Idle thought: If I’m Franken, do I press Coleman on Bachmann in a TV ad?

If Michele Bachmann is losing her own highly Republican district right now, she has to be far less popular in the rest of the state, right?

So wouldn’t it make sense for Al Franken to tie Norm Coleman more closely to Bachmann?

As far as I know, Coleman has mildly disavowed Bachmann’s Barack Obama “anti-American” evaluation. I assume Norm still supports Michele’s re-election — perhaps Franken (or a surrogate) could say, “Norm, if you really believe in bipartisanship, shouldn’t you unendorse the most McCarthyite members of your party? That would send a real message.”

Of course, Norm could simply look at the author of “Lying Liars,” and say, “bipartisanship — that’s rich!”

But as the two recent polls indicate, independents regard Bachmann as poison, so there’s hay here even for DFLers not named Tinklenberg. Maybe mailers about the Coleman-Bachmann ticket?

You can also learn about all our free newsletter options.

Comments (2)

  1. Submitted by Annalise Cudahy on 10/24/2008 - 11:43 am.

    He could get away with it only if they have a video of a direct link. However, the way it’s going down now might be enough to lift Franken. Coleman needs to win big in MN6, but that’s harder to do if Bachman is in trouble.

    Polls suggest that Barkley’s support comes almost entirely at the expense of Coleman, meaning that independents are leaving Coleman behind on their own. If you can tie Coleman to Bachman well, it’s worth doing, but if not it’s probably best to let people make their own conclusion rather than upset the independents with more bickering.

  2. Submitted by Mike Keliher on 10/24/2008 - 12:56 pm.

    To answer the question in your headline: Maybe, if all he’s interested in is winning. I, however, naively hope to see more and more candidates for office interested in principles than votes.

    An absurd hope, I know.

    But on principle, pinning this Bachmann thing on Coleman is, well, without principle. It’s just a ploy for votes. Has nothing to do with “getting things done,” protecting people’s interests or the nations needs, etc.

Leave a Reply