Johnson campaign continues to set the stage to duck Dakotafest debate. Either Johnson can do the job, or he can’t.
While others can take on the duties of constituent relations, as well as mundane office tasks, there are a few duties that only the person that the citizens of a state have elected to the US Senate can perform. As New Mexico Democratic Senator Jeff Bingaman notes on his website:
Chief among my duties as a United States Senator is to introduce and debate legislation. It is through such efforts that I advance my legislative agenda on behalf of New Mexico.
Chief among a Senator’s duties is to introduce and debate legislation. Yet, there are some who downplay the importance of our candidates for public office standing for public debates to prove to their constituents that they can do the job.
Of course, I’m referring to Tim Johnson’s campaign manager Steve Jarding, who seems to be hedging on committing the Senator to appear at Dakotafest.
The official Dakotafest forum schedule, released Wednesday, lists an appearance by U.S. Agriculture Secretary Ed Schafer and debates featuring the candidates for U.S. House and Senate.
But Sen. Tim Johnson, D-S.D., still has not committed to debating Republican challenger Joel Dykstra at the annual farm and ranch trade show near Mitchell.
Johnson’s campaign manager, Steve Jarding, said Wednesday after the release of the Dakotafest forum schedule that “nothing’s been determined yet,” regarding Johnson’s participation in the debate.
Read it all here. Why are they hiding the Senator from being exposed to debate? From previous releases on the matter, it sounds as if they aren’t sure he’s up to the task. Despite it’s importance.
Yes, to the campaign, it might be a simple matter that either Johnson shows up for the debates or he doesn’t. But to the rest of the state, it’s a more complex question as to whether Tim Johnson is up for the challenges of serving in the US Senate. Or not.
If he ducks the debate, they might find we’re leaning towards the latter.
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
Tim is a good, hardworking, man, you should be concentrating on the issues, high cost of gas for one. Who cares if Tim can speak fast and furious, it might be a nice change.
I commend Tim Johnson for his work for our state in the past. However, at this point you can not convince me that he is up to the challenge of representing our state. When the debate is in high gear on capitol hill – I don’t believe his thinking (or speech) is clear and quick enough to debate things important to all of us. I think the honorable thing for Tim Johnson to do is step aside – go down with dignity!!!
My biggest complaint is that his staff is still trying to portray him as a victim. Their jumping on the Dykstra ad regarding Dykstra being a voice in Washington as a slam of Johnson is the latest example. “Being a voice in Washington” is a common slogan used for years by many campaigners.
If Johnson is still a victim, maybe he should not be running. If he isn’t a victim, then it’s time that his staff (and he if he is complicit in their antics) grow up and treat this like a campaign and him like a candidate. You can’t have it both ways!
Maybe if Dykstra can get his poll numbers within say 10% of Johnson’s poll numbers Johnson will feel compelled to debate. Right now, Dykstra’s just a no-name putz with a bankrupt campaign who’s behind by 22 points in the polls. If Dykstra’s got no game then he’s got no play.
#5, If Johnson is so secure in his poll numbers, he shouldn’t be afraid to debate. What can it hurt?
Just to be clear, Professor, if you were an adviser to Tim Johnson, you’d say it’s good political strategy to debate? If you’re being honest, the answer is no…
And the answer has nothing to do with the degree to which he can speak. Joel Dykstra doesn’t have enough money for a 30 second spot at 1am on KDLT, and his only chance to get his message out is to participate in debates. Why should the Johnson campaign give him that platform? That’s like saying that Johnson should share some of his money with Dykstra so that the voters can have a choice. Campaign 101 – if you’ve got a big lead, and your opponent can’t raise any money, don’t give him a platform.
If you really want to make this a race, why don’t you suggest to your friend Joel Dykstra that he get off his ass and put together a serious campaign for Senate? Maybe he could raise some money? Do a press worthy campaign event? Offer voters a reason to vote for him? Or do something? I’ve seen retirees work harder than Dykstra.
You may not like it, but so long as Joel Dykstra fails as a candidate, Tim Johnson doesn’t need to debate him. Debates only happen when there is legitimate pressure – and not the kind that comes from a blogger/failed legislative candidate tilting at windmills.
Hey #7 Jarding is that you or are you still stalking Dystra?
I hope you don’t have Tim debate. The silver medal will be yours!
Sorry Steve… Everyone thought you had a shoe-in with Daschle’s campaign, and you proved them wrong then too.
We shall see if the “prevent defense strategy” works, it almost failed Obama against Clinton. Play the clock out Johnson staff, and keep name calling and play the victim card. This is not Tim Johnson’s campaign but that of his staff. Strategy aside, it’s not right, I dont care what party you are associated with. This is a job interview.
If Senator Johnson does not debate his challenger in this campaign, I think voters will see the obvious. It’s not because he chooses not to debate but that he’s physically incapable of meeting the challenge. If he’s not up to a debate, he’s certainly not up to the job.
Did Strom Thurmond debate anybody in his last 4 senate races? (at the ages of 76, 82, 88 and 94). He could talk, but his mind wasn’t there.
JOhnson’s mind is as sharp as ever.
#9 shows exactly the kind of sophistication we can expect around here. Confuses Steve Jarding with Steve Hildebrand, and Joel Dykstra with John Thune.
Well done, Einstein…
13. Jarding, Hildebrand, what’s the difference. Both are ruthless raving liberals.
Anyway….
The issue shouldn’t be about if there will be debates. It should be about Johnson functioning as a candidate without playing the victim card. No matter what Dykstra does — even an honest assessment of Johnson’s record — will be seen as an attack. And Jarding knows it, and is milking it for all it is worth.
All Dykstra and his ilk can do is whine. Over and over on this blog. Whine, Whine, Whine. Johnson won’t run the campaign we tell him to run. Johnson won’t play right into our hands. Johnson this, Johnson that.
Whining is what losers do, and losing is what Dykstra is working hard at. All your whining won’t change a thing. Johnson will debate, and you’ll find something else to whine about.
I agree with #15, grow up and run a campaign and quit worrying about what Johnson will or won’t do. And one last thing, Jarding and Hildebrand are NOT one in the same. Jarding isn’t even in the same category as Hildebrand in terms of talent, skill and strategy. Hildebrand is brilliant and that is why the other side doesn’t like him. Jarding is just a jerk.
Jarding and Hildebrand are smart, tough and tenacious campaigners, and they love it if you think they are raving liberals.
Problem with Dykstra is simple. He ain’t ready for prime time, and the problem he’s facing in fund raising is a simple one.
Who is willing to invest big $ on someone likely to lose big time?
I would love to see Joel give me one good reason to vote for him. So far, all I’ve heard is that he wants to debate Johnson, he can’t raise money and he has no issues that the press will print about. That is exactly the person that I want representing me in WDC. No backbone what-so-ever. At least TRY and do something that will get people to vote for you. Make this a close election. It seems like the people on this blog care more about him winning then he does.
Make it an issues election…not a dumb debate election.
That’s the point anon 5:46, the debate line is all Dykstra can do. HE’s no better a campaigner than Bruce Whalen, who still can’t express what he means.
Johnson’s staff is in the process of changing the job description and not require an interview. He needs to debate or the state will see through this emperor and see he has no clothes. I will say again he is a decent and good person but what his staff is doing is wrong. Let the state voters determine what his staff is trying to take away from the voters. The job interview, it’s done every six years for a senator.