So I went to a Republican Debate tonight
 

And I can certainly say I won't be voting for a Republican in this Senate election. Here is a brief synopsis:

David Beasley - Former governor of SC, wants a Constitutional ban on gay marriages and wants to amend the constitution to make the pledge have the words under God in it.

Charles Condon - Former state Attorney General, seems to have an insane obsession with the budget deficit. Mentioned on 5 different occasions (out of 8 questions) that we need to eliminate pork spending and that the deficit was like $500 billion last year... I kind of tuned him out.

Something Orly Davis - A business woman who deals with construction and development, so I found it odd when she was very forceful in her assertion that we need to build more hotels and other things to lure tourists. She also made no coherent statements, of course she's from Israel and her English is worse than Ahnolds. I cringed every time she talked.

Jim DeMint - In the US House for a while, the most qualified of the six candidates. Talked either first or second for all the questions (except the next to last where they went in order). I couldn't really discern where he stood on anything. However, I know I've vowed never to hate something because of its fans, but he literally had the place full of supporters. I was asked about 20 times if I wanted a fucking sticker... NO MEANS NO BITCH... and it wouldn't have been bad if these were college kids or adults, but they were high schoolers who can't even vote... plus they were Bob Jones kids, so I don't even want to go there.

Mike McBride - Mayor of Myrtle Beach, wants to eliminate the IRS and the Education Dept... took a swipe at two of the other candidates... so far he's my favorite just because he was a nut and brought out a 2 foot long toy airplane. Completely out of his depth.

Thomas Ravanel - A Charleston businessman, somehow had an Australian accent. Had trouble sitting up, he was very slouched in his chair, legs spread open style. When he talked his hand moved and it looked like he was swirling a non-existant drink. He is a propenent of school vouchers... Voted most likely to have a sexual scandal by the group of people around me based on a hand raising poll conducted by me.

Overall, I learned that the Democratic candidate has to literally be retarded not to win in this state (although Fritz Hollings currently holds the seat...) or else everyone else in the state is retarded for voting for these guys.

I know no one cares, but just thought I'd post a random political topic.

Sounds like my kind of candidate!! I'll root for him :D.

I enjoyed reading this, almost like a recap of a sporting event. I think it would behoove all of us to know more about the people running for seats in office even if it isn't in your jurisdiction. I say vote for the nut with the toy plane, always go with the guy too psycho to realize he's supposed to be part of the system.

Other than Ravenel, I'd say (based soley on these thumbnail descriptions) that every one of the others would be in consideration for my vote, probably with Beasley or McBride as the early front-runner.

In case anybody is curious (like I was), here's a link to a SC GOP page that has links to the website for all 6 of the candidates mentioned. Let's see if my preference for the candidates changes after I've checked our more details.

Where is the link? :D

Oh, and Condon is really the only viable guy I'd go for. I'd rip my eyes out before voting for Beasley, and McBride sounds like a total loon.

You know you will feel my wrath for making a comment like that, but I'll let you slide. In the meantime, I don't want to hear one peep out of you for saying Bush (actually Congress but no one wants to hear that) ran up the deficit since you think it's not an issue for eliminating pork and overspendings.

I do think its all an issue, and Bush and his fiscal policy has multiplied the problem of a budget deficit. Its not the message that made me tune out, its the matter that he felt compelled to say it at every chance, even on questions that did not pertain to that issue. At one point I swear I saw them put a horse on a gurney and take a stick out of condon's hand.

Yes, I'm a screw-up.
http://www.nrsc.org/nrscweb/races2004/sc/

Was there ever a chance of this before you went to the debate? :rolleyes:

Then I can assume you won't be voting Bush-Cheney in November, right?

Its called humor, you should try it some time... its not that hard... I'll even help you out. A Irish, a Spic, and a Catholic walk into a bar...

And certainly not a Democrat. Who do you think the King of Pork is?

Jimmy Dean?

Jimmy Dean.

Damn, well it was a dead head but Easy wins by a nose.

No, no, no. He's the king of meat-colored pig and beef body parts.

Okay, let's see what I get here ...

David Beasley - most prominent issue mention is terrorism, support of Bush course; next is economy, focus mostly on SC job loss, blaming "false" free trade; 3rd item is "attack on traditional values", supports C.A.'s on gay marriage & Pledge of Allegiance. He's still in the running for my support, although I'm not impressed with his approach to economy/trade issues.

Orly Benny Davis - her first three issue mentions are: economy, she's anti "new-tax" & anti deficit spending; 2nd issue is trade, mostly talks about job loss & forcing job creation; 3rd is tourism, interesting to see this as such a high profile issue in a campaign for federal office. I think she's might be more suitable as a candidate for a state senate race than a federal-level campaign. She lost my support as a candidate in the primary with the phrase " I'll insist they (corporations who job export) create new ones here at home to replace them."

Mark McBride -- Unusual website front page design. If his site ever loads, I'm expecting to see an extremely populist approach to campaigning. Site wouldn't load, kept hitting 505 errors. Kinda forces me to give him an "Incomplete" for this course.

Charlie Condon -- Creepy looking little fella. Several issues listed, the most prominent (based upon his choice of ordering them) are: "Entitlement Reform", proposes a 1% reduction in the entitlement spending growth (from 5.6% to 4.6%); Domestic Violence, some proposals that appear to stem from his tenure as state AG; Tort Reform is listed 3rd. Basically, he's not a big fan of lawsuits. So far, his comments strike me as being more suited for someone hoping to be Governor than Senator. And among the other issues he covers, I'm less than impressed with at least half of his positions.

Jim DeMint - His top three issues listed are: Health Care, "We have a crisis in America"; National Security, very pro-Bush positioning here; Pro-Life - S.S.D.D. on this topic AFAIC. This guy looks like the average GOP candidate in my eyes - when we agree, we really agree. When we disagree, we really disagree. Poster-child for why I'm not a "card-carrying" Republican. Still, a contender for my support because he really nails some of my core issues (and despite the fact he totally blows another one of them).

Thomas Ravenel - First three issues listed are: Cutting Taxes, boils down to a tax-cut, trickle-down position AFAIC; Tort Reform, pretty much hates lawyers; National Defense, very succinct, very pro-military & at least manages to mention the importance of intel assets in the field. Much better than I expected frankly. I'm also concerned that he's one of the least electable candidates in the field, just strikes me as lacking enough experience to win.

Mark McBride - One last try gets through to his website. Although I hate the gimmicky site design, I get an immediate chuckle at his "I believe" intro to his positions. If I didn't know better, I'd swear he borrowed heavily from the approach
I used in my (miserably) failed bid for City Council. The issues are totally different of course, but his presentation style is remarkably familiar. His first three mentions are:
Trade, "the role of government is to protect ... from unfair foreign competition & trade practices"; Taxes, they're "too high and need to be lowered no matter the cost to the government bureacracy"; Education is listed next, including his proposal to abolish the Federal DoE. Worth noting, his take on his opposition, gotta see it to believe it (http://www.markmcbride.us/code/heads.html) I'd really like to bitch slap his web designer & whoever came up with his whole creative "theme". Beyond that, I'm just not impressed.

I started with a rough preference order of:
Beasley, McBride, Condon, DeMint, Davis, Ravenel

After looking at each of them a bit, I'd probably rank them as:
Beasley, Ravenel, Davis, DeMint, McBride,Condon.

Beasley is probably the only one I'd consider actively campaigning for, & possibly Ravenel. The rest of them are in various stages of "hold my nose & hope for the best" territory.

Of course, none of this means diddly squat, I'm not a SC voter, I just thought it might be interesting to look at some candidates I'm not familiar with & see what I come up with.

at least the two greenville guys reply at the same time :)

I'd say good research and you're more Repbulican than me, but here is how I saw it:
Beasley, DeMint, Condon, Ravanel, McBride, Davis.

This list has not as much to do with their issues as name recognition. DeMint could jump ahead of Beasley b/c he is more non-commital and he has Washington experience. They each have big name recognition. Condon does as well, thats the only reason why he's 3. Ravanel comes off as kind of elitist and thats backed up even more b/c he's a Charleston-ite (while it didn't hurt Sanford for gov. it might now). Plus he was wishy washy. McBride was great and the best showman, but he's the Al Sharpton of the group and too extreme. Davis would never get votes b/c A)she's foreign (from Israel); B)she's a she; C)She has no idea whats going on.

:p

Aw crap, I totally neglected to say that list was strictly meant as my personal ranking for my own support. It doesn't bear much resemblence to how I think they'll finish. Barring something unforeseen, like a withdrawal from the race or a major scandal or something, I'd bet them as:
DeMint, then Beasley, followed by Condon, Ravenel, Davis & McBride.

DeMint & Beasley in a run-off, with DeMint getting a very narrow primary victory in the end.

So, SkyDog, are your wife and this candidate related?

Condon is a complete scumbag who has been running for office his whole life, never harder than when he was supposed to be Attorney General. He would send out multiple faxes every day to every news organization... "Attorney General Charlie Condon agrees that it's legal to take a shit in your own home" kind of stuff. If he became governor, I would have to consider moving. Seriously.

Beasley is a schmuck who lost a race he should never have lost; namely, as a republican incumbent governor against a milquetoast democrat. He's a loser. He had his shot at being governor, he failed miserably, I don't see a reason why he should get to be a senator.

Ravenel is a goof. He has never held any political office and is only in the race because he is a multi-millionare. He's never done anything to get that money, mind you, other than be born. Total nightmare. Cocksucking Charleston blueblood.

DeMint is definitely the most qualified, but he's a religious freak. The Bob Jones voting bloc is squarely behind him, which means most of the state.

McBride probably represents my views more than the rest of them, but he has no chance. Neither does the chick, whoever she is.

The probable democratic nominee is Secretary of Education Inez Tanenbaum. Compared to the republican freaks, she's a female Thomas Jefferson. She'll get my (republican/libertarian) vote.

That's Correct :D. I'm hoping for Kerry/Republican Congress result in November.

Easy Mac, do the smart thing and vote for a Democrat. And by the way, I don't know much about SC politics, but is this a state that's considered to be a lock for Republicans in the Senate race or is it a swing state?

I don't think they allow you submit two votes for the election, even in South Carolina.

Generally, SC has had 1 republican senator and 1 democrat. Of course, these were the living fossils Fritz Hollings and Strom Thurmond, so no living person can recall who served in office before them.

The 2 senators have also been split between the upcountry (Greenville) and lowcountry (dirty-ass elitist Charleston). The incumbent senator who isn't up this year (R-Lindsey Graham) is from Columbia. So, the upcountry and lowcountry are going to fight this one out hard. People in Charleston are more likely to vote Democrat, but they will vote for the person from the lowcountry who can win, whatever the party. The upstate will only vote for a republican.

So, if the race comes down to a lowcountry republican vs. a democrat, the republican is a mortal lock. If it comes down to an upcountry republican vs. a lowcountry democrat, it's up in the air.

Interesting.


Your so impartial :rolleyes:

Ah, I think your just bitter because your vote won't count in Kerry country.

How does one vote who is totally liberal on social issues, but totally conservative on everything else? I lost interest in politics long ago when I found that nobody swings to both sides as much as I do, and thus, I cannot relate to anybody running for office.

It was a joke....as I've said before, I'll be voting 3rd Party, and it is kind of nice knowing I can do so without having any chance of affecting the actual decision of who becomes President.

Responded to this via PM, but just went to his web site and read his bio, so I can expound further. He's definitely a relative, but not a terribly close one. (Meaning I have never met him.) She has a 2ndish-cousin named Thomas, but this isn't him. Given that he is a French Huguenot from Charleston though, there's no question that he's a relative.

Incidentally, she's also related to Arthur "Pug" Ravenel. I haven't met him yet either. THAT should be an interesting conversation when it comes to pass. :D

Dola:

There are two distinct lines of Huguenot Ravenels who settled in the Charleston area, because two Ravenel brothers came over from France and started the bloodline. He could be from the "other" bloodline, although I will say he bears a decent resemblance to my wife's brother. I'll ask the wife about him later on today.

Wait the guy who want so ammend the Consitution to ban gay marriage is the guy you'd be most likely to vote for? What's wrong with you people?

Here you go. I think this covers everything pretty exhaustively.

http://dynamic2.gamespy.com/~fof/for...t=Gay+Marriage

http://dynamic2.gamespy.com/~fof/for...t=Gay+Marriage

http://dynamic2.gamespy.com/~fof/for...t=Gay+Marriage

Thanks I needed a laugh. The people against gay marriage are going to be looked upon in history like the people who were pro segregation. In fact the truth is they are probably the same people, dumb Southerners who are out of touch with reality.

Nice to see you not even attempting to respect other people's points of view. It's refreshing, and something of which this board definitely needs more.

How can you repect the views of someone who is clearly in favor of discriminating against a group because they are different. Lets be honest anti-gay marriage people don't give a shit about the sanctity of marriage if they did they'd be pushing for a consitutional ammedment making divorce illegal. They are just bigots.

Like you are against southerners, as you believe that the entire opposition to gay marriage is made up of "dumb southerners". Since the majority of the country is against gay marriage, I guess that means the entire south is dumb and everyone else is enlightened. Piss off.

I don't understand your comment/sarcasm. Where am I being partial to any candidate?

I have not read about the candidates, so I am not backing a horse in this race.

However, I really could not give a damn about the whole gay marriage issue. I could not care less if they are banned or legal, or what the candidate wants to do about it.

If the rest of the candidates positions are in line with my own feelings, you better believe that I am not going to be swayed over a contentious issue I have no interest in.

Look everyone an angry redneck. Gotta stop those damn fags they might be recruiting!!!

Look everyone, a mediocre troll. Gotta resist feeding them damn pieces of crap, they might start to breed.

:) I think the key word there Jon, is mediocre.

Definitely. Thanks, Jon: I didn't recognize the telltale signs. I must be off my game.

You guys do realize why you have to support an amendment to the Constitution to ban gay marriage, don't you? Because a regular law would be overturned by the Supreme Court because laws that discriminate against same-sex marriage are not sustainable under the equal protection provisions of the 14th Amendment.

Not that there's anything wrong with that!

I saw a Jim DeMint ad on tv today and he said that he is against gay marriage and doesn't think "equal "rights" (his words) should be extended to everyone... yeah, he follows the Constitution.

Here's the add from his website, yeah, Easy Mac, he seems like a regular everyday lock-steppin' Nazi.

http://jimdemint.com/demint_contents/tv/proud/

What is this world coming too?????

:)

wow, is it possible he has more than one ad??? Wow, you really are fucking retarded.