National Journal.com

nationaljournal.com > Blogometer

6/3: Pawlenty Of Speculation

June 3, 2009 12:30 PM by Ian Faerstein | |

Share This

Liberal bloggers were disappointed by MN Gov. Tim Pawlenty's (R) decision not to run for re-election -- not because they're nervous about him challenging Pres. Obama in '12 (although they do consider him a "formidable" candidate), but because they think his decision is bad news for Senate candidate Al Franken (D). Why? The netroots believe that Pawlenty is now less likely to sign a certificate of election that would allow the Senate to seat Franken, since the governor no longer has to worry about facing MN voters. In fact, now that Pawlenty appears increasingly likely to run for President, the netroots worry that he has "tons of incentive to pander to the hardcore tea-bagging wing of the GOP and keep Franken out of the senate as long as he can." Conservative blogger Scott Johnson thinks this speculation is "simply stupid" and writes: "I predict that Governor Pawlenty will follow the law and will issue the election certificate precisely when the time comes."

What else is happening in the blogosphere?

PAWLENTY: Bad News For Franken?

Liberal bloggers think that Pawlenty's decision not to run for re-election means that he'll be less likely to sign a certificate of election that would allow Franken to be seated in the Senate:

  • TPM's Josh Marshall: "I hope I'm wrong. But Gov. Tim Pawlenty's (R) apparent decision not to seek reelection does not bode well for Al Franken's ability to get seated in the senate any time soon. That's because the most probable next step in the endless Franken-[Norm] Coleman drama is that the Minnesota Supreme Court will rule in Franken's favor and it will fall to Pawlenty to issue the certificate of election that will get him seated in the senate. [...] As long as he was going to run for governor and had to face Minnesota voters again, there was good reason for him not to completely stick his finger in the eye of the election process. But now that's not holding him back. And since he's probably running for president, he'll have tons of incentive to pander to the hardcore tea-bagging wing of the GOP and keep Franken out of the senate as long as he can."
  • dday: "[C]learly, not having to face Minnesota voters again frees him up to do whatever he deems necessary with respect to the US Senate election. Al Franken will probably get approval from the state Supreme Court within a couple weeks as the winner of the election. At that point the Court will, in all likelihood, request a certificate of election for Franken to be seated. The people of Minnesota want two Senators again. Pawlenty, by taking himself out of the running, removes himself of accountability and can now be free to show Republican primary voters what a good soldier he is. He'll refuse to sign the certificate. Heck, he makes this announcement THE DAY after the Supreme Court heard arguments in the Franken-Coleman case. He's practically begging you to make the connection."
  • The Washington Monthly's Steve Benen: "[I]f the next set of folks Pawlenty has to impress is Republican presidential primary voters, look for the governor to back Coleman's efforts indefinitely."

Conservative blogger Johnson thinks the liberal speculation is unfounded: "The Minnesota Supreme Court has not yet ruled on Coleman's appeal of the election contest decision. It will do so shortly. When the Supreme Court's decision becomes final, Pawlenty will issue the certificate. Why? Because he has been following the law, not a partisan script. For [Josh] Marshall and his fellow liberals, politics is all."

Meanwhile, Hot Air's Ed Morrissey speculates about Pawlenty's future: "What are his options? In 2012, he has two choices to raise his national profile. He can either run for President against Barack Obama, or he can run against Amy Klobuchar for the other US Senate seat. If Al Franken gets seated after the court challenges, Minnesotans may want a more conservative representative in the upper chamber than the thus-far non-entity Klobuchar. Running for President entails a lot of risk, not just because incumbents win re-election more often than not. (Only Jimmy Carter and George H. W. Bush failed to win re-election in the last 30 years.) Pawlenty will have to go through other Republicans to get the nomination, and with the economy likely to be the main issue, [ex-MA Gov.] Mitt Romney may have the inside edge. Regardless, Pawlenty will only be 52 years old in 2012 and has plenty of time to pursue higher office. Minnesotans will lose out on one of the most effective guardians of fiscal policy we have seen in some time."

MCHUGH: Obama Grabs Another GOPer

Liberal bloggers are offering their thoughts about Obama's decision to tap Rep. McHugh as Army Sec.:

  • Think Progress' Matthew Yglesias: "My guess is that the main political implications here relate to redistricting. Even if a Republican wins the seat, a cloutless freshperson is going to be a very likely candidate for getting screwed-over in a redistricting process that's likely to require New York to eliminate a congressional district."
  • BooMan: "[NY-23 is] effectively a New England seat. It's unclear if the Republicans will be able to win a special election there to fill this vacancy. McHugh has been winning the district with over sixty-percent of the vote, but Obama took 50.33% of the vote in the November election. [...] This move by Obama has to be driving the Republicans nuts."
  • Open Left's Chris Bowers: "With a PVI of R+1, [NY-23] was won by President Obama, and is actually slightly more favorable for Democrats than the NY-20, where Democrat Scott Murphy won a special election two months ago. McHugh himself proved unassailable, even during two consecutive wave elections for Democrats (he won by a little over 20% in both 2006 and 2008), but the seat is now clearly winnable. However, I also worry that many of the same problems that appeared in NY-20 will be repeated in NY-23. Four months ago, Scott Murphy was selected by local party leaders as the Democratic nominee without a primary election. Murphy then immediately promised to apply for membership in the Blue Dogs once he entered Congress. Progressives were thus completely shut out from the process right at the start. Will the same thing happen in NY-23?"

While liberal bloggers are excited to have a special election in NY-23, some of them are annoyed that Obama has appointed yet another GOPer to a key national security position:

  • Daily Kos' Steve Singiser: "McHugh may prove to be an inspired choice, but there is no better way to perpetuate that shopworn Cheney-esque meme that Democrats can't be trusted with national security than repeatedly refusing to trust a Democrat with top-tier national security positions."
  • MyDD's Josh Orton: "There's clear benefit in appointing Republicans to top military positions in a Democratic administration: it adds bipartisan cover to all sorts of progressive policy, from Iraq withdrawal to repealing DADT (assuming that happens before I'm 50). But a little gnome in the back of my head always complains when Obama appoints a Republican to a national security position like secretary of the Army -- on some level, does it confirm the longstanding conventional wisdom that only Republicans are serious enough to handle our nation's defense?"
  • Bowers: "It is not exactly thrilling that yet another major national security position in the Obama administration has gone to a Republican. McHugh scores pretty low on military matters according to progressive punch, and his DW-nominate score hovers around a not-moderate 0.3. After Democrats retook Congress in 2006 largely because of Iraq, and after President Obama won the Democratic nomination significantly because of his early opposition to the war, it gives me a warm feeling for Republicans to still be occupying so many key national security positions."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Mitt Romney Should Run GM

The Atlantic's James Bennet:

"...Over decades now of restructuring plans at [GM], two things have demonstrably not helped get much done: Money and time. The government can't simply give more of each to the automaker. What's needed is forceful, even ruthless, leadership to insist on the changes that everyone -- the managers, the union leadership, the dealers, everyone -- has known were necessary for about 20 years now. [...]

Here's a modest proposal to drive things along: Obama should install Mitt Romney as GM's chairman. Romney grew up outside Detroit and around cars; his father, George W. Romney, saved American Motors from collapse in the 1950s -- by killing failing brands and focusing on compact cars! George Romney successfully took on the Big Three with a 'dinosaur fighter' strategy. The son would bring to GM that legacy, the turnaround expertise and credentials he developed at Bain & Company, and the outsider's eye that GM desperately needs. He would also usefully jack up even further the stakes and the drama of the undertaking.

And he would create a political firewall for the turnaround. An alliance with Romney to save GM would give Obama and [CEO Fritz] Henderson the protection they need to move briskly to shrink the company. Why would Romney do it? Maybe because the chance to renew an American icon, preserve America's manufacturing capacity, and save tens of thousands of jobs would mean something to him. Maybe because it would give him a platform to demonstrate what an effective leader he can be. Maybe because, along the way, it would allow him to save the Republican Party by proving that it stands for something besides...whatever it is that it stands for right now."

LEST WE FORGET: How Not To Order Coffee At Dunkin' Donuts

From Overheard in the Office:

Soccer mom: Can I have a medium iced latte? (pause) Wait, how much is a large?
Employee: $2.99.
Soccer mom: And how much is the medium?
Employee: $2.69.
Soccer mom: So which is the better value?
Employee: Huh?
Soccer mom: How many ounces are in the large? How many are in the medium? What's the cost per ounce of each?
Next customer in line: Here's thirty cents, just give her a large.
Soccer mom: I'm not sure if I want a large.
Rest of very long line: Argh!