Author Archives: Joe Loveland

About Joe Loveland

I've worked for politicians, a PR firm, corporations, nonprofits, and state and federal government. Since 2000, I've run a PR and marketing sole proprietorship. I think politics is important, maddening, humorous and good fodder for a spirited conversation. So, I hang out here when I need a break from life.

For 30th Time, Bachman and the Gang Misread Obamacare Public Opinion

Posted on by

When it comes to Obamacare, Minnesota Congressman Michele Bachman could not be more certain that she has public opinion behind her.  For instance, in her latest broadside, she signed a letter to all 50 Governors urging them to avoiding implementing Obamacare insurance exchanges to help Americans obtain affordable coverage, Bachman cited an oft repeated myth:

I urge all Governors to let Congress finish the job the American people sent us to do, to fully repeal Obamacare and replace it with common-sense free market solutions.

“…the job the American people sent us to do, to fully repeal Obamacare and replace it…” Whether they are spinning or they actually believe that, they are wrong.  This notion that a majority of the American people want the Affordable Care Act repealed or weakened is demonstrably false.

A June 2012 Kaiser Permanente poll is the last latest to show that a majority (53%) either wants to “keep the law as is” (25%) or “expand the law” (28%).

At the same time, only 38% of Americans support what the Republicans propose.  The Kaiser poll finds that 18% of Americans said Congress should “repeal the law and replace it with a Republican-sponsored alternative,” and 20% said Congress “repeal the law and not replace it.”

So, yes, a majority doesn’t support the law as is, because so many Americans, myself included, would have liked the law to have been stronger…if there had been congressional will to do so.  But it simply is not true that a majority of Americans want to do what the Republicans propose to do to the Affordable Care Act — real it or repeal and replace it.

And so today, for the 30th time, Michele Bachman, John Kline, Erik Paulsen, and Chip Cravaack will vote to repeal the Affordable Care Act.  And for the 30th time, they will be dead wrong about the will of the American people.

– Loveland

 

Note:  This post was also featured as part of the “Best of the Blogs” feature in Politics in Minnesota’s Morning Report.

Hey General Mills, Make Pop Tarts, Not Politics

Posted on by

In this morning’s news, Best Buy and other corporations announced that they are joining a growing list of corporations pulling out of the conservative American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) ).  The corporations are doing so because they were worried about their valuable brands getting muddied from fallout due to ALEC’s aggressive advocacy of “stand your ground” gun laws, such as the one at the center of the tragic Trayvon Martin murder case in Florida.

Best Buy’s decision is smart brand management.  Goodness knows, it has enough issues of its own to solve.  Best Buy doesn’t need to add to its woes by putting its  brand in the middle of the political knife fights over the most polarizing political issues of our times.

Which brings me to General Mills and its opposition to the marriage ban amendment that will be on Minnesota ballots in November. Continue reading →

Sign Off

Posted on by


Now that we have socialized medicine, the Wry Wing Politics Braintrust is giving itself a week off.  We’re strapping the dog to the roof of the Family Truckster and heading for Vegas.

Thanks to the dozens of you who have made our first month-ish fun.  The agenda for the week of the 9th is World Domination, which may need to be extended into the week of the 16th.  Till then, try to keep the digit detonation to a minimum.

Minnesota Health System Needs Obamacare Too

Posted on by

On a weekly basis, Garrison Keillor reminds Minnesotans that we are above average.  But we didn’t need him to tell us that.  We’re a pretty innately smug bunch when it comes to our state.  Call it “Minnesota Exceptionalism.”

We’re especially smug about our health care system.  Therefore, some of us were not all that sure we needed Obamacare’s private health insurance mandate, which is presently the only politically feasible way of improving health insurance coverage and banning pre-existing condition restrictions.

But we do.

It is true that Minnesota is better off than the rest of the nation. Nine percent of Minnesotans lack health insurance coverage, and that’s much better than the nation as a whole, where 16% are uninsured.

We can rest assured that we aren’t suffering nearly as much as many other states, such as Texas (27% uninsured), Mississippi (24% uninsured), Louisiana (22% uninsured), Nevada (22% uninsured), and Oklahoma (22% uninsured). These GOP strongholds are suffering more at the hand of the GOP’s shameless health reform stonewalling than we are.

But let’s not delude our exceptional selves.  Minnesota needs the private insurance mandate too.   After all, using the same kind of health insurance mandate the Supreme Court just upheld, Massachusets has a much better record than Minnesota.  Under ArneCare in Minnesota, we have 9% uninsured, which is better than average.   But under ObamneyCare in Massachusetts, they have only 5% uninsured.

Moreover, we self-congratulatory Minnesotans should never forget that in the shadows of Minnesota’s overall 9% uninsured rate are pockets of much deeper health care despair. For instance, more than a quarter (27%) of low income adult Minnesotans are uninsured. That’s a little bit of Texas in our midst.

No, 9% is not good enough. That’s 463,100 of our Minnesota friends, neighbors, and coworkers who are just one metastasized cell or black ice sheet away from a mountain of medical bills, and the bankruptcy that so often goes with it.

That’s 463,100 Minnesotans delaying medical care until medical care becomes much more expensive, and often much less effective.

That’s 463,100 Minnesotans who obviously don’t stop getting hurt or ill, and therefore are forced to shift their enormous medical expenses to the rest of us, which in turn forces more of us to drop our own coverage.

That’s 463,100 Minnesotans — the population of Rochester, Duluth, St. Cloud, Eagan, Plymouth, Lino Lakes, Willmar and Ramsey, combined.

That can’t be ignored.  Minnesota needs the insurance mandate, and the rest of Obamacare too.  So thank you Heritage Foundation, Newt Gingrich, Don Nickles, Mitt Romney and, now, John Roberts for giving it to us.

– Loveland

Note:  This post also was featured as a “best of the best” on Minnpost’s Blog Cabin feature.

Why Tim Pawlenty Will Help Romney Win Minnesota

Posted on by

Dear Mitt Romney:

Whatever you do, please don’t pick Tim Pawlenty for your Vice Presidential nominee.  As an avid Obama supporter in Minnesota, I would HATE to see that.  It would guarantee that you would immediately erase Obama’s large lead in Minnesota, and shake up the nation’s electoral map.

Pay no attention to bitter bloggers who claim that Pawlenty is politically impotent in Minnesota.  It is true that he ended his tenure as Minnesota Governor with record low approval ratings from Minnesotans.  But that was a long time ago.

And, yes, Pawlenty campaigned night and day for months to try to win Minnesota for John McCain, only to get pasted by 10 points.  But that was just a fluke.

Sure the negative Nellies also point out that Minnesota’s bemulleted favorite son also was trailing President Obama in his own home state, before his premature evacuation from the GOP nomination fight.   But Governor Tim is right, you can’t believe polls any more than you can believe the climate scientists.

And it is true that, after Governor Pawlenty pulled out of the primaries, he threw all of his Minnesota political muscle behind you, only to see the Pawlenty-backed Romney campaign lose the Minnesota GOP caucus vote, by 28 points, to a protest candidate endorsing legalized hookers and heroin.  But this was clearly the media’s fault.

Finally, never you mind that Pawlenty currently would be getting pummeled by 15-points  by Minnesota’s freshman  Senator Amy Kloubachar.  Maybe the poll has a 15-point margin of error?

So Governor Romney, whatever you do, please DO NOT choose Minnesota’s favorite son as your running mate.  Such a stunningly brilliant move would ensure a Minnesota massacre for Barack Obama.

What Exactly Do Minnesota Republicans Have Against Minneapolis?

Posted on by

There is something about Minneapolis that disproportionately irks Minnesota Republicans.   A recent Public Policy Polling survey found that a strong majority of Minnesota Republicans loves them some Duluth, and are fine with St. Paul and Rochester.

But a majority of them just don’t approve of Minneapolis.

At first, I thought the obvious explanation is that Minneapolis is a DFL stronghold.  After all, Hennepin County gave Barack Obama 65% of the vote in 2008, and I could see how that wouldn’t go over well at the country club or Tea Party rally.

But that explanation doesn’t really hold up especially well, because Duluth’s St. Louis County and St. Paul’s Ramsey County are as about blue as Minneapolis’s Hennepin.  In fact, St. Louis and Ramsey gave Obama 67% in 2008, slightly more than Hennepin’s 65%.  Moreover, Republicans didn’t express strong preference for GOP-friendly Rochester (Olmstead: 52% for Obama in 2008) over the DFL strongholds of Duluth or St. Paul.

So I don’t get it.  Maybe it’s all of those descendants of Sweden, what with that nation’s despicable insistence on providing comprehensive access to education and health care to all its citizens.  What a cancer that would be if it spread across the Minnesota motherland.

I’d sure like to think that it’s not because Minneapolis was named the Gayest City in America by The Advocate, or that it has the largest Somali and Hmong population in the nation, and the second largest Vietnamese and Ethiopian populations in America.

On paper, it would seem like there might be a lot Republicans would love about the City of Lakes.  CNBC named Minneapolis one of its “Top Places for Business.” Forbes calls it one of the most innovative cities in America.  Many rankers have listed Minneapolis as one of the best places to find a job and make a living, or start a small business.

Holy free market felicity, Minneapolis sounds like a Republican nirvana.  What’s not to love?

I honestly don’t know what it is.  But if you’re new to Minnesota and are planning a get together with a Republican friend, here’s a little tip:  DO NOT SUGGEST MINNEAPOLIS.

– Loveland

 

Note:  This post also was featured as a “best of the best” on Minnpost’s Blog Cabin feature.

DFL Statewide Media Campaign Needed: “Replace The Worst Legislature Ever.”

Posted on by

“All politics is local,” Democratic House Speaker Tip O’Neill famously proclaimed.   To question this proclamation in DFL activist circles is a bit like questioning the Gospel in church circles.

But, unusual times dictate that the DFL candidates for the State Legislature broaden their messaging beyond the predictable O’Neilian “I brought home the bacon” messaging.  After all, the reality of these fiscally austere times in St. Paul is that Minnesota legislators have been bringing home festering carcasses, not bacon, and that is not going over real well locally.

(Incidentally, at the congressional level, New York Times whiz kid Nate Silver makes a compelling case that “all politics is local” hasn’t been true for a long time.)

Therefore, in 2012 I’d argue “all politics is local” is a dumb strategy for for DFL legislative candidates.  This year, the Minnesota DFL should use more of a statewide messaging and media strategy than they typically do.

I nominate this theme for a statewide TV and radio campaign to serve as an overlay for individual candidacies:

“Replace the worst Legislature ever.”

Real subtle, right?  And I’m not kidding.  This rallying cry works because it is simple, provocative, sticky, and, most of all, true.

Just ask the people of Minnesota.  The current GOP-controlled legislature is the proud recipient of a 19 percent approval rating, which appears to be the lowest approval rating  anyone can find on record.

Ponder on that for a moment.  The worst approval rating ever.  This is a truly putrid moment in Minnesota political history.  Therefore, the minority party needs to make “worst Legislature in history” the rallying cry of a unified TV and radio campaign to unseat the majority party that gave this special gift to Minnesotans .

Such a campaign might sound something like this:

 Who says the Republican-controlled Legislature is the worst in Minnesota history?

Minnesotans.  In surveys, Minnesotans give this current Legislature the lowest approval ratings in the entire history of our state.

Not just lousy.   Not just terrible. The.  Worst.  Ever.

Why?

Their shameful use of our local school funding as their own personal ATMs.

Their bizarre obsession with policing Minnesotans’ personal lives.

Their stubborn refusal to take a balanced approach to the state budget.

Their reckless shutdown of our state parks and government.

For the past two years, Minnesotans have watched all of this in horror.

Now, it’s time to send a clear message:  It’s time to replace the worst Legislature in Minnesota history…and move forward with a new Legislature, and a fresh start.

Tying together legislative races into more of a statewide campaign would mean the DFL would need to focus much more than usual on statewide messaging and media, and much less on localized messaging and media.   That’s an extremely unpopular proposition with local candidates, who want the campaign to be more about them personally.  But in times like these, statewide political leaders need to have the courage to seize the historic political opportunity before them.

Many voters – particularly the much larger group of less active voters that turn out in presidential election years – don’t know much, or anything, about the candidates in down ballot races.  A memorable theme can guide them.  “Replace the worst Legislature ever” does that.  “Support good old Senator Bob because he brings home the bacon” does not.

So sorry, Tip, this campaign needs to focus on the smelly statewide whole, not the local parts.  This year, the DFL can, and should, run a unified statewide campaign against the the Republican Party’s Frankenstein — the Legislature that Minnesota citizens say is the worst ever.

– Loveland

 

Note:  This post was also featured as part of the “Best of the Blogs” feature in Politics in Minnesota’s Morning Report.

How Liberal Wonks Like Me Are Inadvertently Making the Conservatives’ Case

Posted on by

There is a recurring pattern in modern political discourse that goes like this:  Republicans make a ridiculous charge about President Obama being a socialist on Issue X, which is outrageous because Obama has been blocked by Republicans from being even somewhat liberal, much less socialist.

Outraged liberals then come to the rescue!  We start spouting data proving that Republicans are overstating their case.  But to the casually involved public, the liberals’ rebuttal sounds a lot like liberals are asserting that “Obama is actually a conservative.”  More conservative than Bush, for instance.

With both sides sounding like they are claiming to be conservative, the public concludes that the conservative position must be the good and right position.

The pattern repeats over and over.  Here are specific examples: Continue reading →

Film Premier: Bills’ Choice

Posted on by

Minnesota U.S. Senate candidate Kurt Bills apparently has produced a movie trailer to promote his forthcoming short “film,” Staring at the Future.

In an oh so artsy black-and-white trailer for the film, Bills, doing a pretty fair Rod Sterling imitation, warns viewers:

 “The right choice will lead to growth and family. The wrong choice:  Despair.”

But the full film won’t be released until tonight at 9 p.m., leaving us hanging in agonizing suspense to guess what Bills’ Choice is about.  What a tease!

 

It would be way too tedious and predictable for Bills’ film to be another detail-free sermon about debt reduction.  He’s already been doing that for months.

So maybe Bills’ film will  finally offer some details about his policy agenda.  Maybe we’ll find out what “Bills’ Choice” actually is for Minnesotans.

  • The choice of whether to enact Congressman Ryan’s family-cutting, growth-killing austerity budget?
  • The choice of whether to enact the heroin and prostitution legalization proposals of Ron Paul, Bills’ choice for President?
  • The choice of whether to invest in pro-family, pro-growth education, health care and infrastructure improvements, investments that polls show most Americans are choosing?

In real life, these are the choices Bills’ campaign poses to Minnesotans.  So will art imitate life?

– Loveland

The Minnesota Vikings and The Butterfly Effect

Posted on by

Part of chaos theory is something called the butterfly effect, the notion that even a minor change in a nonlinear system, such as the flutter of a butterfly’s wings, can result in large differences in outcome later on, such as the change in the path of a tornado.

Politics is a decidedly non-linear system, where small changes can definitely cause large swings in outcomes. Here are a few the behind-the-scenes flutters that caused the Vikings to finally prevail in their decade-long effort to secure stadium subsidies at the State Capitol.

A Recount.  00.4% of the vote.  That was Mark Dayton’s margin in a general election recount in 2010.  As a result, “Landslide Dayton” became the Vikings most powerful and committed supporter.

But what if Dayton’s 2010 opponent Tom Emmer had not started his campaign so gaffe-prone?  What if pennies had not been dumped on Emmer, turning an obscure issue like tip credits into an enduring symbol of an ideologically extreme candidate?

In a Republican wave election year, it’s easy to imagine that a few small improvements in Emmer’s campaign could have given Emmer an additional 00.5% of the vote, and the helm of state government.

If Emmer had prevailed, he would not have been as aggressively pro-Vikings Stadium as Dayton.  MPR captured Emmer’s position in 2010:

 “I support a solution for a Vikings stadium, but I don’t think you give $700 million in taxpayer money and hand it over to a private business.”

Emmer suggested a voter referendum linking funds from a new casino to pay for the stadium. He also suggested community ownership (Green Bay Packers model) or giving Wilf the Metrodome.

The Vikings viewed all of Emmer’s demands to be bill killers.  So if Dayton hadn’t squeezed into the electoral end zone — after an instant replay review by the officials — the Vikings likely would not have squeezed into their stadium subsidy end zone.

A Leader.  Powerful House GOP Speaker Kurt Zellers opposed the Vikings bill.  So did powerful House GOP Majority Leader Matt Dean.  That could easily have spelled the end for the Vikings.  After all, there aren’t too many major bills that pass the House with the leadership of both parties opposing the bill.

So if the DFL’s highest ranking House member, the often powerless Minority Leader Paul Thissen, had joined Zellers and Dean in opposing the bill, the Vikings fragile coalition probably could not have scored.

It’s not often that a minority party leader swings the balance in our polarized Legislature, but Thissen did.

A City Attorney.  With the Metrodome site as the only viable option at the end of the session, the whole effort would have collapsed without an endorsement by the Minneapolis City Council, a very tall order at the time.  And if Minneapolis City Attorney Susan Segal had not ruled that a city referendum provision didn’t apply to the City’s stadium proposal, because the City didn’t control the funding in question, City Council Member Sandy Colvin Roy made it pretty clear that she would not have been the final swing vote in support of the proposal.

Vikings MVP?

Think about that a minute.  If a political pundit had predicted before the session that someone named Susan Segal would be the key to whether the Vikings would get their new stadium, even many political savants would have said “who?”

But Susan Segal, Paul Thissen and 00.4% of Minnesotans all fluttered their relatively small wings, and the Vikings decade-long stadium loss streak finally came to an end.

“A game of inches,” indeed.

– Loveland

Note:  This post was also featured as part of the “Best of the Blogs” feature in Politics in Minnesota’s Morning Report.

Democrips, Rebloodlicans and the Venturattentionaddict

Posted on by

The scorpions in Jesse Ventura’s Baja backyard must not be giving him enough attention, so a predictably surly Jesse Ventura is back in the news this week.

What shocking news does Jesse’s new book bring to the world?  Jesse dislikes political parties.

This will come as an enormous surprise to Minnesotans, and readers of Ventura’s last four books.  After all, Jesse has never said THAT before.

So, it’s easy to see how that revelation landed him on the front page of the Pioneer Press.  Once again, Jesse has perfected the art of bashing the news media as a sure fire way of getting himself nearly unlimited news media coverage.

I haven’t read the book, Democrips and Rebloodlicans, but it sounds like a tour de force of false equivalency cop outs.  All politicians and all parties (i.e. all non-Jesses) are equally guilty of fighting too much, like the street gangs the Crips and the Bloods, get it?  This from a Governor who was so thin skinned that he was constantly at war with just about everyone in Minnesota, except for members of his Independence Party.

Until now.  Seemingly the only news made in this book is that former Governor Ventura now is denouncing the Independence Party as well.  Their unforgiveable sin?  They seek contributions.  In Jesse’s conspiracy-obsessed mind, this means that they are bought and paid for.  This makes perfect sense.  After all, Jesse has never sought to raise money for himself.

“We already have a two-headed monster. Why would we need a three-headed one?”

Jesse is also done with the Tea Party, because they are funded by corporations.  But so far, he is okay with Occupy Wall Street protesters.   After all, you have to save someone new to denounce…in the next book.

This is what the world looks like with Jesse Goggles on:  Everyone is a monster, gangster, or jackal out to get him.  That outlook of the world is many things — simplistic, delusional, and a cop out, among them.

But at this stage in Jesse’s career, there is one thing that such predictable ranting most assuredly is not.  News.

– Loveland

Note:  This post also was featured as a “best of the best” on Minnpost’s Blog Cabin feature.

Racial Minorities Overwhelmingly Support the Photo ID Amendment That Suppresses Their Vote

Posted on by

The case against the state constitutional amendment to require photo identification at Minnesota voting sites is that the requirement will disproportionately suppress turnout of, among others, racial minorities.  State Senator Patricia Torres-Ray:

 It’s going to make voting more difficult for thousands of law-abiding Minnesotans, and the brunt of that burden will fall on communities of color.

Amendment opponents need to more effectively make their case to communities of color, because in a obscure crosstab of a new Public Policy Polling survey released this week it is clear that racial minorities in Minnesota are currently overwhelmly supportive of the amendment, even significantly more so than white Minnesotans.

To state the obvious, a particular specialty of mine:  If opponents can’t even convince the primary victims of this amendment to oppose it, the Photo ID Amendment is headed for easy passage.

There is a LOT of work to do here.

– Loveland

 

Note:  This post was also featured as part of the “Best of the Blogs” feature in Politics in Minnesota’s Morning Report.

Did Walker win? Or did recalls lose?

Posted on by

A New York Times exit poll suggest that that the general notion of a policy-based recall election was bothering  an overwhelming majority of Wisconsin voters.

Exit pollsters asked “Do you think recall elections are appropriate?”  To quote the late, great Richard Dawson, “survey SAYS:”

  • For any reason:  27%
  • Only for official misconduct:  60%
  • Never:  10%

In other words, seven-out-of-ten Wisconsin voters thought a recall election over a policy disagreement, such as anti-union legislation, was inappropriate.  So many Wisconsinites may have opposed the recall of Scott Walker more because they disliked mid-term recalls based on policy disagreements, rather than because they loved Governor Walker.

This would help explain why exit polls showed that the same voters who gave Walker a 8-point win were also picking The Antiwalker, President Obama, over Walker supporter Mitt Romney by 7 points.  Some of those Obama supporters who opposed recalling Walker may just have been uncomfortable with the idea of the concept of this recall.

– Loveland

 

Note:  This post was also featured as part of the “Best of the Blogs” feature in Politics in Minnesota’s Morning Report.

Why DFLers Should Be Happy Scott Walker Won

Posted on by

Minnesota’s DFL Governor Mark Dayton has taken controversial positions that most Minnesotans oppose, such as support for a subsidized Vikings Stadium, an individual health insurance mandate and gay marriage.

So conservatives would be justified in launching a recall election to remove him from office, right?

Of course not.  Whether the target is liberal like Dayton or conservative like Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, honest policy disagreements shouldn’t lead to mid-term recalls.  Recalls should be reserved for people who engage in proven criminal behavior.  For policy disagreements, we have a tried and true solution — regularly scheduled elections.

If a recall had succeeded in Wisconsin, more mid-term recalls would surely start to sprout around the nation, funded by corporations and billionaires who no longer are limited in their political spending.

And  what would policymaking look like if we were in a constant state of policy-based recall elections?  Chaos. You think the Minnesota State Capitol is chaotic, polarized and ineffective now?  Imagine it in perpetual recall campaign mode.

The other destructive outcome of a policy-based recall epidemic would be leaders who are even more afraid to take positions that don’t have strong majority support, for fear that doing so would make them a target of a multi-million dollar recall drive.

And here is the problem with leaders not questioning majority viewpoints:  Many times, the majority is just flat wrong.  The majority was very wrong on slavery and civil rights for a long time.  It was wrong on the Iraq War, trickle down economics, no new taxes, and single payer health care.  We need leaders who are not afraid of questioning the majority viewpoint.

What distinguishes Democrats from Republicans is that Democrats want government to be functional, because they know a dysfunctional public sector can’t help ordinary people pursue the American dream.   For that reason, they should oppose these policy-based recall elections that thrust government into mid-term chaos.

– Loveland

Will Changes Among Religious Minnesotans Make the Difference In Minnesota’s Gay Marriage Vote?

Posted on by

One politically interesting aspect of the marriage ban amendment on Minnesota’s ballot this November is the potential Lutheran Effect.

Even if we didn’t have Garrison Keillor to constantly remind us, it’s no secret that Minnesota has a lot of Lutherans.  Wikipedia tells me that something like a million Minnesotans are Lutheran (24% of the state), with 81% of Minnesota worshiping under the banner of the  Evangelical Lutheran Church of America (ELCA), which is much more progressive than the Missouri Synod brand of Lutherans.

In fact, Minnesota has one of the highest percentages of Lutherans of any state in the nation.  The religious landscape in Minnesota is vastly different than it is in, say, North Carolina, which recently was the latest in a long line of states to pass a marriage ban amendment.    Luternans are 24% of the population in Minnesota, but just 2% in North Carolina.

All of this raises the question:  What impact will Minnesota’s Lutheran-heavy religious landscape have on the marriage ban amendment Republicans have put on Minnesota’s November ballot.

Relatively speaking, the Lutherans are progressive on the issue of gay rights.  Four synods of the local ELCA-ers recently formally opposed the Minnesota marriage ban amendment pushed by Minnesota’s social conservatives, and I don’t think the votes were close.

Lutheranophile Garrison Keillor observes:

“Lutherans…are the sort of people you could call up when you’re in deep distress. If you’re dying, they’ll comfort you. If you’re lonely, they’ll talk to you. And if you’re hungry, they’ll give you tuna salad.”

And if you’re discriminated against?

This charitable attitude looks to be even stronger among young Lutherans.  For instance, a popular song among Lutheran youth, “Party in the ELCA” (a parody of Miley Cyrus’s “Party in the USA”) has the following lyrics:

“We’re coming as we are (sinners and saints),
Doesn’t matter if you’re straight or gay.
YEAH! It’s a party in the ELCA!
”

“Doesn’t matter if you’re straight or gay,” indeed.  This “Party in the ELCA” is not exactly the type of religious party the Minnesota Republican Party is hoping for on Election Day 2012.

And it’s not just the Lutheran Effect.  It’s now also the Methodist Effect.  Over the weekend, the Methodists just took  basically the same position as the ELCA.  Methodists make up another 4% of Minnesotans, making them the fourth largest denomination in Minnesota, just behind the Baptists at 5%.

And what about Catholics, who are almost tied with Lutherans as the top religion in Minnesota, claiming 25% of the population?  Can we presume that Minnesota Catholics want to ban gay marriage?

Yes, but it’s not as overwhelming as some might think.  If Minnesota Catholics are anything like national Catholics, 46% of national Catholics support gay marriage, rapidly trending upwards from 40% in 2007.

Hmmm, the times are changing for Catholics too?  “Doesn’t matter if your straight or gay?  It’s a party in the Opus Dei?”

Many Minnesota social conservatives seem to make the mistake of assuming that the  marriage ban amendment debate is a strictly battle of the religious versus the irreligious, and that they will therefore easily win because the irreligious are so few (14% in Minnesota).

But increasingly, religious Minnesotans – looking to the empathetic teachings of the Golden Rule and the tolerance teachings of the Sermon on the Mount – are opposing gay bashing schemes like the proposed marriage ban amendment.

– Loveland

 

Note:  This post also was featured as a “best of the best” on Minnpost’s Blog Cabin feature.

Minnesota Now Has To Look To South Dakota For Interesting Political Ads

Posted on by

For a time, the nation looked to Minnesota for innovative political ads.  Working with local ad pros in 1990, an obscure college professor’s “Fast Paul” and “Looking for Rudy” TV ads were a national sensation.

Since then, Minnesota’s pols have gone conventional.  Most ads now follow The Recipe:

Ominously droning music.  Grainy photo of Evil Opponent caught in an unflattering facial expression. The Big Accusation(s).

Transition to heroic music!  Lovely images of Our Photoshopped Candidate helping school children read, seniors do paperwork, and veterans secure their lapel pins! Images of Our Photshopped Candidate working at his desk in the wee hours, and in front of a sea of flags inspiring the masses with a forceful finger jab in the air! Call-to-action!  Logo!  Disclaimer.

Sound familiar?  The ingredients to The Recipe never change appreciably.  Just add special interest money, and repeat ad nauseum.

The Recipe produces ads that are so similar in tone and feel that it is very easy for voters to tune them out.  Nothing about them sparks enough curiosity to prevent voters from closing their ears, changing the channel, or skipping the commercial via DVR.  For this reason, The Recipe remains more effective than most tactics, but much less effective than it once was.

Still, year after year, political consultants convince politicians and special interests to bake up enormous batches of The Recipe.  Consultants push it because it is relatively fast to produce, low-budget, and low-risk.  Just shoot stock video and drop it into the template.  Those are somewhat defensible reasons.  But consultants also push mass production of The Recipe because it earns them a high profit margin, in the same way that any assembly line has higher profit margins than customized craftsmanship.  The Recipe often serves the constulant’s needs more than the candidate’s needs.

In every election cycle, there are a few exceptions to the rule.  Wellstone in 1990 was one.  Jesse Ventura had a few.   A couple of years ago, Steve Novick in Oregon was another.  This month, there is a pretty decent non-conventional web video from South Dakota congressional candidate Jeff Barth:

Scoff at the production value if you like.  Look down your nose at the campy humor.  But this video, airing for free, has had over 150,000 YouTube viewings, due to peer-to-peer sharing, and referrals from free airings on news programs.  For a primary candidate in a state of 380,00 voters, that’s a big deal.  And unlike conventional ads, it is airing for free.

Why is something like this successful? After all, it’s not nearly as glossy, glib or compact as The Recipe.  Barth’s video is successful because it is many things that the 30-second cookie cutter ads are not.  It’s unique enough to draw you in.  It’s funny enough to cause you to want to share it.  It’s informative enough to make it worth your while.  It’s provocative enough to stick in your memory.

Even if you only watch this video once, you come away knowing something about the candidate’s background, personality and approach to life and politics.  This video leaves me thinking this guy Barth might not be another risk averse  congressional clone.  In a year when job approval ratings for Congress are at 10% that “not like the others” message is a strategically important leave behind.

Will anyone in Minnesota be imaginative and courageous enough to do anything unique with their political ads this election cycle, or can we look forward to heapin’ helpins of The Recipe?

Loveland

In Minnesota, Romney’s 6% Unemployment Goal Sounds Like Underachievement

Posted on by

Mitt Romney is pledging to bring the national unemployment rate to 6% by 2016.  The current national unemployment rate is 8.1%.  So, happy days are here again, the skies above are clear again, right?

Romney’s 6% pledge may inspire confidence in Nevada, where unemployment is running at almost 12%.  But to Minnesotans’ ears, it sounds like Romney is promising an economic downturn.  Minnesota’s unemployment rate has already decreased in the Obama years to 5.6%, and by Romney’s 2016 deadline for reaching 6% Minnesotans certainly expect to be below today’s 5.6%.

After all, in the last three years Minnesota’s unemployment rate has improved from 8.3% in April 2009 to 5.6% in April 2012.  If that rate of improvement continued in Minnesota, we’d be down around 3% before Romney’s 2016 deadline for getting us to 6%.  Even if there is no improvement at all over the next three years, Minnesota under Obama will still be outperforming the Romney goal for four years from now.

It is far from certain that Romney’s proposed return to the Bushonomics that preceded the economic meltdown will now somehow improve the economy.   Romney wants Bush tax rates and Bush-style deregulation of banks, Wall Street and other corporations, so I’m not sure why we might expect that will produce a different result than it produced for Bush.  Governor Romney also wants to add austere spending cuts in programs that help the middle class, which economists say will retard consumer demand and economic growth.

But even if Romney’s 6% unemployment goal is doable under Bushonomic policies, a very big “if,” as a political rallying call 6% sounds very weak in many states.

Minnesota is not the only place where Romney’s pursuit of 6% unemployment within four years sounds like underachievement.  Romney’s Six Percent Solution also rings hollow in swing states such as Iowa (5.1% unemployment), New Hampshire (5.0% unemployment) and Virginia (5.6% unemployment).

The Obama Administration learned a hard lesson about naming unemployment rates.  Though Politifact says that Republican claims that Obama promised unemployment rates below 8% are “Mostly False,” the whole political back-and-forth about that claim shows how dangerous it is to make any numerical proclamations about unemployment rates.

In states like Minnesota, Romney may now learn that lesson.

Polls: Minnesota GOP’s Libertarian Lunge Looks Like A Loser

Posted on by

Devotees of libertarian candidate Ron Paul occupied the Minnesota GOP State Convention this weekend, winning all but one of the national convention delegate positions.  It was a remarkable organizing feat.

But will the Minnesota GOP’s dramatic lunge to libertarianism be a winner on Election Day?  Polling on issues pushed by Paul isn’t promising:

  • LEGALIZING DRUGS – 84% OPPOSE.  In a Rasmussen poll released yesterday, Paul’s support for legalizing cocaine is opposed by 84% of Americans.
  • LEGALIZING PROSTUTION – 81% OPPOSE.  A national survey from the mid-1990s found Paul’s position of of legalizing prostitution running opposed by 81%.
  • CUTTING SOCIAL SECURITY – 72% OPPOSE.  A June 2011 PPP survey of Minnesotans shows 72% of all voters, 69% of Independents and 61% of Tea Partiers, oppose cuts in Social Security.  Paul says the national Social Security program is unconstitutional and should be eliminated.
  • CUTTING ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS – 77% OPPOSE.  An August 2011 PPP survey didn’t find much support in Minnesota for Paul’s call to cut environmental regulations.  Over three-fourths (77%) of Minnesotans say environmental laws should not be weakened or repealed for industries, even if industries claim the move is necessary to create jobs.

I couldn’t find any polling on eliminating the Federal Reserve or switching to the gold standard.  I’m just guessing here, but there might be a pretty solid majority for “Not Sure” on those obscure Ron Paul fetishes.

One Paul position that does have a plurality of support is pulling out of Afghanistan.  Almost half (47%) of Americans would like to withdraw from Afghanistan sooner than the current timetable.  Congressman Paul’s opposition to banning same sex marriage also has majority support in some polls.

But with those exceptions, an overwhelming majority of Minnesotans don’t seem to be nearly as enamored with Paul’s libertarian policy agenda as Minnesota Republican activists are.

Loveland