(Images: NationalAtlas.gov, Bob Anderson)

(Images: NationalAtlas.gov, Bob Anderson)


Things are heating up in the race to unseat 6th District Rep. Michele Bachmann: Democrat Maureen Reed raised $230,000 in the two months following her announcement to run; past Bachmann challenger Elwyn Tinklenberg says he’ll be in the Democratic primary whether he gets the DFL nod or not; and state Sen. Tarryl Clark is expected to announce her candidacy soon. A new twist: Third-party candidate Bob Anderson — who garnered 10 percent of the vote in the 2008 election — is seriously considering running again.

Last time Anderson ran as an unendorsed Independence Party (IP) candidate; Tinklenberg was cross-endorsed by the DFL and the IP. This time, Anderson says he wants just one endorsement — the IP’s. Coinciding with the IP’s executive committee meeting last weekend, he sent a letter to the party indicating his interest in running. He wouldn’t share the letter, but said his first post on his new campaign blog, launched Sunday, sums it up. He writes that candidates should focus on just one party: “I feel if you need the endorsement of two parties you are not the strongest candidate.”

In an interview with the Minnesota Independent on Thursday, Anderson said he learned a lot during the last campaign and will leverage that experience this time around. But it all hinges on whether the IP will cross-endorse.

“I don’t want to get involved in that again,” he said. “I want the party’s support — I don’t want ‘anti’ support.” Later he said he doesn’t think cross-endorsement helped “anybody,” adding with a chuckle, “It’s all fun and games until somebody gets hurt. ”

The endorsement question

Don’t expect a definitive decision from Anderson soon. He’s waiting for the results of the Independence Party’s October 10 Central Committee Meeting, when the body will vote on whether to continue cross-endorsing.

Party chair Jack Uldrich was hesitant to guess about the outcome of that meeting, but he says he’s heard strong opinions on both sides.

“My personal feeling is it’s going to be a very close vote,” he told the Minnesota Independent. “A lot of people in ‘08 were disappointed with how cross-endorsement worked.”

He said there are pros and cons to the practice: On one hand, cross-endorsement improves the odds of a candidate with a platform similar to the IP’s getting elected (although Minnesota law prohibits more than one party affiliation being listed on ballots). On the other, cross-endorsement dilutes the party brand, as Uldrich puts it. “The public might say, ‘Well, what does this party stand for?’”

Uldrich implied that Anderson’s chances of getting the endorsement are much better this time around. “The fact that he’s reaching out earlier will work in his favor,” Uldrich said. “Against him is that El Tinklenberg or Maureen Reed will seek the party’s cross-endorsement, too.”

But of Anderson, who addressed the 2008 IP convention, he added, “He’ll be received warmly by the party. Whether that’s enough to garner the endorsement is impossible for me to say.”

The Democratic Party likely wouldn’t welcome an Anderson candidacy, given his take of the vote last time around. But when asked about Anderson’s potential run or the party’s thoughts about cross-endorsement or whether Anderson was a “spoiler” in 2008, Gabby Adler, Midwestern press secretary for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), dodged the question.

“Minnesotans are looking for a Representative who reflects their values and will fight to protect jobs, reduce home foreclosures, and promote local economic growth,” she wrote in an email. “We are excited to work with whoever emerges as the DFL nominee next year as they reach out to Democrats, Republicans, and Independents alike to build a winning base of support.”

Spoiler?

Anderson calls himself a “right leaning centrist” running in the “most conservative district in the state.” But some call him “spoiler.”

He took 10 percent of the vote in a 2008 election that was decided by a mere 3-percent margin of victory.

“I know I created a lot of stir. I know a lot of the bloggers have been against me, because they think I cost the election,” he said. But he believes he took more votes from Bachmann than Tinklenberg, since he runs as a conservative.

Anderson sees himself as a legitimate alternative to Bachmann and didn’t hesitate to criticize her over, among other issues, the congresswoman’s failure to support the Mental Health Parity bill and her practice of holding mid-day teleconference calls that she bills as town hall meetings. Plus, he calls out media appearances where Bachmann suggested President Obama had “anti-American views” and announced her refusal to fill out the full U.S. Census.

“I think she’d be much better off concentrating on the district,” he said. “She’s got the ability to draw all that news coverage. Why doesn’t she do something less divisive?”

He added, “She’s kind of embarrasing the district. She’s a smart gal and attractive, but she’s got a lot of negatives. She’s got a really strong base, but believe me I hear more people talking negative about her than positive.”

Aubrey Immelman

Aubrey Immelman

Aubrey Immelman, a St. John’s University political science professor who ran as a Republican against Bachmann in the 2008 primary, wrote in an email that it’s “empirically unverifiable” whether Anderson lost the election for the Democratic candidate.

He cites numbers he crunched on his website in May that he believes show the primary election results “predicted the outcome” of the general election. In the primary, Tinklenberg won 43.1 percent of the vote, a fraction of a percent less than he got on election day (43.4 percent). Bachmann went from a 47.2 percent share in the primary to 46.4 percent on Nov. 4, whereas Anderson went from a 2 percent share in the primary to 10 percent on election day.

Whether Immelman will join Anderson in the race and challenge Bachmann for the GOP nomination is also up in the air.

“I have not yet decided,” he said. “I’m encountering significant hostility to my open primary strategy — not from Republicans, but from partisan Democrats.”

He cites commenters on liberal blogs, as well as a post by Dave Mindeman at mnpACT, who called Immelman’s primary bid “election trickery” and “foolishness”: “Really, Mr. Immelman — if all you have to recommend you for the 6th District is that you are not Michele Bachmann, then spare us the typeface.”

Whether a vote for Anderson constitutes supporting a “spoiler,” the IP’s Uldrich gave his solution, then his opinion. The Independent Party supports instant-runoff voting (IRV), which allows voters to rank their voting preferences. (Democrats support IRV in their plank, he said, while Republicans oppose it).

“Whenever a voter votes his or her conscience it’s never a wasted vote,” Uldrich said. “That says quite a bit about the caliber of candidates the Republicans and Democrats are putting up.”