Disturbingly, the latest poll from Zogby (one of the pollsters I most respect) shows Wellstone pulling away from Norm Coleman in the race for U.S. Senate, at a level of 46% - 37%. This effectively reverses a previous trend toward Coleman, most recently shown in mid-September where the Zogby poll showed a Coleman lead of 48% - 41%.
If this movement in the electorate is true, it doesn't bode well for those us trying to get Wellstone back to his true calling, that of poisoning the minds of the students in his classes against their country and to stirring up trouble at wildcat meat packer strikes. Such a deficit this late in the game is not easily overcome.
It's been well documented that Wellstone has never received more than 50% of the vote in Minnesota. I think it's fair to say that a person with such an abrasive personality and radical ideology could never attain a mandate from the Minnesota electorate and he's only able to get even 50% by energizing his base to a n extreme degree. Inside sources from the elections staff in Ramsey county say that Wellstone is expending an unprecedented effort to get out the college student vote. He's going so far as establishing a campaign presence on every floor of each residence hall on metro area campuses with a corresponding "floor captain" who will be tasked with getting every single person to the polls. He's no doubt counting on the established immaturity and pliability of student voters, their misguided sense of rebellion (rock the vote indeed) and his fetishization of education and promises of more and more aid to get them to support him (and they will).
Even given this, it continues to dumbfound me is that he Wellstone can attain even 50% of the vote. Watching his performance in the debate against Coleman last Friday night, it should be clear to any reasonable observer that the guy is fundamentally an arrogant, antagonistic, little bully. As an example, he filibustered every question asked of him for an interminable amount of time and whenever Coleman would reasonably and politely try to break in, to respond to some unsubstantiated slur, Wellstone would stab at him with his index finger and shout angrily "Don't interrupt me!" and then proceed with trying to convince Grandma that her Social Security benefits were about to be limited to a cardboard refrigerator box and a 2 for 1 coupon on Alpo. Then, when Coleman was responding to a separate question, Wellstone would butt in and begin shouting him down within 30 seconds. This happened over and over--behavior that would be considered unacceptable in the Monday morning staff meetings at even the most unsophisticated, slack ass offices in town (think Tires Plus or the Star Tribune editorial board). Any competent, reasonable boss would put an end to it in good order with some "persuasive" one-on-one counseling and failing that, the lead pipe. Yet Wellstone suffers absolutely no electoral sanction for his childish and counter productive behavior
I guess the lesson learned is that it doesn't matter if a candidate is antisocial and annoying as long as you're convinced the little prick is on your side. (I woudn't really know, since I can't think of a single Republican who is prone to act this way. In fact, I suspect it would be impossible for someone of such retarded social development to attain any influence within the institutional structure of the GOP). If your voting choice is predicated on selecting the candidate who will "fight for you"--that is, the one who will make sure you're a net gainer in the societal redistribution of wealth--then it doesn't matter if he's beneath contempt as a human being. I think that adequately describes the calculus of most hardcore Democratic voters.
But what about these so-called swing voters? Those that don't make up their mind until late in the game and really don't have any ideology to base their electoral choices on. Those who base their vote on their opinion of the man and not the party? Shouldn't Wellstone’s behavior be a turn off to these people? If it is, there's hope that more displays of Wellstone's true personality could yet turn the balance. More commercials like the one that shows Wellstone hopping up and down and screaming during a speech at a labor rally would help.
Coleman also needs to hammer away at Wellstone's promise to only serve two terms. I personally don't think it is a significant issue (what's that compared to his permanent stance for more taxation, less defense spending, and fewer individual rights?)--yet some observers believe it's a wedge issue. Most interestingly, his own former advertising guru, Bill Hillsman thinks this issue is critical to Wellstone's swing vote. His definition of the "swing vote" and why Wellstone will have trouble in getting them back, as quoted in this month’s issue of The Rake:
"They were mostly guys, living up in places like Anoka. You'd ask these guys, "Why do you vote for Wellstone? You don't agree with him on a single thing." And they'd scuff their shoes and look at the dirt and say, "I think he's honest. I think he's got integrity. And there ought to be one son-of-a-bitch like that in the United States Senate." And that's his swing vote. He's not going to get them this time."
What Wellstone doesn't understand, because he's too caught up in Washington, is that the two-term pledge he made is a deal-breaker with these people. These are people he made a promise to--I mean, I was there when he made it, time after time. He hated being called a professor because Boschwitz was calling him that to paint him as ivory tower, out of touch. So he said, "No, I'm a teacher. And after I serve my two terms in the Senate, I'm gonna come back to Minnesota and I'm gonna teach. And it's not going to be at Carleton or any other private school, it's not going to be at the University of Minnesota, it's going to be in the community colleges." Well, that's these guys' kids—that's his swing voter's family. That's where they go to school. That was a deal to them, and now he's reneged on that deal.
Amen brother.
No comments:
Post a Comment