I had Governor Daugaard’s State of the State address running in the background while I was working yesterday, and while it’s not coming in a year where there are big projects to accomplish, he had a lot of good things to report, and spoke about what he wants to accomplish in the next year.
What did we hear from the Democrats in response? A lot of awful. I caught Governor Daugaard’s Democrat opponent in the last race, Susan Wismer, bumbling and stammering through her hack response. Which was very illustrative as to why Governor Daugaard beat her by one of the largest margins in state history.
And we also had the State Democrat office who had a release prepped to go, which was equally as bad. But don’t take my word for it on how awful it was, here’s what Greg Belfrage on KELO-M had to say on the topic yesterday:
A written release from the South Dakota Democratic Party says, “Unlike today’s lackluster, complacent, and unfocused State of the State Address, Democrats will lead in this year’s Legislative Session by pursuing a pro-economic growth legislative agenda that is focused on making South Dakota work for all South Dakotans and making state government work for all people, not just the powerful and well-connected.”
Unfortunately, the release doesn’t articulate any “pro-economic growth” ideas. It’s simply a list of all the state’s failures and shortcomings.
You’ve got to wonder when state Democrats are finally going to catch a clue that their “South Dakota sucks” message just doesn’t resonate with voters.
There’s a reason Democrats continue to shed legislators and registered voters. And they’re doing a good job illustrating why they’ve become irrelevant in South Dakota.
They need someone who understands how to win a battle or two before fighting a war.
Daugaard is going to be in the same position as Obama. He is going to be under siege this session by conservative Republicans that he has dumped on since he got into office. Just as we watch one Chicago lawyer limp off into the sunset, we will watch this one do the same the next two years.
Daugaard is a Chicago lawyer? News to me.
He is not as conservative as I hoped he would be, and he has done much to disappoint with his too-moderate approach. I wouldn’t see him go any further than governor (which is a big deal, I understand) if he would want to seek nation-wide office; I don’t think he can create that much enthusiasm, and I think he got such a big percentage of the vote this time due to the terrible candidate the Demos put up.
Daugaard’s legacy is pretty strong as far as a governor. He was resoundingly reelected. He set his own agenda. In his last two years he might get kicked around a little but I don’t know of anything major that he has proposed this year so his veto will be where he sets his mark in these sessions.
I don’t agree with him on everything and heck I didn’t vote for him for reelection. That makes me one of the 24% that didn’t.
The problem with opposing him is that no one has had an alternative vision that has risen to the challenge of opposing him. It’s easy to say no but it’s hard to come up with ideas.
So far Stace and his conglomerate have not come up with any ideas. That is the biggest problem they have. That and the fact that they consistently jump the shark.
Rounds in comparison had a much weaker tenure as Governor and was resoundingly nominated by the GOP and elected by the general public. I believe Daugaard would handily defeat Rounds if they faced off in a primary.