Press "Enter" to skip to content

South Dakota Democrats’ Ongoing Mission: Radical Witness

Last updated on 2012.11.18

A reader rings the Madville Times Tip Jar (there it is, in the sidebar, right below y'all's comments!) and includes this Election Day note:

I decided to vote twice today. One won't count for much in this State. But I know that each time I use my money to vote for you, it counts. Thanks for making a difference, Cory [reader Tip Jar message, 2012.11.06].

Thank you, friend.

The message is bittersweet. One guy blogging should not matter more than the casting of our ballots on the high holy day of democracy.

But in South Dakota, for Democrats, indeed, that ballot doesn't do much, at least not for electing candidates. Intelligent, enthusiastic, hard-campaigning Democrats Matt Varilek and Matt McGovern broke 40% (McGovern barely, contrary to polls that said he was close); Barack Obama and Nick Nemec did not. The Legislature was a wash for Dems, gaining 2 Senate seats but losing two House seats. We creamed the Governor's two referred laws, but even those glorious policy victories didn't translate into a bump for Democratic candidates. With 24 seats in its greater metro area (I'm counting Districts 6 and 9 through 15), Sioux Falls, which ought to be a bastion of urban liberalism, elected only 5 Democrats to the Legislature. I guess all the urban liberals leave the farm, stop for Starbucks at Target, and keep right on driving to Minneapolis.

In a remarkable election year when America acknowledged its real changes by re-electing Barack Obama (oh, the narrative of this election!), South Dakota piped up and said, "Nope! We're good with the same old Republicans!" New Dem chair Ben Nesselhuf tried and tried, but he didn't move the needle. We could replace Ben with Jesus himself, and we'd still get skunked.

I don't like to surrender. I never give up hope. And with the re-election of Barack Obama, the defeat of Daugaard's referred laws, and various victories nationwide against Tea party yahoo-ism, I head to work feeling pretty good about America today.

But South Dakota, O, South Dakota! I love you, I am part of you... but Dems, we just don't have much of a shot here. For now, perhaps for the foreseeable future, we need to resign ourselves to a singular quixotic mission: the calling of radical witness*. Amidst an impenetrable, impervious Republican majority, we must make our outnumbered voices even louder. We must represent and advocate those ideas to which the conservatives around us would shut their ears. We must give voice to the changes happening around our country and around the world.

And when the leaders our state chooses insult education and achievement, when they act in ways that are bad for our state's own interests, we must, quite frankly, call their baloney.

That's radical witness. With no real power, with no organization to mount a successful political campaign, radical witness, speaking truth to power, is the best we Dems can do.

And that matters. It matters for us, for our souls, and for the leaders who someday will emerge and win South Dakota back for Democrats.

That's why I blog. That's why I keep blogging. Thank you, readers, for your support. Now spread the word!

*I take this phrase, radical witness, from William C. Pratt's "Another South Dakota, or the Road Not Taken: The Left and the Shaping of South Dakota Political Culture," in The Plains Political Tradition, edited by Lauck, Miller, and Simmons, SDSHS Press, 2011, p. 118.

Update 2012.11.18 19:50 MST: Republished in the Mitchell Daily Republic, 2012.11.18.

43 Comments

  1. Kathy 2012.11.07

    Thank you for everything you do.

  2. Patricia Shiery Stricherz 2012.11.07

    As I sat and watched the election results unfold last night ( some districts were nail biters!) I felt sadness and pride simutaneouly. Sadness because I knew that this meant I was officially done in my duties as State Legislator. Pride, because I knew in my position, I had done the best job I could, fought hard, stood strong and made a little difference in South Dakota that is now part of her history. I worked across the isle and made decisions that I believed were in the in best interest of the people before the interests of the corporation. It was such and honor to have served the people of South Dakota and District 8. So now I prepare for the next election and with many prayers, support and luck I will again be representing the people of this state. Thank you!

  3. Steve Sibson 2012.11.07

    Cory, perhaps you Democrats need to consider conservatives you political allies instead of attacking us. We agree that corporatism is a problem. What you fail to understand is that corporatism requires a big government. The GOP made gains nationally in 2010 when they embraced tea party types. They went backwards nationally in 2012 as they shunned this limited government movement. If South Dakota Democrats want more political victories, they need to reject their Marxist ways, instead of rejecting those who stand strong for the U.S. Constitution.

  4. John M. Nelson 2012.11.07

    As for the Sioux Falls 'greater metro area'; maybe the most important factor in the South Dakota House and Senate elections was not the issues, personalities, yard signs or funds. It could have been the 2010 redistricting.

  5. DB 2012.11.07

    Matt Varilek's lies just couldn't push him to the top. I'm glad he got his butt handed to him. Even Cory and his campaign of deceit couldn't help that fool.

  6. larry kurtz 2012.11.07

    Varilek clearly underestimated the power of people sitting in their own pew.

  7. John Hess 2012.11.07

    Really surprising that Kristie Noem did so well. Maybe Herseth will make a play in 2014 which may be better timing. Also thought Charlie Johnson would do much better, but people must like Russell Olson.

  8. Megan Konz 2012.11.07

    Don't be silly, Cory. No need to go to Target. The Starbucks on 41st & Louise has a drive thru window.
    The people of South Dakota voted out terrible legislation, but failed to vote out the legislators who supported it. I worry that people just aren't paying attention. Or do they enjoy signing plenty of petitions and voting on multiple ballot measures?

  9. Steve Sibson 2012.11.07

    "Really surprising that Kristie Noem did so well."

    The analysis is simple...Cultural Marxism, the female defeated the white male. That is why his negative ads were sour to most. A guy beating up a female...shame, shame, shame.

  10. tonyamert 2012.11.07

    It's just the South Dakota mindset of independence. People here just view themselves as self sufficient islands. It's really an insane thought though if you consider that everyone in SD is a welfare recipient. From the poorest to the richest.

    People here also have this kind of insane belief that enough hard work automatically translates into success and wealth. This is of course simply not backed up by fact. Success and wealth are primarily dictated by the relative wealth of your family growing up. (Interestingly, it's also the only factor that positively correlates with student achievement.) All other variables are just a wash and not positively correlated with success or wealth.

    So to me, it basically comes down to the people of SD accepting a simplistic world view that isn't backed up by facts. The reality of the situation is much more complicated and people simply don't want to accept it.

  11. John Hess 2012.11.07

    Yesterday I gave a friend a ride to SF for medical. He's on disability and Medicaid, yet a staunch Republican. If provoked, he can get a little crazy. I too think there's a libertarian bent to SD that doesn't add up. People forget yet accept how widely government is involved in the vast majority of things that makes our lives better.

    Good link Larry.

  12. larry kurtz 2012.11.07

    Noem in full denial on Bill Janklow's idea of public radio.

  13. LK 2012.11.07

    Brother Cory,

    If you're judging state interp, I look forward to seeing your camel hair suit and leather belt. My wife and I will take you out to eat at the best locust and wild honey establishment in town.

    Keep preachin'

  14. Ben Cerwinske 2012.11.07

    Sorry Cory, I tried. Even I voted for Varilek and McGovern. I'd rather vote for someone who represented my beliefs more, but not if they're incompetent. If they're incompetent then it really doesn't matter what they believe.

  15. JoeBoo 2012.11.07

    So Noem won? prolly a bit better then some thought, but she still didn't crack 60%, and 6 months ago most would have thought she would have gotten 70%. What does that do? other then the fact that she spent I'm guessing upward of a million on this election? It raised her negatives. She is vulnerable.

    No doubt South Dakota is one of those states moving further to the right. For whatever reason. However, I still think that Noem is vulnerable. South Dakota has Democrats with better name recognition and who look better on stage then Matt Varilek. Matt is a great guy, and ran a great campaign but faced the constant lie machine of Noem, and made Noem spend around $1 million, and made her go negative. I heard a lot of people who said I don't like Noem, but I either don't know Varilek or he is just a little too liberal for me. Well what happens if Tim Johnson's son runs against her? Or if Sioux Falls mayor Mike Huenther runs? Guys that have better name recogntion, slightly more conservative and quite frankly better candidates?

    Ultimately however Pierre needs to do their jobs, Tim Johnson was a guy that was made in Pierre, he made his name when the Dems had little power in Pierre, and was able to make enough of a name for himself that when he has never lost an election. They need to find guys for constitutional positions.

    I'm going to say this, I think Matt Varilek should run for Secretary of State in 2 years. I think he would be great at it.

  16. larry kurtz 2012.11.07

    Expect cannabis to be legalized in Minnesota during leg. session.

  17. larry kurtz 2012.11.07

    Well-regulated militia has killed three in South Dakota in as many days.

  18. Donald Pay 2012.11.07

    For Democrats to gain seats in the Legislature, Republicans have to make fairly large mistakes on issues, and the Democratic Party has to be in a position to pounce. Nuclear waste, corporate hog farms, and out-of-state waste, where the issue is basically monied interests from elsewhere coming in to despoil South Dakota, are the sorts of issues that will elect Democrats. Unfortunately, opposition to the usual petty corruption of the in-state crony capitalist Republican cabal never gets the Democrats over the hump. There are Republicans, some on the right, and some more moderate, who see through this petty corruption, though, so Democrats can at times ally with them to halt bad legislation.

  19. larry kurtz 2012.11.07

    Senator Adelstein: save the Democratic Party in your state, leave the earth hater party and fund South Dakota's rebirth as a Democratic leader.

  20. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.11.07

    DB, Varilek did not lie. Nor do I.

  21. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.11.07

    Sibby, I am open to a Dem-Mugwump alliance. But I can't march into battle with you if you're going to keep shouting about Marxism. We need pragmatic conservative allies focused on core issues, not ideological fantasies.

  22. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.11.07

    Megan, maybe we all do like legislating. Maybe now is the time to set in motion a great (small-d) democratic experiment: a constitutional amendment creating an Online People's Assembly. Do away with the State Senate (unicameralist Doug Wiken will like that part!). Replace it with an ongoing plebiscite. Bills passed by the Legislature go to a public wiki. For one month, citizens can read, propose amendments, and vote on the evolving bills. Bills drawing fewer than 16,000 views (signature requirement for petition) by Day 15 go to Governor for signature. Amendments close on Day 24; final votes are tallied on Day 31. Amended bills that pass the Online People's Assembly go to the Legislature for a reconciliation vote; bills then go to the Governor for signature. Instead of having to veto by referendum, we give the people a chance to weigh in on every bill as they happen.

    Any takers?

  23. Jana 2012.11.07

    Sorry Cory, but I won't go that easy on DB.

    DB, name and prove the lies about Kristi Noem. I know that her strict adherence to dogma and parroting party platitudes is sacred to you and the party faithfull, but no one has ever been able to defend her actions in Congress....and yet she was elected in spite of her incompetence. Oh well.

    Very simple request as you have attacked both Cory and MV for lying.

    Prove it or retract your statement as a lie coming from your keyboard.

    You can defend the Palin of the Prairie all you want, but accusing someone of lying deserves proof.

    Bring it.

  24. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.11.07

    Tony, we clearly need to kick that mindset in the shins. We are not the rugged individuals we think we are.

    Ben, thanks for the votes! Let's keep looking for those folks who can bring our views to the fight.

    LK, yes, I plan to be there!

  25. John 2012.11.07

    Tossed the lousy legislation but kept the lousier legislators? Same song, different tune with the voters rejections of the abortion fiascoes a couple years ago. My South Dakota voters are not the shiniest rock in the creek. It likely will take a generation or 2 of them to die off before the South Dakota electorate walks into the 21st century. These 60, 70, and 80-year olds with a ballot are as dangerous as is a 6-year old with a loaded .45.

  26. larry kurtz 2012.11.07

    Governor Daugaard: it's time to pardon Bob Newland.

  27. JoeBoo 2012.11.07

    redistricting killed democrats as well in South Dakota. I think ultimately in South Dakota the problem has more to do with candidates, when push comes to shove in any competitive race it comes down to candidates, and though there are some cases where Democrats have good candidates, there are very few where Republicans have poor candidates. Add in the money and logistic benefits and you can see why Republicans have such an advantage state wide.

  28. Megan Konz 2012.11.07

    Hmmmm...the OPA? I think I'll need more coffee.
    In the meantime, I'll continue to volunteer for, vote for and contribute funds to people who I believe could effectively do that job for us.

  29. Donald Pay 2012.11.07

    In South Dakota progressives have often found themselves allied with the right on certain issues. The Oahe Irrigation Project would have been built if certain conservatives and certain progressives hadn't found a way to combine their separate concerns into a powerful movement that beat the combined forces of the Chamber of Commerce and other establishment organizations, and Republican and Democratic elected officials. Read Peter Carrels great history of this movement, Uphill Against Water, to get a feeling for how conservatives and progressives worked together against the middle.

    From the 1970s through the 1990s progressives and conservatives were able to work together on a number of issues---ETSI, uranium mining, gold mining, nuclear waste, hazardous waste, medical waste and solid waste issues, and large scale CAFOs.

    I suppose the abortion fights during the 2000s have sort of driven a wedge between this sort of coalition-building, but if you agree to disagree on certain issues, you can still work together on others.

  30. grudznick 2012.11.07

    Pardon Mr. Newland but then test him every week to see if he's keeping his nose clean. I'll pee in a bucket with you, Bob, just like the old days.

  31. Cluck Norris 2012.11.08

    I agree with JoeBoo about the redistricting, however I think the answer is easier than using a wiki-vote: proportional representation. It's frustrating to live in Lawrence County, where Rep's have had a stranglehold on all three seats for years.....imagine a "super-district", with Butte, Lawrence and Meade county. Now, my fellow 30% Dems would be guaranteed at least 3 of the 10 seats in the super district. Voila! Repeat the process in 10 superdistricts, and the Dems have a viable minority. (or at least they have tripled their numbers in Pierre)

    For the record, I think Nesselhuf and the Dems should boycott Pierre this year. Make a statement - "Our votes aren't even needed to pass bills - they probably aren't (5 of 35, and 19 of 70)" The committees would be hampered, but it could wake up more SDan's to governmental process. And then these more informed people (if not just more curious) people would seek you out, CAH!

  32. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.11.08

    Megan, there are numerous technical details to be worked out. But I insist that the OPA amendment include a provision that the Speaker of the House introduce all bills approved by the online assembly by shouting, "Opa!" Greek line dancing around the House chamber is optional.

  33. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.11.08

    Superdistricts: are you sure that would guarantee Dems would get a few seats the Hills and the high country? The problem out here was just the inability to recruit Dem candidates willing to wage war. Making them wage that war over an even larger district would seem to make that battle even more uphill.

    And a Pierre boycott makes me nervous. After lambasting Kristi Noem for skipping work, I'd have a hard time letting Dems do the same. During session, we need to be in Pierre to bear that radical witness, to hear the backroom conversations, to watch the Governor's arm-twisting, and to speak out about the Republican abuses of power. If we boycott, the Republicans might well proceed with business as usual and laugh at how easy it is to get things done without an opposition party in town. That might be the only message voters would get. Yikes!

  34. Phyllis Cole-Dai 2012.11.08

    Cory, I totally relate to everything you said in this post (as I usually do). I like your notion of "radical witness" a lot (or, as one friend of mine puts it, "we progressives are living in a mission field", and he's not talking religion). It's so easy to get discouraged. Even before the election results came in, I wrote a piece of satire, a "Post-Election Nonpartisan Prayer for the Nation," composed in the same spirit as Mark Twain's "War Prayer," which I submitted to the Brookings Register on Tuesday afternoon and posted a few places on line (http://fast-talk.blogspot.com/2012/11/some-post-election-satire.html). Some say it sounded awfully cynical. I think there's more to it than cynicism, but it is a piece of tough writing. We need to be tough, I think, in our writing and speaking out and standing up, and I am more grateful than I can say that you keep blogging away, standing up for your principles, which is the same as also standing up for your neighbor, and the community at large. In a culture where extreme individualism and self-regard rule the day (and in this state, the ballot box), voices like yours cry in the wilderness, and those of us wandering out there and have "ears to hear" flock in your direction. Thank you.

  35. Karl Kroger 2012.11.09

    Reading your post and reading the comments, I'm struck by the challenging role progressives have in SD. We so desperately want to have our voices heard and make a difference--yet it feels like people have to choose between standing on the sidelines as the crazy liberal, or blending in with the crowd, thus losing any distinctive message. The fact that no Democrat ran in Pierre is maddening. No one in my city had the compassion to speak up on behalf of those who struggle, no one had the courage to speak against the silliness of our legislature, no one--including myself. I've got my excuses--some legitimate, others not as much.

    I am convinced that we need people with courage and conviction, ideas and passion to boldly fight for the underdog--whether they're women, students, the environment, Native Americans, or the poor. I emailed Varilek before the primary when he distanced himself from Obama, saying he supported civil unions, but not gay marriage. I was annoyed, the Democrat likely to win the primary seemed to me as if he was going to pull another Herseth-Sandlin and play things safe. He called, he schmoozed, I voted for him and gave him money. Later he went after Noem for being the absent minded and absent representative--I thought he might get close, I thought folks might agree she's not doing her job very well. But in the end, I wasn't excited...so how would other South Dakotans get excited. Oh how my Bishop did such a great job speaking of McGovern's public service, compassion, and integrity. All that he stood for, and accomplished, inspires me. We need people to run who will inspire. People who will stand for something. It's probably silly posting all of this a few days late at 3am in the morning, but I just had to get it out of my head. And as far as that crazy desire that awakens every now and then to try to run myself someday, well hopefully I didn't say anything just now to jeopardize that. Peace.

  36. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.11.09

    Don't be afraid of speaking the truth, Karl. That fear is exactly what gets us a right-tacking party that doesn't distinguish itself on issues. We must not be afraid to challenge and change the culture.

  37. Karl Kroger 2012.11.09

    Thanks.

  38. Jana 2012.11.09

    Wasn't sure if this was the right thread or maybe one on the governor's failed legislation...but it is interesting.

    "Barack Obama fared well across the country Tuesday night, winning 332 electoral votes en route to a second term as president. Nowhere did he perform better, however, than in states that place the highest emphasis on education."

    Think Progress also extrapolates it down to teacher salaries, which might be a bad thing for teachers in a Republican state. OMG...pay them a fair salary and they may vote Democratic!

    For now, let's just look at how the most educated states voted.

    "Obama Swept States With The Most Educated Workforces And The Highest Paid Teachers"

    http://thinkprogress.org/education/2012/11/09/1170241/obama-education-2012/?mobile=nc

  39. Wayne Pauli 2012.11.10

    Subject: A new Country

    Dear Red States,

    We're ticked off at your Neanderthal attitudes and politics and we've decided we're leaving.

    We intend to form our own country of all the Blue States.

    In case you aren't aware, that includes New York, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington, California, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois and the rest of the Northeast.

    We believe this split will be beneficial to the nation and especially to the people of the new country, The Enlightened States of America (E.S.A).

    To sum up briefly:
    You get Texas, Oklahoma and all the slave states.

    We get stem cell research and the best beaches.

    We get Andrew Cuomo and Elizabeth Warren. You get Bobby Jindal and Todd Akin.

    We get the Statue of Liberty. You get OpryLand.

    We get Intel and Microsoft. You get WorldCom.

    We get Stanford, Harvard, MIT, the other Ivys, and the University of California. You get Ole' Miss.

    We get 85 percent of America's entrepreneurs. You get Alabama.

    We get two-thirds of the tax revenue. You get to make the red states pay their fair share.

    Since our aggregate divorce rate is 22 percent lower than the Christian Coalition's, we get a bunch of happy families. You get a bunch of single moms.

    With the Blue States in hand we will have firm control of 80% of the country's fresh water, more than 90% of the pineapple and lettuce, 92% of the nation's fresh fruit, 95% of America's quality wines (you can serve French wines at state dinners) 90% of all cheese, 90 percent of the high tech industry, most of the US low sulfur coal, all living redwoods, sequoias and condors, all the Ivy and Seven Sister schools plus Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Cal Tech and MIT.

    With the Red States you will have to cope with 88% of all obese Americans and their projected health care costs, 92% of all US mosquitoes, nearly 100% of the tornadoes, 90% of the hurricanes, 99% of all Southern Baptists, virtually 100% of all televangelists, Rush Limbaugh, Bob Jones University, Clemson and the University of Georgia.

    We get Hollywood and Yosemite, thank you.

    38% of those in the Red states believe Jonah was actually swallowed by a whale, 62% believe life is sacred unless we're discussing the death penalty or gun laws, 44% say that evolution is only a theory, 53% that Saddam was involved in 9/11 and 61% of you crazys believe you are people with higher morals then we lefties.

    We're taking the good weed too. You can have that crap they grow in Mexico.

    Sincerely,

    Citizen of the Enlightened States of America

    This circulated through email recently, probably not new but still enjoyable

  40. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.11.10

    Phyllis, thank you for adding your voice! We need as many people as we can spreading the word!

    Jana, education sounds like one more of the big cultural factors forming these polarized places, as like minds flock together. Larry submitted this High Country News article under another post, but it applies well here as well: America's higher geographic mobility leads us to cluster around folks of like mind. That makes me nervous: can the voice of radical witness change minds here and forge a new Democratic majority? Or are the people who get the message going to be more inclined to move someplace where they can join a pre-made majority? Can we short-circuit that ideo-geographic feedback loop?

Comments are closed.