Why was the 2010 SC governor's race so close?

[Lloyd Bentsen's Ghost]

You had a very pro-Republican electoral climate that year, a very Republican state, and a Republican nominee who received very favorable media coverage, had the backing of Tea Party groups and was seen as something of a rising star in state politics. With all of this going for her, why did Nikki Haley only beat Vincent Sheheen by 4 points (51-to-47)?

And does this suggest she may face a challenging re-election campaign in 2014 if the national mood is less tilted to the GOP and her own lackluster performance thus far (her 34% approval rating in SC is lower than Obama's) continues?

[MilesC56]

Racism.

[crypto-fascist superhero]

She had a late-breaking scandal IIRC.

[ModerateCoward]

Racism.

[Prez Duke]

A man claimed to have had an affair with her, but he seemed a bit.....gay, so no one really believed him. I was surprised by her weak performance, actually. I don't know what caused it, but she may have trouble being reelected given her current popularity.

[HST1948]

Racism.

Being of Indian (non-Native American) descent may have hurt in some of the more rural parts of the state.

[crypto-fascist superhero]

Wasn't there something involving her taxes?

[krazen1211]

Mark Sanford's first election in 2002 underperformed George W. Bush 2000 in the many of the same counties that Nikki Haley 2010 underperformed McCain 2008.


But its easier for the left to cry racism despite the fact that Haley got around 75% of whites.

[HST1948]

Mark Sanford's first election in 2002 underperformed George W. Bush 2000 in the many of the same counties that Nikki Haley 2010 underperformed McCain 2008.


But its easier for the left to cry racism despite the fact that Haley got around 75% of whites.

It's easy to cry racism when you have South Carolina state senators making comments like this about Nikki Haley:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQtxBwietCg

[Vasall des Midas]

And Sheheen was apparently the first Catholic major party (or was it just Democratic?) candidate for that same post... that old bugbear's gone out of style. He's pretty much been running for reelection the rematch ever since they stopped counting the ballots, of course.

[krazen1211]

Mark Sanford's first election in 2002 underperformed George W. Bush 2000 in the many of the same counties that Nikki Haley 2010 underperformed McCain 2008.


But its easier for the left to cry racism despite the fact that Haley got around 75% of whites.

It's easy to cry racism when you have South Carolina state senators making comments like this about Nikki Haley:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQtxBwietCg

Which has what precisely to do with the topic of the thread?

[asexual trans victimologist]

Haley isn't exactly what we'd call a smart, or a talented, even by the standards of Tea Party Republicans.

[ModerateCoward]

Racism.

Being of Indian (non-Native American) descent may have hurt in some of the more rural parts of the state.

Ah, she looks pretty white though.

[JulioMadrid]

Racism.

And Machismo

[crypto-fascist superhero]

Unfortunate that South Carolina whites are 100% racist, since they're racist whether they voted for or against Nikki Haley.

[nclib]

Which counties did Nikki Haley underperform in, and which are likely due to racism?

[HST1948]

Mark Sanford's first election in 2002 underperformed George W. Bush 2000 in the many of the same counties that Nikki Haley 2010 underperformed McCain 2008.


But its easier for the left to cry racism despite the fact that Haley got around 75% of whites.

It's easy to cry racism when you have South Carolina state senators making comments like this about Nikki Haley:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQtxBwietCg

Which has what precisely to do with the topic of the thread?

Did you watch the video or just read the title? The news clip in the video goes on to explain the backlash when Nikki Haley won her primary and how South Carolina senator Jake Knots said, "We've already got one rag head in the Whitehouse, we don't need another one in the governors mansion", referring to then candidate Nikki Haley as "a rag head" (an ethnic slurr against people of middle eastern origin) after she won the republican primary.  Since this thread is about why Nikki Haley underperformed in 2010 and race was brought up as an issue, I though a news video about a state senator from her own party referring to Nikki Haley as a rag head has a lot to do with the thread.  (And yes I know that the title say "South Carolina Senator Jake Knotts calls Obama a 'Raghead'", but if you actually watched the news clip you would see that the entire point of the video was about Nikki Haley).

I don't actually believe that her race was a big problem for her in 2010.  Bobby Jindal has shown that being Indian American doesn't play much of a role in winning big in conservative states.

[Senator Kalwejt]

Severeal reasons.

1. Haley's late controversies
2. Racism indeed (see Louisiana 2003, Jindall would have win four years earlier if he were white)
3. Sheheen was the best candidate Democrats could possibly run

Of course, we're talking about South Carolina in 2010, so Sheheen still lost. Under at least neutral circumstances he'll beat Haley.

[krazen1211]

Mark Sanford's first election in 2002 underperformed George W. Bush 2000 in the many of the same counties that Nikki Haley 2010 underperformed McCain 2008.


But its easier for the left to cry racism despite the fact that Haley got around 75% of whites.

It's easy to cry racism when you have South Carolina state senators making comments like this about Nikki Haley:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQtxBwietCg

Which has what precisely to do with the topic of the thread?

Did you watch the video or just read the title? The news clip in the video goes on to explain the backlash when Nikki Haley won her primary and how South Carolina senator Jake Knots said, "We've already got one rag head in the Whitehouse, we don't need another one in the governors mansion", referring to then candidate Nikki Haley as "a rag head" (an ethnic slurr against people of middle eastern origin) after she won the republican primary.  Since this thread is about why Nikki Haley underperformed in 2010 and race was brought up as an issue, I though a news video about a state senator from her own party referring to Nikki Haley as a rag head has a lot to do with the thread.  (And yes I know that the title say "South Carolina Senator Jake Knotts calls Obama a 'Raghead'", but if you actually watched the news clip you would see that the entire point of the video was about Nikki Haley).

I don't actually believe that her race was a big problem for her in 2010.  Bobby Jindal has shown that being Indian American doesn't play much of a role in winning big in conservative states.

That, at most, establishes that Jake Knotts might or might not have voted for Nikki Haley. It hardly explains why Haley should have expected to gain substantially more than 51.4% of the vote when Mark Sanford got only 52.9% 8 years earlier.

[Senator Snowstalker]

Probably the sex scandal (and Sheheen was a good candidate)

[MilesC56]

Did Shaheen carry SC-05?

[Lloyd Bentsen's Ghost]

Mark Sanford's first election in 2002 underperformed George W. Bush 2000 in the many of the same counties that Nikki Haley 2010 underperformed McCain 2008.


But its easier for the left to cry racism despite the fact that Haley got around 75% of whites.

Mark Sanford was running against an incumbent Democrat (Jim Hodges) who, from my perfunctory look at his Wikipedia page, didn't seem to have done anything to merit getting voted out of office other than being a Democrat in South Carolina. While 2002 was a fairly good year for Republicans at the federal level b/c of the post-9/11 afterglow, that didn't translate to state-level coattails (see: Republicans losing open-seat governor's races in Oklahoma and Tennessee).

For Nikki Haley in 2010 to underperform relative to Mark Sanford in 2002 seems to fly in the face of what anyone would reasonably expect given the factors I outlined.

[crypto-fascist superhero]

The other thing is that gubernatorial races are simply generally closer than other statewide races and less affected (but hardly unaffected) by national trends.

[rbt48]

That, at most, establishes that Jake Knotts might or might not have voted for Nikki Haley. It hardly explains why Haley should have expected to gain substantially more than 51.4% of the vote when Mark Sanford got only 52.9% 8 years earlier.

But remember, Sanford unseated an incumbent in 2002 (Jim Hodges).  That could well have made his race tougher than Haley's.

[krazen1211]

Mark Sanford's first election in 2002 underperformed George W. Bush 2000 in the many of the same counties that Nikki Haley 2010 underperformed McCain 2008.


But its easier for the left to cry racism despite the fact that Haley got around 75% of whites.

Mark Sanford was running against an incumbent Democrat (Jim Hodges) who, from my perfunctory look at his Wikipedia page, didn't seem to have done anything to merit getting voted out of office other than being a Democrat in South Carolina. While 2002 was a fairly good year for Republicans at the federal level b/c of the post-9/11 afterglow, that didn't translate to state-level coattails (see: Republicans losing open-seat governor's races in Oklahoma and Tennessee).

For Nikki Haley in 2010 to underperform relative to Mark Sanford in 2002 seems to fly in the face of what anyone would reasonably expect given the factors I outlined.

Well, from 2002:

They also recaptured the governorship of South Carolina, where Jim Hodges, a Democrat, was ousted after one term by former Representative Mark Sanford, who had attacked him over the state's lagging educational performance and economic fortunes.





In any case, nobody has posted what the 'expected' vote share for Nikki Haley is. Nathan Deal got 53% against Roy Barnes in the neighboring state.