I just wanted to write to express some thoughts about the convention that I haven't seen yet in the forum. So far I have heard a positive picture of the convention as a whole. I think that that is for the most part true, but I think we need to look a little more at some of the undercurrents that I noticed. (This is a long one, so I won't feel bad if you don't read it)
First, I should say that I was an alternate who wasn't seated until many of the delegates had left (after the endorsement of the mayoral candidate and the first school board vote). I was the second to last male alternate in my ward, which put me in the unfortunate position of caring deeply about what happened and not being able to do anything about it. I did go up on stage with Tom Goldstein and talk to delegates, but my official participation was very limited.
People that I talked to from my ward (7) had very strong feelings about their candidate of choice in the mayoral election. I supported Ortega, who was at a strong numerical disadvantage in our ward. Most of the people I talked to, who were Ortega supporters, thought that a choice between Kelly and Coleman would be between a centrist (Coleman) and a sometimes right of center democrat (Kelly). They thought that that was not much of a choice and thus were pushing for a more left-of-center liberal candidate. After the nomination I heard one guy say "I'll vote for him, but I'm not going to lift a finger to help him" of Coleman. I felt real disappointment from Ortega supporters that someone with a more progressive record wasn't chosen. I think the party tried to pull together, but this sort of belief needs to be addressed and not varnished over.
Conversely, the Coleman supporters were stressing that they thought Coleman was 'more electable' than Ortega because he was closer to the center. I think that this is the same strategy that the DFL, and the Democratic party at large, has been following since Clinton. I spoke out at the Progressive Minnesota meeting over the winter on this topic. If you look at what made the Republican party successful, it was not by trying to move to the left to steal voters from the Democrats. They created a vision for America that mimicked their ideal world view. They then fought to spread that message and attract people to that vision. I wanted the DFL to embrace the idealism, liberalism and the origins of the party and provide a candidate that could stand firmly on the party platform and attract voters to the party. A true DFL leader should be able to draw voters by the power of his/her ideas and not by moving to where the middle happens to be at the moment. Paul Wellstone is an example of someone who stood proudly upon the hill of liberal tradition and got people to come to him through the magnetism of his passion and idealism. While Ortega was not the perfect candidate, he was much closer to that ideal than Coleman. I too will support Coleman, as I supported Gore and Kerry, not because I feel inspired to follow him, but because the alternative is worse. This is an equation which I dislike, and which needs to change.
I had some misgivings about the way the Coleman campaign acted during the convention. I found the hands-free microphone, credential-checking political machine so obviously displayed to be distasteful. The event felt scripted and the turnout of the East-side political machine ensured that Ortega had little chance in wards 6-7. The feeling only worsened when Coleman came on stage to the blasting notes of Neil Young's "Keep on Rocking in the Free World". I could just imagine someone talking into Coleman's ear saying "that's right, now turn to the left and wave. Sir, one of our spotters has noticed what could be a wavering Ortega supported in row 3. Please point to him as you make your next point." Ortega's campaign had a much more organic feel to it. People were wearing different pants, not just khaki shorts, they were much more diverse and seemed to be a group of people with a common goal - as opposed to the small-cogs-in-a-machine feel I got from the big blue Coleman campaign.
I also didn't like the shouted and oft repeated Coleman campaign slogan, "Beat Randy Kelly." If there is any way to hurt your campaign, it is by referring to your opponent as the person to beat over and over. I hope that he drops that and moves to something more like "Making St. Paul a forward thinking and looking city" or something that stresses the strengths of the DFL and not a campaign focused on the person of Randy Kelly. All Kelly has to do to beat that type of campaign is do something out of character to contradict the Coleman campaign. A single public demonstration of progressive credentials such as a push for a higher minimum wage at the eleventh hour would completely encircle the Coleman campaign and leave them floundering. Chris needs to be careful of that and of painting Kelly as an ideologue who is set in his ways.
Finally, I liked both Lovejoy and Goldstein and said I would support both if possible. I found it heartrending to have to choose between them and was glad that none of the candidates closed the door on future office. All the candidates were gracious and were more supportive than I thought they could be after such a competition. Here's hoping for a vigorous and interesting general election campaign in the fall.
Jacob Dorer ---------------------- Alternate 26 Dayton's Bluff ------------------------------------------------- JOIN the St. Paul Issues Forum TODAY: http://www.e-democracy.org/stpaul/ ------------------------------------------------- POST MESSAGES HERE: [email protected]
To subscribe, modify subscription, or get your password - visit: http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/stpaul
Archive Address: http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/private/stpaul/
