Campaign Diaries

Interviewed on CNN’s Larry King Live, former Governor Jesse Ventura announced that he would not jump in the Minnesota Senate race - a major development given that he not only would have been sure to impact the race between Al Franken and Norm Coleman but he also had the potential to pull a victory. Ventura did leave open the possibility that he might change his mind before tomorrow’s 5pm deadline if God speaks him to like he “spoke to our President.”

Ventura started the show by comparing American politics to pro-wrestling: both parties pretend to be fighting though they eagerly cut deals and take money from the same lobbyists. That’s hard to argue with, especially today given how much time was wasted on that New Yorker cover and given the two candidates’ moving towards each other to position themselves for the general. Ventura expressed amazement that Democrats had not put this election away and argued that only they could possibly screw up an advantage like this one - giving as an example of their stupidity their willingness to go along the GOP in overruling the Fourth Amendment and caving on the FISA bill last week.

Yet, Ventura explained that he would not go jump in again because politics had gotten too muddy (”Our politics has turned shameful.”) He explained that politics was now too dirty for him to be willing to face the Minnesota media again and claimed he did not want to put his kids through the same ordeal they went through a decade ago.

Why, you might ask, would Ventura go on television and monopolize a Larry King Live show if he was not running for Senate? Would it have not been more simple for him to issue a statement or call a short press conference? Well, Ventura also has a book coming out and this show was also an opportunity for him to promote it. In fact, it’s hard to argue that these past two weeks were not also meant to be a publicity stunt, however sincere Ventura was in saying that he seriously considered jumping in the race. After all, his book publicist was talking to the media about when Ventura would make his decision known.

Two very conveniently-timed polls of the race were released this evening:

• Rasmussen’s new poll has Al Franken ahead in a two way race, 44% to 42%, an improvement over last month when Coleman led 48% to 45%. Ventura’s flirtation seems to have increased the number of independents. In a three-way race, it would have been 36% Coleman, 34% Franken and 22% Ventura.

• The ABC poll Ventura referred to is a SUSA survey that finds Coleman crushing Franken 52% to 39%. Franken only gets 77% of the Democratic vote. In a three-way race, Coleman gets 43%, Franken 27% and Ventura 26% — so Ventura is third, not second as he said on CNN. (Ventura is second only if the Democratic candidate is Cireci, not Franken.)

That is a significant discrepancy between SUSA and Rasmussen, though it is one we are now used to. Rasmussen has never shown Coleman with more than a 7% lead while this is the fourth straight SUSA poll that has Coleman up double-digit. Other recent polls have tended find Coleman with a large lead (including the very recent Quinnipiac poll), suggesting that there might be a difference in methodology that is resulting in such consistently different results.

Something both polls agree on is that Ventura would have taken more votes away from Franken than from Coleman, complicating the Democrats’ hope to pick-up this seat. So can we say that Franken dodged a bullet tonight and that Ventura’s decision not to run (if it holds until tomorrow 5pm) is good news for Democratic hopes of picking up this crucial Senate seat?

It is difficult to say so for sure. After all, most of Ventura’s venom in the past two weeks was directed at Coleman (whom Ventura beat in the 1998 gubernatorial race) rather than at Franken. Tonight, Ventura’s sentiments towards the two parties were different: he was running against the Republican Party’s ideals and policies and was arguing that the Democratic Party’s opposition was fake, ineffective and cowardly. If he were to spend the next 6 months pounding on Coleman, Ventura could have knocked the incumbent enough to make him stumble.

But, as I said just a few days ago, the most likely scenario is that Ventura would divide up the anti-incumbent and anti-Republican vote, helping Coleman remain on top. Even if he had been able to knock Coleman down, he would have been more likely to benefit. Ventura’s name on the ballot would have left almost few paths to victory for Al Franken, though a Ventura triumph would certainly not have been out of the question.

Ventura’s exit from a race he had never officially entered might not be bad news for Coleman, but it’s certainly good news for Franken.