Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

krazeeboi

The race for Governor

89 posts in this topic

So the primaries are over, and it looks like Sanford and Moore will have a showdown come November. So who's your choice and why?

To be honest, I don't know a whole lot about Moore, but he does seem to be a bit overly persuaded by special interests (e.g., pay day loan companies). I'll have to check up on his some more.

I definitely like Sanford's defiance of the "business as usual" approach that is the Legislature's M.O., but he has GOT to learn to be more of a bridge builder instead of a bridge burner if true progress is to be made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


I was rootin' for Lovelace personally. I don't know who I'll vote for now, so we'll see. I don't know too much about Moore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted for Sanford last time, and I support his basic premise (state government needed massive restructuring/reform). but like Krazee says, the results have been few and far between. If Sanford is re-elected, the legislature will continue to ignore him and override his vetoes. Those pompous baboons will merely 'wait out' a second Sanford term if he gets one.

Of course, Moore is a long-time legislator that doesn't see the need for a stronger state executive. He is basically a better-looking Jim Hodges. Tto be fair, at least Moore didn't sell-out, as Hodges did on the lottery.

Not much of a choice really.

I'll see how the campaigns develop and make up my mind later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not really kept up with Sanford, or whether or not he has acted in concordance with his original campaign promises. It does seem, however, that his attempts to reduce government have been met with little to no cooperation from the legislature. That has to be frustrating for him as he tries to do the things he originally set out to do.

Overall, I simply haven't heard much from Sanford, good or bad. He doesn't seem to be very visible, and for the most part he hasn't done anything extraordinarily good or bad. He has obviously done some things, both somewhat good and somewhat bad, but nothing really huge either way. So I suppose a lot of Sanford's future depends on how strong a candidate Moore is. I also hope to see which third-party candidates emerge. Only then will I make my decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sanford has done a decent job as governor, though I disagree with his attempts at tort reform. I'm not sure what to think about Moore--I went to his website and I'm still confused about where he stands on the issues...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im pleased with the basic thurst of the Sanford administration: reorganize government into a cabinet system, cut government waste and try to acheive a school system that is closer to the family and students rather than a system that dictates directly from Columbia. Hes not perfect and to be honest I wish there was more conciliation between him and the legislature, but the State House has fought him as much, if not more than he has fought them.

I dont really know where Moore stands. I do know that the Sanford folks wanted to face off against Moore so they can have a referendum on Sanfords ideas vs. those in the legislature, so if they win they can take that permission slip to the bargaining table.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a 2 pronged answer to the question. 1) I would like to see less power in the hands of the Legislature and more power in the hands of the Executive branch of state government, BUT the ONLY way that can happen is for there to be a groundswell of support from the people. Unfortunately, the people of South Carolina tend to be on the apathetic side and that has not happened. Having said that:

2. Sanford has demonstrated that he has had serious problems dealing with the legislature so do we really want to have 4 more years of bickering and nothing getting accomplished in our beautiful state? I don't so I will reluctantly vote for Tommy Moore, even though he is way too conservative for my tastes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A Democrat who is a little more moderate seems like a smart move in a traditially conservative state like South Carolina.

If the Democrats had chosen a more moderate candidate in the last Presidential election (i.e., not Kerry), they would have easily won. Kerry was probably about the worst candidate for the Dems in that regard. Lieberman or Kucinich both seemed like better candidates in terms of the issues. And Dean pretty much blew it when he came off like a weirdo with that noise thing he did. Until then, he was the media's favorite and was in good shape. But I digress...

While Sanford is not as vulnerable as Bush was in 2004, I don't think Sanford has been visible enough over the last four years and done enough positive things in the eyes of voters to be shoe-in. It should be interesting to see what Tommy Moore brings to the table, and how that impacts the election.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


I have a 2 pronged answer to the question. 1) I would like to see less power in the hands of the Legislature and more power in the hands of the Executive branch of state government, BUT the ONLY way that can happen is for there to be a groundswell of support from the people. Unfortunately, the people of South Carolina tend to be on the apathetic side and that has not happened. Having said that:

2. Sanford has demonstrated that he has had serious problems dealing with the legislature so do we really want to have 4 more years of bickering and nothing getting accomplished in our beautiful state? I don't so I will reluctantly vote for Tommy Moore, even though he is way too conservative for my tastes.

In this state, we'll take whomever we can get. A change is definitely needed, even if little change occurs in the end. As for a debate; I know very little about candidate Moore, but have a strong feeling he'll be blown away in any debate with Sanford. I really hope I'm wrong and that he is much stronger on the issues we care about in South Carolina. The bottom line is this; If we aren't happy with our state government today, it is in our best interest to vote for new blood. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The biggest problem I have with the legislature is that so many of them don't care about their constituents, they care about pet projects and how much power they can attain. The Hunley debacle is a good example. Does anyone wonder why we are so much poorer than NC and Georgia?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not partisan in nature, but I have long told folks in my circle that I would like for the state of South Carolina to have a new constitution to replace the present 1895 system that places waaaay too much power in the hands of the legislature.

In reality, while we compare the merits of Sanford vs. Moore, the real power in the state rests 1. with the Speaker of the House and 2. less so, but with the Senate Majority Leader. Those guys control the budget, agenda and a lot else in this state. We do not have muc of a balance of power. SC's Governor is just one more agency head with a veto pen.

Presently, SC's Governor can ask nicely and get something, demand and probably get nothing, or stand on an island and get shot down (what we presently have).

Since the constitution was amended to allow for Governor's to run for more than one term, we've had five governors: Riley - a former legislator, who basically acted as a super-Senator who focused on education and job creation in a give and take legislative style, Campbell - who let the legislature do its thing, got a few things through and recruited businesses, Beasley - another super Representative, Hodges - a super Representative who was elected on two issues, and doomed because he was from a minority party, and now total outsider Sanford who wants to restructure the whole thing. In other words, he'll get nothing and the legislature is pretending he isn't there.

We have a system where we elect Ag. Commissioners, Treasurers and Adjutant Generals because the state constitution framers wanted a system where, if the Federal government installed a Governor, like in Reconstruction, he would be hamstrung about what he could do and who he could appoint.

Fast forward a 100+ years, past the massive growth in agencies like SCDOT, Education department, Universities, health services, etc., and having a Legislature of about 200 making major decisions with give and take that should require executive decisions and you end up with lots of little fiefdoms, power plays (like the Hunley), duplicate state agencies, etc.

I really don't think it matters if you are a Republican, Democrat, independent or whatever; the present state government structure is really not the best route to address 21st century needs in growth, infrastructure, planning or what not. Just my two cents, but I think going forward into the 21st century, the state could use a new structure. I really don't think conservative vs. liberal arguments can really even happen because of the present set-up, so I don't even think this is a partisan issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a 2 pronged answer to the question. 1) I would like to see less power in the hands of the Legislature and more power in the hands of the Executive branch of state government, BUT the ONLY way that can happen is for there to be a groundswell of support from the people. Unfortunately, the people of South Carolina tend to be on the apathetic side and that has not happened. Having said that:

2. Sanford has demonstrated that he has had serious problems dealing with the legislature so do we really want to have 4 more years of bickering and nothing getting accomplished in our beautiful state?

The biggest problem I have with the legislature is that so many of them don't care about their constituents, they care about pet projects and how much power they can attain. The Hunley debacle is a good example. Does anyone wonder why we are so much poorer than NC and Georgia?

Truer words have never been written. The only thing that can change things is a grass-roots effort for a new constituition or an across-the-board defeat of the G.A. for new members that campaign to reform the current system.

Great posts everyone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just saddens me that so much of the general public is in the dark about the way our state is really run and that those self-serving bozos in the Legislature benefit from this ignorance and shields them from accountability since all the blame falls on the governor for everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just saddens me that so much of the general public is in the dark about the way our state is really run and that those self-serving bozos in the Legislature benefits from this ignorance and shields them from accountability since all the blame falls on the governor for everything.

Agreed.

Until the general public wakes up and starts demanding change, it will continue in the same manner. Change is going to have to start in individual districts, by electing reformers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


I think that whitehorse hit the nail on the head. We are dealing with a Reconstructionist government structure in the 21st century, which is on major reason nothing can get accomplished.

I like Sanford myself. He doesn't put up with BS, and he genuinely cares about South Carolinians and their money (ok, especially their money). Right now he is my choise, but I am not going to say I won't vote for Moore. I want to learn more about his platform and decided if I think he can actually do a better job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sen. Jake Knotts, R-Lexington, wants to take a stab at running for governor. He's got to get 1,000 petition signatures. If he gets on the ballot, expect Moore to win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sen. Jake Knotts, R-Lexington, wants to take a stab at running for governor. He's got to get 1,000 petition signatures. If he gets on the ballot, expect Moore to win.

It's 10,000 signatures, which must be obtained by July 17th. This will make for an interesting November if he gets it. Moore has been getting a lot of lucky breaks lately, but can he take full advantage of them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whoops, sorry--yeah I meant 10,000.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The republican party has already started the negative attacks. Seriously, is this really necessary :angry:

WISTV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I heard that the Mayor of West Cola is thinking about running as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was going to ask this but forget until Spartan made that last point. Has a mayor of any of our major cities ever made a run for governor?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Truer words have never been written. The only thing that can change things is a grass-roots effort for a new constituition or an across-the-board defeat of the G.A. for new members that campaign to reform the current system.

Great posts everyone

Amen to that, Vic; voters in South Carolina are so disenfranchised that relatively few vote. I've seen many a maverick get elected only to become disenchanted with the entire good old boy system run by both parties. Our state has so much potential that is being wasted. It makes me sick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was going to ask this but forget until Spartan made that last point. Has a mayor of any of our major cities ever made a run for governor?

I don't know about making a run, but its been a long while since one was elected.

The last time a mayor from a major city held the office of governmer as far as I can tell was in 1941. Burnett Rhett Maybank was governor from 1939-1941, and prior to that was the mayor of Charleston. Interestingly enough the only other mayor of ANY SC city since then also occured in the 1940s and was from Bamberg.

Looks like most of the governors came after a stint in the SC Legislature or as Lt. Governor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was going to ask this but forget until Spartan made that last point. Has a mayor of any of our major cities ever made a run for governor?

Charleston's Mayor Joe Riley ran in 1994 and lost the Democratic nomination to Lt. Gov. Nick Theodore by 1,500 votes. Riley would likely have won that race, if he had not been distracted from the campaign by leading the Trident's efforts to block the closing of the Navy Base the previous year. Theodore was free to campaign and lock up support during that important 'laying the groundwork" period. Riley couldn't make up the lost ground from that. Theodore never bounced back from his weak showing against Riley, and therefore lost to Beasley narrowly in the general election.

Other than him, I cannot remember any mayor even RUNNING since the 1970's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.