Regarding Tuesday's Special Elections

Shortly after voting on Tuesday, I went out of town to visit family in Chicago (I'm still there)... I wasn't able to catch up on the results til this morning. While I am deeply disappointed in the results, I am far from surprised. As I have stated before, given the circumstances, this election (especially the senatorial election) would be anyone's to win. Voter turnout was especially light, so while the percentages were indeed in Tarryl Clark's favor, one could hardly consider this a mandate. Our local rag was doing its darndest to get liberals elected. In an unprecedented move, the rag actually reiterated its endorsement of Clark and Haws the day before election day, in effect giving them double the exposure than would otherwise have been the case.

Though this story would have you believe otherwise:

Clark bristles at beingdescribed as an abortion-rights supporter (Isn't it something how being called what you are when you are a liberal is always, shall we say, uncomfortable?), saying she seeks a third way in the abortion debate that reduces abortions while keeping them legal and safe. (Safe for whom, the aborted? Isn't this kind of like being "just a little pregnant"?)

But she went on therecord opposing abortion restrictions during the campaign, as well as opposing a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriages and civil unions that the Senate will be pressured to vote on next year.

Both her opponents took the socially conservative position, yet she received 55 percent of Tuesday's vote.

"I think people want to focus on issues that impact their lives directly," said Scott Wells, co-chairman of the Senate District 15 DFL Party. "The issues that affect people's everyday lives are good jobs, good education and good health care, and that's what both (DFL) candidates talked about."

Republicans didn't do a good enough job of highlighting Clark's positions, said Roger Knauss, Senate District 15 Republican Party chairman.

"Her campaign was very effective at making her appear moderate on social issues and we did nothing to correct that misimpression," he said.

Clark's election may dispel the myth that candidates must oppose abortion rights to win in St. Cloud, but only more evidence from future elections will tell, Frank said.

"The reason abortion-rights supporters don't win in St. Cloud is because they don't run. They don't run because of the perception that the area is so anti-abortion," he said. "But this area, particularly St. Cloud, is not as conservative as most people think."

The writer of the article is again missing a vital point: This was a special election, with extremely light voter turnout. In his apparently pro-abortion zeal, and without considering the circumstances revolving around this special election, Larry Schumacher makes the mistake of trying to say that St. Cloud has moved ultra left.

Clark's election may dispel the myth that candidates must oppose abortion rights to win inSt. Cloud, but only more evidence from future elections will tell, Frank said.

"The reason abortion-rights supporters don't win in St. Cloud is because they don't run. They don't run because of the perception that the area is so anti-abortion," he said. "But this area, particularly St. Cloud, is not as conservative as most people think."

It is my fervent hope that the local and state DFL also take heart and follow suit, and actually let the voters see the flaming liberals that they really are. This could actually bode very well for the republican side come this November. Come on, DFL--bring it on. Run on what you really believe. Probably not only the best thing you can do to help Republicans, but probably the greatest favor that you could ever hope to do for this nation.

Consider it a patriotic move on your part.



(Filed under Elections)