Is Heidepreim the Great Blue (State) Hope?
Up on Mt. Blogmore, I am just getting around to listening to the Steve Hildebrand interview. You know, the one where he rails on the Governor, and says he and Daschle are going to be active in the 2006 SDDP races.
I was told today that it was an interesting listen, and it was good insight into the thoughts of one of the more successful Democrat activists, so I gave it a gander. But what really caught my attention was under the comments for the post where a commenter (Slim Buttes) on that board noted the following:
Clearly, I disagree with Slim Buttes. Because I think if Scott gave it a run, he'd very likely face dim prospects. What are a couple of reasons behind my very Republican opinion?
Having been bitten on the rear before by suggesting what Democrats should do, let's hear it from the opposite side of the aisle. Democrats - if you had your choice, who would it be - Heidepreim or Volesky?
I was told today that it was an interesting listen, and it was good insight into the thoughts of one of the more successful Democrat activists, so I gave it a gander. But what really caught my attention was under the comments for the post where a commenter (Slim Buttes) on that board noted the following:
I saw in the Argus Leader that former Republican State Senator and former chairman of the senate judiciary committee Scott Heidepriem is thinking about a run for Governor. Although he is now a democrat, he could capture a great deal of the moderate republicans and maybe the Sioux Falls area.(Read it all here - Comment #4)
Clearly, I disagree with Slim Buttes. Because I think if Scott gave it a run, he'd very likely face dim prospects. What are a couple of reasons behind my very Republican opinion?
- The Governor faced him in the last race. Except 3 years ago, his name was Jim Abbott. C'mon guys, it would virtually be a re-run of the last election where Jim was spanked. There's little contrast between the two. I believe they even vacation together.
- Compared to the rest of South Dakota, Scott's voting record is not what you would consider moderate. I personally recall watching him on the Senate Floor as a Republican, where he was very vocal and passionate on litmus test issues such as the right to burn the American Flag as a facet of free speech, and vocally leading the pro-choice position on abortion.
- In 2002, and in previous elections, Abbott had criticism leveled against him from within his party as being too GOP. Is someone like Heidepreim who just jumped the party fence going to be viewed as an opportunist from the DEM faithful?(unlike Volesky who has held Dem office before his run). I think you'll see a little bit of that. I've watched a few DEM activists bare their teeth as much as some on my side can do. It's not exclusive to the GOP.
- And then there's the issue of "treasonous conduct" against the Republican Party. Maybe I'm hypersensitive, but I recall watching Scott on First Monday one month where he's with Steve Kirby on one side of Steve Hemmingsen, and then the next month.... He's on the opposite side. I think if he's the Democrat nominee, it's going to bring the Republican diehard activists together. And they're going to be crabby. You want to put together the people who support different facets of the GOP back together under one roof? This would do it.
Having been bitten on the rear before by suggesting what Democrats should do, let's hear it from the opposite side of the aisle. Democrats - if you had your choice, who would it be - Heidepreim or Volesky?
Comments
I think your analysis, while believeable, is blinded by partisanship. Heidepreim and Abbott are two very different people and Heidepreim would be a very different candidate. The "litmus test issues" analysis may or may not have validity, but at the end of the day, those issues may or may not define the race. We don't know that right now. As far as being too GOP for the Dems and too Dem for the GOP; again, that may have some level of validity. But if this race is run correctly by a Democratic candidate, it will be a referendum on Rounds and not the challenger. While he may be popular, the Governor isn't deeply defined in the psyche of the people of South Dakota. Which means how the public perceives him can change very quickly. An opponent who can talk about issues that matter to everyday South Dakotans and how the Governor has failed on those issues will have a fighting chance.
Now, truth be told, we all know it will be an uphill fight in 2006 against Rounds. But Republicans, and I think I can include you in this, who believe that Rounds is completely untouchable may be in for a bit of a surprise.
He has done little or nothing to address education funding, a coming health care crisis, wages, his progress on economic development is shaky at best, the budget is a mess, and he's flying around the state at taxpayer expense and living in a new $3 million mansion. And his popularity, while broad, is not deep.
It wouldn't be difficult to build a strong case to replace this governor. Making it stick will prove to be the biggest challenge, but with the right candidate and team, it could be done.
With that said, I'm not going to endorse any Dem just yet. A lot of things will have to go right for my team to take down Rounds, but he's not invincible by a long shot.
--Chad.
BK