Perhaps I missed this reported elsewhere, but Secretary of State Mark Ritchie told the Red Wing Republican Eagle’s Mike Longaecker that he will not seek the DFL gubernatorial nod in 2010.
According to Longaecker, Ritchie even has a bit of work to do if he wants to run for re-election:
Ritchie said he will lobby his wife for a second term in office, but rejected the idea of seeking higher office, noting some have urged a gubernatorial run.
“I’ve been pretty resistant to that,” he said, adding he prefers his current post, which Ritchie said “allows me to focus on the democracy itself.”
As everyone knows, the gubernatorial field is crowded, though thanks to the U.S. Senate recount, Ritchie has a higher profile than most potential opponents. He would be well-positioned among lefty delegates, but fund-raising would be a challenge, and a drag.
Conversely, unless next year is a huge one for Republicans, Ritchie would be a significant favorite for a second Secretary of State term given Democrats’ and independents’ general satisfaction with how he handled the recount.
Perhaps Richie remembers what some of his fans don’t–that he was lucky to get off with a slap on the wrist from the legislative auditor when he could have got a felony conviction and fine for turning the SoS office into a fundraising arm of the DFL.
Wilford, with all due respect, I think only a distinct minority of partisans will regard that one as a deal-breaker.
After all, if Tim Pawlenty’s $100,000 fine for campaign finance violations in 2002 didn’t derail his career, Mark’s non-charge, non-fine is probably not a career-killer.
Wilford, me and others also remember that Ritchie lied about his misuse of office, twice, and in writing.
What is worse? Immediately breaking his #1 campaign platform (he was all about removing politics from the SOS, remember?), or following it up with a lie?
We know that most Democrat voters don’t think that lying is a big deal, heck it’s almost become a prerequisite for endorsement. But I wonder if they are really ready to stand up for blatant hypocrisy.
“We know that most Democrat voters don’t think that lying is a big deal, heck it’s almost become a prerequisite for endorsement. But I wonder if they are really ready to stand up for blatant hypocrisy.”
Of course DemocratIC voters think lying is a big deal and and we stand up against hyposcrisy. That’s why we’re not Republicans. Did I say “Republicans”? Sorry, I should have thought of some silly name-calling to engage in.
But go ahead and try to make something out of Ritchie’s one mistake if you can. We’ll just remind voters of how Kiffmeyer ran the office.