Go to HHH home page.
Smart Politics
 


26 Days and Counting: Why Norm Coleman Isn't Talking 2010

Bookmark and Share

When former U.S. Senator Norm Coleman ended his 2008 election battle last month, he surprised many journalists by answering the inevitable question about whether he would run for governor with a more detailed answer than expected.

Coleman first stated on June 30th that he would leave decisions as to his future plans "to another day," but then revisited the subject later in the press conference by stating he expected to make an announcement shortly after the July 4th weekend ("Sometime next week I presume I'll be talking a little bit about what the future is.").

That proclamation came 26 days ago.

To date, we have no answer and Coleman currently is described by pundits as a "potential candidate" or one who "has not ruled out running."

But the delay by Coleman to provide any resolution on his 2010 plans is not surprising. It is politically shrewd.

If Coleman is at all serious in making another gubernatorial run, there are many strategic reasons for him to put as much space as possible between his failed 2008 Senate reelection bid and the announcement of his 2010 campaign. Coleman has long been tagged with the label of a 'professional politician,' and announcing a run for governor within a few weeks after losing his Senate seat would give the appearance of desperation.

Moreover, Coleman asked a lot of his supporters during the preceding months, raising several millions of dollars during his reelection bid and recount efforts. While few doubt Coleman would be able to fundraise competitively should he run for governor, launching a gubernatorial campaign mere weeks after his Senate bid ended would not be the most prudent way to re-approach donors and kick off a fundraising campaign.

Thirdly, with centrist Republican Jim Ramstad now officially out of the 2010 picture, Coleman can bide his time knowing he would be, by far, the biggest name in the race for the Republican Party endorsement and primary run. Coleman, who legislated as a moderate the last four years of his term in Washington, D.C., also would now have virtually no competition from the left side of the party.

Fourthly, in an effort to shed the 'professional politician' moniker to the greatest extent possible, it is in Coleman's interest to make it seem as if he is being 'recruited' to run for governor. Making a quick announcement mere weeks after the Minnesota Supreme Court decision would give the appearance that Coleman had planned all along to run for governor during the recount as part of a careerist back up plan. Waiting a few months will give Coleman the time to wait and see if any grassroots "Run Norm Run" websites pop up to give more legitimacy to another statewide campaign.

Those are the upsides to waiting. There are, of course, a few downsides.

If Coleman waits too long, he runs the risk that the campaign of one of his potential GOP competitors will catch fire. An earlier entrance by Coleman has a greater chance of "clearing the field."

A late-entry swoop by Coleman also has the potential downside of creating antagonism among the growing field of Republican candidates who would have invested significant time and political capital in their campaigns during the intervening months. But should Coleman run and win, and thus deny the DFL a seat in the Governor's mansion for the sixth consecutive election, almost all will be forgiven.

Coleman's toughest decision, however, is not when to announce, but what to announce. If Coleman fatigue is deeper or lasts longer than supporters of a Coleman gubernatorial campaign suspect, losing a third statewide election in twelve years would likely spell the end of Coleman's political career.

If Coleman wants to hold an elite political office one more time, he thus must decide whether his best dice roll is to run for Governor in 2010, or to seem aloof from the political process during the coming years, and then reemerge to seek a rematch against Senator Al Franken in 2014. (For Coleman will certainly not challenge popular DFLer Amy Klobuchar in 2012).

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Previous post: The Honeymoon Is Over: Obama Approval Rating Drops to 51 Percent in Minnesota
Next post: Unemployment Continues to Rise at Historic Pace Across Upper Midwest

1 Comment


  • There is no way I want Coleman to run for Governor! There is not way that I would forgive him if he ran and won the Governor's race. I don't want Coleman as Governor, it would be like having DFL Light in the Gov. office, just like we had when he was our Senator. Coleman should quit, stay out of politics, get a real job! I will fight tooth and nail to keep Coleman out of this Gov. race. Coleman demonstrated during his 6 yr term as senator that he was not a true Republican, that's why the election was so close, that's why we had to go through this recount and that's why we now have Senator Al Franken!! If Coleman was truly a Republican, he would have voted like one during his term and he'd still be in office.

  • Leave a comment


    Remains of the Data

    Is There a Presidential Drag On Gubernatorial Elections?

    Only five of the 20 presidents to serve since 1900 have seen their party win a majority of gubernatorial elections during their administrations, and only one since JFK.

    Political Crumbs

    Strike Three for Miller-Meeks

    Iowa Republicans had a banner day on November 4th, picking up both a U.S. Senate seat and one U.S. House seat, but Mariannette Miller-Meeks' defeat in her third attempt to oust Democrat Dave Loebsack in the 2nd CD means the GOP will not have a monopoly on the state's congressional delegation in the 114th Congress. The loss by Miller-Meeks (following up her defeats in 2008 and 2010) means major party nominees who lost their first two Iowa U.S. House races are now 0 for 10 the third time around in Iowa history. Miller-Meeks joins Democrat William Leffingwell (1858, 1868, 1870), Democrat Anthony Van Wagenen (1894, 1912 (special), 1912), Democrat James Murtagh (1906, 1914, 1916), Democrat Clair Williams (1944, 1946, 1952), Democrat Steven Carter (1948, 1950, 1956), Republican Don Mahon (1966, 1968, 1970), Republican Tom Riley (1968, 1974, 1976), Democrat Eric Tabor (1986, 1988, 1990), and Democrat Bill Gluba (1982, 1988, 2004) on the Hawkeye State's Three Strikes list.


    Larry Pressler Wins the Silver

    Larry Pressler may have fallen short in his long-shot, underfunded, and understaffed bid to return to the nation's upper legislative chamber, but he did end up notching the best showing for a non-major party South Dakota U.S. Senate candidate in more than 90 years. Pressler won 17.1 percent of the vote which is the best showing for an independent or third party U.S. Senate candidate in the state since 1920 when non-partisan candidate Tom Ayres won 24.1 percent in a race won by Republican Peter Norbeck. Overall, Pressler's 17.1 percent is good for the second best mark for a non-major party candidate across the 35 U.S. Senate contests in South Dakota history. Independent and third party candidates have appeared on the South Dakota U.S. Senate ballot just 25 times over the last century and only three have reached double digits: Pressler in 2014 and Ayres in 1920 and 1924 (12.1 percent). Pressler's defeat means he won't become the oldest candidate elected to the chamber in South Dakota history nor notch the record for the longest gap in service in the direct election era.


    more POLITICAL CRUMBS

    Humphrey School Sites
    CSPG
    Humphrey New Media Hub

    Issues />

<div id=
    Abortion
    Afghanistan
    Budget and taxes
    Campaign finances
    Crime and punishment
    Economy and jobs
    Education
    Energy
    Environment
    Foreign affairs
    Gender
    Health
    Housing
    Ideology
    Immigration
    Iraq
    Media
    Military
    Partisanship
    Race and ethnicity
    Reapportionment
    Redistricting
    Religion
    Sexuality
    Sports
    Terrorism
    Third parties
    Transportation
    Voting