Last updated on 2018.06.20
O.K., I've had enough. There's some crowing going around about the South Dakota Libertarian Party's "huge success" in recruiting candidates at its convention last Saturday. The Libertarians found warm bodies for six of the seven statewide slots filled directly by party convention nomination.
"Libertarians 6, Democrats 3," chortles Bob Mercer, referring to the South Dakota Democratic Party's embarrassing failure to nominate candidates for attorney general, treasurer, and commissioner of school and public lands. My friend and convention-goer Leo Kallis says the SDLP are "rightfully rejoicing." Ken Santema deems his party's achieving a status that Dems could not "somewhat notable."
You know what's notable? The South Dakota Libertarian Party nominated six candidates (the most prominent of whom, according to a check of the official state voter registration database after supper tonight is still a registered Republican and thus, under state law and per the Arndt precedent, cannot be certified as a Libertarian nominee) who didn't have to do anything more to qualify for the ballot that show up at the library and say "Why not?"
And did you notice I said they filled six of seven statewide slots? Let's not forget the one Libertarians left empty that Democrats didn't: lieutenant governor. The SDLP didn't nominate a louie-gov because they failed to get anyone to run for gov. All they needed to do was get one of those eager conventioneers to spend the winter lining up a measly 250 Libertarian signatures. The Democrats and Republicans both had two people manage that minor feat of organization and perspiration and undergo a statewide primary.
But that was too much work for the Libertarians, whose laggardliness will now cost them their status as a recognized party. SDCL 12-1-3 conditions party status on fielding a gubernatorial candidate who wins at least 2.5% of the popular vote in November. Whatever status Libertarians get from nominating more candidates at convention than Dems, on November 4, the SDLP will lose its existential status, because it couldn't put first things first.
But if we're really going to play this numbers game, let's look at all the numbers. The Libertarians have six candidates. Yay. Democrats have 70 (71, if we count Susy Blake for lieutenant governor separately). That's Weiland for Senate, Robinson for House, Wismer for Governor, Schultz for Secretary of State, Pierson for treasurer, Allen for PUC, and 64 candidates for state legislature.
That 64 still stinks, stinks, stinks considering that there are 105 seats in the Legislature, and I will be kicking in chairs and knocking down tables at Democratic meetings asking why we can't fill that roster. But that 64 is (literally, mathematically) infinitely better than the big zero Libertarians have vying for Legislature. And I'm not even counting the dozens more Democrats who are running for county commissioner, sheriff, and other local offices, ballot lines from which Libertarians are also absolutely absent.
To top it off, some of our 70 Democratic candidates will win. None of the Libertarians will. Again, that's infinitely better performance by Democrats.
We South Dakota Democrats aren't rejoicing—we have lots of problems, and lots of work to do. But we Dems have far more real candidates than emerged from the SDLP's weekend pizza party. We have a far more real party.
And after Election Day, we'll still have a party, unlike the Libertarians. I'd call that somewhat notable.
p.s.: The SDLP convention also couldn't hold its quorum's interest long enough to finalize a platform. Santema reports the SDLP executive committee will paste something together later. We thus have six candidates on our statewide ballot who are unified by nothing other than a label that will become legally meaningless the day after the election.
Okay, so the Democrats have more candidates in elections in which half will lose. Okay, so the SDLP has candidates in 6 elections in which all will lose. Hey, come back here, we can still kick your ass, we don't care that we have no arms or legs. Hey, quit walking away, we'll kick your ass.
It has been said that kicking a man when he's down is a cowardly act. It has also been said that there's no better time. I subscribe to both schools of thought.
And none of us ate any f[...]' pizza until the convention was over, and then it was just me and Emmett, 'cuz everybody else had to go home to their families, where they opened Spam and Pork n Beans.
Like all good Americans.
The SDLP is also now complicit in allowing the Bosworth/Haber/Stranahan circus (scam) to continue to bilk money from the gullible. Imho, the SDLP lost all credibility when they embraced Haber and Stranahan.
I feel sorry for the libertarians. For the next three months, every dumbass thing that Haber does will be entitled "libertarian candidate..." Take, for example, his call for Kristi Noem to investigate Marty Jackley. His grasp of how government works seems to be a bit tenuous.
How noble of you to wait for leftovers. Doesn't that get kinda old? Sounds like political reality in South Dakota-trickle down everything(if you're lucky). Glad you amended the spam and pork and beans quip or I'da been mad as heck.
Is it just me or is Chad Haber one of the most hideously ugly men on the planet?
SDBlue.... what you said... I couldn't have said it better myself. You too, SDTeacher. That three ring circus (who apparently couldn't understand why the Libertarian Convention was referred to as such) needs to simply fade away... Those three humans, Boshabahan as I like to refer to them, are everything that's wrong with politics in South Dakota... and then some.
Bob, I understand why we're both a bit sensitive on the issue of the viability of our respective parties. Tell us what concrete action the SDLP planned at its convention to organize and mobilize voters this fall. Tell us when you'll be holding training sessions for SDLP volunteers to go door to door, make phone calls, and get out the vote this fall.
Or, true to Libertarian philosophy, will the SDLP be operating under the assumption that social action just happens spontaneously and doesn't require any central organization, planning, or management?
The chair warmers occupying the South Dakota Democratic Party office in Sioux Falls should do the honorable thing today and resign. The party needs to find their own Emmett Reistroffer and hire that person to build a competent organization that, at least, can compete with the Libertarians.
"...a competent organization that, at least, can compete with the Libertarians."
Are you effing kidding me? For realsies even? Thanks for the belly laugh this morning. I needed that.
SDBlue: "the SDLP lost all credibility when they embraced Haber and Stranahan"
I agree, but when I look at the other canidates they offer some aren't much better. You have a group of "also rans" who appear on the ballot every few years, earn a few percent of the vote primarily as people vote against the mainstream candidates, and they brag about their abysmal performance during the next election cycle when they are trying yet again.
Gathering 30 Libertarians in a room and nominating a half dozen of them to run for offices they aren't remotely qualified for isn't as notable of an event as they would have us believe. It was more difficult to the nominate candidates for class president when I was in high school, and I dare say we had a stronger group of candidates.
The thing is, it is difficult to take a party seriously when they can't even find the time to discuss their platform. It is more difficult when they nominate Republicans to fill seats they were unable to fill with real Libertarians.
I do feel bad for Reistroffer however. He seems to have a solid understanding of the political process and has potential... but he seems to have hitched his wagon to a dead horse. He wasn't even marginally successful with his campaign for Sioux Falls City Council, and I'd place money on the fact that his performance at the statewide level won't be any better. Then you have people like Haber and Stranahan making a mockery of the Libertarian Party itself and at the end of the day it just results in a cloud resting over everyone connected to this debacle.
Well-said Craig. Not only did they nominate someone who is a Republican (changing your registration at the last minute does not change the beliefs you have claimed to hold for years...), but they also nominated someone to their executive committee who doesn't even live in South Dakota. I am appalled that they would do such a thing, especially after witnessing his Facebook posting shenanigans on their event page.
While I understand the entertainment value inherent in the spectacle of the SDLP convention, it appears that a number of people are making entirely too much of a group of candidates whose presence in the campaign terminating November 4 will have almost no visible effect.
I have conducted several statewide campaigns, some for elective office and some for ballot issues. My quests for office had the same effect as will those of the six men we nominated Saturday. The ballot issues fared better, although I have yet to be involved in a ballot issue that won at the polls.
A campaign for office provides a personal growth opportunity unknown to those who don't engage in it except through carping. It's fun and exciting and leads to experiences that help the campaigner in ways unforeseen.
So, laugh and enjoy yourselves while we do the Lord's work and enjoy the fruits of Jesus' blessings.
My personal growth has expanded since I was forced to retire so much that Larry Kurtz will probably want me euthanized with a BMI of 200 or so. And I did it all w/o compromising my principles.
There is a silver lining however.
First, Haber has shown he is willing to to aside any political affiliation he has for an opportunity to stretch his 15 minutes of fame ever so slightly. This means a viable poltical party will never have anything to do with him, which means his chances of ever being elected have all but vanished. He might even need to find a real job, but since his name will now be forever tied to this trainwreck (Google never forgets) this means his chances to manipulate others in the future is now weakened.
Second, what little credibility Bosworth had has all but vanished. If she can't even convince her husband to support her party platform and remain loyal, she won't have any chances with the voters. Her political career has a few dozen more nails in it's coffin.
Third, now that Haber has decided to run this means Stranahan's desire to be a political consultant is slowly imploding. This will be the second failed candidate that Stranglehams has been involved with, and when your political resume includes a candidate who comes in second to last in a seven way race while spending more money per vote than anyone in the entire history of South Dakota, along with that candidates party-hopping, scandal-attracting husband who will be lucky to collect more than a single digit percentage of the vote.... well needless to say your skills as a political consultant and/or spokesperson won't be highly sought after.
Fourth, since AG races don't tend to be prime opportunities for fundraising, the Haber campaign likely won't have a warchest. This means funds to direct towards Stranglehams will be minor, which means Stranglehams will soon find himself in the position of needing to find a real job. Since his last contract offer from a viable employer would make a South Dakota schoolteacher show empathy, and because it wasn't that long ago that he admitted he was broke, it stands to reason he will need to move on to greener pastures to feed his family. Perhaps he can get a job as a columnist for the Punxsutawney Spirit or the Hill Country Herald... although he may not be qualified for either. His desire to be taken seriously as a journalist (even one not seen as impartial) has evaporated.
Fifth, Haber is metaphorically poking Marty Jackley with a sharp stick while calling him names. If Haber and Bosworth believe the AG was picking on them before... they haven't seen anything yet. Jackley has done a fairly good job of ignoring Haber's past transgressions and there was reason to believe he would have ignored his current and future transgressions as well. However, with this little stunt you can bet the kid gloves are coming off, and after November who knows what might happen. Haber might as well be wearing a safety orange suit with a reflective target painted on it, and Chad has now done something I didn't think was even possible... he has united Republicans and Democrats in support of Jackley and any future action taken against team Bosaber.
Is the number of Democratic candidates dropping in recent years. You can't blame Republicans for leaving 41 races go uncontested.
12 - Now that your belly has stopped shaking from laughter, reality might sink in that the Libertarians demonstrated the resourcefulness of finding candidates who could pass the "fog this mirror" test. Democrats left three statewide ballot positions empty with a population base that's 100 times larger than the Libertarians. Attorney General, Treasurer and Commissioner of School & Public Lands were left blank. Who best demonstrated they were interested in being prepared for the 2014 election?
Still belly laughing, 12? Reality bites.
As of 8/9/14, SDLP = JOKE.
well said everyone but tears. ifn haber wins the legislature might amend the job description, but the state will have a constitutional crisis. it'll be hilarious, dd will fume, and haber will be.... back to national politics.
If Chad Haber is on the ballot, he has a mathematical chance of winning the AG election. Who cares about alleged scandals? Even if Marty Jackley had been the ring leader behind Watergate, he still would make a better AG for South Dakota than Haber. The best thing that can happen now is to completely ignore Chad Haber. Repeating the fecal matter he and Stanheimsteamroller throw out only gives them credence and increases the chance something my "stick." I think the AG election should be treated as a "non-contested race" and it should not be mentioned again.
Mr. Newland, people should have voted for you. I was rooting for you.
I imagine you were rooting for me, grudz.
I'll just leave this here: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/08/the-illusion-of-a-libertarian-moment/375844/?single_page=true
96, I'll agree that the SDDP should be ashamed of leaving so many seats unfilled. But leaving the Legislative slots is the gravest issue. Leaving AG open is the next gravest, although one could argue that on this slot, the Dems still deserve more credit than the Libs for choosing to nominate no one rather than nominate a joke candidate (open for debate!). Leaving auditor and CSPL open is least grave. On CSPL in particular: that job is the most boring job on the ballot. I vow as your next party chair ( ;-) ) to expend all of my resources recruiting candidates for every other available office right down to county commissioner, auditor, and sheriff first before working up a sweat to find a CSPL candidate.
Good link, Craig! There is no Libertarian moment. Any such moment in South Dakota would end on November 4, when the SDLP will lose its recognized status and have to reboot from zero.
Minor correction Cory, I think the libertarian moment ended in SD when they brought Lee into their party leadership and nominated Haber. It's impossible to take them seriously and I honestly believe the Haber candidacy plus inability to create a platform turns them into a joke. It'll be an interesting sideshow, but that's it.
Good link Craig, TPM goes further with calling out the bullshit of libertarians and who funds and backs completely. They are a subsidiary of the Christian right.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/cafe/libertarian-christian-right
Ron Paul and his fakery along with Aqua Buddha, his dumbass son, just more hustlers hiding behind the curtain.
This is like a revolution. These Libertarians aren't worried about being politically corrected. This is like an anti-establishment, anti-corruption movement in which you will see the 2 main blogs tear them apart. I see how people are crying out for help everyday and it seems like the 3rd party and Independent Candidates are on a mission for change, not control. Do they have any money or party organization, no, but they do have passion and care about people. They are talking about very uncomfortable issues that that other 2 parties are afraid to address. Now just watch, I am going to get land blasted. But, I believe this needs to be said. These people need a chance. I think it is great that there are no Republicans running unopposed. I wish them well and I am excited to be part of the movement.
It is very much like a revolution. A bunch of people get on a merry-go-round, laugh and get dizzy, then get off and find they haven't gone anywhere.
Want to save South Dakota? Vote Democrat. Run Democrat. Donate Democrat.
Cory, I am digging your merry-go-round comparison.
A revolution still needs wisdom as it's driving force and thrives on unity. A party in chaos may claim it is united but when it is faced with challenges, it will collapse under the pressure.
I like the idea of a third party - I really do. I don't feel it as important within our state as it might be on a national scale, but I still like the idea. However, I suspect I'm like most people when I say I want a third party I can actually support. This means running viable candidates with new and unique ideas. This means running canidates that have an actual chance of winning based upon fresh ideas and common sense. There have been independent candidates that appeared viable and had interesting ideas. I can get behind that, but what about the Libertarians?
With rare exception, I don't really know what the Libertarian candidates actually stand for. From what I can tell there are few of them passionate about the legalization of medical marijuana... some would even support full legalization. Yet beyond that I have no idea because they aren't telling me. Haber seems to be running on the premise that he isn't Marty Jackley but I haven't a clue what he actually stands for beyond that. He doesn't talk about his qualifications or experience - merely that he isn't Jackley.
I don't hear discussions from the Libertarian candidates about gun control, healthcare, gay marriage, tax reform, open government, or anything else. Sure I understand what the Libertarian party itself stands for... but the candidates aren't nearly as open.
To make matters worse some of the unprofessionalism employed by some of the people who purport to speak for the group and/or represent them online is simply amazing. Say what you will about the Democrats and the Republicans, but at least after reading some of their talking points I'm not left wondering if the person who wrote them has a high school education or if they need to be medicated for a mental health issue.
When a party lets its own members make a mockery of itself, it ceases to be relevant, and it simply cannot be taken seriously. I feel sorry for the few honest Libertarians trying to make a difference, because the circus sideshow seems to have hijacked the Libertarian name and it has tarnished the entire idea of a legitimate third party in our state.
Craig,
I agree. The lack of formal organization of the Libertarian Party (inherent in libertarians?) leads to a lack of coherence of organizanizing principles. The lack of coherence leads to multiple messages (effective brand problem). The lack of a coherent brand means voters don't know what they are getting if they vote for a Libertarian candidate. If they don't know what they are getting, the candidate needs a ton of money to communicate that.
My point: The Libertarians might have been better served to nominate a few "true believers" in libertarianism and left off the fringe candidates. At least then, they could communicate a coherent message.
I think the libertarians will all have great messages and bold ideas to give the voters of SD for, another choice come Nov. They don't have money, but they have guts. It's good for voters from all parties including Independents to look at alternatives.
The Wadhams/Arends team is certainly getting their money's worth from the Haber/Bosworth circus.
Haber/Bosworth is Wadhams/Arends/Jackleys worst nightmare. This is exactly what SD needs, to show all the cover-ups with the EB-5 scandal along the abuse crises of our children. The Boes children are living in a homeless shelter in Rapid City. They were taken away from the Boes family in Ft Pierre. Just go to the fb page "Angels Need Your Help" and watch the interview. This is what's happening to the children of SD. There will be many more parents coming out, because now they are getting a voice. I talked to the biological mother of the children. She wants her children in a safe loving home. The Boes family have been caring for them for almost 4 years. The media will not report on this story. Doug and Candi have spent thousands of dollars on Lawyers and private investigators to get them back. Thune, Johnson, Noem, Daugaard and Jackley have done nothing. It's time to take these cases to the people. Myers and Hubbel will be speaking out for these children at their press conference this afternoon. Let's see if the media skirts the issue again. We will not give up on these children until they are back with their parents.
"I think the libertarians will all have great messages and bold ideas to give the voters of SD for, another choice come Nov."
Maybe they "will" have great messages, but how a party nominates candidates that haven't even declared their positions is beyond me. How a party has a convention without taking time to nail down a platform is even more bizarre. It all harms credibility... especially when candidates are selected by fewer than 30 people and the candidates are allowed to bring people to stack the vote in their favor. If there are no true delegates picked to represent the party, it becomes a contest to see who can bring along the most friends.
Newsflash - that isn't how you pick the best and brightest. It does make for a fantastic trainwreck however.
Well, at least they are trying. I takes time and work to get a movement going. They made it past the first hurdle, now let's see what they have to offer.
Do or do not. There is no try. And let's be honest. We are not witnessing a real political movement. We are witnessing a political party in name only hijacked for a vanity campaign designed to distract, provide the candidate three months of immunity from prosecution, and extend a fundraising scam.
And we're witnessing one of the major parties continue to deflate and flounder without purpose or relevance. Or as Firesign Theater once framed it, "the sun ain't goin' down, the horizon's movin' up!"
96, if that's the case, and if we take your advice and secure the resignations of every current SDDP leader, then who's left to take over? Who is our Wellstone, our Obama, our fiery organizational genius? Whom will the masses follow and work for? Does SHS send Zachary to school and run the party herself?
I do agree that the headline of this article is more a measure of Libertarian failure and not at all a measure of Democratic success.
Cory -- This habit of failing to recruit candidates is getting worse. If the old guard doesn't step out of the way, the party will continue its decline to the status of Libertarians in this state.
It's time to pass the torch to a new generation of Democrats. But first, someone needs to relight the torch. Before there was a Sen. George McGovern, there was a serious young college professor George McGovern who worked his ass off to make a defunct party compete and win. It's safe to say a personality like that is not among the party's leadership these days.
The Democrat Party cannot force people to campaign for office, so what else can they do?
I think part of the reason why Democrats do not campaign for office is that it is awfully expensive to do so. Not everyone can afford a second mortgage on their house without knowing that they will win, and receive compensation to pay off that second mortgage.
I think the oppressiveness of Democrats by the Republicans is also a factor. As soon as any Democrat even hints at the possibility of campaigning for office, there are people like flies on road kill out to destroy their attempt.
The oppressiveness, as you say, is real and it has been one line of defense for a GOP influence that permeates every business community in our state. Also real are the wicked personal attacks and the special interest money to beat down Democratic candidates like they were baby seals. So, do you choose to live on your knees or die on your feet? The Republicans are strong, JeniW, but they are not invulnerable. Democrats contribute to the Republican Party strength when they don't try hard enough.
People are not stupid, either, but if a major party won't talk people into running and give people a choice and a better vision than a corrupt Attorney General and the rotten good ol' boy network he's shielding, then I guess you miss 100 percent of the shots you never take.
This attitude that South Dakota is locked up tight for the Republicans is exactly what put Mike Rounds in the driver's seat so far in this election. But you have tools to defeat him and a really energetic and charismatic candidate in Rick Weiland. You've also got a tough Governor candidate who proved she's not going to knuckle under easily.
Beating Rounds is a David and Goliath proposition, but if David didn't have the faith to pick up that rock and do his best ... well, let's say David didn't choose to live on his knees.
You are absolutely correct 96 Tears. It is not me that has to be convinced, it is convincing potential candidates.
I was referencing on the comments that the SDDP did not have a candidate for each possible position.
I believe that the SDDP is doing the best that it can to find potential candidates, but they cannot force people to campaign for office. So, the question is how should the SDDP go about seeking and getting potential candidates?
From out of the East a staranger came,a law book in his hand.
A man-the kind of a man the West would need to tame a troubled land.
But the point of a gun was the only law that Liberty understood.
When the final showdown came at last-a law book was no good!
How does this cypher out? Charles Darwin and Abe Lincoln were born on the very same day.
Mike, the law is still king. We must campaign from that perspective.
JeniW, if the candidate-suppression tactics of the GOP are partly to blame, then we evidently need to respond with harder tactics... and more money to fight them. If the current leadership is unable or unwilling (which is it, 96? Both? Why?) to get such money and wage such tactics, then yes, we could use a new leader
But a new leader to challenge the GOP in South Dakota won't come from the ineffective Libertarian Party. Their platform (more accurately, their rhetoric, since they don't have a platform, since all of Haber's zombies left convention once they'd done their job, leaving the platform unfinished) doesn't differentiate the SDLP enough from the SDGOP to give serious candidates and voters a reason to switch... rather like the reason that Blue Dog Dems who portray the SD Democratic Party as GOP Lite can't light a fire under candidates and voters.