Nonprofit, nonpartisan journalism. Supported by readers.

Donate

Secretary of State challenger Dan Severson declares ‘war’ for fall election

Dan Severson, a state rep from Sauk Rapids, wore his old Navy flight jacket as he stepped to the podium and gave a rousing speech as to why he must be the next secretary of state of Minnesota.

“If there’s any question, we’re at war,” he said. “War for democracy. War for the values our party stands for. … Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

Severson, unopposed at this convention, not only won endorsement but received big cheers as he questioned the integrity of current Secretary of State Mark Ritchie.

Severson said that photo ID will be the No. 1 issue of the campaign.

“That was a bad election in 2008,” he said.

After winning endorsement by acclamation, Severson compared his situation to the days when he was in his fighter pilot, ready to hit the sky. His plane was equipped with bombs, missiles and cannon.

“But we needed fuel,” he said, noting that his campaign needs to be fueled by money.

Severson was introduced to the crowd by Rep. Mary Kiffmeyer, who was defeated by Ritchie four years ago.

“Let me say two words about the importance of the office of secretary of state — Coleman-Franken,’’ she said. “With his military background, he knows how to protect our ballots.”

Comments (1)

  1. Submitted by Greg Kapphahn on 04/30/2010 - 09:27 am.

    He knows how to protect “our” ballots? I can’t help but suspect that her “our” includes only the types of people represented in the convention hall.

    No doubt Ms. Kiffmeyer is envisioning the National Guard setting up military checkpoints at all polling places for the purpose of making sure as few legitimate-but-poor and disadvantaged people as possible vote, and making sure those with financial means vote early and often.

    If disenfranchising large numbers of qualified voters doesn’t prove to be enough to produce the desired result, the Guard can, of course, bring the voting machines directly to central locations where the results can be altered to create the outcome that, in the eyes of “The Party,” should have been produced.

Leave a Reply