Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Marking Minnesota (Clearing the field for a GOP winner/Plus: Social Sec. specifics from White House)
The American Prowler ^ | 3/9/2005 | The Prowler

Posted on 03/08/2005 10:44:38 PM PST by nickcarraway

KENNEDY COUNTRY

Could a "Draft Al Franken" movement be far behind? Rep. Betty McCollum, thought to be one of the stronger Democratic options to fill the seat of retiring one-term Minnesota Senator Mark Dayton, announced that she would not seek the DFL nomination in 2006.

McCollum was considered one of the stronger potential challengers to Rep. Mark Kennedy, who is quickly solidifying his position as the presumptive Republican nominee. Former Sen. Rod Grams is also seeking the Republican nomination, but according to a Republican National Committee aide, there are ongoing discussions within the party of how to clear for field for Kennedy.

Already, Sen. Norm Coleman and Gov. Tim Pawlenty have endorsed Kennedy. Pawlenty was expected to reach out to Grams at some point in the near future to discuss what could be done to draw out of the race the man who lost to Dayton four plus years ago.

"Grams may have his back up now that what he views as the state party establishment has backed Kennedy," says the RNC source. "He felt that this was an opportunity to regain what he had lost. But Kennedy is just a stronger candidate this time around."

As for the Democrats, there appears to be nothing left but second-tier candidates, unless current state attorney general Mike Hatch throws his hat in the ring. Hatch had let it be know that he had his eye on the governor's race, but given Pawlenty's strong position, most Minnesota political observers believe Hatch might opt for the seemingly more competitive Senate race.

Either way, Republicans are feeling good about their prospects of taking yet another Democratic seat on what they hope will be the cheap. "We know Pennsylvania and probably Tennessee are going to be highly competitive for us, and we're going to be putting a lot of resources there," says a Republican Senate staffer. "That's why a situation like Minnesota that can cleared up quickly is helpful to us."

SOCIAL SPECIFICS

There is speculation among some Senate Republicans that the White House and President Bush may be tweaking their message on Social Security just as they are beginning the critical 60-day national lobbying and education effort across America.

"We're hearing different things coming out of their legislative affairs shop," says an outside lobbyist. "We hear there may be more specifics to call the Democrats' bluff, or there may not be. There is some uncertainty there."

Up until now, it appeared the White House was willing to sit back a bit, push the issue of the need to reform Social Security, and firm up public opinion on the need to make major changes to save the system. Now it appears the White House is thinking that there needs to be more of a stated plan or at least some focused details to go along with the broader message.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Minnesota; US: Pennsylvania; US: Tennessee
KEYWORDS: bush; dayton; democrats; electionussenate; gop; grams; kennedy; mccollum; minnesota; normcoleman; pawlenty; republican; rnc; senate; socialsecurity

1 posted on 03/08/2005 10:44:44 PM PST by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

While I'm sure it's nothing new, I really don't like how the RNC is hand picking candidates. It seems that their arm is becoming more farther reaching than ever.

Are we really electing our officials anymore?


2 posted on 03/08/2005 11:00:45 PM PST by Lijahsbubbe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lijahsbubbe

Hmm... I don't know. In the Minn. case, Grams lost to empty suit Dayton -- there is no reason why he should have another shot.


3 posted on 03/08/2005 11:05:49 PM PST by UM_mac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: UM_mac

I like Grams. He was very conservative and was consistently trying to eliminate pork. However, if he doesn't have a shot, oh well.

I do recall Pawlenty having to step aside for Norm. I voted for Norm, but it just seems to me that there appears to be an increase of micromanaging. Perhaps I'm wrong.


4 posted on 03/08/2005 11:10:17 PM PST by Lijahsbubbe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: UM_mac

He lost to Dayton because Dayton had enough money to outspend him 3-1. Sen. Grams raised over 5 mil for the race, but Dayton pulled out his own checkbook and ended up spending 17.some million of his OWN money.

Social Security and personal accounts IS Sen Grams issue! He was calling for personal accounts and Soc Sec reform in 2000. Its an idea who's time has come, and his proposals from the late 1990's are almost identical to the President's current ones.

Sen. Grams lost only because Dayton could afford to buy the seat. It won't happen again. Minnesotans also don't like being told who to vote for. I don't like how this coronation of Kennedy seems to be taking place. Mark Kennedy is a good man, and would make a good Senator if he becomes our nominee, but this race is Sen Grams'.


5 posted on 03/08/2005 11:11:45 PM PST by GopherGOPer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Lijahsbubbe

Senator Grams does have a chance. There is no reason we have to sit by and accept the coronation of a candidate. Congressman Kennedy is a good candidate, and if he wins the nomination I would have no problem working for him, but I really object to this pre-emptive coronation of candidates. Thats why we have primaries, caucuses, and state conventions. To crown a candidate the way they have seems to take the people out of the picture, and I for one don't like it.


6 posted on 03/08/2005 11:14:21 PM PST by GopherGOPer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: GopherGOPer
To crown a candidate the way they have seems to take the people out of the picture, and I for one don't like it.

Thanks for your reply. Glad to hear I'm not the only one who's noticed this.

7 posted on 03/08/2005 11:19:41 PM PST by Lijahsbubbe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

I've heard that Grams is a weak candidate who only won in 1994 because of the Republican Revolution. As a weak candidate, he was drummed out in 2000. Clearly, he was outspent. However, it seems clear that Kennedy is the stronger candidate; Grams isn't being forced out but the GOP elected officials have the right to whomever they believe is the stronger/better candidate.


8 posted on 03/09/2005 2:00:04 AM PST by jagrmeister
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson