Herseth

Dave Kranz has a column today which mentions the friction between the Daschle and Herseth camps.  Yes, as DVT reported back in June (but which the MSM didn't want to discuss), Herseth's victory in the June House special election hurt Daschle.  I guess it's conventional wisdom now.  Here's a post from June 10th reviewing Herseth's recent victory and noting how it hurt Daschle:

The Verdict: Herseth Victory Hurts Daschle

I've finally reviewed the stack of articles on my desk about the House special election. Here are my thoughts (most of the information cited below was previously reported on the blog, but in scattered bits).

On June 1st, by fewer than 3,000 votes, Stephanie Herseth was elected to serve-out the term of former Congressman Bill Janklow, defeating Elkton farmer and state senator Larry Diedrich. While the historian’s natural predilection is to examine the issues dividing the candidates and divine whose stands were most popular, such an effort would be frustrating. Dave Kranz of the Argus Leader reported that “[t]hose who listen to Herseth and Diedrich side by side often say there isn’t much difference between them.” 5/16/04 When the Argus endorsed Herseth, the editors also said “there’s hardly a whiff of difference between them on the key issues they would face in Washington, D.C.” 5/23/04 When the Aberdeen American News endorsed Herseth, the editors similarly concluded “there’s not much difference between the candidates.” That’s because Herseth co-opted much of the Republican agenda. As Kranz reported, “Herseth sought to discard the liberal label, saying she was going to be an independent voice for her constituents. She demonstrated that with her support of President Bush for his handling of the war and for a constitutional amendment on marriage.” 6/2/04 Herseth also supported renewal of Patriot Act and touted her A-rating from the NRA. Diedrich told the New York Times: “She has done a very good job of running as a Republican.” With regard to the Presidential candidacy of John Kerry, Herseth practiced what Kranz called the “politics of avoidance.” Asked about Kerry coming to campaign for her, she laughed at the idea: “I just don’t see there would be any interest from my campaign or the national party.” When asked about her political role models, she conspicuously shunned Daschle and mentioned Senator Tim Johnson, who is perceived to be the more conservative Democrat of the two. She constantly said she would be a bipartisan “independent voice” in Washington and join the Blue Dog Democrats in the House.

With few issues to debate, many voters focused on personality, which served Herseth well given her sunny demeanor and her 30-point lead in the polls. Stuart Rothenberg reported that “Herseth has been trying to make the special election a popularity contest.” Roll Call, May 10, 2004. Long-time KELO-Land television anchor Steve Hemmingsen noted the problem of a popularity contest for Diedrich, who was a political “nobody except to legislators and soybean farmers” when the race started. He also noted Herseth’s “Mary Tyler Moore Show innocent spunkiness” and took to calling her “Princess Stephanie” (in the 1950s, the Democrats used to call Karl Mundt, the long-time GOP Senator from South Dakota, “King Karl,” so the royalty moniker is time-worn). The New York Times reported that Herseth had “a star quality about her.” 5/20/04 Some reporters also said that Herseth’s image benefited from the resignation of her 2002 opponent, former Governor Bill Janklow, who was convicted of manslaughter in December after a traffic accident. The final release of a list of some rather strange pardons made by Janklow also became public in the final days of the campaign, which some thought aided Herseth and overshadowed her opponent.

In a campaign about personality, it’s important to be nice, a factor which Herseth promoted. The Argus picked up on the strategy and ran stories under headlines like “Some opt for gentle politics” and “’Nice’ image appeals to many S.D. voters.” 4/29/04 In her TV ads, Herseth said “I’m not going to tear my opponent down.” Charlie Cook said Herseth “tried to set a trap for Diedrich with ads that call[ed] for a positive campaign.” National Journal, May 4, 2004. After a minor spat over the issue of whether tax cuts should be made permanent, Herseth ran an ad saying she was “committed to a truthful campaign. It’s clear that Larry Diedrich is not.” Herseth was responding to a Diedrich contrast ad deemed “downright wimpy” by Stuart Rothenberg which said “on tax cuts, I think they should be made permanent. Stephanie does not.” Rothenberg concluded that “Herseth responded as if Diedrich just accused her of strangling kittens. She badly overreacted, making herself the one guilty of directing a ‘negative attack.’” He added that “Herseth is like the little boy who cries ‘wolf’ when no threatening animal is in sight….Herseth’s response is a classic effort at inoculation. She is trying to make it impossible for Diedrich to identify differences with her, even if they exist.” Roll Call, 5/10/04 While she was attempting to promote her nice image as a clean campaigner, the episode seemed to backfire when her ad seemed snippy and she quickly took down the ad.

There were some other bumps in the road for Herseth. She ran as pro-choice and was supported by Emily’s List, but it was unclear many voters knew what Emily’s List was. She even played down Emily’s List’s interest in the pro-choice issue. Herseth’s support for the President’s gay marriage amendment also caused some blowback in the Democratic ranks. A prominent Rapid City couple cancelled a fundraiser for her and Daschle’s campaign manager demanded his campaign contribution back from the Herseth campaign. Also, on the Sunday before the final week of the campaign, Senator Johnson, who Herseth listed as one of her role models, made a strident remark about the “Taliban wing of the Republican party” which caused a national uproar and certainly didn’t help her clean campaign/non-partisan image. With the exception of the Taliban remark, which caused a few days of newspaper stories, these flaps hardly received any attention.

Despite Herseth’s astute co-optation of Republican issues and her winning personality, Diedrich did close the 30-point gap and only lost 51%-49%. As the Associated Press reported, the final tally was “much closer than expected.” Herseth joked that “[c]ompared to 524 votes, over 2,000 is a landslide here in South Dakota,” but she was clearly hoping for stronger numbers. Another long-term concern for Herseth was that key Republican counties didn’t turn-out as they could have. In western Pennington County, the state’s second largest county which Diedrich won with 59% of the vote, only 53% of voters voted. In eastern Minnehaha County, the state’s largest county which Herseth won, 59% of voters turned out. Other western Republican counties also had low turn-out: Butte, 50%; Meade, 52%; Lawrence, 46%. If a better-known Diedrich runs in the fall after Herseth has had to make some tough votes in the partisan House and if more Republicans turn-out, Herseth could be in trouble.

The House special election also had implications for Daschle. Hemmingsen wondered if it would hurt Democratic candidates like Daschle in the fall when “inherently GOP South Dakota will be fence row-to-fence row with Democrats in Washington.” It would be the first time since a month in late 1936/early 1937 that the South Dakota delegation was completely Democratic. An Argus Leader poll also indicated that 25% of voters would be “less likely” to vote for Daschle if Herseth won in June. Nationally, Al Hunt, Bob Novak, Larry Sabato, John Fund, Rush Limbaugh, many bloggers, The Hill, Roll Call, and The New York Times, which ran the headline “Could Herseth’s victory in South Dakota hurt Daschle?”, speculated that Herseth’s win would hurt Daschle. In response to a question about whether the all-eggs-in-one-basket argument would hurt Daschle, even South Dakota Democratic National Committeewoman Sharon Stroschein said “I’m sure it would work to some degree.” Sabato said it the most clearly: “I also say that if Herseth wins, it's actually bad news for Daschle. South Dakotans don't want to be represented by three Democrats in DC. One is going to have to go.”

More fundamentally, the Herseth win caused Daschle problems because of campaign strategy—she ran as a non-partisan conservative Democrat, which no longer fits the Daschle profile. As one UK blogger noted, the race was more like a Republican primary than a general election. She used the Daschle model from 1978, but Daschle, despite his attempts to revive it by saying he is still an “independent voice,” only looks desperate. As the partisan leader of the opposition party, Daschle is as far from being an "independent voice" as one can be. Unlike Herseth’s A rating from the NRA, Daschle was severely criticized by the NRA during the winter of 2004. Unlike Herseth, Daschle opposed the federal marriage amendment and has been outspoken in his criticism of the war (except when in South Dakota, where he praises the war effort). Herseth’s clean campaign strategy, which was designed to prevent any contrast ads and which the Daschle campaign was planning to use, also seemed to fall flat and was subject to much ridicule. In short, Herseth's win hurts Daschle's re-election chances, which is why Democrats in Washington are positioning themselves to replace him as leader, as The Hill is reporting.