Reply #8: Oh, Hatch, the one who flip flopped on abortion and lied to DFL activists

[Dickie Flatt]

...doesn't mean you should vote for him.

He's run for governor twice. He's lost in the primary twice. But now it looks like he just might easily coast through the primary for no reason other than it's "his turn."

Don't do it. You can't trust Hatch. Remember how I said he lost the primary twice? Well, at least one of those times, he shouldn't have even been in the primary. He was only there because he LIED to the DFL delegates and BROKE HIS WORD to DFL activists during his 1990 run for governor:

Hatch, a former party chairman, had said he would abide by the endorsement. Yesterday he said he still expects to win it, but he said he had to go into the primary. "If one (candidate) does, the other would be a fool not to," he said "We are in this to the end."

And he's only attorney general now because he ran against the endorsed candidate in 1998.

And his record on choice? Not consistent. Not principled. Here's a tidbit from a 2001 Star Tribune article:

His critics say Hatch tried to pull off one of the more cynical stunts in Minnesota politics when, in the space of four years, he went from selling himself as the abortion-rights alternative to Perpich to remaking himself as an abortion-opposing alternative to DFL nominee John Marty in 1994.

And back in '94, he was supported by Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life! From the Strib in '94:

Mike Hatch, 45, lost the gubernatorial primary four years ago as an ardent abortion-rights supporter. He softened his message this year and picked up the support of Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life (MCCL).

Watch him go! Here's Hatch in 1990:

"I support the right of women, not politicians, making that decision. Rudy Perpich does not," Hatch said at a State Capitol news conference with Emily Anne Staples, his lieutenant governor candidate. ...

And while Hatch noted that he's been a consistent supporter of abortion rights, his new emphasis on the issue is a politically pragmatic move. Abortion is not a liberal or conservative issue, but one that cuts across party lines, he said.

But in 1994, Hatch sang a different tune:

The MCCL backing is based on Hatch's agreement with the group's position on each of eight questions involving current abortion issues. His positions include support for "informed consent" laws and parental notification and opposition to public funding for abortions and against the proposed Freedom of Choice Act. He also sided with MCCL in backing a law against abortion "as a means of birth control." ..

The MCCL recommendation is based on Hatch's perfect score on eight questions listed in the newsletter. His responses represent a dramatic transformation, said Lisa Goodman, executive director of the Minnesota affiliate of the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League.

While Hatch was a "100 percent pro-choice" candidate for governor in 1990, his responses to MCCL questions represent an abrupt about-face, Goodman said. "Obviously, the pro-choice community cannot trust Mike Hatch. I wonder if the MCCL, or the citizens of Minnesota, should trust him," Goodman said.

Hatch said this about MCCL's support: "I welcome it."

And just read what people in this thread have said about him. The negative stuff is really negative.

Honestly, why Hatch?