The best SC election result in a while

Screenshot — click to see source.

Last night, I started to text Alan Wilson my congratulations. I was going to say:

Alan, I’m very happy for you tonight, and very relieved for South Carolina.

But when his number came up, I realized it was a landline, probably at the AG’s office. I guess I don’t have his mobile. So I’ll just say it here.

I’m happy for Alan not only because he’s a good guy, but because he was the only remotely decent, qualified, sane candidate seeking the GOP nomination. He was a guy who was running because he thinks S.C. needs a good governor (near as I can tell, that idea was nowhere in the minds of his opponents), and that he could do the job.

And I think he’s right. Let’s hope so, because he’s now the guy who will be elected governor in November. That is, officially elected governor, in the de jure sense. The de facto election was yesterday.

Is that a crack at Jermaine Johnson? Absolutely not. I don’t know him, and know little about him (factors that most voters in South Carolina share), but I know a lot of people who do know him and say only good things about him. He seems to have clearly been a stronger candidate than the other two who ran. But among those people who say good things about him and are thoroughly versed in the realities of South Carolina politics, I don’t think a single one thinks the Democrats are going to win this time.

Just to review: No Democrat has been elected governor in this state in this century. The last was Jim Hodges in 1998, and he had to sell out completely on the state lottery (he was a staunch and articulate opponent of the idea before that) in order to win. Before that, the last had been Dick Riley, who was first elected in the ’70s and was already out of office when I arrived at The State in 1987.

Since then, the Democrats have had two strong candidates — Vincent Sheheen and James Smith, whom I helped make a run at the office in 2018. Vincent made a very good showing in the 2010 race — a tough one because that was the year of the Tea Party and the beginning of the state GOP’s slide into very disturbing territory. But he didn’t do as well.

There was no one as strong as those two seeking the Democratic nomination this year.

So for me as a voter, the issue was as always: How do we get the best — or least bad — result out of this election? Given that the Republican was almost completely certain to win, that meant Alan Wilson had to win. Because the rest of the field was… disturbing, to use that relatively neutral word again.

Never mind the bullets South Carolina dodged on June 9. In yesterday’s runoff, Alan was up against a woman who had offered zero reasons why any voter who cares about good governance would vote for her to become our state’s chief executive. Go look at her website if you doubt me.

And yet, she had received more votes than Alan Wilson had on June 9. That was worrisome, since to beat her, Alan had to get the votes that had gone to the other candidates who didn’t make the runoff cut. Arguments can be made that those people were worse options than Pam Evette. And Wilson would need the support of people who actually voted for those people.

And he got them, I’m happy to say. In fact, he crushed Pam Evette, by a proportion you would have expected back in the days before the American and South Carolina electorates went mad about a decade ago. He got 69 percent of the vote, at last count.

That’s what makes this the best election result in SC since… well, since Russell Ott beat first Dick Harpootlian, and then the Republican to become my new senator in 2024. In this election, people who had just voted for some of the worst candidates possible somehow managed to see by yesterday that Alan was clearly the better choice. Which he was, for all sorts of reasons that used to matter in elections, but seldom do these days — things like experience, understanding of the job, character, temperament, and ability to see beyond the pettiest concerns of your own partisan base.

Cindi pointed out some of those things in her paper’s runoff endorsement of Alan. I was reminded of such point again this morning. I had coffee with James Smith to talk about something totally unrelated to this stuff, but of course the runoff came up. James told me about something I had totally missed.

Did you watch the GOP gubernatorial debates? I tried to watch one for about two minutes, but stopped so I wouldn’t hurl. James tells me that Pam Evette tried to make an issue of him. She blathered on about Alan having supported a “liberal judge” candidate — that candidate being James. That’s the level on which she operates — Trumpian labels, rather than facts or other relevant considerations.

I hadn’t remembered Alan supporting him, but James did not dispute that fact, and if it’s correct, that would make sense.

Let me tell you an anecdote from the 2018 election. One day, Alan was presiding over a ceremony on the south lawn of the State House that was honoring — I think (it’s been awhile) — public officeholders who have served in the National Guard (or in the military generally — as I said, it’s been awhile).

Alan and James are officers in the Guard. Alan is a JAG officer, and James was a JAG officer who, after 9/11, resigned his commission to enlist as an infantry soldier. He eventually regained his commission in that capacity, and led troops in combat in Afghanistan. That gained him a place in the Guard’s Hall of Fame. He’s now a lieutenant colonel. If there are any officers in the Guard who don’t deeply respect his service, I haven’t met them.

I was standing on the edges of that gathering, waiting for James to come down from his office in the Blatt Building (where I think he was making calls to potential donors or something else dreary but necessary). As I waited, Alan came up to me to ask whether James was going to make it. He was very anxious to make sure James would be there to be recognized and honored. He was very clear and insistent on that point, and his tone and facial expression strongly emphasized his words.

Or to put it another way, the Republican attorney general was very worried he wouldn’t get a chance to honor the Democratic nominee for governor, in the middle of the general election. That’s the way Pam Evette would have put it, and she would have expected voters to be totally outraged at such a display of honor and decency.

So I went up and told James “We have to go NOW,” and he came along, and as I recall, Alan was quite relieved.

To the Pam Evettes of this world, that story would damn him. So I’m quite relieved that she won’t be our governor beginning next year.

 

3 thoughts on “The best SC election result in a while

  1. Brad Warthen Post author

    Um… actually, I just checked, that number I tried to text was NOT the AG’s office. It was his old number when he was practicing with Willoughby and Hoefer.

    I really need to update my contacts. But to be honest, that’s not likely to happen. I’ve been building that database since the turn of the century, since I first got a Palm pilot. It’s quite a mess. But more often than not, I can find what I need. Just not this time…

    Reply
  2. Brad Warthen Post author

    As has usually been the case in recent years, I tend to find the best numerical analysis of this South Carolina election in… The New York Times. (If you know of another source that’s as good or better, I’d love to hear about it.)

    Here’s a page that breaks things down in considerable detail. I doubt you’ll be able to see it if you don’t subscribe, so I’ll describe some of it to you…

    • The merest glance at the map itself (there are other charts with the map) tells a pretty stark story. Wilson won in all but three counties.
    • Two of those are statistically insignificant (for Republican primary considerations) counties in the Pee Dee. The other was Horry County, which had the second-biggest turnout in the state. Evette won there, 55 percent to 45. I don’t know how much significance you attach to her relative success there, but consider this: do you think Horry County is a like the rest of the state — politically, culturally, or any other way? The rest of the map suggests not.
    • The biggest runoff turnout (41,529 with 95 percent counted) was in Greenville County. Wilson won BIG there, with 76 percent of the vote.
    • Where did Evette win the “biggest?” In the county of my birth, Marlboro, where she got 66 percent of the vote. But let’s talk real numbers. She received 429 votes. That’s what the map says. For some reason, a chart next to it — also supposedly based on 95 percent counted — says she got 652. Either way, it’s more Republicans than I thought even lived within the county boundaries. The two different versions seem to agree that she won by a 32 percent margin (66 to 34 on the map).
    • The county where I live and vote — Lexington, which is also Wilson’s home base — had the third-highest turnout. Here, he won by a 54 percentage-point margin (77 to 23). Over in Richland, where he works, he won by 51 points.

    The NYT also did some demographic breakdowns:

    • Wilson got 73 percent of the vote in “Majority college-educated areas.”
    • In “Lower-income areas,” he got 65 percent.
    • The NYT didn’t show any demographic groups that had Evette winning. But she probably would have ruled in a category of “Areas with an average of one beachwear shop per block.” Sorry. Couldn’t resist.
    • Most national — and I suppose most state — coverage emphasized the meaningless Trump endorsements of both candidates. Which demonstrates questionable news judgment, since the effect seemed to be, to use a World Cup term, nil. Wilson got 70 percent of the vote in “Areas that voted strongly for Trump,” and 71 percent in “Areas that voted strongly for Harris.”

    Of course, there’s little indication that Trump had any hope of influencing the outcome. The concern for him, with his phenomenally fouled-up priorities, was to have an excuse (by his standards) to say, “I won!” I haven’t looked to see, but I expect he’s going around saying that today, despite the fact that the candidate who was his until the home stretch got creamed.

    Reply
    1. Brad Warthen Post author

      I found myself wondering, as I do when I see such a statement, what these “Majority college-educated areas” look like on a map. They must be pretty small, and located within a few blocks of an institution of higher learning.

      Or are they simply areas with higher incomes? There’s a correlation there, if not a perfect one.

      I wonder about this because only a third of South Carolinians have college degrees. It seems like you’d really have to narrowly define an area for it to be “majority college educated.”

      By the way, this isn’t a crack at SC. The national average is less than 36 percent. And that’s pulled up by, for instance, the 48.3 percent in Massachusetts. That’s the highest in the nation — but still not quite a majority.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *