SC-1 special election - May 7th

[BigSkyBob]

Hillary and Bill are still together. Mark and Jenny aren't. Do you really believe the first has damaged his marriage more? LoL.

I haven't offered an opinion either way, nor, was it in any way the topic of discussion in this thread. Another poster was mystified about how any Republican could vote for a liar and cheater. I merely asked him how he could vote for Bill Clinton given the fact that Clinton was a felonious liar and serial cheater. Until now, no one but you wished to debate whether or not, Hillary Clinton was more of a doormat to her philandering husband than Jenny Stanford.

[xavier110]

PPP says Republicans are coming home in these final days...gonna be a nail biter.

[Tender Branson]

Yeah, if Republicans finally decide not to sit this out, Sanford will win it.

Too much of a GOP district.

[Tender Branson]

PPP also finds the following:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

plus the already mentioned

You must be logged in to read this quote.

...

This is in line with the Gravis Marketing poll, which showed a tie as well after the debate and Gravis was good in 2012.

[Maxwell]

I think it was going to be hard to imagine Colbert Busch holding on to a 10 point lead in a R+11 district. I think Sanford narrowly holds on.

[DrScholl]

Gravis Marketing was not good in 2012 at all, they had some polls that were off the mark.

That aside, Republicans don't really gain a thing from Sanford winning, he's a liability. So whatever happens, it's a win-win for Democrats, who would get a big talking point and with Sanford having to go to court, it might get even bigger.

[Tender Branson]

Gravis Marketing was not good in 2012 at all, they had some polls that were off the mark.

That aside, Republicans don't really gain a thing from Sanford winning, he's a liability. So whatever happens, it's a win-win for Democrats, who would get a big talking point and with Sanford having to go to court, it might get even bigger.

Let's check the final Gravis polls:

National: Tie (was O+4)
IA: O+5 (was O+6)
PA: O+3 (was O+5.5)
NH: O+1 (was O+5.5)
CO: O+3 (was O+5)
VA: Tie (was O+4)
OH: O+1 (was O+3)
FL: Tie (was O+1)
NC: R+4 (was R+2)

http://www.gravispolls.com

So, they were within 3 in 6 of the 9 polls and the other 3 were not far off either, factoring in the undecided too ...

[DrScholl]

They still were off compared to some other pollsters (like PPP) and they had wider gaps before the election if I recall correctly. But that's a moot point, since Gravis didn't do the SC-1 poll, they just gave a list a phone numbers to the pollster that did.

[BigSkyBob]

The best thing for the GOP at this point would be for Colbert Busch to win the special election and then get a more honest Republican to win it back in 2014.

If this were True, then it would also be the case that the best thing for the Democrats were if Stanford won this race. Somehow, I haven't read any Democrats hoping for a Colbert lose. Rather, when the polls showed Colbert up by double-digits, and the RNCC fortuitously for Stanford wrote him off, the gloat-a-meter was reading "high." I can only conclude that since the Democrats perceive their interests lie in winning the race it must be the case that Republican best interests rest on a Stanford victory.

If Stanford wins this will be a needless lose for the Democrats. No matter who was the nominee they would have been saddled with Pelosi and Obama. Had the Democrats had an once of brains they would have nominated someone without such obvious ties to Hollywood. They put Stanford in the power position: Democrats in Washington such as Obama and Pelosi are trying desperately to defeat him, while, Republicans in Washington are aiding and abetting them.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Given how Republican the district is, I wonder if having the DCCC directly fund ads was a mistake.  It might have been better, tho more difficult, to funnel funds into the Colbert Bush campaign.

Had the Democrats had an once of brains they would have nominated someone without such obvious ties to Hollywood.

Hollywood?  It's not as if Elizabeth could help who her brother was and she had been active in Democratic politics beforehand.  Also, the Democrats do not have a deep bench to draw from in South Carolina, let alone in such a Republican district. It's hardly even a narrow bench.  Frankly, when this special election began, all the Democrats could hope for out of this was to build for the future.  Besides, the seat will not be the margin in any significant House vote in this Congress.  Whether Colbert Busch wins or loses, having her have faced Sanford will have been a help to the Democrats in rebuilding for the future.  I fully expect Sanford to face a costly primary battle in 2014 if he does win, and I doubt he will win reelection.

[tmthforu94]

That aside, Republicans don't really gain a thing from Sanford winning, he's a liability. So whatever happens, it's a win-win for Democrats, who would get a big talking point and with Sanford having to go to court, it might get even bigger.

After making such a big deal about this race when it looked like victory was inevitable, it's pretty funny to see Democrats try and backtrack and act like this race isn't as big of a deal...or even worse that they actually win by losing.

[Brittain33]

If this were True, then it would also be the case that the best thing for the Democrats were if Stanford won this race. Somehow, I haven't read any Democrats hoping for a Colbert lose. Rather, when the polls showed Colbert up by double-digits, and the RNCC fortuitously for Stanford wrote him off, the gloat-a-meter was reading "high." I can only conclude that since the Democrats perceive their interests lie in winning the race it must be the case that Republican best interests rest on a Stanford victory.

This race is for LULZ. Dems don't care too much because Colbert Busch is a 1-termer if she wins and can't make a difference in the house.

[memphis]

I'll pass on making a prediction. Specials are too weird. But I am irked by all the personality driven races, especially in the House, where whoever wins is one of 435 members. Vote for the person who you think supports the same policies you do.

[Brittain33]

Let's check the final Gravis polls:

Gravis may have pulled in their polls at the very end but throughout the season, they were way off and often in a R direction (but occasionally very D). They were hired by R firms to poll for the R narrative. End of story.

[DrScholl]

After making such a big deal about this race when it looked like victory was inevitable, it's pretty funny to see Democrats try and backtrack and act like this race isn't as big of a deal...or even worse that they actually win by losing.

Let me set you straight. Look here, I'm not backtracking anything, I'm just making the point that Republicans should realize that Sanford winning isn't such a good thing. For the record, I still think he's going to lose and I will maintain that prediction, his baggage is just too great and it's a district that a Democrat almost won against a backbencher with no scandal. It's true that win or lose, Democrats can gain some good talking points, but I'm not counting on Elizabeth Colbert Busch losing.

[tmthforu94]

After making such a big deal about this race when it looked like victory was inevitable, it's pretty funny to see Democrats try and backtrack and act like this race isn't as big of a deal...or even worse that they actually win by losing.

Let me set you straight. Look here, I'm not backtracking anything, I'm just making the point that Republicans should realize that Sanford winning isn't such a good thing. For the record, I still think he's going to lose and I will maintain that prediction, his baggage is just too great and it's a district that a Democrat almost won against a backbencher with no scandal. It's true that win or lose, Democrats can gain some good talking points, but I'm not counting on Elizabeth Colbert Busch losing.

lol, that's absurd. Sure, having Sanford in Congress isn't ideal, but it beats all the bad press we'd get for losing a special election in South Carolina, and would also give the middle finger to all those in the media and on the left who thought Colbert-Busch was actually going to win. You're just trying to save face in case Sanford manages to hold on to this seat.

[minionofmidas]

Actually, based on what happened, I think that if Mark had been able to stay away from Maria after he had been found out, Jenny would have stayed with Mark.  However, it wasn't a case of Jenny leaving Mark.  It was Mark who left Jenny.

I thought this was a politics thread. Please don't discuss soap operas here. (That's certainly what this post especially sounds like you were doing.)

[DrScholl]

lol, that's absurd. Sure, having Sanford in Congress isn't ideal, but it beats all the bad press we'd get for losing a special election in South Carolina, and would also give the middle finger to all those in the media and on the left who thought Colbert-Busch was actually going to win. You're just trying to save face in case Sanford manages to hold on to this seat.

Please, there's nothing to save face for, it's an R+11 district, so the notion of Sanford winning was never a foreign or an impossible concept. It's not a swing district and it's not like a Democrat losing an R+11 is the end of the world, but as I said, I fully expect Elizabeth Colbert Busch to win. End of debate, because I don't see it as something to be argumentative about.

[Mehmentum]

The best thing for the GOP at this point would be for Colbert Busch to win the special election and then get a more honest Republican to win it back in 2014.

If this were True, then it would also be the case that the best thing for the Democrats were if Stanford won this race. Somehow, I haven't read any Democrats hoping for a Colbert lose. Rather, when the polls showed Colbert up by double-digits, and the RNCC fortuitously for Stanford wrote him off, the gloat-a-meter was reading "high." I can only conclude that since the Democrats perceive their interests lie in winning the race it must be the case that Republican best interests rest on a Stanford victory.

If Stanford wins this will be a needless lose for the Democrats. No matter who was the nominee they would have been saddled with Pelosi and Obama. Had the Democrats had an once of brains they would have nominated someone without such obvious ties to Hollywood. They put Stanford in the power position: Democrats in Washington such as Obama and Pelosi are trying desperately to defeat him, while, Republicans in Washington are aiding and abetting them.

There are such things as win/win and lose/lose situations.  The Democrats are currently in a win/win situation. 

[RogueBeaver]

In other news, TPE has endorsed Sanford.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

In other news, TPE has endorsed Sanford.

Not surprising, except for one thing.  They ask rhetorically "do they want to elect a proven conservative that will get things done?"  Thing is, Sanford has never been able to show much ability to get things done.  He did show some talent at doing nothing, so if you want government to do nothing, Sanford is a good choice for that.

Still it's odd they waited this long to make the endorsement.

[BigSkyBob]

The best thing for the GOP at this point would be for Colbert Busch to win the special election and then get a more honest Republican to win it back in 2014.

If this were True, then it would also be the case that the best thing for the Democrats were if Stanford won this race. Somehow, I haven't read any Democrats hoping for a Colbert lose. Rather, when the polls showed Colbert up by double-digits, and the RNCC fortuitously for Stanford wrote him off, the gloat-a-meter was reading "high." I can only conclude that since the Democrats perceive their interests lie in winning the race it must be the case that Republican best interests rest on a Stanford victory.

If Stanford wins this will be a needless lose for the Democrats. No matter who was the nominee they would have been saddled with Pelosi and Obama. Had the Democrats had an once of brains they would have nominated someone without such obvious ties to Hollywood. They put Stanford in the power position: Democrats in Washington such as Obama and Pelosi are trying desperately to defeat him, while, Republicans in Washington are aiding and abetting them.

There are such things as win/win and lose/lose situations.  The Democrats are currently in a win/win situation.  

So, Democrats don't actually have a preference as to whether Colbert or Stanford wins? I don't think that is the case.  Nor, do I see how Stanford winning is another other than stinging rebuke of Nancy Pelosi.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

In other news, TPE has endorsed Sanford.

He did show some talent at doing nothing, so if you want government to do nothing, Sanford is a good choice for that.

Or if you want late night comedians to have more material.  At the very least, he'd make the SC GOP competitive with the TX GOP by measure of absurdity.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

So, Democrats don't actually have a preference as to whether Colbert or Stanford wins? I don't think that is the case.  Nor, do I see how Stanford winning is another other than stinging rebuke of Nancy Pelosi.

Obviously Colbert Busch winning would be preferred by the Dems, but it's not the most important thing the Dems can hope to achieve in this race, especially since it doesn't matter who holds the district until a new Republican takes the district in 2014.  In a district as Republican as the 1st is, it is impossible for any Republican to deliver a stinging rebuke to Pelosi unless he wins by 20 points, which Sanford ain't going to do.  A Sanford single digit win won't even be a mild chastisement of Pelosi.

[JerryArkansas]

I really hope Stanford loses, he deserves it.