That Sioux Falls paper’s new political reporter decided to write a Sunday piece about the South Dakota Democratic Party. Dana Ferguson’s report included the following statements:
- Rep. Spence Hawley (D-7/Brookings) cheers Governor Dennis Daugaard’s surrender, after a costly three-year delay, to the logic of Medicaid expansion.
- Ferguson says Democrats see the “unlikely emergence of Medicaid expansion and teacher pay at the top of the 2016 legislative agenda” as a “rare window of opportunity to make some progress” on policy and political relevance.
- Ferguson then douses that optimism by noting historic lows in officeholders and voter registration and questioning “whether the party has enough of an organization in place to be a factor in Pierre or next year’s statewide elections.”
- Minnehaha County Commissioner Jeff Barth seconds that pessimism, saying the party is “shrinking” and “dismal.”
- University of Minnesota professor Eric Ostermeier throws foam on the water and the wet blanket, saying, “This is the bleakest outlook for the party since the 1950s.” (Ostermeier elaborates on that bleak outlook with more historical data in a Sunday post on his blog.)
- Ferguson says staff turnover and lack of statewide office holders have hamstrung SDDP fundraising and candidate recruitment.
- Ferguson says the SDDP has lost registered voters since 1978.
- New SDDP exec Suzanne Jones Pranger counters that the SDDP can find support among Independents.
- Former Minnehaha County Democratic Party chairman Sheldon Osborn says Democratic legislators won’t have much effect on whether Medicaid expansion or teacher pay raises pass unless the GOP splits on those issues.
- Jones Pranger says voters will see corruption as reason to elect more Democrats to the Legislature.
- USD professor Elizabeth Smith says South Dakota doesn’t vote Democratic very often.
- Senator Billie Sutton (D-21/Burke) says Democrats need to translate their success on ballot measures into success in electing candidates.
The GOP spin blog’s approach to Ferguson’s article is first to excerpt Barth’s pessimism and the “bleak” subheading as the only items worth noting, then invoke his vomit fetish (can we all agree that “threw up in my mouth a little” is gratuitous and gross?) and stroke his rabid partisan audience’s fur by accusing that Sioux Falls paper of editorial bias for its print headline, “Dems Looking Up.”
It’s not my job to defend the paper. But when I look at a front-page Sunday article that offers more reasons from more sources for pessimism than for optimism (compound that pessimism with the Drinking Liberally observation, in which the GOP spin blog gleefully rolls, that the rural dominance of the SDDP reduces its effectiveness), I do feel a duty to offer Democrats some constructive counterpoint.
If you think Democrats are in a tight spot, here’s what you can do:
First, recruit candidates for Legislature. We have the U.S. House race covered, and the SDDP leadership assures us they have the U.S. Senate race covered. We have 35 districts that need their local movers and shakers to find three brave souls to pick up the winning issues of corruption, teacher pay, and defense of voting rights (polling places for Indians, the right to initiative and referendum) and demand new legislators who will act on those issues.
As you recruit Legislative candidates, think school board members. Those folks have won elections, and they can speak more directly than anyone in your district to the bind the Legislature has put them in by strangling K-12 funding for two generations.
Also, think teachers. They can speak to the impacts of K-12 funding in their classroom. They can speak to the impacts of barrel-bottom teacher pay in their ranks, as they have watched their classmates from college move away for better pay.
You may find other candidates whose personal and professional experience can tie nicely to the big issues on the table. Maybe you can find a local doctor or nurse who can speak to the advantages of expanding Medicaid and how foolish and costly it was to reject that expansion for three years out of pure political spite. Maybe you can find a lawyer or an accountant who can speak to the legal and financial issues involved in the corruption that runs rampant in Pierre (and Aberdeen, and Platte).
Second, be ready to raise heck on ballot measures. We have two referred laws and eight filed initiatives that we can cite as proof that South Dakotans feel their Legislature is not only not responding to the popular will but, in the case of youth minimum wage, actively thwarting it.
Second-and-a-half, keep in mind that we might need to do one or two more ballot measures. The 2016 Legislature could still screw up. They might still resurrect HB 1234 and tie the Blue Ribbon teacher pay raise to counterproductive merit pay, which we would have to kill to save our schools. Senator Corey Brown (R-23/Gettysburg) might try again to destroy the initiative and referendum process, and we might have to take our democracy back. I’m not eager to walk around with more referendum petitions, but if the GOP supermajority asks for another referendum, they’ll get it.
Third, be ready to promote that synergy that Senator Sutton says we should be able to use between candidate success and ballot measure success. Tell your legislative candidates to talk about the ballot measures, especially the referred youth minimum wage, the referred petition reform bill, the independent redistricting proposal to stop gerrymandering, the 36% payday lending rate cap, and the Anti-Corruption Act. If your candidates sound confused, have them call me, and I will explain every one of the ballot measures well enough that your candidates can go out and make blistering stump speeches on all of them!
I like these three and a half suggestions because they don’t require waiting for someone at Party Central to make them happen. We need Legislative candidates; we can each talk to our friends and local leaders and roust some up. We need to get educated about ballot measures and spread the word: we can do that ourselves by having conversations and sharing articles online.
The South Dakota Democratic Party has lots of dings against it. We’ve lost important seats and thousands of voters. Now we need to get them back. That effort starts now with a push (from the bottom as well as from the top!) for the Legislature tied to ballot measures that South Dakotans will support.
A very good article “The Decline of South Dakota Democrats” written by a professor at the University of Minnesota Humphrey School of Public affairs. http://editions.lib.umn.edu/smartpolitics/2015/12/20/the-decline-of-south-dakota-democrats/
Hey SDDP can go for that Hail Mary pass and get Monarch America to a few more fundraisers right? Rather than focusing on the long term narrative of restoring the middle class they go for the short term gain and in the end ads more fuel to the thriving poverty industry in South Dakota.
Eric Ostermeier is an earth hater of Lauckian proportions.
Hear, hear Mr. Heidelberger. Your advise is as sound and grounded as your moral approach to politics. South Dakota has become the state of the “politically selfish” and that’s in direct opposition to the feelings of it’s people.
Ostermeier’s twitter feed is a hate orgy. He makes Jon Lauck look like a liberal.
It’s hard to dispute facts.
Yet Pat Powers disputes facts all the time.
I wonder if there aren’t a few people like myself that generally vote Democrat but register as Republican so that I can vote in a primary that has a lot more choices. Plus I can tell people, when they call me an environmental left wing activist nut job, that I am a registered Republican.
Amen, Paul.
So Paul…. what you’re saying is that D candidates should maybe register and run R…. and remain environmental left wing activist nut jobs, too?
What social policies out there would be bad for Dakotans? Which religious/fear driven wingnut policies out there are good for Dakotans?
Is Medicare bad?
Is helping the poor bad?
Is educating kids bad?
Taking care of the elderly?
Equal rights for everyone?
How about allowing everyone to go armed everywhere?
How about giving all to the wealthy?
How about taking away rights for women?
How about spending tax payer dollars on private/parochial schools?
Discriminating against gays,lesbians and transgendered people?
I view political party participation in ballot measures as both an indication of party failure and a detouring of party organizing effort into inappropriate avenues. The SD Constitution is pretty clear about this: the initiative and referendum are the people’s (not parties’) process. I think parties should stay out of the process, but there is, apparently, no bar against party sponsored initiatives or referenda.
However, when a party is barely alive and incapable of electing leadership that can put forth, let alone enact, alternative policy and programs, people (not parties) have little alternative but to use the initiative and referendum.
I hadn’t really thought of it that way 12 but you might be onto something. The Democrats have an open caucus during the legislature so one could still participate in that.
Mike I know Porter has the answer so does Lanny,But our Governor can’t figure this out as it is rocket science to him.Can you imagine waiting this long to to help the unfortunate all over money.Have a great Christmas Gov, by the way do you have a conscience.
The National Republican Party a couple weeks ago sent out sent out a lengthy issue survey to a 90+ year old relative of mine who is registered R and always votes. It was different than the push poll mini surveys they usually send out which are simply disguised fundraising pitches. This big survey was real, though the questions were still slanted. Besides the obligatory pitch for donations, the main gist of it was a question about when and how the person votes. Is it on election day, or before? If before, is it in person or by absentee ballot? If by absentee ballot, how do you get your ballot? Do you need help getting a ballot?
The SDGOP has always had an absentee ballot get out the vote program, and now the national GOP is getting in on the action. The Democratic Party needs to make contact with all Democrats and put an absentee ballot in their hands. But even more, the SDDP needs to put boots on the ground re-activating inactive Democratic voters and registering new ones. This will be a multi-cycle process in SD, so they better get going now. That said, all hope is not lost. Politics is cyclical, and when there is a Republican President the SDDP will do well as it did from 2002 – 2008. That is, if it starts preparing now for success by doing what McGovern did – grassroots organizing.
Rohr-the state of iowa sent every eligible voter absentee ballots in 2014. I did not use mine because I make it a point to vote and democracy in person. I ended up in the hospital on November 3 and 4, 2014 and did not get to vote. Never again will i miss that opportunity.
It was once explained to be by a wonderful Democrat (who never ran for office) that there is a fundamental distinction between Democrats and Republicans when it comes to running for office. Republicans see running for office as public service; they run when they have established a professional career that allows the time to take that step – avocation. Democrats see public service as a vocation – most often a career that does not allow time off for legislative service. As such, Republicans channel public service to candidacy, while Democrats channel public service away from it.
I wish we would disband both (all) parties. The labeling of candidates is outdated. Now the party affiliation has degraded to the intellectual status of sport team allegiance – it might as well be Vikings and Packers.
66 county seats means 66 county chairs. How is that conservative or sustainable?
http://wnax.com/news/180081-sd-counties-may-be-the-next-in-line-in-pierre/
O so is Thune a democrat and Rounds they both work in the public sector.Tell me what they have done for South Dakota except mass money for themselves.
Lynn, your statement that the SDDP should have Monarch America do a few more fundraisers for them falsely asserts that the SDDP has had Monarch America do any fundraisers for it.
As you can see above, I do not consider coordination with Monarch America to have any top-tier value for the 2016 campaign in South Dakota.
Cory,
The SDDP has already had Monarch America share the stage at one fundraiser down in Vermillion along with the essentially the soft tug at the heartstrings fake/flawed medical/recreational pot advocates so why not? They are desperate for donations.
*yawn*
On Ostermeier, Kurtz, your slaggings offer no refutation. Show me what things he said aren’t true and/or provide additional facts to counter the statement that the Democrats have undergone a great decline.
As I note in my link to Ostermeier’s fuller blog post in the original post, Ostermeier speaks of past performance, historical data. He offers no assessment of the current SDDP players’ ability to reverse that decline. He asserts that the SDDP is in danger of leaving Thune unchallenged, but he provides no evidence that the SDDP is lying when it says it is recruiting a candidate. The Ostermier article says a great decline has taken place. It does not prove that the decline will continue.
The true low point for Democrats electorally was 1952. That election produced only two Democrat seats in the House (73 Rs) and zero in the 35-member Senate. If all politics are local, losing all but two legislative races marks the exact point where SDDP hit bottom.
During summer 1953, SDDP Chairman Ward Clark hired college prof George S. McGovern who built a state party organization where none really ever existed. Looking further back, Democrats got lucky in 1926 when Republicans were feuding, resulting in the first Democrat being elected governor, William J. Bulow, who later was elected U.S. Senator and in 1932 when FDR’s momentum swept in Tom Berry for two terms as governor. Prior to George McGovern’s service as SDDP executive secretary, Democrats didn’t work at creating and sustaining their own luck.
I’ve thought a lot about Bob Mercer’s analysis about the downward spiral of the Democratic organization in South Dakota and the electoral behavior of Republicans to vote every election and always vote Republican. Bob talks about an age group that is marching to the graveyard and which held up the electoral prospects of Democrats like George McGovern, Tom Daschle and Tim Johnson. I believe the indication is the true believers who are fading away remember the benefit of all those alphabet soup programs of the New Deal and which built a booming post-WWII economy in South Dakota. If that is the source of the Kneip-McGovern era surge, then why would pretty much the same electorate in 1952 elect only two Democrats to the entire legislature?
The success of Democrats in South Dakota started with George McGovern’s efforts, which were not and are not rocket science. It was simply hard work, determination and follow-through. He built a successful House campaign in the 1st Congressional District in 1956, and the model hatched a successful governor campaign for Ralph Herseth in 1958 (one term). McGovern lost the 1960 Senate race, but won in 1962 and used his incumbency to keep the model functioning in the 60s. Unplanned opportunity, a severe blunder by then-Gov. Frank Farrar, ushered in Dick Kneip as governor in 1970, but his incumbency didn’t spread wings to other seats until 1972. You know the rest.
Lessons learned (but too frequently ignored): Never stop working harder than Republicans. Never give up. Never leave ballot positions open anywhere. Take smart advantage of small and large opportunities, like the never ending supply of corruption scandals in the Daugaard and Rounds administrations.
I agree with observers that SDDP has been the underdog in South Dakota politics. So what? The deck has always been stacked for Republicans, although national waves have some impact here. In 2008, the presidential primary campaign produced a large surge in SDDP registrations while GOP registrations flat-lined, but the SDDP failed to sustain that opportunity. My observation was and remains that Democrat Party hierarchy is more interested in internal squabbles, geographic snobbery, placating egocentric personalities and chasing inconsequential priorities. They should always be raising big money, recruiting candidates for all ballot positions, running a perpetual campaign against the SDGOP stronghold in Pierre, and centralizing a strong effort to elect all Democrats on the ballot (instead of table scraps for down ballot efforts, if even that). Mostly, they look at opportunities with indifference or pessimism, leading one to think that the Democrat mascot in South Dakota is Eeyore and not the heel-raised donkey of the DNC.
Cory, I think your remedy is right on the money. I’ve never met the two SDDP staffers seen in the Sanford Leader article, but I will assume they can function. But will key Democrats let them function by doing their part to help create a statewide success?
The ballot issues are prime for Democrats to use, especially the initiative to give the boot to loan sharks. It speaks volumes to South Dakota voters that they hold the power to improve their state. If there are SDDP officials who choose to continue internal squabbles and misdirection, I hope the SDDP staff and leadership show those clowns the door until they grow up.
I don’t buy the narrative that the best days of the SDDP are gone. They’re in front of us, but it requires consistent leadership and a sock in the jaw for the naysayers for being stupid, wrong and lazy.
Remember, you’re got more than just two Democrat legislators. You’re much better off, Democrats. You’ve got the best political blog by far with DFP. You’ve got assets with the issues and that creates enthusiasm. Stop dropping the ball.
http://www.democratsforprogress.com/2013/09/23/take-five-jerks-in-progress-edition/
O, it sounds like we’ve got your vote for the non-partisan primary initiative? Does that initiative have the potential to draw Independent voters to a legislative candidate who trumpets it?
Lynn, I maintain that your interpretation of that Vermillion event is incorrect. Given that Monarch America’s stock has flatlined since the Flandreau burn-up and is now literally worthless, they are now completely irrelevant to the election.
Moses, I don’t claim that either Rounds or Thune are Democrats. Don’t be silly. My claim is that both probably see their elected roles now as “public service.” Whereas democrats see their vocation as public service.
http://www.shotinthedark.info/wp/?p=5425
http://www.shotinthedark.info/wp/?p=5426
http://www.shotinthedark.info/wp/?p=5427
Cory,
Leadership of SDDP, Paula Hawks who also shared the stage sure didn’t think having a marijuana grower from Colorado and advocates for legalization were such a bad idea when they highlighted them for the fundraiser in Vermillion. What happened in Flandreau was probably a temporary setback in their minds. Elle Spawn who is running for a legislative seat for 2016 is endorsed and a favorite of SDAP. I could go on with others. Sure looks like an endorsement and at the very least a convenient association to others and myself.
What was interesting were the denials stating that they were simply putting them up there for voters to have a choice. At a SDDP fundraiser? If that’s the case why not have reps from Keystone XL, Dakota Access and the 18% payday loan rate cap there to speak and advertised as big draws?
96,
Have you been to a SDDP Central Committee meeting lately? Bless their hearts that they are there but it’s an older group that maybe have a few election cycles left. Once they are gone where are the younger ones to replace them? They barely have enough for a quorum and must get confirmations beforehand or it will be a long drive for many not to be able to have an official meeting.
SDDP has zero to lose by being revolutionary.
South Dakota is one state where the perception of harm from cannabis is declining.
http://www.samhsa.gov/data/sites/default/files/report_2121/ShortReport-2121.html
Bernie Sanders: “Any serious criminal justice reform must include removing marijuana from the Controlled Substances Act.”
Lynn – I heard that has been the case for at least the past 25 years. There needs to be a new instrument for party building than waiting for the next U.S. Senate campaign or hoping to create county party leaders in all 66 counties. As Mr. Kurtz indicates, SDDP has nothing to lose by being revolutionary. Perhaps the most useful tool may be DFP. Cory does what George McGovern did, but without driving thousands of miles. He engages people in conversation and then keeps the conversation running. If people are willing to invest their time to read about the issues and to speak their minds, they are more likely to invest their money and efforts to win elections.
I got a chance to see McGovern a couple times in his last years. He really enjoyed people walking up to him to talk. I noticed that he spent more time listening and asking why people believed what they said, even when they strongly disagreed. I think there’s some wisdom in that.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/02/27/63-of-republican-millennials-favor-marijuana-legalization/
96@noticed that he spent more time listening and asking why people believed what they said, even when they strongly disagreed. I think there’s some wisdom in that.”””” I hope you believe and not just think, 96.
RW did an admirable job in his senate run. Why didn’t he get my vote? Regardless of how close I might have been on many issues with the voices of the Dem party, they were not willing to hear me out in the arena of our disagreements. I am not willing to vote for their man and have no voice in the future of political unity other than my consent to their desires.
On the weaker side for not voting Weiland, continuing attacks for being registered pub without knowlege of who I am or how I vote drive me away from both parties. Lynn is obvious collateral over one issue and you have her possibly driving votes to the GOP.
What an uphill battle for Take It Back!
Les – What was your motivation for voting (or not voting at all) in that contest? Please clarify what you mean in that second paragraph. Am I to understand that if your voice can’t be heard above the voices of others who find consensus, you’re not interested in consensus? What are the grievances you have that nobody wanted to hear?
Speaking of grievances, start airing them now. Happy Festivus!
No doubt, a full slate in ’16 meaning strong legislative candidates and quality initiatives and referendum issues are a must for the SDDP next year and its future. But there is also one other ingredient which is needed to make the SDDP viable in the future. Eventually, fate will give the Democrats in South Dakota a winner in a statewide office, when that happens it is imperative that that successful candidate (especially if it is a federal position) be more than just about themselves and their own political continuance. We are in the state we are in today as a political party, because since the 1980s, the SDDP has been a congressional party, and or a party for a few families and not a state party. It has over the years been too much about the winners and their families and not about the party. It is time the party apparatus stop being used by statewide successful candidates like a sailor who is only at port temporarily. If we do not break that potentially reoccurring reality, our relevance as a party will continue to be just talk instead of an genuine reality.
Winston, I agree that if Paula Hawks beats Kristi Noem, Hawks needs to use her political capital to bring other Democrats along. Winning Legislative candidates need to help each other (though can Legislative candidates do anything for folks beyond their district lines?). McGovern shared that wealth, right? In what ways have subsequent top elected Dems done that?
Contrast this op/ed with anything John Thune has ever written:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tom-daschle/learning-by-example-an-ex_b_8804096.html
96, thank you for taking the time to develop your thoughts (and ours!). Let’s look at the lessons 96 says we can draw from SDDP history:
Never stop working harder than Republicans. Case in point: Dakota Free Press vs. Dakota War College. I now beat Pat on eyeballs and authority, which only happened by working harder than Pat every day, not relying on press releases as crutches, and insisting that Pat’s tactics are not the template for successful blogging. (Larry, take note.)
Never give up. That’s this blog’s motto (that, and that thing about being South Dakota’s true liberal media :-) ). We can’t surrender to Newquistian despair. We must a reason to get up and fight.
Never leave ballot positions open anywhere. No kidding! Readers, don’t wait for the SDDP or even your county leaders to make calls and anoint candidates. If you’re reading this, you’re smart enough to recognize a good candidates in your community. Go talk to them, go get them to run. Or if you have the chops, run yourself!
Take smart advantage of small and large opportunities, like the never ending supply of corruption scandals in the Daugaard and Rounds administrations. Corruption is an opportunity. The Blue Ribbon debate is an opportunity. Corey Brown’s assault on initiative and referendum is an opportunity. A Presidential election in which we will have another strong, history-making candidate is an opportunity. Five or six good ballot measures are an opportunity. 2016 has opportunities lying around like candies at the toddlers’ Easter Egg hunt. Get your bucket and run out there!
96, I respond humbly and dubiously to your comparison of my work to McGovern’s. What you say about McGovern’s willingness to converse and listen is a profound observation on his wisdom, something I need to get better at. But speaking nuts-and-boltsily, if this blog is doing a digital analogue to McGovern’s statewide outreach, how do we transform it from conversation to organizing and electoral success? I mean, I’ve been talking a lot for the last ten years (and it took half that time just to get noticed), but has this blog awakened any county parties, recruited any candidates, or won any elections? The data say no. What’s the next step that we all have to take—author, commenters, and readers—that translates the connections made here into useful electoral action?
Hey, Donald! If party involvement in ballot measures is a bad idea, how about candidate involvement? Whether or not parties should be putting measures on the ballot, once they’re on the ballot, should candidates promote or fight them, with an eye toward vote synergy?
you’re welcome, cory.
Mr. H, I do not attempt to minimize your harder work and improvements and getting more eyeballs, if that be the case. I laud you, young sir. You did work harder and harder and do things to earn more respect.
I would also point out that in your example, Mr. PP seems to have slipped considerably since his hay days and his blog loads so slow nobody can stand it and is only about press releases we could all read elsewhere if we wanted to read them at all. So he kind of chopped off his own foot there.
Point being it’s like you are the GOP and Mr. PP is the SDDP.
The DWC needs to upgrade its Soviet software. DOS is just not cool any more….
PP at the press release blog hasn’t even troubled himself to write a post on the GOP Presidential debate last week. I guess he’s waiting for someone to write him a press release on it. Or maybe he believes that none of his readers care about such things and would rather just read press releases.
y’all know cory didn’t build this by himself, right?
His sidekick?
Mr. Rorschach, I myself never bother to read any of those press releases. It, and the slowness, drives me almost insaner than all get out. Nobody wants to read press releases.
Cory is my sidekick, Lynn.
We should be celebrating the death of DWC instead of bashing Cory for his efforts. Dig it or don’t, Democrats.
Bob is my sidekick, Lar. Sibby is yours, which makes him Mr. H’s grandkick.
sibby is god.
god’s drowned in a bowl of cereal.
dominus vobiscum, fleming.
this isn’t about you les, or lynn.
its how the state runs things; its benda, joop, sveen, republican cronyism, tidemann, GOAC, GOED, mrs. westerhuis and her kids, and 55,000 residents denied medicaid expansion needlessly causing 300 deaths.
its about Indian kids education (Menominee high school graduation was 40 or 60 % in 2005, its 99% today) and health care, teacher pay, education administration, higher education administration, privatization, racism, charter schools, koch brothers, the attorney general’s office, ag/financial industry/tourism, nuclear waste disposal, and mining regulation.
and a governor that builds his own home in a flooded area below the largest (nearly) dam in the world knowing USACOE management of drainage of the Rocky Mountains, cares more about his own flying hobby than South Dakotans, and has the gall to run for senate as his legacy in SD unwinds (EB5, MCEC), and now denies climate science in DC as he attempts to eliminate EPA.
there are a few handfuls of individuals who aim to get rich or stay rich to the detriment of the rest of us. the state administration is manipulated for their benefit. big fish in a small pond.
then there are noem and thune.
don’t let you vision narrow
Et cum spirtu tuo, kurtz. Bonae voluntatis et in terra pax hominibus.
I tip my hat to Cory and 96tears for their positive and energizing comments. 96 your historical commentary is important to rebuilding SDDP and I agree that Cory is doing that best with his blog.
What do our candidates talk about once we have filled all the slates? We talk about taxes, fear, and corruption.
They need to talk off the same play book when a republican says Democrats are all about tax and spend, Democrats remind those ignorant republicans that they are responsible for raising taxes and fees for the past forty years.
Our candidates need to get in the face of republicans about the horrendous amounts of documented corruption from GOED, Gear Up, and SOS’s office. I expect more corruption to come down the pikes as we getter closer to the election.
Democrats need to make it clear that republicans shouldn’t have anything to fear except the fear republicans shove down their throats at election time.
How do Democrats and blog followers get our word out, we start by sharing DFP on social media, there is a bar at the bottom of each thread directing you to email, Facebook, Twitter, etc. Share Cory’s thread with as many people as you can.
Our friend Owen does this all the time and I try to remember to do so to. It is only a small start, but it is a start.
Even Mr. Owen is on Twitter now. I need to ask about getting that.
twitter is a POWERFUL TOOL
Roger, on taxing and spending, we point out that Daugaard and the Republican Legislature have accelerated spending over the Rounds rate and past the national average for states, and we ask, “What did we get for that? More iPads for Jason Gant to lose?”
On fear… well, help me out, Roger, how do we work fear into it? Can we play that issue at the Legislative level?
If you’re talking about candidates Cory, I can’t stress enough how important simple name ID is. Unless you’re already a household name in your voting district, your name has to be seen thousands of times by voters between now and voting day. Thousands. I’m not exagerating. Tens of thousands of times would be even better. Hammer it in. Dont ask why. Just do it.
Tens of thousands of times… most effective way to do that? Yard signs? Bumper stickers? Facebook blitz? Radio? Newspaper? Sandwich board at 6th and Main?
(By the way, just yards from the 6th and Main intersection here in Aberdeen, at the edge of the Domino’s parking, a plaque on the sidewalk marks the location of the erstwhile 524 South Main headquarters of Dakota Freie Presse.)
All of the above Cory. And then some: http://www.creativeguerrillamarketing.com/what-is-guerrilla-marketing/
The problem with South Dakota Democrats is that they are far too timid, and too late to the game.
Here’s an explosive issue in the state that South Dakota Democrats need to start doing some serious work on:
http://www.energy.gov/articles/finding-long-term-solutions-nuclear-waste
The Democratic President’s administration is about to launch, quite a bit late, actually, its effort to flesh out what it means by “consent-based siting” of radioactive waste dumps. I mean they have been laying the groundwork for sticking South Dakota with deep borehole disposal for about five years.
Essentially, what the Democratic administration means by “consent-based siting” is that it finds some corrupt governor in some rural one-party state, bribe the state’s business and academic community with federal money, and massage some local flunkies and tribes with federal impact funds. You get a couple local units of government to sell out, the Governor and the local power structure gets paid off, and the feds get their “consent.”
Since South Dakota is mentioned as one of the prime locations for deep borehole disposal of defense-related radioactive wastes and since they are also investigating the state for a storage or disposal site in shale in the western part of the state, it would seem that what is meant by “consent-based siting” would be of special concern to the state. It might behoove state Democrats to make it a priority to shape what is meant by “consent-based siting” in federal policy, and in state policy. It could have a big impact, given the President is of their party.
Basically what the DC bi-partisan elite (including Thune, Rounds and Noem), the DOE and the nuclear industry just want a corrupt governor and some bought off local county commission to make the decision, but that’s not what South Dakotans voted for in 1984. State citizens wanted the say, taking the decision away from elected officials.
It would be nice if the Democratic Party would stand up for South Dakota citizens on this matter and just say, “Hell, no!” to the Department of Energy, the DC elite and the state Republican corruption machine.
Don – Thanks, but you moved to Wisc.
Good reading! We need more people to step up and run. Progress is made each time a candidate steps and says I care enough to participate and then speaks to the issues.
Bill, I appreciate the exhortation to “and then some.” Stratospheric skydiving might be overkill for state legislative races, but how about some chalk on the sidewalk?
Mark! Has anyone jumped in the trench with you in District 17? Full slate yet?
Donald, do you think South Dakota voters are ready to talk about and vote on boreholes? Can we sufficiently document the issue to convince voters that the issue is ripe?
exactly, leslie.
Curt,
Yes, I left South Dakota, but South Dakota never left me. More importantly, I never left the issues I care about.
When I left, we had beaten the nuke and other waste dumpers and pretty much ended Brohm’s massive mine. Job done, I finally had to consider my own life and the life of my loved ones for a change, which meant moving to a state that valued workers (until Scott Walker was elected). I have stayed active on these issues here in Wisconsin. We, too, have crystalline rocks that could be used for radioactive waste disposal, but the Department of Energy has not put us in the cross hairs, as it has put South Dakota. But I am monitoring this issue for both states.
You’re welcome.
Cory,
I think that has to be part of the immediate discussion, because the Department of Energy is fast-tracking deep borehole disposal, and we see the secretive way both the DOE and the state have decided to approach this issue. If they really want “consent” they wouldn’t hide all the information from the public. They are really going about this in the typical corrupt DC/South Dakota way, and if that is what Obama means by “consent-based siting,” it’s got to be met with some citizen activism and voter resistance. Further, all the noise coming out of DC is that they are going to use the deep borehole disposal issue as a means to test “consent-based siting” of the commercial nuclear waste repository. So far, they aren’t doing so well. I mean moving Heather Wilson over to grease the skids was a pretty clear tip off that this had nothing to do with “consent,” and everything to do with “done deal.”
Cory – I think you’re already seeing in this thread how DFP can be used as a tool to keep people informed, gather insight, disperse action and set out strategies. It can’t be the only tool. It’s got to be even more grounded to send out more personalized information and draw folks back to DFP.
George McGovern’s early organization tool was a 3×5 index card in a box with hundreds of other cards. Your DFP blog is a different kind of tool. So is Twitter, Facebook and other social media. So is good ol’ fashioned email. How you use the tools matters. The name of the game is communicate. It can generate other action items: Name identification, issue development, candidate identification and recruitment, etc. It started with a 3×5 62 years ago. It starts with a blog today. Who knows what the organizational medium can be 20 years from now. What matters is that Democrats evolve.
Don’s correct that Democrats have been too timid and too late for the game. He has identified an issue that virtually nobody in South Dakota is aware of. Radioactive waste issues have played here before, and each time it involves a dump site in the extreme western part of the state. That makes it hard to warm people up in East River on such an issue until they realize that the dangerous waste will be hauled on the highways and backroads of their home counties. Having watched these controversies play out before, I strongly recommend that a more astute strategy start with how does this affect me if I live in Huron, Aberdeen, Watertown, Yankton, Mitchell or Sioux Falls. If not, most voters will be too late for the game.
Bottom line is will it all translate into votes in 2016? It sure didn’t in 2014 which was one of the worst defeats in state history for SD Democrats. Hard to say what will happen overall but a number of people have been turned off to voting for SD Dem candidates and and at least one ballot initiative by what has been posted and commented here that has been archived. Those turned off people are growing but will they be outnumbered by those who are attracted to this? Hard to say. Time will tell.
South Dakota never leaves you, Donald. It’s like the smell of working hogs: it just won’t wash out! :-D
Interesting to see 96 second the notion of making the deep borehole tests as prelude to nuclear waste dump a major campaign issue. Part of the challenge, as both note, is the absolute lack of awareness of the issue. A candidate would have to spend a lot of time educating people about it (which Donald has been doing here in the comment section, and which I’ve tried to supplement with that one October 27 post. But then the candidate has to sustain that genuine educational effort amidst a news cycle looking for sound bites and quick responses to the scandal or bogus press release of the day. A candidate has to make a real commitment to move an issue from zero to top-of-mind awareness.
Missile silos were supposed to be bomb proof. They would have made safe places for some radioactive waste, but were destroyed as part of a treaty with Russia. I can understand that logic, but for both countries it was a terrible waste of re-purposeable ? resources.
One advantage McGovern had was that newspapers then considered every press release from a different small town as news. Now the papers will only print one story on one issue by a challenger no matter where the event happened. That has greatly reduced challenger opportunity for name recognition. Bill Janklow noted this to Bernie Hunhoff and said that as an incumbent, the governor would always get press coverage on an issue no matter how many times it was said.
“O”s comments about Democratic candidates looking for a vocation and GOP candidates doing public service is total crap. Thune has spend his whole life sucking a public tit except for a few months sucking the tits of medical groups seeking more public largess for themselves. Right now Pierre is filled with opportunists who would probably fail in any other area.
I suppose all have heard this joke. How many Pierre Republicans does it take to screw in a light bulb. Two– one to publicize the event and criticize the Democrat who originally installed it, and one to screw the bulb into the water faucet.
Good eye, Doug.
Yes, Leslie, this is about Lynn, myself, you and the rest of our communities. We are the government.
But, tactics such as yours help assure corruption can run unchecked in SD.
Some laugh at Lynn and her calling on votes. Obviously you’ve never done any calling. One person can easily call 250 plus a day. My goal was 30 contacts per hour. Of those 30 I felt I was gaining no less than 3 undecided and results favored that number. So in two months she has 18 votes per day times 60 days or 1080 votes. Maybe I’m off by half either direction, but I would bet the hot air directed here has no impact compared to Lynn’s phone calls which I personally have no interest in.
The SD Dem party does not show the ambition to become a viable force and it doesn’t matter what corruption or problem you bring to the press, unless you are personally taking it to John Q you will be exactly what you are now.
I will also agree, Cory may be the SD Dems only hope.
Les,
At the very least this will be a place for leslie and others to therapeutically vent when things don’t go their way. Internet desk jockeys.
btw! Did you get energized when visiting with some of the people you called? I know I do and some people get really fired up, telling their own stories and others just disappointed from what we are able to communicate, thank us for the call and will tell others not to vote for legalization and the party/candidates that support it. It’s a numbers game.
You can get that kind of reaction from Dial-A-Prayer or having Jehovah’s Nitwitnesses drop by. And I’m sure.just like have a JW drop by,not everybody appreciates your pestilence…er peskiness.
The gubmint could get consent like General Mills does. If you buy any of their products,you forfeit the right to sue them for any reason. If your gubmint uses any nukular materials,we forfeit the right to complain what they do with such materials. That seems to be where we are headed.
Mike Who Resides in Iowa,
Been doing this for a long time and it is very low key in regards to calls being conversational and polite rather than a scripted robo call nature or high pressure. We will see what happens in regards to an impact at the voting booth.
Lynn, remind us again what you’re calling people about. I forget. Are you organizing for (or against) a specific ballot measure? Candidate? Party?
I suspect the Grim Reaper could be polite and low key when he comes calling. I ain’t about to converse with him or other callers I don’t know. Maybe it is just me.
p.s. I know you are opposed to any form of legalizing of marijuana, so if that’s it, I’m up to speed. No need to re-open that box. I’m just suspecting from your drift here that there may be more to it than that?
Bill,
I have never said I personally was opposed to any form of legalization. The current South Dakota ballot initiative to legalize medical marijuana is flawed/fake and is really a softened recreational marijuana initiative which was most likely written that way to increase a wider range of support from those who will profit immensely from it, recreational and those who are chemically dependent on marijuana. If they were to write it strictly for medicinal use such as written into Minnesota law it would be far less profitable and more focused medically. It’s based on real science not High Times magazine, Ryan Gaddy’s SDAP pulling miracle pot cure claims out of their bong, pot porn memes, and especially studies financed and tampered with by Big Marijuana.
SDDP and https://www.facebook.com/events/1022167577815068/
kick off your D-Days celebration with an evening of food, fun, and politics!
Enjoy delicious roast pork on homemade rolls with your choice of 4 gourmet sauces and sides of baked beans and potato salad. Cash bar.
6:00 pm Social Hour
7:00 pm Meal
The music of Bruce Gray & Cindy Gehm during supper.
We have a great lineup of speakers including:
Ann Tornberg – Redistricting South Dakota
Ray Ring – State Representative (District 17)
Doug Kronaizl – Respect the Vote SD
Melissa Mentele – Medical Marijuana
Jonathan C. Hunt, VP Monarch America
Paula Hawks – U.S. House of Representatives Candidate
with more to come.
$15 per person
Tickets & more information available soon!
A number of SDDP candidates have shown support. At least one SDGOP candidate also being “I’m all about Marijuana May”
Good update. Thanks Lynn!
Bill, it looks like the box is reopened. Too bad, I was interested in reading an actual answer to your question.
Ms. Lynn, no doubt, applies her considerable talents to many different campaigns and missions. I myself, if I had a more pleasing voice like she, wouldn’t mind randomly calling people to warn them of the dangers of the demon weed but I don’t think that’s even on the ballots yet.
Grudz many of the candidates that support it will be on the ballot along with the party which we are working to defeat along with the ballot measure next fall.
Lynn 2015-10-13 at 07:54
Come on! Is this really a surprise to anyone that has ever been around potheads?
Anyone who is responsible that has had to deal with potheads in a work environment, collecting rent, cleaning up after their mess knows they will say and claim anything so they can legally get their “fix.”
The bogus claims by both SDAP and New Approach for SD really do a disservice for many people seeking medical relief and many will find it has no affect, a placebo and those suffering will find out they were pawns for profiteers looking to make big bucks off them in an effort to legalize or looking to legally get high.
Meanwhile I’ve been enjoying making phone calls across the state with a focus on defeating the candidates and misguided political party that support legalization.
I am shocked that Mr. Ring and Ms. Hawks who are already elected into the legislatures would speak at a demon weed rally and be for legalization of recreational smoking, Ryan Gaddy style.
I guess Lynn means she is personally against pols and parties that support legalization and not the legalization itself.
Stuart speculated that Dear just “ended up at Planned Parenthood” and that he could have been having a “psychotic episode” caused by marijuana edibles.
“If you trace his path backwards from where he ended up at Planned Parenthood to that grocery store where the first person was shot and go back another half mile, you know what they sell there?” he asked. “It’s a couple of marijuana shops.”
“I don’t know the facts of this case,” he acknowledged, “but I’m sure law enforcement is looking into this, we’ve had multiple instances of people consuming what are called marijuana edibles … I’d just be curious to know if he stopped by one of those. We’ve had a number of folks who have eaten these things and then had psychotic episodes.”
Focus On The Family Spokeman Stuart Shepard
What the hell?! Is every thread about Democrats going to turn into Lynn’s propaganda campaign for her nearly baseless vendetta? Come on, we’ve got to stop feeding this beast…
…or we’ve got to point out that GOP Rep. Liz May’s declaration and GOP Rep. Mathew Wollmann’s visit to the Flandreau grow-op pre-fire demonstrates Republicans support medical marijuana and Lynn should be making calls to destroy both parties.
Now, drop the pot. SDDP is not pushing the issue. I am not telling them to push the issue. We all have bigger fish to fry.
Cory,
Baseless? They had them being the vice president of a Colorado marijuana pot growing company and pot legalization activist advertised, promoted and were the guest speakers at a SDDP fundraiser! The party chair was on the stage along with those running for the legislature and US House. The county chair helped organize it.
Besides you posted an interview Melissa Mentele, featured updates from both the medical and recreational movements on their ballot efforts but not once posted any info sent by Tony Harrison with stats coming out of Colorado that run counter to the pro-pot industry there.
It doesn’t matter what happened in Flandreau but when it was first announced and promoted it was obviously comical how it was denied and then said it was helping give people a choice. As I’ve said before than if that is the case why not invite others there to speak such as Dakota Access, Keystone XL and the 18% Payday loan rate cap promoters? Denial and blowing it off just makes people that see it more ticked off. We point it out all the time.
Somebody is really paranoid that cannabis is something the legislature is going to debate.
What’s wrong with this picture?
https://apps.sd.gov/st12odrs/LobbyistViewlist.asp?cmd=resetall
Sorry Master. Have a good evening,people.
Bill, see what I mean? Cory, you are right on. Maybe its time to consider deleting some post?
Deleting my comments is exactly what the pro-pot activists would love. I would expect it here.
Deleting my comments is exactly what the pro-prisons activists would love. I would expect it here.
Lynn reads like Marty Jackley’s grandmother.
Lynn reads like Marty Jackley’s grandmother in law.
lynn- “it ain’t sibby yet but its gettin there….”
Like I said, Lynn, I get a positive feeling from about 10%. Another percentage disagrees and the rest pacify you to get you off the line. It is not fun work. Similar I’d guess to a collections operator. But given the fact most elections only need to work on about 20% of the vote they don’t have to win, it becomes just a numbers game and as BF stated, they need to hear names, many many times for that to happen.
And to get back on topic here, I’m for total legalization of mj. Put the money into education.
Cory,
Maybe you should do like the Constant Commoner and other blogs and only post comments after you have reviewed them to insure they are on topic.
I am simply sick to death of this mindless sniping and does harm to your blog.
Cory,
Your commitment to support potential candidates by informing them about the ballot measures and your statement about working from the bottom up are wonderful. We need SDDP leaders to get out of the isolation booth and begin reaching out into 66 counties to work on the long hike back up the mountain. Won’t happen in 2016 but will move in that direction if at the kitchen tables national politics are pushed aside and local teacher pay and education standards, medicare, infrastructure, cronyism, college debt and better public image can be the conversations.
I like to believe some of Daugaards philosophical followers are getting tired of being embarrassed, I would.
I’ve learned from this conversation. 96 gave an excellent history, Mr. Cornelius is inspiring when talking about getting personally involved. I know plenty of good cowboys and farmers that are pretty tired of being used and if the right candidate came along they would be open to change. They don’t see multi million dollar foreign investors helping their operations. They and their wives worry about their dying school districts, the roads being maintained and plowed, good health care for their kids and parents. Opportunity to improve their businesses, which includes hunting and outdoor recreation. We have an exceptional and beautiful state. The lowest paid teachers? Not good. Well the big pay education administrators have morphed into Highwaymen in suits?
SDDP can approach this with a strong campaign if handled by the right people. In my humble opinion SDDP needs to venture out of Sioux Falls and hit the streets. Open an office in Rapid City. I believe the people of SD be it dem, repub, indee, lib or other expect to see strong leadership.
It’s who we are.
Ferguson article sure cuts to the bone. Corys points of potential candidates and issues are very good tho.
Holy buckets Larry, there are 406 lobbyists listed. In some parts of South Dakota, that would qualify as a larger than a county seat. That is a lot of greasing the skids.
You’re a breath of fresh air, Spike.
You’ll take away my kurtz when you pry it from my cold dead hands.
I know Mike Huether isn’t the most popular guy in the SDDP, but I reckon to say if he runs for Office of Governor or House, he could be the first serious candidate the SDDP has had in a long time. Name recognition, successful business man, Sioux Falls, and money. Welcome him into your party SD Dems, you need him.
Jenny, you ask an awful lot of me. Do we yet know what kind of Democrat he is? Does he have any Wellstone in him? Does he have any desire to build the party? Or would he be our Janklow, a guy who’s in it for himself, not the party?
Spike, the issues you list that could tip those farmers and ranchers could tip a lot of other constituencies our way, too.
That lobbyist list was for 2011 and back. Mercer just responded to my tweet with the updated page.
https://sos.sd.gov/Lobbyist/LRPublicAccess.aspx
perhaps seth tupper would interview heather at sdsm&t about her role behind the scenes with siting for deep borehole nuclear waste placement?
Cory, what you’re asking me just speaks volumes of how broken the SDDP is. A known Democrat in the state’s largest city that is rumored to be interested in running for Governor or House and he’s a mystery to the Party? I’m sure Jeff Barth knows the attributes of Huether. I’m just saying if Dems want to start winning in SD you’re going to need to bring in some names that people know. An unknown is far less likely to be successful.
Jenny,
Huether is out for Huether and he could run under just about any party label he chose though it would damage that party he ran under. It would be looked upon as the really bad stereotypical politician.
SDDP broken? It’s bad! real bad and will most likely get worse before there is a turnaround in maybe 10 years or longer.
Jenny, Kristi is out for Kristi and she could run under just about any party label she chose though it would damage that party she ran under. It would be looked upon as the really bad stereotypical politician.
South Dakota’s GOP congressional delegation just voted for a “1,603 page federal spending measure that effectively ends the federal government’s prohibition on medical marijuana and signals a major shift in drug policy.”
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-medical-pot-20141216-story.html
Happy birthday, Mr. Cornelius!
Thank you Larry, I appreciate that, but please call me Roger.
daugaard wrote DOE 2.22.12-come check out our shale beds for nuclear waste storage ala state is not committed w/o vote of people, but we’ll help!! YIPPEE
April 2013 he hired heather wilson thru regents economic development guise, as pres. SDSM&T
Recently, to study deep borehole rock melt SEALING techniques ( think BP blow-out preventer on deep sea oil drill platforms), Heather was brought onto Sanford Science Board for the Lead Particle Physics project.
THIS IS IT FOLKS-POTENTIAL 2016 ISSUE IN SD
https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2015/12/23/2015-32346/invitation-for-public-comment-to-inform-the-design-of-a-consent-based-siting-process-for-nuclear
thx dp
it is the recommendation from the Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future that a phased, adaptive, consent-based siting process is the best approach to gain the public trust and confidence needed to site nuclear waste facilities.
“shelby, bring me another beer…don’t make me come out der…!
Thanks Leslie! Take a look at the invite. The scope is narrowed to dotting i’s and crossing t’s on the process of selecting a site, and not on the location of where to keep these dangerous materials or whether a dump should be built. It pretty much resigns its fate that a site will be developed. Period.
A site will be selected and the decision will be very political. The site meeting minimum standards and encountering the least resistance will get the waste and the risk.
Don, would trucks and train cars carrying this very dangerous waste be a soft, easy target for ISIL and other (foreign and domestic) terrorists?
In and out and out and in
And up and down and all around
We’re going through it
Nothing to it
All you’ve got to do is do it
Going through the motions – 1,2,3,4
I go you go you go me go
Everywhere that we go we’ll be
Going through the motions – 1,2,3,4
Do not forget. It is/was Albet Einstein Gore who’s carrying/carried the water for the nuke industry with his Global Warming. His boss, Bill has since traveled the world helping mostly Canadian to my knowledge secure the yellow cake rights.
I’m guessing we are years behind on this issue and it is well done. Also don’t forget our own state legis handed off authority to the Feds on SD insitu mining and this most likely falls under that same category. Hopefully not. Donald Pay?
http://www.salon.com/2015/12/19/george_w_bush_vs_al_gore_15_years_later_we_really_did_inaugurate_the_wrong_guy/
Hey Cory,
That’s cool slipping in a post dated comment for me. I like that. You run a great blog. Your absolutely right about other South Dakotans having same concerns.
I also believe that the people of SD would be surprised at what those lobbyists actually do to our political process. I don’t think that’s what they want in government. It’s going to exist. But it reeks.
I will humbly remind those that read this.. The cowboy and indian alliance that gathered to defend their way of life, the land, the water and their rights against the Keystone pipeline wasn’t exactly a bunch of Tree Huggers. There were some great relationships that grew from the common ground. Why Keystone some people ask? Because at some point we have to draw a line in the sand.
Spike, that’s a good reminder of the success of the Cowboy-Indian Alliance against Keystone XL. Democrats should think more about how to help those groups find common ground on other practical actions. (I wonder: are Republicans thinking about how to make use of the Cowboy-Indian Alliance as well?)
I wonder Cory if Thune/Noem trip to pine ridge and sudden concern for native “health care” just happened to coincidence with 2016 election….
Considering they have both consistently voted to reduce funding to said services I find it rather ironic personally.
I remind my friends to not be overly impressed by their sudden compassionate concern…. Noem never even bothered to show up to the house committee on natural resources to vote on native issues. Media ops versus grind it out program oversight are two different things.
Do not the EB-5, medicaid, Mud-central and low teacher pay controversial issues provide true opportunity to create a grassroots SD citizens alliance irregardless of political leanings?
What specific actions can SDDP take to measure the opportunity and/or begin the building of said coalition? An occasional press release doesn’t cut it in mho.
Paula, Suzie and Ann at SDDP, perhaps they will chime in on a public blog…
les, after your very brief fling w/lynn…my point was you both seem to have a personal issue you try to take out on SDDP (lynn’s calling…”telling on” us) and your big worry about being overly judged by being, as I recall, a registered repub and voting for rounds, daugaard and I assume jackley. join us. its the right thing. we won’t tell.
Leslie, you ask much of our leaders… but you get me wondering: to carry out the strategy I lay out above, to recruit lots of candidates and get them to synergize with ballot measures, we Democrats need as much public presence as we can get. Candidates in every district need to get in the paper and on the TV and radio every week moving toward every day. Candidates need to work the social media to get their friends sharing their policy points, their arguments against the regime, and their pitches for cash and volunteers. The same logic would seem to apply to our U.S. House candidate, her eventual ticketmate running against Thune, and our party leadership.
So should our top candidates and our party leadership pursue a more active presence on social media, including the blog comment sections?
Your right on Cory.
Leslie, you are smart, committed and informed. How do “we” get SDDP to commit to this. It appears to be a clique that is hunkered down.
My man Joe Lowe says politics is a blood sport. Particularly when on your back like we are now.
Of course nobody has a 10 million dollar war chest like Thune…but he really doesn’t say much when he talks.
After Ms. Wismers dismal campaign there is no where to go but up.
Is it money? SDDP that broke? I vote to open a Rapid City office n hire Leslie full time. N put Cory on the payroll or ballot.
Thanks, Spike! Spend your money on a Rapid City SDDP office before you spend it on me. Good organizing in Rapid City would be of great value to the party.