South Dakotans are idiots, and I’m their fearless leader
Funny, the same people have elected him twice and his one-party rule with a majority of legislators;
Daugaard said voters were sold on the idea that the law would prevent corruption in government, but didn’t realize the extent of the proposed reform. He said he didn’t believe that voters truly supported IM 22.
“I do not believe they do. I just refuse to believe it. Not South Dakota,” he said.
Daugaard said he wished he’d been more vocal in campaigning against the measure earlier this year. He said he’d focused his attention on a proposed constitutional amendment aimed at creating a non-partisan primary.
“Shame on me,” Daugaard said. “I just didn’t think it could pass. I didn’t think voters would support public funds for campaigns.”
Legislative leaders have said they plan to evaluate the law during the 2017 legislative session barring earlier court intervention.
So we are a bunch of dummies when we want relief from corruption, corruption under the Governor’s watch (EB-5, Gear Up, Dilges termination) but good South Dakotans when we elect these clowns. What a moron.
Yeah, here is the first time he thought we were idiots back in ’12:
http://www.keloland.com/news/article/politics/daugaard-reacts-to-defeated-ballot-issues
He must have thought we were idiots this past year, too, when he had the audacity to advocate an expansion of Medicaid, while at the same time he was telling us to vote for Thune and Noem who have voted umpteen times to repeal the Affordable Care Act without any replacement….
Oh by the way, thanks KELO, your internal search engine is finally working! I found the aforementioned news story in no time, this time…..Thank you!! (Finally!?!) 🙂
There are some topics where politicians should step out from party lines. This is one. There’s a Tea Party the governor should attend. Try the Grey Tea with a Crumpet.
My understanding is that this particular law has parts of it that may be unconstitutional on both the state and federal levels. If that is the case, then the law will not be able to be implemented. I happen to agree with the Governor that it is a bad law on many levels. This is one of those examples of where an IM should address one thing and one thing only. BTW, the Governor is not an idiot and it does little for you to use such terms.
Voters aren’t very detail oriented, and often happily support ideas that are entirely conflicting because they don’t even realize they’re conflicting. Most are happy to support new spending, so long as someone else is paying for it.
It’s poor form though for politicians to immediately try to gut something that voters passed. I know they tried it a few years ago with youth minimum wage as well. They’d be better served to make it work within the budget, cut something to fund it, and then go to the public and say “look, this is what your new program costs, this is what we had to cut to fund it, and if you don’t like that, you need to tell us how you want us to raise more money.”