Nonprofit, nonpartisan journalism. Supported by readers.


Walz-Demmer update and upclean

I know, “upclean” isn’t a word. But I am both updating and cleaning up some things from yesterday’s post about the race for Congress in the First District.

I said there was no public polling in the race, but I was wrong. Rochester TV-station KAAL did commission a SurveyUSA Poll on the race and it showed Walz ahead 47-42. The results are six days old. If that’s the state of the race, you can understand why both the NRCC and the DCCC are advertising there.

On the other hand, Politico acquired an internal poll taken early this week for the Walz campaign that shows Walz ahead 50-34. If that’s right, the Repubs will have to look elsewhere. But outsiders relying on internal polls is dangerous if only because the insiders release them only when they know it will help them.

I also said yesterday that I wasn’t sure whether Demmer disputes the Walz and DCCC ads that state that Demmer favors privatizaton of Social Security. I had a good talk about it last night with Demmer campaign manager Jason Flohrs. As long as you are sure to note that it is only a partial privatization (similar to the Bush plan of 2005) and as long as you make clear that such a plan would reaffirm the current level of promised benefits for those at or near retirement (cutoff age maybe in the range of 55 or so), then yes, Demmer does favor the idea.

PoliGraph looked at the earlier Walz ad on Demmer’s Social Security position and rated it false both because they felt it implied that current seniors could lose benefits and because it said that Demmer had a “plan” to privatize Social Security, when in fact he has no “plan,” only a favorable view of the idea.

(I should note that the same Poligraph piece also found Demmer’s then-current ad “false” for claiming that Walz’ vote for the stimulus bill helped create jobs in China with U.S. taxpayer money. Not so, says Poligraph.)

But the main point here is to clarify that while Demmer has never embraced a detailed “plan” to partially privatize Social Security, and he would favor such a plan only as an “option” and only for younger workers, he nonetheless, like many Republicans, favors the general idea.

No comments yet

Leave a Reply