MN: Klobuchar raises over $1.2 million

[Moooooo]

Amy Klobuchar, candidate for U.S. Senate, has raised a total of over $1.2 million for her U.S. Senate campaign, ending the quarter with over $1.1 million cash on hand. Klobuchar raised $593,000 in the first quarter of her campaign, and an additional $650,000 in the second quarter.

...

Klobuchar noted that while the money is critical to a race like this, it is equally important to have the grass roots support. "I'm just as grateful for the 26 volunteer college interns and hundreds of campaign volunteers who covered 29 parades on the 4th of July as I am for our generous contributors." Young people, who have found it harder and harder to afford college and health care, have been particularly motivated by Klobuchar's call to action that "this election is not going to be about what's right and what's left. It's going to be about what's right and what's wrong."

A substantial number of Klobuchar's contributions were received through her website, amyklobuchar.com, and many of them were raised personally by Klobuchar who called people from her kitchen table. Klobuchar also held many successful fundraising events, including an event in Rochester which, according to Rochester Democrats, set record for people attending a fundraiser there for a statewide Democratic candidate. In addition, there was a highly successful event with the Austin, Minnesota-based band the Gear Daddies, which brought out many young professionals who hadn't previously contributed to a United States Senate campaign.

...

Link

[nini2287]

I thought that Kennedy would win the race easier than most people expected, but Klobuchar actually looks like a halfway decent candidate.  It'll be interesting to watch this one play out.

[TheresNoMoney]

Klobuchar is a strong candidate and will have a good chance to win this seat.

[King]

I'm pulling for Klobuchar in the primary because she is doing the worst in head-to-head matchups against Kennedy than any other candidate in the DFL primary.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I've been saying all this time Kennedy is not a very good candidate. He votes with Bush on almost everything. Why would he win easily then in a state where Bush is not popular? Plus he can't even break 60% in his congressional district, which any GOP incumbent should be able to do easily.

[TheresNoMoney]

I'm pulling for Klobuchar in the primary because she is doing the worst in head-to-head matchups against Kennedy than any other candidate in the DFL primary.

Where do you get this information from? I haven't seen any polling on this.

[King]

I've been saying all this time Kennedy is not a very good candidate. He votes with Bush on almost everything. Why would he win easily then in a state where Bush is not popular? Plus he can't even break 60% in his congressional district, which any GOP incumbent should be able to do easily.

He isn't in a strong Republican district, so he shouldn't be able to break 60%, but he did get 57% in 2002 and remember he unseated that Democrat in MN-2 in 2000.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

Hopefully this will also convince Wetterling to switch to the open seat MN 06 campaign.

[King]

I'm pulling for Klobuchar in the primary because she is doing the worst in head-to-head matchups against Kennedy than any other candidate in the DFL primary.

Where do you get this information from? I haven't seen any polling on this.

It was from a Democratic-lean, pro-Wetterling poll so Kennedy is probably a few points higher than what it shows.

http://pattywetterling.com/docs/2005/pollingMemo.pdf

[King]

Besides, Klobuchar's fundraising means relatively less in the general as she as to spend a good amount on a primary while Kennedy can just zoom on by.

[TheresNoMoney]

OK, thanks for that. Both Wetterling and Klobuchar lead Kennedy, so that's good news.

Wetterling also has higher name recognation than Klobuchar at the moment since she ran for Congress last year.

[AuH2O]

Kennedy would smoke Wetterling, and I imagine he'd beat Klobuchar by 5% or so in the Senate race.

[Moooooo]

I think Wetterling would be an ok candidate.  She's polling 9 points ahead of Kennedy.  She would probably pick up a lot of sympathy votes too.

By the way, have any of you heard Kennedy speak before?  He has Dan Quayle written all over him.

[TheresNoMoney]

Kennedy would smoke Wetterling, and I imagine he'd beat Klobuchar by 5% or so in the Senate race.

Why do you think that? Pure partisan gut feeling?

[King]

OK, thanks for that. Both Wetterling and Klobuchar lead Kennedy, so that's good news.

Wetterling also has higher name recognation than Klobuchar at the moment since she ran for Congress last year.

Klobuchar does not lead Kennedy by 2 as it states if you read my above statement:

"It was from a Democratic-lean, pro-Wetterling poll so Kennedy is probably a few points higher than what it shows."

[TheresNoMoney]

"It was from a Democratic-lean, pro-Wetterling poll so Kennedy is probably a few points higher than what it shows."

Key word is "probably". You don't know and neither do I.

[AuH2O]

There's no "probably" to it. It's a bogus poll that is much, much more than a few points off. I might as well make up numbers and call it a "pro-Kennedy poll."

Kennedy has a base in his district and is more experienced than Klobuchar... I think that adds up to a somewhat marginal, but solid win. He's already taken down Wetterling, who has no experience and no real qualifications, either... I think the sympathy vote is sort of mitigated by her repeated (failed) efforts at election to the House. Not a real good resume to run for the Senate.

[Alcon]

If you are going to call a poll bogus, it's inappropriate to attempt to use it to assume the other candidate is really doing much better.  The poll should be dismissed outright or taken as it is; otherwise it is manipulating the numbers to suit personal assumptions.

The exception to this rule in my mind is generally party-sponsored polls where adjusting the MoE to be the best for the non-sponsored candidate would result in a win for that candidate (i.e. a poll by the West Virginia GOP showing Capito up by 1 could be assumed as a lead for Byrd).

[A18]

If you are going to call a poll bogus, it's inappropriate to attempt to use it to assume the other candidate is really doing much better.  The poll should be dismissed outright or taken as it is; otherwise it is manipulating the numbers to suit personal assumptions.

He didn't use it to do that.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I've been saying all this time Kennedy is not a very good candidate. He votes with Bush on almost everything. Why would he win easily then in a state where Bush is not popular? Plus he can't even break 60% in his congressional district, which any GOP incumbent should be able to do easily.

He isn't in a strong Republican district, so he shouldn't be able to break 60%, but he did get 57% in 2002 and remember he unseated that Democrat in MN-2 in 2000.

It is a fairly strong Republican district. 57% there is nothing. Ramstad in MN-3 is in a much less Republican district and he breaks 60% all the time with no problem, and sometimes breaks 70%.

[Alcon]

If you are going to call a poll bogus, it's inappropriate to attempt to use it to assume the other candidate is really doing much better.  The poll should be dismissed outright or taken as it is; otherwise it is manipulating the numbers to suit personal assumptions.

He didn't use it to do that.

He said he "might as well call this a pro-Kennedy poll."  I was just pointing out the invalidity of that idea, even if he agrees with it or not.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

And now I finally notice Goldie's comments. Notice how he has never predicted a Democratic victory in anything but the most solid Democratic of races?

Even if Kennedy wins, it will be close. He will not "smoke" anyone, and he will not win by more than 5 points. The last Republican in Minnesota who won by more than 5 points in a 2-way race was Arne Carlson, and Kennedy is NOT Arne Carlson.

Now for incorrect statements in his post:

Kennedy is more experienced - false. He was not elected until 2000. Prior to that he had not held political office. Klobuchar was first elected in 1998.

Wetterling has repeated failed runs for House - false. She only ran once.

And the  misleading statements:

Kennedy has a base in his district - false. Like I said, he has yet to break 60%. The 57% he got in 2002 is about equal to what Norm Coleman got, so it's nothing. In 2004 he underperformed Bush in that district. That's hardly a solid base. Klobuchar has twice won election in Hennepin county, which has more people than Kennedy's congressional district.


Kennedy has already "taken down" Wetterling - Well yes he beat her, but that district is far more friendly to Republicans than statewide. Like I said, he underperformed Bush and since Bush didn't win here, obviously he can't if he performs the same in the district.

The one thing I do agree with is that Wetterling is not truly experienced, but all she would need to do is hold Kennedy to the 2004 numbers in that district and win the rest of the solid Democratic areas in the rest of the state to win. Still I would rather have her run for the open 6th district seat. Kennedy might have a chance, but someone who votes with Bush on everything is never a shoo-in in an open seat where Bush is not popular. Especially when what nickshepDEM said about him was true.

[A18]

If you are going to call a poll bogus, it's inappropriate to attempt to use it to assume the other candidate is really doing much better.  The poll should be dismissed outright or taken as it is; otherwise it is manipulating the numbers to suit personal assumptions.

He didn't use it to do that.

He said he "might as well call this a pro-Kennedy poll."  I was just pointing out the invalidity of that idea, even if he agrees with it or not.

Which isn't what you said he did.

[AuH2O]

The poll is garbage. Trash. Worthless. Imagination. Fiction. I don't give it any meaning or significance for either side.

Wetterling will not win statewide against Kennedy. That's pretty close to a fact. Klobuchar will provide for a tough race, as I predicted a 5pt win for Kennedy.

I predict Democratic victories anytime I think they will happen. If you haven't noticed, things have not gone too well for Dems recently-- probably why it seems I always pick the GOP to win.

In 2004 I predicted an alumnus of my university would lose in a race he was actually favored (Baron Hill vs. Mike Sodrel) and was correct. I've picked against the GOP in various House and Gubenatorial races. I have not so much in Presidential and Senate races, of which there are few and the GOP has done well.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

How well was your prediction for Washington in the Presidential election or the Colorado Senate race? And you were claiming the VERMONT Senate race was a toss-up until the polls showed Sanders crushing any candidate the GOP could come up with.

"Pretty close to a fact" Then you must have more backing ito it other than that the poll is crap.

a 5 point victory is around 52-47. Why would Kennedy get 52% in an anti-Bush state when he just votes the party line with Bush and is hardly the best public speaker as nickshepDEM pointed out.

Kennedy is the new ultra-overrated candidate. An ultraconservative from a solid Republican district in a blue state is now expected to be a shoo-in.