Candidate quality is supposed to matter. Two Sioux Falls Republican House candidates rocking more than one protection order filed against them.

Seriously. Another one?

I just had someone drop me a note about one of our Sioux Falls Republican House candidates, asking me if I had heard about the protection orders that had been filed against them.

My reply was “Are you referring to Brad Lindwurm?”  My corresponent: “No. Bill Linsenmeyer in District 11. He’s had two restraining orders filed against him for domestic violence. Not pretty stuff.

Ugh. For crying out loud. We’re supposed to be sending our best and brightest to represent us in Pierre, aren’t we?  The fact that I didn’t get it on the first try is a pretty good indicator that the GOP needs to pay attention to candidate quality. Because when you’re rocking 2-3 protection orders, and running as a candidate, it’s bound to come out.

And while I understand that, at times, yes, sure. There might be two sides to every story. But do you really want to debate that in the public square?  Such as with passages from the 2017 affidavit for a protection order for domestic abuse against Linsenmeyer:

That is an ugly request for a protection order. And the thing is, THIS IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT.   Do candidates with this kind of history somehow think that it’s not going to come up? Who are we going to run next? Shad Olson?

D11 Republican primary candidate Linsenmeyer is rocking 2 protection orders, one from 2007 (41TPO08000030 for domestic abuse granted until dismissed over 2 months later), and one from 2017 (49TPO17-000034, later dismissed). Add a 2009 Chapter 7 bankruptcy to the mix, and it’s obvious there has been no candidate vetting here.

And that’s the candidate with two protection orders filed against them. Shall we go for three?  Because District 15 GOP House candidate Brad Lindwurm was my first guess.

Yes, I’ve had people ask my why I’m so down on Brad Lindwurm as a candidate. This is reason #1.  Three Protection orders filed against him.  Case #49TPO10000124 in 2010 with an accusation of domestic abuse, with the order granted. Case #49TPO12001076 in 2012 with an accusation of domestic abuse which was dismissed, and case #49TPO19-001188 in 2019 – less than 5 years ago – for stalking.  That one, from a somewhat recognizable person in Sioux Falls, was dismissed a month later because the petitioner did not appear. But the fact they had to go to that extent to get him to buzz off brings up a question of judgement on Lindwurm that voters are going to have to ask themselves if they can get past.

I could go on, but, I shouldn’t need to.

One of the basics steps in running for office is that before you do opposition research on your opponent, you need to do it on yourself. Because you’d better know what’s out there, and be able to respond to it adequately.  If there are responses that can be viewed as adequate. Some things are tough to get past. Like 2 or 3 protection orders.  If someone is sitting there with bad things lurking in their background that were found in less than 5 minutes, such as the above, it might behoove a candidate to think twice about running for office.

In 2022, Republicans were faced with a hard lesson in the matter of Joel Koskan, when we found ourselves with a candidate who had been arrested and charged with incest right before the November election in 2022.

Can we really afford to not do some perfunctory candidate vetting before the fall campaign gets rolling?  Especially in those cases where red flags are popping up?

13 thoughts on “Candidate quality is supposed to matter. Two Sioux Falls Republican House candidates rocking more than one protection order filed against them.”

  1. Thugs and misfits. Why do these characters want to serve in our Legislature. Can’t they find meaningful employment? They are too young and inexperienced to contribute anything of value. They obviously have problems with judgement and discipline. The Legislature isn’t an alternative to jail. Why are these doofus delinquents even under consideration?

    1. They want to serve in the legislature because they have personal problems which have come under judicial considerations, like divorce, child custody and support, domestic violence, etc.
      And they don’t think the law was fair to them, so they want to change it.
      This is the Mad Dad Caucus.

    1. The Donald paid child support, to both of his ex-wives, and I don’t recall hearing of any complaints.

  2. These are not establishment, common sense conservative candidates, to be sure. They have been recruited to run against the good legislators by certain groups…

    1. Are they part of the “anti” group?

      Anti-economic development
      Anti-landowner protection
      Anti-good sense
      Anti-anyone who disagrees with them

  3. How are Shad’s charges coming along? Has he confirmed it is all just a “political witch hunt” yet?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *