Last updated on 2012.08.07
Double your fun: the Madville Times offers not one but two fun-filled polls! Discussion of our Democratic House candidates' positions on same-sex marriage has raised the question of just how unpopular same-sex marriage may be in South Dakota. So let's check the temperature of popular opinion with these two questions:
- Do you support South Dakota's ban on same-sex marriage?
- For whom will you vote in the June 5 Democratic U.S. House primary?
We South Dakotans amended our Constitution in 2006 to outlaw same-sex marriage (see South Dakota Constitution Article 21, Section 9... under "Miscellaneous"). The 52%-48% split on that amendment constitutes the smallest margin of victory for any statewide same-sex marriage ban in recent history.
Jeff Barth supports President Obama's affirmation of marriage equality. Matt Varilek says he's o.k. with civil unions, but he wants the definition of marriage left to churches and states. Given this issue is one of the few policy matters to arise so far to distinguish the candidates, let's see where we stand on the issue and on these two candidates.
Poll runs until breakfast time Tuesday. Vote now, and tell your friends!
MN has an anti-gay marriage amendment on the ballot this year. In response, lots straight people are buying rainbow flags and displaying them on their homes. It is incredible to go down a street, and see so many rainbow flags, (Many flying alongside US flags.), fluttering in the breeze.
Reminds me of the Danes in WWII, when they wore yellow six-pointed stars so the Nazis couldn't sort out the Jews.. Or the people in Billings, when some years ago, in response to harassment of Jews, they put menorahs in their windows.
It's a beautiful thing, seeing fellow Americans stand up for one another.
As a registered independent, I will not be voting in the Dems primary...my experiences with the Dems of South Dakota vis a vis gay issues, that once elected they won't stick to their principles and will not support the equal access to the law of LGBT citizens. I have no faith in South Dakota whatsoever when it comes to citizen equality. It is a state run by special interests, religious zealots, and entrenched Republican do-nothings who give the words freedom and equality lip-service only when it makes them look good at military funerals and election speeches. None of them actually believe in those words. They are more interested in controlling the lives of other people than allowing people real freedom to enjoy their lives without the interference of government. They are all about interference, disruption and punishment of people who think differently from themselves. The only result this legislature and state wants is for everybody to be the same, think the same, act the same, and do nothing to bring real change to improve the lives of citizens of this state. It will send its citizens off to war and allow them nothing upon return. The citizens of South Dakota are viewed as cattle to be penned and branded. The only people allowed to be adults are the legislators and the special interests they serve. Everyone else is a child that doesn't know its own mind. Most of South Dakota's legislators haven't read or even thought about the State's Constitution....and don't care. "What's it this job for me" is the basis of most South Dakota's legislators and pols.
D.E., that's a stirring vision of popular support.
Barry: dang. Where do we find leaders who will help make your voice heard?
I think that both of our candidates will stick to what they say, we need to actually get some Democrats from this state together instead of electing "Democrats" that don't support the Democratic Party (ie Blue Dog Democrats). It just seems like it is pretty hard to do in a state already so controlled by special interests and voter apathy. The first step to equality in this state is making sure it is a two party system rather than a one party system.
Ditto to what Barry said...except for the Independent part. I will be voting in the Dem. primary. Exactly who I will vote for...I still haven't decided 100%. One would like to hope that candidates will stick to their word and and carry on as promised,but I won't hold my breath. As my dear grandmother used to say," Wish in one hand and crap in the other and see which one gets full faster."
A vote for Barth is a throw away vote in my opinion.
In order to have any success at all the nominee will need to raise money. Varilek might have a few positions that are wrong to many liberals but Barth will never have any money to spend in order to take on Noem and her medicare/social security positions to task.
Mike,
Barth will have plenty of money once Varilek loses and, his mentor, the Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, steps out of the way and stops directing all the Washington money Varilek's way. You seem to be someone who follows the money angle. Have you seen where Varilek gets most of his money? Almost all of his early money (2011 money) came from Washington DC or from SD PACs which got most of their money from DC or from somewhere else besides SD. In essence, as far as the Washington connected Johnson staff and crowd is concerned, South Dakotans are pretty close to irrelevant politically. Just a cheap cheering section, or a polling pool to see what kind of conservative water they have to carry to get elected without really leading. Johnson supported the Bush tax cuts and refused to support a filibuster of Alito's nomination. Varilek appears is cut from the same cloth. I say vote for Barth and give the Democrats in South Dakota a chance to make something of themselves.
Barry, right on.
My wife and I love the movie Pleasantville because it so reminds us our experiences transplanting to Rapid City, South Dakota in the mid-1990s. Pro *and* con.
Here is your problem.
This is just like 2010 with the GOP.
In that race Nelson was the front runner and had name recognition. Curd could challenge him because he had money. Neither of them had a charismatic out going personality.
They are both the Barth and Varilek of the race accept that neither Dem has name recognition.
Noem on the other hand has a big personality and is comfortable in her own skin. There for she was able to translate that into raising money and connecting with people. The Dems don't have a "Kristi Noem type" running this cycle.
So you have to settle for either a guy without much charisma who struggles to raise $20,000 or a young guy who will likely grow into a more pollished candidate and is raising an impressive amount of money.
When it comes to winning I will take charisma over a candidate with money. Because a candidate only goes so far in an election but a candidate with people skills can win over donors and motivate the base. We don't have charisma to choose from and in all reality Barth and Varilek agree on a majority of issues.
Your best option is Varilek even if you are upset with him right now.
If Barth is your candidate he will not raise any money. The money will not come once if he is the nominee because the race will be written off. It would be written off right now if Varilek weren't raising a decent amount of money and had the connections he does in DC.
If you want Noem to get 70% of the vote put Barth up against her.
If you want Noem to get 58% of the vote put Varilek up against her.
No one knows who Jeff Barth is and he won't raise the money to build his name id. Think Dykstra, Lien, Whalen. Varilek is giving you the best oppurtunity to protest Noem's positions.
If I had my choice Herseth would run again. or at the very least Nancy Turbak-Berry.
Mike,
I have been a supporter of Barth so write off my opinion if you would like. This is the situation, if you follow the money angle you should be voting for Kristi Noem, not either of the Democrats. If you are a South Dakotan, then you should probably also look at the money and realize Varilek is raising his money from DC. This guy is a DC Staffer, and from all accounts a good one, the problem is that DC doesn't give a crap about normal South Dakotans. He has the support of Johnson; however, this is the first time (and I have done a little bit of research on the issue) that a sitting Senator has so heavily endorsed a candidate. Varilek is only raising money because his former boss is in charge of the Senate Banking Committee and is basically bankrolling the SDDP.
Seeing that Jeff B's online ad made national news, leading to an interview MSNBC and an article in huffingtonpost.com, I don't know if we can call him someone with no name recognition. Now lets see how the local media outfits keeps it up. I know if he wins the primary, he will be getting a big check from me.