 |
| click image to read it |
With the other Republican politicians Lucero listed, Whelan's in like-minded company. Readers can scan the list or trust me; Jim Abeler, a long-time Republican repeatedly consonant with district moods, is not equally favored by Mr. Lucero.
Hat tip to an earlier Bluestem Prairie post back in June, here, stating in part:
The other women that the endorsed Republican for 30B supports are equally anti-marriage equality as Lucero is, though not as hyper-focused as he and Kihne.
Whelan, who is running for 35A (now held by Jim Abeler, who is running for U.S. Senate), has posted a website short of details, but clear about being "pro-life and marriage" with her "morals and perspectives built upon a solid faith in God." The district voted for the marriage amendment by 51.39 percent.
[...] The endorsed DFL candidate is Peter Perovich, who is running on bread-and-butter DFL issues of job creation, property tax reduction and infrastructure. Given that Abeler was one of two Republican state representatives to survive his party's outrage over a vote to override Governor Pawlenty's veto of a gas tax hike, focusing on transportation is a solid choice for connecting with voters in the suburban Anoka County district.
Mandy Benz is trying again to unseat Jerry Newton (who lost the swing seat himself in the 2010 Republican wave election). Like Loon's district, HD37A helped vote down the anti-marriage equality amendment, though by a far smaller margin than in HD48B. Benz fared even worse, losing to Newton in a 42.64 to 57.18 percent split.
Will the ladies experience a Lucero bump in August and November?
[links omitted - the original is thoroughly documented via extensive linking, and is focused more on the Kihne primary assault against GOP incumbent Loon as grist for Lucero's extremist mill]. As most Crabgrass readers now realize, Ms. Kihne's extremist agenda was turned down by voters, via Ms. Loon's GOP primary win.
In candidate forum action, expect Whelan and Perovich to equally state the belief that north metro road infrastructure upkeep and upgrades, i.e., MnDOT funding, are goals the state should pursue. However, voters should realize Whelan's Republican party in the legislature votes against responsible transportation legislation. In 2013, HF 1444, was voted against by Anoka County Republicans Abeler, Scott and Petersen. Whelan can advocate something her colleagues likely will continue to oppose, and go figure where that goes.
Remember, Abeler became a Republican persona non grata as one of the “Override Six” for voting against a Pawlenty veto - so the best way to assure transportation is a successful legislative issue in the next two years is to maintain DFL control of the executive and to send DFL legislators to St. Paul.
This is not to say the DFL is without fault. Readers may note Dayton's sidebar absence. Using the old saying, he can put that in his pipe and smoke it. While Peter Perovich is quite more conservative than I am, he is less so than Whelan. Where it matters. And what I look forward to seeing in candidate forum debate, are the minimum wage issue and the student debt burden issue. With Whelan largely a professional student in her adult life up to now, will she show sympathy to the latter issue, breaking ranks with her GOP colleagues, or will she largely state an "I got mine let them deal with getting theirs" issue answer, which after all is generally to-be-expected GOP dogma. Beat up on the next generations, to teach servility and obedience - and incite fears.
Last - saving the best for last - What is Ms. Whelan's position on Right to Work [for less]? That is a gaping hole on any campaign lit or website posting originating from the Whelan camp.
Where is this woman on that issue?
She's hardly held any long-term regular day to day job - that's in her resume - and she is in her late twenties. Where is she on bread-and-butter concerns? Finding answers is what candidate forum events are for. We should look forward to Ms. Whelan's participation to flesh out who she really is and who she'd be if sent to St. Paul by voters.
_____________UPDATE______________
It is hard to get started on Lucero, then letting go. Who would such an extremist appeal to? Good question, fine answer per the image below, and - reader quiz, old timers welcome - among those listed which one served but a single Minnesota House term for which he is to forever be remembered for a memorably unique legislative sponsorship proposal? (One with which Liberty Republicans might [and should] disagree since it went to curbing individual matters of lifestyle conduct and choice in a Constitutionally protected area, citizen privacy.) A hat tip to any reader posting a comment correctly identifying the individual and the legislative failed bill purpose for which his term of service shall always be remembered. Click the image to read:
 |
| Wikipedia page link |