Rasmussen Reports has published a poll showing DFLer Al Franken leading incumbent Republican Norm Coleman in the 2008 Senate race, 44-42.
Reports published elsewhere indicate that SurveyUSA also has a poll coming out tonight, and S-USA will show a 52-39 advantage for Coleman.
Clearly, one of the two polling firms is going to end up with a good deal of egg on their face on November 5th unless one (or both) of their trend lines changes.
SurveyUSA’s result seems to fit in the recent trend of rising (and now, peaking) numbers for Coleman, and is right in line with the firm’s previous results. However, Rasmussen’s result, while out of line with other firms’ recent results, is right in line with its own results, which are generally pretty good and respected for accuracy on both sides of the aisle. Rasmussen shows 14% undecided, while SurveyUSA shows just 9%, so that certainly factors in a bit.
There’s another factor that may be in play here, which was addressed earlier today on Salon as “Obama’s missing 2%”: younger, college-educated, property-renting voters who may be getting severely undercounted in polls because they’re more likely to use cell phones as a primary means of communication. Granted, Obama is leading by as many as 13-15 points in these same pollsters’ polls, but that doesn’t remove the possibility that those same voters, which could comprise as much as 14% of the electorate this year, aren’t being included in these polls and thus are detracting from Franken’s numbers.
So we’ll see. And I’ll check back over the 2006 numbers to see which of these two major pollsters called the Senate race more accurately.
Cross-posted from Minnesota Campaign Report – feel free to drop by and keep track of what promises to be an exciting race for the better part of twenty months!
On February 14th, humorist and Air America radio personality Al Franken made official what political observers have long expected: he will run for the DFL nomination for U.S. Senate in 2008, hoping to face off against incumbent Republican Norm Coleman. In the wake of the announcement and, according to reports, several successful events to kick off the campaign, Franken took a few minutes to answer some questions about why he’s running, major issues, and standing up to the right-wing smear machine.
MNCR: Straightforward question out of the gate: Why are you running for the United States Senate?
Al Franken: Here’s a straightforward answer: I’m not happy with the leadership Senator Coleman has provided on the issues that matter to me and to Minnesota families, and I know I’ll be a leader in the Senate. I’m going to lead on universal health care, on renewable energy, on taking care of our veterans, and on restoring America’s standing in the world. I think we need more of that kind of leadership. That’s the kind of Senators Minnesota has given the country: leaders like Hubert Humphrey and Paul Wellstone and Amy Klobuchar. And that’s the kind of Senator I’ll be.
Read more after the break.
MNCR: Moreso than most recent candidates for statewide office, your name is already known to many Minnesotans. Which particular aspects of your experiences do you think prepare you both to run for and serve in the U.S. Senate?
AF: You know, I’ve been in this debate for a while now, with my writing and my radio show. People, I think, know me not just as a guy they’ve seen on TV, but as a guy who stands up for his principles and is willing to speak out on important issues. Take my show – we’ve gone in depth on issues ranging from Iraq to stem cell research to renewable energy to health care to early childhood education to tax policy to Social Security. I know the issues. But more importantly, I know where I stand on the issues. I’m for universal health care and against privatizing Social Security. I’m for stem cell research and against the president’s Iraq policy. I’m for comprehensive immigration reform and against CAFTA. You’ll never have to check which way the political winds are blowing to know where I stand.
MNCR: Is there a role for humor in the upcoming campaign season? How will you tell Minnesota that you’re a serious candidate for a serious job?
AF: Well, I think people have a right to be skeptical, and I’m going to have to prove that I take this seriously. Again, I think if you listen to how I’ve dealt with the issues on my show and around Minnesota over the past year, you understand that I take the issues seriously. How can you not? That said, I don’t think humor and seriousness are necessarily incompatible, and I think this is going to be a fun campaign. I’m not a career politician, and I’m sure I’ll make some mistakes as we go, but we’re going to run a really creative, really exciting race. Oh, and, if I could, I’d like to acknowledge and apologize for all the mistakes in advance. Can I do that?
MNCR: Hmmm??No.
AF: Ah, nuts.
MNCR: The particulars are probably sensitive information, but what can you tell me about your strategy? Will there be a focus on urban, rural, or suburban areas of the state?
AF: I’m going to be a Senator for all of Minnesota, not just the Twin Cities. Obviously, the Twin Cities represent one of the nation’s epicenters of the progressive movement, and I’m excited about being part of that. The suburbs are growing and becoming more Democratic, and I think we will do really well there. People there are interested in economic security and fiscal responsibility, and after how badly this Republican Party has screwed up in Congress, those are now Democratic issues. And the rural communities around the state are what make Minnesota Minnesota. It was so great to go around to Fergus Falls and Winona and Virginia and Crookston this past year and see the energy in these small towns. You can bet I’ll be there a lot again during the campaign.
MNCR: Does the fact that you’re running for the seat once occupied by Paul Wellstone have a role to play in this race? What do you see as the single biggest failing of the seat’s current occupant?
Paul used to say, “The future belongs to those who are passionate and work hard.” That’s how I approach politics – I’m not afraid to show that I’m passionate, and I’ll work harder than anyone in this race to earn the support of Minnesota’s families. And I think this race is really going to be about character. People disagreed with Paul sometimes, but they knew that he led based on his values, and they trusted someone who stood by his principles. They knew what they were getting with Paul. And I think that’s what leadership is. So if you hear me say that Senator Coleman’s biggest failing is that he’s not a leader, that’s what I mean by that.
MNCR: What are your three biggest substantive issues right now, and what do you want to do about them in the Senate?
AF: Obviously, the biggest issue facing our country now is Iraq. For the past four years, the Republican Congress gave Bush and Rumsfeld a blank check instead of fulfilling their constitutional responsibility to provide oversight. That has to change. Congress has to find the best way out of this mess with the least damage to our national security and to the people of Iraq. Right now, I think that means putting pressure on the Maliki government to cut the Sunnis in on the oil, start a reconciliation process, and clamp down on sectarian death squads. We need a regional conference that includes Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Egypt, and a redeployment of our troops so they’re not caught in the crosshairs of sectarian violence.
2. Universal health care, starting with every single child in this country. That we let kids go uninsured isn’t just wrong, it’s downright stupid. It doesn’t cost that much to insure kids, and it keeps them in school, keeps them from developing chronic disease, keeps families economically secure if a kid gets sick. It’s a no-brainer, and I’ll start fighting for that in my first 100 minutes in the Senate.
3. An Apollo program for renewable energy. We can save our environment, make ourselves more secure by reducing our dependence on foreign oil (and actually DOING it, instead of just talking about it like the president does every year in the State of the Union), and create jobs here in Minnesota – it’s win, win, win, WIND. Sorry.
4. Veterans’ health care. Regardless of what people want to do with our Iraq policy, everyone supports the troops over there. Me, I want to also support the troops when they get back here. Senator Coleman has a 40% rating from the Disabled American Veterans. That is really embarrassing. I’ll fight to make sure we fully fund veterans’ health care.
Sorry, that’s four.
MNCR: Already we’ve seen quite a bit of mud being slung your way from conservative pundits in Minnesota – what’s the best way, in your mind, to combat these attacks, and what outcome will you be fighting for in doing so?
AF: I take it as a compliment – they’re obviously very worried. And, you know, I was a comedian for a long time, and I’ve been in the public eye for a long time. I’m sure they’re going to dig up anything I ever said in front of a camera or a reporter and see if they can make it sound bad. If they want to turn this race into a referendum on my career as a comedian, I guess that’s their prerogative. But I think Minnesotans are smart people with a very low tolerance for b.s., and I’m going to keep talking about how we can make things better for working families. The attacks didn’t work in 2006, and they’re not going to work in 2008. They may work in 2010; it’s too early to say.
MNCR: Finally, what does the 60-second stump speech look and sound like, here at the very beginning of things?
AF: It looks and sounds pretty much like my answers to the last seven questions, except I say it out loud instead of typing it. Also, there are hand gestures and facial expressions. Really, your readers are getting a bit cheated having to read this. Maybe they should come out and see me around the state.
Or they could watch my announcement video, which is a bit longer than 60 seconds: watch here.
Cross-posted from Minnesota Campaign Report – check back for more news on Franken’s kickoff. Robin Marty is liveblogging Franken’s final show on Air America here at Minnesota Monitor – check that out too!
Today, entertainer Al Franken has made official his candidacy for the DFL nomination for U.S. Senate.
In his announcement, Franken discussed his background and focused on what government can do for families: namely education assistance and social security:
Your government should have your back. That should be our mission in Washington, the one FDR gave us during another challenging time: freedom from fear.
Franken’s announcement follows that of fellow DFLer and trial lawyer Mike Ciresi, who announced the formation of an exploratory committee earlier this week. Some twenty months from now, the DFL nominee will face off against incumbent Republican Norm Coleman for the seat once held by Paul Wellstone.
Some other choice quotes:
It’s different for middle-class families, too. These families are being squeezed harder and harder every year. Maybe you know what it’s like to be one health crisis away from bankruptcy. Maybe you, or your parents or grandparents, can’t afford prescriptions. Maybe you have kids, and you’re worried about paying for their college. Maybe someone you love is in Iraq, and you don’t know how long they’ll have to stay there, or what will happen when they come home.
…
President Clinton used to say that there’s nothing wrong with America that can’t be fixed by what’s right with America, or, as I would add, by what’s right with Minnesota. We can lead the fight against global warming and dependence on foreign oil by developing new sources of renewable energy-and create good Minnesota jobs in the process. We can lead the nation in finding life-saving cures by harnessing the potential of stem-cell research. We can lead the nation by sending someone to the Senate who’ll be a voice for a strong and responsible America, one that uses its relationship with our allies to create a better and more secure world for ourselves and for future generations.
You’ll find the complete text of Franken’s announcement speech in the extended entry.
Hi, I’m Al Franken. I’m running for the United States Senate here in Minnesota.
I’d like to talk to you about why I’m running.
I’m not a typical politician. I’ve spent my career as a comedian. Minnesotans have a right to be skeptical about whether I’m ready for this challenge, and to wonder how seriously I would take the responsibility that I’m asking you to give me.
I want you to know: nothing means more to me than making government work better for the working families of this state, and over the next twenty months I look forward to proving to you that I take these issues seriously.
Today, however, I want to take a few moments to explain to you why I take these issues personally.
My family moved to Albert Lea from New Jersey when I was four years old. My dad never graduated high school and never had a career as such, but my mom’s father, my grandpa, owned a quilting factory out East and gave my dad a chance to start up a new factory in Albert Lea. After about two years, the factory failed, and we moved up to the Twin Cities.
Years later, I asked my dad, “Why Albert Lea?” And he said, “Well, your grandfather wanted to open a factory in the Midwest, and the railroad went through Albert Lea.”
So, I asked him, “Why did the factory fail?”
And he said, “Well, it went through Albert Lea, but it wouldn’t stop.”
That was my dad – great guy, terrible businessman. He got a job as a printing salesman, and my mom worked as a real estate agent. The four of us – I have an older brother, Owen – lived in a two-bedroom, one-bath house in St. Louis Park.
That was my childhood. I grew up in a hard-working middle class family just like many of yours. And as a middle-class kid growing up in Minnesota back then, I felt like the luckiest kid in the world. And I was.
My wife, Franni, whom I met our freshman year of college, wasn’t quite as lucky. When she was seventeen months old, her dad – a decorated veteran of World War II – died in a car accident, leaving her mother, my mother-in-law, widowed with five kids.
My mother-in-law worked in the produce department of a grocery store, but that family made it because of Social Security survivor benefits. Sometimes there wasn’t enough food on the table, sometimes they turned off the heat in the winter – this was in Portland, Maine, almost as cold as Minnesota – but they made it.
Every single one of the four girls in Franni’s family went to college, thanks to Pell Grants and other scholarships. My brother-in-law, Neil, went into the Coast Guard, where he became an electrical engineer.
And my mother-in-law got herself a $300 GI loan to fix her roof, and used the money instead to go to the University of Maine. She became a grade school teacher, teaching Title One kids – poor kids – and so her loan was forgiven.
My mother-in-law and every single one of those five kids became a productive member of society. Conservatives like to say that people need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps – and that’s a great idea. But first, you’ve got to have the boots. And the government gave my wife’s family the boots.
That’s what progressives like me believe the government is there for. To provide security for middle-class families like the one I grew up in, and opportunity for working poor families like the one Franni grew up in.
By the way, I stole that boots line from Tim Walz, our great new congressman from Southern Minnesota. Tim’s father died when he was a kid, and he and his brother and his mom made it because of Social Security.
Last year I traveled all over the state of Minnesota on behalf of Tim and other Democrats: from Waseca and Wabasha up to Fergus Falls and Detroit Lakes, over to Bemidji and the Iron Range, from Duluth down to Albert Lea, I was in Hastings and all over the metro, up in St. Cloud a few times, eating a lot of beans and buns and burgers and maybe a few too many Dairy Queens along the way. But most importantly, I talked to Minnesotans and listened.
They told me that they’re sick of politics as usual-and they’re sick of the usual politicians.
And I’ll tell you what else they told me. It’s different now than it was for me and Franni. When Franni’s sisters were using them to go to college, Pell Grants paid for 90% of a college education. Today, they pay for 40%. And President Bush, with the help of his Republican allies in Congress, have even tried to privatize Social Security. You should have heard Franni when they tried to do that.
It’s different for middle-class families, too. These families are being squeezed harder and harder every year. Maybe you know what it’s like to be one health crisis away from bankruptcy. Maybe you, or your parents or grandparents, can’t afford prescriptions. Maybe you have kids, and you’re worried about paying for their college. Maybe someone you love is in Iraq, and you don’t know how long they’ll have to stay there, or what will happen when they come home.
Middle-class families today struggle with that feeling of insecurity-the sense that things can fall apart without notice, outside of your control.
Your government should have your back. That should be our mission in Washington, the one FDR gave us during another challenging time: freedom from fear.
Americans have never backed away from challenges. And Minnesotans have always led the way. Our state has sent strong, progressive leaders to Washington-from Hubert Humphrey to Walter Mondale to Paul Wellstone, and now to Amy Klobuchar. Minnesota’s public servants might not always look and sound like typical politicians, but they stand by their principles and lead by their values.
That’s the kind of leader I think we need more of these days, and that’s the kind of Senator I’ll be.
President Clinton used to say that there’s nothing wrong with America that can’t be fixed by what’s right with America, or, as I would add, by what’s right with Minnesota. We can lead the fight against global warming and dependence on foreign oil by developing new sources of renewable energy-and create good Minnesota jobs in the process. We can lead the nation in finding life-saving cures by harnessing the potential of stem-cell research. We can lead the nation by sending someone to the Senate who’ll be a voice for a strong and responsible America, one that uses its relationship with our allies to create a better and more secure world for ourselves and for future generations.
My political hero is Paul Wellstone. He used to say, “The future belongs to those who are passionate and work hard.” I may be a comedian by trade, but I’m passionate about the issues that matter to your family because they mattered to mine, too. And I’m ready to work as hard as I can to help us build a better future together.
Thanks for listening, and I’ll see you on the trail.
The National Journal (subscription req’d) recently dug into disbursement records for Congressional and Senate candidates in the 2006 election to answer an interesting question: How much did a given candidate spend on each vote he or she eventually received? Alternately, how efficiently did candidates spend their hard-earned warchests?
As noted, this is an interesting question, especially when it comes to Minnesota. The 2006 U.S. Senate race between Hennepin County Attorney Amy Klobuchar and Sixth District Congressman Mark Kennedy saw nearly $20 million in candidate committee disbursements, and the race between Michele Bachmann and Patty Wetterling to succeed Kennedy in his Congressional seat was quite expensive as well.
But there’s something missing from the National Journal’s analysis. Even in an underfunded position, a certain number of voters are always going to vote a certain way – what’s usually known as “the base”. The Republican base was never going to vote for Amy Klobuchar in statistically significant numbers, nor was the DFL base going to defect in droves to the Kennedy banner. It’s the votes beyond the base – the marginal votes earned – that might yield more insightful data.
Likewise, there’s a margin in terms of dollars spent. Even marginally competitive candidates are going to raise and spend at least a certain level of money – it’s what they raise and spend beyond that level that we can focus on as a measure of their effectiveness.
This Marginal Dollars per Marginal Positive Outcome has been used by Baseball Prospectus in analyzing clubs’ efficiency in spending – high-revenue teams like the Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, and Dodgers pay dearly for each win above what a team of rookies, each paid the league minimum, would achieve.
Enough baseball – more political statistics!
Some definitions:
—Net Disb: Net Disbursements from the candidate’s primary campaign committee, courtesy of FEC.gov
—dBP: District Base Percentage. This is a somewhat fudged figure, based on convention wisdom about the political dynamics in each district and statewide. It accounts for a slight DFL tilt statewide, conservative tilts in the Second and Sixth Congressional Districts, a heavy tilt toward the DFL in the Fifth, and a generally even balance in the First.
—dTV: District Total Votes. Total number of votes cast in this race for competitive major-party candidates. Fifth District candidate Tammy Lee counted in this analysis, as did John Binkowski in the Sixth, but Robert Fitzgerald and others did not.
—Bvotes: Base votes. Candidate’s vote total times their base percentage – again somewhat fudged due to conventional wisdom.
—Mvotes: Marginal votes. Total votes minus base votes – this is an attempt to represent votes the candidate earned over the course of the campaign beyond those that would vote for a carrot with the right letter after its name.
—Mdisb: Marginal Disbursements. This is another somewhat fudged figure. In the several competitive congressional races in Minnesota, I defined the minimum spending level as that of Alan Fine, Republican candidate in the Fifth District, who raised and spent a shade under $200,000. For the Senate race, I defined “competitive funding” as a cool $3,000,000 – in an inexpensive media market, three million should provide at least a modicum of competitiveness in a statewide federal race. If anyone has a better figure for this, I’m all ears.
—mD/mV:Marginal Dollars Spent per Marginal Vote Earned – the mother lode.
Caveats: There are several fudge points in this analysis, including the base percentages and disbursement levels. I hope they’re generally accurate. This analysis also does not account for larger political events and trends, including hurricanes, wars, and ineptitude leading to popular dissatisfaction. Nor does it account for independent expenditures by political parties and outside organizations, the effects of which are difficult to quantify.
Nevertheless, in the aftermath of 2006, this analysis may further clarify who spent money well and who did not.
The chart above reveals some interesting trends. Many of the mD/mV numbers make sense – Mark Kennedy spent a lot of money on each vote he earned, because he didn’t get many beyond his base. Tim Walz, in defeating entrenched incumbent Gil Gutknecht, spent his smaller warchest efficiently. Although Keith Ellison had a natural advantage in a DFL-friendly district, it turns out that he spent a fairly high dollar amount for each vote beyond the hardcore DFL vote, and Tammy Lee spent efficiently, if only to achieve a 25% finish. And fittingly, the Sixth District race saw two candidates spending massive amounts of money for each vote beyond their bases.
Given the final outcome, it appears that this was an extremely inefficient race on which to spend money.
Cross-posted from MN Campaign Report – now with even more snarky wonkishness!
U.S. Senator Norm Coleman has made it clear that his vote is available to prevent deadlock in the Senate once Democrats take control in January. The writing is on the wall – Coleman is vulnerable in 2008, representing a state that kicked out Republican officials up and down the ticket and didn’t give him 50% of the vote against a dead incumbent and a former VP thrown into the race at the last moment. In light of these factors, Coleman has flip-flopped on his party – all too happy to go with the flow when the Republicans have a majority, his vote is available to the Democrats when it’s their turn in charge.
I’ve written before about some of the factors affecting this race before it begins – the 2008 Republican National Convention will be held in the Twin Cities, perhaps seeking to bolster Coleman’s vulnerable profile. 2002 was an up year for the Republican Party in general, and if the 2006 winds stay at the Democrats’ backs, 2008 promises to be a dangerous year indeed for Coleman.
Coleman has called the new Democratic majority an “opportunity” for him to extract gains for Minnesota. An “opportunity” indeed. Much like the “opportunity” that presented itself in the late 1990s to switch his party affiliation from Democrat to Republican for a gubernatorial run, and the “opportunity” to play the blame game with Michael Brown over the FEMA/Katrina debacle, Coleman’s career is full of opportunistic moves that betray a lack of conviction on important issues facing our nation today.
Having betrayed the DFL once before, and now betraying the Senate Republican caucus for political gain, Coleman’s latest move begs us to ask, “who’s expected to vote for you in 2008?”
We finally have poll results in CD5. SurveyUSA’s poll for KSTP is complete, and will be broadcast on tonight’s 10 PM news. The results, according to a solid source…
Keith Ellison (DFL): 49
Alan Fine (GOP): 25
Tammy Lee (IP): 22
Jay Pond (GP): 2
The fight in this race does indeed appear to be for second place. With the entire DFL GOTV operation pushing base votes across the district, Ellison should have no problem cleaning up and becoming the first Muslim Congressman in American history. A third-place finish for Fine, on the other hand, would present a significant problem for the CD5 Republican organization.
For SSP readers unfamiliar with the Minnesota scene, it’s worth noting that if elected, Keith Ellison will be the first Muslim Congressman in history.
SurveyUSA’s result seems to fit in the recent trend of rising (and now, peaking) numbers for Coleman, and is right in line with the firm’s previous results. However, Rasmussen’s result, while out of line with other firms’ recent results, is right in line with its own results, which are generally pretty good and respected for accuracy on both sides of the aisle. Rasmussen shows 14% undecided, while SurveyUSA shows just 9%, so that certainly factors in a bit.
There’s another factor that may be in play here, which was addressed earlier today on Salon as “Obama’s missing 2%”: younger, college-educated, property-renting voters who may be getting severely undercounted in polls because they’re more likely to use cell phones as a primary means of communication. Granted, Obama is leading by as many as 13-15 points in these same pollsters’ polls, but that doesn’t remove the possibility that those same voters, which could comprise as much as 14% of the electorate this year, aren’t being included in these polls and thus are detracting from Franken’s numbers.