Is there someone who went to the Dakota Scout debate tonight with a tin can on a string? Wondering if I can hook in to your feed to improve the sound quality?
Is it really a debate if no one outside the theater can tell what the candidates are saying? The sound was largely indecipherable from Hansen and Rhoden. Not much better from the other two, either.
The sound was good from the moderators.. but I didn’t tune in for just the questions. Like several who are texting and emailing, I might try the replay.
Update…
Go here: https://www.newscenter1.tv/watch-now
Much better sound across the board.
Another Update..
How many notes did Toby plan on writing on his hand?
Sounds ok on TV (besides the feedback ringing in the background) Not as well organized as SDPB’s debate though. SDPB’s definitely sounded better too.
Why have a SF paper team up with a westriver TV station?
This should have been with Kelo or Dakota News Now.
I do like a paper teaming up with TV. The coverage of the other debates has been lacking.
KNBN (Newscenter1) and KSFL are both owned by Forum Communications Company from Fargo. Surprise surprise, Sioux Falls Live is as well. Forum has been buying up a lot of small newspapers. The Mitchell Republic and Madison Daily Leader are owned by them now as well.
https://www.forumcomm.com/brands/
I didn’t even know there was a Channel 36 in Sioux Falls before the debate.
These outfits are not ready for prime time. The quality of production is terrible. Why did Toby Doeden write things on his left palm?
hell, I can’t even get a picture!
They should have had the Middle School AV class put this online.
Dusty is running circles around the other three!!
Yes, he did. TKO.
He might have sounded like it but not if you know the facts. According to Dusty, he’s the only one in Congress that can bring people together. By his words at face value, you’d think he’s a personal counselor/mediator between Mike Johnson and Trump who rely on HIM to help them communicate. Not true. If it were true, why doesn’t he stay in DC and become Speaker of the House? Because that would never happen.
Dusty is polished and smarmy.
You say “polished and smarmy” I say “experienced, tested, visionary, ready for this time and place.” Kind of the same thing.
Rhoden can’t give a straight answer.
Rhoden gave excellent answers. His delivery may not be as polished as Dusty’s but the content and honesty were definitely there.
Rhoden gave excellent answers. His delivery may not be as polished as Dusty’s but the content and honesty were definitely there.
You must’ve been listening to the poor audio. He provided straight answers and data for each question I heard in the audience.
Hansen is clear and concise.
You misspelled full of sh*t
Haha. Spot on! I was worried that since the last debate I would’ve somehow become Jon Hansens equal. Not to worry, he’s still more Christian than I am, more grassroots than I am and definitely an all around better person than I am. Whew! I can sleep easy tonight.
Rhoden fears Hansen.
Still don’t understand how Hansen claims he’s grass roots and people believe him. He was first elected in 2010. Those roots go pretty deep.
lol!!
When all you do is regurgitate the same 3 talking points, over and over and over again, it is easy to be concise.
You sound like angry Rhoden supporters.
I get the impression Hansen was the only person in the legislature by the way he talks.
God complex
It was funny when the moderators made him admit others helped defeat G, he didn’t actually do it all on his own. Lol!
Took THREE debates but the moderators did that well. Leslee Unruh must be wondering if she had any part in the Life Defense Fund whatsoever. Noem and Rhoden must be wondering if they hadn’t stepped in when Amendment G was failing in the polls had they not ponied up $40K of their OWN money on radio ads; what would have happened. Oh, Jon would done exactly what to take credit for it?
If you mean he knows how to take credit for others work and say the word “I” the most of anyone, I’d agree.
Doeden sounds good, but is an unknown quantity.
Why is there no visual? Disappointed by high school level quality of the audio. Doeden is giving wishy washy answers, Hansen sounds angry, Dusty sounds pretty decent and I forgot Rhoden was even in it.
This is why KEVN doesn’t print a news paper and the Rapid City Journal sucks at videos.
Who cooked up these bad questions? Outside of that KELO “grade Governor Noem on a scale of 1-10, do you think she is a 9?” question these are confoundingly weak.
Is it just me but has Rhoden dyed his hair?
Who cares?
It kinda hurts his “Everyman” image.
He might be the last guy I can think of that would die his hair.
I certainly wouldn’t kill mine.
Who’s advising Rhoden!?!
Tony Venhuizen, Matt McCaulley, and Matt Michels are subverting Rhoden’s campaign. They have nearly identical political connections to Dusty Johnson. All four were the architects of the Dennis Daugaard era.
If their goal were to facilitate a Johnson victory, their “subversion” would not look like active sabotage, but rather like “establishment” advice that steers Rhoden into the very policy traps that Johnson is now using to lead the primary.
1. The “Daugaard Alumni” Power Core
The three advisors and Rhoden’s chief rival represent a single, cohesive political machine:
Tony Venhuizen: Daugaard’s son-in-law, campaign manager, and successor to Dusty Johnson as Chief of Staff.
Dusty Johnson: Daugaard’s Chief of Staff (2011–2014) and the primary’s current front-runner.
Matt Michels: Daugaard’s Lieutenant Governor for eight years and his 2010/2014 running mate.
Matt McCaulley: A key advisor with deep ties to the Daugaard administration through his legal and lobbying work for the same urban donor networks.
2. Anchoring Rhoden to “Toxic” Policy
The primary argument for subversion is that these “institutionalists” have guided Rhoden toward Senate Bill 96, the unpopular property tax swap.
The Trap: By framing this as the “only viable solution,” they have forced Rhoden to own a “tax hike” narrative just as Johnson launched his campaign.
The Benefit: This allows Johnson to run as the “sensible alternative” who can critique the plan while maintaining the support of the Daugaard-era donor base that McCaulley and Michels represent.
3. The “Institutional Handover” Theory
If Rhoden were to lose, these advisors would likely see their influence increase, not decrease:
Professional Reunion: A Johnson win is effectively a Daugaard 3.0 administration. Venhuizen and Michels would be “coming home” to a leadership team they worked with for a decade.
Financial Security: McCaulley’s lobbying firm would arguably be more valuable to clients under a stable, corporate-friendly Johnson administration than under a Rhoden administration constantly fighting populist rebellions.
Rhoden as the “Bridge”: In this view, Rhoden is being used as a temporary vessel to hold the office after Kristi Noem’s departure until the “true” Daugaard successor (Johnson) can be elected.
By giving Rhoden advice that is mechanically sound but electorally fatal, these advisors may be clearing the path for their long-term political family to retake full control of the state’s executive branch.
If Rhoden loses, these three individuals face no professional penalty; in fact, their “Daugaard/Johnson” pedigree makes them the first phone calls for a new Johnson administration. By providing Rhoden with “establishment-approved” advice that happens to be electorally toxic, they may be intentionally letting the clock run out on an administration they view as a temporary bridge to the “real” return of their political network
Oh, waah.
What?
A few thoughts:
1. Doeden and Dusty bickering tonight helps the other two.
2. Hansen never got attacked so he never got rebuttal and seemed like a non factor though.
3. Rhoden’s best closing of any debate. Ran out of time but set himself apart from the others but in a positive way. Really impressed a few first timers I was watching with.
4. Dusty getting some crowd laughter made him smart yet relatable.
5. Hansen’s probably peaked and now will lack a stage or finances to add more supporters.
The AV sucked until we https://www.newscenter1.tv/watch-now to the link you posted but the QA and pushback was refreshing from the moderators.
Who won?
Hansen
wished he was a factor in the debate.
Hansen sings me me me me
Rhoden
Rhoden had his best debate showing.
Dusty always can talk a good talk if you believe what he says.
Hansen speaks well but still took credit and FINALLY gave Unruh credit for Life Defense Fund but ONLY when he was pressured by the moderators.
Doeden can talk out of his @$$ perfectly fine and fluidly because he’s mastered the narcissist communication but this was his worst of the three debates.
No clear winner in my opinion. And there are two perspectives on winners. Showing or content and untruths. If you take everything at face value, the winner would be completely different than the winner based on factual answers. That is certainly true for all three debates. Probably every debate ever.
Good gosh, the bots have been unleashed. When the same ip addresses post 10-15 comments, don’t be shocked when they disappear.
The live stream links didn’t seem to work. When I finally got a link somehow couldn’t understand it. It’s very disappointing that most people who wanted to see this debate couldn’t. Why wasn’t it on SDPB on utube so anyone interested could access it? Will it be rebroadcast like advertised? When? One link said it would be on at 8:30 but that is just a rehash.
Also would have been nice to let people know the better link given above.
I watched the debate on the Rapid City network affiliate (through air via rabbit ears). Audio and visual were good. I thought moderators did a good job choosing when to allow rebuttal on specific responses, and candidates did a good job advancing their talking points. (I especially appreciated Dusty gently but firmly grabbing Toby’s lob right over the plate about presumptive “parole.” To those that know the difference, we know.)
Poor disappointment in quality all around. Shame. Shame. Shame on the candidates and on the Dakota Scout. Thankfully for Sioux Falls live nobody knows who they are.
Switching to TV feed helped immensely, and it was the best moderated of the debates, but the technical difficulties at the start were nothing short of frustrating.
I agree. These were the best moderators of the three debates.
Patrick needed a shave and Jonathan needed a haircut but C+ overall.
The moderators made it about them. If they had talked less and stopped trying to be funny, maybe we could have heard from the candidates more.
Where was Austin Goss when they needed him?
Heard he was tied up on some phone call… Sounded like it was really important.
Making pizza and busing tables.
Toby and Hansen were exposed with their lack of substance or clear answers to any topic. Hansen, of course, only gives himself credit for anything even though Rhoden would run circles around him when it comes to any ‘one’ of his topics. We know who (JH) ‘took’ money for very high $ ‘cosulting fee’ for Amendment G and who actually came in and ‘saved’ the campaign by raising funds. (not JH). Took credit for the Maudes when he had no impact on the decision. And he wants to be CEO of the state with zero experience in a real job? Scary!
Dusty was rehearsed and polished as usual. He would never get anything done as he doesn’t want to work with legislators, but rather ‘buy’ them with his 1 million $ he said he is dedicating to legislative races. I wonder if he paid DS before the debate just as he made a donation to
SDPB right before the debate. He would usher in DC politics like nobody’s business.
The only straight shooter and effective leader on the stage was Rhoden. What he is doing and what has been done in his 15 months of office is nothing short of amazing. He knows what service is and has been successful by building relationships with people from all sides of the aisle and backgrounds. We need to keep the man in the ring as he has surrounded himself with the best of the best for SOUTH DAKOTA. If Dusty wins, it will be a game of ‘upset the fruit basket’ with all of the campaign promises and positions. It would be a mess. Rhoden won the debate on substance, real results and honesty.
Ian it still does not excuse the Governor shifting taxes which is very regressive and will negatively impact the poor, working poor and those on fixed incomes the hardest. The Governor will have a boat anchor chained to him from when Kristi Noem was Governor though not in the office or state very much with all the scandals that happened with misuse of taxpayer funds.
Kinda have to agree. Never knew much about him as LG, but the more I see of Rhoden the more I think he’s the guy. The only candidate who’s served in the military? Sorry, not sorry. That should be a prerequisite to be the Commander In Chief of our NG soldiers. And the only one with a life spent in Agriculture… Not sure what state we’re living in when the only guy who represents our largest industry isn’t walking away in the polls. But hey what do I know.
Hello – any explanations yet for the extreme poor quality of the debate last night – audio was terrible and no video – etc. If I was a sponsor, I would have been pretty upset.
Hansen didn’t impress. Some chest beating and credit taking for things he really didn’t do himself. It’s funny how many times someone (who’s probably never been in a fight) can say the words “I fought”. It should be a drinking game. Someone should buy him a razor and teach him how to shave the patchy mess on his face.
Hansen was ignored by his opponents in a debate forum that would require he be given a chance to rebut. That shows they all fear him.
Rhoden and Dusty now send their staffers after him when it’s safe.
Who?
Never heard of him.
What?