For Democrats, the Race That Got Away

Thanks to Tom Daschle and a vocal liberal base, Democrats weren’t able to put red state South Dakota’s Senate seat in play.

National Journal
June 2, 2014, 4:01 p.m.

If Demo­crats fall a seat short of hold­ing the Sen­ate, there will be a lot of second-guess­ing on the one race that nev­er ma­ter­i­al­ized but should have held a lot more prom­ise: South Dakota.

The state is hold­ing its primar­ies Tues­day, and they’re an af­ter­thought. Former Gov. Mike Rounds is the Re­pub­lic­an now on a glide path to the Sen­ate, fa­cing weak op­pos­i­tion in the GOP primary. In the gen­er­al elec­tion, he’ll face Rick Wei­l­and, a former state dir­ect­or for Tom Daschle who (even the most op­tim­ist­ic Demo­crats will ac­know­ledge) faces near-im­possible odds in the solidly red state.

But it didn’t have to be that way. The Sen­ate race to suc­ceed re­tir­ing Demo­crat­ic Sen. Tim John­son could have been one of the most con­sequen­tial con­tests in the coun­try, if Demo­crats had a little more luck. Just over a year ago, the polit­ic­al talk in South Dakota centered on which of their up-and-com­ing pro­spects would run — former Rep. Stephanie Her­seth Sand­lin, one of the most pop­u­lar fig­ures in the state after rep­res­ent­ing it for three full terms in the House, or Tim John­son’s son Brendan John­son, who’s serving as a U.S. at­tor­ney. Des­pite the state’s Re­pub­lic­an moor­ings, now-Sen. Heidi Heitkamp’s sur­pris­ing 2012 vic­tory in neigh­bor­ing North Dakota served as a fresh re­mind­er that strong can­did­ates run­ning in con­ser­vat­ive-minded states can over­come dis­ad­vant­ages.

As Sen­ate Ma­jor­ity Lead­er Harry Re­id and the Demo­crat­ic Sen­at­ori­al Cam­paign Com­mit­tee tried to en­gin­eer the situ­ation to their ad­vant­age — they pre­ferred Her­seth Sand­lin to the more-lib­er­al John­son, and wanted to avoid a con­ten­tious primary — the party’s worst-case scen­ario ma­ter­i­al­ized. John­son first ex­pressed his dis­in­terest in May 2013, leav­ing the door wide open for the former con­gress­wo­man to run. At the same time John­son made his de­cision, Wei­l­and an­nounced his can­did­acy with sup­port from some John­son al­lies. Less than a week later, Her­seth Sand­lin sur­prised sup­port­ers by passing on a bid, even without John­son in the race. She an­nounced the de­sire to spend more time with her fam­ily as the reas­on for step­ping aside, but sev­er­al Demo­crat­ic op­er­at­ives fa­mil­i­ar with her de­cision said she didn’t want to face any primary op­pos­i­tion, even against a longer-shot can­did­ate like Wei­l­and.

“I had sev­er­al con­ver­sa­tions with her, she soun­ded like a can­did­ate. She was on the cusp of run­ning,” said former South Dakota state party Chair­man Ben Nes­sel­huf, who de­camped the state after the dus­tup to man­age an Iowa con­gres­sion­al cam­paign.

Against Wei­l­and, Her­seth Sand­lin would have been a clear fa­vor­ite to win the nom­in­a­tion. But against the more-lib­er­al chal­lenger, she would have been forced to de­fend her vote against the pres­id­ent’s health care law, an is­sue she trum­peted in her un­suc­cess­ful 2010 reelec­tion. In a state where Demo­crats have little mar­gin for er­ror, be­ing pushed to the left in a primary would have been costly in a gen­er­al elec­tion.

In­deed, for all the at­ten­tion the GOP’s es­tab­lish­ment-tea party di­vide re­ceives, this is a race where Demo­crat­ic di­vi­sions between the party’s pro­gress­ive and cent­rist wings cost them an op­por­tun­ity to com­pete. To the ir­rit­a­tion of Re­id and oth­er cam­paign of­fi­cials in Wash­ing­ton, Daschle en­cour­aged Wei­l­and to run, even though his former staffer’s un­abashedly lib­er­al views make it dif­fi­cult to win in con­ser­vat­ive South Dakota. Re­id even went so far as to pro­claim Wei­l­and wasn’t “his choice” in the race, dis­miss­ing his can­did­acy. But in echoes of the tea party-es­tab­lish­ment battles roil­ing the Re­pub­lic­an Party, to the small uni­verse of Demo­crat­ic act­iv­ists with­in the state, Wei­l­and’s pro­gress­ive prin­ciples trumped Her­seth Sand­lin’s more-elect­able pro­file.

“Stephanie’s still try­ing to lick some wounds with the party faith­ful that were dis­ap­poin­ted in her health care vote, and can’t get over that. There was a motive there to shut her out, from even en­ter­tain­ing the op­tion from run­ning,” said state Sen­ate Minor­ity Lead­er Jason Frerichs, an ally of Her­seth Sand­lin. “Her de­cision not to run sur­prised so many of us, we’re kick­ing ourselves for not push­ing harder on her to run.”

For a time last year, the pro­spect of a messy primary fight on the Re­pub­lic­an side seemed more likely. Rounds entered the race in early 2013 to much fan­fare, but struggled to raise money and faced grumbling from out­side con­ser­vat­ive groups over his spend­ing re­cord and in­clin­a­tion to­ward deal-mak­ing as gov­ernor. One of the GOP’s rising stars, Rep. Kristi Noem, who un­seated Her­seth Sand­lin in 2010, was ser­i­ously con­sid­er­ing en­ter­ing the race, hop­ing to cap­it­al­ize on the con­ser­vat­ive dis­con­tent. But to out­side con­ser­vat­ive groups, her re­cord was as un­ten­able as Rounds’s, with her sup­port of the farm bill and near-the-bot­tom vote rat­ings among House Re­pub­lic­ans from the an­ti­tax Club for Growth. After meet­ing with GOP lead­ers, in­clud­ing Sen. John Thune, she passed on a bid last June. “She real­ized that she could jeop­ard­ize what would be a slam-dunk Re­pub­lic­an op­por­tun­ity,” said one Re­pub­lic­an of­fi­cial with ties to South Dakota.

In­stead, the primary op­pos­i­tion to Rounds back home has been splintered among four Re­pub­lic­an can­did­ates, none of whom have the re­sources to mount a cred­ible cam­paign. (State Rep. Stace Nel­son is ex­pec­ted to be his closest com­pet­it­or.) One of his chal­lengers, phys­i­cian An­nette Bos­worth, drew ri­dicule for hold­ing a press con­fer­ence to de­cry hate­ful rhet­or­ic dir­ec­ted at her cam­paign, where she stood in front of a graf­fiti-scrawled back­drop of epi­thets. Rounds may struggle to re­ceive 55 per­cent of the GOP vote — a mid­dling total for a well-known former gov­ernor, but enough to coast to vic­tory.

An­oth­er reas­on Demo­crats may re­gret not field­ing a stronger can­did­ate: the pres­ence of former Re­pub­lic­an Sen. Larry Pressler on the Novem­ber bal­lot as an in­de­pend­ent. If Her­seth Sand­lin ran, Pressler could have played a sig­ni­fic­ant role in a com­pet­it­ive race, but he’s now a quirky af­ter­thought. Out of polit­ics for over a dec­ade, Pressler was nev­er a threat to win, but he could have peeled away enough Re­pub­lic­an votes from Rounds to make the gen­er­al elec­tion highly com­pet­it­ive.

For her part, Her­seth Sand­lin may have missed her best op­por­tun­ity to com­pete for a polit­ic­al comeback in South Dakota. Un­like oth­er los­ing mem­bers of Con­gress who re­gister as lob­by­ists, Her­seth Sand­lin only spent one year work­ing in Wash­ing­ton (as part­ner at the law firm OFW) be­fore mov­ing back to South Dakota to serve as gen­er­al coun­sel for Raven In­dus­tries. It was a clear sign she wanted to run for of­fice again in her home state. But after passing on the Sen­ate race, it’s hard to find many fu­ture op­por­tun­it­ies.

Thune is a near lock for reelec­tion in 2016, Rounds will have one term of ser­vice un­der his belt, and the gov­ernor’s race won’t be on the bal­lot again un­til 2018. Frerichs said she re­ceived a stand­ing ova­tion at the state party’s April McGov­ern Day fun­drais­ing din­ner — an ac­know­ledg­ment that the state’s pro­gress­ive base is over its an­ti­pathy to­ward her can­did­acy, even though it’s far too late to change the tra­ject­ory of the Sen­ate race.

“Des­pite be­ing a Demo­crat, she’s well-liked in the state. She’s still got really strong num­bers. That would have been a le­git­im­ate battle with Rounds,” said the Re­pub­lic­an strategist with ties to South Dakota. “She still would still have the same up­hill sled­ding in a tough en­vir­on­ment, but she would have made Rounds really work for the seat.”

What We're Following See More »
Trump Inauguration Spending Now Under Investigation
3 hours ago

"Federal prosecutors in Manhattan are investigating whether President Trump’s 2017 inaugural committee misspent some of the record $107 million it raised from donations, people familiar with the matter said. The criminal probe by the Manhattan U.S. attorney’s office, which is in its early stages, also is examining whether some of the committee’s top donors gave money in exchange for access to the incoming Trump administration, policy concessions or to influence official administration positions."

Federal Judges Nix Proposed Atlantic Pipeline
4 hours ago

In a rare rebuke to energy companies in the Trump era, "a panel of federal judges has rejected permits for the Atlantic Coast natural gas pipeline to cross two national forests and the Appalachian trail in Virginia, finding that the national Forest Service 'abdicated its responsibility' and kowtowed to private industry in approving the project. The harshly worded, 60-page decision issued Thursday by three judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit is part of a string of legal setbacks for the 600-mile pipeline. The $7 billion project, being built by a consortium of companies led by Dominion Energy, is planned to carry natural gas from West Virginia, through Virginia and into North Carolina."

Senate Moves to End Support for Saudi War
5 hours ago
Federal Judge Upholds Ranked-Choice Voting in Maine
7 hours ago

"A federal judge on Thursday rejected Republican U.S. Rep. Bruce Poliquin’s constitutional claims against ranked-choice voting and denied the incumbent’s request for a new election against Democratic Congressman-elect Jared Golden. U.S. District Court Judge Lance Walker ruled that, contrary to the arguments of Poliquin’s legal team, the U.S. Constitution does not require that whichever congressional candidates receives the most votes—or 'a plurality'—be declared the winner. Instead, Walker ruled the Constitution grants states broad discretion to run elections."

Mueller Probing Middle East Countries' Influence Campaigns
7 hours ago

Officials working under Special Counsel Robert Mueller are investigating Middle Eastern countries' attempts to influence American politics, and are set to release the findings in early 2019. "Various witnesses affiliated with the Trump campaign have been questioned about their conversations with deeply connected individuals from the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, and Israel ... Topics in those meetings ranged from the use of social-media manipulation to help install Trump in the White House to the overthrow of the regime in Iran." Investigators are also probing meetings organized by Lebanese-American businessman George Nader, and Joel Zamel, "a self-styled Mark Zuckerberg of the national-security world with deep ties to Israeli intelligence."


Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.