Press "Enter" to skip to content

Barth Makes First Move in House Chess Game

Greater Yankton area native and Senate staffer Matt Varilek is flattered by an online push to draft him to run against Rep. Kristi Noem in 2012. But RCJ's David Montgomery reports that Minnehaha County Commissioner Jeff Barth gets first-mover advantage, filing campaign finance papers declaring himself a candidate for U.S. House.

Boosting Barth's stock even more in this nerdly writer's eyes is Montgomery's note that Jeff Barth is one of the top five chess players in South Dakota:

When I reached Minnehaha Commissioner Jeff Barth by phone Friday, he was in his car on his way to Fort Pierre to play in the South Dakota Chess Association's annual team championship.

Barth, 59, is a longtime chess aficionado, and was even the South Dakota champion in 1993. ("I've been unable to replicate that success," he said.) I asked him if he was ranked, and he guessed he was probably "in the top five in the state."

"There's a couple of people I probably can't beat," Barth said. "We've got a grandmaster from Russia who currently lives in Sioux Falls" [David Montgomery, "Barth to Noem: P-QN4," Mount Blogmore, 2011.07.18].

Good chess-playing indicates a highly analytical mind. It also promises all sorts of fun bloglines...

...like the prospect of debate questions about the candidates' favorite chess pieces. Noem's likely response: "The horseys!"

32 Comments

  1. mike 2011.07.19

    The one concern I have with Barth and Varilek is can they make Noem spend money on a race she doesn't want to spend money on...

  2. David Newquist 2011.07.19

    "Pawnie" might not be a favorite, but more accurate.

  3. Matt Groce 2011.07.19

    Mike, if I may quote from Kevin Woster's bolg.

    “Varilek will have a lot of support — in finances, volunteers and strategy — from the (Sen.) Johnson camp. That will include the senator himself, a gritty campaigner with astute insights into how to win in South Dakota, as well as the serious mental muscle from the old (Sen. Tom) Daschle camp, led by (Steve) Hildebrand, who was a key part of the Obama phenomenon in 2008”

  4. South DaCola 2011.07.19

    Not a fan of Barth. Way to goody-two-shoes-nanny-state-tax-and-spend Democrat. That being said, his chances of beating Noem is 1 in 100. We need to run a strong Dem or Indy against her.

  5. Ben B 2011.07.19

    Scott,

    However much you might discredit Jeff, he has run two successful campaigns for county commissioner and is a shrewd guy with practical experience in government. I have great respect for Matt Varilek and hope there's a competitive primary. While either man has an uphill battle against Congresswoman Noem, November '12 is still a long ways away.

  6. mike 2011.07.20

    Thanks Matt.

    One interesting thing about Matt Varilek that could be trouble in a general is he will likely be a strong supporter of Obamacare.

    Noem will be in favor of Medicare cuts.

    Those two issues will cancel each other out with their support of unpopular programs.

    being neutral on Obamacare is essentially the reason Herseth lost. If she'd have strongly opposed it she'd have walked to reelection.

  7. mike 2011.07.20

    Basically I'm just saying anyone in strong support of Obamacare will likely have a very hard time cracking 40% in the election. Even if Noem supports cuts to Medicare.

  8. Matt Groce 2011.07.20

    I get what your saying Mike, but you're saying it wrong. Do a test poll with your friends, ask them if the like:

    A. Ending pre-existing conditions for kids with cancer.
    or
    B. Cutting Medicare for the elderly.

    I think Noem is in trouble on that one.

  9. John 2011.07.20

    Its a 60-40 race no matter who the Dem is. Look at state wide races for the past 20 years. Dems are consistantly at 40%. We get excided at the end of a race but the numbers end up at 40%.

    South Dakotans are not fed up with Republican rule- YET. Its getting closer but I don't think it has turned yet. Look at teachers. Their pay gets cut and they still vote for R's. I could go on with more groups and how they are hurt by electing R's but people keep doing it.

    I don't believe Barth or Matt can get that message accross.

  10. caheidelberger Post author | 2011.07.20

    John, they'll have an easier time getting that message across about Noem than about state legislators because Noem is more distant. She also has an awful record and an inability to articulate a truthful defense of it.

  11. caheidelberger Post author | 2011.07.20

    ...and Noem is nowhere near enjoying a 60-40 advantage over a Dem challenger.

  12. John 2011.07.20

    Cory wish it were true. But remember all of the "polls" that showed Steph ahead? In all of the polls except the one that counted.

    As Dems we have real problems with both candidates. Both are from Sioux Falls and male. There is a real Johnson Daschle connection that will hurt them as well as help. The machine you talked about has become a real problem for party insides. Both Senators have cause a rift with activists. Steve added to that. You choose the Steve- H., E. or K.

  13. Roger Elgersma 2011.07.20

    We need to remind tea partiers that the reason for medicare and social security is that the private sector savings do not always last in an up and down economy. That is why those systems started and why they are still necessary. To run on a phrase that 'government is bad' does not change the fact that it is still necesary for the same reasons it started. When the stock you own goes down, when you are to old to work again or to old to understand the stock market, just because their competitors sent jobs overseas then you will die real poor and helpless.

  14. caheidelberger Post author | 2011.07.20

    Good point on the safety net, Roger! Remember those cries of "Keep your government hands off my Medicare!" We can win on that message of the need for government.

    John, I'll grant there can be problems with Sioux Falls and the machine. But on those polls, remember: the SHS polls never predicted a runaway. The polls were generally single-digit differences that may well have represented genuine fluctuations in public opinion right down to the end, when Noem won a plurality, not a majority, by 2%.

    Certainly Noem against well-known SHS produced a different margin than might Noem vs. less well-known Dem new to statewide voters. But I don't here Noem on her own merits winning over tons of SHS Dems, Blue Dog Dems, indy voters, or even the GOP folks who didn't care much for her in 2010. Noem has a base, but she doesn't seem to be expanding it. Run a serious, competent Dem who calls Noem relentlessly on her voting record and her bumbling public statements, and the election never comes anywhere near a 60-40 margin for Noem.

  15. mike 2011.07.20

    Noem is going to be very tough to defeat. I would agree that her 2012 reelection campaign will look something like:

    Noem: 65%
    Barth: 35%

    Noem: 59%
    Varilek: 41%
    I would consider this a strong showing by Varilek and a moral victory.

    But these three can make Noem spend money and work really hard. These are the top 3 candidates in the Democratic party that I can think of.

    Noem:
    vs
    Turbak-Berry:

    Noem:
    vs
    Brendan Johnson:

    Noem:
    vs
    Herseth-Sandlin:

  16. Troy Jones 2011.07.20

    Roger,

    Facts are stubborn realities. Your reason's for Medicare and Social Security is at odd with the reality.

    SS was started for two reasons: Provide retirement income to those who had none by taxing those currently working and be an effective forced retirement savings for future retirees. It had nothing to do with the flucuations in the stock market.

    Medicare was started for one reason: Insure elderly had medical care by taxing those currently working. It had nothing to do with flucuations in the stock market.

    Cory, regarding your comment "But I don’t hear Noem on her own merits winning over tons of SHS Dems, Blue Dog Dems, indy voters, or even the GOP folks who didn’t care much for her in 2010" you are ignoring two very real realities in South Dakota:

    1) Incumbency advantage. If you look over history, incumbents historically run better than their first campaign. This applies to Republicans and Democrats alike.

    2) Republican registration advantage

    Rationale for both together.

    In races where neither are incumbents, very seldom to Democrats win by much more than just a few percentage points but Republicans can often win by in excess of 10%. But, when a Republican or Democrat incumbent wins, they almost always increase their margin but usually the Republican's gain is larger. This applies in national, state/constitutional, and legislative races.

    In short, to beat an incumbent in South Dakota, I believe Democrat challengers need all three must be present and Republican challengers might get by with two (if one is intra-party enthusiasm) because of their voter registration advantage:

    1) A lack of enthusiasm for the candidate within their party.
    2) An alienation of Independents against either the candidate or the candidate's party.
    3) Extra-ordinary enthusiasm for the opponent in the other party.

    In the case of SHS, I think all three were present.

    In the current case of KN, I sense the GOP has a high degree of enthusiasm, I sense no tempering of SD Independent's preponderance of opposition to the party of Obama. As I have no sense of enthusiasm for Varilek or Barth or potential for it to be generated within the Democrat faithful, I can't comment on its effect. However, unless both #1 AND #2 manifest themselves #3 will be insufficent for KN to be beat.

    Proof of my thesis, in the last fifty years (maybe forever but my knowledge only goes back that far), only two incumbents by new face challengers* have been beat for re-election: Democrats Frank Denholm and SHS. The reason no Republicans have been beat is their voter registration advantage.

    * Abdnor/McGovern, Daschle/Abdnor, Johnson/Pressler, Thune/Daschle don't count because they were effectively two "incumbent" races. But to some degree they support my case as at least two of my three scenarios were in place as well.

    Abdnor/McGovern: The GOP was fired up, Democrats were disheartened by Carter, and Independents moved strong for the GOP across the nation. Thus Abdnor had the largest margin of beating an incumbent in history.

    Daschle/Abdnor: The GOP was divided by a primary, Democrats were fired up, and Independents had tired of Reagan. But this was a squeaker.

    Johnson/Pressler: The GOP had never been enthused with Pressler, Democrats loved Johnson, and Independents had been the difference for Clinton in the prior election and he was quite popular with them.

    Thune/Daschle: This is possibly the only exception. The GOP was highly enthused for Thune but Democrats still loved Daschle and Independents had started drifting away from the GOP. And, this might make the mountain against KN the hardest for Democrats because the voter registration advantage for GOP candidates might be enough. I don't sense any softening of enthusiasm for KN in the GOP and nor do I expect it.

  17. larry kurtz 2011.07.20

    Mr. Jones: could you take a moment and discuss Orion Financial's relationship to the State of South Dakota?

  18. larry kurtz 2011.07.20

    Then, explain its relationship with the State as well, please.

  19. Bill Fleming 2011.07.20

    Actually, I think maybe Noem could be beat in a GOP primary. I've heard rumblings...

  20. caheidelberger Post author | 2011.07.20

    Troy, you're at your best when you draw on that extensive knowledge of history. Well done!

    I'll accept the thesis that first-time incumbency in general provides an advantage. I'll certainly accept the thesis that a Democrat seeking to unseat Noem comes in as underdog, though not as big an underdog as posited above, unless we Dems run a Bruce Whalen-caliber candidate... and I doubt Varilek or Barth would be that bad.

    But you are also saddled with an incumbent who is not as good at her job as any of the other incumbents you mentioned. And I've heard Republicans (just a few, far from a scientific sample) cuss Noem out in ways that I've not heard Dems (inlcuding myself) cuss SHS or Heidepriem.

    Barth and Varilek may step in at 60-40 based on lack of name recognition and the Republican registered voter advantage. They can remedy the recognition thing quickly, just as Noem did during her primary (and dang it, Dems, that's part of why we need a primary!). We can chip away at the voter registration thing by working our butts off.

    And while I'm being hopeful, let me throw this one out for discussion: maybe we offer Barth, Varilek, or any other Dem who takes the plunge a built-in advantage with the HB 1230 referral. We have an issue that let's us shout about GOP inconsistency and bad priorities. We can rile up a lot of voters with that. That issue can help us draw in voters who will look up the ticket and like our people as well. What do you say, spot us another couple percentage points at least thanks to that line on the ballot?

  21. Troy Jones 2011.07.20

    Larry,

    First of all, my words written anytime for public consumption are my personal opinion, analysis. By inference, you seem to be implying an accusation that my writing somehow benefits me or my business.

    Alternatively, you are going on a fishing trip knowing I'm close to many politicians and assume all conservatives are crooks/hypocrites as you have no reason to even ask the question.

    Second, this is the first time in all my time on blogs that the inference has been made because both Republicans and Democrats who know me also know these are my thoughts held at the core of my being. In everything I've said (as I sign my own name), is consistent with what I say in private as well.

    Third, this is an adhominem attack intended to denigrate what I say not by their merits but by inferring there is an ulterior motive.

    This said I'm going to answer the question this one time. If it ever comes up, again I'll ask Cory for a personal favor to dismiss it.

    18 years ago, my wife and I left the employ of the State of South Dakota (In Pierre, it is more common to have husband and wife both state employees than not). Since that time, my company and me personally have not recieved a dime from the State of South Dakota with the following exception: I attended two Governor's Hunts despite being invited to many more. The first one I attended was within a few years of leaving the Governor's Office of Economic Development. Because part of my job while at GOED was to work the Hunt, even as a guest, it felt like work and didn't attend another for 6-7 years. After the passage of time, I thought maybe the "work" reminder had passed and I accepted an invitation and it was still the same so I haven't gone back. After turning down several invites in a row, the invites stopped.

    (Sidenote: I always chuckle when people say invites to the Governor's Hunt are related to political donations. I don't think I've ever donated to Governor Janklow and if I have it was nominal. While I did donate to Governor Rounds as much because of our personal relationship as his politics, I'm pretty sure my invites were more related to my past Economic Development experience as the Rounds hunt I did attend I was briefed on who all the out-of state prospects were in my hunting party and the factors they were considering as they hoped I'd help them sell the business on coming to South Dakota).

    I will go further. Despite growing up and spending hours in the Rounds house and playing football with two of the Governor's brothers and knowing John Thune for over 30 years, our wives being pregnant with girls at the same time while we both lived in Pierre, and considering him a close personal friend, I've never once asked them for a favor or even discussed a public policy which directly affected me or my business. In fact, I don't recall ever discussing a public policy with Governor Rounds. Every time I saw him, we talked family stuff. With regard to Senator Thune, it seems like every discussion we've had, we disagreed and I don't recall him once ever adopting my view. Seriously, if our friendship was based on the political discussions where I've advocated him changing positions, we'd hate each other. However, in all honesty, when we agree, there is never a reason to discuss it, he'd rather talk family and personal stuff, and our friendship means more to me than any political view whether we agree or disagree.

    Despite the fact I've never asked them for anything, don't think I think it wrong. A relationship with an elected official doesn't cause one to lose their right to petition their government. I just didn't do it as I had no reason (my business isn't conducive to state contracts).

    As I think about it, shortly after I left state government, GOED asked me to do some consulting as my prior work made me the expert. I did it on one condition- it was pro bono and I was given no credit for anything that came from it (nothing came from it). One other time, about the same timeframe, a former colleague did give me a referral because he thought I my services and skills could be helpful, I took the engagement and completed it to fruition. Since then, nothing (Hopefully, the reason I've never gotten another referral isn't because they think I'm a dolt but because they don't know me or what I do).

    As I sit here, since my major marketing is to bankers, accountants, and lawyers who might refer business to me, the fact I've never actively or passively maintained contact with the economic development people is probably a deriliction of duty. Or presciently, I subconsciously knew some dolt was going to make an accusation that would adversely reflect on Governors Janklow, Rounds and now Daugaard, a reflection I don't want.

    The closest thing to a "benefit" I've rec'd because of my political activity is all three of my daughters have served as a page. Daughter #1 was sponsored by a Democrat Senator who my daughter had known longer than I had, Daughter #2 was sponsored by the grandfather of kids she had babysat since they were born as his son lived in my neighborhood, and Daughter #3 was sponsored by the same person as #2. While I hope me being their father was not a negative to their application, I'm fully confident they would have been selected on their own merits.

    I'll go one step further. Daughter #2 who was a A-B business major at Creighton University talked to me about being an intern for Senator Thune who she had known her entire life and had volunteered hundreds of hours (yes hundreds) on his Senate races while in H.S. and maybe working in Economic Development after graduation as I had. In both cases, I advised her not to because I was afraid people would infer she got these positions because of me and I wanted all to know her accomplishments were on her own merit. Because I felt those experiences are among my most valuable and memorable, I told her it was her own decision and didn't want to forego anything because of me.

    Oh, yes, I might get a benefit by virtue of my past employment as I'm quite open I once worked for Senator Abdnor and Governor Mickelson because I'm very proud to have been associated with these great men. And, I'm sure people who think well of them probably induce I'm a good guy as I was trusted by them. But, I'll tell you this Larry. If someone wants to impugn me for being proud to have worked for them, it will roll off my back. In a truly personal way, I love Jim Abdnor and George Mickelson not for their public persona or accomplishments but the human beings they were to me in so many ways.

    Final comment: Cory works for a state entity. Many times he speaks out on issues that directly affect his employer (and possibly his job as I don't even know what he does for a living). Not once have I so much as inferred his views should be denigrated because of his employer. Furthermore, if someone did so and they were of a conservative ilk, I'd defend him (if a liberal wants to impugn him over this, I might let it go as I tire of always correcting liberals). :)

  22. Troy Jones 2011.07.20

    OOPS: Forgot one more "benefit." When my family went to D.C. during the August recess (Senator Thune was back home), we got a tour of the Capitol from an intern. As I had given hundreds of such tours during my tenure with Abdnor, I knew we got a Cadillac tour. Maybe the quality and depth has improved since I was there. And maybe Senator Thune said something as he knew we were in DC. I don't know as I don't even think I thanked him for the tour.

  23. larry kurtz 2011.07.20

    Thank you, Troy, not ad hominem so much as psychoanalytic. You're chief principal at Orion, then?

  24. mike 2011.07.20

    One thing everyone forgets when discussing Bruce Whalen and Chris Lien is that John Thune and Mike Rounds didn't get involved and help them in anyway. they had $0 money.

    Johnson seems to be interested in helping Varilek and a lot of democrat operatives seem interested in helping Varilek. That is why he has a shot to at least raise money and make Noem campaign.

    Johnson looks to be thinking about his legacy and that is also a reason for Republicans to take any challenge to Noem seriously. She will not get Herseth like numbers for reelection. #1 because she ran a contentious election and #2 Herseth took over after Janklow's accident and people had a positive attitude towards her and a negative one of Larry Diedrich.

  25. mike 2011.07.20

    Troy,

    At the very least it appears Noem will have to spend money she doesn't want to spend if Tim Johnson, Daschle's people and others are helping Varilek raise money.

    I bet they can raise a good amount out of state.

    (I'm sure Noem would rather pile money up for a senate race)

  26. Troy Jones 2011.07.21

    Mike, legitimate points but all they do is change the size of KN's victory margin (how much who knows) and not the final result.

    My only question: Does reducing KN's margin a bit really do anything for Johnson's legacy or does being associated with a losing race damage it?

  27. larry kurtz 2011.07.21

    Troy, thank you for your candor and kind letter.

    Guggenheimer had Rick Kahler (he's always struck me a bit of a dink) on Dakota Midday as an expert panelist on finance and i wondered why you weren't asked.

  28. Troy Jones 2011.07.21

    I know Rick. While he has an expertise specifically in Real Estate, I do think he is very smart financially.

  29. mike 2011.07.21

    Changing the margin of victory does a lot in Noem's case.

    No one is going to expect Matt Varilek to defeat Kristi Noem. But making her campaign and holding her accountable to certain votes is more than anyone made Stephanie Herseth do for 6 years.

    Also if Herseth or Brendan Johnson want to run for the US Senate in 2014 the Democrats have to run a campaign that keeps Noem's numbers down and don't allow her to run cupcake ads.

    #1 because she spends her war chest.
    #2 because it keeps people from just throwing in with her.

    The lower the margin of victory Noem has the more difficult it will be for her to defeat a top tier candidate for Senate.

    And if Varilek does well and is viewed favorably maybe he gets the oppurtunity to run again for an open seat if he doesn't win this time.

    So the election is all about keeping her numbers down.

  30. mike 2011.07.21

    Noem needs to win really big because the conventional wisdom is that Mike Rounds wants to run for Senate. Rounds would think twice about running against her.

    Herseth and Johnson would probably think twice about going for the senate if she won huge also.

    Noem's margin of victory has a lot of implications for her.

  31. caheidelberger Post author | 2011.07.21

    Minor correction: I will expect Matt Varilek, Jeff Barth, or anyone else we nominate to beat Noem.

  32. Erika 2011.07.22

    Anyone who gives a shout-out to GM Yermo gets a few extra points in my book.

Comments are closed.