Democrats met yesterday as a group in Chamberlain….. And they still don’t appear to have candidates.

So, supposedly the Democrats met yesterday in Oacoma at Cedar Shores, according to the Sioux Falls chapter of Drinking Liberally:

In Political News: The South Dakota Democratic Party (SDDP) meets in Oacoma (Cedar Shores) on Saturday to amend their Constitution, review their candidate recruitment efforts (Will they introduce a US Senate candidate?), and plan for the 2016 election. Lest they get overconfident, I reprint a paragraph from last week’s Drinking Liberally post describing the abyss into which their Party’s voter registration numbers have fallen in South Dakota:

“Democratic voter registration in South Dakota fell to 169,059 this week, the lowest level of Democratic registration since 1972 when it stood at 158,086. Democratic voter registration has declined by 37,000 from its historic high of 206,000 in July of 2009. Over the same period Republican registration has remained around 240,000. Republicans now top Democratic registration by 69,000 voters, vs a workable 36,000 advantage in 2009. (For comparison purposes, in 1972 Republicans outnumbered Republicans by 37,000 registered voters, but the Democrats held the Governorship (Richard Kneip), the two US Senate seats (George McGovern and Jim Abourezk) and one of the two US House seats (Frank Denholm). In 2014, the Democratic Party was unable to deliver its own 35% share of registered voters for any of its statewide candidates, the highest vote total being the 33% received by the Democratic House candidate, Corrina Robinson.)”

Suffice it to say, the SDDP has its work cut out for it. I wish them luck and I plan to join them in Chamberlain to cheer them on. As they say, hope springs eternal.

Read that here.

They seriously need an RSS Feed, as they’re the only ones on the other side of the aisle who actually talk about what’s going on in Democrat Circles. The other sites tend to be ignorant of it, willfully or by that being their natural state.

The important point to take away from Sheldon Osborne’s 12/11 post was that this meeting was an opportunity for Democrats to introduce who their standard bearer was going to be in the US Senate race, and possibly to give some face time to Paula Hawks for a mid December media bump. But if you look at Social Media for the State Dem Party and Hawks…. I hear a quiet, lilting sound:  *chirp* *chirp* *chirp* 

dem_rockYes, the only things you hear are crickets chirping. If you look, you’d hardly know they had a meeting.  And there’s no indication whatsoever that they’ve been able to come up with a candidate yet.

Make no mistake, no matter what script the Democrat party is handing out to be parroted, petition circulation begins in 19 days.  Fundraising should have begun between 6 months to a year ago. There are very few, if any, scenarios where a candidate on the other side of the aisle can begin to approach legitimacy, much less be able to raise the funds to go on TV.

Even their high mark candidate last election, Corinna Robinson, whom I hear is job hunting and passing around her resume in Washington, DC nowadays, began her efforts in October of 2013, when she moved to South Dakota. Robinson gave it a good try, but was unable to raise awareness and money in that amount of time.  Slick Rick Weiland, who suffered under the disadvantage of people knowing him started back in May.

Dems are months PAST those points in this cycle, and there’s still no hint of names bubbling up to the top of the swamp.

It was unheard of when they took a pass on running a US Senate candidate 6 years ago. When they do it again this election, you’ll hear the word “historic.”

8 thoughts on “Democrats met yesterday as a group in Chamberlain….. And they still don’t appear to have candidates.”

  1. Wouldn’t be surprised if they did not have the numbers for a quorum and unable to get anything done.

  2. They could go down to the bottom of the barrel and get Kory to run and have his sidekick takeover the stoner blog.

  3. I still wager that Kooky Kory Heildelberger will “hear the calls” and “volunteer” for one of these races…or all of them since his ego is big enough.

  4. All I heard was that Ann will be in a Senate race. She has promised a candidate and the possibility of a primary. Her 12 days of Christmas fundraising has been a success. Why not keep going for the Senate run. The way she rammed through party Constitution changes was a fine piece of work. Why Debate when one quick vote gets it done.

  5. Would this primary be over the Senate nomination or the future of the South Dakota Democratic Party or both?

Comments are closed.