The Radio Equalizer: Brian Maloney

20 December 2006

Al Franken's Likely US Senate Run


Measuring Franken's Minnesota Chances

Now that the curtain has almost certainly closed on Al Franken's talk radio career, the big question is what will become of the exiting Air America Radio host, author and alleged comedian.

Conventional wisdom has it that his US Senate run from Minnesota is a near certainty, but is there a Plan B?

We still believe he would prefer the relative income stability of a cable talk show to the risky nature of running for office.

But he's behaved like a candidate for so long that it's simply hard to ignore the elephant (or donkey) in the room.

So what are his chances of victory in Minnesota? At the non- partisan National Journal, analyst Chuck Todd believes that Franken's presence in the race could actually help the otherwise endangered GOP incumbent, Senator Norm Coleman.

How could that happen? Here's his reasoning:

Minnesota (Republican Norm Coleman): Sen.-elect Amy Klobuchar's 20-point blowout win is encouraging to Democrats and worrisome to Republicans. But Democrats would have to be very lucky to avoid a fierce primary for a second cycle in a row.

And Coleman's secret weapon could be Al Franken. If the comedian runs, he's not going to clear the primary field. There are a lot of Democrats who sat out '06 in favor of Klobuchar (like millionaire trial lawyer Mike Ciresi) who probably won't do that again. Franken's presence raises the profile of the race and benefits Coleman financially.

In other words, Franken can't expect a free ride from fellow Democrats, who may have their own ideas about who should take on Coleman.

On the other hand, Franken has played politics much better than he ever performed on talk radio, successfully raising money for his Midwest Values PAC and handing out cash to key Democrat candidates in the region. Quite a few people are going to owe Stuart a favor or two.

But will that be enough to secure the nomination, much less beat Coleman? We shall soon find out.

Franken PAC: David A Lunde

Looking for gift ideas? Your Amazon orders that begin with clicks here, regardless of what you ultimately select for purchase, greatly help to support this site's efforts. Thanks again!

Technorati tags:


  • For the answer to your question, I would consult the campaign of Senator Steele of Maryland.


    Never mind...

    By Blogger SierraSpartan, at 21 December, 2006 00:21  

  • Your spin on Al Franken's career is so bizarre. It's like you're chewing on his ankles as he goes from success to success.

    His show has been great: intelligent talkers speaking in an intelligent way about important things. We're not talking about the misleading lies of Rush Limbaugh or the strange, sycophantic ravings of Sean Hannity so loved by you, which, I guess, by your standards pass for good talk radio. If you have a brain in your head, Al Franken's shows have been great. And I speak as someone who doesn't particularly agree with his moderate opinions. (Which is another story:
    Why are you so obsessed with a person who is really quite moderate? What is this Jacobin attack on the middle about?)

    Fact is he will probably be Minnesota's next senator, and you're acting like that's a failure. I don't think so.

    This is lunatic stuff you're putting out there—only for the Kool-Aid drinkers who support Bush as he drives the whole country (deficits, superstitious attacks on science, Iraq etc.) into some weird Jonestown-style apocalypse.

    By Blogger John, at 21 December, 2006 00:28  

  • Metro,

    Al Franken/AAR obsession is Maloney's niche. Just like there is some right-wing moron whose niche is recapping Olbermanns newscasts with snarkasm.

    I am curious. Are there blogs run by liberals that focus only on Conservative media figures that are updated daily AND have more than 1,500 hits a day?

    By Blogger none, at 21 December, 2006 01:39  

  • You know the liberal media and blogs are NOT going to dig out the corruption of lefties like Fanken, Berger or the CLintons to name a few.

    In fact, there is no integrity on the left at all. I'm calling you bums out:

    I don't think there is a shred of honesty on the left and that especially includes elmonica, hash, MOP, and the other lefties that post here.

    By Blogger PCD, at 21 December, 2006 07:50  

  • PCD, still drooling about Sandi Berger
    HYSTERICAL; PCD, what corruption frpm Franken? You are insane, Franken corruption!!! A laugh riot

    HERE IS SOME REAL CORRUPTION, HACK. Instead of shrieking like a litte sissy about Franken (hysterical) or Berger(lameeeeeeeeeee, right wing conspiracy) take a look at what your Bush administration is doing with our TAX dollars. You sick, degenerate mentally sick sociopathic "R" over America FLUNKIE


    WASHINGTON — The Pentagon is still struggling to get a handle on the unprecedented number of contractors now helping run the nation's wars and losing millions of dollars because it is unable to monitor industry workers stationed in far-flung locations, according to a congressional report.
    The investigation by the Government Accountability Office, which released the report Tuesday, found that the Defense Department's inability to manage contractors effectively has hurt military operations and unit morale and cost the Pentagon money.
    According to the report, some 60,000 contractors are supporting the Army in Southwest Asia, a region that includes Iraq.
    That figure is compared to the 9,200 contractors used to support the military in the 1991 Gulf War.
    This unprecedented number of contractors on the battlefield means loss of visibility, said the GAO, the investigative arm of Congress.
    Commanders are often unsure how many contractors use their bases and require food, housing and protection, according to the report.
    One Army official estimated the service loses about $43 million each year on free meals provided to contractors, who also receive a food allowance.
    The military does not have enough personnel devoted to overseeing the implementation of contracts, the GAO found.
    In one case, a single person was assigned to monitor compliance of a contract at 27 installations throughout Iraq in just a six-month tour.
    In response to the report, the Pentagon said it agreed with the GAO's findings that the military should implement a database of contractors and appoint a senior-level office dedicated to improving contractor management.
    Contractors are used in battle zones to do nearly everything but fight. They run cafeterias and laundries for troops, transport supplies, run communication systems and fix weapon systems.
    Outsourcing such tasks has been seen as much more efficient, leaving troops trained in combat to the business of war.
    But since the war in Iraq began in spring 2003, battlefield contractors also have become associated with allegations of fraud and abuse.
    A special inspector general office focused solely on reconstruction spending in Iraq has prompted four criminal convictions.
    Democrats say they plan next year to ramp up oversight of the billions of dollars being spent in Iraq, including money awarded to contractors.

    By Blogger Minister of Propaganda, at 21 December, 2006 10:46  

  • MOP,

    You are a blind degenerate. Franken was in on the Rape of the Gloria Wise Boys and Girls club. He signed legal papers which the Smoking Gun published.

    MOP, sad, dementded representative of the DNC far left.

    By Blogger PCD, at 21 December, 2006 11:41  

  • While there appears to be merit in oversight, the problems of too much oversight in military hardware acquisitions programs has been evident for years, dramatically driving up costs with no increase in efficiency. It's a problem the military has been dealing with for years, and so far no one has come close to finding a satisfactory solution, or a way to balance oversight with the pressing need to control costs caused by too much oversight.

    In any event, the idea of having civilian contractors doing the "non-military" duties so that soldiers in our volunteer military can focus on the real business of soldiering may have made sense on paper, but it appears that it's been fraught with difficulties in practice. One can certainly understand why the military, which undertakes the expense of training individuals to be professional soldiers, would not want its personnell engaged in kp duty. On the other hand, it really makes you wonder if anyone is minding the store!

    As an aside, and I'm probably pissing in the wind here, but some of the people who are posting should understand that they will never be able to convince anyone of the worthiness of their arguments by stringing out invectives - it's downright juvenile and counterproductive, and actually draws attention away from the point that's being made (if there is a point in some of these comments). And, this for the mediator, it disinvites comments, rather than the reverse.

    By Blogger thinkcon, at 21 December, 2006 17:06  

  • Let's see, on the one hand, 600,000 dead (including some 3000 U.S. soldiers) in an illegal war brought into existence by lies and accompanied by the obscene war profiteering.

    On the oher, "the Rape [sic] of the Gloria Wise Boys and Girls Club?" Did I read that right?

    What planet are you from, pdc?

    By Blogger John, at 21 December, 2006 20:06  

  • No knowledge of Co-op City...

    No understanding of the real world.

    Neoconservatism's legacy (with oceans of innocent's blood, and taxpayer money funneled to Paraguay, for good measure)....

    By Blogger hashfanatic, at 21 December, 2006 23:01  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Page Rank Checker

Powered by Blogger