which of the three would do best, in their opinions, to take on the Republican). Emmer has no votes to gain between now and August.
I’ve gotten a few mailings from Entenza–more or less, he wants to push more money at the schools and tax the rich more.
Given that I’d get a raise if the state paid me what it’s spending on the government schools to stay home and educate my own children, I tend to think they’ve got enough–especially as the teacher rarely sees more than 20-30% of what they’re spending in each classroom.
By Mitch Berg
“Last week, we discussed the media flap over what amounts, in the end, to Tom Emmer’s not releasing details on how he plans to change Minnesota government until he actually has an opponent.”
Ummmmmm is Emmer’s plan going to be reactive? Will it change depending on who his opponent is?
If so, then, that is something voters should know (and which is not, imho, the mark of clear, proactive leadership in any direction).
If not —–then what is he waiting for?
I would disagree with Chuck’s comments on two points – while it does give other candidates time to respond to your proposals, Emmer would have time to respond back as well —- giving the voters who are undecided (and those who think they are decided for that matter) plenty of time to consider and reconsider their votes. So, yes there ARE votes to gain between now and August, and so what if it gives your opponent more time to respond? Can Emmer only prevail if there is a short period of time where his opposition cannot respond? Sheesh! If Emmer cannot recognize that it is also an opportunity for him to confront and defeat his opposition, he is missing a whole lot, and looks like a coward to boot.
Instead, lets press ALL the candidates to release their proposals – not just Emmer – and have at it! Let the games begin!
DG,
Ummmmmm is Emmer’s plan going to be reactive? Will it change depending on who his opponent is?
If so, then, that is something voters should know (and which is not, imho, the mark of clear, proactive leadership in any direction).
Perhaps, but it’s a bit of a strawman; the strategic gain is not in knowing the opponent as in saving it for when it’ll have the maximum impact on the campaign.
That’s just smart politics.
I would disagree with Chuck’s comments on two points – while it does give other candidates time to respond to your proposals, Emmer would have time to respond back as well
Perhaps, but that’s really not how it works. For starters, voters who aren’t wonks (or amateur wonks, like all us bloggers) don’t devote that much energy to long-term analysis. First impressions count.
And it is a fact that the media will work to try to discredit Emmer, effectively as adjuncts to the DFL. More on that below.
So, yes there ARE votes to gain between now and August, and so what if it gives your opponent more time to respond? Can Emmer only prevail if there is a short period of time where his opposition cannot respond?
There would be merit to that, if it could be honestly said that the media – the major factor in how these ideas get to the voters – weren’t effectively an adjunct of the DFL, and wouldn’t be actively working with the DFL to try to counter-spin and neutralize Emmer and his platform before the DFL has a candidate.
But since that is the reality we face, Emmer has to act accordingly. It’s possible to outflank the media and go directly to the people – Emmer will excel at it, frankly – but it’s expensive and takes an amazing amount of effort. It’s doable – but it’s something you do for two weeks, not five months. Not that the DFL wouldn’t love it for the MNGOP to try to go at it for five months, burn out their volunteers and empty their bank accounts.
There should be a post on this subject tomorrow.
Sheesh! If Emmer cannot recognize that it is also an opportunity for him to confront and defeat his opposition, he is missing a whole lot, and looks like a coward to boot.
Nope. It’s smart politics (but congratulations on uncritically joining the DFL’s spin machine!). There is no real advantage to coming out with it now; even if the press weren’t in the bag for the DFL, the fact is it’d be wasted right now. Emmer is busy building name ID outstate; that’s what he needs to do. Why release a detailed plan to a state that is still meeting him?
Instead, lets press ALL the candidates to release their proposals – not just Emmer – and have at it! Let the games begin!
Y’see, DG, the fact is it’d be stupid politics for ANYONE to get too specific yet. Which is the real reason the DFL and their collaborators in the media are trying to cow and bluster Emmer into showing his cards, while not demanding anything of the sort of Dayton or the three redshirts.
Emmer could have a “comprehensive plan”
like Mark Dayton.
Strengthen Schools!
Create Jobs!
Tax rich people! (but not trust funds)
Large desks to hide under!
Yup, I say let Emmer turn on the charm and a serving of platitudes for the time being. Let the Dems spend deep into their pockets flinging up a can of whoopass on each other. It’s certain that Emmer is the GOP candidate. We’ll see who the Dem candidate is, and what a happy little family they are after their lovefest is over. I don’t think the Horner campaign will amount to much more than a wet fart.
Mitch wrote: “Nope. It’s smart politics (but congratulations on uncritically joining the DFL’s spin machine!).”
Ummm………no, not a fair claim. I want ALL of the candidates to be engaged with tthe voters, Mitch, regardless of how you want to spin this.
Dayton or the three redshirts.
HAH! thanks for the end of day geek humor reference, Mitch!
Ummm………no, not a fair claim. I want ALL of the candidates to be engaged with tthe voters, Mitch, regardless of how you want to spin this.
You said “If Emmer cannot recognize that it is also an opportunity for him to confront and defeat his opposition, he is missing a whole lot, and looks like a coward to boot.”.
So you, like Eric Black, would like both sides to flout commonsense campaign tactics and come out with their end-of-campaign points now – but with the Dems it’s a nice-to-have, while with Emmer it’s a sign of cowardice?
Do you see where the confusion is coming into the picture?
I want ALL of the candidates to be engaged with tthe voters, Mitch, regardless of how you want to spin this.
You mean like when MAK led a chant “KKK go away” to the Emmer people during the cinco de mayo parade?
Ben,
Oh, you didn’t hear? Conservatism is “patently and overwhelmingly racist”. They said so on Penigma.
And when you’re dealing with icky racists, there’s no such thing as slander. That, indeed, is the entire point of framing ones’ opponents in defamatory terms; to justify behavior that people would otherwise eschew.
As with your last response, Mitch, you misrepresent things.
I would prefer to see ALL of the candidates address the issues, as early as possible, instead of playing political games.
Which is what you are describing however much you wish to spin it as being clever. I think to buck that kind of playing-political-games-thinking takes more leadership and courage than playing it safe. For all of the candidates. It also argues for a greater conviction of their ideas if they feel they can do so.
But heck, you just go change the subject, if that makes it easier.
Is Mark Dayton a “coward” if he doesn’t give us his detailed plan right now?
That’s not changing the subject; it’s your words!
Pingback: Tweets that mention http://www.shotinthedark.info/wp/?p=11527%3Futm_source%3Dpingback -- Topsy.com
I’m not an MN voter these days, but it seems to me that it’s good political sense, if you have a divided opposition, not to give them a common target. Maybe it is not ‘politicics the way it should be’, but it is the way every successful politician plays it – left or right.
But heck, you just go change the subject, if that makes it easier.
Jeebus. It’s Mitch’s blog, Mrs. Teasdale. He gets to decide what the subject is, not you. You play that “I’m Mitch’s friend” card a lot, but serial thread-jacking is a strange way of demonstrating your friendship.
Dog Gone said:
“As with your last response, Mitch, you misrepresent things.”
Perhaps you think you are the one to “buck that kind of playing-political-games-thinking” with a post arguing against the idea that “the right is not racist”? That is both vile and offensive.
“As with your last response, Mitch, you misrepresent things.”
This coming from a person who misrepresents simple things like geography. Find Pinal county on the map yet, DogPile?
Why is it that madlibs never play fair? Lets see – Emmer = 1 person. MAK+Dayton+Entenza=3 people. Why is it “fair” and necessary for Emmer to take on 3 people?
Why is it that madlibs never play fair?
Scruples is more of a conservative/Republican thing. Not always, but usually.
Pingback: Things You Need to Avoid While Trading in Forex Market-business