Another article on GOP Chair Race, this time from the Argus Leader. Check it out.

The Argus weighs in with their take on the GOP Chairmanship race. And actually, it’s a very good article, well worth the read:

For decades the governor’s seal of approval has been an effective appointment to be confirmed by the committee. Candidates lobbied the governor for his endorsement and on a few occasions unendorsed candidates have continued but pulled out hours before the vote.

“By the time the voting started there was only one candidate standing,” said Frank Brost, a former chief of staff to Govs. George S. Mickelson and Walter Dale Miller and longtime member of the GOP Central Committee. “I can’t remember in my lifetime a race that was contested going into the convention.”

Daugaard told reporters that he liked Roberts’ modesty, along with her hard work and strong track record in the role.

“Pam very clearly is a very capable, unselfish candidate that I would wholeheartedly support and look forward to helping her in her role over the next two years,” Daugaard said.

Holien said the party was ready for a change and that during the time he and Lederman worked together in the South Dakota Senate he found Lederman to be a straight shooter and strong advocate for the GOP.

“In politics you learn the people who will stand by their word and stay true to it, and Dan did that,” he said.

Check it out here at the Argus Leader.

8 thoughts on “Another article on GOP Chair Race, this time from the Argus Leader. Check it out.

  1. Anon

    Should we read into Daugaard’s comments about Roberts’ “modesty” as an indication of what he thinks about Lederman? Seems like an odd comment unless he’s trying to make a contrast with Dan.

    Reply
  2. anon1

    One important quality that the Chair would require, would be to put the party’s well-being ahead of his own well-being. Dan was never able to do that in the legislature, and it appears that hasn’t changed.

    Reply
  3. Fred Deutsch

    I’m waiting to hear the candidates talk about their vision for the Party. In particular, it seems to me if an out-of-state ultra-left organization can pump $1.7 million into local media to pass an IM, they very likely will pump the similar amounts in 2018 legislative races. I would like to hear how each candidate would counter the influx of that kind of money to buy attack ads against republican legislative candidates.

    Reply
    1. Anonymous

      I agree with Fred….I hope there are statements about vision and going forward and also a Q&A session.

      I think some of these basic questions everyone has should be answered by both of them.

      Pat will you be going to cover it?

      Reply
  4. Anonymous

    Roger Larson vs, Dan Parish, I believe it was in 81 or 82. Dates may be off a little. Parish won when Janklow flew out to the convention Rapid City on F.riday night to put the hammer down. Over time Roger became a close friend of Bill and Mary Dean.

    Reply
    1. Anonymous

      Does anyone have a list of former chairs? I feel like we get a lot of historical hearsay. It would be nice to have facts.

      Reply
  5. Troy Jones

    I think it i might be a couple years later than you recall but my memory is fuzzy. The reason I think it was later as it was perceived as a proxy fight between whether Abdnor or Janklow was going to be the titular heads or at least co-heads and the behind the scenes jockeying for the 1986 Senate Race had already begun.

    But it was more complex than that as the West River/East River and rural city divide was more visible than today. Plus, there were two Reagan groups on opposite sides- Those who were with Reagan in 1976 or before (Parrish was one of those) who were also older with relationships going back to pre-Watergate and those who were younger/newer Reagan people. The older crew had a genteel view of the party where everything began from relationship. The younger crew were newer to politics and into organization for fundraising, GOTV, rallies, everything. Different styles. In other words, generational differences.

    In short, there were Abdnor people supporting Parirsh and Janklow people supporting Larson for a whole bunch of reasons.

    Also, I wouldn’t say it was “Janklow coming out there to put the hammer down.” Janklow had two very good vote counters. One of them told me years later Janklow wasn’t going to come but changed his mind at the last minute because his surrogates had identified a small number of people who might switch with a direct Janklow appeal. They turned out to be right because that handful had told Abdnor’s team they were with Larson. Jim never forgave them because for Jim a one’s word is one’s bond.

    Regarding Janklow and Larson being friends. I’m not sure they ever weren’t friends. But they were friends who had a period where they didn’t talk and were mad at each other. It was that way for a lot of people.

    Sidenote: Roger had a son born around that time and Jim Abdnor is the Godfather.

    Sidenote 2: Pressler ended up helping Parrish thinking it would improve his relationship with Janklow. Didn’t have any impact.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.