To be honest with you, I feel bad for Dimitrios Gliarmis, if Dobberpuhl wasn’t in the race, I would have supported him. A very progressive candidate. Gliarmis decided NOT to raise or spend any money, which is fine, he also got the least number of votes. But in reality, he is the real winner because he paid $0 per vote.

But what I found ODD was the SDDP’s email endorsement of Gliarmis ONE day before the election;

First off, the Dems have supported INDEPENDENT Dobberpuhl in the past, and like I said, party shouldn’t matter anyway because this was a non-partisan race, until Mickelson brought in the dark money of the SD GOP.

Even with the Dem’s endorsement of Gliarmis, it still seems Dobberpuhl picked up their votes.

But this post isn’t about Gliarmis OR Dobberpuhl, it is about how pathetic the SDDP is in their endorsement of Gliarmis. They are constantly getting on their high horse about running candidates for the smaller races like school board, city council, etc., so now that they had a candidate in Gliarmis, they don’t do any fundraising for him, NO phone banks, no volunteers, no support whatsoever except for an email endorsement a day before the election. That’s some pretty badass strategy.

If the SDDP is serious about running candidates in ALL the races, they need to support these candidates. If I was Gliarmis, I would have kindly asked them NOT to send out the email, he probably would have garnered MORE votes.

By l3wis

One thought on “What’s a SD Democratic Party endorsement worth? About 108 votes.”
  1. This endorsement was either a naive attempt to endorse someone merely because they are a registered Democrat, or it could have been an attempt to blunt Dobberpuhl’s momentum.

    My guess is, that there were those within the elite of the Democratic Party, and especially those with a background in education, that were quietly supporting Mickelson; and thus, encouraging the SDDP endorsement of Gliarmis as an attempted to stop Dobberpuhl.

    Elite Democrats tend to be very pro business and would be less sympathetic to the criticism of the pro work force development rhetoric.

    These elite Democrats, and there again especially those with a background in education, tend to have a “we know best” attitude when it comes to the Board. They see the school board, in my opinion, as their turf, their expertise, and everyone else just needs to go a way or get in step.

    This local division within the Democratic Party on education, is also a division between those who are really concerned about creating well rounded students versus those who have more of a pro-business attitude, when it comes to K thru 12, and is analogous to the debate within the national Democratic Party on free trade. Where some Democrats have had a macro attitude towards jobs and trade, while other Democrats have had a micro attitude towards jobs and trade, with the former being pro-business and the latter being pro-worker with an interest in the empowerment of the individual.

    And when you talk about the empowering of the individual over the macro interests of the business community you are speaking to the heart of the debate between the WFD crowd in this town, when it comes to K-12 education, and those who are more concerned about the individual and developing well rounded students. And that, in my estimation or logical guess, was at the heart of the SDDP endorsement of Gliarmis. It was merely a clever attempt to stop the election of Dobberpuhl and promote a pro-business agenda with our local Board at the expense of the individual student and the empowerment which comes from a pro well rounded student mentality.

Comments are closed.