Readers Write: Park Tavern tragedy, presidential debate, Rachel Blount

Opinion editor’s note: Strib Voices publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

Since the horrific homicides at Park Tavern in St. Louis Park, many Minnesotans have asked how this tragedy could have been avoided. While no policy can eliminate all serious drunken driving, we could adopt proven policies that would significantly reduce it. Suspicionless, random breath testing has reduced road fatalities by 30% to 50% in many countries. In Minnesota, this would mean 150 to 200 lives a year. Effective random breath testing only requires an average of about one stop per driver per year. The inconvenience to daily life would be less than our current practice of IDing people into their 60s, and more effective.

Random breath testing is the road-safety equivalent of suspicionless metal detecting for guns and knives when entering public buildings and planes. A tiny inconvenience can prove surprisingly effective at saving the lives of hundreds.

Evan Roberts, Minneapolis

Tuesday night’s presidential debate was a profile in temperament. While there was some light shed on each candidate’s policy positions, I think Vice President Kamala Harris missed an opportunity to clarify a root cause of the increased cost of living. This is what I wish she would have said about inflation: The COVID pandemic, and its worldwide supply chain issues, spawned global inflation. As a result, every single economy experienced runaway price escalation. The United States was not spared. While the cost of day-to-day goods has increased here at home, the U.S. does indeed stand apart in its recovery. If you look at all the metrics, we are improving better and more quickly than every other major economy. There’s a lot of work yet to do, and it may seem like those successes are not being felt at the kitchen table, but we are not a “failing nation.” Inflation is falling month to month, and we are on the right track.

Susan Barrett, Mora, Minn.

•••

After watching the presidential debate Tuesday night between Harris and Trump, one thing is very obvious: We do not need another debate. The differences between these two candidates were as clear as could be — and will not change in the next few weeks. I’ve never been to a Trump rally before, but I think I have now experienced one.

Lynn Bollman, Minneapolis

•••

I am disappointed by the analyses of Tuesday’s presidential debate by Strib Editorial Board members (“We heard what they did. Still waiting on what they’d do,” Sept. 12). Yes, they were cogent, serious and, for the most part, accurate. However (to use a phrase now becoming popular), the “sane-washing” of what was said by Trump by these writers was beyond egregious. The board attempted to compare the nearly incoherent, angry ramblings that all but ignored the moderators’ questions from Trump to the well-communicated responses provided by Harris. The consistent interruptions after a Harris response to inject more anger and lies and a general failure to act and contribute in a manner somewhat suggesting self-control and, dare it be said, sanity was completely ignored by the analyses. While Harris stuck to her basic campaign themes without enough depth of policy details, her responses were delivered in a thoughtful and professional manner.

I doubt many voters will be swayed by this debate one way or the other, but for the Editorial Board to treat both performances as a discussion of equals is patently absurd.

Richard Rivett, Chaska

•••

The commentary about role reversal in our political parties was spot on (“Might we be witness to a political pole reversal?” Strib Voices, Sept. 12). I realized this reversal 25 years ago when I switched from a Democrat to a Republican. During my formative years, the Democrats supported the working class, abhorred big government (we didn’t need Big Brother overseeing us) and vehemently defended the First Amendment. Over the last 30 to 40 years, Democrats have championed big government, taxing the working class into subservience and censoring speech that differs from their narrative.

Regarding the debate, Mark Penn, pollster and former Bill Clinton adviser, stated it best, “There can be no fair game or debate no matter what the score when the referees put their fingers on the scale.” The moderators fact-checked Trump five times (three times erroneously, in my view) and Harris zero times (she made at least nine statements that were blatantly false, in my opinion). Neither candidate’s base was swayed by this farce but the independent, undecided voter may have been moved toward Trump. Reuters (a left-leaning news outlet) polled 10 undecided voters in swing states after the debate, and six said they will vote for Trump, three will vote for Harris and one is still undecided.

The American people are realizing the media is biased and will not even attempt to challenge Harris on her positions or even ask what those positions are. Hopefully we can survive the continued election interference by the media and rebuild our republic.

Bob Tumilson, Apple Valley

•••

The presidential debates prove nothing with respect to a candidate’s ability to lead a nation. In recent years, they have become spectacles for one-liners, personal attacks and biased moderators with agendas to pursue.

Many Americans did not watch the debates because they are tired of the fighting that goes on.

What the American people deserve is a thorough flushing-out of policies proposed by each candidate. A better format would entail each candidate spending 90 minutes presenting their policies and answering questions from a large cross-section of media (not just a select few). Deriving substance from the candidate is more important than trying to drive up TV ratings via a political cage match.

Perhaps this kind of presentation format would lesson some of the animosity and vitriol that the current debates help to foster as well?

Corby Pelto, Minneapolis

Commenting on former U.S. Rep. Liz Cheney’s recent statement that she will vote for Vice President Kamala Harris in the upcoming election, a Sept. 6 letter writer wrote that Cheney’s vote “will probably not be ‘counted’” because it will be cast in a red state. That sort of phrasing is inaccurate and dangerous because it leads to voter disengagement and false allegations of stolen elections. While her vote may not sway the results in her state, it will certainly be counted. When did people start believing that only votes for the winning candidate matter? All votes are counted, and they all matter. If the candidate you vote for loses, it simply means that more people voted for the other candidate, not that your vote wasn’t counted. If you don’t like being on the losing side, then get involved and help your candidate win.

Lori Wohlrabe, St. Louis Park

Thank you to sportswriter Rachel Blount. I was sad to see on social media that Blount is no longer writing for the Minnesota Star Tribune. Thanks to her for writing on women sports and sports that do not — but should — receive attention, such as volleyball, horse racing, swimming, track and field, etc. Her articles were inspiring and showed there are more spectacular sports out there besides football and men’s basketball (and I like both, but that is the main focus of the sports section). Her coverage of women’s sports was fantastic. She covered the Olympics, Special Olympics, etc. And she continued while she went through chemo, which was another inspiration for all of us. I will really miss reading her articles.

Thank you for your time and effort.

Amy Omodt, Minneapolis