Independents appear to have crapped out and offered no candidates for statewide office. The deadline for submitting petitions to nominate independents for the 2022 general election ballot was Tuesday, April 26, and as of this morning, Secretary of State Steve Barnett has not posted any certified independent candidates for U.S. House, U.S. Senate, or Governor. Bert Olson’s April 1 announcement of his candidacy to challenge Congressman Dusty Johnson appears to have gone nowhere (other than one surprise appearance with an air horn that got him bounced from Democratic gubernatorial candidate Jamie Smith’s launch party on April 9).
But fear not: South Dakota’s lone seat in Congress will not cruise down the Dusty trail uncontested. The Libertarians have once again risen to the challenge and nominated one of their party members to challenge Dusty in November. According to a surprisingly late Facebook note posted six days after their April 23 convention, the Libertarian Party of South Dakota has nominated Vale rancher Collin Duprel to run for U.S. House.
The Libertarians went mano e mano with Johnson in 2020 as well, with Libertarian Randy Luallin winning 75,748 votes, less than 20% of the total turnout. That’s the most votes a Libertarian has ever won in South Dakota, though not the highest percentage—in 2014, Libertarian John English won 23.55% of the vote for Commissioner of Schools and Public Lands against Republican Ryan Brunner, in another statewide race with no Democratic contender. Collin Duprel, the way is open for you to break both records.
The Libertarians also nominated candidates for U.S. Senate, Governor, Lieutenant Governor, State Auditor, Secretary of State, and four seats in the Legislature:
The four Legislative contests the Libertarians are entering have no Democratic candidates, leaving Libertarians free to contend for the principled conservative vote.
Hey, Libertarians! Don’t forget to send your letter certifying your nominations to the Secretary of State by August 9!
“Kurt Evans – Teacher from Wessington Springs for Secretary of State”
Where does Evans teach?
Evans is a self taught teacher of troll. Clearly a masters degree in bullcrap in the making.
Wessington Springs was spotlighted in February for an attack on a teacher who had an “ally magnet.”
The Democrats should hopefully run someone for Secretary of State, while they develop their farm team of losers. Although, Jamie Smith could win, with a lot of cash and a passionate digital state wide network.
If we DO elect you, Mr. Smith, don’t prattle to us about the banality and supposed good of bi partisanship. Bi partisan ship has created a white apartheid state and poverty all across the state, including Buffalo County, the poorest county in the US! Bipartisanship is the 2 Party political hack word for we the 2 parties are gonna ban other parties from existing and we ll keep poverty in its apartheid place. Bipartisan is such an evil hack word. Don’t say it, Mr. Smith.
Libertarians are Center-right, Reps are right-right, Democrats are barely Center-left.
The Independents let us down this year.
He’s not listed on the staff of Wessington Springs School District. Maybe he’s a Substitute Teacher ?
In Project Vote Smart, he lists-
Math teacher, Highmore, 1995-1996.
Math teacher, Alpena, 1994-1995.
Camp Counselor, SD Teen Democrats, 1989.
The current math teacher at Wessington Springs has been there for 22 years plus.
So I think the correct title for Evans is Former Math teacher or perhaps Substitute Teacher.
Much like potential catholic converts and women’s volleyball players: when it comes to politics, Evans just doesnt know how to take no for an answer.
Nothing will ever change until blue states pull the welfare plug feeding the red states.
SD is addicted to free money and until congress steps up and says states will get no
more money returned to them than said taxpayers paid into the feds.
grudznick is pretty red-assed about this slate once again not including me as the Lt. Gov nominee.
Nobody is independent.
Taught math in Highmore? Vote for him. Did he coach?
Sorry, Grudz. My sources tell me the vote was about 53-47%.
Thanks, Mr. Oakes. Next time I will campaign more out there in the woods around Spokane and shake a few more hands at the Gaslight. That’s probably where I fell down.
I hear it’s easy to fall down at the Gaslight, especially on bluegrass night. 😉 On that note, I do sometimes have to wonder if the fire exorcised the ghost of my great uncle Terry.
cibvet; that’s a rather bogus idea you have in my opinion! That’s the same as the “Pubs” thinking we need to get something “back” from the poor for ALL we’ve given them. Land (treaties are supreme law of the U.S.) $$$ and education and medicine. South Dakotan’s should feel some “shame” for being such a “taker” state; but then again, that takes some thought to elect those who’ll lead us in the governor’s office and legislature to thinking more in terms of the good for ALL-not for ME…..
You know Jake, Uncle Scrooge didn’t mind the money going out. He knew he would collect it all back over time. Just look at Senator Scott and his 76 times of taking the fifth for taking money out of the Healthcare system he was managing. That system had the largest fine in history. He’s still trying to take from the poor and middle class. It’s in his nature.
Jake– the “ALL that we’ve given them” would be a mere drop in a bucket compared to the corporate welfare and farm subsidies that are given to the state every year and lest you forget, the handouts to the state to keep SD limping along to each tourist season. The treaties are and should be the law of the land, but, not being a history buff, name one this country hasn’t broken. The most recent I recall was done by your boy trump. Yes , you are correct that SD should “feel some shame” and there again I challenge you to name someone.
Good 25 minutes on how democrats lost (gave up) rural America.
Far from the whole story, but it makes several good points. The first segment is on Mike’s Iowa, which is similar to the situation here.
The nutshell version is anger and hopelessness from the losses of jobs, then schools, then towns. Folks took it for granted that the rural American situations from the 1920 to 1970s was “normal” in rural America – when it was just a long economic phase that’s playing out. Democrats, which are largely urban now, pseudo allow republicans to use the usual code words and scapegoats to (nonsense social issues) to beat democrats — while the republicans do almost nothing to improve the lives of rural Americans. Government via agricultural subsidies and medical care is the bulk of the rural economy — yet the republicans argue for less of each – and the clueless voters lap it up.
Well John, Rubio publicly wondered if the Republicans should actually help their new found rural friends. Why should they?