Ashwin Madia Addresses 50 Edina Dems

Sure Paulsen can do the hustle, but only I can moonwalk!

Tonight Ashwin Madia held a campaign event at Davanni's in Edina. The restaurant has a party room which was filled to capacity this evening. Edina is in Senate District 41, whose biennial convention will take place in four days.

Ashwin opened speaking at length about Iraq, telling the Edina DFLers what most of them don't want to hear--that he'd like to vastly reduce our presence in that country but not entirely get out, near-term. When he speaks on Iraq Madia comes across as realistic, in contrast to Terri Bonoff's pandering. Ash often refers to our enemies in Iraq in the harshest imaginable terms, sometimes using the word vermin; I've never once heard Terri Bonoff discuss the insurgency thus.

Both Terri Bonoff and Ashwin Madia have claimed that they opposed the war at the time of the invasion--at a time when many Democrats (including Al Franken and li'l ol' me) supported it. If anyone disputed my contention that I supported invading Iraq, I could [and, to my embarrassment, you could] produce quite a trove of purple prose urging the disaster forward. But if I'd actually gotten Iraq right and sensibly opposed the invasion back then--and were now running for Congress--why wouldn't I now publish a few choice paragraphs I'd written back then? I observed a number of fellow liberals go from supporting the invasion in early 2003 to swiftly airbrushing that blemish out of their records--to the extent that few who know them today are even aware that they supported the invasion in early 2003. Ashwin and Terri, can you produce any evidence (an email, say) showing you actually opposed the war prior to its inception?

During the Q&A Ash mentioned that much gentrification had already occurred in Iraq. (I'm not talking out of school: Ron Carey [wiki] already has the disk [for context, read below the next photo] in his briefcase.) What was the phrase he was looking for? Ethnic cleansing? Not a gaffe in the Kinsleyan sense, I suppose, but a gaffe nonetheless.

I was struck this evening that interest in the Madia for Congress campaign is ratcheting up--I've never seen either of Ashwin's opponents draw 50 people, solo [besides staffers]. Occasionally I thought the Madia stump speech could benefit from the addition of several more upbeat sections. The addition of a bit of smiling from the candidate would be welcome. I've criticized the Madia stump speech's economic section here; I remain in that minority which believes Ash's 'green economy' plank is utterly incoherent--essentially a list of pleasant-sounding words. At the current state of Ash's campaign, he could easily pick up the phone and try to begin establishing some ongoing discussions with a seasoned moderate economics professor or two; had he done so, I don't think he would have walked out on his ongoing anti-economic-stimulus-package limb. And so far as I can tell, Ash doesn't just oppose this economic stimulus package--he opposes any short-term anti-recessionary jolt. This is not sound economic thinking; it's cutting one's nose off to spite one's face.

Ash has also recently added a section to his stump speech imagining if George Bush had called for shared sacrifice after 9/11, rather than shopping. The sacrifice Madia now wishes Bush had called for--making Sunday a voluntary no-driving day--is not sensible, in my view. Those of us who drive cars that get 35 mpg don't feel much of a moral obligation to join hands with people who drive cars that get 11 mpg for a singing of Kum Ba Yah. But Madia's 'shared sacrifice' peroration included another, greater curiosity: In imagining a more positive 9/12/01 speech for Bush, Madia, speaking as a hypothetically good George W Bush, described the gas-free Sunday idea 'So that no American dies again as a result of our reliance on foreign oil.'

Notice anything weird in that last sentence?

**************

I personally think a slightly brisker pacing of the standard Madia stump event would play better. The speech itself could easily be briefer and more upbeat. Ash tends to devote more time to Q&A sessions than most people are interested in--which means the blowhards and bores tend to speechify lengthily.

When it was all done I asked my tablemates for some feedback. 'Anything you didn't like?,' I inquired. They noted a few of Ash's verbal tics--his over-frequent alrights?' and a number of other forensic flaws. In getting this nomination, Ash will have beat Terri Bonoff in a public speaking contest. But to seriously challenge Paulsen, I'd wish for Ashwin Madia to be daily working with someone who was capable of providing him non-fawning feedback both on style and substance. There is considerable room for improvement, and there is significant aptitude in this candidate for ratcheting up both his rhetorical and substantive game, and quickly. Were I now in Ash's shoes, I'd be on the phone as frequently as I could with David Schultz for strategic advice. I'd be trying to re-establish some relationships with econ and polisci faculty--and if that proved difficult I'd look elsewhere. I'm excited about this candidacy--but acknowledge that we have a long road ahead and we're going to have to massively ratchet up his game to get within striking distance of a November victory.

Erik Paulsen's eyeball, flanked by his poodles.

Can readers help identify the two smarmy mugs pictured above? (Were you in possession of one, would you have the shamelessness to show your face in public, sans goalie mask?) They follow Democratic candidates around so that The Hustler has movies to watch at night. Last time she showed up on GavinSullivan.com, my webstats showed a spike coming from the College of St. Catherine. Surely we can learn more about the duo, no? I want to know! gavin6@gmail.com Let's show them we care, readers! Names? Hobbies? Fun facts? Yearbook pictures?