Subscribe
It Looks Like Tinklenberg in the Sixth
With former MnDOT commissioner Elwyn Tinklenberg expected to enter the race for the DFL endorsement in the Sixth Congressional District, We’re likely to see both current candidates — attorney Bob Hill and banker Bob Olson — step back and re-evaluate their candidacies. Olson, who earlier this year had launched a long-shot U.S. Senate bid, had shifted his attention to the Sixth largely at the urging of local political operative Nikki Carlson, who had hoped to exact some revenge against Hill, who had dumped her as campaign manager. Hill, for his part, may be better suited to the retail politics of the state legislature. Look for some clarity here in a couple of weeks.
Meanwhile, Tinklenberg is reprising the role of Patty Wetterling, in that he had vowed earlier this year to stay out of the race — just as Wetterling had done in 2005 — and jumped in when the political winds blew in his direction. He did the graceful thing last time around and deferred to Wetterling, even though his centrist political positions (pro-life, anti-gun control) play better in the Sixth than Wetterling’s liberal stances.
Wetterling proved to be out of her league in each of her congressional campaigns — despite huge name recognition and plenty of funding. The big question with Tinklenberg is whether he can overcome his reputation as a policy nerd and bring some real passion to the stump. If he can, there’s a chance that he could garner enough support from independents (he served in Ventura’s Reform Party administration) and “dump-Bachmann-at-all-cost” liberals to give the controversial incumbent a run for her money.
That’s not to say Bachmann is shaking in her boots at the prospect of facing Tinklenberg next November. She’s proven herself to be a hard-nosed campaigner whose right-leaning positions on Iraq, abortion, and taxes play well in the Sixth. Her easy victory over Wetterling last year in a down year for the GOP tells me she remains a formidable candidate.
More Mayoral Gossip
First-term Minneapolis Park Board Commissioner Tom Nordyke is the latest local politico to feel the itch to run against Mayor R.T. Rybak. Nordyke, a disciple of City Hall power broker Lisa Goodman, tells us he’s been “encouraged to think about it by a number of people,” but adds that he’s not going to make any decision until next year. It has been widely presumed that Goodman would anoint Nordyke as her successor in the city’s Seventh Ward before her third term ends in 2009, but Goodman may be considering a fourth term, which would leave Nordyke to contemplate another four years on the Park Board.
Rybak Critics Ask ‘Where Are All Those Cops?’
Mayor Rybak is by now accustomed to getting hammered from all sides on the public safety issue, but now there’s a coordinated effort by Independence and Republican Party activists to intensify that debate. They’ve launched a new Web site, www.50morecops.org, that accuses the mayor of reneging on his campaign promise to use increased state aid money to bring the local police force back to the numbers it employed prior to the LGA cuts of the past three years.
Rather than the full complement of 893 officers Rybak said he would have in place with the 2007 budget allocation, the force is down to 852, with 10 of those on leave of absence, according to attorney George Soule, an IP activist and husband of former City Council Member Lisa McDonald. And because there are no plans to hire any additional officers this year, Soule estimates that normal attrition will leave the force with only about 830 cops by year end. “Did the mayor know that the Police Department would not provide for the 893 sworn officers when the budget was adopted, or later when he continued to claim credit for increasing the number of officers in 2007?” Soule asked. “Was police staffing overpromised and underfunded in the 2007 budget?”
(On Saturday, the group planned to kick off its initiative by passing out “50 More Cops” signs to supporters in the community room of the 5th Police Precinct, but precinct brass — citing a directive from Police Chief Tim Dolan — put the kibosh on that effort and forced them out into the parking lot.)
Rybak spokesman Jeremy Hanson acknowledged that the police force numbers were altered “to reflect past internal changes not previously accounted for at the time of the 2007 budget proposal.” For instance, 18 of the sworn officer positions were changed to civilian positions, 14 positions were eliminated due to the loss of special funding (including money from Neighborhood Revitalization Program funds that did not materialize), and three positions were added through additional grant funding. That all adds up to 864 cops — 29 fewer than projected.
“It is important to note that MPD staff levels fluctuate throughout the course of the year, making it difficult to articulate an exact, consistent number of officers on any given day or week,” Hanson said.
The mayor has increased the police budget by more than $20 million since 2003, Hanson noted, and he argued that violent crime is trending down as a result. Hanson also alleges that the criticism of Rybak’s public safety record can be traced past the IP and the Republicans to the city’s Police Federation, which has been a consistent supporter of Gov. Tim Pawlenty. “If the Police Federation and Republicans really wanted more cops in Minneapolis,” Hanson said, “they would stop supporting Gov. Pawlenty, whose budget cuts have hurt Minneapolis’ ability to hire more cops.”
The criticism even brought a rebuke from DFL State Party Chair Brian Melendez, who called it a “cheap shot” and an indictment against Pawlenty’s no-new-taxes leadership style. “It’s hypocritical that the Republican Party and Pawlenty’s other allies are blaming a responsible public servant like Mayor Rybak for Pawlenty’s own failures,” he said in a statement.
Those are pretty strong words coming from a party that has twice failed to endorse the mayor. It would be awfully ironic if this latest challenge to Rybak’s public safety leadership led to a warmer DFL embrace of the mayor. Just in time for a gubernatorial run?
Comments
The even bigger question for
The even bigger question for Tinklenberg will be how to bring back all the real Democrats in the DFL who will sit out next year’s 6th CD election rather than work for a Bachmann-Lite, anti-choice, pro-concealed-handgun candidate whose positions on Iraq and gay marriage are murky at best. Particularly a candidate who has been foisted on them by the kingmakers in Washington. How pathetic is it that two announced candidates with substantial support from 6th CD residents would withdraw even before the precinct caucuses to make way for someone chosen by party hacks in D.C. or St. Paul? Is this how the DFL is making the party more inclusive?
Bachmann only won the 6th last year with 50.3% of the vote. That means 49.7% voted for socially liberal candidates Wetterling and independent John Binkowski, whose 8% of the vote you conveniently ignore. A .4% shift in the vote is all it takes to elect a socially liberal candidate in the 6th if a decent DFL candidate runs with a decent campaign, which Wetterling was not. But the last time a Bachmann-Lite candidate ran in the 6th (Janet Robert) she got her ass handed to her by Mark Kennedy—and many DFLers refused to vote for her, let alone work for her. I hope the DFL doesn’t make that same mistake twice—but it appears they may.
Tinklenberg does nothing for me
Seriously!
Months after he announces that he is not running in the 6th because “too soon after his last campaign” decides to run after the 35W bridge collapse?
Pro-life, anti- same sex marraige aside, Tinklenberg will have a hard sell across the 6th. He’s a good man, but very vulnerable.
Is he running a strong transportation platform? If so, Republicans will tear Tinklenberg apart for his work during the Ventura Administration.
If Elwyn is running on fixing our roads and transit issues, he should run for the State House. Heck, he can come out my way and run against Dean Urdahl, where he can actuall fix some roads.
The 6th is changing as well. Support for the Iraq War is falling across the district. Tinklenberg’s support of Bush’s failed Iraq plan will not bode well for him. Answering questions about his support by stating that “I would have supported the invasion based on the information available at the time.”
Really?
Why did Paul Wellstone, and Mark Dayton get “better’ information then. Or Betty McCollum and Martin Sabo?
It’s an excuse, and I for one, am tired of excuses from our political leaders and those that want to tread in those shoes.
I had a First Sergeant in the Army that used to ask us, “What’s the maximum effective range of an excuse?”
Zero
What the 6th needs is leadership. Leadership that has been absent during Mark Kennedy’s reign of terror and more so during Michele Bachmann’s run.
Leaders stand up before bridges fall and make things happen.
Leaders stand up before soldiers deploy and die.
Tinklenberg has had so many nuanced stances on all these important issues, I have no idea where he stands.
That is unacceptable.
That is why Bob Olson is the right candidate at the right time for the 6th. I know where he stands on all the important issues of the day. He will not waver in the strong political winds that blow through the 6th CD. He is a man with great conviction, someone who will look you dead in the eye and tell it to you straight.
That’s what we need in the 6th, not another Norm Coleman esque political chameleon!
Craig Cox is Misinformed
Was anyone i n the 6th CD contacted for this article?
I don’t know anyone up there who wants Tinklenberg to run.
Here’s what someone I know in the 6th CD sent me:
Seldom have I seen such a misinformed piece about the
6th district race. This is clearly a case of the
writer hoping for a scenario then writing about it
like it was fact.
First off, Bob Olson is not even vaguely considering
getting out of the race. Why should he? At this years
DFL caucus in February will be attended by anti war,
pro choice progressives who will be attending to
support candidates like Franken, Ciresi, Clinton,
Oboma etc… How does a social conservative, former
supporter of the war fit in with that crowd?
2nd. The IP most likely will not be running anybody
against either Olson or Tinklinberg.
The IP hates Bachmann. Both candidates will and have
earned support from independents.
3rd and most important, Tinklinberg’s support last
time came due to the fact that unions supported him
early on when he was the only person in the race and
Wetterling had pledged to not run. He was never close
to winning the endorsement at the last convention. He
had enough votes to block but never enough to win.
Unions should be happy they didn’t endorse early in
this race as yet another candidate who pledged not to
run has just gotten into the race. The unions are not
likely to make the early endorsement mistake again.
And they have the advantage of having two strong pro
union candidates in the race. Unions have adopted a
policy of waiting to see who will get the endorsement
in spite of new pressure being exerted on them by the
power brokers in Washington and the congressman from
the 8th district who happens to be the head of the
transportation committees and would love to have a
transportation lobbyist win. So If the unions stay
cool to the idea of endorsing early he won’t even get
the same level of support he received last time from
local Democrats which was luke warm to say the least.
If Tinklinberg had gotten into the race early, back in
May or June then the local Democrats would not have
recruited Olson. Contrary to the claims Cox makes, the
Local Democratic leadership did recruit Olson. And
they are sticking by him.
Olson now has enough money to get him to the
endorsement convention. And we can be sure that it
will be a contested convention. Will the party
activists pick a social conservative fiscal liberal
like Tinklinberg, or a social liberal and fiscal
conservative like Olson?
Read Blue Man in a Red District blog and you won’t find any enthusiasm for Tinklenberg either.
Cox Urged by the Tinklenberg Campaign?
Wow! I don’t think I have ever read such nonsense by a someone so very misinformed (oh, except the Strib’s Katherine Kersten). Or is Mr. Cox being urged by the Tinklenberg campaign to spread rumors that only Tinklenberg can win?
So far Mr. Cox, I have not spoken to many that think Tinklenberg is the candidate they want in the 6th nor do they think he can win. As stated by Blue Man, did you bother to ask any of us that are residents in the 6th who WE want as our candidate? Elywyn has only one thing to run on; transportation, and one could question that as well. The I35 bridge didn’t just recently become in so ill repair and dangerous as to fall. Tinklenberg could and should have done something on his watch.
Residents and activists in the CD6 want a candidate that will vote to end the war in Iraq. WE want a candidate that respects and supports issues like LGBT civil rights and a woman’s right to choose. What WE don’t want is a candidate that holds the same views as Michele Bachmann concerning those issues. We want a candidate that will represent US not the Washington insiders.
So far the only candidate that fits that profile is Bob Olson.
Misinformed is a polite way to describe...
It is a very old technique used by those seeking to deceive, to combine a few obvious truths with a few malicious lies hoping that by conflating them the reader will accept the whole package as being correct. Hitler used it. Bush uses it. Another rule of successfully employing this method is to get the most egregious lies in early. It took only until the second sentence of Mr. Cox’s screed, for him to tip his hat. Either that, or Mr. Cox has mind-reading abilities when he states: “...local political operative Nikki Carlson, who had hoped to exact revenge against Hill, who had dumped her as campaign manager.” Putting aside the inaccuracy of these statements; What possible purpose is served by these malicious allegations? How does this discourse advance understanding or debate? Is it fair to Ms. Carlson or the reader(s) without any verification, evidence, or even the common decency to allow her response? It should be clear to any fair minded observer that Mr. Cox has his own private agenda which betrays trust through his willingness to unfairly trash whomever meets his purpose. Given these facts, one should be careful and question any other opinions offered by someone so disposed. Half truths can be more damaging than full bore lies. The ‘sugar coating’ conceals the poison. Karl, Hal, and Ken exhibit much more understanding of the real conditions on the ground and the issues they raise. I have lived in the 6th for more than 20 years. I have been active in local politics for more than six years. With the exception of Ms. Bachmann, I know all the principals involved or mentioned. The real issue has less to do with the personalities and more to do with private alliances and the interference of forces outside the CD6. Ever since Jesse Ventura rode the 6th to victory this district has been a big fat piece of meat fought over by wolves of various colors from various places, afar. One fact which illustrates this is that almost every major fund-raiser held by either party last cycle was held out of district. What does that say? Grassroots and local activists in the DFL are waking up to this finally. The important story to be told, which is emerging, is the struggle for Home Rule in the 6th. Bob Olson’s candidacy and support is home grown. El Tinklenberg’s candidacy has it’s origins elsewhere, (DC and DCCC). If you talk to Patty, she will tell you that when you accept that outside money and support you are liable to loose the reins of controlling your race and message. Local activists and volunteers know the meaning of being ‘ridden hard and put up wet’ after dealing with these professionals. Realization of these lessons is spreading throughout the CD6 rank and file. I think it bodes well for citizens and voters in the district. It bodes well for candidates who understand and maintain there independence like Bob Olson, maybe not so well for Elwyn or Michelle. The stars are aligning nicely for change, which the people want more each day.
Olson v. Tinklenberg
Bob Olson: Independent Community Banker/Tax Lawyer/Sustainable Energy Advocate
(vs.)
Elwyn Tinklenberg: Roads and Bridges Lobbyist/Social Conservative
Option 1: Olson and Tinklenberg duke it out until the endorsement.
DCCC is focused on 3rd Congressional District. Some unions endorse early, some wisely stay out. IP party likes either candidate well enough – Olson for his fiscal conservative/social progressive stances that align with IP values, Tinklenberg because he was in the only IP governors administration, so they wait to see what happens. Wetterling waits to see what happens. Tink talks roads and bridges. Dems attack Tinklenberg for his part in underfunding transportation (license tabs, etc) and his anti-progressive stance on choice, civil unions, the war, conceal and carry, etc. and being a big government lobbyist. Olson talks sustainable energy, jobs and Iraq. Republicans keep their powder dry. Tinklenberg gets his money from developers and big contractors. Olson gets his money from bankers, lawyers, choice and LGBT. All fodder for attack in the general. Olson gets endorsed by a slim margin, unions endorse Olson. Republicans make the general a referendum on wedge issues. Who wins the general? It’s a toss up.
Option 2 – Olson gets out of race and endorses Tinklenberg.
Unions endorse him, Wetterling endorses him. Some Dems are disenfranchised by what they perceive as his hate positions. He hires a professional campaign staff, and looks to the DCCC for the help they promised, but they are distracted by the 3rd CD and Walz races. He tries to nuance his social positions some more and erodes even some of his small pro-life Dem base. People who vote on wedge issues vote Bachmann anyway. The party stalwarts in the district start looking to 2010-12, and hope for favorable redistricting after the census. If it looks like a losing race, IP could field their own candidate to build on Binkowski’s efforts. Bachmann wins.
Option 3 – Tinklenberg decides not to run and endorses Olson
After Tinklenberg endorses Olson, Unions endorse Olson, Wetterling endorses Olson. Olson attracts moderate Republicans and swing voters. Party leaders in the district continue with their party-building activities. It becomes a race about pocketbook issues, and working families vote their own economic self-interest, because they are hearing the truth from a tax lawyer who knows what he is talking about. The party comes together in a powerful way. Olson gets elected. There is a large group working for sustainable energy – manufacturing plants in the district with union jobs – the 6th becomes the Silicon Valley of sustainable energy he’s always talking about.
Mr. Tinklenberg: There are more effective ways to work for a Dem in Congress from the 6th than to run: endorse Olson, it’s the right thing to do.
Congrats, you made dump bachmann
Congrats Mr. Cox. Your piece made it to Dump Bachmann.
Why was Craig Cox's name scrubbed from Bob Hill's website?
A “Craig Cox” was listed on Bob Hill’s website as a “supporter” when this piece was first posted. Now it’s gone. Why? Is it because a Daily Planet reader recently drew your editor’s attention to that little fact and suggested that it be disclosed?
You can see the original website here:
http://tinyurl.com/2o9kgq
Here is the page as it appears now:
http://www.thedatabank.com/dpg/310/support.asp
How about some answers about your failure to disclose this fact—and then cover it up, Mr. Cox?
Post new comment