Clark has the "news" posted more quickly, which I linked to via this link.
It is good to see two such qualified alternatives to the incumbent discussing shortcomings of the incumbent rather than either sniping at the other.
One, after the DFL primary, will be the candidate going into November and each looks poised to be able to throw support to the other if not winning the primary.
That is good. I recall how last cycle Bob Olson urged all to support the Tinklenberg effort, once it was certain that Olson had not enough support for gaining endorsement. This time there could be a primary, Reed saying she will run and Clark, so far, saying she would honor the endorsement while appearing the front runner for it.
Jason Isaacson's email from the Reed campaign, briefly, indicated [italics being commentary not in the interview]:
Bachmann in her own words:
St. Cloud Times Reporter: Name three bills or amendments that you have gotten passed that are the most beneficial to the people of the 6th Congressional District.
Bachmann: I was involved in a foster care amendment to support and encourage people in foster care. It is a very important issue. Sen. Mary Landrieu, (D-La.) and I are working on the Haiti situation. We are trying to put together initiatives so that children can actually go into homes and not stay in institutions their whole life. I was able to pass this resolution honoring people in foster care. I am in the deep minority in Congress and a fairly new freshman, so I don’t have substantive bills that I have passed. I would love to. The very first bill I introduced was the Health Care Freedom of Choice Act.
The Health Care Freedom Choice Act was just introduced recently. What has she been doing for three years?
St. Cloud Times Reporter: The 6th District has had a high level of homes that have been foreclosed on. What role should the government play in that and what is it that you can do as the congresswoman in the 6th District to help people who may have lost their home or may be in jeopardy of losing their home?
Bachmann: It is a real difficult situation for people and it is real tragic. The 6th District has had a high level of foreclosure because we are the fastest-growing district in the state. When you have high growth — we had the highest number of single-family homes built in my area — it makes sense that those are the homes that have the foreclosures. The best thing we can do is turn the economy around. If we can turn the economy around and have job creation and job growth, then people will be able to purchase these homes and stay in them. A lot of the reason we are seeing foreclosure problems now is people have lost their jobs.
But how has she voted to turn the economy around? Bachmann voted against the Home Foreclosure Relief bills, against the Credit Card holder bill or rights, and against Wall Street Reform.
St. Cloud Times Reporter: How interested are you in working with the Democratic majority in Congress and the president in passing legislation?
Bachmann: Very. Now the Republicans are in the deep minority. Although the American people have been rejecting the policies that have been coming out of the Obama administration in poll after poll. The American people have said very clearly they are rejecting the job-killing government takeover of health care. It’s important to remember we serve the people. We make our decisions by the consent of the people we serve.
Bachmann injects fear and anger in politics to paralyze debate. She claims she wants to work with Democrats, but decided go to a fundraiser in California instead of attending the House Republican’s question and answer session with President Obama.
Read the whole article here.
There was a bit more detail there than in the Clark email, Clark hit the website first with a "news" posting; Reed linked to a transcript; Clark linked to a video. On the Reed link, it appeared to be a tracking link, so when in the above quote I made it a hot link it was to the direct story, not again putting readers through a tracking exercise, which I detest.
So, personal preferences - style, Reed gets the bigger hat-tip for a more informative email, and for linking to a transcript. The Clark campaign might note that district voters closer in age to Reed might be more like me, a curmudgeon who uses the internet for reading and the TV for TV. How the demographics of older DFL votes divide might be interesting. First older people vote, and that counts in a primary where turnout is usually lighter than in a general election. Second, while Reed and Bachmann appear to chronologically be the same age Reed lacks the vanity of trying to look younger than she is. Clark, younger than both, appears closer to Bachmann in age, which I think is untrue.
Do older voters identify with older candidates? McCain in the Sixth proved that it remains GOP-heavy, but the contemporaries I have, with one exception, had the sense to go with Obama.
My guess, Clark in closer than expected endorsement voting, getting the institutional backing [money] then, but a dead heat in the primary. That is where Bachmann's challenger will be identified, not in endorsement, and Bachmann's ginned up negative advertising minions and friends will have to wait for certainty.
Finally, everyone should read Maureen Reed's op-ed that Strib carried over the weekend, online here, on the cost control part of the healthcare debate, thus still unclear on single payer, public option, Minnesota having opt-out capability, and all policy dimensions where Clark has been fairly quiet also. I do not see any strong endorsement of the Minnesota Health Plan, as among the DFL governor candidates; and with equal reticence that way from both camps I would go with Reed's experience in the field, while Clark's appeal is having already run for office, won, and legislated. Both women have exceptional resumes, and Bachmann pales by comparison.
__________UPDATE__________
After more consideration I go a step further, Reed is explicit in the Strib item, this being the gist:
As the national spotlight shifts to the crucial area of putting people back to work, we must remember that job growth hinges not only on economic policies, but also on addressing the impediments to job growth like our soaring health care costs. Small and large employers alike cannot expand when they are crippled by such costs.
We need common-sense solutions to cover all Americans with a basic set of benefits.
As a doctor practicing in the Twin Cities, I've seen patients recover from terrible diseases because they had access to top-quality care. On the other hand, during my 12 years at the Fremont Community Clinic in north Minneapolis, I've seen patients die from treatable illnesses because they lacked basic health insurance.
Comprehensive reform must include a basic benefits package for every American, must cover preexisting conditions, and must emphasize prevention and achieve payment reform.
Democrats, Republicans and independents all agree that cost controls must be a foundation of any health care reform bill. We don't need another dime, let alone another trillion dollars, in health care; we need the trillions already in the system to be spent more effectively so we can invest our resources in education, transportation and paying down the debt.
Payment reform must be a cornerstone of our health care efforts.
Language such as, "a basic benefits package for ever American must cover preexisting conditions, ..." is not equivocation. It is universal care. It is endorsed, (for what it is worth), from this opinion outlet. And the recognition of the healthcare swamp being a swamp that needs draining to not drain all other economic activity in the nation, that also is in Reed's item.
Clark - she has a video. Here and here, per google. I am not going to watch it. If she does not post writing on her website, or get an op-ed published, it's the equivalent of not having a position if you only go, You Tube. That is simply unduly insufficient attention to those who both read and vote. I will not watch a video. Bottom line, repeated, I will not watch a video.
Others might be less inflexible. That's okay with me.
So far, Reed is on record, Clark is on video.
Kids watch videos. Adults vote in primaries.
There is a vast difference. Bag the video, or get support elsewhere. I take offense.
It is an approach and style I dislike. Most certainly, it is not Glen Beck as a policy platform, and Clark remains a viable alternative to that. But Reed's use of text trumps video, with me.