Tweets Candidates Learn to Regret

When you’re a candidate running against an incumbent, there are usually qualities that people want to see in you – like the ability to identify and properly handle problems in a calm and reasonable manner. Because, let’s face it, if you’re elected, you’re going to be helping constituents with a lot of red tape and general bureaucratic messes. It would seem that Mike Starr, running for election to Minnesota’s 31st Senate seat, might not be the most qualified for handling problems in a calm and reasonable manner.

This is his very public response to getting a bad grade from NRA on his questionnaire:

It seems he has since tried to send the tweet down the memory hole, so I guess he learned that acceptable political rhetoric from a candidate rarely involves demands to “kiss [one’s] ass” directed at a major interest group for a key demographic.

Now, I’ve been involved with a campaign whose opponent was unfairly given an inflated grade and ignored in the endorsement process when it was a clear choice for gun owners in a winnable seat. You know how they handled it? Ask around and contacted NRA about the grades. Guess how NRA handled it? They reconsidered the race, acknowledged the need to revise the grade, and sent out postcards noting the correction. Don’t get me wrong, the internal folks were initially very upset with the situation. But, they didn’t react by cursing at NRA publicly.

On Starr’s website, he indicates he has previous grades of A & B from NRA. I went searching and found that he has run for office before, and his grade was already on the decline due to his answers on his questionnaires. More importantly, his grades were from years ago, not the most recent election cycle. The issue has fundamentally changed since he first answered a questionnaire. Heller, McDonald, the expiration of a federal gun ban – all monumental game changers that happened since he first answered NRA and his grade has fallen since those things started happening.

Now, I’m not arguing that NRA got it 100% right in this case because, clearly, I haven’t seen his responses. On the other hand, I can say that this type of outburst on behalf of his campaign account doesn’t exactly bode well for any gun owners who might want to talk to him about concerns about his positions. It looks like he would just tell them all to “kiss [his] ass” and walk away.

UPDATE: To Starr’s credit, his demand for gun owners to kiss his ass still stands. Twitter was just acting up and telling me the tweet was no longer there when I gathered the information for this post. Here’s the Twitter embed version:

14 thoughts on “Tweets Candidates Learn to Regret”

  1. Starr’s next tweet (5 minutes later):

    In the past the NRA has given me an ‘A” and a “B” rating. How they can drop it to an “F” shows how they have their head up their ass!

  2. It’d be interesting to find out where this guy is falling down. Might take a lot of shoveling if we can’t see his survey answers.

    1. Considering the tone & maturity of his initial response, I’m not sure you’d get a clear answer from him. For example, the parts of his resume he highlights have less to do with the issue as it stands now versus 2004.

  3. You know, even if his NRA Questionaire answers revealed that he deserved an A+ rating on gun rights, and his biographer coudl prove he was the second coming of Jeff Cooper, and a direct descendent of John Moses Browning and Annie Oakley… I’m going to give in an F in statesmanship.

    Maybe I’m old fashioned, but I prefer my legislators to behavior more “Mr. Smith Goes to Washiongton” and less “Kevin Smith Goes to Atlantic City.”

  4. Here is what his opponent Michelle Benson says in part about gun rights:

    Peaceable citizens have a right to own guns to protect their person and property. Even the best efforts of our police and peace officers cannot protect us in every situation.

    She also voted for the Castle Doctrine.

    Starr does include this – Please remember the word D.O.G. which means: Democrates Own Guns. I’m not sure what a “Democrates” is but I presume he means “Democrats”.

  5. I think he needs a comma or two. I’m with Packetman. I THINK he meant “spt C+C, spt 2nd Amendment” . Translated, it means “support Concealed and Carry” comma “support Second Amendment.”

    But it sounds to me like he was “Coasting’ on his old Credentials, and got caught between the Modern Democratic Party and the NRA. And since the Modern Democratic Party is the Party of Harry, Barry, Hillary and Nancy; and we KNOW how they “feel” about the RKBA, this guy is more angry about being caught than he is about his NRA Creds. Seems to me we have a “Sheep in Wolves Clothing” here.

    1. Wow, I totally didn’t see that translation. But your guess is as good as mine. That’s kind of sad when people who put a priority on gun positions and are more politically aware than the average voter have to guess what he meant. :)

Comments are closed.