Go vote, people. In all too many of these races, the primary is all there is; this is the election.
If you forget what you’re voting on, here’s the recap of our endorsements, and a link to the endorsements themselves. Whether this helps you remember who you wanted to vote for or wanted to vote against, just go vote.
Here’s the brief endorsement recap from today’s paper:
The State’s
endorsements
IT’S PRIMARY DAY — the only chance voters will get to pick who represents them in many offices. Here’s a recap of The State editorial board’s endorsements:
— Republican U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, the quintessential conservative Republican, is an erudite advocate of reason and sound policy, taking courageous stands that make him a leader in the Senate. Michael Cone appears to be the stronger of two weak Democratic candidates for the same office.
— GOP Rep. Joe Wilson is dedicated to the service of the 2nd Congressional District, and his views come closer than his opponent’s to those of his constituents.
Democrat Blaine Lotz, also seeking the 2nd District seat, is an Air Force veteran and former assistant secretary of defense, and well grounded in both foreign and domestic issues.
— Democratic state Rep. John Scott and his opponent have similar positions, and electing his opponent to succeed Sen. Kay Patterson in District 19 would seem like a reward for the unacceptable state of the Richland 1 schools he has overseen for 16 years.
— Democratic Sen. Darrell Jackson (District 21) understands our state’s challenges and is focused on fixing the way we fund education, and improving public health and financial literacy. He has a good track record of working across party lines to get things done.
— The pro-voucher/anti-government groups that are trying to intimidate our Legislature would claim credit if so powerful an incumbent as GOP Sen. Jake Knotts (District 23) was defeated, strengthening their hand in a battle that goes far beyond their immediate issues.
— Richland County Council Chairman Joe McEachern, a Democrat running to succeed Mr. Scott in House District 77, would work to free local governments from the constraints of meddling legislators, overhaul the broken tax system, restructure state government and provide a good public education for all children.
Michael Koska’s campaign for the Republican nomination in District 77 grows out of his grassroots involvement in local transportation issues. He would be more effective than his off-putting opponent.
— Republican David Herndon seeks to replace Rep. Bill Cotty in District 79 to make sure an avid voucher proponent doesn’t win. He is committed to improving the public schools, in part to strengthen the economy, and he’s fairly knowledgeable about tax policy.
— Democratic Rep. Joe Neal’s (District 70) depth of knowledge in education and health care is impressive, and he fights effectively for equal educational opportunity for children regardless of their address, to force attention to the medical needs of those too sick to care for themselves and to promote civil justice.
— Democratic Rep. Jimmy Bales’ (District 80) work as a high school principal gave him the real-life understanding of the challenges of educating poor children that most legislators lack; and he appreciates the need to overhaul our tax system and to give the governor more control over state agencies.
— Democratic Rep. Chris Hart (District 83) is focused on the big picture that his challenger shows little interest in, and he is committed to creating a stronger public education system to help transform our state.
— Republican Mike Miller understands our state’s problems, wants to bring more services to District 96 rather than more parades and seems more supportive of improving public schools than the incumbent.
— Richland County Sheriff Leon Lott, a Democrat, established a cutting-edge DNA testing lab, has been in the forefront in the battle against gangs and engages citizens through his innovative community advisory board and community policing programs.
— Lexington County Sheriff James Metts, a Republican, is an accomplished, experienced law enforcement officer who has implemented groundbreaking programs.
— Democratic incumbent Damon Jeter has the experience and broader focus to make him the better choice in Richland County Council District 3.
— Democrat Johnny Bland has been active in the community and area schools and outshines his opponents in Richland Council District 7.
— Republican Val Hutchinson, running for re-election in Richland District 9, is an effective leader who has promoted good growth, called on developers to help provide infrastructure, opposed the proliferation of billboards and objected to an unneeded baseball park.
— In Richland District 10, Democrat Kelvin Washington has a firm grasp of issues, understands how county government works and would hit the ground running.
There’s no good reason to elect ministerial positions with no policy-making duties. With competence as the only relevant question, we see no reason to fire any of these incumbents on the ballot today: Richland County Democratic Clerk of Court Barbara Scott and Coroner Gary Watts, and Lexington County Republican Auditor Chris Harmon and Clerk of Court Beth Carrigg.
Related Posts
Of course I voted, I made it a priority to do my part to rid Lexington County of Knotts and Metts and the state of SC of Lindsey Graham.
Voted against Graham and Wilson. Voted for Koska.
Wonder how much Lindsey Graham will be talking about immigration in the coming months following his less than stellar performance at the ballot box yesterday?
The people of SC sent a message yesterday. Amnesty for law breakers is not acceptable.
For an incumbent like Graham to get less than 90% of the vote against an unknown, non-politician, is a stunning message of how angry voters are with his selling out SC and America to out-of-state and foreign donors.
You neo-con idiots are so full of bull. Graham got 67% of the vote in the primary. He’ll probably win in the general election with 55-60%. Graham is an ultra right-wing pro-occupation, anti-choice, pro-ruin-the- ANWR, pro-activist-conservative-judge neo-con. To suggest an even more radical neo-con would be better for the country is ludicrous. Given the utter failure of the conservative agenda over the last 8 years we can only hope the pendulum will swing back in the direction of sanity. Fortunately the defeat of the nutcase Witherspoon indicates a tiny bit of common sense still exists.
bud, take a deep breath. Step back, and put the adjectives down.
The people who are angry at Graham — aside from you, I mean, the ones who will vote Republican — aren’t neocons. They’re paleocons.
As for the rest of your misplaced modifiers, you might want to look at how Graham positioned himself. He’s a smart guy; he uses words well. He’s an expression of “mainstream, traditional conservatism” — the kind that I praised back in this column. Despise that if that’s what you want to do, but be accurate. Don’t try to demonize him with the most extreme — and inaccurate — modifiers you can think of. You’re not going to persuade anybody that way.
Now, for the rest of you… I make it a point not to argue with Lee (his logic and command of the facts are just so devastating… just ask him; he’ll tell you). But I occasionally point out the obvious to make sure the innocent are not taken in by his wild assertions. First, when is the last time you saw anybody win anything by over 90 percent? Second, Buddy Witherspoon was not unknown, and certainly was not a non-politician. He has been a leader of his party in Lexington County — at one time in recent years the most Republican county in the country, and still pretty close to it — for a long time. He has served since 1996 on the Republican National Committee. He didn’t come out of nowhere, the way, say, a Bob Conley did.
But he most certainly represents a disreputable strain of Republicanism, and that’s why he was so soundly repudiated by the voters yesterday.
Finally, here’s a lesson for all. Not to knock the blogosphere or anything, but anybody who forms his impression of popular thought, or the Zeitgeist, or trends in the real world, on the basis of comments on blogs — this one included — is going to miss the boat. Not to cast aspersions on y’all, but the people who comment on blogs tend to be — how shall I put this? — a tad more intense than the general population. They are not representative.
If you read this blog or any other, you’ll think, That Lindsey Graham’s really in trouble. But he wasn’t. He never was. Not with the overwhelming majority of real Republican voters — much less the full population.
Remember this.
I never said Lindsey was really in trouble. He’s got the election sewn up already thanks to his multi-million dollar war chest (what IS the going rate to buy a Senator these days, anyway?).
Plus, to follow on to what you wrote:
> – a tad more intense than the general
> population. They are not representative.
What that really means is that incumbents rely on the ignorance and apathy of the uninformed electorate. It would be like
me vote on who should run The State newspaper. Just because I have a vote doesn’t mean I’ll use it wisely.
All I said was that the Republicans sent him a message on his views related to illegal immigration. I would imagine a large number of the 2/3 voters he did bamboozle have no idea what Lindsey proposed last year… or that he called people opposed to illegal immigration racists.
Brad, the whole endless occupation of Iraq thing has become a radical cause. The vast majority of both Americans and Iraqis want American forces brought home within a year. All the polls support that. The 2006 election confirmed it. Pro stay-the-course people are falling like stones, just ask the 3 GOP incumbents who just lost in special elections. Lindsey will no doubt win in November but I suspect his support for the Iraq debacle will cut into his winning percentage, even in SC.
Perhaps instead of calling Graham an ULTRA right-wing, pro-occupation, anti-choice, pro-ruin-the-ANWR, pro-activist-conservative-judge neo-con, I should have just called him a GARDEN VARIETY right-wing, pro-occupation, anti-choice, pro-ruin-the-ANWR, pro-activist-conservative-judge neo-con. But to call him a mainstream United State’s senator is really absurd.
Make that:
GARDEN VARIETY right-wing, pro-occupation, anti-choice, pro-ruin-the-ANWR, pro-activist-conservative-judge PALEOCON.
Well, bud, I’ll just thank you for making the effort, and leave it at that… well, except to say that Graham wouldn’t be the paleocon. The people you were talking about earlier — the Witherspoon voters — would be the paleos. Graham, by comparison, would be the NEO.
Remember, the invasion of Iraq was a NEO idea. PALEOs, like say Pat Buchanan, were always against it, as would be anyone with isolationist tendencies (unless he’s an isolationist leftist, a creature we’ve inherited from the anti-Vietnam War movement).
Of course, one cannot expect intellectual consistency from candidates who are primarily motivated by powerful emotions. Mr. Witherspoon is an example of this. While espousing nativism with regard to immigration (although not to the extreme degree as Bob Conley, who amazingly may have won the Democratic nomination for U.S. Senate), he also espouses the GOP boilerplate on Iraq: “I will not cut and run.” If he were consistent, he’d advocate pulling our troops back from all over the world and putting them down on the border with Mexico, as many paleos (and some on the left) do.
What political consistancy is there in your supporting war hero John McCain and traitor Barak Obama?
The invasion of Iraq was based on:
* Clinton’s failure to destroy Saddam’s WMD with a 80,000 tons of bombs dropped by the USAF
* Hans Blix and the UN saying 2 days before the invasion that Saddam still had lots of WMD
* Joseph Wilson (Valerie Plame’s husband) writing an official report that Saddam was buying uranium.
* European intelligence showing Iraq providing cash to the 9/11 hijackers.
* Saddam paying $20,000 to the families of every suicide bomber around the world
* Iraq running 2 hijacker training camps where used by the 9/11 hijackers
* Iraq harboring Bin Laden and other top Al Qaeda leaders