Two screenshots from the "About" sub-page of each campaign's current candidate's website. Click either to enlarge and read. Neither presents the entire page, so check the originals.
Reed here.
Clark here.
Each has a supporter page, neither has an issue page. I prefer less to know what others besides the candidates think, and to know more what each candidate is willing to present as what she thinks - as an issues position posting - which each so far avoids. I am not a lemming following others. I want each individual to define herself.
Most certainly their common foe, Michele Bachmann, has defined who she is - her issue being ACORN, and not what, if anything, over her several years in DC she has done for the district.
And instead of any real issues showing from Bachmann, we have her directly displaying how she's repeatedly abused the franking privilege; on her Congressional website showing the slick mailings she's freely distributed at the public's expense - made by PR hacks for the benefit of a political hack. Enlarge them. Have a look at where your taxes are going under the Michele Bachmann stewardship. To promoting Michele Bachmann. Enjoy. It's your money, not hers.
Judge for yourselves if this meets the Bachmann Challenge. We're still waiting. There must be something?
It's been years. Are there any takers yet, on the Bachmann Challenge?
What has that profligate spender of funds on promotional mailings done for the district? Have a look at her slick product. Find a major accomplishment, a major in district project she is responsible for causing, a major piece of legislation she has gotten through the legislative process - and take it all the way back to her earlier days in DC when her party held a majority and she was busy kissing Bush in the aisles of Congress - for what, beyond publicity.
She has been little but a publicity monger, of the worse sort, seeking publicity of any sort, from any source, in ways Britney Spears might envy.
If it gets her name recognition, a headline - hey, it beats doing work, doing the job for the paycheck. That's for chumps, not for Michele Bachmann - she only gets chumps to vote for her - and that's proven easy enough without being one.
Politicking on the public's dime - that is very, very, very coarse behavior.
Who needs more of that, when there are hard times for us all and yet taxes are buying only sham-shows from the folks in the Bachmann office?
______________UPDATE____________
TPM, here, talks of fund raising over the past closed quarter; Reed getting less than previously, but having $30,000 more reported cash on hand over Clark's amount. Previously a Clark press release had reported, "Clark’s 2,412 donors contributed an average of $107."
TPM states,
"Maureen now sits with over $300,000 cash on hand, all of which was raised without relying on endorsements from prominent individuals or special interests," campaign manager Jason Isaacson said in a press release. "This outpouring of support shows that our message of creating jobs, fixing healthcare, and reducing the national debt is resonating with people."
I am unsure what to make of that, since Clark's supporters webpage lists endorsements while Reed's supporters page lists names, and if it's donors, only, then it is substantially less than the 2,412 Clark claims; and if it is more than that, endorsements included or especially endorsing donors, I think I have to question the likes of Wendell Anderson and Mark Rotenberg being characterized as other than "prominent individuals."
It appears some hair-splitting is going on.
Reed's prior quarter haul was substantially more than the latest, and that is trending the wrong way for a campaign where Bachmann will be spending like a drunken sailor [after all, it's donor money, not out-of-pocket where the Bachmann clinic staff's had to go without medical coverage, at least in the past because the Bachmann family's been unwilling to provide it - or maybe they could not afford to because of insurance firm rapaciousness in setting premium levels].
__________FURTHER UPDATE__________
Blue Man says he knows and backs Clark, and points to Big E's analysis, which is comprehensive. Big E notes Issacson was Bill Luther's campaign person, and worked for the last DFL Rep. from the Sixth District. First that's one and the same, Bill Luther, and since the Sixth's been delineated as it currently stands, Janet Robert was the first DFL candidate and she lost to Mark Kennedy and Kennedy and Bachmann have since held sway. Luther, under earlier district boundaries defeated Col. Klink, then when the boundaries changed, Klink won against Luther.
But I digress. Big E indicates the Reed people ignored blog opinion, which he faults. My understanding is that IP candidate Bob Anderson has had the opportunity to talk to both Reed and Clark, and he has respect for each. In turn, I respect Anderson's judgment that way.
Reed has energized a few, but I do not see it as equating to a strong caucus showing.
I believe Reed should hold her options open until she sees what the regular caucus folks think, in guessing whether she has a primary's chance in things. Which she has done.
If she gets hammered as badly as I expect in the caucuses, and then poisons the well knowing rank-and-file primary-going Sixth District DFL'ers opinion are usually reflected in the caucus outcome - it gains her and others with her nothing unless she'd want a Bachmann victory; which she adamantly disclaims as not being at all desirable.
So, until caucus time, it's rhetoric, and each camp, Reed's and Clark's, have hired rhetoricians and tacticians; so we can expect more of the same.
Another quarter, looking at donor strength among the small donor pool in the district should resolve things along with caucus results unless Reed shows substantial small in-district donor fund raising strength, and caucus strength.
Before she does anything as precipitous as causing a primary Reed should use some of the three hundred grand in the war chest to poll to see if people want her, especially if the poll includes a question about a primary challenge after endorsement's run its course.
It could prove enlightening to spend a little that way, polling opinion, before spending greater funds other ways. However, would a poll now say much about primary or general election time? Polls trending, is what made the Ventura phenomenon, and without polling over time with public disclosure of results; showing a publicly visible trend is impossible.
So, the next two quarters in fundraising, and precinct caucus results should resolve things, in reasonable circumstances, and so far neither Reed nor Clark has been unreasonable - with Clark appearing to be the more aggressive thus far in personally contacting likely caucus attendees.
I would argue with Big E that working the caucus lists is more important than schmoozing the blogs.
................
This is the last thing I will add - I do not know whether Bill Luther or Bob Olson has said anything publicly about either Reed or Clark. If any reader has knowledge, a comment or email would be appreciated. I consider both Luther and Olson "prominent individuals," and "praiseworthy individuals." I expect each would say that in comparison to Michele Bachmann either Reed or Clark is by far a better human being, but that's something we already all know. We can agree with our friends on that.
_______POSITIVELY LAST FURTHER UPDATE______
Hat tip to Eva Young at Dump Michele Bachmann, for flagging this MnPublius fund-raising post.