Gerson, an engineer by training, thanked Kline for his service before railing against the "Washington establishment and its tired and ineffective leadership."
That begs the question which for me is a valid one concerning Gerson, "an engineer by training," and that is, who employes him, for how long, i.e., who puts bread on his table and what are his fiduciary loyalties that way; and how might it square with his stated policy; statements being easy, facts being informative. In effect, is there some empolyment history which might help voters consider who, actually, Gerson might be in the event he is elected to represent them in Washington.
Stebbins managed past Gerson campaigning, so he's a Ron Paul Republican; or at least we can infer that from the Stebbins fact.
Unproductive. Several David Gerson Linkedin pages exist, but I failed to find one for David Gerson, Mechanical Engineering worker, Minnesota. (Facebook and Twitter are for twits, but Linkedin does give job history.) If there is a Gerson employment history with years spent with an international, multinational highly-capitalized global-marketing mega-corporation, it might be harder to envision an undivided commitment if in DC to push for small-government severed largely apart from traditional big-business Republican corporatism agenda dimensions. One can easily position per, "End this Corporate Welfare Now! – May 18, 2015," but voters might want to know of any employment history that might weigh upon what of that is rock solid firm vs negotiable.
About David, on his campaign website, nice banner pic., young guy, looks bright, but content wise:
David conceded to Rep. John Kline at the 2014 convention after Kline received endorsement by a margin of less than 3%. As promised, David upheld the voice of the grassroots by respecting their endorsement.
David worked his way through college and earned scholarships to attend graduate school. He earned his Bachelor’s Degree in Mechanical Engineering and his Master’s Degree in Integrated Manufacturing Systems Engineering – both from North Carolina State University. He has over two decades of private-sector experience in leadership transformation and has authored a book on the economics of crony capitalism. David is a pro-life, pro-business, limited-government conservative [...]
David will leverage the leadership transformation skills he has developed in the private sector to build coalitions and clear roadblocks to common-sense solutions, bring accountability to government, reduce wasteful Washington spending, and [...]
[italics added] In touting private sector leadership and skills, and begging the question, "doing what exactly," the glass is half full/half empty, and that need not be since David Gerson knows exactly what the details of "two decades ... experience" entails; while, curiously, we do not. Also, does "Integrated Manufacturing Systems Engineering," mean robotics, replacing hand labor with more efficient reproducible work by machinery; and if so, is that a plus or a minus, in terms of how Mr. Gerson views the future of international competitive enterprise; e.g., us and China (the latter having a hand labor cost edge) - the Tesla new way vs the Henry Ford labor-intensive factory implementation paradigm?
Mary Pawlenty. We know a bit more there. Spouse a Wall Street lobbyist, and if getting into Congress presumably the family lobbying fortunes would get a major boost. And Tim Pawlenty's Financial Services Roundtable, not surprisingly, wants to "cut red tape" constraining mischief Wall Street might get into; something like that, per this FSA link quoting from a post at The Hill (evidencing the levels of sincerity we might always expect of "Sam's Club Republican" Tim Pawlenty).
Wall Street is wooing black lawmakers as part of their effort to block a controversial rule championed by President Obama that would change the way financial advisers operate.
Groups led by the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA) want to block the rule, arguing it would hurt lower and middle class consumers by raising costs and requiring even simple advice to be accompanied by heavy paperwork.
In private meetings and in ads that have blanketed cable television over the last month, they argue the days of getting simple financial advice over the phone would end, and that constituents of black lawmakers could be disproportionately affected.
Some members of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) have been receptive to arguments about the rule, which has divided Democrats.
“Rich people are always going to get advice,” one aide to a CBC member concerned by the rule said. “But it’s the poor people — many of which are our constituents — who we’re concerned about.”
Supporters of the rule argue that imposing a new “fiduciary standard” on financial advisers would better protect consumers.
And Gerson wants to "cut red tape" per this vague shopping list:
You tell me, do Gerson and Ms. Pawlenty both want to cut the same "red tape," i.e., "red tape" for Wall Street; or does Gerson's thinking that way differ, and if so, exactly how? If he shares Pawlenty family love of unfettered Wall Street, he should say so.
The fact is, I put zero value in this kind of lower website banner slideshow crap [opening images set out below]; and instead would like to see actual content - facts and policy detail about the man's history and his thoughts. That banner seems a bit short on thoughts.
Who IS the guy? Really, that's my concern, and that site is content challenged on such a fundamental question. Two additional screen captures from the Gerson campaign website, so readers might weigh whether they are helpful in defining expectations (like them or not), or too vague to really help discern meaningful likely differences between Gerson and Ms. Pawlenty, e.g., as to cutting red tape (whose red tape), and otherwise:
If you want to like Gerson because he is not a Pawlenty, he makes it hard by hiding needed personal, historical fact.
It is neither my district, nor my party; and that is a fair thing to emphasize. Regardless, the BIGGEST QUESTION an admitted outsider guesses for Republican CD2 caucus goers is, will Ms. Pawlenty commit without hedging and from the start to abide by caucusing. It always seems the question, and given Tea Party sentiment and the Trump surge, spouse of the big dog would have every reason to hedge and demure; with it likely money would suffice in any primary to bury the Gerson candidacy.
Moreover, the currently posted online Strib-AP item on Ms. Pawlenty testing the waters - who doubts the result - notes at the end:
State Rep. Pat Garofalo of Farmington, who has ruled out a congressional campaign, said even the mere possibility of a Pawlenty campaign could change the course of other potential candidates.
"Her name is enough to give people pause," Garofalo said. "But when you combine her name with her background, that's enough to get people to get out."
My take, perhaps that of a cynic, is the recent torpedo to the careers of Ms. Mack and Mr. Kelly, both more business Republicans than theocratic monsters, might more effectively "change the course of other potential candidates," to a greater degree than any special "name recognition" being "ehough to get people to get out."
Who's to say what is hardball and what is coincidence?
___________UPDATE__________
Two items online which might help distinguish policy differences (e.g., whose red tape) between the Pawlenty camp and the Gerson camp; here and here. In drawing a focused differentiation on the Ex-Im bank policy positions, I am agnostic, having lived in Seattle where the health of the local economy was heavily reliant on Boeing and where Ex-Im is helpful to the prosperity of the Boeing Corporation. And helpful to Microsoft prosperity in international commerce, out of Redmond, Washington, on the other side of Lake Washington from Seattle but a part of the greater metro area. Wall Street vs. Main Street may be a campaigning theme, GOP side, CD2. That being said in wishing wisdom in choosing to our Republican inner-party friends in that District. Lack of posting of the DFL side here is because GOP writers and others likely will sketch differences and preferences there. Contrasts on the GOP side appear more stark, and possibly inner-party Angst might be greater among Republicans, these days. Bush Republicans vs Trump Republicans being illustrative.
A final note, among all Congressional candidates this cycle positions on sulfide mining risk management should be of interest to all, because of the long-term environmental impacts involved; and in that regard, I would view favorably any DFL candidacy affirmatively stating that Tom Bakk has got to go out of party legislative leadership, sooner being quite better than later. My own personal version of a litmus test. Bakk not being alone in that regard. The phrase, "cancer on the body politic," comes to mind.