Franken's accountant paid the right amounts but in the wrong states

Which is why Al should, right now, commit to holding several debates with Jack on substantive issues and we as a DFL party can get beyond fund raising and media-inflated tax problems.

I do not support Pallmeyer, but I think its unfair to compare him to Nader. Nader runs in general elections and siphons votes from Democratic candidates. Pallmeyer is running for Democratic endorsement - which is what Nader should have done.

If the DFL State convention were held today, Al would not win on the first ballot. That's today. We have over a month to go.

Both candidates are abiding by the endorsement and whichever one does not win, will drop out of the race.

We need to respect the endorsing system and let the process play itself out.

Look, I agree with every single Franken supporter that this tax thing is a complete non-issue. You may have seen my Strib letter to the editor yesterday, stating just that. It is a trivial question and not worthy of any serious news coverage.

But it is having an effect because Franken has been running a trivial campaign. It has all been about celebrity and money, and practically none of it has been about the issues. I am not saying that Franken himself is a shallow person, but it seems quite obvious that someone advising him is telling him to never, ever say anything that might give offense. So he says nothing. No strong stands. No more debates with Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer. His people on the rules committee have been working hard to get his speeches at the congressional district conventions down to 3 and even 2 minutes. That is just enough time for Franken to say, "Hi, I'm Al Franken, the celebrity. You know me. Vote for me." If given more than 3 minutes, he has his 4th grade teacher take his place at the mic.

So Franken is getting slimed for a totally trivial and irrelevant offense. Except that he has been running a totally trivial and irrelevant campaign based on his perceived frontrunner status and the same sense of inevitability that you continue to push.

Sorry, Amuseinc, but that sense of inevitability is now punctured, as unfair as it might be. So how do you figure that the substantive candidate is the one who should withdraw?

Please put some actual content into posts, or you will be deleted. Using your real name, citing sources, using a login name would all give you a more real feel. So edit your posts and improve them or find them deleted. Mere namecalling is not a sufficient comment in the conversation.

I've read enough of your posts, in other places, to know that you can articulate your argument better than that!!!

Well, that's if ya really are "Amusinc"...

Your pal,

TPT

p.s. - they don't let me (cheney)in' cuss here, either!!!

"I never thought I'd see the day I'd miss Richard Nixon."

I don't know if you saw that 2005 documentary about George McGovern called "A Bright and Shining Moment." One McGovern supporter was asked, after all these years, how he felt about having supported such a doomed campaign for the presidency. The fellow was philosophical, saying it was painful when you saw how badly McGovern lost, but then again, most of Nixon's inner circle ended up in jail and Nixon's presidency ended up as a disgrace and a historic flameout.

Tilting at windmills, however, isn't at all what we are talking about. You, Amuseinc, are still going around and around with the circular argument that Franken is the best candidate because he is the most electable because he is the best candidate because he is electable. I am getting dizzy here.

Of course, Franken wouldn't be the best senator. That would be Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer. But the real question is: Why in the world do you think he is the most electable? Your claim just makes no sense at all. Franken has no appeal to the DFL base (outside of those few, like you, who still maintain that he is the most electable, despite the evidence). And Franken has little appeal to the general Minnesota voting population. Which is why his consultants are being so careful to severely limit and tightly script any public appearance he makes. The campaign of running a satirist for the U.S. Senate just makes no sense.

None of this is intended in any way to reflect on the character of Franken. He is a good man, has shown a certain bravery at times in his past, and a gifted satirist. I just wish he would get back to the satire that he does so well, and leave the politics to Jack.

All of this has been addressed before

1) Polls like references don't count when the person does not know the candidate

2) Certain sites and news services only say something when they have something bad to say

3) The same arguments could have been made about Wellstone, were made about Obama

You are clearly angry here, Amuseinc. Why is that? Your candidate is ahead in the polls, as you claim. Your candidate has literally millions and millions of dollars more than Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer. Your candidate is famous throughout the world. Your candidate has a bunch of endorsements from unions and influential DFL leaders. I think just about everybody would admit that your candidate probably still has more delegate strength for the state convention, even after this latest brouhaha.

So why are you getting so angry? Attacks on Franken haven't come from Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer supporters. We have said critical things, but they have been entirely about the issues and occasionally about the process.

Process questions like my own complaints that Franken seems to be afraid to attend a candidate forum with Jack. Like the severe restrictions that Franken supporters have been putting on senate candidate contact with congressional convention delegates. Like packing rules committees with Franken supporters to the exclusion of many good DFL volunteers. These process questions bother me not because they block the strengths of my candidate, but they bother me because the undermine the process altogether and tend to discourage new participation in the DFL.

We have had issue complaints. Like Franken's original support of the tragic Iraq war. Like Franken's support of new coal plants (disclosure: he wants them "clean") and new nuclear plants (disclosure: he only wants nuclear as part of a "mix" to address global warming). Or about Franken's wish for a much more cautious end to the U.S. occupation of Iraq. Or Franken's ambiguous statements about Iran. Like Franken's opposition to advocating single-payer health insurance (disclosure: he wants single-payer for kids and thinks maybe it might be a good idea for all of us one of these days).

And I can personally say that I have had several high words of praise for Franken. I think his support of gay marriage is simple and eloquent. I think he grasps the great potential in creating green manufacturing jobs. In a million years, I would prefer Franken to the slippery Republican incumbent. I admire Franken as a person and as a satirist. I think his wife Franni is truly wonderful human being. I think Franken is smart and I admire the way he has been able to gather smart people around him, both in researching his books and in working at his campaign. (I understand Andy Barr is too young to run for the Senate, but I certainly can see this as a possibility at some point.)

But, Amuseinc, we haven't had our convention yet, and Franken hasn't been endorsed. I think the attacks on Franken's supposed tax problems are silly and a non-issue, and I have said so often and publicly. What else do you want here? As much as Franken would be an improvement over Coleman, I think Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer would be a truly exceptional senator -- one of the more outstanding additions in several decades. What in the world could be the harm in wanting Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer to be our senator, if we think he would be the very best possibility?

Please reconsider this rage, Amuseinc. It looks like some bizarre sense of wounded entitlement. Nobody is trying to slander your candidate. We just think we have a much better one. That shouldn't be offensive in the least.