Now, that's a weak excuse.
In today's Argus Leader, Dave Kranz relates the weakest justification I think I've heard yet from the D's on leaving the Gubernatorial race uncontested:
Okay, the only problem with this argument is that someone was using recreational drugs when they came up with it. #1, Governors have never, ever, had difficulty in finding people willing to donate to their causes. And it isn't going to happen anytime soon.
And #2, Sorry, but the Gov. would be able to point to another huge victory as evidence of his popularity. Unpopular governors have strong opponents. Popular ones have weak opponents. And in SD, really popular Governors apparently have no opponents.
Like it or not, it's safe to consider 100% as a mandate.
Post-Volesky strategyRead all of this lame strategy here.
It didn’t take some Democrats in the state Capitol long to come up with a strategy for their party after Ron Volesky withdrew from the governor’s race.
Even though it is virtually unprecedented to leave a candidate uncontested, they say it would be Rounds’ worst nightmare to have no one run against him. They offer that he would not be able to get people to contribute to his war chest. He would not be able to point to another huge victory as evidence of his popularity. There would be no victory speeches. The governor simply would declare victory early and go back to governing for another four years.
Okay, the only problem with this argument is that someone was using recreational drugs when they came up with it. #1, Governors have never, ever, had difficulty in finding people willing to donate to their causes. And it isn't going to happen anytime soon.
And #2, Sorry, but the Gov. would be able to point to another huge victory as evidence of his popularity. Unpopular governors have strong opponents. Popular ones have weak opponents. And in SD, really popular Governors apparently have no opponents.
Like it or not, it's safe to consider 100% as a mandate.
Comments
Let's face it. Rounds is very popular. Probably almost as popular as Representative Herseth.
Any way you look at it, 2006 is shaping up to be a boring year at the top of the ballot.
If the democrats pick a moderate who is willing to expose the problem areas of this administration, this could easily be a horse race.
The governor has not endeared himself to his base. The base is not excited and certainly will not be if thid administration is exposed. Democrats may be enthused by Stephanie and national democratic themes--they could be hungry!
Don't count the democrats out. They just have to be smart about recruitment and campaigning to make this a contest.
I think Chad has it right on this one - boring election year on the ballot toppers...