MNGOP Leadership Update April 13, 2009 – 2 Months Out
We’re now just 2 month away from the big day. On June 13th the Republican Party of Minnesota will pick a new chair. As BPOU Conventions have wound down, the race turns to garner the pledged support of the newly elected State Central Delegates and Alternates. Over the next month, the candidates will roam the State attending Congressional District conventions and a handful of debates/forums.
The big news this week is Dave Thompson‘s entrance into the Chair’s race. Thompson brings in the X factor. He is widely known for his radio and TV work in the Twin Cities. He has spent the last 8 years pushing the conservative message on radio and TV so it is pretty enticing for those of us who are sick and tired of lame press conferences and gimmick gotchya communication strategies from the party.
So yeah. Thompson’s conservative principles are well known via his work. His skills as a communicator would be much appreciated and are sorely needed in the party. On that point, he clearly has the advantage to his competitors. I know some people out there are wondering if this is the guy being put up to diffuse the anti-establishment (read: Sutton) vote, but I don’t believe that is the case. He’s got too many serious players in the conservative movement and supporters for this to be a bogus campaign.
Former State Senator Carrie Ruud is also still in the race. Thompson’s entrance does make her task much harder, but I think the two of them do stand a good chance to build a consensus against Sutton and the establishment. You have a great communicator who made a living from persuading people and debating in the public eye, plus you have someone who has had her name on the ballot, asked for the public’s vote, and worked to pass legislation. Both of them offer something Sutton hasn’t ever done and something the party has all but forgotten how to do.
Tony Sutton is the establishment candidate, no ifs, ands, or buts about it. His campaign seems to be based on the notion that things were good back in 2001 when he worked for the Party as Executive Director or other jobs through the years, and it has all gone south only recently. But then he glosses over how he has been basically #3 at the MNGOP since 2005. He has been there for the last 2 election cycles when the wheels have come off the bus.
Now maybe he is not an actual carbon copy of current Chair Ron Carey, but I just don’t get that picture based on the things I see with my eyes. The results have been dreadful, and the operations of the party have been on the steady decline of effectiveness. Gone are the principles, embraced are the pollsters and strategists who have recommended all that has transpired. (The all your eggs in one basket and no policy policy) Add to that the disrespect being paid to the grassroots, and well the Party has become a very poorly run organization the last few years thanks to a few people at the top. Sutton was either with them or sitting right next to them and couldn’t stop them. How, having him slide over one seat would change anything….. the powerborkers of the party must clearly know, since they have jubilantly gone from Supporting Carey last time to Sutton this time……
Sure, Sutton’s supporters say, “but you weren’t in those Executive Commitee meetings, you didn’t see him stand up to Carey.” But Sutton was incapable of keeping Carey from destroying the grassroots and demoralizing the base, and with a view from a powerful and influential position within the party, no less. If this race was between Ron Carey or Tony Sutton…… well it isn’t, and I’m not sure Sutton is much different then Carey. He may be better then Carey, but I just don’t think taking a guy who knows where the bathrooms are at MNGOP HQ and has been around the last 2 decades is all this party needs right now.
A Command and Control, top down leadership attitude is well entrenched at MNGOP HQ and I am not sure (pretty dang) that Sutton would do away with it or the people who believe on the party staff is smart enough to know how to do anything. Arrogant is an understatement. Smug, well, let’s just say I wouldn’t let them watch my 90 pound bulldog.
The distrust and fear of the grassroots base of the party is what has divided State leadership from the wheels on the ground. We’ve lost supporters and alienated many long time activists by the abuse of them from those at or near the top. Whether it be dictatorial conventions or wasting their time on cold voter ID calls to Colleen Rowley, the conservative base has lost faith in the party since it has walked away from fighting for conservative principles and taking a stand on the issues that matter to the base of the party. (No matter where Coleman & Pawlenty came down on them!!!!)
The Deputy Chair’s race is still a head to head race between Dorothy Fleming and Michael Brodkorb. I’ve written a lot on this in the past, so I won’t go into it too much. I will say though that it doesn’t appear the whole boyish game from Sutton and Brodkorb and them not running together isn’t working. Everytime I talk with people about it, everyone just says they are the ticket and working together. Oh sure, separate campaigns, but ….. yeah, we all know who the powerbrokers and establishment want to win. Sutton/Brodkorb.
They are both running on the notion that they will do the jobs with out drawing a salary. A noble talking point coming from a guy who ran the campaign of the highest paid MNGOP Chair that I can remember. Oh yes, Micheal Brodkorb managed the campaign of the current 6-figure Chair Ron Carey. So noble of him to now stand up and try to win the votes he had to discredit last time. Pathetic.
I know he thinks it is winning him some favor to say he will work for the MNGOP for free while drawing from his ‘accumulated’ wealth of polictical operativeness and that of the State of Minnesota, but it raises a few big questions for me.
1) Where did he get all that money so that he doesn’t need to get paid for the work? He was a Senate Staffer, then a Party staffer, then a freelance campaign advisor.Oh wait, there was the stint with Weber Johnson or something, but that was a year or two. Seriously, how’d he get to be independently wealthy? For a guy in his mid 30′s who has worked in politics or for Government, he sure seems to be pretty “well off”.
Not that there is anything wrong with it, or maybe that isn’t the case at all. And that brings me to …….
2) How can he do both jobs? His current employer is the State of Minnesota. He is the communications director for the Senate Republicans. While being paid by the State of Minnesota he can’t do Party work. It raises big legal issues as well as just who would he being working for, and when? The Senate will need him focussed on the business of the Legislature whenever they are in session, but what if the party does too? Imagine if we actually become an activist party again, where we organize our supporters to call Legislators about legislation and some Republican Senators happen to be on the wrong side of the issue. I just don’t think you can be in two places at once, nor can you serve potentially competing masters.
3) I’ve had a chance to see the guy in action at BPOU conventions and other functions lately and the stress of this and his temper are getting to him. I just don’t think he is cut out for a role like this. He carries grudges and seems to be more interested in being a pitbull of the State leadership, not one sent into their meeting. (A dig from a quote from Politics in MN he has on his website) He’d be the official party bully now, that is when he isn’t working at the State Senate. I really don’t see how it is possible to do both jobs.
Our party needs to reunite right now, that means pulling all the people who have disagreed in the past back together – and all work together for the good of the party. Brodkorb is not a guy who I have seen any evidence of doing that. I believe he is a very divisive person who is as far removed from the grassroots as one can be. In my personal dealings with him, of late especially, I just don’t see him to be a person that will rise to the position and responsibility.
He’s been something far too different in the past, and the Brodkorb I know is not fit for party office. Attack blogger, or radio sidekick, maybe, distinguished party leader who will help reverse the trend in MN and get conservatism back on the map? Just what has he done to make you think that?
The problem with this party is that whenever there was a disagreement about a candidate, people like Michael Brodkorb and Tony Sutton were more often then not- the guys who were laying down cover fire and keeping the passionate and principled conservatives from, at the very least, having their concerns even heard. From the National Delegate and State Convention fiasco last year, to the Railroading of Sue Jeffers in 2006, dissent is not in the Brodkorb Sutton GOP vocabulary.
I would see their election to be a giant step backwards for the party.
Sorry, AAA, but all I can see here is an inconsistent rant. You can cheer for anybody you want, of course, but to claim that Tony Sutton is the “inside guy” that couldn’t get the job done, and then support Dorothy Fleming — the “inside gal,” well, that’s inconsistent.
Then you say that we need to reunite the Party, right in the middle of a major diatribe against Mr. Brodkorb, the “establishment” and the majority of delegates who re-elected Mr. Carey to his current position. How about YOU re-unite with US?
I’m far more concerned with picking the best of these candidates, not based on some personal vendetta either by me against “them” or by “them” against me, but based on my perception of their ability to do what has to be done– putting forth a plan to win elections, big-time and soon, that we can all buy into and make happen. Electing new leadership based on personal taste or perceived weaknesses of one or another of them doesn’t accomplish a thing. It’s like the old Chad Mitchell ditty: “A congressman [or Chairman] comes with just two ends, a thinking end and a sitting end, and since his future depends on his keeping his seat, why bother, friend?” I’m not willing to just exchange one sitting end for another. I want somebody to use their thinking end.
Dorothy Fleming got elected two years ago, so she’s technically “in” as deputy chair, but that does’nt make her “the inside gal.” Not with that crowd. She wasn’t the establishment pick when she won in 07 and she isn’t now. I’m sure Carey and Sutton wouldn’t count her among their number. As far as I can tell, Dorothy is the only one out engaging the grassroots and trying to get things done. She’s done tremendous work organizing and training people for various efforts and causes.
Character matters in leadership Jerry. I know it doesn’t to you, but it does to me. We can’t have divisive people running for Chair or Dep Chair. We can’t have people who are better at beating fellow Republicans then DFLers running the party.
I’m not willing to rearrange the chairs on the titanic again. I’m not willing to let people who think activism or message is the enemy – run the party. I’m not willing to let someone who thinks the State Party should dictate to BPOUs how they function – become Dep Chair. I’m not willing to let top down command and control people replace the outgoing chair who lives by that model.
If Brodkorb and Sutton were just this way at the office or with friends it wouldn’t be a problem, but their offices and friends have been the GOP for most of their professional lives. That means it does matter how they treat others.
If this is a grassroots party, then by gosh the grassroots should decide the leadership, not have people thrust upon them by the people with deep pockets or in elected office. And especially not by simply putting out fluffy one time lit pieces.
I do not see Sutton or Brodkorb as people who are willing to embrace the reforms that people are asking for. I see them as simply slapping some lipstick on the party of Ron Carey, and if that makes you happy, then good for you, watch out, there’s a cliff ahead there Mr. Lemming.
http://opengop.wordpress.com/
There’s a great website about some of the reforms that we need to embrace in order to reassemble the base. Call it unite, call it merge, call it whatever you want. But the arrogant attitude that these 2 men can save the party is a crock. They’ve both been intimately involved for the last few elections and beyond. They’ve both been very involved in the divisive activities the party has undertaken in the last 2 elections.
You think my personal interaction with Brodkorb is not worthy, but isn’t how the guy treats those in the party something to judge a Deputy Chair candidate on? He looks down on people, as do many in the HQ staff. That is not good. Nor is it healthy for the party.
Character matters. So does thinking grassroots is more then just something you need to say every 2 years when you’re running for your job.
I hate to break it to you Jerry, but Brodkorb is not a bottom up grassroots leader. He’s a command and control leader. Much like those who think the state party should take over BPOUs and dictate to them how they should operate.
Apparently, unlike you, I don’t think that has anything to do with grassroots, except squashing it. That is top down leadership. That is command and control. That is exactly the wrong type of leadership this party needs.
I think character matters, too, especially in terms of “leadership.” But if I must choose between somebody that occasionally rubs a few people the wrong way and a solid technocrat with a bold but workable plan for getting us where we need to go, you know which one I’ll choose. We’re not “in business” to be buddies, we MUST work together.
The big reason to reject “command and control” from the State Party is that it simply doesn’t work in a volunteer organization, which is why YOUR guy– the Colonel– may not have been best suited for the job. You like to speak for the “grassroots,” whoever that may be, but you forget that State Central represents the grass roots as much as anybody, and they elected Carey, Sutton and Fleming the last time out. I suspect all of them have made their share of mistakes, both of commission and omission, but I really don’t care!
The only reason I care about what these folks have done in the past is as an indication of what they might do in the future, and as instruction for those that have to do it. They’ve all established themselves, in my mind, as people of good character and as solid, principled conservatives. I think it is inappropriate and a disservice to the Party as a whole when they are maligned as some evil “establishment.” We’re SUPPOSED to all be on the same team, Andy. If you don’t like the way our leaders have performed, find a better one and convince the rest of us. That’s all you have to do. We’re the party of ideas. I want to know which of these candidates has the best (and again, most workable) set of ideas. (OK, and to satisfy us both, the degree to which they seem open to making them better still.) Anything else is just, well, unproductive kvetching.
I’m sorry, and I don’t really want to offend you in any way, just as I’ve not been offended by anything any of the current officers or candidates have said. I just don’t see what you see, for some reason. I think they’re all fine people and deserve to be elected, or not, based strictly on what they can bring to the Party. It’s halftime, and we’re down by three touchdowns. Do you want to fire the coach now, or see if maybe he’s got a better game plan, somewhere?
Rubs people the wrong way? No more like tries to rub them completely out of the party.
I got news for you. Brodkorb, Sutton, and Sturrock are command and control people who think THEY should tell the grassroots what to do (and sadly I am afraid in some cases what to think). Grassroots are our voters, supporters, volunteers, BPOUs, small donors, and candidates. It is what drives this party.
The fact that you are throwing the term grassroots overboard simply because you refuse to acknowledge the arrogance of the current ‘good old boys’ just because they are nice to you is just further proof that some people don’t even understand that the party has a serious problem and will end up rearranging the chairs on the titanic becuase that guy had a cool looking letterhead and said exactly what they want to hear.
You have the best possible choices this year in Thompson and Ruud as alternatives to another guy who simply has been there so long he has to know what to do. Fleming is from the grassroots and rubs the insiders the wrong way, hence she isn’t even told what is going on. She is intentionally left out of the loop, further proof character is lacking in some (sutton included)
I’m not offended by you other then disappointed you’re drinking the kool aid again. You think just picking Sutton this time will change everything. Just picking Brodkorb, despite his vengeful and angry antics behind the scenes or on the floor of conventions, will change everything. Like somehow giving Ron Carey another chance would change everything.
How’d that work out for us? Are you at least willing to say that Ron Carey has been a complete failure yet? Or will you take the Sutton approach and just not talk about the last 4 years?
I just feel like I’m not communicating well, or you wouldn’t be telling me things that you think I can’t see. You say that the current leadership are “command and control people,” and yet you supported exactly that in the last cycle. What you see as central control I see as the essential leadership, direction-setting, coordination, what have you that the State Party MUST provide. Having all the BPOUs inventing their own wheels and doing their own thing hasn’t exactly worked wonders, you know. If these “good old boys” are nice to me and not to you, perhaps there is a message there.
I’m not supporting Tony Sutton, or anybody else, but neither am I dismissing them, as you are doing. On paper, Sutton has clear advantages in experience. When I have worked with him on platform and other issues, I’ve found him temperamentally well suited and very much concerned with the grassroots of the Party.
I’ve already said I will support the plan, not the man. This Party is in a deep, deep hole not because Ron Carey was in charge, but because we failed as a whole party to do those things we ought to have done. If there is a blame to our leadership, it is for not having a complete and effective battle plan and/or for not implementing it correctly and thoroughly. That is what needs to change, and how we all respond to that is what is going to make the difference, not the individual on the letterhead.
You worry about me because I think that “picking Sutton will change everything.” I can assure you I do not, but my concern for you is that you think that picking “anybody but Sutton” will change everything, and I can assure you THAT is not true, either. Some CDs and BPOUs have already held strategy sessions, but we have not heard from the State Party what their strategy is, nor from the candidates what specific elements, if not the full-fledged details, of their strategy is, either. Most of the candidates have gone around for some time “listening.” Two months out, I think it’s time they started putting that listening to use, and telling us how WE, collectively, can get ‘er done.
It has been 2 years so i may be having trouble recalling the lit pieces, but when was Repya Command and Control? Are you assuming all military vets are command and control? Better yet, wouldn’t a military vet be better at command and control then a fired software salesman?
BPOUs and CDs “inventing their own wheels” and the conservative groups that have popped up recently are doing so out of the vacuum that has been left by the MNGOP. As I said in 2007 we have followship. Carey took the party down the road of following a pollster and the top of the ticket candidate, Coleman in the last election, Pawlenty in the previous.
Wait, didn’t you just say you didn’t even know what the grassroots was? How did Sutton explain that to you?
Leadership matters. You may be willing to give Carey a pass for his terrible “plan” that ending up driving our people away. You may be one of the people who blames them, I’m not. A bigger problem than just our broken apparatus is the refusal to become conservative activists again. The party’s no policy policy killed our motivation and the absolute refusal to hold Republicans accountable (at the highest levels on the ballot) ended up eroding our base. That means less workers and volunteers, and in the end some votes.
If the choice is more of the same or something different, you had to choose something different in 2007. That was the choice: FAILURE or different. I chose different, you chose the FAILURE. FAILURE WON. Great job Jerry.
The problem I see with your logic of listening is that you are trusting someone who is a career political bureaucrat will actually follow through on his promises. Sounds a heck of a lot like Ron Carey to me. Now that was good enough for you, it ain’t for me.
You may be willing to have a guy who is going to be controlled by the good old boys, who owes the powerbrokers, who has been in top levels of this party for decades. I am not. If the choice was Carey or Sutton…… well it isn’t. The choice is a guy who has been on the inside of the exclusive and command and control inside of the party for decades and someone who has been an activist or office holder.
Frankly the later has a hell of a lot more experience in the grassroots then someone who has to wear a suit. I know, I know, you’re willing to trust that Sutton won’t be like he was and will clean up the corruption in the party staff, I don’t. He’s been there while all the divisive policies and people have torn this party apart and refused to let the grassroots even talk to each other.
Therefore, I can’t vote for Sutton when there are other alternatives who bring something to the argument he cannot. They’ve done someone in the conservative movement besides working for the party or a candidate.
Thanks for the good over view Andy.
I agree that Sutton is an “Inside” man that could have affected change if he had wanted to.
Dave Thompson is a breath of fresh air and has clearly demonstrated his values & principles on radio and on TV.
Dorothy Fleming was the only one with a finger on the pulse of our grassroots. She was the only Exec that was approachable. She listens and understands what needs to be done from an “outside-in” perspective.
Ed Mathews has grown a lot as a candidate in the 4th CD and has the legal & accounting experience as well as values & principles to represent us well.
We now have some good candidates to represent us!