Will SC Dems run afoul of the Civil Rights Commission?

posted at 10:55 am on June 17, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

Talk about being between a rock and a hard place.  The Democratic Party in South Carolina will hear a protest today by Vic Rawl over his loss to Alvin Greene in the state’s US Senate primary earlier this month.  The Daily Caller notes that they have three choices to settle the embarrassing issue, none of which look good, and at least one of which could land them in hot water with the Department of Justice:

Democratic voters in South Carolina nominated the mysterious Alvin Greene for the U.S. Senate last week, but the 92 men and women on the Democratic Party Executive Committee could void those results on Thursday and award the nomination to his opponent, Vic Rawl.

“In an extreme case … our executive committee could actually decide to overturn the election results and declare [Rawl] the nominee,” Keiana Page, a spokeswoman for the state party, said in an interview with The Daily Caller. …

The executive committee will formally hear the primary election protests by Rawl Thursday afternoon. Following the hearing, the committee has three options: overturn the election and declare Rawl the nominee, order a redo of the election for Aug. 16 or uphold last week’s results.

The “extreme” circumstance that Page said would warrant the committee overturning the results and awarding the nomination to Greene’s opponent would be if Rawl can prove voting machine malfunctions or that paper ballots were not counted.

But if the committee went ahead with replacing Greene with Rawl, expect a firestorm reaction, said Ken Klukowski, a conservative constitutional lawyer co-wrote a book, “The Blueprint,” with former Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell. “You could have a federal constitutional challenge,” he said. It could be argued, Klukowski said, that by automatically replacing Greene, who was popularly elected in the election, the state is violating citizens’ right to vote.

It all depends on the definition of “extreme.”  The results of the primary election have been extremely embarrassing to South Carolina Democrats, who have watched aghast as Greene self-destructs in every single interview.  They have been extremely uncomfortable in providing an explanation as to how a man with no visible means, no visible campaign, and a pending felony obscenity investigation could have taken 60% of the vote in a statewide primary. Needless to say, they will also be extremely interested in hearing actual evidence from Rawl of vote tampering in order to justify overturning the results.

However, that theory has its share of problems.  Greene got over 100,000 votes in the primary.  How could that have come from vote rigging on Election Day?  It would take a massive effort to attack the thousands of voting machines in the precincts to come up with that many votes, which no one apparently noticed even though Democrats had election judges on hand in these precincts.  Who would have paid for the effort?  After all, one of the reasons this is so controversial is that Greene doesn’t have money or a job at the moment, and didn’t do any fundraising or campaigning.  It would take a conspiracy rivaling the Illuminati to have succeeded in this case, and Greene is hardly the kind of genius it would take.

Considering the implications of invalidating a primary that would throw an African-American candidate off the ballot for no good reason, South Carolina Democrats have to ask themselves whether it’s worth it anyway.  Jim DeMint is going to win this race against either Rawl or Greene by double digits, perhaps as much as 20 points or better.  Why bother to assume that much legal and political risk when the end result will be a big loss either way?  Pressing for either an appointment of Rawl to the nomination or a new primary would be about as epic a disaster as the unions created in Arkansas by losing $10 million in another Senate race the Democrats have almost no chance of winning.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Lou Rawls just can’t win…

SuperCool on June 17, 2010 at 10:57 AM

heh, speaking of grade levels and reading comprehension…..what better subject than SC Dems and Al Greene???

ted c on June 17, 2010 at 10:58 AM

They have been extremely uncomfortable in providing an explanation as to how a man with no visible means, no visible campaign, and a pending felony obscenity investigation could have taken 60% of the vote in a statewide primary.

Well, Good Lord – how much more Democrat Resume enhancement do you need?

I really hope they try to take him down. I’ll contribute to his legal defense fund, just so it drags right into November.

Fishoutofwater on June 17, 2010 at 11:00 AM

Disenfranchised!

mankai on June 17, 2010 at 11:01 AM

A televised debate between DeMint and Greene would be well worth watching.

a capella on June 17, 2010 at 11:01 AM

Greene’s a barely literate pervert. Where better for him to be than the Senate?

livefreerdie on June 17, 2010 at 11:02 AM

Lou Rawls and Al Greene. What are the odds?

sandee on June 17, 2010 at 11:02 AM

If the rules of the game don’t work….change the rules mid-game. That is the democratic way.

bloghooligan on June 17, 2010 at 11:02 AM

Don’t they face both civil-rights charges as well as accusations (probably justified accusations) of racism?

Or are Democrats going to be given a pass on the racism issue?

Al-Ozarka on June 17, 2010 at 11:02 AM

Oh sorry, I’m too illiterate.It’s Vic Rawls…

sandee on June 17, 2010 at 11:03 AM

The smartest move would be to throw up their collective hands and drop this issue to avoid further embarrassment. Let Greene self-destruct and go down in a blaze of glory all on his own.

I sincerely hope that they do not do the smart thing.

Holding another primary is probably what they will do. Won’t it be funny if Greene wins again? BTW, who would have to pay for another election? The state? Because if I am an average voter I’d be pretty pissed about having to pay for another election in order to save democrat voters from themselves.

Mord on June 17, 2010 at 11:04 AM

Ironically, this truly exposes to the country the average SC dem voter.

So, who will agree this man was nominated in SC because his name is Al Greee, just like John Kerry won Iowa because his name is Kerry?

bloghooligan on June 17, 2010 at 11:05 AM

A televised debate between DeMint and Greene would be well worth watching.

a capella on June 17, 2010 at 11:01 AM

Yeah, much in the same way as watching Mike Tyson in his prime fight an eight year old with rickets.

Twenty bucks says a white towel gets thrown on to the stage during Greene’s first rebuttal…

SuperCool on June 17, 2010 at 11:05 AM

Only Republicans can violate Civil Rights laws so… no.

Skywise on June 17, 2010 at 11:05 AM

You can’t just invalidate stupid votes. Half of the US Congress would be unemployed tomorrow, if that were the case. Don’t they understand what a slippery slope this is?

RBMN on June 17, 2010 at 11:06 AM

It would take a conspiracy rivaling the Illuminati to have succeeded in this case, and Greene is hardly the kind of genius it would take.

Ed, I wouldn’t rule out Zombie Ninja Penguins having a hand in all of this. They do get around.

Johnnyreb on June 17, 2010 at 11:06 AM

Will SC Dems run afoul of the Civil Rights Commission?

I hope so. Pass the popcorn!

dczombie on June 17, 2010 at 11:07 AM

The Democratic Party… could land … in hot water with the Department of Justice.

Now that’s what you call a real knee-slapper! You merely have to juxtapose the very beginning and very end of the first paragraph to see how unlikely it is that there will be any impediment to the replacement of Mr. Greene.

‘Bye Alvin!

drunyan8315 on June 17, 2010 at 11:07 AM

the state is violating citizens’ right to vote.

So what? Reference yesterday’s story of the judge in New York allowing “Hispanics” six votes per ballot:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100615/ap_on_el_st_lo/us_voting_rights_election

Then read:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/new-bill-gives-obama-kill-switch-to-shut-down-the-internet.html

Then tell, me again why any of this matters…

oldleprechaun on June 17, 2010 at 11:08 AM

RAAAAAACISTS!

Rev. Jackson, Rev. Sharpton, please pick up the white black courtesy phone.

rightside on June 17, 2010 at 11:09 AM

So Greene is really an electoral super-genius villain the way Ed Norton was in Primal Fear to getting away with murder?

I’d tread carefully when overturning a clear election result in favor of the guy. When they do that in other countries observers don’t certify the elections as fair.

Beagle on June 17, 2010 at 11:10 AM

Al(vin) Green(e) winning the nomination was enough of an embarrassment for the SC Dems. But dumping him for the establishment’s preferred candidate would turn this into a full-blown national story with racial and unconstitutional overtones. And all of that for a Senate seat they don’t have a prayer of winning.

Doughboy on June 17, 2010 at 11:10 AM

They have been extremely uncomfortable in providing an explanation as to how a man with no visible means, no visible campaign, and a pending felony obscenity investigation could have taken 60% of the vote in a statewide primary.

so now is the time for discomfort? You woulda thought that if a man with no visible past accomplishments, an unknown birthplace, a shady past in chicago, and unknown grades would’ve also produced some degree of “discomfort.” Natch, we just heard crickets back then… Let me guess, “expressing discomfort” is the SC Dems way of saying “get back on the porch, Alvin”…..? am i wrong?

ted c on June 17, 2010 at 11:10 AM

at least one of which could land them in hot water with the Department of Justice:

HAHAHAHAHA!!! Ed you’re funny. THIS Justice Department? The New Black Panther Justice Department?

I really don’t think so.

jnelchef on June 17, 2010 at 11:11 AM

order a redo of the election for Aug. 16

I hope they order a redo… I will donate to Alvin Greene…

ninjapirate on June 17, 2010 at 11:11 AM

It’s not about DeMint, it’s about the establishment keeping ordinary blacks and other dems in line. There will be no Democratic tea party movement, even if the establishment has to jettison every last democratic pretense to keep it from happening.

abobo on June 17, 2010 at 11:11 AM

On Special Report on Fox last night, they showed the funniest Jon Stewart clip about this gentleman. Very harsh to the Dems.

Cindy Munford on June 17, 2010 at 11:12 AM

He’s just trying to be the next Obama.

meci on June 17, 2010 at 11:17 AM

They’re missing the OBVIOUS solution! Just have BO offer Greene a position on an unpaid White House commission! I can think of a wide range of topics about which Greene knows far more than BO.

He did serve in the military, so right off the bat Greene has more experience holding a real job than BO. If he ever had any soldiers under his command, then he’s got more management experience too! Hey, I wonder if he ever worked in the motor pool. If so, he’s probably better than BO at cleaning up oil spills!!

SoRight on June 17, 2010 at 11:18 AM

Considering the implications of invalidating a primary that would throw an African-American candidate off the ballot for no good reason, South Carolina Democrats have to ask themselves whether it’s worth it anyway.

And we should encourage this action (invalidation) not only would it provide weeks of real life entertainment, and blog fodder, it would should everyone the Democrats true colors and feelings.

LincolntheHun on June 17, 2010 at 11:18 AM

Does Alvin Greene get to make his case before the committee?

Alvin:
1) The people of SC have spoken,
2) The people of SC have spoken,
3) The people of SC have spoken,
4) Vic Rawls, the Democrat Party, and the press didn’t do any research beforehand and people are saying I’m as dumb as an ox?

Dusty on June 17, 2010 at 11:18 AM

Does Greene have anyone defending him? I keep hearing from all the Democrats working to throw him overboard, but the only thing you hear from the Greene camp is, “the voters have spoken”. Is the Greene camp a camp of one?

ramrants on June 17, 2010 at 11:19 AM

LUUUUUUUUUW ZUUUUUUUUUURS !!!!!

ExpressoBold on June 17, 2010 at 11:20 AM

If the rules of the game don’t work….change the rules mid-game. That is the democratic way.

bloghooligan on June 17, 2010 at 11:02 AM

Heck, the New Jersey Democratic Party did that in their last Senate election, when the incumbent was facing felony (IIRC) charges and so was replaced less than 30 days before the election, even though black letter NJ law stipulated that less than 30 days before the election, you can’t replace a party nominee. And as the Democratic Party controls the state S.Ct, they let it go.

Absolute corruption.

rbj on June 17, 2010 at 11:21 AM

I’ve had a revelation moment with one on my Conservative Democrat friends. He seems to think they know they can’t win against DeMint with either Greene or Rawls. They’re just cringing for the debate encounters between DeMint and Greene. Said friend also said he thinks they’d do almost anything to prevent the general party embarrassment that they think would come from the campaign.

I asked if Greene managed to win the election did he think the support for Greene would improve. He just looked at me like I was stupid.

Of course they would.

hawkdriver on June 17, 2010 at 11:24 AM

It would take a conspiracy rivaling the Illuminati to have succeeded in this case, and Greene is hardly the kind of genius it would take.

That is just what he wants you to think.

Joe Caps on June 17, 2010 at 11:25 AM

Hey, are they going to broadcast the hearing? I think it should be public and the press should be demanding it.

Dusty on June 17, 2010 at 11:25 AM

I understand the preliminary polling has Greene getting 34% of the vote against DeMint. That is the thing I find amazing.

CC

CapedConservative on June 17, 2010 at 11:25 AM

I wonder how many SC Republicans are changing their party affiliation right now to let them vote in a rescheduled primary.

Greene by a LANDSLIDE next time!

OBQuiet on June 17, 2010 at 11:25 AM

Enough about the voter’s rights. You should exercise the right to vote like you exercise the right to own a gun. With great caution and respect.

The people who nominated Alvin Greene deserve to lose their rights.. its not like they cared enough to stay informed in the first place..

triple on June 17, 2010 at 11:29 AM

So in this thread we have Vic Rawl, and in the other headline concerning SC, there’s a reference to a Rawl as the head of the state Chamber….

“Those discussions have been had in regards to whether or not she can get along with the General Assembly,” Chamber President Otis Rawl said…

Patrick S on June 17, 2010 at 11:31 AM

It would take a conspiracy rivaling the Illuminati to have succeeded in this case, and Greene is hardly the kind of genius it would take.

Ed, I wouldn’t rule out Zombie Ninja Penguins having a hand in all of this. They do get around.

Johnnyreb on June 17, 2010 at 11:06 AM

In conjunction with the Lizard People.

Joe Caps on June 17, 2010 at 11:32 AM

Calling all chat room junkies, commenters, and political pundits:

Become a fan of Ed on Facebook http://tinyurl.com/29hozmo

Opportunity to discourse with him about political news and his personal response …

Hop on board, mateys!!!!

-Amy the Conscript (intern)

Amy Ritter on June 17, 2010 at 11:38 AM

Why does the Dem party have a problem with Alvin Greene? Like Ann Coulter says, he’s the ideal candidate. He’s unemployed, broke, has a felony arrest and it’s a sex-related crime. This guy is custom-made for the Dem party.

http://www.anncoulter.com/cgi-local/article.cgi?article=373

Daggett on June 17, 2010 at 11:39 AM

didn’t joe kennedy organize two “rossi” candidates to appear on JFK’s early primary ballot to confuse the Italian voters?

joeindc44 on June 17, 2010 at 11:40 AM

Greene is an evil genius. No wonder it was worth $10K to run for senate. He’s forcing the SC Democratic Party to make a drastic move that will allow him to sue. He’s going to be a millionaire. Hats off, dude. That’s brilliant.

fleiter on June 17, 2010 at 11:41 AM

This is the Southern area that thinks calling people “ragheads” is OK. The whole area and everyone in it, for the most part, is a disaster.

Narutoboy on June 17, 2010 at 11:43 AM

And you are an idiot Narutoboy.

thekingtut on June 17, 2010 at 11:53 AM

If the racist dems just announce they’re overturning the results of the election, watch black turn out in the state become almost non-existent in November. The racist dems chosen white candidate will be crushed.

thekingtut on June 17, 2010 at 11:56 AM

In all the video interviews I have seen Greene in he hasn’t thrown a punch or put a cameraman in a choke hold yet.Maybe that doesn’t qualify him.But you just know Rawls would love to start throwing alot of punches at alot of people.This is a dream come true.

docflash on June 17, 2010 at 11:57 AM

thekingtut on June 17, 2010 at 11:53 AM

I believe the term is bigot. Oddly enough he seems no difference between himself and Sen. Knotts. His blanket condemnation is okay.

Cindy Munford on June 17, 2010 at 11:57 AM

But if the committee went ahead with replacing Greene with Rawl, expect a firestorm reaction,

I kind of doubt it. If history is any indication, those with standing to object will just stand by the Democratic party position.

Count to 10 on June 17, 2010 at 11:59 AM

The whole area and everyone in it, for the most part, is a disaster.

Narutoboy on June 17, 2010 at 11:43 AM

Yah! Like Georgia is any different outside of Buckhead!

ExpressoBold on June 17, 2010 at 11:59 AM

Greene is an evil genius. No wonder it was worth $10K to run for senate. He’s forcing the SC Democratic Party to make a drastic move that will allow him to sue. He’s going to be a millionaire. Hats off, dude. That’s brilliant.

fleiter on June 17, 2010 at 11:41 AM

Entrepreneurship of the kind that would make John Edwards envious, if true.

Count to 10 on June 17, 2010 at 12:00 PM

seems = sees. Sorry.

Cindy Munford on June 17, 2010 at 12:01 PM

Heck, the New Jersey Democratic Party did that in their last Senate election, when the incumbent was facing felony (IIRC) charges and so was replaced less than 30 days before the election, even though black letter NJ law stipulated that less than 30 days before the election, you can’t replace a party nominee. And as the Democratic Party controls the state S.Ct, they let it go.

And Frank Lautenberg was elected, who helped provide the Dems with the 60 votes to pass Obamacare. Who says that “cheaters never prosper”, “crime doesn’t pay”?! Dem cheaters win.

mydh12 on June 17, 2010 at 12:06 PM

I believe the term is bigot. Oddly enough he seems no difference between himself and Sen. Knotts. His blanket condemnation is okay.

Cindy Munford on June 17, 2010 at 11:57 AM

Never called anyone that name or made any equivalent statement. So yes, I see a big difference.

Narutoboy on June 17, 2010 at 12:08 PM

Or get behind a Vic Rawls third party run.

Greek Fire on June 17, 2010 at 12:13 PM

Narutoboy on June 17, 2010 at 12:08 PM

Look, you don’t want to go there. Another poster was nice enough to link the thread from May 26, 2010 about the mosque in N.Y.. I won’t go off thread by linking your comments but you need to ease back on your crazy statements.

Cindy Munford on June 17, 2010 at 12:17 PM

Here’s my fantasy: Every single FoxNews program from now till November has Al Greene on as a guest to represent the Democratic point of view on every single issue.

Healthcare? “Today’s guests are Republican Senator Dr. Tom Coburn and Democratic Senatorial candidate Alvin Greene …”

Afghanistan? “Today’s guests are Republican Senator John McCain and Democratic Senatorial candidate Alvin Greene …”

Budget? Today’s guests are Republican Representative Paul Ryan and Democratic Senatorial candidate Alvin Greene …”

Kagan nomination? Today’s guests are Republican Senator Orrin Hatch and Democratic Senatorial candidate Alvin Greene …”

God, that would be funny. (Although it might costs FNC just a teeny weeny bit of credibility . . . )

SwampYankee on June 17, 2010 at 12:19 PM

Lou Rawls just can’t win… SuperCool on June 17, 2010 at 10:57 AM

You’re gonna miss my lovin’… when I’m gone…

Mojave Mark on June 17, 2010 at 12:20 PM

SwampYankee on June 17, 2010 at 12:19 PM

I’m reluctant to give Mr. Greene too much attention. I think his publicity should be limited to S.C. since they are the ones who will vote. Making a mockery of a man that we know nothing about has too many possible bad outcomes.

Cindy Munford on June 17, 2010 at 12:23 PM

SwampYankee on June 17, 2010 at 12:19 PM

Ooooh, you let us supply the obvious one:
.
Energy Policy? Today’s guests are Former Governor Sarah Palin and Democratic Senatorial candidate Alvin Greene …”
.
Cringe, Liberals!

ExpressoBold on June 17, 2010 at 12:26 PM

In the headlines is another article about him by Time. He apparently thinks(or hopes) that he is suppose to be paid for his interviews.

Cindy Munford on June 17, 2010 at 12:39 PM

I won’t go off thread by linking your comments but you need to ease back on your crazy statements.

Cindy Munford on June 17, 2010 at 12:17 PM

If you think what I said there (all true statements, by the way) is equivalent to “raghead,” you’re crazy yourself.

Narutoboy on June 17, 2010 at 12:47 PM

Somewhere, in the back of a limo, Karl Rove is leaning back and quietly smiling to himself.

evilned on June 17, 2010 at 12:50 PM

Narutoboy on June 17, 2010 at 12:47 PM

Suit yourself. Crazy compared to you is fine with me.

Cindy Munford on June 17, 2010 at 12:51 PM

His own party wants him out so bad I can’t help but pull for this guy.

rollthedice on June 17, 2010 at 1:02 PM

Suit yourself. Crazy compared to you is fine with me.

Cindy Munford on June 17, 2010 at 12:51 PM

I’m totally stealing that! LOL !

ExpressoBold on June 17, 2010 at 1:02 PM

The worry of a re-vote is that Alvin Greene will get the sympathy vote being seen as a common guy who has some troubles, took a gamble and won. That is fairy tale material all day long, and a political party wanting to botch that, in an election that will see their party go down to defeat no matter who they put up is just asinine.

Let the fairy tale story continue to its bitter end… the people of SC have spoken.

Maybe CNN can ask Mr. Greene if HE understood Obama’s speech. Wouldn’t that be fun?

ajacksonian on June 17, 2010 at 1:17 PM

actual evidence from Rawl of vote tampering

So will Rawl name the names of those who tampered ? techniques ?

J_Crater on June 17, 2010 at 1:19 PM

Maybe CNN can ask Mr. Greene if HE understood Obama’s speech. Wouldn’t that be fun?

ajacksonian on June 17, 2010 at 1:17 PM

How about, what, in his own words, he understood from that well-regarded sham?

ExpressoBold on June 17, 2010 at 1:23 PM

How water with the obama dept. of justice? I doubt it.

paul1149 on June 17, 2010 at 1:32 PM

Wait
The people have spoken.

seven on June 17, 2010 at 1:41 PM

If the dem party in SC overturns this, what is to stop them from turning over any election where they do not get the result that they want. I actually don’t think they can overturn the election since it was run by the state. Only the state AG, Henry McMaster could do something or the sec of state. And this can only be done if there is proof that enough fraud occured that could affect the outcome of the election

ConservativePartyNow on June 17, 2010 at 1:42 PM

Well, since the SC Dems can look to the example of Pelosi walking out and simply nominating Skippy for an election without that whole pesky voting thing, they’re probably sure they can dispense with it in this case, too.

Wind Rider on June 17, 2010 at 1:45 PM

So the Democrat Party might toss out a black man who won in a landslide and replace him with a defeated white candidate?

DaMav on June 17, 2010 at 2:15 PM

Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.

patch on June 17, 2010 at 2:29 PM

It would take a conspiracy rivaling the Illuminati to have succeeded in this case

Exactly what conspiracy are you referring to?

I know of no such organization as the Illuminati, nor would I be disposed to discuss such an organization if it did, in fact, exist.

JohnGalt23 on June 17, 2010 at 2:29 PM

SwampYankee on June 17, 2010 at 12:19 PM

Here’s my fantasy: Every single FoxNews program from now till November has Al Greene on as a guest to represent the Democratic point of view on every single issue.

See, there’s a problem with that. Alvin Greene strikes me as being a simple kind of guy. Granted he’s not the sharpest tool in the shed, but he appears to have a basic level of honesty and decency.

But for most Democratic initiatives, it takes a special kind of stupid to defend them with a straight face. You’re average simpleton, or even moron, couldn’t even try to explain how the government is going to simultaneously bring 30 million new people into the health care system and bring down health care costs. He’d break out in laughter halfway through.

JohnGalt23 on June 17, 2010 at 2:36 PM

You’re gonna miss my lovin’… when I’m gone…

Mojave Mark on June 17, 2010 at 12:20 PM

+100

Apparently, a primary defeat, like love, is a hurtin’ thing…

SuperCool on June 17, 2010 at 3:11 PM

I saw briefly something on the news about questioning voters as to why they voted for him. No one knew anything about him, but one said the name “Al Greene” reminded them of a singer, and another one said “because Al Greene sounded like a black name”. This is how we got Obama in the White House. People saying “eeney meeney miney mo” when they go to vote.

silvernana on June 17, 2010 at 3:26 PM

If you think what I said there (all true statements, by the way) is equivalent to “raghead,” you’re crazy yourself.

Narutoboy on June 17, 2010 at 12:47 PM

No. I think you’ve cornered the market on crazy. And you’ve been taken to the woodshed several times, but are too dumb to realize it.

stvnscott on June 17, 2010 at 3:29 PM

If this were in the actual senatorial race, it would be a big problem, but can’t an individual party do what it wants? If the leaders of the Greens or the Blues (or some other chariot faction) decide to pick Mr. X over Mr. Y, are they answerable to anyone but the members of their own party?

Tzetzes on June 17, 2010 at 3:37 PM

This is a preview of what California has in store. The idiots here just voted to have an ‘Open’ primary. This means you can cross party lines and vote for the other guy.

This is going to create a stampede to elect the other party’s dumbest guy. As a result, we will end up having the two top morons running for every State position.

…Oh wait! We already have a Statehouse full of morons. Never mind. Move along…Nothing to see here.

Uniblogger on June 17, 2010 at 5:45 PM

Seriously, what’s wrong with electing Mr. Greene?

He’s not likely to come up with some new expensive program.

He’ tends to avoid politics in general.

How much damage could he do as a Senator!

I would rather have Mr. Greene than Mssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss. Boxer

DSchoen on June 17, 2010 at 8:42 PM

Uniblogger on June 17, 2010 at 5:45 PM

Uh what line crossing?
Is this the newest “conspiracy” that Rep crossed over and voted for Greene?

More than twice as many South Carolinians voted in the Republican primary (424,893) as voted in the Democratic primary (197,380).

If there was a “MASSIVE” crossed over vote, it would have shown up in the vote totals. Sorry its not there. 116,454 (59%) out of 197,380 voted FOR Greene!

DSchoen on June 17, 2010 at 8:57 PM