Additional thoughts

So Laura W told me the Strib endorsed Coleman (so did the PP but that's not a surprise)--oh if only I could get the Strib to deliver my Sunday paper to Paul's house instead of mine! But anyway, it prompted me to continue my research on whom to vote for, despite my despair from earlier this week. Some thoughts:

• I find the Strib's argument about how well Coleman would be positioned to reform the Republican party and advance moderate legislation much more compelling than the Clinton ad about voting for Franken because we need to strengthen the Democratic majority. When we have a Democratic president, the need for a stronger majority diminishes. Judging from our experience here in Minnesota, I think there's real value in having to sell some of the other party's moderate members in order to pass major legislation. Also, Americans typically do not consider a congressional member's seniority enough in their voting decision. For a relatively small state, seniority makes all the difference in getting our issues heard. For example, South Dakotans made a really moronic move in voting Tom Daschle out of office in 2002. Coleman has only one term, but the Strib makes a good point--Republicans are retiring in droves and when McCain is defeated the party will hopefully be looking to its more moderate members to help rebuild.

• Comparing the "issues" sections of the Coleman and Franken websites, I think Coleman gets the edge. I feel like I agree with more of Franken's positions but don't agree with him on the issues that are most important to me: health care reform and balancing the federal budget. Former Sen. Dave Durenberger has endorsed Coleman's position on health care which is a big deal because Durenberger is one of the foremost voices on reasonable health care reform. Coleman also supports "pay go" which is getting rare among Republicans since it was tainted by Democrats during the Clinton administration--but this is really the only way we're going to balance the budget. I know a big economic crisis isn't the time to decrease federal government spending and all that blah blah but I'm not too keen on current retirees and near-retirees rebuilding their nest eggs by borrowing against mine. But then he did vote for the bailout, which Franken opposed. So I just don't know.

• But then there's gay marriage. Coleman opposes legalizing gay marriage or civil unions. That's just dumb. But given the composition of Congress and a Democratic president with a lot of other things on his first 100 days agenda, plus the economic and health care crises, it's unlikely the federal government will be doing much on gay rights during the next 6 years.

• Coleman is well-known for questionable morality and putting a pretty face on a troubled family life. I'm not a big "morals" voter so this isn't a huge issue for me, but it's disturbing when people run the shiny-happy family campaign ads when the entire world knows that's crap. I do believe the big blow ups about his apartment and clothes are really much ado about nothing--but still, stuff like this comes up about him all the darn time. Oh, but I thought he had a good response when his dad got caught doin' it with a lady of questionable morals in the Savoy's parking lot.

• Coleman supported the invasion of Iraq and has been generally supportive of Pres. Bush's policies regarding the war. Can possible future good deeds outweigh this colossal mistake? I'm leaning towards no.

Sigh, any one else have helpful thoughts?