Three candidates, three states: Newt takes South Carolina

Rick Santorum learned this week that he actually did squeak out a 34-vote victory in the Iowa Caucus. Mitt Romney held on to a commanding lead in New Hampshire, and won the first-in-the-nation primary.

Now, in a very apropos manner, given how turbulent this race has been, Newt Gingrich has taken a dominating lead, and will win South Carolina. As of 7:30pm (CST), with 35.8% reporting, the results are Gingrich 40.4%, Romney 26.2%, Santorum 18.1%, and Paul in last with 13.4%.

Three states. Three different victors.

The next primary will be in Florida, on January 31st.

All eyes turn to South Carolina...

After the closer-than-a-hair finish in Iowa, sparked by the Santorum Surge, all eyes are now on South Carolina.

After squeaking out a plurality in Iowa by eight votes (which some are already calling into question), Mitt Romney goes into New Hampshire this Tuesday as the overwhelming favorite. The latest Rasmussen poll puts Romney at 42%, with Ron Paul at 18% and Rick Santorum at 13%. However, given Romney's history in the state, and the fact that he governed in next-door Massachusetts, that is not unexpected.

As Mark B. Lowe on Race42012.com posted this morning, We all know the old political adage, “Three tickets out of Iowa, two out of New Hampshire”. For a while now, a third phrase has been added to it, “One out of South Carolina”. Since 1980, the winner of the South Carolina primary has ended up being the eventual GOP presidential nominee.

The Rasmussen poll in South Carolina finds a close race between Romney at 27% and Santorum at 24%. Santorum was at 1% in the last poll taken by Rasmussen - an astounding surge! If they do not finish first or second, Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry will probably end their campaigns, as there will be no momentum or reason to continue.

South Carolina votes on January 21st, and will most likely again decide the Republican presidential nominee.

"Offbeat" GOP Candidates? Let's Look at the Democrat Party, Too

Politico ran a story Thursday entitled Will its offbeat candidates hurt the GOP?. The article focused on candidates like Rand Paul (KY-Sen), Sharon Angle (NV-Sen), Linda McMahon (CT-Sen), and a few others.

I have a few candidates I'd like to point out to Politico that are Democrats, but first, a few words from Rush Limbaugh, who I thought had a great response to this on his radio show:

The Politico could run a list of the offbeat legislation the Democrats introduced every day in Congress like Rangel's constant efforts to reintroduce the draft.  Maxine Waters today blamed Bush for her ethics problems.  We got Fortney "Pete" Stark.  These are normal people, all of these wondrous Democrats.  But of course The Politico has to go out and find offbeats in the Republican Party.  This Burns guy gets one thing right.  "It’s almost impossible to imagine a group of nominees like this emerging in any other election cycle, and the willingness of primary voters to embrace such downright strange candidates underscores just how violently the 2010 electorate has turned against political institutions and the would-be officeholders who belong to them." He's exactly right.  We've gotten so odd that somebody who wants to reform Social Security is a political offbeat.  Somebody who wants to shore up Medicare and fix it a political offbeat.  Somebody who wants to fix the Department of Education is considered an offbeat candidate.  Somebody who wants to bring the budget in line is an offbeat, oddball, weirdo candidate.  Somebody who wants to end the crime and the fraud and the waste in government is an offbeat candidate.

And now for a few "offbeat" Democrat candidates, starting down in Florida.

Florida Democrats have two main candidates for U.S. Senate (Marco Rubio is the GOP candidate, and governor Charlie Crist is running as an Independent). Jeff Greene is a billionaire, who made most of his money in a questionable real estate venture in California. But, that's not his only problem.

In 2005, his 145-foot yacht dropped anchor right smack dab in the middle of Belize's protected barrier reef (designated by the UN as a "World Heritage Site"). Greene was slapped with a $1.87 million fine by the Belize government... but he's not been back to pay it, and in fact denies that the event ever occurred.

Let's move to Texas.

Kesha Rogers is the Democrat nominee for Congressional District 22. Rogers is best known for being a LaRouche candidate.

Kesha, like all LaRouchers, believes that President Obama is a puppet for the British Empire and their imperialist bankers. Mhmm.

Moving on...

No list of "offbeat" candidates would be complete without the infamous Alvin Greene. Greene is one of the most bizarre candidates who actually won a primary in this election cycle.

The candidate has had disastrous, blooper-reel interviews with the media, and to top off all his other mishaps, he was indicted on Friday on two charges - a misdemeanor for communicating obscene materials to a person without consent, and a felony for showing pornography to a teenage student in a South Carolina college computer lab.

And yes, this guy won the Democrat primary, over the candidacy of a longtime Democrat politician.

And last, but not least, Oklahoma's own Democrat U.S. Senate nominee - Jim Rogers.

Rogers is a perennial candidate who never campaigns. He wears the same old red campaign sweatshirt, with "Jim Rogers for U.S. Senate 20__" ironed on the back. I saw the man when he filed for U.S. Senate in 2008, and he had taped "08" to update the shirt from his previous run for office.


I didn't even go into all the high-ranking Democrat incumbents who are facing ethics investigations, either. Just a closing, interesting note - these four candidates that I highlighted only have two last names: Rogers and Greene.

Jenny Sanford's Statement and the Repercussions of Mark Sanford's Affair

South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford, who had mysteriously disappeared earlier, admitted today that he had an affair over the past year with a "dear friend" from Argentina. His wife of nearly twenty years, First Lady Jenny Sanford, issued the following incredible statement:

I would like to start by saying I love my husband and I believe I have put forth every effort possible to be the best wife I can be during our almost twenty years of marriage. As well, for the last fifteen years my husband has been fully engaged in public service to the citizens and taxpayers of this state and I have faithfully supported him in those efforts to the best of my ability. I have been and remain proud of his accomplishments and his service to this state.

I personally believe that the greatest legacy I will leave behind in this world is not the job I held on Wall Street, or the campaigns I managed for Mark, or the work I have done as First Lady or even the philanthropic activities in which I have been routinely engaged. Instead, the greatest legacy I will leave in this world is the character of the children I, or we, leave behind. It is for that reason that I deeply regret the recent actions of my husband Mark, and their potential damage to our children.

I believe wholeheartedly in the sanctity, dignity and importance of the institution of marriage. I believe that has been consistently reflected in my actions. When I found out about my husband's infidelity I worked immediately to first seek reconciliation through forgiveness, and then to work diligently to repair our marriage. We reached a point where I felt it was important to look my sons in the eyes and maintain my dignity, self-respect, and my basic sense of right and wrong. I therefore asked my husband to leave two weeks ago.

This trial separation was agreed to with the goal of ultimately strengthening our marriage. During this short separation it was agreed that Mark would not contact us. I kept this separation quiet out of respect of his public office and reputation, and in hopes of keeping our children from just this type of public exposure. Because of this separation, I did not know where he was in the past week.

I believe enduring love is primarily a commitment and an act of will, and for a marriage to be successful, that commitment must be reciprocal. I believe Mark has earned a chance to resurrect our marriage.

Psalm 127 states that sons are a gift from the Lord and children a reward from Him. I will continue to pour my energy into raising our sons to be honorable young men. I remain willing to forgive Mark completely for his indiscretions and to welcome him back, in time, if he continues to work toward reconciliation with a true spirit of humility and repentance.

This is a very painful time for us and I would humbly request now that members of the media respect the privacy of my boys and me as we struggle together to continue on with our lives and as I seek the wisdom of Solomon, the strength and patience of Job and the grace of God in helping to heal my family.

What class and forgiveness, after the excruciatingly painful details of her husband's infidelity were exposed for the whole world to see. I sincerely hope that the Sanford's can, with God's help, restore their wrecked marriage.

On another note, this definitely eliminates any chance of a Sanford candidacy for President in 2012. Sanford had the potential to become a serious candidate, though still behind Huckabee, Palin and Romney.

Unfortunately, foolish choices like those made recently by Sanford and Nevada Senator John Ensign have the chance of ruining the GOP's chances at turning things around in 2010. Again, this just proves that no party has a monopoly on losers.