“Daring ideas are like chessmen moved forward; they may be beaten, but they may start a winning game.” (Johann Wolfgang von Goethe)

Troy Jones

Update:  8-11-15 @ noon:  Another Iowa caucus poll was just released and was in the field one day longer which showed an expected result-  The reaction from the debate appears to be confirming as discussed in the original post but the reactions are more muted and Rubio should be listed as a “winner.”  Further, the “Bubble” I discuss may be on the verge of disappearing.  Fiorina moves into the top tier debate and Christie falls back.

Additionally, there are two other pieces of news today that may be illuminating.

  1. Rick Perry has run out of cash and has asked his paid South Carolina staff to become volunteers.  Because he has concentrated this in the 3rd state (after Iowa and New Hampshire), it tells me he is hopeful to turn things around and/or he has decided to stay in the race as an “issues candidate” (see below) and that issue might just be Donald Trump.
  2. Rand Paul has decided to strike out at Donald Trump.  After Bush, Paul may have the strongest/smartest campaign team, he has plenty of money, and is likely spending money on polling/focus groups so this is not likely an action of desperation.  It has a purpose but I’m not sure what it is.  Veep Cred?  Believe Trump supporters would otherwise support him as “another kind of Republican?”  Precursor to choosing to run for re-election for US Senate and not wanting Trump at the top of the ticket?

I want to stress the following:

  1.  I don’t think any of this is predictive of who will be the nominee or who will still be viable once the elections start.  However, those in the bottom tier may have only one more chance to break-out and they may have to do it in the next debate.  
  2. In my mind, the value is what will happen with undecideds and to the support for the bottom 7-10 candidates when they disappear over the next 6 months.  This is roughly 30% of the primary voter population.  The candidates who pick up chunks of this will find higher viability via fundraising and ability to attract organization for when the elections start.
  3. This is Iowa and not the nation as a whole.   My main point was to attempt to assess movement and reaction to the debate as well as try to discern strength/weaknesses and future direction/discern of the individual campaigns.

However, this poll gave some interesting new information:

  1. Top 5 candidates as 2nd choice after their first choice (in order):  Carson (12%), Rubio (12%), Cruz (11%), Walker (10%), Fiorina (9%).  Personally, until and through the Iowa Caucus & New Hampshire primary, I think this is a critical component of staying in the field as it winnows down.
  2. Top 5 candidates with a favorable impression (in order):  Carson (78%), Walker (73%), Rubio (72%), Fiorina (70%), Huckabee (69%).  Lowest is Cristie (37%)
  3. Top 5 candidates with an unfavorable impression (in order):  Christie (43%), Paul (41%), Trump (37%), Bush (36%), Huckabee (19%).  Lowest is Carson (7%).
  4. Of those who watched the debate second debate (Fiorina got 83% in the first debate), Top 5 who made a favorable impression (in order):  Rubio (23%), Carson (22%), Cruz (11%), Trump (11%), Kasich (8%)
  5. And, finally, after watching the debate two Trump impressions:  56% are less comfortable with Trump as a candidate and 32% think Trump doesn’t show appropriate respect for women.

Original post:  At this stage of a campaign, I don’t put any stock in polling with regard to predicting who the nominee might be.  There are way too many variables, especially when you consider the current size of the field.  Too much can happen plus we don’t really know the voter’s second and third choices which is relevant as first choices fall out.  In a few months, the most relevant polling information will be candidate’s favorable/unfavorable numbers.  A candidate has negatives above a certain level is not longer viable (too unlikeable-think Gingrich). Similarly, a candidate who can’t stimulate a favorable number above a certain level is not going to be viable (not likable- think John Edwards).

However, I do think where polls are informative at this stage is they give understanding about what is moving people’s impression at particular stages of a campaign.  Most recently, we had a debate which was watched by a record number of viewers.  And, today we got the first post-debate scientific poll  measuring a highly informed group of voters (Iowa Republican caucus goers).  Yes, they are generally considered more conservative than the average Republican primary and general voter.  However, they are those most likely to be monitoring current developments and how they move can be a glimpse into what is happening or will happen in the general public.

So, comparing it to a similar poll of the same voters, what happened from before the debate and after the debate?

Apparent “winners;”     Fiorina (+7%), Trump (+6%), Bush (+5%), Carson (+5%), Cruz (+2%)

Apparent “losers:”       Walker (-10%), Jindal (-2%), Paul (-2%)- Editorial comment-  Walker might not really be a “loser” as his number settled to a level comparable to his national numbers.

Everybody else:          Between +1% and -1% which is really no movement.  Maybe a case can be made that no movement is a move backwards but, at this stage, I think treading water keeps them in the game unless they are near the bottom.

If these numbers extrapolate to the nation at large in national polls:

Practical Impact #1 for the CNN debate on September 16:

In top 10:  Bush, Carson, Cruz, Fiorina, Huckabee, Rubio, Trump and Walker

Bubble:    Christie, Kasich, Paul, Perry (two will make it, two will not)

The debates after the the CNN debate have not announced the selection criteria yet.  Thus, we don’t know whether the debates will have all remaining candidates or will have a limit on the number of candidates.   If the debates are limited to 7-10 candidates on the podium, I suspect we might see more fireworks with the lower tier candidates trying to stand-out.

Practical Impact #2 on fundraising:  Florina has reported a big spike in fundraising.  Cruz and Bush are rumored to have had a good weekend.  Graham, Jindal, Pataki & Santorum are likely going to see raising money very difficult.  Unless they are the break-out candidate (ala Fiorina) in the next debate, their reason for remaining in the race is down to two purposes:

  1. Be a “happy camper” and hope to be selected as Veep (ala Biden in 2008)
  2. Be an issue candidate hoping to frame an issue in the minds of voters (ala Gene McCarthy in 1968)

Practical Impact #3 on strategy:  

  1. Bush, Carson, Cruz, Huckabee, Rubio & Walker (assuming Walker’s support nationally doesn’t drop as it appears to have done in Iowa) are likely to continue to do what they have been doing.  They don’t have to be aggressive or throw any bombs.  They should just keep raising money and meeting with voters in low-volatile formats with an occasional policy speech or announcement to add to their gravitas.
  2. Fiorina is hot right now and needs to try to get one more bump to firmly get herself in list above.  Candidates who get hot risk flaming out.  If I were her, I’d maximize fundraising as money presents viability and hammer exclusively on Clinton to engender greater bona fides as a politico.
  3. Trump is rumored to be considering making a pledge to not run as an Independent and to support the GOP nominee.  While it might not be politically critical (I think it is) at this stage of the election, it will become practically critical prior to state primaries because the national and state parties will not make available voter lists and other data available to a candidate who hasn’t made such a pledge.  Additionally he needs to find a way to make amends with women, he might be able to reverse his current high unfavorable rating where he only trails Graham (40%) and Christie (36%) with 35% of the GOP primary voters having an unfavorable opinion of him.    Finally, with the exception of building a wall on our southern border, Trump has been high on rhetoric and low on policy.  At minimum, he should unveil 2 or 3 policy specifics.
  4. Bubble candidates have two choices:  Throw bombs and hope to move up while risking they blow themselves up.  Christie and Paul appear to pursing this strategy.  Or, do as Floriina did-  steadily and seriously talk about issues with voters and hone their message.  Perry and Kasich appear to moving in this direction.
  5. Bottom tier candidates have one realistic hope- be the next Fiorina in the CNN September debate.

Practical Impact #4 on organizational emphasis:  You might be wondering how the Fox debate influences organization priorities?  The top candidates (poll standing or money) have the luxury of looking forward to the blocking and tackling of preparation to an actual Election Day.  By the time the campaign moves to South Carolina, it is likely the field will be reduced to only 4-5 candidates at most.  Right now, NO CANDIDATE is assured of being in the top 5 after New Hampshire and there will be only one winner in Iowa.

  1. Iowa:  This state is famous for picking candidates who disregard perceptions of national viability or conventional wisdom (Santorum in 2012 or Huckabee in 2008) or are regional favorites (Dole in 1988 and 1996).  This state is ripe for someone to make a statement and catapult up in standing.  This is where Cruz, Rubio, and Walker can shine.  Trump and Fiorina have real problem here because of its intense retail politics, with which they have little experience.  Nobody has ever won here without being excellent retail politicians.
  2. New Hampshire:    Because this is almost a home state for the Bush family and they have most of the political leaders in their camp, this is a place where Bush must do reasonably well (yet currently is polling below his national standing) and someone can land a knock-out punch.  Carson, Paul and possibly Kasich can be that candidate as they appear to be polling well so far.  Trump also seems to have captured the imagination of NH voters above his national standing so he should attempt to build on his standing there.

South Dakotans for Fair Lending Press Release on Attorney General Explanation

@SoDakCampaigns

From my mailbox comes a press release from Lisa Furlong on the reason behind their measure as reviewed by the Attorney General today:

South Dakotans for Fair Lending Press Release on Attorney General Explanation

People have a right to be treated fairly.  By supporting this constitutional amendment, we will bring fairness to the lending process, while protecting the people of South Dakota’s rights as consumers.

Our measure places a strict 18% cap on interest rates, far more stringent than that of other measures being proposed.  Additionally, our measure takes the extra step of amending the South Dakota constitution, which will ensure that the cap placed on interest rates is not later removed or weakened. Other measures being circulated simply make changes to statutes, which can be easily altered and undermined.

Our supporters and volunteers are ready to get to work collecting the needed signatures to have this common sense measure placed on the ballot and we appreciate the work of the Attorney General and his staff in issuing the explanation of our measure in a timely manner.”

Lisa Furlong
Chair
South Dakotans for Fair Lending

New ED for @SoDakDems given big thumbs down on first public outing

@SoDakCampaigns

Is the GOP going to maintain impossibly high election numbers again in 2016?  From the sounds of it, it isn’t looking good for Dems as they roll out their new Executive Director in her first public appearance representing their party:

SuzanneJonesPranger
Hey kids! Let’s put on a show, and pull old lists and stuff!

I wanted to ask Suzie what she would do to get more registered Democrats. James Abourezk beat me to the punch. After himming and hawing for a moment, and pausing, Jim asked again. Suzie said she was going to “pull old lists and start contacting those people” then rambled about Gregory County or something. I left early.

Read that here.

That sounds ….awful.

Democrats have had a tough time when they’ve had seasoned professionals at the helm. And it sounds like the new director is anything but. You know it’s bad when one of their few former statewide elected officials starts grilling her and putting her on the spot.

It’s a good indication that Chairwoman Ann Tornberg and crew have no experience, no message, and definitely no plan to do anything this next election but lose, and lose badly.

Press Release: Local Victim Rights Groups Partner with National Organization to Pursue Equal Rights for Crime Victims in South Dakota

@SoDakCampaigns

Local Victim Rights Groups Partner with National Organization to Pursue Equal Rights for Crime Victims in South Dakota

Passing Marsy’s Law would provide victims of crime with rights equal to those already provided to those accused and convicted of crimes.

marsys lawMarsy’s Law for South Dakota, an organization composed of citizens and victim rights organizations in South Dakota, announced today that it is starting the petition process to place an initiated constitutional amendment on the 2016 General Election ballot for consideration of the voters.

Marsy’s Law for South Dakota is named after Marsalee “Marsy” Ann Nicholas. Marsy was a beautiful, vibrant University of California Santa Barbara student who was stalked and killed by her ex-boyfriend in 1983. Only a week after Marsy was murdered, her mother Marcella and her brother Nick walked into a grocery store after visiting her daughter’s grave and were confronted by the accused murderer. They had no idea that he had been released on bail.

Marsy’s family’s story is typical of the pain and suffering that the family members of murder victims have endured. The Nicholas family was not informed because the courts and law enforcement, though well meaning, had no obligation to keep them informed.  Passing the Crime Victims Bills of Rights will ensure that future victims of violent crimes have Constitutional rights, and a formal voice in the criminal justice process.

Dr. Henry Nicholas, Marsy’s brother, has made it his mission in life to give victims and their families across the country constitutional protections and equal rights.

A constitutional amendment for victims’ rights, if adopted in South Dakota, would guarantee equal rights to crime victims. Victims and their families would receive information about their rights and the services available to them. They would have the right to receive notification of proceedings and major developments in the criminal case. They would have the right to receive timely notifications changes to the offender’s custodial status.

Victims and their families would have the right to be present at court proceedings and provide input to the prosecutor before a plea agreement is finalized. They would have the right to be heard at plea or sentencing proceedings or any process that may result in the offender’s release. Finally, they would have the right to restitution.

Marsy’s Law for South Dakota also announced today that attorney Jason Glodt will serve as its new State Director. Glodt, 42 of Pierre, is a former Assistant Attorney General and Senior Policy Advisor to Governors Rounds and Daugaard. Glodt also has over 20 years of experience managing campaigns in South Dakota and is a founding partner of GSG Strategies.

“I started my professional career as a prosecutor fighting for victims of crime,” said Glodt, “I am very excited to be back in a position where I will be working to help victims. Marsy’s Law is not a Republican, Democrat or Independent issue. We should all embrace it. That’s why we have put our political differences aside in support of Marsy’s Law for South Dakota. We are going to build a strong statewide grassroots organization and I look forward to working with crime victims groups and other citizens who support this worthy cause.”

“Thirty-two states already have some constitutional rights in place for victims of crime,” said Glodt “Unfortunately, South Dakota is one of eighteen states that currently does not have any constitutional rights for victims of crime, but we hope to change that.”

###

AG issues opinion in proposed “informed consent in lending” Constitutional Amendment.

@SoDakCampaigns

Looks like Steve & Steve have competition.

An “informed consent in lending” Constitutional Amendment has been filed with the Attorney General and an opinion on same has been issued today with regards to capping loan rates, but allowing a higher rate upon specific disclosure of the rate. As noted in the measure:

No lender may charge interest for the loan or use of money in excess of eighteen per cent per annum unless the borrower agrees to another rate in writing. No law fixing an annual percentage rate of interest for the loan or use of money is valid unless the law provides borrowers the right to contract at interest rates as may be agreed to by the parties.

Read that here.

Should a person have the right to contract for a certain service at a certain rate if they’re made fully aware of the ramifications and the charges?

In the traditional sense of the word, Informed consent is a process for getting permission before a healthcare intervention on a person. Why or why not would an informed consent in lending be appropriate is a person wishes to seek the service?

The Crime Victim’s bill of rights petition drive is coming to South Dakota

@SoDakCampaigns

If you notice by the press release from the AG below, there’s going to be at least one constitutional amendment on the ballot this year that everyone should be able to get behind – The Crime Victim’s Bill of Rights.  If you’re wondering what it is…

Marsy’s Law, the California Victims’ Bill of Rights Act of 2008, is an Amendment to the state’s Constitution and certain Penal Code sections enacted by voters through the initiative process in the November 2008 general election. The Act protects and expands the legal rights of victims of crime to include 17 rights in the judicial process, including the right to legal standing, protection from the defendant, notification of all court proceedings, and restitution, as well as granting parole boards far greater powers to deny inmates parole.

Read that here.

I spoke with the measure sponsor, Jason Glodt, whom most elected party officials and activists should know well, about the measure, and why it’s coming to South Dakota. It’s rather serendipitous that this has come about, and very welcome measure, as I’ve written about the problems of restitution in South Dakota before.

Jason tells me that 35 states have crime victim rights measures, but South Dakota is one of 15 that do not. At the same time that constitutional rights protect the rights of citizens, they protect the rights of criminals. What this measure seeks to do is to place the rights of victims on the same footing at the same level.

When it was first passed in California in 2008, it received 53% of the vote. When passed recently in Illinois, it passed with 77%  Ultimately, they have a goal to seek a federal constitutional amendment on equal rights for victims, but in the absence of it, this is a good intermediary step.

What does the measure propose to add to the constitution?

MARSY’S LAW: A SOUTH DAKOTA CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO AFFORD CRIME VICTIMS EQUAL RIGHTS

Section I . That Article VI of the Constitution of the State of South Dakota be amended by adding a new section to read as follows:

§29. A victim shall have the following rights, beginning at the time of victimization:

I .The right to due process and to be treated with fairness and respect for the victim’s dignity;

2. The right to be free from intimidation, harassment and abuse;.

3. The right to be reasonably protected from the accused and any person acting on behalf of the accused;

4.The right to have the safety and welfare of the victim and the victim’s family considered when setting bail or making release decisions;

5.The right to prevent the disclosure of information or records that could be used to locate or harass the victim or the victim’s family, or which could disclose confidential or privileged information about the victim, and to be notified of any request for such information or records;

6.The right to privacy, which includes the right to refuse an interview, deposition or other discovery  request, and to set reasonable conditions on the conduct of any such interaction to which the victim consents;

7. The right to reasonable, accurate and timely notice of, and to be present at, all proceedings involving the criminal or delinquent conduct, including release, plea, sentencing, adjudication and disposition, and any proceeding during which a right of the victim is implicated;

8. The right to be promptly notified of any release or escape of the accused;

9.The right to be heard in any proceeding involving release, plea, sentencing, adjudication, disposition or parole, and any proceeding during which a right of the victim is implicated;

10. The right to confer with the attorney for the government;

11. The right to provide information regarding the impact of the offender’s conduct on the victim and the victim’s family to the individual responsible for conducting any pre-sentence or disposition investigation or compiling any pre-sentence investigation report or plan of disposition, and to have any such information considered in any sentencing or disposition recommendations;

12. The right to receive a copy of any pre-sentence report or plan of disposition, and any other report or record relevant to the exercise of a victim’s right, except for those portions made confidential by law;

13. The right to the prompt return of the victim’s property when no longer needed as evidence in the case;

14. The right to full and timely restitution in every case and from each offender for all losses suffered by the victim as a result of the criminal conduct (And this is long overdue – PP) and as provided by law for all losses suffered as a result of delinquent conduct. All monies and property collected from any person who has been ordered to make restitution shall be first applied to the restitution owed to the victim before paying any amounts owed to the government;

15. The right to proceedings free from unreasonable delay, and to a prompt and final conclusion of the case and any related post-judgment proceedings;

16. The right to be informed of the conviction, adjudication, sentence, disposition, place and time of incarceration, detention or other disposition of the offender, any scheduled release date of the offender, and the release of or the escape by the offender from custody;

17.The right to be informed in a timely manner of all post-judgment processes and procedures, to participate in such processes and procedures, to provide information to the release authority to be considered before any release decision is made, and to be notified of any release decision regarding the offender. Any parole authority shall extend the right to be heard to any person harmed by the offender;

18. The right to be informed in a timely manner of clemency and expungement procedures, to provide information to the Governor, the court, any clemency board and other authority in these procedures, and to have that information considered before a clemency or expungement decision is made, and to be notified of such decision in advance of any release of the offender; and

19. The right to be informed of these rights, and to be informed that a victim can seek the advice of an attorney with respect to the victim’s rights. This information shall be made available to the general public and provided to each crime victim in what is referred to as a Marsy’ s Card.

What do you think? Are you ready to get behind and support the victims of crime in South Dakota?

Attorney General Explanation Released for Initiated Constitutional Amendment Limiting the Ability to Set Statutory Interest Rates for Loans

@SoDakCampaigns

Attorney General Explanation Released for Initiated Constitutional Amendment Limiting the Ability to Set Statutory Interest Rates for Loans

Marty JackleyPIERRE –South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley announced today an Attorney General Explanation for a proposed Constitutional Amendment has been filed with the Secretary of State. This statement will appear on petitions that will be circulated by the sponsor of the proposed amendment. If the sponsor obtains a sufficient number of signatures on the petitions by November 9, 2015, as certified by the Secretary of State, the measure will be placed on the ballot for the November 2016 general election.

This is a measure to change the Constitution, as opposed to changing state statutes (which requires 13,871) and the sponsor will need 27,741 signatures.

  1. An initiated amendment to the South Dakota Constitution limiting the ability to set statutory interest rates for loans

Under South Dakota law, the Attorney General is responsible for preparing explanations for proposed initiated measures, referred laws, and South Dakota Constitutional Amendments. Specifically, the explanation includes a title, an objective, clear and simple summary of the purpose and effect of the proposed measure and a description of the legal consequences.

To view the Attorney General Explanation for the measure, as well as the final form of the measure submitted to this office, please click on the link:

http://atg.sd.gov/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=tKus_2twEd0%3d&tabid=442

2015 Interest Rates.pdf

To date the Attorney General has released Attorney General Explanations for the following:

  1. An initiated measure to set a maximum finance charge for certain licensed money lenders
  2. An initiated amendment to the South Dakota Constitution to allow referral of state and municipal laws affecting public peace, health, safety and the support of government and also to limit the ability to amend or repeal initiated laws
  3. An initiated measure to legalize marijuana for medical use
  4. An initiated measure to decriminalize the possession of one ounce or less of marijuana and marijuana paraphernalia
  5. An initiated measure to criminalize the transfer of alcoholic beverages
  6. An initiated measure to criminalize the transfer of tobacco and tobacco paraphernalia
  7. An initiated amendment to the South Dakota Constitution to provide for state legislative redistricting by a commission
  8. An initiated amendment to the South Dakota Constitution to expand rights for crime victims
  9. An initiated amendment to the South Dakota Constitution limiting the ability to set statutory interest rates for loans

Attorney General Explanation Released for Initiated Constitutional Amendment to Expand Rights for Crime Victims

@SoDakCampaigns

Attorney General Explanation Released for Initiated Constitutional Amendment to Expand Rights for Crime Victims

Marty JackleyPIERRE –South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley announced today an Attorney General Explanation for a proposed Constitutional Amendment has been filed with the Secretary of State. This statement will appear on petitions that will be circulated by the sponsor of the proposed amendment. If the sponsor obtains a sufficient number of signatures on the petitions by November 9, 2015, as certified by the Secretary of State, the measure will be placed on the ballot for the November 2016 general election.

This is a measure to change the Constitution, as opposed to changing state statutes (which requires 13,871) and the sponsor will need 27,741 signatures.

  1. An initiated amendment to the South Dakota Constitution to expand rights for crime victims

Under South Dakota law, the Attorney General is responsible for preparing explanations for proposed initiated measures, referred laws, and South Dakota Constitutional Amendments. Specifically, the explanation includes a title, an objective, clear and simple summary of the purpose and effect of the proposed measure and a description of the legal consequences.

To view the Attorney General Explanation for the measure, as well as the final form of the measure submitted to this office, please click on the link: http://atg.sd.gov/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=VbrXi9zbdGY%3d&tabid=442

(Or read below – PP)

Initiated Measure 2015 Rights for Crime Victims

To date the Attorney General has released Attorney General Explanations for the following:

  1. An initiated measure to set a maximum finance charge for certain licensed money lenders
  2. An initiated amendment to the South Dakota Constitution to allow referral of state and municipal laws affecting public peace, health, safety and the support of government and also to limit the ability to amend or repeal initiated laws
  3. An initiated measure to legalize marijuana for medical use
  4. An initiated measure to decriminalize the possession of one ounce or less of marijuana and marijuana paraphernalia
  5. An initiated measure to criminalize the transfer of alcoholic beverages
  6. An initiated measure to criminalize the transfer of tobacco and tobacco paraphernalia
  7. An initiated amendment to the South Dakota Constitution to provide for state legislative redistricting by a commission
  8. An initiated amendment to the South Dakota Constitution to expand rights for crime victims

Robot bee lady claims that @MegynKelly is proven to be a GOP Shill because she told Annette Bosworth she lost

@SoDakCampaigns

Every once in a while, I have to look at stuff I know to be absolutely off the wall nutty.  It’s probably a lot like people driving by a car accident or storm damage, where you want just enough information to go “wow, that’s really bad.”

Well, I did it again. I got my fix of looking at “storm damage bad” in a political sense by going to former Secretary of State Candidate Lori Stacey’s web site.  You remember Lori. She’s the one who thinks that there’s a plot to kill off bees, so they can be replaced by government controlled robot bees.  And today, she’s taking on Megyn Kelly.

People should not be shocked about the outrageous questions posed by Fox News moderators at Thursday night’s prime time debate. The event was more like an evening of multiple-candidate gotcha interviews in prime time rather than a formal presidential debate.

With the enormous backlash brewing against Megyn Kelly which largely stems from her attacks on Donald Trump, some might almost start to feel sorry for her. Well, not so fast. It turns out that this is certainly not the first time Megyn Kelly has sucker-punched a candidate for the Republican establishment.

Back during the 2014 Republican primary in South Dakota, Megyn Kelly played dirty tricks on a US Senate candidate that embarrassed the establishment by miraculously raising more money than the obvious GOP establishment’s pick in the primary.

Read the car accident article here.

Um, what?  Somehow Megyn Kelly played a dirty trick on Annette Bosworth by informing her that she lost? As if all those polls, pundits, and practically everyone else in South Dakota not supporting her weren’t an initial clue?

And according to robot bee lady Lori Stacey, taken alongside the questioning of Donald Trump over some fairly misogynist comments he’s made, it’s somehow proof that she’s in the bag for ‘establishment Republicans?’

There’s a reason why Lori Stacey’s thought processes are “car accident bad.” They lack a basis in credibility.

No one is persecuting Annette Bosworth. It’s all been self-inflicted, as there are consequences for her actions. Same with Donald Trump. When you say inflammatory things, there’s a good chance that you might get burned by them.

And I don’t think either one of them can conjure up an alleged sympathy for the Republican establishment on Megyn Kelly’s part to blame.

They managed to do it all by themselves.

The South Dakota Teacher Shortage crisis? Well, it’s not just us.

@SoDakCampaigns

You know that Blue Ribbon Task force charged with finding ways to raise teacher pay, and in turn, allowing us to hire more teachers due to a shortage?

The New York Times has an interesting article this morning regarding the teacher shortage. And it’s not just us. It’s a nationwide trend:

Across the country, districts are struggling with shortages of teachers, particularly in math, science and special education — a result of the layoffs of the recession years combined with an improving economy in which fewer people are training to be teachers.

At the same time, a growing number of English-language learners are entering public schools, yet it is increasingly difficult to find bilingual teachers. So schools are looking for applicants everywhere they can — whether out of state or out of country — and wooing candidates earlier and quicker.

Some are even asking prospective teachers to train on the job, hiring novices still studying for their teaching credentials, with little, if any, classroom experience.

Louisville, Ky.; Nashville; Oklahoma City; and Providence, R.I., are among the large urban school districts having trouble finding teachers, according to the Council of the Great City Schools, which represents large urban districts. Just one month before the opening of classes, Charlotte, N.C., was desperately trying to fill 200 vacancies.

Read it all here.

Interesting. The story cites that the teacher shortage is “a result of the layoffs of the recession years combined with an improving economy in which fewer people are training to be teachers.”  That doesn’t alleviate the shortage, but it flies in the face of what some would have you believe about South Dakota.

What’s your take on it?