“Humor is a Form of Common Sense”: Further Notes on Franken’s Minnesota Run

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


My story on Al Franken’s Minnesota senate run hits the web today, and I thought I’d round it out with some more material on the blog.

There were three things that I heard consistently when I was on the ground in Minnesota. First, no one seemed to mind that Franken’s background is an unconventional one for a Senate candidate. Here were some responses I got when I asked about it:

  • “I think a lot of comedians find real big problems in our world. And they point out problems by making humor out of them.”
  • “It may be time we sent someone different to Washington.”
  • “Anybody who listens to [his radio show] knows he knows his stuff. If you read his books, you know he knows his stuff.”
  • “You can be a comedian and you can still be serious.”
  • “Humor is a form of common sense anyway.”

I was genuinely surprised that Minnesota Democrats (known as DFLers) were not more worried about Franken’s history of dirty jokes and lack of public service. The national media seems to think those two factors make Franken’s candidacy a non-starter, and Norm Coleman, the Republican incumbent, and other GOP forces are trying to play them up as much as possible.

The second thing I found is that Minnesotans deny being abnormally open to oddball candidates. It’s a common media meme, based on the fact that Minnesota elected Paul Wellstone, a short, bald college professor with a fanatical devotion to extremely liberal beliefs, and Jesse Ventura, a wrestler and C-level actor. “I don’t know if it’s just an anomaly,” Franken told me. “People embraced Paul because of his uniqueness, and I don’t know if that was just… unique.” He made the point that Wellstone connected in a very special way with people and was almost genetically truthful, and that voters from any state would have found him appealing. “And Ventura won in a three-way race at a point when the state was totally flush, when the economy was just tooling along, we had a surplus in the country and in the state. And I really believe that during that period… people went like, “How hard is it really to do this?”

Franken pointed something else out. “I think Ventura did speak to people’s dissatisfaction with the blandness of politics at the time. You know he had Skip Humphrey and Norm Coleman on either side of him.” As Minnesota native Garrison Keillor would say, “empty suits.” (Coleman later went on to win Wellstone’s senate seat after Wellstone died in a plane crash less than two weeks before the election.)

Even the professional punditry agreed. I asked Wy Spano, long-time Democratic politico and Director of the Center for Advocacy and Political Leadership at University of Minnesota Duluth, if Minnesotans like quirky politicians. He seemed taken aback. “I don’t know about that,” he said. He paused, and then went into a detailed explanation of Wellstone’s and Ventura’s elections.

This is the way Minnesotans account for their voting history, from Franken and Spano all the way down the line. If you examine the circumstances of Wellstone and Ventura individually, they say, and look at the accidents of history surrounding their campaigns, the explanations reveal themselves. As Mark Ritchie, Minnesota’s Secretary of State, said to me, “I don’t think voters appreciate quirkiness here any more than any place else.”

As for authenticity, it’s on the fore because of Wellstone — a man who Minnesotans, at least politically active ones, clearly still miss. Instead of a senator in Wellstone who was legendary for his rigid principles, Minnesotans got Coleman, a former Democrat with weathervane tendencies. One Democrat described Coleman to me as “one of the most transparently phony people in all of American politics.”

Franken has an aura of authenticity that Minnesotans were buzzing about. Maybe it’s that he sometimes gets so angry over a Bush Administration sin that he stumbles over his words and loses any semblance of a politician’s veneer. Maybe it’s that he has confronted all of the Right’s biggest bullies (O’Reilly, Limbaugh, Gingrich, Wolfowitz, among others) and no half-hearted liberal would put his reputation in harm’s way so recklessly and frequently. Regardless of the reason, people buy in. “We tend to send the same kind of people [to Washington],” said a retired farmer I spoke with Minnesota. “[They] are arrogant, have ambition, and have drive, and when they get there they kind of forget why they went. I think Al is the kind of person who if he got there would be the same kind of person he is now.”

The question is, is that a good thing for Minnesota? And for the Democratic Party?

And PS – I should admit that I spoke mostly to Democrats when I was up north — following a Democratic candidate on the campaign trail doesn’t put you in touch with many Republicans — so people were naturally disposed toward Franken. But the facts as I saw them do have bearing on his chances in the Democratic primary. I did attempt to contact Coleman’s campaign and the Minnesota Republican Party — they didn’t return my calls.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate