David Strand wrote: It appears, that like elsewhere in > the country, that candidates who did not cater to > revising the smoking ban to exclude some bars faired > better in the election. > > This would parallel other election results in other > communities and other parts of the country when people > have been allowed to vote for candidates where this > has been a hot issue or where the people have been > able to vote on such issues directly(the Washington > state public smoking which won Nov. 5th at the ballot > box for example).
I would disagree with this assessment. I think one of the big mistakes made in Shegstad's campaign was not making the smoking ban an issue from the outset. Our committee (myself included) determined that issues like rising crime, and expanded eminent domain power were more pressing concerns to speak to voters about. Shegstad was nudged out in the primary by about 100 votes. It was only in the final days of his write-in campaign that we decided to press the smoking ban issue, and went on a two-day barn-storming tour of Ward 9 bars and clubs the weekend before the general election. We met patrons, workers and owners and distributed cards focused on the smoking ban issue. In the end, Shegstad fared better than any other write-in candidate in the city, Fareen Hakeem included. She received only about double the votes that Shegstad did with 13 times as many potential voters. In ward 9, without being on the ballot, Shegstad received 432 votes out of 437 write-in votes cast, which amounts to about 10% without being on the ballot. This is unprecedented success as far as I can remember. I'd also mention that Dave Shegstad was received like a rock star at every bar we visited. Patrons, workers and owners alike were thrilled that someone was standing up against the ban. I'm certain that if we'd tapped into that before the primary, Schiff would have been soundly defeated. It's a bigger issue with voters than even I knew. Live and learn. In Bloomington, an *incumbent* council member didn't make it past the primary. She cited her opponent's vocal opposition to the smoking ban (which she supported) as the prime factor. Dan McGrath Longfellow http://www.shegstad.us REMINDERS: 1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If you think a member is in violation, contact the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
