Let’s tamp down some of that liberal enthusiasm for our momentous Democratic candidate, shall we?
Billie Sutton is so conservative—
—How conservative is he?—
—Billie Sutton is so conservative, he’s 16 percentage points more conservative than any other 2018 Democratic South Dakota State Senator. He’s more conservative than the average 2018 South Dakota State Senator. He’s more conservative than the average 2018 Republican South Dakota State Senator:
So says the American Conservative Union Foundation, a national group dedicated to preaching the conservative gospel. On 2018 bills, ACUF rates Sutton 73% conservative, tying him with Republican Senators John Wiik, Ryan Maher, Kris Langer, and Joshua Klumb. There’s some hard right in that group, though not as edge-of-the-world right as Senate conservative champs Stace Nelson and Phil Jensen at 93%.
Sutton beat my District 3 Senator Al Novstrup, who only scored 67%. Sutton beat his opponent’s running mate, Republican Representative Larry Rhoden, who scored only 71% conservative with ACUF this year (don’t worry: Big Larry has an 87% lifetime average).
I don’t see updated conservative scores for Sutton’s opponent, our Republican Congresswoman Kristi Noem. However, as of 2017, ACUF gave Noem a lifetime score of 75.78%. Our Senator Rounds is carrying around a 74.33% lifetime conservative rating. So by this scale, Billie Sutton’s strong 2018 conservatism is almost indistinguishable from two thirds of our Congressional delegation’s lifetime ratings.
But wait! Did someone say lifetime? Our man Billie appears to have tacked hard right this year: according to ACUF, Sutton’s lifetime average is 49%.
So as Sutton gets closer to the governorship, he gets more conservative, more conservative at the moment than his opponent’s running mate, and pretty much as conservative as his Republican opponent has been for the last eight years. Hmmm… I’m looking for the good news for my liberal voters in that.
Bonus Liberal Angst: ACUF says the “Coalition of the Radical Left” does not exist in the South Dakota Legislature. While ten of our 105 legislators earn scores of 90% or better, ACUF finds no South Dakota legislator scoring in their lowest decile:
Come on! We’ve got to round up at least a little balance! Let’s get at least a couple true leftists to counter the over-represented radical right!
Let’s be real here. The Republicans have veto proof majorities in both houses of the legislature. Thus, Governor Sutton’s (that has a nice ring to it) effect is not going to be heavy on a lot of legislative fronts.
The biggest effect that a Sutton administration will have is on the executive branch operations. Oversight, accountability, and transparency will be paramount considerations instead of party loyalty, blame-shifting and secrecy. The occasional potty bill will arise that Sutton will likely strike down with his veto power, but it is going to be his administrative powers that will be the most noticeable change.
Of course, I do hope his priorities differ from the prior Republican administrations in terms of important issues like education funding, but those will be policy battles that he cannot win without Republican support. The chance for him to engage the public in a discussion of funding priorities will be invaluable nonetheless.
“I am not sure if De Gaulle is currently in our country, but this Vichy guy claims he can save us…. ..Onward Frenchmen! ….. Onward!”
It bothers me too, Cory, but there’s no way I’m going to vote for NOem. I don’t think I”ll even have to hold my nose.
What are all of you going to do “if” Sutton is elected and turns out to be very conservative and supports a right-to-life effort in the state, prosecute illegals, throws out the elite and slams socialist?
Bette question: Is Sutton is just using the cover of being a democrat to improve his chance of even being able to run for governor? This is getting hard to watch.
JKC,
Your WWII analogy would require your fellow Americans who are Republicans in SD to be considered invading Nazi’s. I don’t think that is helpful in any sense toward the goal of moving our state forward. And it certainly will antagonize fellow Democrats that work with Republican friends across the aisle or believe in the American political system that is dependent upon compromise to be labelled “Vichy” traitors.
Your analogy of politics in SD being akin to war seems apocalyptic and pessimistic for the Democratic party since the Republican “army” could outnumber the Democratic “army” 2-1 soon. There is no force from another state that will aid “De Gaulle Democrats” in taking back our state. Our state has to be reformed from within and that starts with Democrats sharing in the levers of power.
Your view of politics seems as strident as the hard right. It appears you are two sides to the same coin. The Tea Party would rather watch it burn than be part of the solution for saving it. I find it sad that you would see no other choice than to hand them a gas can.
In any other state, Billie wouldnt be considered a Democrat and he wouldn’t run as one either. One only has to take a slight detour to dakotawarcollege to realize how far wisdom and reason has declined in S.D. I will be a bleeding heart liberal til the day I die but I do think Billie is decent. I don’t think he’s a democrat. I think if push came to shove I would disagree with him deeply, but I think he listens. Kristi isn’t decent. She’s not someone who is responsive or listens to anyone who isn’t thowring Benjamin’s at her. This is S.D. we don’t have a Beto or a Cortez and with the horribly inflexible mindsets of many in this state, it wouldn’t happen.
You are right, WWII analogies are a little harsh at times. But history judges us all and there are two categories in this judgment, or relative to this discussion, that is: You can either be a Churchill or a Chamberlain.
“De Gaulle Democrats” do exist, they just need to be led. There are also “De Gaulle Democrats” outside of South Dakota that could help, many are former South Dakotans who now live in DC and they could help, too.
Oh, and it is hard to burn something that does not exist. Unless our political philosophy has become existential, which would explain a lot here, would it not?
I think a sound argument could be made JKC that WWII comparisons are at the very least worth being worried about. There are some very frightening likenesses between the mentality of the people in power then and now.
Mr. Larson, your statement is correct about the veto proof majorities. Maybe some of the Republicans will get some spine and do like Mr. Nelson and some others have shown to be against the corruption that has taken over the state and stand up to it. Now they cannot get a voice from the executive branch but wit the election of Sutton, maybe then they will all stand up to this crooked behavior.
Put some help in there like with Cory and we may be able to finally break free from the corruption that is stagnating us. I would like to think we can do that by electing Billie Sutton. Clearly, for the last several decades, all the governor’s have bought is corruption on a massive basis like EB-5 and Gear-Up, pretty astounding the millions of dollars that have been lost to murder and fraud.
RJ, you are definitely right, especially at the national level. Perhaps, a better comparison at the state level would be a banana republic. Except, that it is a banana republic without the bananas…. We really have nothing to show for it, but low wages, partisans on the bench, an AG office which is political, corruption in government, no public pre-K education, and a wish by some to have high schoolers working at factories instead of studying….. And none of these major problems will begin to be solved until the Democratic Party in this state becomes a true alternative and not this silly generic alternative or copy.
You know, I hear a lot of good Democratic legislative candidates this year, who persistently talk about how they should be sent to Pierre to end the discussion of and defeat bathroom bills. Now, I can’t disagree with their comments, but we need to be more than an anti-bathroom bill political party. Such marketing shows a lack of courage, perhaps a lack of understanding of the true issues, and an attempt, unknowningly, to drop the Democratic Party in this state into the abyss of true mediocracy; an such dependency upon such political assessment, or spin, of our current political state only further feeds the complacency, which a banana republic feeds off of….
Correct Mr. Claussen, we need Billie Sutton, Randy Seiler and our own Cory H to start the process of putting real change in our state. Ya gotta start somewhere and sometime and this is the somewhere and the sometime to get it started. Sorry the bathroom bills are not in your view of civil rights, but they are really that. So yeah, there are Democrats who actually believe they are standing up for people’s rights and those would include your’s for a multitude of things. I would never for a minute thought that this great country would stoop so low as to have children’s concentration camps, but here we are, with thousands under lock and key.
I think you’re a smart fellow who feels some kind of sadness because of the Lieutenant Governor was a Republican that changed party. That is yesterday’s news. Let’s work together to start to make the change you want by electing those Democrats that are not into complacency, but are into changing our state for the better.
JKC,
What I don’t understand about your position is what is the alternative you are presenting that would have a likelihood of success? It is not like there haven’t been numerous traditional liberal Democratic candidates that have run for office in SD. These were top-notch people and formidable candidates and included people endorsed and supported by Bernie Sanders. But their messages have almost always fell on deaf ears and they were almost all defeated at the ballot box.
I would contend that fighting the good fight with the “perfect Democratic candidate” so to speak is less effective most of the time than running a Democratic candidate that is not ideologically pure, but can win the election. When you are shut out of power almost completely with perfect but un-electable candidates, the Democratic message is shut out. The Republicans in charge set the agenda and the message that gets out to the public is the one defined by them.
If elected governor, Billie Sutton has a chance to set the agenda and get a new message out to the citizens of SD. Whether he will take advantage of that opportunity is yet unknown. We know what Noem’s message will be: “All is well. Nothing to see here. No changes necessary.”
You referenced Churchill. I read “How Churchill Saved Civilization” by John Harte earlier this year. I admire Churchill’s tenacity and strength of purpose, but he had little other choice than to “fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender.” I like to think the Democratic party in SD has that Churchill tenacity, but Churchill was smart too. He and the Allies did not try to invade Normandy until they had made years of preparations. Churchill was pragmatic not ideological. Billie Sutton is the pragmatic choice for South Dakota Governor.
Jerry, it could be tomorrow’s news too and it is today’s as well. I totally understand the civil rights issue, when it comes to the bathroom bills, but that is not how that issue is being marketed currently by Democratic legislative candidates, however.
Darin, the failure of the “perfect Democratic candidate” in recent years has to do with the lack of organization, a lack of the understanding of the math involved. Instead, Democrats in this state try to run Republican campaigns against Republicans, but that will never work, and if it does, it will be short lived.
Cory’s own assessment of the Sutton voting record severely indicts your hopes and dreams for the future with a governor who has a “D” behind their name.
As far as Churchill, Churchill was ideological, it was Vichy who was not or of the wrong philosophy; and your assessment of Churchills pragmatism, is not pragmatism, rather that is merely political timing.
And if we are looking for a pragmatic choice, then let us not confuse pragmatism with a willingness to vote more conservative “than the average 2018 Republican State Senator.”
And let us also remember, that if victory is found in 2018, then it is all about 2022, is it not? And what reality as that will bring less than more conservatism, or what you call pragmatism?
Mr. Claussen, you speak as though you have the solution to it all. Tell me, what your solution would be regarding civil rights.
If you look at the bills they are rating legislators on, you would be hard pressed to decide why they chose the votes they did. It leads me to conclude K-Street Schlapp doesn’t know what the hell constitutes “conservatism,” especially in a rural state. What’s the conservative position on alcohol and charities? I could see a conservative in South Dakota going either way on that one. My hypothesis is that the liquor interests give the ACU a lot of money, so they picked that vote out, and called the liquor side “conservative.” That’s generally the way it works with these national outfits. What’s conservative to them is what interest forks over the money.
So sad. All the wasted verbiage above for naught. 30% Wall folks. Sutton cannot win.
Jerry, I would work to fight against the Republicans’, or conservatives’, bathroom bills in Pierre, but as a candidate I would talk about more than just that issue, and would not allow myself as a candidate to use that issue as a catch all, or generalistic conclusion for why I was running as some type of way to escape from a discussion of the other true issues before us. That issue is used as a block tackle too often, but I am not sure where the running back is, or what direction it is running in, in relation to that block tackle, however, as long as we do not talk about the other issues, too.
I will tell a little story: A friend who is Democratic to the core once had to vote in a governor’s race in which the Democratic candidate was kind of a nut, and the Republican was fairly reasonable. After much consideration she voted for the Republican. He appointed all sorts of other Republicans who were not nearly as reasonable as he was. Those appointed Republicans made everyday decisions that moved the state much farther to the right. My friend said she’d never again vote for a Republican. The End.
… Who is Billie Sutton likely to appoint? Who would Kristi appoint?
I think I like your explanation Ms. Marttila-Losure much better than Mr. Claussen’s. It is clear to me that you see the big picture whereas Mr. Claussen seems to see the picture in a jaundiced light. If a person does not stand for something, they will fall for anything.
Well, his first appointment was a Republican for Lt. Governor…. I rest my case….
My friend from Mayo clinic recently told me that many republicans in Minnesota would be considered democrats in South Dakota.
SD has sure changed since the days of Mundt, Case, Pressler, McGovern, Daschle, Johnson, et al.
Spike,
Ask your friend what percentage of Minnesota Republicans are against abortion?
Isn’t the Minnesota legislature controlled by Republicans?
They just need to get rid of the Dayton.
JKC,
Your case is a weak one. Who do you think is going to appoint more Democrats to their cabinet Sutton or Noem? Who is more likely to look into Republican corruption Sutton or Noem? Who is more likely to support civil rights? Who is more likely to prioritize education funding? Who is more likely to advocate for Pre-K education? Who is more likely to look at innovative new programs for our workforce? Who is more likely to expand Medicare? Who is more likely to consider reforming our tax system?
It is clear to me that you haven’t chosen De Gaulle over Vichy. On the contrary, you make no distinction between De Gaulle and Vichy and say they are equally bad. To continue the analogy, you are angry that De Gaulle withdrew from the battlefield at Dunkirk to fight another day. You would’ve insisted that De Gaulle fight to the last man against the Nazi’s at Dunkirk or he was no better than the Vichy regime.
As present, I cannot think of a better Democratic choice to run for Lt. Governor. She is a smart and savvy Democrat that will fit nicely in Billie vision for South Dakota.
Darin, to answer your first question, a Democrat. A Democrat who is not anti-choice, who does not compromise with the Republicans on IM22, who does not play the Christian card, and who does not pick a Republican for Lt. Governor, a pick I might add, who was the former president of the Sioux Falls Downtown Rotary Club, which is nothing but an organization of businessmen, and women, who create jobs, but don’t pay their employees enough.
As far as De Gaulle and Vichy, De Gaulle fought Hitler, but Vichy did not. In fact, De Gaulle’s call at Dunkirk is what you would call pragmatism and I would call timing.
Jerry, I want a Democratic governor who will fight for the workers, and not one who will allow their Lt Governor to be a conduit to the low wage paying Sioux Falls business crowd.
I want a governor who has just proven he can reach across partisan aisles to get things done for our state. You cannot have change if you are not willing to change, and that has to start at the top these days. You cannot expect change without showing you are adaptable to it yourself. Billie showed that, much to your disdain for the purity in politics. That is what the Republican now do sir, and see the headlines now in the papers about what the EB-5 and Gear-Up have done with that kind of thinking.
Low wages, Democrats fought for and got higher wages, where ya been? Right now, in South Dakota we struggle to find workers. Tell me about the low wages in Sioux Falls that are not up to the wage limits that were set and are now set to increase. What jobs are you speaking of JKC?
Jerry, the pay in Sioux Falls is not great. With all due respect, what planet are you living on? The higher wages you speak of that Democrats are responsible for having increased is actually the minimum wage, which in its own right is a good thing, but such wages are nothing to brag about. Sioux Falls is very much a tale of two cities and our Lt. Governor nominee is a member of one of those cities, while most Democrats. many Republicans, and Independents in Sioux Falls are a member of the other city.
JKC,
My position is basically the maxim “don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.” Your position seems to be that the perfect is the enemy of the good. You talk as if the world is always black and white when the reality is we live in a world that is most often gray.
Why wouldn’t you support the better of two candidates and then hold that candidate accountable if they are elected? To me it makes sense to support a candidate that is in agreement with me on some or many issues rather than risk the other candidate getting elected that agrees with me on few or no issues.
I think you referenced strategy above with regard to De Gaulle retreating from Dunkirk. In terms of strategy, I think of Billie Sutton becoming governor as the beachhead at Normandy. The war is not over with the landing on D-Day, but at least we have started to take back our state.
Darin,
I think Billie’s campaign is marketed as the beachhead, but it is not. It is appeasement. And his pick for LtG was the first proof of that.
And I don’t see the world black and white, rather I see it for what it is, and I have seen this dog and pony show too many times. The willingness of Pierre Democrats to capitulate on IM22 was the straw that broke the camels back for me, quite honestly, then his Lt G picked turned a hypothesis into proven theory for me.
Mr. Claussen, so the minimum wage is not the issue but higher wages are the issue and you think the governor should step in and demand private company’s raise their wages, brilliant.
So if you were the Lt. Governor, that would be your ticket. All of you South Dakota business owners, raise your wages to the one I see as the target or I will…. do what? I can see why you were passed up for the Lt. Governor and why Billie Sutton made a very good pick for his second.
He may have Conservative traits, which shows that he can work with the Legislature effectively. But Billie possesses two other trait that are equally or more important….he possesses a great deal of comment sense and he put people before party and politics. Quite a contrast with his opponent, who is self-serving and party before all people.
When there is a veto proof Republican majority and a Republican governor, what exactly could the Democrats have done regarding IM22 Mr. Claussen?
Jerry, we need Democratic leadership that grabs the “Bully’s pulpit” when it comes to wages….A healthy minimum wage is definitely an issue, but real wages are too…. The world you want, we actually already have, and it is why things are as they are…
To answer your IM22, it is called the courts. The Democrats should have filed a lawsuit on the grounds that the intial IM22 plantiffs were a unique plantiff, that gamed the system by abusing the balance of powers, well as the separation of powers doctrines of the State Constitution, but instead we, or our Democratic leaders, signed off on an appeasing alternative.
Darrell makes some very good and succinct comments in support of Billie, but when you run a campaign that plays the Christian card, runs with a Republican, and coordinates with the Republicans instead of the Take Back crowd on IM22, then I think we have some real problems here…. Hate me if you want, but at some point we need to pull the brake lever and put a stop to this ridiculousness in the Democratic Party, which speaks of desperation and some sort of inferiority complex…. and I am doing it….
So we did not go to court, instead we go the polls to make it work. That is called Democracy. Your way or the highway is exactly why we are in the problems we are in
jerry, I agree. JKC sees his way or the highway and all we have gotten is the highway. Time to take a different path.
JKC, I could be mistaken, but I swear I remember Billie Sutton standing up and speaking passionately and forcefully against the Republican tear down of IM22 in the legislature. Where were your idyllic Democratic standard bearers when the legislature undid the will of the people with regard to IM22? A few of them were in the legislature–much too few to stand in the way–and the rest were at home licking their wounds from another loss at the ballot box.
IM22 is actually the perfect example of what would be different if Billie Sutton had been governor. With Sutton as governor and his veto power at the ready, there would have been a chance for a coalition of Democrats and Republicans to save IM22 or at least put together a more effective replacement.
You decry Sutton and I assume the other Democrats that worked toward salvaging some aspects of IM22, but that is their job. They don’t take their toys and go home if they don’t get everything they want. People like Rep. Soli rolled up their sleeves and made lemonade out of lemons. I’m sure a lawsuit was considered and if it would have been feasible and advisable it would have been attempted.
Get behind Amendment W and get behind Billie Sutton for better government in SD.
Darin, at the top: I’m all for real.
A Sutton victory requires a whole lot of Democrats to come vote.
When Herseth came within single digits of beating Mickelson in 1986, his voters helped send one more Democratic senator and nine more Democratic representatives to the Legislature. A Sutton win would bring notably larger gains.
We need six more Dem Senators to sustain a Sutton veto. Six. We aren’t that far from making a Sutton governorship even more substantial than you propose.
I am all for getting behind “W,” Amendment that is….. ;-)
Heidi, whom will Sutton appoint? Not me, that I guarantee! (Besides, I’ll be too busy calling point of order on Senate President Lavallee.)
Sutton will appoint a large corps of smart, young Democrats who are dedicated to bringing smart, open government back to their home state. Those smart, young Democrats will not be ladder-climbers: they know that they could find better, longer-term jobs for more powerful Democrats in bigger, more Democratic states, as many of their ex-pat friends already have. Those young Democrats know that a job in the Sutton Administration would be far from a lifetime of guaranteed employment in state government. They will look at history and say the odds are that Sutton will serve like Berry and Kneip: briefly, and followed by a Republican who will clean house and bring back the GOP climbers. Facing that likelihood, Sutton’s appointees will thus serve with passion and eagerness to do all the good they can for the state in whatever time they have available rather than passing their resumes and looking for the next rung of the state ladder to climb.
Kristi Noem will appoint more of the same cronies and climbers. She will appoint the people her lobbyist puppetmasters tell her to appoint.
Regardless of ideology, Sutton will put better, fresher faces in government than Noem will.
Sutton just said on TV that he supports Trump.
What? Mr. Sutton supports Mr. Trump? That’s insaner than most. That’s nearly like you telling me Mr. Sutton now back’s Mr. Howie’s tax-dodging and overgodding.
De-potato your ears, Jason. Sutton said, “As Governor, I’ll work with anyone to grow South Dakota’s economy, including Donald Trump.” That statement is not at all equivalent to saying “I support Donald Trump,” unless you are about to claim that working with Kim Jong Un shows that Donald Trump supports the North Korean dictator, or that working with the Republican leadership on a compromise, bipartisan bill to fund NSU would mean that I support the Republican leadership.
It is possible to work with any number of SOBs to achieve practical goals while still not supporting those SOBs in the next election.