Clyburn says S.C. Dem Senate candidate a 'plant'; calls for probe

[Goshin]

ROTFLMFAO... This is too rich.

We have Sestak and Romanoff being offered jobs to get out of a race, then we have some unknown Democrat winning... who has nary a chance against DeMint, and they call for an investigation!

Hilarious.

What about an investigation about Sestak and Romanoff?

Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.
That doesn't matter. This need be investigated.

LOL... these Dems... and the sad thing is they're running the country.

.

Locally, we affectionately refer to Clyburn as "that blithering idiot".

 

[FilmFestGuy]

The SC "circus" was in regards to the Governor race, not the Senate race, so there's no reason why it would happen here.

Look, if the Republicans had the ability to stealthily manufacture tens of thousands of votes in order to sway an election and their goal was to put an end to the SC drama, don't you think they would have used that force to avoid a runoff in the Governor's primary? Instead, we're going to have that race splattered across the front pages for the next two weeks.

It just blows my mind how something dumb happening in an entirely unimportant Democratic primary has turned into OMG REPUBLICONSPIRACY!!!1 We have plenty of our own scandals and **** to deal with already. Take responsibility for your own.

So, here's my question: how many blogs have I read in the last two days with this headline:

South Carolina Democrats Elect Unemployed Felon

democrats elect unemployed felon - Google Search

I'm not necessarily saying that it was Republicans, but something is fishy when a guy declared indigent by the state of South Carolina is able to afford a $10,000 filing fee. And there was an incident of "place marker" candidates in SC's past.

You don't find that suspicious?

 

[Redress]

Suspicious maybe. Substantial enough to warrant a government investigation not so much. If he feels that there may be something to this, he needs to find out something concrete.

 

[FilmFestGuy]

Suspicious maybe. Substantial enough to warrant a government investigation not so much. If he feels that there may be something to this, he needs to find out something concrete.

I'm not joing Clyburn here (at least not with the same motivation or fervor) - I'd just like to see if something happened. It's like figuring out a train wreck. I just find it fascinating.

 

[RightinNYC]

So, here's my question: how many blogs have I read in the last two days with this headline:

South Carolina Democrats Elect Unemployed Felon

democrats elect unemployed felon - Google Search

I only see one or two with that headline, and most are noname blogs that I doubt anyone's ever heard of. Regardless, that's not evidence of anything.

I'm not necessarily saying that it was Republicans, but something is fishy when a guy declared indigent by the state of South Carolina is able to afford a $10,000 filing fee. And there was an incident of "place marker" candidates in SC's past.

You don't find that suspicious?

Do I find it surprising that a crazy person ran for office? Of course not, it happens all the goddamn time.

Exhibit A: The Rent Is Too Damn High Party

This guy is a near-indigent lunatic who walks around the city screaming about rent and trying to sell his CDs and karate training services. He's been on the ballot for mayor in each of the last two elections.

Exhibit B: THE NEW YORK PRIMARY: THE GADFLY; Brodeur's Surprise Result: He Takes 4 Percent of the Votes - New York Times

Christopher X. Brodeur is a dude with a ponytail whose platform could best be summarized as "10,000 free public toilets on NYC public streets." He's spent months in jail on two occasions for harassing officials from the Mayor's office. He spent exactly $120 on his election campaign. Despite all that, he got 17,000 votes in the primary.

**** like this happens all the time. It's just not news because these people usually don't win.

 

[FilmFestGuy]

I only see one or two with that headline, and most are noname blogs that I doubt anyone's ever heard of. Regardless, that's not evidence of anything.



Do I find it surprising that a crazy person ran for office? Of course not, it happens all the goddamn time.

Exhibit A: The Rent Is Too Damn High Party

This guy is a near-indigent lunatic who walks around the city screaming about rent and trying to sell his CDs and karate training services. He's been on the ballot for mayor in each of the last two elections.

Exhibit B: THE NEW YORK PRIMARY: THE GADFLY; Brodeur's Surprise Result: He Takes 4 Percent of the Votes - New York Times

Christopher X. Brodeur is a dude with a ponytail whose platform could best be summarized as "10,000 free public toilets on NYC public streets." He's spent months in jail on two occasions for harassing officials from the Mayor's office. He spent exactly $120 on his election campaign. Despite all that, he got 17,000 votes in the primary.

**** like this happens all the time. It's just not news because these people usually don't win.

Fair enough - but how much does it cost to sign up in New York?

That's the only part I find odd - well, aside from Greene winning, sure.

I'm into this just for the intrigue. Maybe it is just the oddity of the whacko candidate winning randomly. I just think it's funny that it happened after all the other craziness SC has been through in its politics.

Maybe I'm just trying to extend it all for my own pleasure.

 

[RightinNYC]

Fair enough - but how much does it cost to sign up in New York?

That's the only part I find odd - well, aside from Greene winning, sure.

I'm into this just for the intrigue. Maybe it is just the oddity of the whacko candidate winning randomly. I just think it's funny that it happened after all the other craziness SC has been through in its politics.

Maybe I'm just trying to extend it all for my own pleasure.

I don't know about the actual up-front filing fees, but you have to obtain petition signatures from 7,500 registered voters to get listed on the ballot. That's much harder than scraping together $10k.

It's definitely interesting and amusing, but I think that it's just one of those things that happens sometimes, rather than a deliberate plot. Back in 2005, Gifford Miller was the biggest threat to Bloomberg's reelection. Despite spending millions, Miller only received 3,219 votes in the BX primary, while no-name Brodeur spent $120 and received 4,921. Nobody could figure out why a young white hippie from the lower east side had done so well in the Bronx, until we looked at the district data and realized that he had done very well in Haitian and black muslim communities. His full name on the ballot was Christopher X. Brodeur, and X is a common Haitian middle initial as well as being a black muslim tradition.

I suspect something similar happened in this race. Some others agree, though using more questionable language:

State Sen. Robert Ford, D-Charleston, who lost his gubernatorial bid Tuesday, said race could have played a role. The Democratic primary electorate is majority black, as is Greene, but not Rawl. "Vic Rawl had money, but he didn't have enough. He wasn't able to identify himself with black voters," Ford said. "No white folks have an 'e' on the end of Green. The blacks after they left the plantation couldn't spell, and they threw an 'e' on the end."

The Post and Courier - Update: Clyburn calls for probe in Senate race - Charleston SC - postandcourier.com

 

[TOJ]

I'm not saying that there are charges in THIS race: I'm saying it's happened in South Carolina's past where a Republican had paid a place marker candidate in a Democratic Primary:

Free Times: Government - A Phantom Candidate for U.S. Senate?

And this is a story from a South Carolina paper BEFORE the election.

Oh, and by the way - you've never heard of voters crossing over during the Primaries?

Can GOP Voters Spoil the Dem Race? - TIME
Rush the Vote: Operation Chaos Meeting and Exceeding Objectives

Again, this is nothing more than a silly side-show. DeMint had this wrapped up before any of this circus took place.

And before this: the main event was the circus in the Republican tent.

South Carolina is simply doing their damnedest to challenge New Jersey and Illinois for craziest politics.

Appalachian Trails, Argentina, "Raghead", Alleged Affairs, and now Ghost Candidates...

So are you saying the dude in the early 90s case was charged with planting a candidate in the Democrats primary? Is there an actual law against planting a candidate? Got a link to that law? I would like to read it.

And you are saying there was a conspirary of Republicans large enough to win the vote for Greene. Sounds kind of tin-foil hatism to me. :lol:

.

 

[MyOwnDrum]

South Carolina Investigating Alvin Greene's Primary Election Win, Dems Say

This is an intriguing story from S Carolina. A virtual unknown, Alvin Greene, has won the Democratic primary. The Democrats are claiming it might actually be a Republican plant. And investigation has been called for.

FOXNews.com - South Carolina Investigating Alvin Greene's Primary Election Win, Dems Say

South Carolina authorities have launched an investigation into Democratic nominee Alvin Greene's Senate candidacy and surprise primary win, a state Democratic Party official told FoxNews.com, but law enforcement authorities have yet to confirm the investigation.

Keiana Page, a spokeswoman for the South Carolina Democratic Party, told FoxNews.com that state authorities launched the investigation Friday at the request of an unknown person. Neither she nor a law enforcement spokeswoman could provide details about what is being reviewed.

The law enforcement spokeswoman, Jennifer Timmons of the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division, or SLED, told FoxNews.com that she wasn't sure whether an investigation had been launched or a request for one had been sent. She said she was tracking that information down. But she added that a request for an investigation doesn't automatically lead to one.

On Thursday, House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn, D-S.C., called on federal authorities to launch a probe into how Greene, an unemployed military veteran, entered and won the state's Democratic primary for U.S. Senate without party support and little campaigning.

Greene, who has called himself a "legitimate candidate," could not be reached for comment for this story. Clyburn's office did not respond to a request to comment on the latest developments in South Carolina.


Greene, 32, stunned the Democratic Party establishment Tuesday night when he handily defeated Vic Rawl, a four-term state lawmaker and former judge, for the party's nomination. Rawl, who had campaigned little but already raised $186,000, was forced to scrap a fundraiser planned for Thursday night.

Greene has not yet reported any fundraising, run any ads or put up signs or a website in his challenge of Republican U.S. Sen. Jim DeMint. Greene had been considered such a long shot that neither his opponent nor the media bothered to check his background, which includes a November arrest on a charge of felony obscenity.

Greene, who says he left the military last August after 13 years in the Army and Air Force, has said he paid the $10,440 filing fee by saving up two years of his service pay.

Clyburn has suggested Greene is a Republican plant. On Thursday, he said he was skeptical Greene paid the fee himself and demanded that federal authorities investigate where the money came from. Clyburn notes that state law makes it illegal for candidates to let someone else pay their filing fee if their candidacy is intended to damage another candidate.

 

[jamesrage]

Re: South Carolina Investigating Alvin Greene's Primary Election Win, Dems Say

This is an intriguing story from S Carolina. A virtual unknown, Alvin Greene, has won the Democratic primary. The Democrats are claiming it might actually be a Republican plant. And investigation has been called for.

FOXNews.com - South Carolina Investigating Alvin Greene's Primary Election Win, Dems Say

If he won fair and square then who cares if he is a plant of if someone paid his bills,last I checked it wasn't illegal for someone to pay your bills. Sore losers are just pissed that their guy didn't win so now they are crying fowl. Instead of whining like a little bitches they should ask themselves why a no name democrat won the primaries. Is it because the voters chose him? There is no evidence that the guy is a plant.What the republicans called every physic hot line on the planet and was told that paying the fees of a no name candidate would ensure victory? If anyone is going to hand the republicans a victory it is the democrats pissing and moaning over a no name candidate winning.

 

[MyOwnDrum]

Re: South Carolina Investigating Alvin Greene's Primary Election Win, Dems Say

So, the Democratic elite of SC is showing its true colors?

 

[jamesrage]

Re: South Carolina Investigating Alvin Greene's Primary Election Win, Dems Say

So, the Democratic elite of SC is showing its true colors?

Thats what I think. The voters didn't want the same old **** so they voted for someone new.And now the more established democrats are pissed.

 

[MyOwnDrum]

Re: South Carolina Investigating Alvin Greene's Primary Election Win, Dems Say

This is a backlash against the status quo? And Democrats want to blame it on Bush, possibly?

 

[zimmer]

You need to read your source material better. It's not "they", it's "he".

I understand, but I am sure he has the support of his party on this... hence the "they".

One note: 10G to enter the race is a pretty steep hill to climb for the average Joe. Don't we want more average Joes, and if someone is willing to assist with paying, I see no problem.

Their law should be changed. It caters to the elite, not the masses.

.

 

[Deuce]

Re: South Carolina Investigating Alvin Greene's Primary Election Win, Dems Say

This is a backlash against the status quo? And Democrats want to blame it on Bush, possibly?

No, that's not at all what is happening.

 

[Renae]

Re: South Carolina Investigating Alvin Greene's Primary Election Win, Dems Say

No, that's not at all what is happening.

No, the Dem Party is making sure the Black Voters of SC know their place. How DARE they vote for someone other then their approved Candidate.

 

[Deuce]

Re: South Carolina Investigating Alvin Greene's Primary Election Win, Dems Say

No, the Dem Party is making sure the Black Voters of SC know their place. How DARE they vote for someone other then their approved Candidate.

I don't see any evidence that what you say is true. The focus is on how the hell this guy paid his filing fee when he had a recent felony charge where he had to get a public defender, which in SC requires you to sign an affadavit saying you can't afford a lawyer.

 

[pragmatic]

Re: Surprise SC Senate Democratic candidate faces felony obscenity charge

Odds are pretty long on any states officials having as many sex scandals in one year as SC has had this year(so far!). It does not really mean anything about SC, but I do find it funny.

Just picked up on this story. Think there may be a misguided focus here. My suspicion would be that the SC democrats likely didn't vote this Green fella to a primary victory.

Something waaaaay funny going on with these results. :roll:


Democrats increasingly convinced of voter fraud in SC primaries | Raw Story


.

 

[RightinNYC]

Re: Surprise SC Senate Democratic candidate faces felony obscenity charge

Moderator's Warning:

Threads merged

As to the new claims, this is just getting ridiculous. First the Dems claim that this guy was a Republican plant, despite there being no evidence to support that claim and such an effort being astonishingly implausible. Next, because even the plant theory doesn't explain why the guy actually won, they're now claiming that there was also massive voter fraud (for which they also have no evidence).

How desperate can these people be to blame everyone else for the fact that a nutjob won an unimportant and barely-contested election? How gullible do they think the rest of the country is that they'll believe it?

 

[Dittohead not!]

Elephant dung' all over S.C. Dem primaries

So says House Majority Whip James Clyburn

(CNN) – A leading South Carolina Democrat charged Sunday that his state’s recent Democratic primaries had been tainted. And House Majority Whip James Clyburn used some very colorful language to do so.

In addition to the fact that Alvin Greene, an unemployed veteran with no apparent campaign apparatus, won Tuesday’s race for the South Carolina’s Democratic Senate nomination, Clyburn also told CNN of a suspicious element in his own primary race - a consultant with Republican ties worked for Clyburn’s unsuccessful challenger.

Dirty politics, or sour grapes? What do you think?

 

[Deuce]

Re: Elephant dung' all over S.C. Dem primaries

Moderator's Warning:

Threads merged

As to the new claims, this is just getting ridiculous. First the Dems claim that this guy was a Republican plant, despite there being no evidence to support that claim and such an effort being astonishingly implausible. Next, because even the plant theory doesn't explain why the guy actually won, they're now claiming that there was also massive voter fraud (for which they also have no evidence).

How desperate can these people be to blame everyone else for the fact that a nutjob won an unimportant and barely-contested election? How gullible do they think the rest of the country is that they'll believe it?

No evidence?

Experts review S.C. Senate ballots - David Catanese - POLITICO.com

I don't know if there was something shady going on, but there are a LOT of red flags:

- Completely unknown candidate
- Fishy source of filing fee. (candidate was unemployed and recently signed an affidavit saying he couldn't afford a defense lawyer)
- Candidate has a pending felony charge
- Candidate did not campaign at all
- Massive discrepancy between absentee ballots and in-person votes cast. (Absentee ballots, Greene got only 16% of votes in Lancaster County, yet wins with a 17 point margin in election-day votes)
- Vote count discrepancies
- Candidate's interviews are strangely inept. Greene was military intelligence yet comes off as an idiot. He received three medals, but never mentions them. He just mentions his discharge was not voluntary.

Edit: If it does turn out to be election-tampering, I think the GOP is going to have a nasty fight on their hands, even if it's proven it wasn't them who did the tampering. The idea that someone tampered with the primary might get Democrats out to vote more out of sheer outrage.

Edit 2: Of course, this "investigation" could just be sour grapes on part of the loser.

 

[RightinNYC]

Moderator's Warning:

Threads merged.

 

[Deuce]

Man this thread is making me dizzy.

 

[Dittohead not!]

Re: Elephant dung' all over S.C. Dem primaries

Here I thought I had come up with something new, and it's already gone on for seven pages!

What an interesting story, don't you think? Either the Republicans of SC managed to plant a candidate who can't possibly win in November, or the Democrats were dumb enough to elect one on their own.

Or, maybe the Democrats know what they're doing, and the rest of us are wrong about Greene being unelectable. Somehow, that's an even scarier thought than the idea that dirty politics might be involved.

Elephant dung all over LOL.

 

[jamesrage]

Re: Elephant dung' all over S.C. Dem primaries

No evidence?

Experts review S.C. Senate ballots - David Catanese - POLITICO.com

I don't know if there was something shady going on, but there are a LOT of red flags:


- Fishy source of filing fee. (candidate was unemployed and recently signed an affidavit saying he couldn't afford a defense lawyer)
- Candidate has a pending felony charge

That is not evidence that the primary winner is a plant.

- Completely unknown candidate

- Candidate did not campaign at all.

That is not evidence of planting a candidate. If anything they suggest the voters were sick of the usual status quo.

- Massive discrepancy between absentee ballots and in-person votes cast. (Absentee ballots, Greene got only 16% of votes in Lancaster County, yet wins with a 17 point margin in election-day votes)
- Vote count discrepancies

Those things would suggest a possible voter fraud but not a plant.

- Candidate's interviews are strangely inept. Greene was military intelligence yet comes off as an idiot. He received three medals, but never mentions them. He just mentions his discharge was not voluntary.

Many people have a perception of what an idiot is, Many die hard tin foil hat wearing kool aid drinking Bush bashing loons claimed Bush was an idiot,but yet Bush went to Yale,was governor of Texas and was twice elected president. A candidate's perceived intelligence is not evidence of anything.

Edit: If it does turn out to be election-tampering, I think the GOP is going to have a nasty fight on their hands, even if it's proven it wasn't them who did the tampering. The idea that someone tampered with the primary might get Democrats out to vote more out of sheer outrage.

Why tamper with a primary election instead of the main election? From what I understand this guy has as much chance of beating the republican during the main election as his primary opponent.

Edit 2: Of course, this "investigation" could just be sour grapes on part of the loser

That's what I believe this is. The idea that voters would rather vote for a political newbie instead of their guy angers them.