SC-1 special election - May 7th

[BluegrassBlueVote]

It seems that Sanford always had this in the bag and many polled citizens were just too embarrassed to say they were voting for him when asked. Understandable rationale.

[Badger]

What is it that allowed Sanford to come back so hard so fast?

Because most southerners are hypocrtical morons.

There. I said it. And before anyone whines about 'sterotyping', for once prove the rest of us wrong.

On another note, does anyone have the slightest doubt krazen will flagrently cheat onhis wife if he ever marries?

What am I saying? A woman marry/date/talk to krazen?

[Morning in Atlas]

What is it that allowed Sanford to come back so hard so fast?

Ask Maria.

[Miles]

What is it that allowed Sanford to come back so hard so fast?

Because most southerners are hypocrtical morons.

We can be frustrating sometimes, electorally.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Lets not go that far with this...

[Ogre Mage]

A victory for the party of "moral values," lol.  Yes, he prayed and found God's grace, blah blah.  You nominated him, GOP, and now you own him.  It will be fun seeing where this goes.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Tim Scott ran a few points lower in his part of Charleston than he did in the district as a whole. Pray tell what data you have to support your contention that it more Republican than the district as a whole?

I was basing it on the partisan numbers in Dave's Redistricting App which are based on more than just one election.

Also the 2012 1st district election isn't a particularly good one to base partisanship levels on between counties.  Neither the Presidential race, nor the 1st district race was in any doubt, so levels of voting depended upon interest in local elections.  Charleston had lower voter turnout than either Beaufort or Berkeley in 2012 because of the relative lack of competitive races there and both Beaufort and Berkeley had local referendums of the sort to drive up Republican interest, while Charleston had no local referenda.

[Miles]

She's at 50. Sanford has 41, Platt 3. All are mentioned by name, though, so Platt's score may decrease. Most of Platt's voters voted Romney! Colbert-Busch is at 56-31, Sanford at 38-56.

What can I say.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/04/colbert-busch-expands-lead.html

Try again.

Is your life so meaningless that the high point of your day is going "neener neener" at posts people made long before the direction of the race changed?

Krazen wouldn't be quoting posts, or even posting at all tonight, if Sanford lost.

In kindergarden, he must have missed the day when they talked about winning and losing graciously.

I suppose that is the difference between me and some others who have this bizarre desire to impugn others on the internet with profanity and vulgarities.

I chalk it up to bad parenting, immaturity, and perhaps an improper drug regiment.

I know, thats why I defended you when badger said you're liable to cheat on your wife

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Tim Scott ran a few points lower in his part of Charleston than he did in the district as a whole. Pray tell what data you have to support your contention that it more Republican than the district as a whole?

I was basing it on the partisan numbers in Dave's Redistricting App which are based on more than just one election.

Also the 2012 1st district election isn't a particularly good one to base partisanship levels on between counties.  Neither the Presidential race, nor the 1st district race was in any doubt, so levels of voting depended upon interest in local elections.  Charleston had lower voter turnout than either Beaufort or Berkeley in 2012 because of the relative lack of competitive races there and both Beaufort and Berkeley had local referendums of the sort to drive up Republican interest, while Charleston had no local referenda.

Err, even on Dave's app, the average of the 4 counties outside the district is about 7 points higher than the average in Charleston County.

I'm not selecting whole counties, just the portion in the 1st district.  Yeah, as a whole county, Charleston is less Republican, but as I pointed out in a previous post in this thread, the most Democratic portions of Charleston were gerrymandered into the majority-minority 6th district.

[DrScholl]

What is it that allowed Sanford to come back so hard so fast?

Because most southerners are hypocrtical morons.

There. I said it. And before anyone whines about 'sterotyping', for once prove the rest of us wrong.

On another note, does anyone have the slightest doubt krazen will flagrently cheat onhis wife if he ever marries?

What am I saying? A woman marry/date/talk to krazen?

That can be said of partisans anywhere, as partisanship rules all these days and that is the main thing elections are decide, using the right partisan buzz words. As for the rest your post, I'm not touching that one, rofl, major shade thrown there.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

So the big question is...

Does the election of Sanford destroy the GOP's credibility even more than before?

[Ogre Mage]

So the big question is...

Does the election of Sanford destroy the GOP's credibility even more than before?

It will be (even more) amusing to see their outreach to women voters in the future.

[badgate]

Maybe his ex-wife will primary him next year.

[Miles]

So the big question is...

Does the election of Sanford destroy the GOP's credibility even more than before?

The people whose credibility has been shaken are liberal Democrats in the South.  Their claims to being "conservative" are increasingly being discounted.

Sad but true. This is why the party, at least the state levels in the south, needs to move to right. Then, they can bring the voters who are increasingly willing to vote R back into the coalition.

[Morning in Atlas]

She's at 50. Sanford has 41, Platt 3. All are mentioned by name, though, so Platt's score may decrease. Most of Platt's voters voted Romney! Colbert-Busch is at 56-31, Sanford at 38-56.

What can I say.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/04/colbert-busch-expands-lead.html

Try again.

Is your life so meaningless that the high point of your day is going "neener neener" at posts people made long before the direction of the race changed?

Krazen wouldn't be quoting posts, or even posting at all tonight, if Sanford lost.

In kindergarden, he must have missed the day when they talked about winning and losing graciously.

I suppose that is the difference between me and some others who have this bizarre desire to impugn others on the internet with profanity and vulgarities.

I chalk it up to bad parenting, immaturity, and perhaps an improper drug regiment.

Good, you figured it out. I'm actually a methhead.

[Miles]

So the big question is...

Does the election of Sanford destroy the GOP's credibility even more than before?

The people whose credibility has been shaken are liberal Democrats in the South.  Their claims to being "conservative" are increasingly being discounted.

Sad but true. This is why the party, at least the state levels in the south, needs to move to right. Then, they can bring the voters who are increasingly willing to vote R back into the coalition.

Why should they come back into a coalition that brings Nancy Pelosi to power?

I'm talking more about rebuilding strength at the local level. Democrats should be a diverse group.

[Beet]

So the big question is...

Does the election of Sanford destroy the GOP's credibility even more than before?

The people whose credibility has been shaken are liberal Democrats in the South.  Their claims to being "conservative" are increasingly being discounted.

Sad but true. This is why the party, at least the state levels in the south, needs to move to right. Then, they can bring the voters who are increasingly willing to vote R back into the coalition.

Yep, this is exactly correct.

[Miles]

Yep, this is exactly correct.

Well, if nothing else, it would help with the polarization.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

SC-1 certainly is a pretty partisan district.

[Citizen (The) Doctor]

Can't Sanford still get convicted of trespassing?

[smoltchanov]

Expected result (i count only 4 Democrats in comparable and redder districts, and all of them (Barrow, McIntyre, Matheson and Rahall) are more conservative then ECB), but unexpected margin..  In some aspects - last year MA-06 election in reverse: as much baggage as Tierney had couldn't sink him.. The same with Sanford. Party affiliation now beats "morale" convincingly. I even think a convicted killer with "proper" letter after his name could be easily elected in a number of districts NOW. And remember an election of 1979, when a nominal "Republican" (everyone knew he was really a democrat, but still - ..) was elected in predecessor of present Joe Serrano Bronx district. Anyone can imagine this NOW?

In addition - one more proof that "really southern" white-majority non heavily Jewish districts (i can't really consider districts as VA-08, VA-11 or NC-04 as "southern") essentially (exceptions are, again, Barrow, McIntyre and, may be, Murphy, but even in their cases i can't see them elected in "open seat situation" now) doesn't want to have anything in common with present day national Democratic party. For clear majority of people in such districts Democratic party is party of "minorities (racial and sexual)". "libruls" (or even "commies") and so on.. "Obama's party" in short. Not "their party"))))

[Pheurton Skeurto]

Late to the party, but I feel sick to my stomach cuz of these results

[xavier110]

Peter Hamby on Twitter just now: "Chances Sanford will consider running for SEN or GOV in a few years? 100%." God forbid.

The man thinks he's been ordained by god for leadership.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Maybe his ex-wife will primary him next year.

No, Jenny had her chance if she'd wanted it.  It's clear she does not want to be a politician in her own right.

[Miles]

The Fix's take on why Sanford won. He's never lost a race before; I didn't know that.

[BigSkyBob]

So the big question is...

Does the election of Sanford destroy the GOP's credibility even more than before?

The people whose credibility has been shaken are liberal Democrats in the South.  Their claims to being "conservative" are increasingly being discounted.

Sad but true. This is why the party, at least the state levels in the south, needs to move to right. Then, they can bring the voters who are increasingly willing to vote R back into the coalition.

Why should they come back into a coalition that brings Nancy Pelosi to power?

I'm talking more about rebuilding strength at the local level. Democrats should be a diverse group.

A diverse group that unites around Nancy Pelosi?