VP KAMALA HARRIS CONCEDES HER PRESIDENTIAL BID TO PRESIDENT-ELECT DONALD TRUMP

WASHINGTON, D.C. (AP / South Dakota Searchlight) – Vice President Kamala Harris Wednesday afternoon called Donald Trump to concede the 2024 presidential race, according to a senior Harris aide.

During the call, the Democratic presidential nominee “discussed the importance of a peaceful transfer of power and being a president for all Americans,” the senior aide said.

Harris delivered a concession speech to her supporters at Howard University in Washington, D.C later in the day.

The college was also the site of her election watch party on Tuesday night, which quickly turned somber after her path to the White House narrowed when the southern battleground states of North Carolina and Georgia swung to Trump.

Harris, who was originally expected to attend her own election night party, never arrived on campus, disappointing supporters and Howard alums.

Trump was declared the presidential winner early Wednesday, according to projections by The Associated Press. Harris is expected to deliver her speech on the Yard, a field within Howard University.

The presidential race isn’t the only loss for Democrats. They lost control of  the U.S. Senate and Republicans are favored to take the House, potentially giving the GOP a trifecta in Washington.

The election saw a deep gender divide, with exit poll surveys showing women tended to favor Harris over Trump.

It’s the second time a woman has led as the presidential candidate for a major party and it’s the second time a woman has lost to Trump. He defeated Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton in 2016.

The election came two years after the constitutional right to an abortion was stripped away by the U.S. Supreme Court. The incoming 47th president cemented its conservative majority by hand-picking three justices.

Harris, whose bid only began in July after President Joe Biden suspended his reelection campaign, had a little over 100 days to pick a running mate, release policy plans to appeal to voters and hit the seven battleground states.

Additionally, there was deep dissatisfaction within her party for the current administration’s handling of the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza.

Michigan, which has a high Arab American population and is a state that Biden won in 2020, voted for Trump, according to projections by The Associated Press.

It was Harris’ second time running for the White House, after her first run quickly fizzled in 2019 before Biden picked her as his running mate.

With Biden out of the race following a disastrous June debate that rattled his party’s belief he could win a rematch against Trump, the coronation of Harris as the party heir breathed new hope into Democrats along with a flood of cash. They raised more than $1 billion, according to the campaign.

Despite the funding and new enthusiasm among Democrats, the swing states of Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin ultimately went to Trump, giving him a clear path to the White House with 292 Electoral College votes out of 270 needed to win the White House, to her 224 votes, according to The Associated Press.

 

FRUSTRATION MOUNTS OVER THE WAIT FOR ELECTION RESULTS FROM MINNEHAHA COUNTY

SIOUX FALLS, S.D. (Joshua Haiar / South Dakota Searchlight) – Statewide scrutiny fell on the shoulders of a controversial Minnehaha County official Tuesday night and Wednesday as her office failed to timely report the county’s election results.

The office of Auditor Leah Anderson still had not completely reported the county’s results as of mid-afternoon Wednesday, although results were trickling out at that time. That held up definitive results in some races, including legislative races, many of which are clustered around Sioux Falls, the county seat and the state’s most-populated city.

Anderson, a Republican, has been a lightning rod for criticism since taking office in 2022 after questioning the integrity of the 2020 election. Wednesday, she blamed the delay on the number of voters, limited staffing and the timing of absentee voting.

“It’s the sheer volume of ballots, and a lot of absentee ballots,” Anderson said. “We had a good amount of staff, but additional staff would be great.”

Election officials statewide knew Tuesday’s turnout would be high. Secretary of State Monae Johnson predicted turnout around 75%, which would be the state’s highest general election turnout in 20 years. The actual turnout figure remained unknown early Wednesday afternoon due to Minnehaha County’s incomplete results.

Republican Minnehaha County Commissioner Joe Kippley said he looks forward to Friday’s canvassing review to verify vote totals. He expressed concerns about the delay and Anderson’s role in it.

“She didn’t request staff. She didn’t request any of the stuff she evidently needed,” Kippley said. “She said she had a plan. It’s hard to believe this is ‘according to plan.’”

State Rep. Tony Venhuizen, a Republican who represents a Sioux Falls district, said frustration with Anderson is growing.

“I don’t know what exactly is going on down there, but I’m hearing from legislators of every stripe who are very concerned that it’s taking longer to count the votes in Minnehaha than it did in the entire state of Florida,” Venhuizen said. “I think there would be great interest in a legislative fix if that’s necessary. Trust in our election system relies on quick, reliable results.”

Anderson offered numerous explanations when asked to explain the delay in vote-counting.

According to Anderson, nearly 30,000 early or absentee ballots were submitted in Minnehaha County, with voters continuing to cast those ballots through Monday. Processing absentee ballots involves several time-intensive steps, she said, including verifying voter information, opening envelopes and preparing ballots for scanning.

However, Bob Litz, Minnehaha County’s retired former auditor, said 30,000 absentee ballots do not necessarily take that long to process.

“I had 42,000 absentee ballots in 2020,” he said. “Yeah, sure, it takes time. But we were done the morning after the election by about 9 or 10 in the morning. I wasn’t as far behind as she is, that’s for sure.”

Litz said he also had three ballot tabulator machines compared to Anderson’s four, which “would make a huge difference.” Litz said he also shut down for a period overnight while the ballots were guarded.

“When people are up all night, that’s where mistakes happen,” Litz said.

Anderson said some members of her team worked all night.

“My core team has not come home. They have barely gotten off their feet,” Anderson said Wednesday morning. “We’re working as hard as we can.”

Anderson said after early and absentee voting ended Monday night, the team had to reorganize the space for vote counting, a process that wasn’t complete until about 10 p.m. Monday.

“We need to not have absentee voting on the Monday before the election,” Anderson said. “It needs to end on the Friday before or something.”

Her core team came to the office at 6 a.m. Tuesday, she said, responding to calls from voters, precinct workers and county staff. At 8 a.m., absentee superintendents — election officials overseeing absentee ballot processing — began organizing ballots, which started around 9 a.m., when about 50 additional workers arrived to help prepare the ballots for scanning.

Anderson said the county only reports results to the secretary of state — which reports them to the public — when “about five” precincts have been fully counted. That process pushed initial reporting well into late Tuesday night.

Litz said Anderson’s reporting protocol is a preference, not a rule or standard.

“She could be reporting partial precincts to the Secretary of State’s Office if she wanted,” he said. “That’s what we did.”

Court documents reveal that Anderson’s count was also affected by other problems.

At 10:25 a.m. on Wednesday, Anderson filed an affidavit in pursuit of a court order. In it, she said that while counting ballots for Precinct 4-6, a tabulation machine jammed. After clearing the jam and restarting the machine, the ballots were returned to a sealed ballot box as required by law, according to Anderson.

Upon reviewing the count, Anderson and her staff found a discrepancy: The machine’s tally showed 21 fewer votes than there should have been. They determined that some ballots affected by the jam were not counted.

Because the number of counted ballots did not match the total number of ballots cast, her team did not complete the tabulation or transmit the results to the South Dakota secretary of state. She pointed to a law stating ballots that cannot be accurately counted by the tabulation equipment should be referred to the Minnehaha County Resolution Board for review. And since the ballot box for Precinct 4-6 had been sealed, she was unable to unseal it without a court order, she said in the court documents. That order was issued Wednesday morning.

The 2024 election is Anderson’s first time overseeing a presidential contest since her election as county auditor in 2022. She has drawn controversy for questioning the integrity of the 2020 election, calling Minnehaha County’s election system untrustworthy, and publicly engaging with groups such as South Dakota Canvassing, which have promoted some unsubstantiated claims of election fraud and interference.

In the June primary election, activist Jessica Pollema challenged 132 ballots from one Minnehaha precinct, claiming they were fraudulent due to the use of P.O. box addresses. The South Dakota Supreme Court ultimately ruled against her, siding with the county and state officials. Pollema was assisting with the Minnehaha County vote count on Wednesday morning.

Additionally, Anderson recently amended county rules to allow voters to wear election-related apparel at polling places, a change that some viewed as undermining election decorum.

 

ABORTION REFORM DISCUSSION CONTINUES EVEN IN THE AFTERMATH OF TUESDAY’S ELECTION RESULTS

SOUTH DAKOTA (Makenzie Huber / South Dakota Searchlight) – If anything could be predicted in Tuesday’s election, it was that Amendment G’s fate would not be the end of abortion discussions in South Dakota.

The measure, written to mirror Roe v. Wade’s trimester approach to abortion regulation, failed with a 59% vote against it, based on unofficial results from the Secretary of State’s Office.

When the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the national right to an abortion in 2022, a trigger ban adopted by the South Dakota Legislature in 2005 immediately took effect. The ban has one exception for abortions necessary to “preserve the life of the pregnant female.”

Abortion rights were on the ballot in 10 states Tuesday. South Dakota was one of three states, including Florida and Nebraska, where the measures failed.

But proponents of Amendment G rallied Wednesday with a challenge for anti-abortion advocates and politicians: Keep your promise.

In some advertisements leading up to the election, anti-abortion groups said South Dakota’s laws may need to be changed — a possible reference to the lack of exceptions for the mother’s health and for instances of rape and incest — but emphasized Amendment G was “too extreme.”

Dakotans for Health Chair Rick Weiland issued a statement to fellow abortion-rights activists Wednesday calling attention to that advertising.

“You have forced these politicians to make a promise they can’t back out of,” Weiland wrote. “… This is no small task, but it’s one they’ve committed to. Now, it’s their responsibility to keep it.”

Kenya Majia of Sioux Falls was one of the South Dakotans who voted against the measure but also found fault in the state’s current law.

“There should be something, but I don’t think this is the right amendment,” Mejia told South Dakota Searchlight outside her polling place Tuesday.

Jon Hansen, co-chair of the anti-abortion Life Defense Fund and a Republican state representative from Dell Rapids, said Tuesday night that such discussions will continue in the months and years to come.

“There’s already lots of people talking about what the law should look like,” Hansen said.

Caroline Woods, spokesperson for the Life Defense Fund, also said she expects discussions to continue.

“The creation of Life Defense Fund was to defeat Amendment G, and that mission was accomplished,” Woods said. “Undoubtedly, conversations will continue to take place to determine what laws are best for children, mothers, and fathers in our state.”

Nancy Turbak Berry, who led a coalition supporting Amendment G, doubts there will be any legislative action — largely because in the two years since the abortion ban was triggered, no state lawmakers have introduced a bill to create exceptions for rape and incest. A bill to create an exception for the “health of the mother” failed in 2023.

“They acknowledged late in the campaign they may need to fix some things with the current law,” Turbak Berry said, “but I don’t put much stock in that because I think they’d say anything to defeat the ballot measure.”

Many new Republican lawmakers are headed to Pierre, having defeated incumbents in the June primary by running as conservatives. The makeup of the incoming legislative body, said Democratic Rep. Erin Healy, of Sioux Falls, will make it challenging to “advocate for women’s health and the care they receive, especially in circumstances when a woman’s health is at risk.”

Healy, who supported the amendment, said its failure raises more concerns about broader health care access, including family planning and maternal health care resources.

Sen. Sydney Davis, R-Burbank, said she doesn’t “anticipate a lot of movement” on abortion changes with the incoming legislative body. Davis supported the 2023 bill to amend the state’s ban to include the “health” of the mother and a 2024 bill mandating the state create an informational video interpreting the state’s abortion law and medical interventions.

“I think South Dakotans agreed resoundingly last night that G is too extreme,” Davis said. “What the state will find as far as consensus on the topic moving forward? I don’t know that I have a good indication.”

Davis hopes to hear more from South Dakotans about their opinions on the proper exceptions and regulations for abortion in the state, she said. She expected such conversations whether Amendment G won or lost.

“If G passed, I think the Legislature would have taken up the opportunity to regulate it in the second and third trimester,” Davis said. “If it failed, there are some opponents of G who recognize, even in the messaging used, that the current law isn’t perfect or where it needs to be either.

“It’s going to take time to strike that balance of what the public is looking for,” Davis continued. “Our government is designed to move slowly and methodically, ensuring voices are heard.”

If the Legislature does not reach some consensus, Davis anticipates the discussion will return to the ballot in two years, given the state’s “strong history of direct democracy.” South Dakotans rejected abortions bans on the ballot in 2006 and 2008.

Weiland vowed another ballot measure will happen if lawmakers don’t repeal the current law.

“Either you end the ban and fix the healthcare crisis your promises created — promises you made with that three-million-dollar campaign on every billboard, phone call and TV ad across the state — or we will be back, and we will do it for you,” he wrote.

Turbak Berry added that she believes Dakotans for Health being outspent on advertising contributed to the amendment’s demise. If abortion comes back to the ballot, it’ll likely be bolder and will have more financial backing from out-of-state, progressive organizations, she said.

The American Civil Liberties Union of South Dakota, which did not publicly or financially back Amendment G, issued a statement Wednesday from Executive Director Libby Skarin. The organization is grateful and inspired by the measures’ supporters, it read, and is disappointed the vote didn’t reflect “the support we know South Dakotans have for abortion rights.”

Planned Parenthood did not support the amendment either, but issued a statement Wednesday saying politicians are not “more qualified” to make medical decisions than a patient and their health care provider.

Both organizations had expressed concerns about the amendment’s wording and what they described as its insufficiently inclusive drafting process.

Skarin added the ACLU will seek “the best path to meaningfully restore” abortion access in the state.

 

POST-ELECTION ANALYSIS SHOWS THAT RURAL VOTER NUANCE IS DEEPLY ENTRENCHED

UNDATED (News Connection / Mike Moen) – Donald Trump’s victory in the race for the White House was again aided by wins in rural states like Nebraska, South Dakota, and even Iowa.

While other contributing factors are discussed, a rural expert says it’s clear longstanding political sentiments in smaller towns haven’t changed. As the results from Tuesday night are examined, political analysts cite Trump’s gain with Latino voters.

Nick Jacobs, assistant professor of government at Colby College is also an author who has written about rural issues, and says the campaign also regained some ground in rural America that it had lost in 2020. Jacobs said if the media or political strategists try again to understand why these areas still largely back Trump, they have to resist preconceived notions.

“We’re going to see it again with these diner interviews – is that prior to even being interviewed [post-2016], rural people were put into this prefabricated box,” he explained. “And the truth is, voters in rural places — [like] urban places — they’re complicated.”

It’s been decades in the making, but Jacobs feels the public still doesn’t grasp that rural voters feel underappreciated by the political establishment. The trouble is, he added, this generally doesn’t lend itself to policies that can directly appeal to them. He thinks Democrats should keep trying to produce local candidates who can relate to these voters, adding that having both parties find success in rural America is good for democracy.

Jacobs said his research, along with separate polling, has shown that rural and urban voters often agree on certain issues.

“Concerns about corporate monopolies, freedom within, sort of, the marketplace, whether that’s for health care or reproductive rights — there are very few policy issues that divide the two,” he explained.

In South Dakota voters rejected an amendment to put abortion rights into the state constitution.  Meanwhile in Nebraska, voters rejected an abortion rights amendment and instead endorsed restrictions, even as reproductive rights saw victories in other conservative states. However, Nebraskans did approve paid sick-leave requirements, a policy often aligned with the Left.

The Biden administration’s big policy achievements, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the Inflation Reduction Act, have paved the way for a lot of rural investment. But Jacobs says many projects aren’t shovel-ready yet, and aren’t likely to move the needle with rural voters hesitant to embrace them.

“It can’t be such a simple story as, ‘Spend money and the votes will follow,’ because what we’re talking about [is] decades of feeling like ‘the government has left me behind,'” he concluded.