Ashwin Madia's response to Terri Bonoff's attack letter
Ashwin Madia has responded to Terri Bonoff's attack letter by restating the facts and reiterating that he believes in positive issue-driven politics. He won all those delegates by talking about the issues and he brings it right back to why he's winning -- he communicates what he believes so much better and so much more convincingly than the other candidates.
I've stuck to my word—despite advice from the experts—and people across our district have responded. What started as a humble effort out of my apartment in Plymouth has grown into our very own movement for change—complete with victories in 10 of 12 Senate district conventions held earlier this month.
The true test of a politician's character, however, isn't what he or she says when things are going well, It's how their campaign responds to adversity—and that's what our effort faces today.
Many of you may have already seen the mailing Sen. Bonoff recently distributed. This misleading attack on my character represents exactly the kind of politics that I am fighting to change—and I won't be a part of it by drafting similar assaults against Sen. Bonoff. Instead, I'd like to reiterate that I respect Sen. Bonoff's service to our community and value the ideas that she has brought to this race. It has been my honor to run against her for this endorsement.
At the same time, I know I need to set the record straight—because in politics, you can't afford to let the mud dry. So, here are the facts:
Conventional wisdom says that after being attacked I should fire away with everything I can find on Sen. Bonoff, but as I stated earlier, that's not my brand of politics and I won't be a part of it. Instead, you can read what others are saying about this latest turn in our race for yourself: http://www.mncampaignreport.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=1223 and http://gavinsullivan.blogspot.com/2008/03/bonoff-to-losing-gracefully-drop-dead.html To win in the 3rd District, Democrats have to be about something better than the same old political dirty tricks that have left too many Americans believing politics is irrelevant and inherently corrupt. Telling the truth and sticking to the issues is the strategy I'll continue to use to win this endorsement contest because: As Democrats, it's time for us to lead on the critically important issues facing our country. We'll face enough fire this fall from Republicans eager to preserve the status quo. Attacking each other only makes Erik Paulsen's job that much easier. I have always been open and honest about my record and will continue to do so throughout this campaign and as your next representative in Washington. You should expect nothing less from any candidate seeking your vote. Thank you so much for everything you've done to make our campaign a success. If we stand together, I know we can do more than just win this election—we can rebuild our politics and help America live up to its ideals again.
»
- The Big E's blog
- Login to post comments
Stumble It!
My score : A+
I think that is a very good response!
Amen, Good Fortune, and Godspeed.
We are going to see a very big downticket surge in those all-important suburbs in CD 3. This is terrific.
Ashwin gets an F
Madia talks a good game, but has little to back it up. The cliche is that one campaigns with poetry and governs with prose. Madia is good at telling us what we want to hear and to spin the Bonhoff letter as an "attack letter."
It is not an "attack" to bring up the record of the candidate. Unfortunately, Madia has so little in the way of any record and what shows up isn't good. I find it difficult to believe someone went from a McCain conservative to a progressive candidate based on the things he lists above. Bush was building up for war for a long time, and Madia joins the Marines.
He professes that the Bush stance on Gay, Lesbian, and Trans Gender people changed him. This stance should not have been a surprise as the Republicans have always been militantly anti-gay/lesbian/transgender. If this was a revelation to him I find that a bit naive.
Madia wants to "stick to the issues" because he doesn't want to deal with his complete lack of experience. If we just talk about the things we're going to do but not look at our ability to actually do them it's a lot easier on the candidate with the least qualifications.
If his campaign views this as an "attack" they are pretty thin skinned. If he gets the nomination look out. Taking the high road traditionally has not worked. Again, he is quite naive or he has nothing to fight back with.
Madia's written response is beautiful, but lacking in substance other than saying that he is above the fray and to trust him. Unfortunately, I do not trust him and have not from first meeting him. He is a very slick politician but sadly lacking in real substance, and there is no substantive difference in the policy positions of either of these candidates.
I believe that Madia cannot win in this district. I also believe that Democrats have a death wish and a history of endorsing feel good candidates with the best of intentions and the least able to succeed. Therefore, we will probably endorse him and lose the election.
Sorry.
Well done
I especially like this dissection of stances:
- He professes that the Bush stance on Gay, Lesbian, and Trans Gender people changed him. This stance should not have been a surprise as the Republicans have always been militantly anti-gay/lesbian/transgender. If this was a revelation to him I find that a bit naive.
A little more effort and polishing on this note, then perhaps Stephen D should be offering his services to the Bonoff campaign.
Going negative always seems to be a dangerous territory. I think that Bonoff should have had a powerful positive vision paragraph as well as more powerful writing like Stephen D's example.
Following our heads to defeat.
Well, we followed our hearts instead of our heads, and we have effectively handed the third district to the Republicans. If any of you had listened to Madia on MPR the day before the convention, you would have seen he is very uninformed on Education (No child left behind would be okay if it was just funded), immigration (he likes George Bush's plan), as well as wanting to maintain as many as 20,000 troops in Iraq to, among other things, fight terrorists. Yet, we feel we can elect anyone.
You would hear that he won't take any corporate contributions, ignoring the fact that he has to have the support of the business community to win. I am not sure how he will raise the three million or more dollars he would need to run. In these harder economic times the money will be a little harder to ply out of people's pockets to rely on small donations.
Bonhoff won two very tough elections in a Republican district, beating Judy Johnson, a well known and well financed candidate was was a popular mayor in Plymouth. One elected official (not from our district) commented that this is a fatal mistake. Bonhoff had a lot of visibility in the souther suburbs, which Ashwin does not have.
Eric Paulson won his last election in his house district by approximatelhy 66% to 33%. Those people are not going to jump onto the bandwagon of an unknown if they can jump onto the bandwagon of a 7 time election winner.
For Ashwin to win, he needs to educate himself on the issues,expecially education, medicare and social security, and forge some ties with the business community. He needs to work away from his scripted approach (he meadered and sounded a little unsure when "off message" on MPR) and he needs to be able to respond to the Republican smear machine. If he's up to the task, he may make it close but he just doesn't have the time in the district (he's been a Democrat in the 3rd for maybe two years) and has very limited work experience (less than a year) outside of the Marines, unless there is something we don't know about. In my encounters with Madia on the phone, personally, and with his campaign staff, I have found him/them to sometimes be sanctimonious, arrogant, and sometimes rude, especially when challenged.When pressed on the experience issues, I have simply been told that is not important. I am not the only one who feels this way.
He needs to come up with solid economic answers - he won't win this on the war because that has dropped down on the list of what people are most concerned about. He is very weak economically.
Madia wooed the delegates, but he has yet to run a district wide race. I predict a loss of double digits in November. People knew what they had in Bonoff. People know what they have with Paulson. Madia is the wild card they don't know about, and in hard times, people sometimes like to stick with what we know. He certainly should be congratulated for achieving what he has done. It is amazing. But the moment is over
As Simon says, "Sorry."
I hate to say I told you so, but....
I am looking at this old post, and the smugness of Grace Kelly in her response to me, and the great "down ticket surge" we will get and I am amazed that I was right. Ashwin ran a rotten campaign, and in the end was unable to respond to the negative attacks. He allowed himself to be defined, and this was basically due to his inexperience.
I hope we have learned from this, because we gave away the CD3 district. Paulson, though not the strongest candidate, appeared more experienced and stronger, and the DFL ads run against Paulson that were basically false hurt Madia. I predicted a double digit loss, and I believe it was 7 points or so. Madia stated that maybe he was the wrong messenger. He was. We ran a guy that basically has held no permenant job outside of the Marines and was basically a moderate Conservative. Paulsen painted himself as moderate and because he had a record and was a known quantity, he beat the newcomer.
We can't elect just anybody. Right from when he won the nomination I knew he would lose. He just didn't know enough. He worked hard, but hard work is not enough. Bonhoff's letter pointed out those weaknesses, and it was because of those weaknesses he lost. Paulsen will be able to hang onto this seat fairly easily, and we lost our first real chance to get it back in a long time.
S. DeBerg