Mitchell Daily Republic is jumping on the bandwagon to sound the Johnson for Congress horn

The Mitchell Daily Republic spent some time tooting PUC Commissioner Dusty Johnson's horn today in an article touting his candidacy for Congress:
There are at least two obvious reasons that some Republicans want Dusty Johnson to run for the U.S. House of Representatives in 2008.

In a 2004 campaign for a relatively obscure post in state government, he won more votes and raised more money than the 2006 Republican candidate for South Dakota’s House seat.

Johnson, a Mitchell resident, won a spot on the Public Utilities Commission in 2004. In doing so, he garnered 196,974 votes and reported receiving $194,905 in campaign contributions. Conversely, Bruce Whalen earned 97,864 votes and raised $150,447 last year in his failed bid to unseat Democratic U.S. Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin.

and...

Another consideration in Johnson’s decision-making process may be the status of Herseth Sandlin. Some political speculation has her running in 2008 for the U.S. Senate seat currently occupied by Democrat Tim Johnson, who may not be willing or able to run for re-election because of his continuing rehabilitation from a December brain hemorrhage.

If Herseth Sandlin runs for the Senate, it could clear the way for numerous hopefuls to run for the House. Dusty Johnson said Herseth Sandlin’s status will not affect his decision, but said what she does “will affect a lot of people’s decisions.”
Read it all here.

Comments

Anonymous said…
I think Dusty's comment shows his arrogance. If Stephanie's decision will not affect his own, then why didn't he announce what his decision is?

Because her decision does in fact affect his - just like it affects everyone else on the Republican side. If Stephanie runs again for the House, Dusty will not. If Stephanie runs for the senate, Dusty will not run for the senate. You can take that to the bank.
Anonymous said…
Maybe he didn't because it is still eighteen months until the election, over a year until the primary, and in any case ridiculously early to state his intentions. Not that Jim Burg was Stephanie Herseth, but he was an entrenched incumbent who twice had been reelected easily, and Dusty was willing to take him on and work hard to beat him. Don't assume that he wouldn't be willing to challenge Stephanie as well.

Of course, I suppose you'd say that Dusty would be arrogant if he WAS willing to take on Stephanie. Because in South Dakota, intelligence + confidence + any degree of success = arrogance.
Anonymous said…
Nothing wrong with confidence, intelligence, or success, 1:38. I've made some positive comments about Dusty. But in this article it's the dishonesty that bothers me, and demonstrates his arrogance. If Dusty is intelligent, he is certainly watching what Stephanie does and making his decision based on that.

Obviously, deciding to run for an open seat is not the same as deciding to run against a popular incumbent. For Dusty to claim that it makes no difference to him is disingenuous hubris.

If Dusty will make his decisions without considering the facts, is that who we want in office? As a PUC Commissioner does he make his decisions without considering the facts? If Dusty told you he made his decisions without considering the facts would you believe him? Maybe YOU would, 1:38.
Anonymous said…
No person holding office or thinking about higher office would come foward with the decision now.
Get with reality.
For those who would like to make a name for themselves might just condsider making an intention known.
If it were me, i would not say one way or the other at this point. It doesn't matter what side of the isle you are on.
Anonymous said…
By the way Dusty is a nice guy and i feel safe to say would get much support in SD on both sides of the isle as well as those inbetween.
Anonymous said…
Herseth is in trouble, She is already back peddling on her vote for the troops. it kind of sounds like the "i was for it before i was against it" from a former VP candidate that she didn't want in the state of SD for the 04 election.
Can anybody wonder why. If you are in the know it is no wonder she didn;t though there are sim thought patterns in them.
Anonymous said…
2:36 hahahahahahahahahahaha!! She's so not in trouble. Anyone who thinks she is is just out of touch with reality.

Check out the Iraq war stats on cleancutkid if you want to see who's in trouble. Or if you prefer a Republican opinion, check out Joel Rosenthal's blog to see who's in trouble.

As a matter of fact, you're the reason the elephant's in trouble. Blind support for the President and refusal to acknowledge the obvious. Iraq is the new Vietnam.
Anonymous said…
Lord I hope not 2:47. Dems got us into Vietnam and then made us pull out causing the "Killing Fields" in Cambodia. I weep for the Iraqi people if Iraq becomes the next Vietnam and we pull out before knocking out the bad guys. All it'll prove is that the US can't stomach adversity.
Anonymous said…
Dusty may be cool, but I don't think he can beat Tim or Stephanie.
Anonymous said…
I don't think you can blame Dusty for saying it makes no difference whether Stephanie runs. What is he supposed to say "Yes, I am afraid to run against Stephanie"?
Anonymous said…
I think Dusty would be a terrific candidate and hope he runs for either House or Governor.

My only question is whether or not he can handle the criticism. People will give you a free pass as an up-and-comer running for a down-ticket statewide office in South Dakota. But, try to elevate to one of the big four seats, and (both parties do it) the knives come out.

Dusty really is a good guy who cares about what people think about him and wants everyone to like him. Nice traits, but not necessarily the best for running a tough statewide campaign. Running for the House won't be the same as running for USD class president or the PUC (where, win or loss, nobody gets really "mean" and everyone thinks you're "kinda" cool for running).

If he and his family can handle it, and handle it well, Dusty will win many statewide upper-ticket elections.
Anonymous said…
As Jim Burg might say: "Where's Bob?"
Dusty Johnson said…
There have been some good points made, and I feel a need to clarify a few things.

First, I'm not being disingenuous or dishonest. It seems to me that each potential candidate has to make two big decisions: 1) Do I want to serve in Congress, and 2) Can I win?

Right now, I'm struggling with question #1. That question doesn't have anything to do with any other possible candidates. It really comes down to balancing the "fire in the belly" to make a difference with the personal and professional sacrifices that come with federal office. I am still stuck on question #1, so other political figures aren't in the picture yet.

If you get past question #1, the question #2 is where political reality comes in. To be honest, though, we are a political eternity away from Election Day 2008. I think that any political calculus done right now isn't worth a whole lot. Maybe Herseth-Sandlin runs for the House. Maybe she doesn't. If she doesn't, though, the House race won't be a cakewalk. Maybe Heidepiem gets in. Or Brendan, or Rounds, or Matt Michels. The bottom line is that if I run, I am probably an underdog regardless -- they don't give these things away. As a result, I haven't let myself think too much about other possible candidates, as I just am not smart enough to figure out every scenario.

Second, anon 1:10, you are mistaken. I can guarantee you that Herseth-Sandlin's decision won't affect mine, because my mind will be made up within the week. If I'm going to run, I need to get started. If I'm not, then there is no sense in dwaddling.

Third, I do understand that politics is a full-contact sport. Let's remember, though, that I weigh 145 pounds, I've had glasses since I was six, and I can't hit a curve ball to save my life. Does anyone really think that I haven't been made fun of before? ;-) I am a flawed human being (as we all are), and it's not all bad to have people remind me of that from time-to-time.

Thanks to the folks that have said some nice things on this blog or that have offered advice. I have been meaning to respond, but have been too busy to do so. Thanks -- I appreciate it.

Dusty
Anonymous said…
you're a good man, commissioner johnson.

--lexrex
Anonymous said…
2:47 I do NOT give blind support to ANYBODY! So don't go there!!!!!

Some people may be opposed to the war from the beginning, middle or now, but I for one do NOT want this fight on our turf.
I feel the other side (Iraq) needs to step up more and get it together. They need to engage for their freedoms.
Sorry this might be off topic.
If you don't believe Herseth's back peddle there are numerious sites out there and i believe this one with her many press releases.
On another note:
The last dang thing Congress should do is public acknowledge a pull out day. Gezzzzz what a stupid move and just think we don't know a fourth of what really happens.
Will said…
Dusty,

You are a class act.

That doesn't necessarily mean I'd vote for you, but I do respect you.
Anonymous said…
Dusty, have you ever considered what it might be like to be a Democrat? You certainly know how to make noises like one.
Anonymous said…
Thanks Dusty. That was classy.
Anonymous said…
Where can I send a contribution?

Bruce -
SWITW said…
Dusty,

You have a lot of career in front of you... don't feel like you have to jump in now. You are doing a great job as Commish- not to mention being a dad to an adorable little one and a husband to a strong, smart lady. I would work on your campaign again if you ran, and like we used to say in junior high, "We'll always vote for Dusty." Just take your time and wait for the best opportunity. If this is it...We're behind you and if not, we trust your judgment- hey, that's why we voted for you the first time!
Anonymous said…
Dusty loses big to Tim or Stephanie.

Popular posts from this blog

That didn't take long

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