Kranz Preaching Doom and Gloom for the GOP based on the Caucus elections

In his Argus Leader column today, Dave Kranz talks rather gloomy about the GOP's prospects for the Senate caucus elections. He even managed to quote a blogger:

Republicans might be in for some trouble because of their selections, said former state Sen. George Shanard, R-Mitchell, who served as both majority and minority leader in the Senate.

"It's not the type of leadership that I would have proposed. I think they are leading themselves into more trouble. I hate to see that," Shanard said.

Shanard is not privy to details on how the decision came about but says Republicans must now get themselves on the same page.

"We have to make sure they can hold everything together and avoid a split in the coalition. Right now, that (split) is exactly what they are doing," Shanard said. "All I do know is, they are walking in a dangerous direction."

What happened Monday in Pierre is just the beginning of a wave of concern within the party, said Ken Blanchard, political science professor at Northern State University.

"A lot of conservatives are very upset with the choices. They feel it is a lot to swallow with the choice of Dave Knudson as majority leader," he said.


While the vote is a secret ballot, word is that Knudson and state Sen. Kenneth McNenny, R-Sturgis, tied on the first ballot.

Longtime Pierre observers saw a a victory by the more conservative McNenny as potentially divisive to the Republican caucus.

Even though Heidepriem and Knudson are on opposite sides of the fence, they agree on many things, thus creating some new advantages for the usually weak Democratic Party.

In fact, people are pressed to mention many things the two might disagree on.

The way the Republican Senate leadership election turned out suits Jack Billion, Democratic 2006 gubernatorial candidate, just fine.
Read it all here. Boy, it's always comforting to have the next SDDP chair give a big thumbs up to what the GOP does.

The key for Republicans at this point is to give them a chance to lead. There's a lot of Republicans throwing cold water on the selections at this point for no good reason. Am I all kicked in the patoot about founders of the MAINstream coalition running the caucus? Well, let's just say that would not have been my first choice, but I'll be the first to say that they at least deserve an opportunity.

I think a lot of people are also leaving President Pro Tempore Bob Gray out of the equation as well. I've always viewed Bob as a solid conservative who should be able to bring reason to the leadership troika. I suspect that Bob will exhibit the qualities that got him elected to his leadership position, and put the brakes on any designs that the Maj and Asst Maj may have on the caucus.

In this situation, 'moderation' will be the key.


Anonymous said…
it's up to Dempster and Knudson. if they act like they don't want to be Republicans people will be very angry with them. but if they act like serious leaders of a conservative/moderate party then they might earn great respect. it's up to THEM.
Anonymous said…
"While the vote is a secret ballot, word is that Knudson and state Sen. Kenneth McNenny, R-Sturgis, tied on the first ballot"

Wrong. On the first 5 ballots.

And then one of the wishy washy conservatives submissively rolled over. My guess it was someone with the initials G.A.
Watching from Pierre and Onida said…
Bob G. better not bend over and be Knudson's beyotch.

If he does, we need to find a primary opponent immediately.
Anonymous said…
Whatever edge Republicans thought they had from riding the hard right up to now is gone. It's a new direction which means we start from scratch with a team of horses that will pull in more than one direction. Some call that moderation. Others, chaos.

For now, objectively, I'm going to see if the Democrats are smart enough to take advantage of this blow-out.
Anonymous said…
it would have been pretty foolish for G.A. to not support a leadership team from Sioux Falls, no matter how that team might feel about the gays or embryos.
VJ said…
"In fact, people are pressed to mention many things the two might disagree on."

Ah, isn't that what Brock said the other day and then some of you jumped all over him about it?

Yes, a lot of conservatives are very upset with the choices!

Brock, continue to stand up for what you believe! You represent the base and all true conservatives in South Dakota.

Yes, I want you to work with the elected leaders, but don't roll over for them!

As the other post said, we don't need any wishy washy conservatives!

Thank God for all the political blogs! Politicians can no longer talk the talk and then after they are elected refuse to walk the walk! We can see every move they make. And yes, we are watching!
Anonymous said…
It seems to me the largest political party in South Dakota is actually the Libertarian Party. The fact is a lot of Republicans (like Knudson) haven't yet realized that it conforms to their political beliefs.

Libertarian is defined as:
1) One who advocates maximizing individual rights and minimizing the role of the state.
2) One who believes in free will.

These views are contrary to those of the "conservatives" who also believe in individual rights, except as it applies to bedrooms and uteruses.
lexrex said…
you're right, pp, bob gray should be fine. i think he'll prove himself a fair and capable ppt and a republican respectful of the platform.
Brad S said…
Good grief, all this caterwauling for what? Working through a 40-day session that probably won't have much in the way of "social issues?" Heck, this will probably be the session in which Gov. Rounds gets to announce what gets cut from the budget.
Brad S said…
BTW, want to handle someone like Scott Heidepriem? Keep the session as quiet and non-descript as possible. He can't make headlines on bills that, say, raise the fines for drunk driving.

Which under non-2006 session standards, is not hard to do.
Anonymous said…
The doom and gloom in that column comes from Blanchard and Shenard, you can't hang that on Kranz. Their comments are pretty tame compared to the chicken littles posting here. If you want some doom and gloom PP, look no further than the hatchlings posting right here. You're stirring this cauldron way more than Kranz.
Elephant's Memory said…
There you go, blaming the messenger. What's the harm with a little honest debate between pseudonyms and non-descripts?
Anonymous said…
Ryan Olson is going to run against Bob Gray?
Anonymous said…
9:06 - I don't think so. It boiled down to party leadership and its abandonment of grassroots principles and the party platform.

I spoke with a 50 year old woman the other day and she claimed the Planned Parenthood does perform abortions. She thinks Planned Parenthood is an adoption agency and talks to families about conservative values.

This type of thinking falls in line with the Healthy Families moniker, merely a trick to fool voter percetion and trust. Much like a placebo except for without the benefit self-actualized healing.

Leadership turned its back on pro-life Republicans, did not help its membership understand 2005-2006 Convention resolutions through commission or ommission.

Rounds advised voters to vote no on issues they don't understand and Thune pulled a Kerry flip-flop with his voting YES on Six while voting against defining language it contains.

Pastors for Moral Choice joined pro-death movements whose only responsibility was to cast doubt in the minds of voters.

Most Libertarians do not approve of taxing Americans to fund abortion at a toon of 270 million annually. Tax payer are essentially getting into a womb with the sole purpose of taking life.

Knudson might be pro-death but I understand his wife isn't. I don't think he will make fighting against life his legacy. As a Sioux Falls businessman Knudson is in a position to influence a potentional run for governor and he will need the pro-life vote to get their.

He will also need to find a way to appeal to voters West of the river. I think PP is right. Let's give him the rope and see what happens.
Anonymous said…
How many people in SD even know who the Senate Majority Leader is? Mike Rounds had the job for six years, and when he ran for governor, he was virtually unknown. The public face of the GOP in SD is Rounds and Thune - and all the petty infighting that goes on is "inside baseball" - 95% of voters don't know or care.
Haggs said…
I see this as a good thing for our state. Finally we are moving away from devisive politics. With moderates on both sides of the isle, we have a good chance to actually do something constructive to improve out state. A move to the center has been long overdue, so I look forward to good things coming out of the SD senate this year.
Anonymous said…
"With moderates on both sides of the isle."

Translations--1. with liberals on both sides of the isle.

2. with Democrats on both sides of the isle
Haggs said…
I don't need a "translation." My assumption was that since Scott Heidepriem is a former Republican, that he's a moderate Demacrat. So, in my mind, the senate leaders of both parties are moderates and will have a much easier time of working together.

Kranz seems to think that the similarities between Knudson and Heidepriem will be a problem, but I think it will be one of the rare times when both parties in the state legislature actually work together.
Anonymous said…
Our party faithful should be glad that the Senate leadership will send the message of being moderate.

If we continue to hold the hard line on right wing conservatism we have been, we might as well just put Heideprim in the Governor's chair right now, cause the voters sure will in four years if we don't change our party's image.
Anonymous said…
Just because most of the readers of this blog are conservative- it doesn't reflect the growing moderate movement East River (the part of the state that is actually growing). Just because some of us are pro-choice does not mean we expect you to change your tune- why do you expect us to change ours? It seems like a waste of everyone's time to try to change very fixed opinions.
Personally I feel that the leadership that was elected may actually raise a return to interest in Republican politics.
Anonymous said…
1202 pm - My bad. I meant to say, I spoke to a 50 years old woman the other day and she claimed that Planned Parenthood does NOT perform abortions.
Anonymous said…
She must live in a cave. It is no secret.
Anonymous said…
Do you guys believe in Aliens?
Anonymous said…
Who doesn't?
Anonymous said…
I hope none of you are planning on Knudson flip flopping on the Abortion issue. There is no question he was against 1215 and legislation restricting women's rights.

Like Bush calling Florida in '04. Write it down!

Knudson will not bend to the Unruh's and evangelicals on this issue.

Dave is a good honest solid thinker and would not change for cheap political gain, no matter what the party says.

And as far as a Governor's run, he will never pass the Primary. He is doomed, but he is a man of impeccable integrety and you in the GOP should be so lucky to have him.

I do see this as a power play for the party. Anti-Choice nutz vs. Big City Rich folk. Big City is winning!

BTW take a look at Dave's election results, the only anti-choicer in the race was Scott. He got less than 1000 votes... and Leslie and Allen live in District 14.
Anonymous said…
most of these postings are missing the obvious. here is kranz, posting (in the argus) quotes from george shanard?


we are going to a guy who is...85? to get the pulse of SD politics?

ya, a quarter century ago. in those days george was THE MAN. but hey, time waits for no man; not me, not you.

george, stick to great grandkids. you missed on every shot you took at fellow Rs.

fact is, gray and knudson are darn good leaders, and folks on both far ends are only mad because neither of them will sign the "i have no brain, you are my brain, i will do whatever you tell me" pledge cards.
Anonymous said…
8:24 - In one line you endorse Knudson as a solid thinker yet count him out in a primary for governor. At the same time big city isn't enough to launch Knudson. Why?

Popular posts from this blog

Why should we be surprised?

Comm 101: Letters to the Editor