Did all of the candidates you voted for Tuesday win? If so, do us a favor, and explain what was guiding your thinking. Did you decide contest-by-contest, for different reasons and on different issues in each case? Or was there a guiding principle or set of principles? If so, please help out the rest of us by explaining it or them.
I was just reading a letter from a voter who says all of his candidates won. That got me to thinking: How can that be, except by random chance?
I’ve looked at the results, and discussed them, and looked at them some more, and I have yet to see intelligible patterns.
Do you? I can’t see a consistent pattern regarding positions on taxes, spending, schools or approaches to leadership. I see no messages regarding "conservative" or "liberal" philosophies.
Simultaneously, voters in the Republican primary overwhelmingly renominated the governor, and gave his choice for Superintendent of Education a victory without runoff in a five-way race. But they rejected the same education ideas in Bill Cotty’s House race, as well as several others.
A guy who puts himself forth as a good ally for the governor, with philosophy to match, wins the treasurer’s race over a guy with pretty much the same governing philosophy (Greg Ryberg was the only person I heard today, in a couple of hours at the State House, who spoke in favor of the governor’s veto of the entire budget) who was actually endorsed by the governor. Thomas Ravenel had no interest in being treasurer just a short while ago, and as near as I can tell, has yet to express such an interest. In an interview recently Mr. Ravenel declined even to promise he would serve the full term. Yet he stomped a guy who is highly qualified, deeply interested in the actual job of being treasurer, and spent $2 million of his own money trying for the second time to get that job.
That makes you think the voters aren’t paying attention. But then they give a big lead to the challenger against a lieutenant governor who has been popular, but has shown himself repeatedly to be undeserving of the public trust.
So the voters are paying attention, right?
I could go on, but I’m interested in hearing from you folks who hit the jackpot. Explain it to us all.
Related Posts
I’d like to hear the same 🙂 I hit 80% (Ryberg was my one loser). I think most voters have multiple criteria upon which they base their votes. Certain criteria carry more weight than others depending on the race.
For instance, some could say a vote for Hammond is “inconsistent” with a vote for Sanford, Ryberg, Campbell, and Floyd. The assumed common theme being support for the Governor’s agenda whether it be school reform and choice or executive branch restructuring. While I do support the Governor on those issues, I placed less value on them than on the value I place on rewarding good administrators. I also doubted that the Sec of State’s position on restructuring would have much to do with the Legislature’s action on that item. I liked what I had learned about the Business One Stop program and saw no compelling reason to replace the incumbent. I don’t view that as an inconsistency of principle as much as an inconsistency of criteria upon which I made my decision.
I think that many voters are motivated to go to the polls either by obligation of conscience or based on interest in one or two races. They tend to pick the others based on surface level impressions. I think that is what you saw in the Treasurer’s race.
I voted for Lovelace – mainly to send a message to Sanford.
Voted for Campbell. Bauer – well, I think it is obvious.
I voted for Ryberg. I don’t know anyone that voted for Ravenel. Can’t believe he won with the margin he did.
I voted for Staton.
Voted for Mark Hammond.
Voted for Bill Cotty.
I want to know if THomas Ravenel has benefitted from ANY government contracts in his construction business. He loves to talk about how he hates government and how it needs to get out of his way so that he can make more money. Well, if he has used his name to obtain government construction contracts-or if he has obtained any government contracts period, he is a hypocrite and has NO business serving the people of South Carolina. Government is NOT a business and our founders never designed it to be run like one.
All I can say is, if I were a candidate, I would pay me not to vote for me.
I hit 100%…. but of course I voted Democrat.
Had I voted GOP I would have gone:
Lovelace
Jordan (I would only have voted for him so I could say “I veted fer Jerdan”… I assume all his supporters get ‘e’ and ‘o’ mixed up like he does)
McKowen (or whatever his name was)
Willis
Weathers
Stanton- I mean Staton
shoot, 1 out of 6 aint so bad, my success in picking one correct already puts me ahead of SCRG’s picks for statehouse.
I, too, hit 100% with Tommy Moore and I hope to get 100% again in November, voting for Spratt and Moore. Sanford’s just got to go. South Carolina Republicans are embarrassing themselves (Bauer) and fighting each other (Sanford vs. the legislature). It’ll be refreshing to have an SC governor who doesn’t embarrass us with ignorance in front of the entire country. Fortunately we have Spratt and Graham, whom I think represent us well, but we’ve got to throw some of these other bums out if we’re going to improve our state.
I despise politicians, so here are my logic gates:
1) No second (or third, etc.) generation politians.
2) No incumbents, unless they’ve done a great job.
Makes voting very easy. Sadly, very few of my choices win.
Capn W, I’d add the following to your clever list:
The candidate must explain his or her position on an issue in more than two sentences (see Jim Rex.com).
The candidate must not present a danger to society (see Bauer.com).
I got most of them, but as a public school teacher I am bitter over Staton not getting into a run-off with Floyd. On the up side, I guess now Jim Rex can start spending his money getting ready for Nov., and the voucher battle can begin. I was just hoping it to be “lost” in the run-off. Glad to see Bill Cotty get past Sheri Few. Phew.
As to governor, I have said a couple of times on comments on articles in The State, Gov. Sanford should have vetoed that budget in its entirety a day before the election instead of waiting until the polls were closed. What a coward.