The public may be fed up with Norm Coleman’s election contest appeals, but the state’s editorial boards are not.
Two polls released Sunday showed that by landslide margins, Minnesotans want Norm Coleman to concede the U.S. Senate race — now. A Star Tribune poll put the margin at 64-28; the liberal Alliance for a Better Minnesota placed the gap at 59-34. The findings track with a 63-37 “concede now” result in an April 15 Public Policy Polling survey.
But after weekend verdicts from the Morris Sun Tribune and Brainerd Daily Dispatch supporting Coleman’s appeal, just 45 percent of the daily paper editorialists side with the public.
As I’ve written before, editorialists’ penchant for process, rather than partisanship, could fairly explain the collective judgment. But it’s striking that the so-called “liberal media” hasn’t put its finger on the scales of justice to immediately seat Democrat Al Franken.
Of course, some may contend the surveys are biased, and since editorialists and the newsroom are separate at most papers, this says nothing about daily coverage. But on this issue at least — as in the November endorsements — newspapers aren’t doing their supposed liberal overlords any favors.
Quit now, Norm (9)
♦ St. Cloud Times
♦ Worthington Daily Globe
♦ Albert Lea Tribune
♦ Winona Daily News
♦ Faribault Daily News
♦ Owatonna People’s Press
♦ Bemidji Pioneer
♦ Marshall Independent
♦ Minnesota Daily
Stay the course for now, Norm (11)
♦ Star Tribune
♦ Pioneer Press
♦ Duluth News-Tribune
♦ Rochester Post-Bulletin (second item)
♦ Mankato Free Press
♦ West Central Tribune
♦ Crookston Daily Times (with plenty of snark)
♦ New Ulm Journal
♦ Mesabi Daily News (Virginia, Mn.)
♦ Brainerd Daily Dispatch
♦ Morris Sun-Tribune (editorialist column)
Lamely wishy-washy (2)
♦ Fargo-Moorhead Forum
♦ Grand Forks Herald
Unheard-from or unfound (6)
♦ Fairmont Sentinel
♦ Red Wing Republican-Eagle
♦ International Falls Daily Journal
♦ Austin Daily Herald
♦ Fergus Falls Daily Journal
♦ Hibbing Daily Tribune
The Strib and PiPress’ tell is kind of interesting. Any insight whether this is because of the recent changes in the editorial board makeup, or ownership? Or both? Or neither??
Damn the public either way, I guess.
Key word is ‘supposed’.
The unspoken word is ‘advertising income’.
Since newspaper editors in Minnesota are familiar with why the process was not uniform and the general public is not, I’d say the reason for the split is fairly obvious. The real question is how could 45% of the papers, knowing the votes were counted differently in different counties, still think the vote counting problems should not be resolved.