Is Noem helping to pick our next president?

Congresswoman Kristi Noem had endorsed Marco Rubio for president several weeks back. But, how important is that endorsement to his winning the presidency?

One theory is that it could make all the difference in the world.

Sen. Marco Rubio has occupied an odd place in the GOP race all year: Never the front-runner, but always — in theory, on paper, hypothetically — on the verge of breaking out.

On Tuesday, Rubio once again showed signs of imminent liftoff after snagging one of the biggest endorsements in the race so far in Rep. Trey Gowdy of South Carolina.

Gowdy, the high-profile chair of the House Select Committee on Benghazi, is the increasingly rare politician who’s popular in both conservative and establishment circles. He easily could have succeeded John Boehner as House speaker had he chose to run.


Rubio has good reason to think his plan might work. The most prominent political science theory today is that party elites tend to pick the eventual nominee over the course of an “invisible primary” that takes place in the months and years before voters head to the polls, at which point rank-and-file partisans usually fall in line behind their choice.


So how’s Rubio been doing on that front? Sure enough, he’s made gains as rivals like Bush and Scott Walker have fallen. Bush took an early lead in endorsements from top donors and federal lawmakers that he still holds, but Rubio has racked up more support from both in the last three months than anyone else in the race. Among the big names: Rising stars Cory Gardner and Steve Daines in the Senate, well-known figures like Kristi Noem, Darrell Issa, and Mia Love in the House, and major party funders like billionaire Paul Singer.

All this is good news for Rubio, who surely has more names ready to roll out before voting begins, but it’s still a long way off from a tipping point.

Read it all here.

Could Kristi be helping to coalesce the party around the man who might be our nation’s next president?

35 thoughts on “Is Noem helping to pick our next president?”

  1. “The most prominent political science theory today is that party elites tend to pick the eventual nominee over the course of an ‘invisible primary’ that takes place in the months and years before voters head to the polls, at which point rank-and-file partisans usually fall in line behind their choice.”

    And just how well has that worked in the last few elections? McCain – NO! Romney – NO! And yet the establishment continues on as usual with this year’s favorite of Bush and when that wasn’t working out so well they switched to Rubio. No wonder the rank and file partisans are so fed up this time and prefer either Trump or Cruz or Carson. I liked Rubio and maybe still do, but if the establishment wants him, it raises red flags and taints his image is the minds of many voters, myself included. I am beginning to think that the ordinary citizens really do not have a voice any longer.

    1. Pat,

      I think it would be interesting to do an interview with Dana Randall and Sandye Kading about the RNC Convention and what they are expecting this time around.

  2. I know the “Pawn Stars” host has endorsed Rubio too, but personally I am holding out for Chumlee’s choice….Now that one will definitely seal the deal for me….

  3. “Could Kristi be helping to coalesce the party around the man who might be our nation’s next president?”

    Voting for Paul Ryan, then the Omnibus and Rubio’s non vote.. Could be !

    1. So Hillary, the lying, dishonorable, stand-by-your-totally-immoral man Socialist is a shoo-in? I shudder to think that there are enough people in this country who are that depraved to vote for Hillary given the fact that she is not honest with the American citizens and is a hypocrite (a woman who claims she is raped should be believed-unless they put the claim against my great hubby, Slick Willie).

      1. Hillary? Heck, Trump is going to run as an independent next year and Bernie is going to be our new president…;-)

  4. turnout is at stake. conservatives think they’ve wasted their votes on romney and mccain, but vote they did in spite of the fiction that the establishment chased their votes away. republicans have failed to retake enough of the middle ground lost to them since 2006. the primary vote next month should be fascinating. huge percentages and wins for trump cruz and carson can only come from a catastrophically low republican turnout, boding ill for the new year and the general if one of the three is made the candidate. fascinating.

  5. “Gowdy made a big mistake and will no longer be a serious factor with the GOP grassroots.”

    He once was good enough to be Speaker but because he did one thing contrary to the self-appointed arbiters of all things Republican, he is now persona non grata.

    These are not the type of people I’d want to count on as a base because they are extremely fickle.

    1. Rand Paul prostituted himself out for McConnell and no longer is trusted or supported by the base. Now, Gowdy has done the same. Just a fact. We the people are able to discern who is taking their pieces of silver, and allowing the destruction of this country.

    2. Marco Rubio, Paul Ryan and Trey Gowdy. None of these are conservative enough? They are all three among the most conservative Republicans in Congress, not to speak of the Democrats.

      But Donald Trump? He’s the man!

      One day Trump is a Democrat, Pro-Choice, socialized-medicine supporting liberal and the next… he is the darling of many conservatives. Why? Because he tells immigrants to take a hike? Gee, that was easy.

      He and Putin want to rule the world. Some of you are crazy enough to let them.

    3. Not impressed with what the site has rolled out. Comes out “face bookish” rather than educational and informative. Just presenting cannon fodder for the other party. Unfortunately, both parties have chosen this path. Time for one to choose the high road.

      Troy, Been over 30 years. Hope things are going well with you.

  6. Convention might be a very interesting time in Cleveland. In 2012 Kristi didn’t show up to the convention. Thune was there but didn’t hang out on the floor except to pledge delegates to Romney. Daugaard was there the whole time with his family.

    We might actually see Thune, Rounds, Noem and Daugaard lobbying delegates for votes on the floor in 2016.

  7. Springer,

    Trey Gowdy a few months ago was “the man” to be Speaker and today is persona non grata over one difference of opinion. In my opinion, such a person is not very reliable at making significant judgments because they are wrong 50% of the time.

    Further, as of today, with the possible exception of Bush, every candidate has said every current GOP candidate for President would be better than Hillary Clinton. If for no other reason Gowdy were to believe Rubio was the one he believed most likely to win, it doesn’t make him Judas or a liberal. Nor do I find credible calling someone a Judas or liberal if that person’s judgement is within months wrong 50% of the time and wrong.

  8. The next President will be a Cuban-American. I have little doubt. And of the two, I’d go with Kristi’s choice. The electable conservative.

    1. Rubio is the only Republican beating both Hillary and Sanders in the Real Clear Politics average of polls. That means a whole lot to me.

  9. All I am saying is that many people do not like or trust the “establishment” politicians, those who have been running this country for a long time in either party. That is why the outsiders are seeing so much support. Rubio might be fine; he would certainly be better than the Democrat candidates. But if the establishment has picked him when they realize that Bush most likely will not get the nomination, we wonder why and don’t have a lot of trust in their pick. I don’t think that’s so hard to understand. The current establishment GOP have given us the new omnibus bill which has been cheered by Obama and Pelosi, and you wonder why we don’t trust anyone that is “establishment?”

  10. Springer,

    I agree with you with regard to why outsiders are doing so well and experience isn’t seen as an asset. That said, if Trey Gowdy was the “man” to be Speaker, his decision on Rubio should be given consideration vs. accusing Gowdy of being Judas (collecting pieces of silver).

    If I were to pick my choice solely by who I agree with most on the issues and priority of issues, my choice would be Santorum and then Fiorina (definitely neither “establishment” or weak conservatives). However, they do not seem to be proving themselves electable. Ignoring the reality that a minority of the nation are conservative or Republican (just as a minority of the nation are liberal or Democrat), I accept getting most of what I want depends on attracting sufficient of the Independents. This can get accomplished two ways:

    1) Being moderate enough to attract Independents. This is definitely not my first choice.

    2) Being conservative AND speaking of issues in ways that aren’t offensive to Independents. This is what Reagan did and what like him or not Rubio is doing. If you listen to Gowdy speak of Rubio, this is a significant factor in him endorsing Rubio. And, frankly, it is having an effect on me because I can’t expect perfection that isn’t possible opening me to candidates who are close enough to me on the issues AND electable. More importantly to me, the fact he is attracting the ire of those who seem to give no regard to electability in pursuit of perfection confirms Rubio might be the best fusion candidate to unite the broadest swath of the GOP AND attract enough Independents to win the Presidency.

    1. speaking to springer’s point about people being tired of career politicians, well it’s valid enough. but republican candidates and office holders never see what the media does to them, so why is it hard to believe the republican rank and file, who see the media clearly supporting democrats, DOESN’T see them grooming angry voters to want to simply CAST OUT the demon career politicians of their own party? if i needed a plumber, but had been convinced on the radio that no local plumbers were worth the trouble, i’d take the newest person claiming to be a plumber i could find, or do it myself under the delusion that i couldn’t be worse than the trained local plumbers that the radio warned me about. FIND OUT IF YOUR INFORMATION IS TRUE. too many people won’t do it, it’s hard work because of the layers of media crap, whether its the yellow journalism of the left, or the distored/false over-reaction of those claiming to be the angry right. it’s all designed to be mental warfare against republicans. trey gowdy is a leader, yesterday, today and tomorrow. rubio is worth considering too, and not chased off because the media says so.

  11. Trump has more independents and democrats than any other republican running, who don’t traditionally vote in GOP primaries. If that was truly Troy’s guiding principle, Troy would be trumpeting Trump. He wants Bush or Rubio, not because of electability, but because they are really traditional prostitutable “republicans”. They are in play for the special interests like Boehner, McConnell, Ryan, Rand Paul, and now, Gowdy.

  12. If Trump did better among Independents or Democrats against Sanders or Clinton, I’d give him electability credit. Just because you say it, there is no objective information that affirms your statement. That said, he has improved his electability quotient but he still trails the other Republicans.

    Trump vs. Clinton: -5% in realclearpolitics average (-2% among Independents)
    Rubio vs. Clinton: +1.6% in rcp avg. (+10% among Independents)
    Cruz vs. Clinton: -0.5% in rcp avg. (+9% among Independents)
    Trump vs. Sanders: -2% in rcp avg. (-14% among Independents)
    Rubio vs. Sanders: +1% in rcp avg (+12% among Independents)
    Cruz vs. Sanders: -3.3% in rcp avg. (+9% among Independents)

    Besides the reality Rubio is the only poll leader against either Clinton or Sanders and doing the best among Independents, Trump is the only of the top three GOP candidates who loses independents and does so handily.

    Further, and most importantly, the above information shows that we win the White House only with a candidate who wins Independents by over 15%. There is no way a Republican is even competitive nationally losing Independents.

    Regarding Bush, he has the worst electability measures against either Clinton or Sanders but Trump is close behind. It is most evident in looking at Net Favorables among General Election voters. At the current moment, Bush and Trump are easily the biggest gift to Hillary Clinton.

    Rubio: +9% (+58% among Republicans & +13% among Independents)
    Carson: +7% (+54% among Republicans & +12% among Democrats)
    Cruz: 0% (+56% among Republicans and 0% among Independents)
    Clinton: -7% (+74% among Democrats & -18% among Independents)
    Trump: -22% (+37% among Republicans & -29% among Independents)
    Bush: -22% (+19% among Republicans & -33% among Independents)

  13. Additional thoughts on Iowa Caucus. Recent history tells us lower tier candidates underperform polls while leaders out perform. Iowa rewards two things: Organization and who can bring the most influential supporter to each caucus. I’ve heard it said the key to winning an Iowa Caucus is having the local evangelical minister at the caucus on your behalf.

    In 2008, Huckabee was the leader gained 5% from today until the caucus vote. In 2012, Santorum was in 3rd but gained 8% from today until the caucus vote, leader Romney gained 2% and #3 Ron Paul stayed steady. Everyone else dropped.

    in 2016 in Iowa, I think Cruz will build on his current 30% because he is most like Huckabee and Santorum with regard to base and is reputed to have assembled most of their former team. They know how to out-perform in the Iowa Caucus. I think Trump will drop from his 27% because his supporters have no caucus experience.

    The big question is where the 30% of the people land who currently support those not in the top 3 (Cruz, Trump, Rubio).

    1. troy i hope you realize in the first paragraph of the post you had three distinct reasons why the iowa caucus should be ended outright, and the later iowa primary be that state’s bellwether.

  14. The importance of electability is critical for because of this reality on who is the next President: GOP has 191 Electoral College votes in the bank while the Democrats have 217. 270 needed to win.

    GOP order of must win (top to bottom) making the Democrats order of must to win is bottom to top. If a candidate loses a state on his/her side of the line, they must pick up at least as many electoral votes on the other side of the line.

    North Carolina (15)
    Florida (29)
    Ohio (18)
    Virginia (13)
    New Hampshire (4)
    Iowa (6)
    Nevada (6)
    Colorado (9)
    Wisconsin (10)
    Pennsylvania (20)

  15. Enquirer,

    I hear you. I go back on forth with regard to the value of the Iowa Caucus and its special place in the nomination process as currently protected by both parties.

    The other side of the coin is there is good information to be gleaned by who does well in Iowa. The candidate who can attract seasoned experienced volunteers town by town has attributes I want in my nominee and ultimately President. The candidate who can then organize those volunteers into a machine that gets results is also exhibiting a skill I find valuable.

    Personally, I don’t put great credence in who wins Iowa so much as I dismiss those who don’t compete in Iowa. Iowa (and New Hampshire) demand candidates to get face to face with voters in intimate ways talking about what really matters to those voters at that moment. After these two states, the campaign begins to rely on media and takes on a national flavor where hot-button issues begin to be the delineators.

    My gut is Cruz, Trump & Rubio (maybe Carson) will do well enough in Iowa to pass the above test. Then, in New Hampshire one or two other candidates will be added to the mix (Christie, Kasich, Bush, or Hail Carly Fiorina?). South Carolina and Nevada will knock out a candidate or two. And we are then one to Super Tuesday.

    Iowa and New Hampshire is the first half of the regular season (The Chiefs are rare in that a team can recover from a horrible first half. You can’t get to the playoffs in the first half but you might eliminate yourself). South Carolina and Nevada is the second half of the regular season. Super Tuesday is the play-offs. And the rest of the way is the Super Bowl knowing most times only one team gets to the Super Bowl without injuries and has some gas left in the tank).

    1. Troy,

      I think your “3-pick” for Iowa is correct, but suspect Christie may be the only real “bump” in NH. Jeb! has enough money to stay in as long as he wants, but it’s not translating into support. It looks like there’s actually a greater “anti-Bush faction, than there is “anti-Trump,” within the GOP.

      At the moment, Cruz and Trump are the leading contenders, and Cruz the most organized and funded of his challengers. Will the “establishment” throw their support to Cruz is he’s the only credible challenger to Trump?

      Christie (or any of the other current candidates) is unlikely to last past SC or Nevada. Not enough money, not enough staff and not enough momentum to continue.

      The most likely “consensus candidate” is Rubio, but the longer Jeb! stays in the race, the more likely a brokered convention or a Trump nomination.

      Cruz may be the best positioned, to go all the way.

  16. Cruz, Paul, Trump, Carson, and maybe Fiorina are the only acceptable nominees for this “rank and file partisan”. The rest are establishment garbage. I’m done lining up behind these corporatist big government donor class hacks. That includes the 3 hacks we have as the SD delegation to Congress.

  17. Did I read that right? Carson raised perhaps the most of all candidates last quarter at 23 million dollars. The same Carson who was tied for first place and suddenly decides in the middle of a campaign to start a book tour followed by foreign trips. His campaign… you guessed it, is imploding with staff leaving daily.

    Then there’s Trump. The man with a six word vocabulary.

    And Mark (above) lists Carson and Trump among his “acceptable” nominees. Sadly, I would guess that Rush, Levin and Ingraham probably agree with him.

    Perhaps they have forgotten the Alisnky tactics that Obama has been deploying for the last eight years. “Divide and conquer” being the goal. Some Republicans seem to be falling for it.

    1. Alinsky like tactics. Really, like Rubio, Huckabee, and now even Santorum teaming up to smear Cruz in Iowa. Rich!

Comments are closed.