I find it entertaining that Cube's junk is in a solid second place, with a commanding lead on Granholm.
I don't know that it matters a great deal which one wins.
MI's economy is not the doing of Granholm, nor Engler before her. It's also not the doing of Dubya or Klinton before him. MI's economy is the net result of "having all of your eggs in one basket".
MI is dependent upon the domestic auto business, which has a number of serious challenges, such as unsustainable union contracts, bankrupting legacy healthcare costs, a product mix heavy on high-margin/low MPG/big ticket trucks & SUVs, a virtual surrender of the "family car" segment to imports, mostly uninspiring new products, and a seemingly unbeatable perception that their quality is second-rate.
MI's economy will get better if:
a) the domestic auto business gets better - in a big way (unlikely to happen soon)
b) the MI economy gets diversified (long term)
c) non-big 3 auto companies see MI as an attractive place to do business (longer term, but a business-friendly Governor can help a little)
I've seen a lot of new material from top-notch economists over the last few weeks - and although they differ on details, all agree that the view for MI is bleak until 2010 or later. It's generally agreed that it'll be 2010 before MI sees employment numbers like 2000 (i.e four or more years to get where we were six years ago, if we're lucky).
I don't see a lot of difference between them. He's pro-life, and she's pro-choice. Big deal - governors won't be re-deciding that, if it should be revisited.
He thinks it's OK to present intelligent design alongside Darwin, she says Darwin stands alone. They're both theories, and I think kids stand to learn more by learning that there are multiple viewpoints. However, I don't look to a governor for school cirriculum design (that's what Hacksaw is for).
The fact that Granholm's best pitch is to paint a distorted picture of DeVos is troublesome. Note: he DID NOT MOVE MI JOBS TO CHINA - he did eliminate jobs in MI and - in a seperate and unrelated move - build a facility in China to serve the exploding Chinese market, as required by Chinese law.
The fact that his best stuff is pointing out her inability to get Honda to build a plant in MI (face it, that's not gonna happen as long as there's a UAW - I don't care WHO is governor) is also weak.
Neither one is particularly inspiring. They both would pass the Ross Perot "would you leave your kids with them?" test. For me, it's DeVos for the sake of change and because he has a better (albeit still slim)chance of driving some diversification of this economy.
This is the Pub. Leave common sense at the door.