If You Can’t Take the Heat, Get Out of the Kitchen

It has been estimated that during elections Mickey Mouse, and other frivolous characters, receive around 20,000 votes for some office or another. Why does this happen? This may go without saying, but for voters to know who they are voting for candidates must advertise their name to the public. Furthermore, candidates will modify their campaigns to accommodate the political views of the residents in their district. 

In the House race for Minnesota's third district communication to voters is especially important to the challenger, Democratic candidate Jim Meffert. Meffert is going up against incumbent candidate Republican Erik Paulsen who has already held the seat for the past two years after winning the election in 2008. Because Meffert and Paulsen are not competing for an open House seat, this is not a very competitive race. Forecast polls indicate Paulsen having a significant lead on Meffert. Paulsen has a clear advantage over Meffert being the incumbent. Meffert, however, has failed to put together a strong campaign against Paulsen which will subsequently cause him to lose the House race.

As mentioned in a previous post, Meffert has raised significantly less money than Paulsen. As a result, Meffert has not been able to afford television ads. This makes it quite difficult for Meffert to obtain any name recognition or for the people of the third district to get to know his political ideals. Meffert weak campaign will also make it difficult if he wishes to run for an office in the future.

In the Words of Jim Calhoun, “Get Some Facts”

Since 1776, when the United States officially became a country, various minority groups have fought for the right to vote. Out of respect for those that put themselves at risk so that individuals like me can have the opportunity to vote, every eligible US citizen should do so. We should not, however, enter the voting booth being politically naïve. As November 2^nd nears it is imperative that voters are familiar with where candidates stand on political issues. The candidates of Minnesota's third district, as expected, have taken positions that reflect the platform of the political parties that endorses them.

Based on his voting record and public statements, the positions that Republican incumbent, Erik Paulsen, can be inferred to follow a strong Republican ideology. For instance, Paulsen is considered to be a pro-life advocate on abortion issues. Paulsen does not support the use of government funds to stimulate the economy or a publicly-administered health insurance program. In addition, Paulsen is a supporter of military action in Afghanistan.

Contrasting with the Republican candidate, Jim Meffert, the DFL candidate follows a Democratic ideology. In opposition to Paulsen, Meffert is pro-choice when it comes to abortion practices and is in support of using government funds to improve the national economy, as well as implementing regulations on energy usage. He also supports the Obama health care option as well as same-sex marriage.

Regardless of one's political views, voters should have an idea of the political views of the candidates that they vote for. Not only will this help to advance the individual's political ideals, but it will help the political ignorance of today's American citizens. 

*Source from Project Vote Smart

“I Voted”

What is red and sticky and shows up around that same time in November every couple years? The ever fashionable "I Voted" sticker of course! Each time a person casts a ballot he or she is presented with a sticker to proclaim taking advantage of Constitutional suffrage. Elections would cease to exist if nobody voted. So, how do people decide who to vote for anyways? In Minnesota's third district party identification plays a large part in how people vote.

Demographics in the third district are quite partial. Over eighty percent of the district's residences are white and over twenty-five percent make between $100,000 and $200,000 a year. According to these statistics it is not surprising that a Republican has held the Congressional seat since 1961. The New York Times Race Rating expects a "solid Republican" win along with the FiveThirtyEight Model predicting a 100 percent chance of Paulsen taking the Congressional seat once again¹.

These statistics also play a large role in a candidate's political ideology. Candidates are most responsive to the concerns of the people who are voting. In this particular district, where people are wealthier and predominantly white, candidates will have a better chance if they follow a more Republican ideological platform.

These facts are once again supportive of the strong lead Paulsen has over Meffert in the polls.





Statistics taken from http://elections.nytimes.com/2010/house/minnesota/3

Ignorance…of Television Ads…Is Bliss?

Media these days can be characterized in numerous forms, from the old fashioned newspaper ads to the contemporary television commercials. But with the development of the internet political campaigns have created a media frenzy. Not only do candidates have their own personal campaign websites, but blogs (ironically), videos, and forums on the internet have communicated other opinions.

The candidates for Minnesota's third congressional district, Erik Paulsen (R) and Jim Meffert (D), have both established their own campaign websites. Information on the websites includes the general political platforms of the candidates comprising ways in which they can better Congress. Links to articles and videos supporting the candidate are also scattered about on both websites. Naturally, political campaign websites are squeaky clean, using layman's terms and highlighting every possible virtuous aspect of a candidate. Websites are an easy, affordable way for candidates to convey their political message while increasing name recognition.

However, Paulsen and Meffert are not so equal when it comes to television ads. Because of Meffert's low budget, he has not been able to afford television ads, while Paulsen has invested roughly one million dollars in television ads, as stated by an article in the Minneapolis newspaper, the Star Tribune. In addition, a Twin Cities' local news station ran a news reel about this topic stating that because Meffert is new to the political realm he has yet to compete in the "TV ad wars". While Paulsen is shelling out thousands after thousands of dollars, Meffert is remaining economical and abstaining from the demise of a negative campaign.



Without the means to run a television ad campaign, Meffert has lesser of a chance to increase his name recognition. On the other hand, perhaps Meffert's lack of television campaign ads is not such a weakness, but rather a mindful tactic.

PACs = Please Accept Cash

The mid-term elections are only a little over a month away. Political ads are in full swing, yard signs have taken over front lawns, and campaign polls dominate the local eleven o'clock news. As I was clicking through channels between classes the other day, I came across an ad for Joe Courtney, the Democratic incumbent for Connecticut's second district. I then began thinking, who pays for the air time for those ads? And who provides campaign signs? The fact is that interest groups play an enormous part in the course of a campaign, especially Political Action Committees (PACs). PACs are private groups that organize to help elect candidates who advance important issues of that specific PAC. 

          http://www.opensecrets.org/races/summary.php?cycle=2010&id=MN03

For Erik Paulsen, PACs have been extremely generous to him. For the 2010 campaign 484 PACs have contributed to the Paulsen campaign totaling in $694,986. Most of the PACs providing funding are coming from the finance, insurance, and real estate industries.Considering Paulsen serves on the Congressional subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit, this is anticipated. Both New York Life Insurance and PricewaterhouseCoopers, a large accounting firm, have each provided $10,000 and are a couple of the top contributing PACs for Paulsen's campaign.

Jim Meffert is without a doubt struggling in raising money for his campaign. Meffert only has $20,000 in PAC contributions. Half of that has come from the American Optometric Association. This is not surprisingly considering Meffert served as the Executive Director of the Minnesota Optometric Association. As a result of Meffert's low campaign budget he has only been able to afford wed ads on YouTube. Below is my favorite Meffert campaign ad that was funded by political action committee Friends of Jim Meffert.

Advantages of an Elephant and (maybe) a Donkey

It is overtly obvious that two major political parties dominate contemporary politics in the United States, the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. Both political parties have fundamental platforms that endorsed candidates tend to abide to; the Republican Party being considered generally conservative and right of the political spectrum while the Democratic Party is considered more liberal and left of the political spectrum. Political parties play a significant role in a congressional race due to monetary aid and endorsements by prominent party members.

Erik Paulsen, the incumbent for Minnesota's Third Congressional District, is a member of the Republican Party and naturally Paulsen's challenger, Jim Meffert, is a member of the Democratic Party. So far in 2010, Paulsen's campaign has raised an astonishing $1,991,726! A majority of those funds have come from individual and PAC contributions. The top Paulsen contributors include major businesses of Minnesota including Target Corp. and TCF Financial. Paulsen has supported continuing tax cuts passed by President Bush and has opposed the health care bill passed by current President Obama; a prime example of a Republican candidate platform.

On the contrary, Meffert has only managed to raise $230,900, a fraction of the Paulsen campaign. In support of Obama's health care bill and running on an unmistakable Democratic platform, Meffert stated on his website, "This bill is a first step towards achieving universal and affordable health care as a right, not a privilege". The Democratic Party, however, has failed to find substantial endorsements for their candidate resulting in fewer funds and a reduced amount of support.

Could Meffert lose this campaign because of his party's lack of financial backing and endorsements?



"Paulsen Outraises Meffert Nine to One"

Third Congressional District of MN - Campaign Finance Data    

Actions Speak Louder Than Words

The state of Minnesota held its Primary Election for 2010 on August 10^th through its Caucus system. In its third district however, both the Republican and Democrat candidates ran uncontested making for an uneventful evening. Even though the Republican candidate and incumbent, Erik Paulsen, is strongly favored to win back the office I strongly believe that Paulsen's leadership is not best for the people of Minnesota at this time.

After observing the campaign sites for both of the candidates I made these observations:

Jim Meffert, the DFL candidate for the third district is making large strides in improving the health care system in Minnesota. Not only has he worked extensively to bring down health care costs, but he has also worked to expand its access. For example, Meffert has worked as the executive director at the Minnesota Optometric Association where he ensured that everyone had access to eye care. He has also served on multiple education boards where he has fought to advance the funding and availability for public schools. Below is a video of Jim Meffert in an interview about the work that he has done.

On Erik Paulsen's campaign site it states that he has been a member of the House Financial Services Committee, the House Medical Technology Caucus, and has worked to give education and benefits to military personnel and their families. In reading this nothing really stands out to me. Paulsen does not seem to have accomplished anything substantial in his last two years in office.



Links to campaign sites:
Congressman Erik Paulsen
Jim Meffert for Congress