The bell tolls for all Senators, especially after three terms in South Dakota.
In several of this and last week’s daily papers, Bob Mercer reviews the book by former SDP blogger and now aide to US Senator Thune Jon Lauck. Bob takes issue with Jon’s thesis where Jon said it was a tide of Reagan conservatism that swept out Daschle, and instead relies on his own evidence for the “third term curse” that tends to hit our Senators::
In his new book Jon Lauck supposes a quaint notion.
Lauck suggests that U.S. Sen. Tom Daschle lost his bid for re-election to a fourth term in 2004 because the Senate Democratic leader was finally swept from power by a great tide of history.
In Lauck’s view, with Republican John Thune’s victory, the Reagan conservatism of the 1980s washed away the McGovern-McCarthy Democratic liberalism of the 1960s and ‘70s.
That is a convenient argument for Lauck, who has been on the Thune payroll since the 2004 campaign and is listed by his book publisher as a senior advisor to the senator.
Unfortunately Lauck’s book overlooks the elemental fact about South Dakota ’s U.S. senators.
They typically don’t last. If their health doesn’t get them, the voters do.
Three died in office and a fourth couldn’t continue when his term ended.
For those fortunate enough to have remained among the living, voters almost always rejected them as they sought a third or fourth term.
and…
Four times the voters sent incumbent senators packing. The total rises to five if you count Abourezk’s withdrawal in the face of Pressler’s challenge.
The vote totals show how fickle South Dakota voters can be in Senate races, jumping parties, favoring the new face, slapping down yesterday’s golden boy.
and…
These outcomes were not the products of great tides of history. These were the stories of men who won seats opened by death’s knock - or they made the winning argument that the incumbents’ times were up.
Johnson, still recovering from his severe health problems, faces election to a third term in 2008. Johnson, after pummeling Pressler in 1996, now knows what it felt like to walk in the incumbent’s shoes. Thune challenged him and came within a few hundred votes of beating Johnson in 2002.
Likewise Thune will get his first taste of what an incumbent senator must endure in South Dakota when he comes up for a second term in 2010.
And Democratic U.S. Rep. Stephanie Herseth, elected three times since 2004, waits for her chance.
Hear the clock ticking. It always does for South Dakota senators.
Read it in the dead tree edition of the Watertown Public Opinion, The Rapid City Weekly, The Capital Journal, and several other newspapers in South Dakota.
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
In the hard copy version of the Mercer article, he says something like ‘few people were surprised’ that Daschle lost. That’s completely ridiculous. Daschle’s was defeat was widely seen as an upset.
Interesting from Mercer, who does dig into history. Some of the defeats that Bob describes in his article are much more complex than Bob says. In 1996, for example, there were lots of reasons that Larry Pressler lost, and probably the least of these was that he was there ‘too long.’ Also, in 1986, Abdnor was just outhustled by Daschle who got boosted from bad farm economy. Nobody thought Jim had been there ‘too long.’
Daschle lost because he was too liberal, unlike earlier, when he posed as a ‘blue dog’ type like Sandlin does now.
#6: I don’t think PP lies about his page views. But I’d sure like to see another graph about it for proof. Graphs = Proof
Mercer was Janklow’s press secretary. And no fan of Thune. So he’ll poo-poo the 2004 victory i am quite sure. Janklow wanted to be a Senator you know.
If Janklow hadn’t had his accident with the motorcyclist, he would have run for the senate and made Thune’s run that much harder. If that had happened, it’s doubtful Thune would be in office now.
I remember the defeat of McGovern in 1980 very well. He was just very liberal. After he ran for president as a liberal in 1972 he never looked back and just got more liberal. There’s lots of indicators that liberalism did in McGovern in 1980. Not sure that fits with this analysis.
D Bender you are right on! Daschle couldn’t lie anymore of his stance because it was all over the National News. Herseth will get caught up with how she votes and what she says too.
I bet Daschle still regrets ” I’m a DC resident, we must stand with the trial attorneys because they stood with us, we must protect a women’s right to choose.”
“a great tide of history” v. people-got-tired of them. couldn’t it be both forces at work? I doubt the book discounts the latter, but it is true that Daschle’s liberalism hurt him in 2004.
Why do U.S. Senators lose? I imagine there are dozens of reasons peculiar to time and place and personality. Mercer’s weary-of-incumbants explanation seems too simple to me. I’ll read the book and then see
I think Mercer’s point is that our Senators don’t last because there is always someone “next.” Because we have only one House member, there is always a strong challenger. McGovern fell to Abdnor, Abdnor fell to Daschle, Pressler fell to Johnson, Daschle fell to Thune, etc. It’s only a matter of time until Herseth Sandlin steps in.
One other thing - If there hadn’t been a motorcycle accident, I think Janklow would have run for US Senate and Daschle would have run for President.
Mercer needs to get out of Pierre more often.
Also, don’t forget that Hildebrand’s campaign efforts were often erratic at best. Part of the reason that the Daschle campaign suffered was people like Hildebrand and Chad Schuldt were in charge.
Maybe Mercers needs to dig a little more. In 1980, McGovern was LIBERAL. And people finally figured it out. In 1996, Pressler was just weird and his luck finally ran out and Johnson smashed his head in.
Bob Mercer should tell us who else could have beaten Tom Daschle besides John Thune. Fact is, nobody could have. Sure, some incumbents lose in SD (certainly more than in other states), but let’s face it—few people could have beaten Daschle. Bob is off on this one.