In the end, voters feared other candidacies more than they favored mine

The best explanation of Minnesota's elections might be found in Will Rogers' insight: "The more you read and observe about this politics thing, you got to admit that each party is worse than the other. The one that's out always looks the best."

But left unanswered again this year is why the party that is almost ALWAYS out -- the Independence Party -- didn't look better to voters than the two parties that are almost ALWAYS in? Why did the voters' pendulum swing from one extreme to the other without stopping at the point on the arc where most Minnesota voters say they reside -- the middle?

Especially perplexing is that 2010 was a year in which the stars seemed to be aligned in favor of the IP:

Opposing parties that nominated candidates from the far reaches of their respective ideologies.

Voters who held incumbents in low regard.

An IP candidate -- me -- who was able to earn the endorsement of virtually every major newspaper in the state, three former governors, a former Republican U.S. senator and a former Democratic member of Congress, as well as a tri-partisan group of business organizations, civic leaders and current and former local officials.

Yet all that translated into only about 250,000 votes, leaving two obvious questions: What happened, and what does it mean for the IP's future?

To the first question, four events defined the campaign from my perspective:

First, when my wave came, all I could do was keep my head above the water. From the Aug. 10 primary election to mid-September, when former Gov. Arne Carlson endorsed me, I had a great surge of momentum. At the same time, Republican Tom Emmer's campaign was rocking from the candidate's summer missteps and the devastating television ad accusing him of leading legislative efforts to undermine penalties for DUI convictions.

At this critical time, I lacked the resources to effectively leverage my momentum, exploit the opportunities created by Emmer's struggling campaign or rebut the under-the-radar-screen attacks launched against me by DFL interest groups. If I had been able to meet my campaign fundraising target of $2 million to $2.5 million, it's possible my early surge could have been sustained and the attacks against me could have been neutralized. As it turns out, my fundraising will be about $1 million short of our high-end goal.

Second, the IP opportunity became my millstone. It wasn't serendipity that I ended up running against Democrat Mark Dayton and Republican Emmer. I expected that they would be the nominees and that the political middle would be left wide open. But the extreme polarization reflected in their candidacies left many Minnesota voters vulnerable to fear-mongering. The DFL played on voters' fears of a Gov. Emmer and the Republicans played on voters' fears of a Gov. Dayton. With public surveys -- flawed as they were -- showing my support lagging, voters were susceptible to the fear-mongering.

Third, contrary to those who fall back on the simplistic "spoiler" tag for the IP, the 2010 election didn't turn on my "taking" votes from Emmer. The media and others should stop the nonsense about the IP "taking" votes. There is a loyal base of support for the IP that transcends any single candidate.

The real challenge -- and it was as true for Emmer as it was for me -- was to cut into Dayton's base, which consistently remained at about 40 percent. Emmer's likely defeat reflects the political reality that many voters perceived him to be too far out of Minnesota's mainstream. He wasn't able to attract the DFL and small "i" independent voters needed to win. That he came within 8,700 votes reflects only the last-minute surge of voters angered by Democrats nationally and a smaller-than-expected voter turnout. The basic math remains. Emmer wasn't able to cut into Dayton's base, and that left him unelectable.

Fourth, give credit where credit is due. Dayton ran a disciplined and strategically effective campaign. His single message of "tax the rich" resonated with many Minnesotans and gave a rallying cry to unify Democrats -- moderates and liberals -- frustrated by a 24-year absence from the governor's office.

Looking to the future, is there a role for the Independence Party?

Certainly, the messages of recent IP gubernatorial candidates, me included, resonate with thousands of Minnesotans. All the endorsements that came my way are acknowledgement among those who follow politics and public policy most closely that the bilateral approaches -- make government bigger or make government smaller -- aren't enough. We have to do things differently.

But translating this message to electoral success will take time and effort.

If the IP is to succeed, it needs to have a full-time voice in Minnesota politics. It can't be a party that is defined only by a different candidate every two or four years. The IP needs to establish a clear identity and then sell it in Rotary Clubs, at chambers of commerce, on MPR's "Midday" and in every other forum where politics and policy are discussed outside of the election cycle.

The IP's role isn't just to put new issues on the table, but to hold Democrats and Republicans accountable. Objectivity, as it is defined by most in today's media, leaves reporters unable or unwilling to challenge the viability of partisan proposals. It takes a credible political entity to confront political-slogans-as-policy-solutions, like "tax the rich" or "government must live within its means."

The IP also needs to build the infrastructure of a party. While political reforms, including ranked choice voting, are good for the overall political process, the IP also needs to show that it is able and willing to do fundraising, grassroots development and candidate recruitment on a full-time basis.

And the IP needs to be a disciplined party. It has to actively discourage less-than-qualified candidates and it has to be willing to stay out of election contests in which the Democrats or Republicans are represented by centrist candidates.

I'm not certain what the future holds for me beyond helping the IP answer these questions. But I don't for one moment regret my decision to run for office. It is an honor to have had the opportunity. As I said on Election Night, running for statewide office is like getting a Ph.D. in Minnesota. My family and I will treasure the experience, and the education.

----

Tom Horner, former partner in the public relations firm of Himle Horner Inc. and former political analyst for MPR News, was the Independence Party candidate for governor of Minnesota in this month's election.

Gallery

Fullscreen SlideshowPrevious Slide

1 of 1

Next Slide