SC-1 special election - May 7th

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Could be a recount (less than 1%) given how close the race for second is. Ask TF about the candidates, I don't have a clue.

Duke is a better one to ask since he lives in the district. I'm not even in the media market. Sanford's opponent in the runoff will be Curtis Bostic.  Even with a recount, there's no way Grooms makes up the difference.

Thanks to the 6th district gerrymander, Bostic doesn't actually live in the 1st district, tho that's not a requirement and if the districts had been drawn without a gerrymander, he'd certainly be in the 1st, so I don't see it as a likely problem for him.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Bostic is a socon, which would be a big plus in most of SC, but not so much in Charleston.

Bostic was actually a two-term City Councilman for Charleston, so at least part of the city likes him. Most of his stuff is fiscal, not social conservatism (though he is a socon). The guy's website is stopspending.com.

Yeah, i know that, but Charleston as a whole never seemed too socially conservative city to me. Greenville or Spartanburg - another matter. May be i am wrong, but my perception is as i described above..

Your perception is right as Bostic is definitely a socon, but unlike some socons, he is not so dumb as to not know what issues he needs to address to be elected in the 1st district, which is why he's been focusing on the fiscal stuff.

Interesting results. Someone named Andy Patrick won Beaufort County outright but finished fifth overall.

Andy Patrick is from Hilton Head and represents the 123rd district in the South Carolina House of Representatives.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Sanford will win the runoff by about 8, and beat Colbert by double digits.

I wouldn't bet that.  In the 2004 GOP Primary for Senate, Beasley got 37% of the vote and first place based on the strength of being an ex-Governor with loads of name recognition, but because he left office in a cloud (he was defeated by a Democrat for reelection in 2002) he only got 40% in the runoff.  (Beasley actually got fewer votes in the runoff since turnout was down.)

Sanford only got 37% of the vote in the first round, and while I expect he'll do somewhat better than Beasley did in the second, if for no other reason than Beasley was in a field of only six whereas Sanford was in a field of sixteen.  Sanford may beat Bostic, but I would be greatly surprised if it was by 8 or more points.  A pro-Sanford PAC has released a poll taken last weekend (before the primary) that showed in a head-to-head matchup with Bostic, Sanford gets 49%, Bostic 36% with 15% undecided. (5% MoE)  Given Bostic's mainly grassroots campaigning in the primary, once he goes full court press in the runoff, I expect Bostic to pick up most of the undecideds and some of Sanford's support.  Plus runoff turnout is traditionally lower than primary turnout and I suspect Sanford''s voters are softer than Bostic's in terms of their willingness to head to the polls a second time.

A lot depends on whether Sanford can pickup any endorsements from his opponents.  There were six others who got notable chunks of the electorate.  Sanford needs to get at least one of them to endorse him or may end up pulling a Beasely and get less votes in the runoff than in the primary.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

But in all seriousness, since I believe SC is open primary, I expect a lot of Democrats to cross over to support Sanford.

That doesn't usually happen and anyone who voted in the Democratic primary is ineligible to vote in the Republican runoff.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

New internal poll for Colbert Busch

http://colbertbuschforcongress.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/PollMemo.ECB_.f.040113.pdf

Colbert Busch 47
Sanford 44

Colbert Busch 48
Bostic 39

Why are Bostic's numbers so low?

Bostic is very much a religious right Republican and SC-1 is far more a small government/strong defense district.  The numbers for a candidate like Bostic would be higher if the race was in SC-3, 4, or 5.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Isn't one comedian (albeit an election thief) in Washington enough?

Elizabeth Colbert-Busch isn't a comedian.

Sanford is.  Here's a photo of Gov. Sanford showing up with "Pork" and "Barrel" at the State House in 2004 to complain about the General Assembly overriding his line-item vetoes too quickly for his taste.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Well, I enjoy interesting races. I just don't enjoy almost losing or actually losing safe seats.

Then I suggest you ignore the SC-1 race until its over, for it will definitely be closer than it normally should be.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Well, I enjoy interesting races. I just don't enjoy almost losing or actually losing safe seats.

Then I suggest you ignore the SC-1 race until its over, for it will definitely be closer than it normally should be.

Just like Sanford was definitely not going to win the runoff?

He got lucky in who got second place.  If it had been one of the State Senators or Representatives as I had thought it would be, then yeah.  Bostic came in under my radar thanks to the large field, and I had said that Sanford could win if got to face a fringy opponent who had enough support to get second place but who wouldn't appeal to the broader GOP electorate.  My fault was not in underestimating Sanford's chances, it was underestimating the chance of someone like Bostic.  Sanford will probably be able to pull it off now, but it will be close.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Did you all expect Bostic to win? Sanford winning is no surprise.

I didn't expect Bostic to make the runoff.  Against a different opponent, Sanford would have a good chance of losing the runoff.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Frasier has been a Republican running in Democratic races for years now in an effort to force Democrats to spend money on primary elections rather than saving funds for the general election.  As for his endorsement of Sanford, Frasier is as deluded about his political importance as Charles J. Guiteau was about his.  That Sanford is bothering to put this endorsement on their website indicates they are worried about losing and are scraping not just the bottom of the bucket, but the underside for every conceivable vote.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Lamest excuse ever.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Jeez... how did Sanford win the primary in the first place? Were his Republican opponents child molesters or something?

There were a ton of candidates splitting the sane vote, leaving Sanford and Bostic to win.  Bostic is a hyper-socon in a district that doesn't have a lot of socons, but he was the only major socon running.  If this had been an upstate district, Bostic probably would have beat Sanford in the runoff, but he might not have made the runoff since more hyper-socons would have entered.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Sure looks like ECB will have that seat for 18 months, and then Pubs can get a sane candidate.

In South Carolina? Where is a sane Republican going to come from?

True enough, Bob Inglis already got crushed.

That was in the upstate.  In general, low country Republicans are notably saner.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Sanford is practically begging Colbert-Busch to do more debates and/or joint appearances.  At least unlike the Mittinator, the Mark II realizes he's in trouble.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

In general, low country Republicans are notably saner.

True, but still - most of the Republican's candidates in SC are very conservative. I don't expect "moderates" there, but even reasonable moderate-conservative (of Lugar - Voinovich type) is a rarity ..

It's a byproduct of having highly gerrymandered districts and a large statewide majority.  There are so few races which are competitive that any sensible politician here will generally be worrying more about the primary than the general election.  Not only that, but the primary voters have little incentive to worry about whether candidates will appeal to the middle.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

As if there were any doubt about how much trouble Sanford was in, when a Republican activist has decided to not vote rather than vote for the GOP candidate, that's a pretty clear sign.

http://www.thestate.com/2013/04/21/2734677/will-women-abandon-sanford.htm

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If either the Libertarian or Constitution parties had fielded a candidate, they'd have a good chance of picking up support from Republicans who can't bring themselves to support Sanford.  I can't see many Republicans voting for Platt on the Green Party ticket and fewer for the fusion candidacy of Colbert Busch. (Elizabeth also got the nod from the Working Families Party.)  In particular the Libertarians might well have picked up 10% or more of the votes cast, but guy they ran in 2012 chose to try his luck in the GOP clusterbomb of a primary.  Heck, if they'd played their cards right, the Libertarian candidate might have come in second.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Most of Platt's voters voted Romney!

I strongly suspect that many of them are Republicans who feel a civic obligation to vote, but do not want to vote for either Sanford or a Democrat, so will be voting for Platt as a safe protest vote instead of staying home.  There would be more of those safe protest votes if either the Libertarian or Constitution parties had put up a candidate.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Most of Platt's voters voted Romney!

I strongly suspect that many of them are Republicans who feel a civic obligation to vote, but do not want to vote for either Sanford or a Democrat, so will be voting for Platt as a safe protest vote instead of staying home.  There would be more of those safe protest votes if either the Libertarian or Constitution parties had put up a candidate.

Even if Platt's to the left of the Democrats?  And besides, why do so many people think Nader cost Gore the 2000 election if some Republican-leaning voters who didn't necessarily want Bush didn't vote for him?  I'm not arguing that they're right, I'm just asking you how that figures.

Platt's politics don't come into play here.  All that matters is that he has no chance of winning so Platt takes the place of the "None of these" option that is on Nevada ballots.  If there were someone closer to their politics than Platt who fit the bill, they'd vote for them.  What'll be interesting to see is how many write-in votes are cast. I suspect many of those will be for Jenny Sanford.

As for Nader/Gore, for those who were right-leaning but anti-Bush, there were other choices on the ballot.  While a lot of Nader's support came from collecting most of the generalized protest votes that would not have gone to either major party in 2000, he also got some votes from the left that would have accrued to Gore had there been no Green Party on the ballot.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

This may be purely coincidental, but worth noting, I think. I really do think that in a neutral election year, ECB has a reasonable shot at reelection in 2014. We'll see what happens. Here's hoping that Bostic runs again and manages to win the GOP primary.

Bostic may run again, but he won't win the primary.  He couldn't even beat Sanford in the runoff.  Nah, what happened here was he had enough support to get second in a very fractured special election primary.  If Sanford hadn't run, Bostic still would have lost the runoff, assuming he even made it.  If Sanford hadn't been running, I think the runoff would likely have been Grooms v. Turner. 

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

This may be purely coincidental, but worth noting, I think. I really do think that in a neutral election year, ECB has a reasonable shot at reelection in 2014. We'll see what happens. Here's hoping that Bostic runs again and manages to win the GOP primary.

Bostic may run again, but he won't win the primary.  He couldn't even beat Sanford in the runoff.  Nah, what happened here was he had enough support to get second in a very fractured special election primary.  If Sanford hadn't run, Bostic still would have lost the runoff, assuming he even made it.  If Sanford hadn't been running, I think the runoff would likely have been Grooms v. Turner. 

I trust your local perspective. I suppose an entirely different wingnut/flawed candidate could come out of the woodwork somehow to muck things up for the GOP.

Any chance that Mrs. Sanford runs? Not the Argentinian one, of course.

Doubtful.  Certainly not any time soon as there will be plenty of Republicans blaming her for Mark's upcoming loss because she let details of their custody spat get into the public eye in a manner that seemed calculated to cause him the most harm without regard to the harm it might do the party.  If she'd let the details come out before the runoff or even better before the primary, there a good chance that Mark would not have ended up the nominee.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Dear God: Sanford debated a cardboard cutout of Pelosi. Outdoors. Forget winning, I'm beginning to wonder if he's losing his marbles.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/04/24/mark-sanford-debates-poster/

Actually, I think it's a fairly reasonable campaign ploy.  It lets him call out his opponent for not agreeing to as many debates as he would like and it lets him paint her a Pelosi-type liberal. However, it's also the sort of campaign tactic used by those who are behind, and unless ECB commits a gaffe, it's not going to help him win.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

There will be a real debate Monday 7pm ET.  It'll be streamed at http://scetv.org/television/streaming/sanford-colbert-debate.cfm if anyone is interested.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Sounds like it was the sort of debate that probably didn't change many minds, but if there is any change in the polls, the debate will be used to explain why.

Incidentally Haley's agreed be the special guest at fundraiser Sanford is holding Wednesday at the home of luxury car dealer.  Couldn't Sanford have found someone with an occupation that doesn't sound quite so plutocratic as that to host it?  The attack ad practically writes itself.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

For those who didn't watch it live, or who want to watch it again, here's a link to the debate:
http://scetv.org/television/streaming/sanford-colbert-debate.cfm

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Ernest, do you know what time the polls close next week?

Same as always, 7pm.  Charleston tends to be a little slow in reporting results, but it's only one race for a special election, so even if it's close, I expect all precincts to have reported in time for the 11pm news and maybe even the 10pm news.  However, unless this is not as close as expected, I doubt there will be a winner declared before 9:30pm.  Colleton County should have its complete results in soonest, since there is only the one coastal precinct connecting Charleston and Beaufort that is in the 1st district.