David Trinh

This is about the best summation of the problem that the Independence Party poses in the 6^th congressional district that I’ve seen.  Go read it if you care about defeating Michele Bachmann.

On a related note, I’ve never been able to understand why the DFL in the sixth doesn’t simply run one of its own members in the IP primary, capture the IP’s ballot line in the general election and then have this phony candidate withdraw their name from the race.  I’m not an expert in Minnesota election law, but it’s my understanding that candidates can take their own names off the ballot even after they’ve won the primary.  Sure, the IP could always nominate a replacement to fill the slot but if the IP was planning on endorsing the DFLer anyway, I’m sure they could be persuaded to leave their ballot line blank in the November election.

Does anyone see a problem with this plan?

Dave Mindeman wonders why the Independence Party hasn’t done more to build its base in the 6^th congressional district:

The Independence Party has some strong base connections in the 6th and as long as that is there, the GOP’s strategy of divide and conquer will probably continue — even with Michele Bachmann as the standard bearer.

Frankly, the Independence Party would be better served to start fresh in the 6th with a real attempt at serious party building. If Tarryl Clark is indeed the standard bearer for the DFL in the Congressional race, then why not bring Maureen Reed back in the fold and endorse her to run for Clark’s Senate seat. Or why have they not looked to Tinklenberg as a legislative recruit or even a Constitutional office candidate.

You have to develop candidates and actually win something to be taken seriously.

Why they haven’t done that is still a mystery to me.

Mindeman is right—bench building is exactly what the IP should be doing in Minnesota if it is going to have a prayer of electing candidates to major state offices.  It isn’t however, much of a mystery to me why the IP has thus far failed to revitalize itself.

After all, the IP lacks an effective party hierarchy (as evidenced by their failure to rally IP voters around Tinklenberg after the party endorsed him in 2008) and has little-to-no leadership capable of setting strategy.  Mindeman’s plan may be brilliant but unfortunately if there is no one in the IP capable of turning the party around and recruiting candidates for down-ballot races, it will never be put into practice.

In my mind this lack of leadership in the IP is the chief problem with Maureen Reed’s argument that she will be able to marshal the strength of the IP behind her during a general election.  The fact of the matter is that the IP’s main asset is the party’s ballot line in the general election.  Barring a change in Minnesota election law that would allow a candidate to appear twice on the ballot under the standards of multiple parties, the IP’s ability to swing an election in the direction it wants will be sorely limited.

I noted on Tuesday that it’s going to be very difficult for Maureen Reed, or anyone else for that matter, to keep a fring Indepence Party candidate from stealing the IP ballot line in the general election—regardless of whatever intentions the IP’s leadership might have about endorsing DFL candidate.  As if on cue, word came today from MinnPost that 2008 IP spoiler Bob Anderson is thinking about helping Michele Bachmann get reelected once again:

Bob Anderson, who received 10 percent of the vote in 2008 as the Independence Party candidate for Congress from the 6th District, may make another run in 2010. He announced his thinking in this blog entry on his campaign website.

…many Dems believe that Anderson’s presence on the ticket divided the anti-Bachmann vote and prevented Dem nominee Elwyn Tinklenberg from winning in ‘08 even after Bachmann’s late-in-the-campaign remarks about Obama being “anti-American” caused a flood of new money to Tinklenberg.

Tinklenberg actually was endorsed in ‘08 by both the Dems and the IP. But Minnesota law prohibits a candidate from appearing on the ballot representing more than one party. So Anderson, a political unknown, ran in the IP primary and secured the IP ballot position.

So much for Dr. Reed’s strategy of threatening to bolt the DFL if it fails to give her the party’s nomination; in fact, ironically the very gambit that Reed may have used against DFLers could actually end up torpedoing her own chances if she does end up becoming the Democratic nominee.  Like I have said before, really the only way for Democrats to prevent an outcome like this is to get one of their own to run and win the IP nomination in a September primary.  After that, said DFL stooge could pull his or her name out of the race, thus giving Democrats a fighting chance in the 6^th.  A bit of a tricky move to be sure, but it will be well worth it if it means the defeat of the ever-odious Michele Bachmann.

Dave Mindeman suggests that if DFLers want to defeat Michele Bachmann they should let Maureen Reed, a former Independence Party candidate for Lt. Governor and U of M regent, win the party’s nomination for Congress in the 6^th:

To win in an offbeat district, you might have to use an offbeat strategy. Maybe, just maybe, the best scenario is to support Dr. Reed as the DFL endorsee and continue that support through the primary. She might have enough influence to keep another name off the Independence Party primary ballot and thus unite the vote against Bachmann. It is a counterintuitive move because Tinklenburg and Clark are good candidates…strong candidates. But when you are dealing with the 6th District — normal doesn’t seem to work.

I doubt it.  First of all, it’s my understanding that the IP is such a disorganized party that it likely lacks the clout necessary to keep another candidate from running on the IP’s line in the general election.  Second, even if the IP did have effective party infrastructure that wanted to intervene on Dr. Reed’s behalf (another big if), it’s not entirely clear what the party could actually do to prevent someone else from running.  After all, the Independence Party actually endorsed Tinklenburg in ‘08 in his race against Michele Bachmann.  Unfortunately, a rogue IP member, Bob Anderson, decided to enter the race and ran unopposed for the IP’s nomination in the September primary.  After he won the primary, Anderson refused to leave the race and ended up sabotaging the chances of the candidate his own party’s leadership had actually endorsed.

All that needs to happen for Mr. Mindeman’s strategy to fail is for another no-name Independence Party member to enter the race and win the IP’s nomination by default.  Barring that happening, I wouldn’t put it past Michele Bachmann to encourage some Republican activist to swoop in to capture the IP’s nomination to ensure there is another alternative candidate on the ballot who will split the anti-Bachmann vote.

All the DFL really can do is nominate the best candidate who runs.  Bachmann can be defeated if voters in her district, who already are willing to vote against her, are given a DFLer they feel comfortable voting for.  Also, it wouldn’t hurt if Democratic donors would decide to donate money to this race sooner rather than later.  Last time, Tinklenburg collected $750,000 in the last two weeks of the race; sadly, by then, it was too late in the game for those resources to be effectively used.  Finally, DFLers could consider running their own stalking horse in the IP September primary, so long as that placeholder drop out of the race before the November ballots are printed.

Andrew, over at Swing State Project offers up a very good diary detailing redistricting in Minnesota:

Minnesota is going to possibly lose a seat and with a DFL governor, we’ll be able to do some damage.  These districts should pass any compactness laws as nothing is gerrymandered beyond unacceptability.  My 8 seat map is in the works and near done and both of these maps reflect what I think is possible and appropriate for Minnesota, all Dem seats with one GOP dump district.

Andrews clever proposal is essentially guided by two principals: (1) split up Minneapolis-St. Paul between three congressional districts which would allow DFLers to use these blue bastions to form three very blue districts and (2) eliminate Michele Bachmann’s district and force her to run against John Kline in a reconfigured (and very red) 2^nd district. 

This is brilliant!  While this redistricting plan would no doubt put Republicans up in arms, it’s difficult to see how the Republicans could accuse DFLers of heavily gerrymandering the map.  The three districts created out of the twin cities would all be reasonably compact and the reshaped 2^nd district would be no more convoluted than the current 6^th district.  Who knows if DFLers will actually have the fortitude to propose such an audacious redistricting plan but in Democrats finally manage to secure the governor’s mansion after a nearly two decade hiatus, the newly minted chief-executive, along with a heavily Democratic state legislature, could very well make this map a reality.

Tarryl Clark is thinking of running in the 6^th:

Tarryl has been contacting folks about a run for Congress, and it is believed that, while we do think she was once eyeing the Gov seat, she is now angling for the US House.

Good for Tarryl Clark.  I remain convinced that a DFLer can win this seat so long as they begin a running and, more importantly, raising money early.  We all, of course, remember the massive haul of cash that Elwyn Tinklenberg brought in following some of Bachmann’s loonier comments in 2008, unfortunately, by then it was too late in the campaign for his campaign to make good use of those resources.  If Clark can raise those kind of big dollars early in the cycle and perhaps score a lucky break by keeping an IP candidate from entering the race, she could be well positioned to finally bring an end to Michele Bachmann’s embarrassing political career.