SC-SEN 2022: Could Joe Cunningham make this race competitive?

[GM Team Member and Deputy PPT WB]

Seriously dude, are you going to create many other stupid/hackish posts/threads until November 2022 ?

MO/SC/IN senate races are not competitive, no matter what you want to believe. And the FL/OH/IA races are very unlikely to flip too.

At the best, if they are very lucky, democrats will be able to flip PA/WI/NC and hold all their vulnerable seats, GA/AZ/NV/NH, but that's it.

Chill out.  This is a discussion forum where we're supposed to discuss Congressional elections, so that's what I'm doing.  I'm not being "hackish" by asking people more knowledgeable than me for insight into some states' politics I know little about.  And nobody is making you read or reply to anything.  If you don't want to discuss Congressional elections, why are you even here?

It's true, the aim of this forum is to talk about elections... but in a serious way, and that's not what you are doing.

Cunningham was voted out last year in a district which leans to the left of the state as whole and democrats failed miserably in their quest to defeat Graham so it is very hard to see how this same person could defeat the far more popular Scott, especially considering that the climate is likely to be less favourable to them. SC-Sen 2022 is Safe R and this is not even debatable.

So please stop inundating the forum with unserious stuff.

Note that I never suggested I think Cunningham could beat Scott.  I don't think it's productive to entertain fantasies about the electoral odds in a state like South Carolina.  At the same time, I think the quality of an underdog is important.  Making a race competitive is better than resigning to an uncontested blowout.  Yeah, Harrison lost to Graham in 2020, but for a while there that race was interesting, and accordingly a ton of resources flowed into SC that helped build up the state party.  From a zero-sum perspective, 2020 was a loss for Democrats.  Obviously!  And 2022 will also probably be a loss for Democrats.  Obviously!   But in some important ways I think Harrison's loss was preferable to what would have been "generic-Dem's" loss.  And that's what I'm really asking about:  Not which SC Democrat can win, but which SC Democrat would likely be the best candidate.

Alternatively, I guess we can do what you're suggesting and talk about the same four or five Senate races exclusively until election day.  Why bother showing an interest in the rest of the country if the results are already overdetermined?  Even better, let's all just stop the "unserious" stuff and roboticly report economic data and poll numbers.  What we already know is all that matters, right?

The resources to help the state party that lost seats? How is wasting hundreds of millions worth it?

It wasn't wasted--it was a long term investment. It's not like the money was needed urgently elsewhere, since Democrats were plenty awash in cash all across the map (Cal Cunningham didn't lose because of money problems, for instance.).  Trump on the ballot juiced Republican turnout much more that a lot of people assumed it would, especially in exurban areas, and that obscures a lot of what SC Democrats accomplished in party building, but it's possible that in a different national environment those statewide efforts might produce results.

No, it was wasted money.

eh, I would say that some party infrastructure was constructed but it was way too much money poured into the state for what it was, a long-shot opportunity.

[Heebie Jeebie]

Seriously dude, are you going to create many other stupid/hackish posts/threads until November 2022 ?

MO/SC/IN senate races are not competitive, no matter what you want to believe. And the FL/OH/IA races are very unlikely to flip too.

At the best, if they are very lucky, democrats will be able to flip PA/WI/NC and hold all their vulnerable seats, GA/AZ/NV/NH, but that's it.

Chill out.  This is a discussion forum where we're supposed to discuss Congressional elections, so that's what I'm doing.  I'm not being "hackish" by asking people more knowledgeable than me for insight into some states' politics I know little about.  And nobody is making you read or reply to anything.  If you don't want to discuss Congressional elections, why are you even here?

It's true, the aim of this forum is to talk about elections... but in a serious way, and that's not what you are doing.

Cunningham was voted out last year in a district which leans to the left of the state as whole and democrats failed miserably in their quest to defeat Graham so it is very hard to see how this same person could defeat the far more popular Scott, especially considering that the climate is likely to be less favourable to them. SC-Sen 2022 is Safe R and this is not even debatable.

So please stop inundating the forum with unserious stuff.

Note that I never suggested I think Cunningham could beat Scott.  I don't think it's productive to entertain fantasies about the electoral odds in a state like South Carolina.  At the same time, I think the quality of an underdog is important.  Making a race competitive is better than resigning to an uncontested blowout.  Yeah, Harrison lost to Graham in 2020, but for a while there that race was interesting, and accordingly a ton of resources flowed into SC that helped build up the state party.  From a zero-sum perspective, 2020 was a loss for Democrats.  Obviously!  And 2022 will also probably be a loss for Democrats.  Obviously!   But in some important ways I think Harrison's loss was preferable to what would have been "generic-Dem's" loss.  And that's what I'm really asking about:  Not which SC Democrat can win, but which SC Democrat would likely be the best candidate.

Alternatively, I guess we can do what you're suggesting and talk about the same four or five Senate races exclusively until election day.  Why bother showing an interest in the rest of the country if the results are already overdetermined?  Even better, let's all just stop the "unserious" stuff and roboticly report economic data and poll numbers.  What we already know is all that matters, right?

The resources to help the state party that lost seats? How is wasting hundreds of millions worth it?

It wasn't wasted--it was a long term investment. It's not like the money was needed urgently elsewhere, since Democrats were plenty awash in cash all across the map (Cal Cunningham didn't lose because of money problems, for instance.).  Trump on the ballot juiced Republican turnout much more that a lot of people assumed it would, especially in exurban areas, and that obscures a lot of what SC Democrats accomplished in party building, but it's possible that in a different national environment those statewide efforts might produce results.

No, it was wasted money.

eh, I would say that some party infrastructure was constructed but it was way too much money poured into the state for what it was, a long-shot opportunity.

All that money bought Harrison a DNC Chairmanship.  That"s gotta be good for the South Carolina Democratic Party, right?

[Virginiá]

All that money bought Harrison a DNC Chairmanship.  That"s gotta be good for the South Carolina Democratic Party, right?

Maybe, but to what end? The key to keeping a state party strong is actually winning elections. For all that money that was spent in the state, Democrats actually lost ground in the state legislature.

I'm all for keeping state/local party organizations healthy and as effective as they can be, but it's a losing battle if said party has no real influence or power in the state government. It's hard to keep your supporters energized and writing checks if it never goes anywhere year after year.

[DaleCooper]

The money spent on South Carolina didn't seem to build anything worthwhile seeing as how Harrison's campaign actually hurt the state party's credibility enough to lose seats while not even outperforming much against supposedly weak Lindsay Graham. If we're going to go nuclear on McGrath, then Jamie Harrison deserves to be about as much of a target of that frustration as anyone else. Plus, if we're going to care about long term investment in a red state, then we should have much more respect for Mike Espy, who didn't selfishly turn his election into a high profile Resistance battle to raise money and who actually over-performed Biden by a notable amount in a racially polarized state. I practically never hear about Espy even though he's one of the only red-state Democratic senate candidates that actually seemed to handle his election professionally.

[Suburbia]

No

[JMT]

State Representative Krystle Matthews is running:

https://twitter.com/kmforsenate/status/1381641346797166595?s=21

[Oregon Eagle Politics]

Did you see the St Pete poll, before the Gaetz story broke DeSantis was tied with Fried.

FL is always a swing state, it's an R 2 state but Rs don't have a monopoly on it, Grayson is a good candidate, Rubio was only leading by 6 in the last poll that was taken

It's wave insurance but as Ds we always think of blue waves, not close Elections, that's how we won GA

First, FL-01 is not a statewide race and the Gates story only concerns the constituents of FL-01, so this race and the senate races are both different stories.

And Election Day is 19 months away and people won’t care about that story on Election Day.

Don't argue with the word of god.

[here2view]

I mean he'd be a fine candidate, but no, he wouldn't make the race competitive

[GM Team Member and Deputy PPT WB]

He seems set on running for governor,  which I think he’ll lose by a slightly smaller margin than normal, though if HR1 passes and causes SC-1 to be redrawn he may run there. I think the reason he’s not doing it this time for sure is that he doesn’t think he could flip it back in it’s current form.

[SpartanburgSam]

I think Tim Swain could beat Scott in the primary.

[Born to Slay. Forced to Work.]

I think Tim Swain could beat Scott in the primary.

Swain or anyone really has a snowball’s chance in hell betting Scott.

[SpartanburgSam]

How will Scott do in Orangeburg county?

[Shaula🏳️‍⚧️]

I think Tim Swain could beat Scott in the primary.

I'm more bullish on primary challengers than others, but no. There is no way he's getting anywhere close to winning. In a very best case scenario he keeps Scott to Abbott primary numbers.

[OdonTrail]

Who wins the Dem primary runoff?

[Huey Long is a Republican]

I think Tim Swain could beat Scott in the primary.

I'm more bullish on primary challengers than others, but no. There is no way he's getting anywhere close to winning. In a very best case scenario he keeps Scott to Abbott primary numbers.

Yeah. It could've way different if Trump endorsed Swain but he didn't, so...

[Roll Roons]

Dem nominee Krystle Matthews says white people should be treated like s**t: https://apnews.com/article/2022-midterm-elections-campaigns-south-carolina-general-tim-scott-968b58c3a799215444e596d92eb8cf7d

Tim Scott was already going to win in a landslide but geez...

[wbrocks67]

Yeah this is a hot mess. Is there even protocol for her to be dropped from the ballot? Would another Dem be able to replace her?

It burns me up though that this came from Project Veritas though.

[Pheurton Skeurto]

Dem nominee Krystle Matthews says white people should be treated like s**t: https://apnews.com/article/2022-midterm-elections-campaigns-south-carolina-general-tim-scott-968b58c3a799215444e596d92eb8cf7d

Tim Scott was already going to win in a landslide but geez...

Jesus, that's brutal. She should drop out.

[Xing]

Wait, Democrats are criticizing her for this? But I thought all left-wingers loved bashing white people and would eat it all up!!!!

She should drop out, obviously.

[NewYorkExpress]

Matthews refusing to drop out or resign her house seat.

South Carolina Rep. Krystle Matthews, the Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate, says she has no plans to step down from her House seat or suspend her Senate campaign, despite calls from even within own party to resign. The Berkeley Democrat is facing pressure to resign after Project Veritas, a conservative activist organization that secretly tapes progressive politicians and edits the tapes often showing a politician in an unflattering light, released a second video this week of Matthews making disparaging comments about white people. “You ought to know who you’re dealing with. You’ve got to treat them like sh--. That’s the only way they’ll respect you,” Matthews says in the recording while speaking to an undercover reporter with the group, noting she lives in a mostly white town and her district leans Republican.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Yes, Oct 15th when Early voting begins we are getting Student Loans Discharge I am getting one and Rs think that it's gonna hurt D's how, we pay payroll taxes the Super rich athletes as I have said many times pay 40% taxes 300 v 50K in taxes a mnth that won't hurt D's our 1000 taxes only pays for bridges and roads and so do 4K in property taxes v 50K in income taxes

Blk and Brown represent 5 percent balance of power that means Rubio up 50/48 over D's Demings can win by 3 with Blk and Brown support we aren't the majority we are the balance of power flip CA in Kennedy era which is a Latino state no Nixon or Reagan Revolution

Nixon would definitely not get elected in this era they would of elected George Romney Sr instead no Watergate

[GM Team Member and Deputy PPT WB]

I’ll be voting third party or writing in.

He seems set on running for governor,  which I think he’ll lose by a slightly smaller margin than normal, though if HR1 passes and causes SC-1 to be redrawn he may run there. I think the reason he’s not doing it this time for sure is that he doesn’t think he could flip it back in it’s current form.

Looks like I might be right on this.

[Calthrina950]

I’ll be voting third party or writing in.

He seems set on running for governor,  which I think he’ll lose by a slightly smaller margin than normal, though if HR1 passes and causes SC-1 to be redrawn he may run there. I think the reason he’s not doing it this time for sure is that he doesn’t think he could flip it back in it’s current form.

Looks like I might be right on this.

Do you think it is plausible that Scott gets over 60% again? Given his general popularity and the extreme weakness of his Democratic opponent, I believe that it could happen. Matthews could sink almost to the levels that Alvin Greene reached in 2010. 

[ProgressiveModerate]

I’ll be voting third party or writing in.

He seems set on running for governor,  which I think he’ll lose by a slightly smaller margin than normal, though if HR1 passes and causes SC-1 to be redrawn he may run there. I think the reason he’s not doing it this time for sure is that he doesn’t think he could flip it back in it’s current form.

Looks like I might be right on this.

Do you think it is plausible that Scott gets over 60% again? Given his general popularity and the extreme weakness of his Democratic opponent, I believe that it could happen. Matthews could sink almost to the levels that Alvin Greene reached in 2010.  

I could see him getting close but America has just become far more polarized since then. Contrary to popular belief, Scott really didn't do particularly amazing with the African American vote and his heavy overperformances of Trump were in the metro areas of the state. A lot of these overperformances were like 30% + relative to Trump 2020 so those will be very difficult if not impossible for him to replicate, and it'll be hard to make up for those losses with significant rural gains over Trump where he basically ran even.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

I’ll be voting third party or writing in.

He seems set on running for governor,  which I think he’ll lose by a slightly smaller margin than normal, though if HR1 passes and causes SC-1 to be redrawn he may run there. I think the reason he’s not doing it this time for sure is that he doesn’t think he could flip it back in it’s current form.

Looks like I might be right on this.

Do you think it is plausible that Scott gets over 60% again? Given his general popularity and the extreme weakness of his Democratic opponent, I believe that it could happen. Matthews could sink almost to the levels that Alvin Greene reached in 2010.  

I could see him getting close but America has just become far more polarized since then. Contrary to popular belief, Scott really didn't do particularly amazing with the African American vote and his heavy overperformances of Trump were in the metro areas of the state. A lot of these overperformances were like 30% + relative to Trump 202 so those will be very difficult if not impossible for him to replicate, and it'll be hard to make up for those losses with significant rural gains over Trump where he basically ran even.

You weren't hear when we won KY 2019 guess what Beshear didn't win by 20 Bevin was ahead until provisions ballots were counted


Everyone think u Beshear win by 20 no he didn't he barely won and hehas endorsed Ryan and Strickland endorsed Ryan, guess what Tim Ryan has lead in Every poll except Trafalgar and Emerson and those polls Vance lead in were 3 pts