You read it here first - Gray elected President Pro Tempore, Majority Leader Race Deadlocked

Here's the scoop coming out of Pierre at 11:30.

Bob Gray was elected to be President Pro-Tempore over Orv Smidt.

Jim Lintz and Cooper Garnos were elected Majority Whips..

And as for Majority Leader? It's deadlocked 10-10 between McNenny and Knudson.

Right now they've broken for lunch. There's hope of something breaking free over the Lunch hour, so there's sure to be plenty of wheeling and dealing. Will there be a third alternative offered? Doubtful, but not impossible.

Watch for the Asst position to be decided after they put the majority decision behind them.

Comments

Anonymous said…
GO Knudson GO!!
Anonymous said…
GO McNenney GO!!

We need leaders like Kenny to move South Dakota forward into the 19th Century!
Elephant's Memory said…
I see that we're alligning our political muscle firmly in West River with Bob Gray, Pierre, being the furthest east point in the GOP leadership spectrum. Add to that the fact that Napoli and Apa will continue grabbing headlines, we ought to move the state capitol somewhere between Phillip and Quinn.

I'm sure this has something to do with wanting to re-live the glories of the 2006 election. Gee, if only we screamed a little louder we'd have more legislative seats instead of five fewer in the senate.

You knuckleheads got one more chance to elect Knudson, or you can kiss East River goodbye in 2008.
Anonymous said…
Elephant, clearly you must be one of the Dems blogging undercover.

Because why would we reward one of the founders of the MAINstream Coalition, which did nothing more than divide the party on an ideological basis, and make Knudson majority leader?

He stood as one of the dividers. We need a uniter.
Elephant's Memory said…
Dear "Moderate Extremist" Hater:

Saw your post and responded in the last thread. You mean you can only unite if there is no diversity of opinion? Do you think about what you say before you shoot? Nope. Guess not. If you're what's in store for future elections we'll go from the majority to the minority party in Pierre inside one election cycle. Libertarians can use crackpots like you. Buzz off!
Anonymous said…
Dear Elephant's rearend:

You don't give a known embezzler the job of watching over a restaraunt till, so why are you dead set on putting a divider in charge of uniting the very group he participated in dividing in the first place.

It would be like Stan Adelstein running for State GOP Chair. It just doesn't make sense.

Who cares where the Maj leader is from - as long as he can bring everyone to the table.

So, buzz off yourself.
Elephant's Memory said…
Well, you've entirely missed the point and that's not surprising for a neanderthal. Balance, or at least the appearance of balance, is needed to make it appear that Republicans have not written off the eastern half of South Dakota. For you, that's the side where 70 percent of the population votes. That, along with other reasons, is why I would not support Adelstein for party chairman.

It took Bill Janklow and Joel Rosenthal to stop the bleeding from the last time Democrats won a majority in the legislature. Joel's past his prime but I would take him over another yahoo who wants to isolate our party from the vast majority of South Dakotans.

If you've ever been around a campaign in your life (which I doubt) you'd realize that politics is a game of addition. When you have the most votes you win. When you chase people out of the party, you lose every time.

Stop shrink-wrapping the GOP!!!
GOP come home said…
elephant man:

riddle me this: why were a super majority of the legislators who voted for the abortion ban reelected to office?

Abortion didn't take down Earley and Latrell and Klaudt. Inter party bickering and petty politics did. Earley and Lattrell were not supported by the mount on high and Klaudt was roughed up in the primary by Wetz. Maher used to be a GOPer in college and is against abortion.

So what do you cite as evidence for the GOP losing because of neanderthalian ways other than making the statements itself? Just because you say it's so means it so (ipse dixit)? Support your assertion please.

What is clearly neanderthalian is the interparty warfare started by moderates seeking more power all because they don't agree with the anti-abortion crowd.

If anything this last election was a mandate for the adoption of a well organized and superbly executed grassroots GOP turnout program. Our dominance in this state means poll watchers in every precinct, it means, callers calling those who haven't voted, it means, dragging the lazy voter on his ear to the poll.

It does not mean watering down and comprimising on those things that the great majority of Republicans believe in.
Anonymous said…
Beautifully put "gop come home"!!!
Anonymous said…
That's right. We can't yield an inch in this war against the gays and the baby killers.

We will win. Jesus is on our side.
Anonymous said…
The Argus says that Gray defeated Apa for pro tem. Is that true - Did Gray, Smidt, and Apa all run? The ARgus did not mention Orv, which seemed weird to me.
Elephant's Memory said…
GOP Come Home,

I apologize for the neanderthal term because its comparison to you insults neanderthals everywhere. Here is a correction for your poorly informed statement: "What is clearly neanderthalian is the interparty warfare started by moderates seeking more power all because they don't agree with the anti-abortion crowd."

Correction: The moderates were the incumbents who were removed in the spring primary. How does that constitute starting warfare? The extremists were the aggressors throughout the last year.

The bottom line is there are five fewer Republican senate seats because the wingnuts grabbed the steering wheel and rammed the car into the ditch. They lost the abortion ban because they were stupid and followed Unruh and Scheenbeck. They lost the senate super majority because they were pigheaded and wanted extreme control to ram through the agenda of a narrow religious point of view.

If you want to help the Dems then keep shrink-wrapping the GOP which used to be a very successful big tent party in South Dakota. The election of Knudson and Dempster was the smartest move made since Bill Janklow made his comeback and appointed Joel Rosenthal chair.

Ditch the Neanderthal. We need Rosenthal!
Anonymous said…
elephant person:

other than calling names how do you refute gop come home's assertion that abortion was not the reason for losing the seats?

do you have polling in those districts, or numbers or where do you derive your assertion from?

and didn't rosenthal support janklow against abdnor or is that wrong?

i think most of use want a gop that wins races, sticks to values but does not yield to moderate leaders.

many of us fear those who are willing to compromise values for the sioux falls downtown chamber crowd.
Anonymous said…
There is a difference between "sticking to values" and "obsessing over one or two issues that the State can have no direct impact over at the expense of the numerous issues over which it can."
Elephant's Memory said…
Great. Now you want to throw away the contributions from the business set in Sioux Falls. What's next? I'm sure the Dems and the pro-gay rights and pro-abortion forces would be glad to take the money and the votes from Minnehaha County and Lincoln County. By the way, Joel Rosenthal is pro-life unless he changed his mind in the last year. He might be able to fit in your shrink-wrapped version of the state GOP except he understands that winning requires being inclusive ... a lesson lost on you.
GOP come home said…
Elephant man:

No, it was the moderates who, long before the primary season began (maybe a 9 months or more), that started a mainstream coalition with the intent of derailing the traditional family values, fiscal restraint, and educational accountability candidates.

It was the primary challengers who attempted to put down the insurrection started by the Mainstreamers. The root cause again as stated earlier was not to play nice but was to start a bare power grab.

Similiar to the last poster, what do you base your bare naked assertions on?

Also, isn't rosenthal the one who supported Janklow against Abdnor? That's some great strategy right there, your the next Rove.

Wasn't it rosenthal and janklow who sat on their asses for Pressler?

Wasn't it janklow who goes to d.c. and says i love daschle and voted for him? Great work for the leader of a party and his minion.

The last thing we needed was a Janklow crony in control at the capitol.
Anonymous said…
3:52:

the legislature last year passed 217 bills of which only two were abortion related.

how do you figure that the legislature was obsessing over one or two issues? Maybe the media was and the Mainstreamers or you, but not the legislature

Also, the type of legislation which is about family values should be state driven and not federally or judicially mandated.
Anonymous said…
that's republican stuff right there. sticking to issue being driven at the state level. can we agree with that?

whether you like abortion or not it should be a state issue just like gay marriage and a whole host of other issues that an unelected unacountable judiciary is currently and wrongfully deciding for us.

last time i checked SCOTUS does put stock into what a majority of states are doing. so acting on issues that have been preempted by the federal judiciary at the state level is something that we can have a direct impact on when enough states choose to act.
Anonymous said…
"last time i checked SCOTUS does put stock into what a majority of states are doing."

You are totally wrong.
Anonymous said…
It is true that the legislature passed only two abortion bills last year. It is also true that there are numerous Republicans who spent WAY too much time on those two bills. The new Senate leadership will spend the time on the areas where the state should be focusing.

And the Mainstream Coalition was not an "insurrection" - it was a reaction to the far-right politics of Napoli, Apa, and friends. You'll notice that practically all of their candidates lost in the fall - we see now where they will lead us.

I'm glad the GOP made Knudson/Dempster the Majority leaders while we still have a "majority" to lead!
Anonymous said…
I don't think anyone is "throwing away" the contributions of the "business set" from what I have read.

Certainly a case can be made that the business community is loathe to act on values legislation. Even Robert Novak has reported on this nationally (see his column from just before the election I believe), and locally there are always those who want to stay out of the values legislation.

Clearly, there is a rift between social conservatives and those conservatives on fiscal issues only. Those are the kind who look out for business perhaps to the extent of middle class families more so.

What we need, and from what the discussion today points out is unity in the gop ranks. That unity is certainly not fostered by posters calling people neanderthals. And while GOP come home makes a case for unity it is a bit confrontational.

However, many want to know who the moderates owe their allegiance, is it the business set? Is it the moderate forces not willing to debate conservative family values issues that belong to states?
Anonymous said…
4:20:

Dennis Schmidt won. Earley, Latrell and Klaudt all lost tight battles, clearly not because of the issue but because of voter turnout.

Your assumption that moderation is required has no support in the facts. Their defeat is a call for more grassroots development not GOP lite legislators.
Anonymous said…
Laterrel, Klaudt, and Schweisow all lost in districts where the GOP had won easily two years before. Sure, it was a Democratic year - but Duane Sutton and Stan Adelstein would have held those seats. (But please don't get started on Stan - I think I agree with you about him).
west river republican said…
Maher used to be GOP and is prolife. Where is the proof that that race was lost on abortion or extremism?

What about Schmidt, he won his race?
Anonymous said…
Anon 4:28:

I wouldn't disagree with you but some of us are looking for something to show that it was republican extremism vs. gop moderation that lost those races.

All factors just point to poor grassroots work and local personality instead of the abortion issue as to why they lost.
GOP come home said…
Elephant's memory, et. al.:

Here's my final contention: it was not abortion that lost those five seats it was lack of a gop ground game.

You can blame abortion all you want in an effort to enhance your "more moderates" arguments but explain why Klaudt lost to another prolifer and why Earley and Laterell lost by less than 30 votes and why Schmidt won.

That's not ideology or issues, its poor turnout. Now I understand the need to rewrite or define history to the benefit of those moderates out there seeking power. To be able to say that abortion hurt the GOP helps your cause immensely. However, that is a bridge too far to say that abortion was the reason as explained in earlier posts.

I know some out there don't want to hear this but we need a grassroots ground game to take advantage of our large voter registration. It's also too easy to scapegoat abortion it prevents us from looking internally to determine our faults, something healthy organizations do everyday in order to perform better.
Anonymous said…
Am I missing something? Do we really know why certain people lost races or is just assumptions? If so where is this data. Or is everybody just drawing their own conclusions? This is the real problem with party. Neither side truly has the facts. They all just assume something to be true.
Here are some facts:

185,948 Voted (36.67%) against the abortion ban.
148,666 voted (29.32%) for the abortion ban.
172,518 (34.02%) didn't vote.
So what did it all mean? There is a small group (less than 30%) that oppose abortion. The rest must be democrats.
Jesus Christ said…
"That's right. We can't yield an inch in this war against the gays and the baby killers.

We will win. Jesus is on our side."

HAHAHAHA
NO on knudson said…
4:24, Don't forget, 4:20 failed to consider that Napoli and Apa both won their races.
Anonymous said…
12:51 pm - I think elephant's memory is Knudson. In the previous blog at 12:55 pm he responded to a post with this comment, "If I'm in a Sioux Falls coffee shop you must be living in a cave-dwelling cult outside Igloo."

3:56 pm - The GOP is not exclusive to SF business types. Or is that your definition of big tent.
Elephant's Memory said…
Hey there Cave-Dwelling Cultist,

Your ilk managed to alienate a guy with a bottomless checkbook who bankrolled Mike Rounds' first campaign to be Governor. Now do you want to remove more bottomless checkbooks from your candidate welfare line? Keep it up. You'll get there by exposing your hostility against loyal Republicans who don't agree with your religious views 100 percent of the time.

Riddle me this, cowboy: Should a publicly homosexual man be allowed to hold public office as a Republican? Why or why not?
Anonymous said…
At least you show your true stripes. It's all about money and campaigns with you instead of values and principles.

Popular posts from this blog

Breaking News: After the television commercial salvo fired at them, Vote Yes For Life Fires back.

Heidepreim: Republicans are the party of hate

The Day in politics - October 24th