13 thoughts on “Our Green Eye Shade Gubers

  1. Newt says:

    If Emmer is smart, he’ll keep his trap shut on budget cut specifics until after winning the election.

    He’s facing a media mindset that says government has no fat to cut and that public sector jobs are twenty times more important than private sector jobs.

    No – pull out the red pen at the end of the first session and start unallotting like crazy.

  2. Joe Loveland says:

    it takes Tom Emmer longer to announce a budget than it takes American Idol to announce a winner. But the political reporters gives him publicity after every minor partial announcement du jour, and that has allowed Emmer to control the debate more effectively than he did earlier in the campaign.

    Following his earlier announcement that he was adding $600-ish million the deficit with a long list of corporate subsidies, Emmer today announced that he will not cut the gigantic K-12 budget, though he apparently will delay the pay back of TPaw’s pay day loan from school districts….another eye glazer of an issue for swing voters.

    Here’s how Minnpost Doug Grow reported today’s green eye shade gobbletygook:

    Given that Emmer’s first step would increase the deficit by $600 million and that the second step would leave 40 percent of the budget “held harmless, Dayton surmises that the rest of the Emmer plan would have to cut more than 25 percent of the budget’s remaining $23 billion.

    Dayton shook his head in disbelief.

    An hour later, Dayton’s campaign followed up with more criticism, saying Emmer’s education numbers don’t add up: “To limit K-12 education funding to $13,300,000,000 as Rep. Emmer is proposing, instead of $15,621,575,000 as required by law, he would have to cut funding by $2,321,575,000. That is a 14.9% cut to K-12 education funding for the next biennium.”

    The campaign calculators are a smoking, and the swing voters are a dozing.

  3. Bob Lewis says:

    What are you thinking of?

    The ratio of horse-race commentary to analysis of candidate competence and policies is already something like 1,654 to 1.

    So the campaign (and miraculously, much of the reporting on the campaign) focuses on public policy for awhile and instead of keeping your mouth shut hoping it will go on that way for awhile, you’re encouraging everyone to veer off into the usual idiocy?

    Let’s treasure the moment. We’ll get back to stupid wedge issues soon enough.

    1. Joe Loveland says:

      I understand your point, but there are two separate issues:

      1) What campaign focus is most constructive for the state?
      2) What campaign focus is most likely to persuade the swing voters who will decide determine the outcome of the election (and therefore the outcome of the budget shortfall debate)?

      I’m pondering the second issue and you’re pondering the first. I agree with you on the first issue.

  4. Newt says:

    Swing voters are idiots. If they can’t see clear choices and tradeoffs in this field of candidates, God help them.

  5. Minnesotan says:

    By definition I’m a swing voter. While it’s easy to see clear choices with this field of candidates, I’m not going to align myself with any party based solely on this election.

    If I vote D, R or I for MN Governor that certainly doesn’t mean they’ve captured my vote in any future election.

    1. Newt says:

      Minnesotan reveals him/herself as unprincipled, which makes Minnesotan a center-left wishy-washy blob.

      If I were Frank Luntz, I’d say you’re not worth pursuing. I also would bet that Minnesotan isn’t sure what’s inside his/her trousers.

      1. Joe Loveland says:

        Over-the-line, Newt. There are invalid reasons for being undecided, such as not caring enough to do homework and deluding yourself that there are no differences between candidates.

        But there are also valid reasons for still being on the fence, such as waiting for full information from all candidates and trying to gauge the viability of each candidate so you’re not wasting a vote on someone who can’t win.

    2. Newt says:

      My insult was uncalled for. My apology.

      But it seems totally implausible that someone with this slate of candidates could still be on the fence.

      The only possibility I can think of is that a liberal might be weighing the tradeoffs between Dayton and Horner, a light-rail “fiscal conservative” (?).

      1. Joe Loveland says:

        We all have those moments. I know I do.

        I think you’re right about liberals on the fence. I also think a lot of fence sitters who are fiscal conservatives and social moderate-to-liberals who are accustomed to voting Republican but are struggling with Emmer’s small tent positions on social issues.

      2. Minnesotan says:

        Newt, if you didn’t crack me up so often I might be offended by you.

        Plus, if you weren’t so preoccupied with my trousers you might have read I can see clear choices with this field of candidates. My point was I’ll still consider myself a swing voter after this election. I vote for the candidate, not the party.

        That may be unprincipled to some, but to me it doesn’t take much principle to just say, “mark me down for the Republican (or Dem, or Ind.) the rest of my life, regardless of the candidate.”

  6. Joe Loveland says:

    The latest in the Battle fo the Spreadsheets. Emmer cuts $3 billion and delays paybacks of loans, and his opponents don their green eye shades.

    Horner says: “It leaves people who are trying to go to college out in the cold. He’s got to raise tuition rates through the ceiling. It says to Greater Minnesota “the jokes on you” and leaves them in the lurch. It’s gong to say to nursing homes in the state, 28% of which are already in financial peril, we’re going to push you off the cliff.”

    Dayto’s people say: “”Rep. Emmer’s plan will cut funding for Higher Education by 14%, K-12 Education by 14%, and Local Government Aid by 33%. He will thus cause huge increases in property taxes, higher college tuitions and seriously damage the quality of education throughout Minnesota. Furthermore, his drastic cuts in funding for Health and Human Services will restrict access to essential health care for those most in need.

    By contrast, Mark Dayton will invest in better education and new jobs. He will protect middle-class taxpayers by making our tax system fairer, while Tom Emmer will raise property taxes and Tom Horner will expand the sales tax.”

Comments are closed.