Pawlenty’s Problem: Why the Former Minnesota Governor’s Presidential Campaign is Faltering

Tim Pawlenty has made it clear he wants to be president. Unfortunately for him, despite repeated trips to Iowa, New Hampshire, and other early caucus-primary states, he remains low in the polls, often hovering below undecided or “don’t know” among the GOP polled about their 2012 presidential preferences. These continued low poll numbers and name recognition become evermore worrisome for Pawlenty with the Iowa caucuses merely one year from now.

But what explains his persistent low poll numbers? There are many reasons. The most recent being him becoming the "other Minnesotan” running for president, being eclipsed by Michelle Bachmann in terms of buzz and excitement.

Yet the core reason for Pawlenty’s lack of success is simple–he lacks a narrative.

I have written often about the importance of a narrative in politics. Political narratives are stories you tell about yourself that define who you are, what your vision of the world is, and what you hope to accomplish if elected to office. The narrative is what defines you as unique. Narratives are selling points for candidates similar to story lines for products being sold (sales pitches) or the arguments made when doing fund raising. This is why I argue that candidates are like selling beer. Budweiser tells a good story about its product, why you should drink it, and what kind of person you are if you consume its product.

Political narratives are powerful rhetorical devices. They move voters and set candidates apart from others. In 2008 Obama had a narrative about change, a story about himself as the embodiment of the American dream. In 1980 Reagan told a story about personal initiative, self-reliance, and government, and in 1960 JFK told of a country facing new challenges in a cold war and Sputnik era. All successful candidates have narratives.

Pawlenty’s problem all along has been the missing narrative. The best way to describe this comes from a recent chart that the New York Times constructed (February 4, 2011) that graphically depicted the major GOP contenders along two dimensions–moderate/conservative and inside/outsider. According to the graph, Pawlenty is dead in the center. He is neither insider nor outsider, moderate nor liberal.

For Pawlenty this placement might suggest perfect placement. He is dead center. This may be true, but I think another interpretation is possible. Pawlenty is not the first choice of anyone, he is the second or third (or fourth or lower) choice for most. He is the default candidate behind everyone else. He is not preferred by anyone as their first choice, and he is stuck behind the other first choices of Romney, Huckabee, Palin, and yes, even Bachmann. As Leo Durocher once said: “Coming in second is like kissing your sister.” There is no thrill or excitement here, and that is Pawlenty’s problem.

Pawlenty is a derivative candidate. He has yet to carve out a narrative that distinguishes himself from the other more famous candidates running. He is thus far a boring, bland, GOP governor from somewhere in the upper Midwest; a candidate who never won a majority of the votes as governor.

Pawlenty has tried several narratives for the last couple of years but none seem to work. He is against taxes but so are other candidates. He opposes abortion and same-sex marriage, but so do others. He in so many ways has run for president on the narrative “Me too” when referring to his positions that ape his more famous competitors. Pawlenty has simply failed to carve out a distinct set of political views that distinguish him from the pack.

On top of that, Pawlenty cannot fill in his narrative with his record in office. Maybe he can say no tax increases for eight years, but he left the state with a fiscal mess that is not good. He cannot point to a major turnaround in schools, and he has no other real accomplishments he can point to. A bridge collapsed under his watch and he lost the unallotment case. There is also no evidence of coattails with his victories and instead, he may owe his election to Paul Wellstone’s plane crash in 2002 and the huge turnout for Michelle Bachmann in 2006 that gave him the winning edges.

The personal story of Pawlenty is not really compelling. Yes blue collar roots to governor. At one time he tried the “I am the Sam’s Club Republican.” That did not work either. It is also not working on the book tour. A tour, by the way, following in the path of all other candidates who sort of write a book and go on tour. Again, his tour is derivative of Palin’s right down to the cover design. Finally, few can say that Pawlenty is a compelling or electric speaker compared to a Palin or Bachmann.

Overall, Pawlenty’s problem is the missing narrative. He has tried several and they are not compelling. He has very little time to find one and I doubt it will happen. Iowa is one year away. He needs a good story now and he cannot find one. Without it, he will remain in the center of the GOP chart, no one’s first choice.

Obama, Bachmann, and the End of the GOP

Is the Republican party ready to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory? Several events this week suggest that may be the case.

Obama and the State of the Union
The State of the Union speech is a misnomer. One would think a state of the union speech really to be one that discusses, well, the state of the union. Instead, the speeches have become a state of the presidency with Obama this week continuing the fine tradition of using the speech to discuss his presidency and what he wants to do. In this case, the speech was effectively the launching of his 2012 presidential campaign as he tried out his new narrative.

Think about how far Obama has moved since Election Day last year. The GOP were giddy with their victories, viewing them as a referendum on Obama. His approvals were in the mid 40s, the Dems lost the swings in the elections, and it looked for certain that 2011 would begin the end for Obama. But Obama responded. He struck a tax deal with the GOP and they then gave in on everything else. He gave a great Tucson speech, he changed his economic team, brought in more pro Wall Street toadies, and now suddenly he is over 50% in approval ratings again. The state of the presidency speech that he gave the other day was part of the rehabilitation and relaunching of his presidency and so far he is doing well in preparing for 2012.

The speech was flat. He trotted out no new ideas. I described it as JFK meets Ronald Reagan. It was Sputnik meets morning in America. (Although I wonder how many of his supporters know what Sputnik was or what the Sputnik moment metaphor or analogy meant). Obama told a good story about the future and he crafted a nice narrative that hit all the themes he resonated in 2008. He said nothing new but did it in a language that seemed to appeal to many.

Never mind that Obama did not address two critical issues–the continued depressed housing market and foreclosures, and the continued high unemployment rate. Both were ignored. Moreover, what also eluded him was the economic consequence of his tax deal with the GOP–a hemorrhaging budget deficit that will grow to $2 trillion in a few years.

A Divided GOP?
But Obama was lucky. The GOP have so far played it badly in taking over the House. They have voted to repeal the health care reform and they make noise about the deficit, but they have no constructive ideas about how to replace the former and deal with the latter. They remain stuck as the party of "no." It remains a narrative of opposition, but not one of construction. The narrative of change they used in 2010 to gain power has not become a narrative of governance.

Additionally, Obama’s real luck is that the GOP is divided. Wisconsin Representative Ryan gave the official response–it was even more flat than Obama’s. But no one is talking about Ryan–it was Bachmann’s response that captured all the headlines. Yes others will discuss her challenges when it comes to facts about American history or her Tammy Faye Baker makeup, but the real issue is how yet again she upstaged her own party to trumpet herself. If I were the GOP I would be so angry with her, yet they are also dependent on her and her Tea Party followers for support. It is a dysfunctional relationship ready to get worse. How?


Bachmann’s Third Party Bid for President?


If Bachmann runs for president, think about two possibilities. One is she runs as a GOP and does well in garnering support in Iowa. In an early caucus state with a crowded field, victory goes to those who can best organize and bring people out on caucus night. Clinton learned that the hard way in '08 as Obama the community organizer did well. It does not take more than 25% or so to win Iowa. Tea Party activists will come out in 2012 for her and Bachmann could do well.

But what if Bachmann decides to bolt the GOP and run as a third party Tea party candidate? This is not a nutty idea. Given her relationship with the party, her “in it for herself approach,” and the ideological gulf, it could happen. If it does, the GOP is split and Obama is definitely the winner. Remember 1912? Forget Palin as going rogue, it is Bachmann.

But does Bachmann really plan to run for president? One thought is that this is a way to raise a profile and prepare to challenge Franken 2014. Another thought is a run for president, even if it fails, raises her value as a commentator on Fox or more likely CNN. Why CNN? They need her more than Fox to capture conservatives to watch.

Overall, a Bachmann campaign will overshadow the GOP, reinforce Obama’s centrist image, and insure he wins again.

A Pawlenty Deathwatch


AP reports Pawlenty’s PAC is almost broke. This means either he is winding it down as he prepares to create a presidential exploratory committee (as Pawlenty might spin it) or that his lack of money demonstrates a lack of support for him as the “other Minnesota Republican running for president.” Pawlenty will not be part of that crowded Iowa GOP field, at least not at the top of the crowd.

UPDATE
Minnesota's 2012 Presidential Hopefuls in the Spotlight
Click here to see the KARE11 Sunrise segment about Pawlenty and Bachmann's presidential pursuits.

Pawlenty, Palin, Podcasts, and Presidential Politics

Pawlenty
There is a great old line from the television show Hee Haw that went: “If it were not for bad luck I’d have no luck at all.” This describes the last two weeks Tim Pawlenty has had.

Last week just as he was ready to start his book tour (aka presidential campaign) Michele Bachmann declares her interest in running for the presidency. Pawlenty becomes the other Minnesotan running for president and he is displaced in the news cycle by her.

Now this week he is eclipsed by the events in Tucson. Yes, he did a National Press Club appearance but in reality, who will remember. He was the third, fourth, or perhaps the fifth story of the week, well behind the events and collateral damage and stories that unfolded around him. Moreover, when he did get a chance to talk, the questions were about his views on Tucson, not on his narrative and agenda. In short, Pawlenty had little time to message, tell his narrative, and make his case for being a presidential candidate.

However, even without these two events, his chances were slim. Consistently I have stated that he has little chance of being a serious candidate for the presidency. I also said that two years ago when I said he had no prayer as McCain’s VP. Why? Simply, Pawlenty has no buzz and no originality. Pawlenty is a “me too’ candidate. Others talk about tax cuts, social conservatism, or what have you, and Pawlenty does the same. Palin does a book, Pawlenty does a book. Romney touts his skills as a pro-business governor, Pawlenty touts his skills as a pro-business governor. Pawlenty is always behind others, never able to find a message or theme that lets him stand out from others. Instead, he seems to a candidate in search of a message, a voice, an appeal. He stands below undecideds among GOPers.

Pawlenty’s time is running out. Think of this. The Iowa caucuses are in February, 2012–barely 13 months away. If Pawlenty is to be a viable presidential candidate he needs to be a serious candidate by the fall, 2011. This means that by the beginning of the summer he needs to catch fire. That is barely six months. His book tour is a fizzle. He is no longer governor and cannot milk that for media time. He is competing against others for money and attention. It will probably be weeks before Tucson and other major news items fade before he has a window to get attention. But it will be under the shadow of “Will she or won’t she” for both Bachmann and Palin.

Pawlenty also faces one final problem. He cannot criticize other GOP without burning bridges. With that, the events of Tucson have changed the political dialogue–everyone but Palin understands this. Pawlenty cannot go on the attack without risking backlash.

No, in the end, Pawlenty has had bad luck, but that only ices the dismal chances he has in running for president. He exited the state with it in worse debt that when he arrived. Maybe he did not raise taxes directly, but at what cost? A state in debt, a K-12 system recently ranked by Education Weekly as mediocre, and a crumbling infrastructure. Pawlenty has no real accomplishment to stand on.

Palin
Palin may be correct that blaming her for Tucson is wrong. But it does not matter that she did not pull the trigger herself. No one really believes her crosshairs over Giffords and others were not gun scopes. Her Facebook speech denouncing critics with invective and inflammatory language only reinforced impressions that she has the subtlety of a machine gun. She demonstrated not one iota of reflection that her style of rhetoric was inappropriate, at least this week, and that a vast spectrum of moderate and swing voters do think the caustic dialogue in America created the atmosphere for Tucson. It does not matter whether this is true–this is what the people think. Palin may have endeared herself to her hardcore supporters, but to the voters she needs to woo if she runs in 2012, she failed to reach them and reinforced the image of her as unqualified to be president.

Boehner and Obama
Unlike Palin, both John Boehner and Barack Obama understood the political climate of the day and responded without looking political. Boehner rallied Congress together for a few days and delayed the GOP until next week. Obama gave a masterful speech that caught the sign of the times and the feelings of a nation. He exploited a memorial service in ways that did not look political, contrasting to the Wellstone service back in 2002 that hurt the MN DFL that year, leading to the election of Senator Norm Coleman and Governor Pawlenty. A new rhetoric, at least for now, is what is politically smart. Obama won the respect of many, but especially moderates this week, helping him in his rehabilitation.

How long will the new political environment last? Free speech cannot be held hostage to nuts with guns, but maybe disagreement can stick to heated debate of policy and issues and not personalty. We need not personally attack others to win a battle. Sticks, stones, and names do hurt.

Podcasting about Corporations and American Politics
Last Saturday, I spoke to the Stonearch Discussion Group in Minneapolis about Citizens United and corporate influence in American politics. Here is a podcast of my talk.

The Impact of Citizens United
On Thursday, January 20, from 7 PM – 8:30 PM at Hamline University, East Hall, Room 4, I will be one of several speakers discussing the impact of the Supreme Court decision Citizens United v FEC one year after it was decided.

Please join the Hamline University School of Business, Common Cause Minnesota, the League of Women Voters, and Minnesota MoveOn.org for a discussion on the impact of the Citizens United decision and ways that we can attempt to mitigate its impact on our democracy.

Speakers include:
Professor David Schultz (Me)
Rep. Ryan Winkler, the chief author of the disclosure legislation that passed in 2010
Mike Dean, Executive Director of Common Cause Minnesota
Allie Moen, League of Women Voters

There will be plenty of free parking and good conservation.

9/11 and Hate American Style: Have we no sense of decency?

If July 4 is the American holiday of freedom and independence, 9/11 is rapidly becoming the calendar date for hate and bigotry in the United States.

As we remember 9/11, numerous events are converging in this country. There are the demands by Tea Party activists, members of the Republican Party, and assorted so- called Christians and nativists to prevent Muslims from building a community near Ground Zero. Claims are it is too close. Is too close four blocks, one mile, one state, or not in the United States?

From the sounds of the lunatic minister in Gainsville, Florida, who wanted to declare 9/11 national burn a Koran day, building anywhere in the Christian, God-loving red, white and blue America seems to close.

Then there are those who opposed immigrants and support the punitive Arizona law. There are those who oppose gay marriage. There are those who rallied with Glen Beck asking that we remain a Christian nation and those–including Beck–who question Obama’s faith and patriotism and implicitly his race, and then there are all of those who think the war on terrorism is the 21st Century version of the Crusades.

Hate seems to be everywhere and it is embarrassing. I thought this country was better than that. I thought the Statue of Liberty represented better. As someone who takes pride in a family that came through Ellis Island, I thought it represented better than that. I thought our Constitution, Bill of Rights, and Declaration of Independence stood for something better than that.

Unfortunately, the ugly side of American politics is out again. The side that burned witches at Salem, enslaved the blacks, beat gays at Stonewall, fried the Rosenbergs, and blacklisted many fine Americans during the 50s; all that is back. 9/11 now seems to be the symbol and date for hatred and bigotry in America.

I feel sorry for Obama, he is doing the right thing denouncing those who wish to persecute Islams. But he seems to be alone. Other major Democrats seem silent, perhaps fearing for their jobs in November. Republicans such as Palin, Bachmann, and others in the leadership are not speaking out, instead ranging from silently to overtly egging on this bigotry.

Moreover, the more Obama denounces the bigots, the more he enrages them, convincing them that he is one of them, whomever it is. America seems to be turning into what we despise. We say we fight for freedom against oppression but now we seem as guilty as those whom we oppose. Where is our moral leadership, our sense of decency?

Charles “Chuck” Colson of Watergate fame, now a Christian leader, got it right in an ad in the NY Times the other day: “Burning the Koran does not elevate the Bible.” How is hate and persecution consistent with any Christianity except for that practiced by the Grand Inquisitor and the Spanish Inquisition? To be Christian, as far as I know means more than that.

Raised Catholic during Vatican II the message I learned was one directly from Jesus and the Sermon on the Mount. It was a Christianity of equality and forgiveness, of social justice, and compassion. Where is that spirit now among those who claim to be Christian? The Jesus I learned about would have said that a Christian nation is one that welcomes all, respects all, and treats us all according to the Golden Rule.

Blaming it all on Islam reminds of another movement. They blamed it all on the Jews. Now I know some will say I am being alarmist or doing an injustice to the Holocaust and what Jews faced under Hitler. Ok, without making that parallel, the recent events remind me of a great Monty Python routine where John Cleese portrays a Hitler-like figure who blames all social problems on the bicycle riders! Sound foolish? Of course it does and so do those who are turning 9/11 into a national day of hate.

The McCarthy era ended when Joseph Welch said to the senator: “Have you no sense of decency?” I ask the same and hope that as a nation we have the decency to turn on the bigots.

All Things Gubernatorial

Two gubernatorial stories dominate Minnesota news now. The first is an MPR/Humphrey School poll declaring the race for governor in Minnesota is deadlocked between Dayton and Emmer, while the other story is Governor Pawlenty’s executive order forbidding state agencies from accepting or applying for any discretionary federal health care funds connected to the recently adopted Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

The Poll and the Governor’s Race
The poll of 750 Minnesotans with a margin of error of +/- 5.3% found Emmer and Dayton deadlocked at 34%, with Horner at 13%, another 19% undecided. Standing on its own, the poll suggests a tight race, reporting results similar to what was reported in other surveys a couple of months ago. Yet more recent polls suggested a clear lead for Dayton over Emmer, especially in light of Emmer’s bad campaign, missteps on tips, and other similar issues. Has the race really tightened up again?

There are several reasons to say yes. Emmer was out of the news with no real primary opponent. Additionally, recent debates may have helped him, and the national anger towards Obama may be helping him. Yet this most recent poll raises more questions than they answer.
First, the margin of error of +/- must be kept in mind. The race may not be that close but the polling may mask it. Second, there are serious reasons to question the poll’s accuracy. It reports that among those surveyed, 46% identify as GOP, 41% as DFL, and 13% as Independence Party, leaving only 0% as unaffiliated. I seriously doubt this is an accurate reflection of the party alignment of Minnesota voters.

To start, to say there are no unaffiliated voters in MN is crazy. Other polls have put that number at least in the teens. Second, other estimates, even this year, have given the DFL about 35% of the affiliation and GOP around 30%. This is about my guess of where it is located. I find it unlikely, even in this anti-Obama, and Democratic party year, that GOP affiliation has surpassed the DFL and that it is 46%. My sense is that this poll has way overestimated the GOP strength in the state, thereby questioning the validity of the poll here.

Finally, what the poll also does not tell me is who the undecideds are and where they are leaning. Consistently I have argued that suburban women control the battleground in the state. This poll tells us nothing about the swing voters. Other recent polls have suggested Dayton with clear leads among women and moderates compared to Emmer.

Overall, while I suspect the governor’s race is close, this poll is not very good and there are reasons to question it.

Pawlenty and Federal Health Care Dollars
No surprise. Pawlenty foregoes federal health care money to help out the state. Critics will say it is political expediency to bolster his credentials for a likely presidential run, defenders say he is standing on principle.

Let us assume it is principle. First, principle did not prevent him from accepting money in the past, but then again, that was before he was as serious as he now appears to be in wanting to run for president. Second, there is panic. Pawlenty’s presidential run is going nowhere. He has no momentum and time is running short for him to gain it. Just a few months. Expect Pawlenty to do other dramatic things before he leaves office as final efforts to jolt his presidential bid. Look to see some way to use other executive orders to layoff workers or trim back the state.

But still, let us assume principle and personal conviction that the governor honestly believes the federal law is an impermissible intrusion. The parallel I see here is back to when NY Governor Mario Cuomo, a Roman Catholic, gave a 1984 speech at Notre Dame, seeking to explain how he reconciled his faith with his duties as governor. As a Catholic he noted a Church opposed to abortion, but as governor he had to recognize that not everyone held the same views as him on this issue. He eventually sought to reconcile faith and office by arguing that he had to represent the diversity of views in NY and serve the people first.

There is a parallel here with Pawlenty. He may have personal convictions about the federal law, but his first duty is to the people of the state of Minnesota. He is governor first, presidential candidate and person of personal conviction second. He needs to first honor his commitments to the state, doing what is best for it. Given the health care needs of the state, its budget woes, and other concerns, his personal convictions and public ambitions should take a backseat.

If the issue is taking the money conflicts with his presidential bid, then Pawlenty has a conflict of interest between his official duties to the state and his personal interests. If the issue is one of personal conviction, then he is letting his own personal views dictate public policy and what may be in the best interests of the state. Third, look at the grant that he forbid his health commissioner from pursuing–one to address teen pregnancy. Would not one have thought that an anti-abortion politician would want to acquire funds for this purpose? This makes about as much sense as making Bristol Palin the poster child against teen pregnancy!