Joel Rosenthal got me thinking. In his most recent blog post, Rosenthal mentions the Kristi Noem strategy of pointing out how often Stephanie Herseth Sandlin votes with Nancy Pelosi. Rosenthal wonders how many of those votes are really significant votes and not just procedural votes that even John Boehner would be voting for.
The Stephanie=Nancy meme is oversimplification for the inattentive voter. Instead of taking time to explain how specific policies supported by our Congresswoman doom the Republic, the Noem machine personifies the issue: Pelosi's evil, Herseth Sandlin votes like Pelosi, so Herseth Sandlin's evil!
Right. Pelosi likes chocolate ice cream, too. But that doesn't mean chocolate ice cream is coming to take our guns.
I don't plan to do a full analysis of every vote Nancy Pelosi and Stephanie Herseth Sandlin have agreed on. You can peruse a list of such votes since 2007 yourself at OpenCongress.org. But to give you an idea of the silliness behind the Noem strategy, here's a sample of some actual votes and how SHS compares with Pelosi and Boehner:
Feel free to peruse that list and other votes. Identify exactly what about the legislation SHS voted for is so bad for South Dakota and the country. If you can do that, great. That's the kind of hard work a politician who wants to go to Washington needs to do: explain to the voters what's actually happening in Washington and how policies actually affect our lives. The personality politics of the Noem campaign are the lazy way out. They insult the intelligence of the voters and reflect poorly on the intelligence of the candidate.
A semantic case for Trump's illegitimacy - legitimateadjective |ləˈjidəmət| conforming to the law or to rules: his claims to legitimate authority.• able to be defended with logic or justification: a...
1 day ago