And then there were none….
The withdrawal of Jim
Graves from the 6th District race for Congress has drawn
considerable comment as well as some interesting emotional responses ranging
from bitter disappointment from moderates and democrats to relief from the
right.
If possible, some
perspective is needed.
First of all,
political observers were truly taken by surprise because they looked forward to
the marquee matchup of the year: Bachmann
vs. Graves. This was to be the Joe Louis vs. Joe Wolcott fight from my time or,
for a later generation, Ali vs. Frazer. It was the
bout. Everyone was in the process of picking sides and getting involved. In a sense, we were already emotionally
invested.
All of a sudden,
Michele Bachmann embraced term limits just two weeks after running re-election
ads on TV and then Jim Graves pulled out after announcing in April that he
would be in. The battle of the
year – the Super Bowl of politics – was no longer. How could they do that to
us?
After eight years of
Michele Bachmann dominating the Minnesota scene and emerging as a Tea Party
favorite on a national level, many Democrats, independents and Republican
moderates felt they had a real shot at bringing Bachmann down. After all, she was hurting from the
wounds of legal inquiry with the likelihood of more shoes to fall.
And Jim Graves was now
the ideal candidate; talented, successful in business, strong people skills,
modest, and genuinely committed to building a better community. Old Timers may remember the radio show,
“Jack Armstrong – the All American Boy”.
Well, that would be Jim Graves.
I supported him in
last year’s contest when he came within a whisker of winning. But I also support his decision to
withdraw from a Bachmann-less contest.
In politics, you rarely get more than two shots at opportunity and after
that you are labeled a loser and cruelly assigned to the graveyard of the
past. The result is you have to
pick your shots carefully and Graves did.
When few others would
come forth to challenge Bachmann in 2012, Jim Graves volunteered. His campaign was little more than his
family and some truly dedicated friends. But the upper echelon of power in the
DFL was noticeably absent both on the elected and party levels. He was not
given a chance and political insiders try to not identify with likely losers.
In the closing days of
the campaign, the polls tightened and more followers came on board. Had they
been there earlier, Graves could have won.
If there can be a
victory in defeat, Graves achieved that in his loss to Bachmann and this is
what propelled him into the big time limelight. He had all the markings of a
winner for 2014 but that would only be if Bachmann were the candidate.
In eight years, she
had become the dominant national force of Far Right politics and the 6th
Congressional District tilted in that direction. But increasingly, more of her supporters cooled as a result
of her extreme comments and faulty interpretation of facts. By 2012, she was
vulnerable and Graves proved that. (See Michele
Bachmann...A Lady in Decline).
Now without Bachmann
on the ticket, Graves’ chances collapsed and he wisely understood the folly involved.
For those who remain disappointed, they should direct their energy toward the
real problem: the gerrymandering of Legislative and Congressional Districts in
order to deny competition and insure incumbency. That is the enemy of
democracy.
As to Jim Graves. I hope he remains active and runs again
for public office. He is the type of business leader we so desperately need:
pragmatic, visionary, caring and committed to governance. I look back at so
many solid business leaders who contributed so much to our well being at the
local, state and national levels and hope he will follow suit. Look at the
names and you realize what excellence is about: Elmer L. Andersen, Bill
Frenzel, Wheelock Whitney, John Yngve, Roger Scherer, John Johnson, George
Pillsbury and on and on.
The simple fact is
that we need our best in public service and Jim Graves represents that.
No comments:
Post a Comment