This Washington Post story about the surprising outcome in South Carolina’s Democratic primary for U.S. Senate on June 8 suggests that the result may have been affected by the order of candidates on the ballot. Apparently in South Carolina primaries, the candidates are listed in alphabetical order.
The story also suggests that Republicans may have raided the Democratic primary and voted for the Democratic candidate who was perceived to be the weaker of the two. That idea will probably be helpful to the new Republican Party lawsuit to obtain a closed primary for itself in South Carolina.
There were 425,000 votes cast in the Republican primary which featured a hotly contest race for the gubernatorial nomination, plus other statewide races, and hotly contested congressional races. The Democrats had 198,000 vote.
I’m surprised that the Washington Post or James Clyburn haven’t tumbled upon the more likely cause.
I think that Congressman Clyburn is way out of line here. He’s simply angry because the democratic Party he helps lead didn’t take care of business. If he had taken a few dollars from his campaign war chest and given it to Rawl, done an advert endorsing Rawl, contacted all his najor supporters and asked them to get behind Rawl, Rawl would have won hands down. Instead, Clyburn and Rawl ignored the voters, especially the African American voters, and got spanked as a result. Instead of admitting that they screwed up they are looking for a conspiracy.
There was no Republican cross over into the Democratic primary. With very hot campaigns for everything from Governor to State Treasurer, Lt Governor to Attorney General, numerous state legislative races to US House, Republicans were voting in their own primaries.
So what was the cause of this outcome? I don’t know, but to accuse Republicans of dirty tricks when there is no evidence of that seems stupid to me. I’m not sure it was strictly race either as Rawl won 47.5% in predominantly Black Orangeburg County, and 43% in predominantly White Pickens County. I am doubtful of the claim that it’s because Greene was on the ballot before Rawl as they were on the ballot alphabetically. If that were the case, Black Republican candidate Tim Scott would not have been first in his race for the 1st House District as his was the 7th of 9 candidates on the ballot.
Bottom line is, no one knows what happened except that Alvin Greene is the Democratic Party nominee whether Carol Fowler or Jim Clyburn like it or not, and they have no one to blame but themselves.
Then again, I hope that ballot placement will make a difference. The Green Party is at the top of the ballot this year.
Jim and Gregg are right on the mark. The state Democratic Party, so eager (like the Republicans) to
keep third-party and independent (“petition”) candidates off the ballot, should have vetted Greene, then declined to accept his $10,400 filing fee, offering to meet him in court if he objected to not being on the primary ballot. The news media also were asleep at the switch, as was admitted this morning by Charleston Post and Courier columnist Brian Hicks. Finally, Vic Rawl, the presumptive Democratic nominee, counted his chickens before they hatched. A lot to be learned from this by SC Democrats and others.
Can anyone in South Carolina tell me if Vic Rawl is launching a write-in campaign for November? South Carolina election law contains a provision authorizing a party chair to go to court to get an injunction against any “sore loser” in a primary who then keeps on campaigning in the general election. The South Carolina Supreme Court upheld that law this year in Tempel v Platt.
Richard, there is a Facebook designed to do just that. Rawl would have to be leading the effort for the law to prohibit it, even under current law. The 1st amendment wouldn’t allow the courts to do anything about that it seems to me. I, or anyone else, is free to encourage the voters to write in Rawl, but Rawl is not allowed to do so.
And Dave, you are right. Not only does the democratic Party have something to learn from this, so do we Greens. We must ourselves be very careful to check out our nominees. We know Tom Clements well, so there is no risk there, but we must learn from the dem’s mistake.
As I understand it, the Democratic Party leadership is meeting at this hour to discuss what to do. Apparently there are security folks there, which would indicate that Clyburn is involved. The state election commission is set to certify the election results today by 3 PM. As I understand it, that will settle that.
This is from the Greenville News: Rawl, a former prosecutor, circuit judge and state representative, congratulated Greene on his win.
“The people have chosen,” said Rawl, 64. “There’s no question that Mr. Greene is the candidate they selected and I wish him the best.”
Having said that I don’t see how Rawl could launch a write in campaign nor even permit it to happen.
I had thought all along that speculation that Black voters had chosen Greene based on his name was off the mark until a friend said that Greene’s first name, Alvin, is more often the name of a Black person than a White person. I am sure there are plenty of people of all ethnicities named Alvin, but he’s right. All the Alvin’s I have even known personally were Black. I have lived my entire life in the deep south except three years in Caracas.
The whole uproar over this is ridiculous.
As a recent former resident of SC, I can honestly say that most of my friends had no idea who either person was before the primary. A little bit of campaigning could have gone a long way for Rawl – most of my friends say they’ve never even seen a sign for him.
I don’t think this case is any different than people randomlý choosing who they vote for down-ticket when it comes to judges or council members. Were a study done on down-ticket voting patterns, I’d bet most people pick, absent a campaign or name recognition, the candidate with either the most pleasant-sounding name, or one most similar to theirs.
Gregg, that may have had some impact, as you say. Yet, according to Brian Hicks’ Charleston column this morning
(titled “What’s Up with SC Dems?”), Greene took 74 percent of the Dem vote in Greenwood County, which is 2/3 white but only 52 percent in Orangeburg County, which is 2/3 African American (and next door to Greene’s home county). Moreover, one of the few counties which Rawl won was majority-black Jasper
County.
Thanks, Dave. It’s about time someone started looking at the actual election returns.
Um…Richard, I posted this in comment #2:
I’m not sure it was strictly race either as Rawl won 47.5% in predominantly Black Orangeburg County, and 43% in predominantly White Pickens County.
Them’s electun resultz. *Looks all hurt and stuff*
You’re right Dave. I had given no credence to the “Black name” argument until it was pointed out to me that Alvin was the “Black” name, and not Greene.
You’re right! That’s what happens when comments are on the long side, they don’t get read as carefully as short comments do.
The main problem was uninformed voters who stupidly voted in a race where they didn’t know anything about the candidates.
With all the attention to the candidates for governor, lt. governor, and Secretary of Education, there was no media coverage of the U.S. Senate candidates. Nobody held a debate. None of the newspapers interviewed both candidates. Bad.
Now, somebody needs to find out where this unemployed, broke person came up with $10,400 to register as a candidate. That’s not chicken feed. Somebody with money to waste wanted to throw a monkey-wrench in this election and they succeeded. I am not sure how one can trace the money, but it needs to be traced.
Were the voting machines hacked?
With the voting machines used in S.C., there is no way to know for sure that the reported vote is the one actually cast. These voting machines have been shown to report the vote incorrectly in other states. Maybe they messed up in this race.
#5 The full title of the court case was:
George E. Tempel, Chairman of the Charleston County Democratic Party, Respondent,. v. Eugene Platt, Appellant
Incidentally, Vic Rawl is a Democrat from Charleston County.
Firstly, regarding Alvin Greene himself. I am a physical therapist and have worked with plenty of people who talk and behave like him. Those people were folks who have had TBIs(tramatic brain injuries). I’m not saying he’s had one, but it’s clear that his mental abilities are highly limited. He make Sarah Palin look educated, and that’s “speaks” volumes.
He supposedly went to college and majored in Political Science–this should be easily proved or disproved. Alvin has reported that in the military his specialty was “military Intelligence.” Has he offered no proof. Mark Kirk of Illinois and other politicians prove that people with lie about their military record to seem more heroic.
The fact that an indigent man has $10, 400.00 to spend to run for office is highly suspicious on it’s own. Then you throw in that he is now asking reporters covering this strange story for money. South Carolina has a history of this happening in the past. Did someone who put him up for this tell him that if he wins people will pay for his story? He is refusing to show proof that the $10,400.00 was his money. He could easily prove himself right with bank documents.
Supposedly he and his friends criss-crossed the state to garner votes, yet he can’t name one place he visited.
This article shows that republicans like Joe “You Lie” WIlson, where financing aka planting highly-unqualified African-Americans in democratic races. This makes it more difficult for other democratic candidates who have a chance to compete against the republicans.
Then the republicans cross-over and vote for the “rube” via “Operation Chaos.” Rush Limbaugh told his republican listeners during the last presidential to cross-over and vote for Hillary to stop Obama from winning. This happened in states such as Texas.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/10/AR2010061004943.html
I find it very offensive that the people who did this would use a mentally-challenged, black man to harm the democratic process. They clearly did this to promote racial stereotypes. I found it absolutely no accident that they found a man who was black who had a obscenity charge against a white woman, and then gave him money to run. They wanted to hit on the old, Southern fear that black men wanted your white women. These people have no shame!!! I smell Karl Rove all over this.
To make things easier, here is a list of my questions:
1) Why won’t you show proof that it was your “Army money?”
2) Who are these “friends” that you say helped you canvas for votes and why haven’t any of them stepped forward to defend your story?
3)Doesn’t the public have a right to know, since you are now running for public office, the reason why you were–in your words–“involuntarily discharged” from the military?
It’s clear that the republicans that more and more people no longer believe their lies. They will do ANYTHING to stay in power.
Since the elected Senator from South Carolina will be casting votes that affect all US citizens and there are many questions about the legitimacy of his candidacy and the election, the US Justice Department should investigate what happened and those responsible should face criminal charges for interferring with the election process.
Statewide 95.9% of Democratic voters voted in the governor’s race (which was actively contested), 88.1% in the state superintendent of instruction, and 86.2% in the senate race. 99.4% of Republicans voted in the governor’s race.
This suggests that there were some voters crossing over to vote in the high profile Republican governor’s race, and a tiny percentage (2-3%) who took a Democratic ballot and didn’t find the GOP governor’s race on the ballot.
And given that 14% didn’t vote in the senate race, it probably meant that a large share of those who did were guessing.
Do South Carolina ballots include uncontested races? The federal races are listed under the statewide races in the results, and on the Republican side, the senate race was 7th. So on a ballot that included uncontested races, the senate race would have been a “down-ballot” race.
Many of the highest overall turnout counties were where there was a contested primary for a state representative race on the Democratic side. So it appears the fact that 68% of voters voted in the Republican primary was more a combination of Republicans coming out to vote in the governors race, and Democrats staying home, and less a result of cross-over voting. It is plain stupid of the Washington Post or James Clyburn to think there was cross-over voting the other way.
The area of lowest overall turnout was the area directly south of Charlotte, which probably means that the Charlotte TV stations don’t provide as much coverage to SC politics. The areas of Greene’s strength were the eastern part of the state, north of the Santee up to just west of I-95, and along the Georgia border south of the Saluda and Edisto rivers from Anderson to Allendale. At least some of these areas would be in the Florence and Augusta (GA) TV markets, which likely means weaker news coverage and also weaker signal coverage – which could result in more reliance on cable and satellite, which will have a national focus. Cherokee Count was an isolated pocket for Greene, but 93% of voters voted in the GOP primary there.
Jasper and Hampton counties had among the highest overall turnout, and had a state representative race. 91% of the vote in Jasper County was in the Democratic Primary.
Lancaster County went slightly for Rawl, but had 27% absentee turnout in the Democratic primary, vs. 4% in the Republican primary. And the absentee vote was 84% for Rawl. The election day percentage for Greene was very similar to that in neighboring Chesterfield, Kershaw, and Chester counties. But in those counties, the absentee share of the vote was much lower and the Greene share was just a slight bit less in absentee votes than election day votes. It is the Lancaster absentee votes which are anomalous.
Other areas of greater Rawl strength were in the Columbia area, and counties to the north. Columbia probably has a greater political awareness because of the capital and the university. Two of the gubernatorial candidates were from Fairfield and Kershaw counties, and Kershaw County had a particularly high turnout (Sheheen is from Camden in Kershaw county). Rawl is from Charleston and won that county.
The fact that a county has a somewhat smaller black population doesn’t necessarily mean that most voters in the Democratic Primary were not black. 80% of the voters in Greenwood County voted in the Republican Primary. If whites were twice as likely to vote as blacks, you could have a Democratic primary that was all black, even though only 1/3 of the population was black.
I don’t necessarily think the voting pattern was racial. I suspect that most people would favor “Greene” over “Rawl” in the absences of other information. “Rawl” is simply a kind of odd and unfamiliar name. Greenwood is known as the Emerald City, so “Greene” would have particular favor there. Ninety Six is also in the county, so there would probably also be higher awareness of Nathanael Greene there (Greenwood is named for an early plantation known as Green Wood, while Greenville is named for General Greene).
Robert Ford (one of the Democratic gubernatorial candidates) claimed that “Greene” indicates someone is black while “Green” is a white name, saying that former slaves added an extra “e”. More likely, if there are a lot of black Greene’s is that some white Greene’s owned some larger plantations.
It is hilarious to squabble over $10,400 when the opposition is throwing around $millions.
Then to report Greene is mentally challenged is equally hilarious. Most of the Democratic Party will say if you don’t believe in global warming you have a mental problem.
I’ve heard Greene speak and he sounds more intelligent than most politicians.
#17 (dissertation): I note that Richard Blumenthal, the US Senate candidate in Connecticut, did not make your list of liars. Could that be because he’s a (gasp!) DEMOCRAT??
“Then the republicans (sic) cross-over… via “Operation Chaos.” Rush Limbaugh told his republican (sic) listeners during the last presidential [race] to cross-over and vote for Hillary to stop Obama from winning.”
Rush suggested that people vote for Hillary because Obama was leading. If Hillary had been leading the race, Rush would have urged his listeners to vote for Obama (then people like you would be implying that Rush was sexist).
Do you happen to know who James Golden, aka “Bo Snerdly,” is? I doubt it.
Before you make any more comments about Rush, you might try actually listening to his show a time or two.
Please name one Democrat who could defeat Senator Jim DeMint this year.
Dem Cross-over Produced Haley, Greene, and “Republicans for Obamacare”
If you believe as I do that 14% of the “Republicans” voting in the SC GOP Primary were Democrats, it answers three questions: 1) Why did 14% of the “Republicans” in a right-wing orgy like the SC GOP Primary vote FOR Obamacare? 2) How did Alvin Greene become the Democrat Senate nominee? 3) How did Haley go from a pre-scandal mid-May Rasmussen 30% (with 22% undecided) to a 49% Primary share? A June 2 poll still had her at 31%.
Assuming that the 22% undecided divided their votes in proportion to the four candidates’ standings in mid-May, 31 plus 14 is 45, or close to what Haley pulled. Shrewd Dems (with the emotional intelligence that GOP Asperger cases lack) realize that if numerous lengthy late night calls and Marchant’s semi-credible polygraph are “on the table” along with Bauer’s suggestion that Haley clear herself with a polygraph but Haley’s chosen not to do so, the candidate most likely to implode before November is Haley. The theory that Haley’s jump from 31 to 49 is all due to most of the 22 undecided going for Haley is not only contrived, but only answers the third question, not the other two. My theory answers all three. The shrewd cross-over Dems voted for Obamacare, left no one minding the store to stop unemployed felon Greene, and successfully gave it to Haley.
Hey, Republicans did this in the Wisconsin 1972 Primary and put McGovern on the path over Scoop Jackson, Muskie, and HHH. Turnabout is fair play to produce a Sanford-with-ovaries – or a Sheheen victory when further evidence arises.
Robert Edward Johnson
Greenville