Escorted from the scene after making a scene.
I think she has cause to sue. Winning, who's to say, but go ahead lady, sue the bums.
Getting name recognition is often a problem for down-ticket candidates, but she tries.
Trying hard, against a Minnesota Supreme Court sitting Justice, one who served for years as the local US Attorney. One having respect within the legal community.
Why would those big-tent Republicans turn away one of their own?
It looks bad.
Endorsed by them, no less.
Not only that; from Minnesota's finest law firm, and doubtlessly approaching her party's booth with preparedness and tenacity, personal traits of which she appears proud.
Yes, sue them and see if you can take the case all the way to the Supreme Court. But short of that, make a promise they can't ignore:
She says she isn’t trespassing and plans to return every day unless the party takes legal action against her.
A daily show at the fair. Ouster of the unwanted.
A continuing boisterous crowd pleaser? Or not? Wait and see.
One hope, she will wear a chicken suit. Or show some other fowl conduct.
_______________UPDATE______________
Insufficient theater, akin I suppose to a bad apple, and hence that might, instead of the DWI, be a truer believers' cause to hold a groupwide expulsion of MacDonald from GOP state fair Eden.
And yet, in that self-nomination speech, saying GOD, and GOD BLESS as frequently as she did, how can that offend theo-GOP powers that be?
They all stood in accord.
___________FURTHER UPDATE___________
In a quasi-insider's review of collective bad apple indigestion, leading to a scurrying to be that angel with the sword of judgmental expulsion; Brodkorb reporting the dominoes falling, here. There's a bit of irony to Brodkorb being a GOP-driven-from-Eden reporter.
___________FURTHER UPDATE___________
In reviewing the comments to Brodkorb's post, I very much look forward to reporting of these events in Harold Hamilton's Anoka County Record.
"... if left alone, would have attracted no attention whatsoever." Wow. From an ostensible media editor. How's that for a peep under the ol' kimono? (And, yes, I did a full screen capture.)
___________FURTHER UPDATE___________
That above-noted comment to Brodkorb's Aug 21 post, was preceded by a like-minded parallel comment to an Aug 20 post by Brodkorb:
Email authentication is being sought from the person captioned as being the comment author. In effect: The GOP's 1%'ers erred, letting Minnesota's groundlings, the 99% of us, see - oh my - strife within the big tent?
In effect, chastise other inner-party souls who elect to not bury such stuff, but elect as the wiser choice to disavow mistakes publicly, as error?
Media should disapprove of stiffling of transparency or not? What is at play? What policy suggestions underlie the comments, by whom?
___________FURTHER UPDATE___________
That Aug 20 Brodkorb comment thread is a hoot. Within it, you sometimes see something that cries out for naming of names. Crabgrass readers are urged to start at the link in the last sentence, and from there explore the main post and the range of thoughts in the thread. It is worth the time.
FURTHER: Post was corrected re spelling, MacDonald. Further MacDonald news, Strib here wherein The McFadden casts shame:
Republican U.S. Senate candidate Mike McFadden also said in a statement Saturday, “Given her recent behavior, I’m concerned that Michelle MacDonald does not have the temperament to serve on the Minnesota Supreme Court.”
Interestingly, although not mentioned in that Strib item, The McFadden waffles around too about another GOP ticket "master of comedy" Hagedorn, who apparently also registers as a co-ticket embarrassment to The McFadden, and his and his handlers' ambitions. Give him a week or two, his handlers might have him change his mind, either to condone or castigate his co-ticket folks further. For now it's perhaps a difference of degree, insistence upon an entitlement of being endorsed by The McFadden's party, and being a misogynist, each of which registers this way, with The McFadden (and handlers).
I’m disappointed in the conduct of some of the other Republican candidates on the ballot this fall. Given her recent behavior, I’m concerned that Michelle McDonald [sic] does not have the temperament to serve on the Minnesota Supreme Court.
Meanwhile I think that Jim Hagedorn needs to apologize for the inappropriate comments he’s made on his blog. His writings do not reflect Minnesota values. This country has become too divided; we need leaders to focus on uniting not dividing us. From the beginning, I’ve set out to share a positive message with Minnesotans, and I would encourage every candidate – Republican and Democrat – to do the same.
Meanwhile, GOP Guv hopeful Jeff Johnson, longer in GOP politics than The McFadden, expresses loyalty without enthusiasm:
“I am the leader of our ticket so I’m going to support our endorsed candidates,” Johnson said. “I will tell you that I’m not thrilled with the distraction and the way she’s been acting. It’s not helpful, but I’m going to stick with the ticket.”
Johnson’s statement comes one day after Scott Newman, the Republican candidate for Attorney General, said he’s backing Supreme Court Justice David Lillehaug over MacDonald. He said MacDonald is unfit to serve.
Johnson said he has not spoken with MNGOP Chair Keith Downey or other party leaders about their decision to ban MacDonald. He said he’s too focused on his own race to get involved in another one.
But Johnson also suggested MacDonald should back off her push to appear at the booth.
“I just don’t think we need to be creating scenes,” Johnson said. “I think she should be out there campaigning like the rest of us and if there’s a dispute then you figure out where people actually want you and listen to you.”
 |
| Hunky dory, with Hagedorn? |
Figure that one out Soon. Before November.
ONE LATE GREAT IDEA OFFERED OUR GOP FRIENDS
DUAL USAGE: Below, a potential dual-use logo that
Michelle MacDonald
should consider using to advance her campaigning:
After all, it's kinda cutsie. Ad-agency keen. Unless, of course it's a registered, protected trademark, for brand identification (as in don't buy any look-alike substitutes). Reader thoughts?