Do you think it helps Democrats win elections in small town South Dakota?

Over the past decade or so, Democrats in South Dakota have and continue to be reduced in numbers in the state.  Some attribute it to the Democratic party moving away from issues that resonate with voters who might find sympathy with their messages of social justice, and putting their energies into areas of pure liberalism which don’t resonate in conservative, small-town South Dakota.

If you recall, for some of these “true-believer Liberal Democrats,” Stephanie Herseth was too conservative to be their candidate in the last 2 elections, preferring instead to go with members of the Weiland family as their champions of South Dakota Democratic liberalism. (Which didn’t really work that well in either case.)

The latest example of that in in an on-line petition that Democrats are touting that takes on something that a lot of small towns in South Dakota take pretty seriously – their local high school sports teams. And Democrats are howling loudly about a legislative measure introduced by Representative Jim Bolin and Senator Ernie Otten that rescinds a rule passed by the High School Activities Association:

South Dakota GOP legislators obviously didn’t get the message last year with SB 128 and are back to spreading hate across our state.


HB 1195 and HB 1161 are aimed at preventing the SD High School Activities Association from allowing transgender students to participate in activities because of the legislators own insecurities.

These bills all work differently, but have one common theme: they amount to bullying the LGBT community, and we need you to stand up again and say enough is enough!

Read it here

You could sign their petition if you agree with them… but it doesn’t work because the links are all dead.

The South Dakota High School Activities Association passed the controversial rule this year, and it obviously didn’t pass unnoticed, with those legislators sponsoring the measure, and it passing the State House overwhelmingly 51-16, and moving on to the State Senate.

Obviously, people have strong opinions on the issue one way or the other. Some think the SDHSAA is ok to pass it, to preempt any lawsuits that could come their way. Some think their decision was good in the interest of equality, and some think it’s social engineering.

Regardless, it affects those sports teams in small-town South Dakota, which typically trends quite conservative. So I ask the question – What do you think about the SDHSAA rule-nullification Bill?  And with the Democrats drawing battle lines on the issue, does taking up arms on the issue help Democrats win elections in small town South Dakota, or does it hurt them?

17 thoughts on “Do you think it helps Democrats win elections in small town South Dakota?”

  1. We don’t have coed sports for one reason: innate differences in physicality between the genders.

    We allow females to play football, wrestle or even boys basketball if the are physically able to compete. We don’t allow boys though to compete in girl’s sport again because of physicality differences.

    Frankly, it is really just a recognition of principles of fair play and sportsmanship.

    No matter how one feels about transgender issues, believing a person born male who thinks he is a girl should compete against those born female in sports where physical size makes a difference are nothing more than bad sports.

    Penalty box for the Dems.

    1. So, an extra five inches would potentially give some an advantage in basketball or volleyball? The funny thing is if a girl were to inject herself with performance enhancing anabolic-androgenic steroids to have the same advantage as a “transgender individual” with natural levels of the hormone she would likely be disqualified from any competitive sport. As for the extra five inches in height, I guess South Dakota girls are just going to have to deal with getting stuffed or killed by someone who has figured out how to bend rules to their liking.

  2. I think it’s less about the gender issue than it is a message by a Legislature that wants to interject itself into the SDHSAA’s business. I can recall plenty of calls from neocon RINOS to dismantle the SDHSAA because they are mad about one thing or another there.

    There are lots of arguments for and against this type of move. On the one hand, schools use tax money and that gives the Legislature an “in” on decisions that the board makes.

    On the other hand, so many South Dakota neocon RINOS hate government and want the government out of everything. That must have been a dilemma for some of the neocon RINOS in Pierre who both wanted to punish the SDHSAA and keep government out of everything the could keep it out of.

    The SDHSAA didn’t just pull their rule out of thin air or make it up during a board meeting. This language has been tested around the country and is the best they have been able to come up with so far that keeps the various activities organizations out of court, wasting millions of taxpayer dollars.

    1. ” various activities organizations out of court, wasting millions of taxpayer dollars”

      The SDHSAA is not funded by taxpayers.

          1. ‘fraid not:

            SECTION 3. DUES. Each member school shall pay dues for each student enrolled in grades 9, 10, 11 and 12. The amount
            of dues per student and the minimum and maximum dues per school will be recommended by the Board of Directors. Each
            member school will have an opportunity to vote on the Board of Director’s recommendation with the majority prevailing.
            Entry fees for all events shall be determined by the Board of Directors.

    2. “On the other hand, so many South Dakota neocon RINOS hate government and want the government out of everything.”

      Not true. All you have to do is spend some time in Pierre and you will understand that government is the solution for the SDGOP.

    3. classically, the neocon rinos love government for certain things. paleocons and libertarians want to ‘go commando’ so to speak on government.

  3. “who might find sympathy with their messages of social justice,”

    I think S.Dakotans and other common sense folks recognize that the Dem’s “message” of “social justice” is neither socially responsible nor justifiable. Most folks understand that the snake oil of “social justice” is simply immoral and damaging to the individual, society, our national identity, and to any sense of fairness.

    And so, they vote against the shaman Dems.

    1. the voters clearly heard the ‘social justice’ message on initiated measure 18. those concerned with the fiscal practicality of it didn’t do what they had to do to win that fight.

  4. It’s really rather sad. It’s not a matter of bullying LGBT, but of not bullying those who aren’t. Because what’s going on in someone’s head as to whether they think they’re this or that is irrelevant to the biology – and biologically, there are girls, and there are boys. That’s it.

    I’m sorry if you’re a boy and want to be a girl, or vice versa. And I’m sorry if you think tab A goes in slot B instead of slot A. And I’m really sorry if you’re trying to figure out a way to make slot A go into slot A as you are not only contending against biology, but physics, too.

    But the issue when it comes to biological functions – body motion, relative strength, natural hormone balances, sexual organs, and bodily waste disposal – is biology, not what’s going on inside your head. The boys/girls split in bathrooms, locker rooms, and athletic events is simply applied science.

    I thought liberals were the pro-science people?

    1. No, this is where liberals suddenly find God: “God accidentally made me this, or I am a woman in a man’s body.” Science cannot validate anything that they are saying or thinking; so, they must resort to anything that is left. It would be great if we could cut through all of the political correctness bologna and provide treatment for all of these profoundly mentally ill people. Obviously, they need help; yet, liberals are more concerned about making them a wedge issue that helping them. Now a transgendered individual watching you taking a shower is your problem, not theirs to be corrected and treated.

Comments are closed.