As we wait for Rep. Scyller Borglum (R-32/Rapid City) to give us the full Monty today with her well-teased U.S. Senate campaign announcement, let’s glance back at her 2018 campaign finance reports to see which big donors helped her climb the first rung of her political ladder and who will surely be getting nastygrams from incumbent Republican Senator Mike Rounds telling them not to toss any more dollars her way.
Borglum started off as her own biggest donor, loaning her fledgling $4,050 in spring 2018 to get things going. Her first itemizable individual donations included $250 from prominent Republican lawyer and down-standing legislator David Lust and $250 from establishment fixture Rexford Hagg. Borglum also took out-of-state money (meaning she’s evil and not to be trusted, right, Jon Hansen?):
Also helping Borglum in the primary:
- South Dakota Association of Healthcare Organizations: $100
- SD Chiropractic PAC: $200
- Solano for Senate: $500
- Partridge for District 34: $100
The biggest check pre-primary came on May 26, $1,000 from Stanford Adelstein’s “A Better South Dakota” PAC. The well-known and well-off former Rapid City legislator made Mike Rounds governor in 2002 with his primary support. He backed Rounds’s Senate bid in 2014. Will the Better South Dakota PAC change allegiances next spring and undo Rounds in favor of a newcomer with a degree in Adelstein’s field of expertise?
Borglum’s pre-general cash consisted mostly of the usual assortment of blind influence buying from big business PACs making sure they’re on the right side of the political monolith. Borglum’s biggest money came from the House GOP PAC ($2,500) and from Dennis Daugaard’s campaign kitty, ($1,000). She also got $500 from Regents chair Kevin Schieffer, before whom she testified last week about the counterproductivity of the House GOP’s war against real campus diversity. That testimony is just one straw guaranteeing Borglum won’t get money from the House GOP PAC ever again if she primaries Rounds… but what about Schieffer? He’s an establishment critter whose pourage into the Republican Party includes $5,000 to Rounds in 2012. But he threw even more money behind his old boss and pal Larry Pressler’s independent campaign against Rounds in 2014.
Borglum finished the 2018 campaign season with just $435 cash on hand, with no sign that she repaid herself for her loan to the campaign. So if she is going after Mike Rounds, she’s going to need much more outside help to build up that campaign kitty. And of the handful of donors who helped her win her South Dakota House seat, Kevin Schieffer could be the only one with a remote likelihood of helping her mix things up with the establishment incumbent.
Cory,
This is two posts now where you’ve used sexual imagery in reference to a female politician. I would challenge you to think about your choice of language. Mock behaviors all you want, but do you do the world a service by touching on old tropes of painting a woman as promiscuous to discredit her?
Wow, who knew that “nest egg” was sexual imagery? I think financial planers like Partridge are gonna have to change their tones when it comes to making the case for your savings situation. Let the shocked continue to be shocked at what Cory is blogging, but don’t read the messaging as it might give you some real news.
Wayne might be thinking Full Monty from that movie when those Brits took off all their clothes, but the actual meaning according to Wikipedia is not sexual: The full monty (or the full Monty) is a British slang phrase of uncertain origin. It is generally used to mean “everything which is necessary, appropriate or possible; ‘the works’”.[1] Similar North American phrases include the whole kit and caboodle,[2] the whole nine yards,[3] the whole ball of wax, the whole enchilada, the whole shebang, or [going] whole hog.
As often as Cory speaks out against misogyny it seems doubtful he would say that again’t anyone let alone a female politican.
I confess to a similar interpretation of “Full Monty” as happy suggests Wayne had, especially since Cory followed it with “well-teased” despite all the controversy about the prior use of “strip tease” in describing Borglum’s political anouncement.
Another source of this interpretation of “Full Monty” reportedly comes from a nude scene in Monty Python’s Flying Circus. Perhaps this explains my Wayne-like reaction. Although I had never seen the “Full Monty” movie happy references, I was a huge Monty Python Flying Circus fan in the 70’s and tried not to miss an episode.
That said, it will be interesting to see which candidate Stan Adelstein PAC chooses to back in 2020. Stan doesn’t seem to be much of a Trump fan, but his former golden boy Rounds sure seems to carry a lot of water for Trump these days. Do we know where Borglum stands on the Trumpian lies and fear wagon?
In the sixth paragraph of his June 2019 manifesto, Neal Tapio used “the full Dusty” as a synonym for gay sex.
He probably got it mixed up with the “full monty”, which as happy camper points out is not even sexual.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D8kUNlvWsAQsE3O.jpg
The “full Dusty” was just a term Dusty Johnson had coined for one of his own campaign ads:
https://youtu.be/N384B2pjx1k
I confess, I don’t know that much of Ms B’s political views, but I do know folks that worked Smilin’ Mike’s gubernatorial security, true SD GOP types, and had a really difficult time pulling the lever for him. Like Donald says when you consider someone new, “What have you got to lose?” ;-)
Don’t bury the lead – SDAHO, the health systems, are supporting her in her primary run? Would like to learn more about this.
I am having a hard time understanding why you would double down on the language? What benefit is it to you to spark controversy? It isn’t getting you any new readers. People are not discussing the substance of the article. What are you gaining? It’s a giant distraction and runs counter to our parties values.
Misty, that was the 2018 primary run. There’s no signof who plans to support her 2020 run.
Oh. Cory Allen Heidelberger!!! I missed the first post so failed to understand the distress. For the record the striptease in Full Monty was done by men. I’m still gonna stick up for Cory cause he just wanted to add a little jazz. A new poll showed overwhelmingly people are sick of the constant PC pointing and if you think Cory was saying that to objectify women you’re just being silly, but it is a little amusing to see Cory come under fire by other libs for something he himself hates. Lighten up. Noone’s been a bigger defender of women than Heidelberger. This thing is reminding me of Kamala Harris going after Biden.
I wonder if the SDGOP is going to stick with her? It doesn’t seem like Borglum is being a very good GOPer, as in obedient. That seems to be the #1 characteristic the SDGOP leadership wants in the members who pledge loyalty to them, over the state of SD, its constitution and citizens. I wouldn’t be surprised to see lukewarm, or even non support.
The SDGOP is going to treat her like they treat Stace Nelson. They will give her an ultimatum to withdraw from the race and be a good quiet girl for the 2020 Session, and maybe, just maybe, they’ll let her run for re-election to the State House… but it’s more likely her political career is over.
Of course, she could just be angling for some attention from Donald Trump. He always needs more staff….
I bothered to come to the comments section specifically to say essentially what Wayne already said. “Strip tease,” “nakedly obvious,” “Caprica six,” “full Monty,” and “well-teased” are the words you decided to use to write about a female politician? Cory, you are better than that.
Perhaps the fact that darn near everyone thinks it’s more important to talk about me than about the candidate who declared today indicates that Borglum doesn’t stand a chance.
this could get interesting.round’s needed some one in the primaries to be a pain in his butt,maybe to take smiling mike to an uncomfortable mike with a frown on his face .we need more info on benda’s death, why it took so long to build a packing plant, the missing that joop wailed off with & what happened to the missing chunk of money.
Could Trump force Mike out if he thought Rounds spoke a little too harshly about the soybean markets getting destroyed? Maybe the pieces are in place now?