DSCC Seems to be Playing with South Carolina

[Lunar]

Best summary of all of the details, although from a Democratic partisan perspective:
http://senateguru.com/diary/775/scsen-introducing-brad-hutto

Remember too that the DSCC is running ads right now attacking Demint (included in above link), so they seem to be playing with this race in the early stages.

From more neutral sources:
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/senate/demint-to-face-a-democratic-ch.html
http://www.postandcourier.com/news/2009/jul/01/hutto_may_challenge_demint87739/

[Kaine for Senate '18]

This is probably just a scare tactic.  We have too many other seats to focus on.  DeMint could only go down in a 1958/1994 style election.

[TeePee4Prez]

This is probably just a scare tactic.  We have too many other seats to focus on.  DeMint could only go down in a 1958/1994 style election.

I think in 2006, Inez Tennenbaum could have beaten him.

[Lunar]

I would disagree that it's a scare tactic - scaring who? - Demint already has plenty of money.  I think it's an experiment, quite unlikely to be successful, but possibly worth the money at this stage, to see if any headway can be made into making this a legitimate race.  Every cycle has your races which are surprisingly close.  And besides, the more states you can tell your donors that you're on the offense against, especially against politicians they detest -- the more money you can milk out of them for the DSCC.

And again, the more states that are on the offensive playing field, the more opportunities one has to have lightning strike, "focusing" probably isn't the best strategy at all.

I mean, it's a completely empty threat at this point.  

[Sam Spade]

When is the last time an incumbent South Carolina senator was defeated? 

Unless I've forgotten, it's the 1940s, I believe and that was back when only the primary mattered.

[JohnnyLongtorso]

A top-tier candidate might make this competitive... If there were any of those in South Carolina.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

DeMint is a total lunatic, but South Carolina seems to like their incumbents, even if they're 94 years old.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I would disagree that it's a scare tactic - scaring who? - Demint already has plenty of money.  I think it's an experiment, quite unlikely to be successful, but possibly worth the money at this stage, to see if any headway can be made into making this a legitimate race.  Every cycle has your races which are surprisingly close.  And besides, the more states you can tell your donors that you're on the offense against, especially against politicians they detest -- the more money you can milk out of them for the DSCC.

And again, the more states that are on the offensive playing field, the more opportunities one has to have lightning strike, "focusing" probably isn't the best strategy at all.

I mean, it's a completely empty threat at this point.  

I tend to agree with you on this. My basic though was Menendez is trying to get the limousine liberals to donate more dough and what better way then to entice them with the slim chance of removing the Numero Uno Conservative in the Senate.

[Lief 🗽]

Demint really should be beatable, since I don't think South Carolina is that crazy conservative (Obama lost by less than 10 points). Too bad we don't really have anyone to run.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

DeMint is likely safe in 2010.  With the constitutional offices up in 2010, the Democratic candidates capable of running a statewide race have a clear incentive to run for them. Governor is an open race, Lt. Governor might be open, and if not, Bauer is likely the weakest of the Republican constitutional incumbents except possibly Converse Chellis who replaced cokehead Ravenel and thus hasn't been tested in a statewide race.  McMaster is running for Governor instead of reelection as Governor.

So that's four statewide offices, Governor, Lt. Governor, Treasurer, and Attorney General that are far easier to campaign for than having to fight an incumbent Senator with a campaign warchest.

As for the other constitutional offices, Comptroller General Eckstrom of SNL fame, Secretary of State Mark Hammond, Adjutant General Stan Spears, Commissioner of Agriculture Hugh Weathers, and our sole Democratic constitutional officer, Superintendent of Education Jim Rex, should each be able to easily to win reelection if they seek it.


DeMint should be a much easier target in 2016 if Obama is a popular two-term president.  His race and that of the Presidential race will be the only statewide races them  Indeed, I will be so rash as to make a prediction for 2016.  If Obama wins a second term in 2012, DeMint loses in 2016.  No wonder he's gunning for Obama to face his Waterloo.

[Mr.Phips]

I think Democrats would actually have a better chance here than in Louisiana, which still isnt very good. 

[Lunar]

Another thing to consider:  sometimes running a losing campaign, as long as it's credible or surpasses expectations, can be enough of a platform to run for another statewide office later, certainly an incentive for Hutto

[Meeker]

When is the last time an incumbent South Carolina senator was defeated? 

Unless I've forgotten, it's the 1940s, I believe and that was back when only the primary mattered.

I was curious: Fritz Hollings beat Donald Russell in the 1966 primary

However, no South Carolina senator has ever been defeated in a general election since the popular vote came into use.

[Brittain33]

However, no South Carolina senator has ever been defeated in a general election since the popular vote came into use.

If Hollings had been running in a year other than 1998, he might have lost. That environment was about perfect for him to defeat Inglis.

Of course, I'm not arguing you can flip that around for a Republican incumbent in the state.

[The Mikado]

Hey, as long as a semi-credible opponent ties DeMint down and forces him to tap SC's GOP fundraisers, rather than have them send their checks elsewhere, why not?  (Assuming that this is just a feint and not a serious DSCC move.)

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

DeMint is probably safe here in 2010, especially since it appears as if it will be a Republican leaning cycle. The Democrats really have no one big on the bench to run, and DeMint, other than being a far-right loon sometimes, hasn't done anything that would cause him to lose reelection, especially if the Democrats do not run anyone worth noting. They have a much better chance at picking up the Governor's Mansion by capitalizing on Sanford's tactics, but even then they might be unsuccessful.

[Alexander Hamilton]

DeMint is probably safe here in 2010, especially since it appears as if it will be a Republican leaning cycle. The Democrats really have no one big on the bench to run, and DeMint, other than being a far-right loon sometimes, hasn't done anything that would cause him to lose reelection, especially if the Democrats do not run anyone worth noting. They have a much better chance at picking up the Governor's Mansion by capitalizing on Sanford's tactics, but even then they might will be unsuccessful.

[HAnnA MArin County]

Obama only did so well in South Carolina because the African American turnout there was really high and he got a fair share of the white vote, although not nearly enough to carry the state. I think in order for Democrats to carry South Carolina (and all Southern states in general), they're going to have to do better among white voters but since they make up the base of the Republican Party (Southern whites), I don't see this happening anytime soon so I'd say DeMint is safe, unfortunately. The huge African American turnout won't be there in 2010 like it was in 2008 so that also adds to the probability that DeMint will retain his seat. Also, he was the #1 most conservative member of the U.S. Senate and was one of two who voted against Hillary's confirmation as Secretary of State (the other being Diaper David Vitter) - for that reason alone, he should go.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Obama only did so well in South Carolina because the African American turnout there was really high and he got a fair share of the white vote, although not nearly enough to carry the state. I think in order for Democrats to carry South Carolina (and all Southern states in general), they're going to have to do better among white voters but since they make up the base of the Republican Party (Southern whites), I don't see this happening anytime soon so I'd say DeMint is safe, unfortunately. The huge African American turnout won't be there in 2010 like it was in 2008 so that also adds to the probability that DeMint will retain his seat. Also, he was the #1 most conservative member of the U.S. Senate and was one of two who voted against Hillary's confirmation as Secretary of State (the other being Diaper David Vitter) - for that reason alone, he should go.

Statewide races are different than Presidential ones. Inez Tennembaum nearly won in 2004 over DeMint, while Bush carried the state by 18%. I'm not saying he will lose, but its not a cut and dry case that he wins handily. He's popular in the more conservative upstate, but here in the lowcountry, he isn't invisible. Of course, it depends on who the Democrats put up. Just because Obama did poorly with whites in SC doesn't mean that no Democrat can get 30% of them, it just means that Obama could not.

[JohnnyLongtorso]

Obama only did so well in South Carolina because the African American turnout there was really high and he got a fair share of the white vote, although not nearly enough to carry the state. I think in order for Democrats to carry South Carolina (and all Southern states in general), they're going to have to do better among white voters but since they make up the base of the Republican Party (Southern whites), I don't see this happening anytime soon so I'd say DeMint is safe, unfortunately. The huge African American turnout won't be there in 2010 like it was in 2008 so that also adds to the probability that DeMint will retain his seat. Also, he was the #1 most conservative member of the U.S. Senate and was one of two who voted against Hillary's confirmation as Secretary of State (the other being Diaper David Vitter) - for that reason alone, he should go.

Actually, Tenenbaum didn't come close. She lost by something like 11 percent.

Statewide races are different than Presidential ones. Inez Tennembaum nearly won in 2004 over DeMint, while Bush carried the state by 18%. I'm not saying he will lose, but its not a cut and dry case that he wins handily. He's popular in the more conservative upstate, but here in the lowcountry, he isn't invisible. Of course, it depends on who the Democrats put up. Just because Obama did poorly with whites in SC doesn't mean that no Democrat can get 30% of them, it just means that Obama could not.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Actually, Tenenbaum didn't come close. She lost by something like 11 percent.

9.5% actually, but a month earlier the polls were much closer.   By comparison Bush beat Kerry by 17.1%.

If it were an open seat in 2010, I'd rate it as Lean Republican, but between incumbency and other races for Democrats to aim for in the State, it's safe for DeMint. That said, I can think of one good reason for the DSCC to spend money here.  Every dollar they force DeMint to raise is one less dollar available to the GOP for the Statewide races.  It wouldn't be a particularly efficient way to funnel National dollars to help State candidates, but the Democrats need to regain the Governor's Mansion in 2010 if they hope to avoid a GOP gerrymander at redistricting.

[Alexander Hamilton]

It's a good thing Republicans spent Sanford's entire term as Governor attacking him, now they can distance from him without being called out.

[JSojourner]

Duke, Ernest --

What made Tennenbaum so formidable?  (Not in an Obama or Bush sense, but for a South Carolina Senate race...I was really shocked she stayed so close in the polls for as long as she did. What did she have and can it be replicated?)

Thanks guys.  As ever, you both provide credible analysis.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

First off, there was the heavily contested Republican primary.  DeMint exhausted his campaign funds in the primary and the subsequent runoff, while Inez breezed through token opposition.

Secondly, there was the familiarity factor in play.  2004 was DeMint's first statewide race, while Tenenbaum had won two statewide races before in 1998 and 2002 for Superintendent of Education.  (SoE elections lean Democratic because there are enough Republicans who want to gut public education, thus the Independents in the center are skeptical about putting a Republican in charge.)

Thirdly, while the campaign stayed on the issues, she was able to make headway against him, hitting him hard on his support of the so-called "Fair Tax".

DeMint managed to switch the subject to something totally unrelated to being a Senator when he made his "gaffe" in early October.  According to him, not only were gays are unfit to be teachers, so are unmarried mothers living with their boyfriends.  He then managed to distance himself from those remarks enough to unruffle the feathers of Independents by the time the election was held while he brought the GOP base solidly behind him.

I thought then and now that his "gaffe" was intentional, as he needed to get the voters distracted from the issues, and it worked. Partly that was because in 2004 people were talking about us being on the verge of an era of a permanent Republican majority.  If that had been true, having a 2nd GOP Senator would help bring the pork home from Washington, which likely influenced some voters. 2004 was a strong year for the GOP and SC tends Republican anyway.  Inez was formidable enough to do 7.6% better than Kerry, which would have been good enough to have held the open seat in Florida, but that wasn't good enough to hold onto Fritz's seat.