SC

Coming Soon: SC Libertarian Gubernatorial Bid

THIRD PARTY CHALLENGER PREPARING ANNOUNCEMENT … The Libertarian Party of South Carolina will nominate a gubernatorial candidate for the first time in more than a decade-and-a-half, multiple sources familiar with the impending announcement tell FITS. While these sources declined to give us the name of the candidate, they described him…

THIRD PARTY CHALLENGER PREPARING ANNOUNCEMENT …

The Libertarian Party of South Carolina will nominate a gubernatorial candidate for the first time in more than a decade-and-a-half, multiple sources familiar with the impending announcement tell FITS.

While these sources declined to give us the name of the candidate, they described him as a “Lowcountry businessman” capable of self-funding a portion of his campaign.

An announcement could come within a week, we’re told.

Interesting …

The last libertarian candidate to run for governor – Timothy Moultrie of Aiken, S.C. – garnered 1.3 percent of the vote in 1998. Moultrie had no money to get his message out, though – and was running at a time when the Republican party still had some credibility on fiscal issues.

Not anymore …

We’ve been arguing for months that South Carolina voters deserve a viable third option – a candidate capable of providing a contrast between big government backers Nikki Haley (RINO-Lexington) and Vincent Sheheen (D-Camden).

Haley ran as a Tea Party Republican, but veered wildly toward the status quo after receiving the GOP nomination in 2010. Things have only gotten worse since then. In fact on taxes, spending, education and (most notably) government-subsidized health care, she’s governed like a Democrat – a pattern that has accelerated in recent years due to the lack of a pro-free market challenger on her ideological right flank.

Can the Libertarian Party’s candidate emerge as a credible challenge to the state’s failed two-party system?

That depends …

If the party’s nominee fails to raise money, then another abysmal 1.3 percent showing is likely. However if a legitimate candidate can get on television with a consistent message – anything is possible.

In addition to the Libertarian Party’s nominee, former S.C. Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer is reportedly still contemplating a third party bid of his own – also eyeing Haley’s vulnerable right flank.

Related posts

SC

Why Freedom Of Information Matters

Jenn Wood
SC

University Of South Carolina Gets ‘Green Light’ For Free Speech?

Erin Parrott
SC

Accused Voyeur At It Again?

Will Folks

48 comments

Tummy Enema February 23, 2014 at 6:39 pm

I’ll be the head honcho bigass boss for the campain!!

Reply
follydude February 23, 2014 at 6:40 pm

… John Steinberger? Also, why show the Gadsden Flag? Isn’t that the Tea Party’s symbol? Do the Libertarians have a flag?

Reply
Frank Pytel February 24, 2014 at 3:49 am

The Gadsden flag is not the flag of the TP. It’s the flag of participants to freedom, a symbol against tyranny and, in my opinion, the true state flag of South Carolina.

Reply
UGH February 26, 2014 at 11:56 am

John Steinberger is certainly NOT a libertarian. Like most “liberty-minded Republicans”, he is for personal liberty in your bank account and absolutely no where else.

Reply
GrandTango February 23, 2014 at 6:47 pm

A Liberal-Tarian has been running for Gov. in SC every election that I can remember.

If you actually LOVE freedom, as you all claim, you need to DEMAND the GOP candidate adheres to its Platform.

You’re just wasting time, otherwise. Nobody needs to vote for more dope, more whores and vilification of the US military for freeing other counties strategically important to our freedom…

Reply
Smirks February 24, 2014 at 9:20 am

Nobody needs to vote for more dope and more whores because conservative politician gatherings already have plenty of those.

Reply
GrandTango February 24, 2014 at 9:40 am

You must know how the ancient Greeks and Romans lived…since you are immersed in mythology…

You do know what happened to their fable-based civilizations, don’t you???…or are you ignorant of history???

Reply
Rocky February 24, 2014 at 10:09 am

The question is, does the SCGOP know?

Reply
Mary February 24, 2014 at 10:51 am

The Roman Empire survived for about 1000 years. We still have a way to go to catch up.

The Western half of the empire was ultimately destroyed by roving bands of capitalists; who sold their services to the highest bidder and when the Empire could not pay the bill, engaged in aggressive collection methods.

I doubt you know much about history. You don’t seem very educated.

Reply
GrandTango February 24, 2014 at 12:59 pm

The Roman Empire placed babies they did not want under a bridge, so wild dogs could feed on them. They then banned Christians from rescuing the babies.

The Romans enslaved others and used foreigners conquered in battle for lions to devour for their entertainment.,… They pitted slaves against each other and ordered one to kill the other.

A typical Greek adult man legally had a boy child he was allowed to molest for sexual pleasure…

Are you a defender of abortion??..and you say we have to catch up..you are one low and Filthy form of excrement if you aspire to be what Rome was…

Mary February 24, 2014 at 2:27 pm

Well Big T, given your lack of education, its obvious you also have selective history syndrom. Every nation must admit to periods of history that are not, lets say,moral.

Perhaps you forgot that the US slaughtered tens of thousands of native Americans and seized their land. Perhaps you forgot that we conquered and enslaved hundreds of thousands of Africans, and that tens of thousands died on the slave ships coming to the US chained to a bunk and forced to travel in their own excrement. Perhaps you forgot that US citizens had the right to keep their slaves in chains, breed them like livestock and sell their children to the highest bidder. Perhaps you forgot a slave owner could kill a slave for attempting to escape. Perhaps you forgot that many US slave owners fathered children with their slaves and then as soon as those children were old enough to sell, forcibly took them from their mother. Perhaps you did not recall that no slave owner was ever arrested or charged with raping his slaves or molesting them. Perhaps you did not recall that US soldiers sometimes raped Native American Women when raiding their villages. Perhaps you did not recall that the US Army gave native American tribes blankets infected with Small Pox so that they would die.

So each nation has to own up to its sins and hope its goods offset the bad to some degree. The Roman Empire did some of the things you say, but it also spread civilization to much of the world, and in the end (for Christians anyway) it adopted Christianity as its religion, and made Christianity the official religion of the known world. The entirety of Roman Catholicism, and the Greek, Russian, and Eastern Orthodox churches (a vast majority of Christians worldwide) trace their church to its foundation by the Roman Emperor, Constantine.

GrandTango February 24, 2014 at 2:37 pm

You F*#King idiot. The US NEVER ‘conquered and enslaved’ anyone…and the US did not put anyone on a slave ship…
A small minority of Democrat slave-owners did that…Just like it was an elitist group of democrat slave-owners who bought and sold slaves. The ancestors of the people you now Worship…Dumb@$$…

The Constitution I support, and you trash, actually provided a means for hundreds of thousands of American WHITE men to give their lives, so the salves could gain a freedom, they would not, or could not earn for themselves…You imbibe…

Also: Americans going west were savagely brutalized by Indians, who refused to let us travel on land that was claimed by No One…

You are as F*#king ignorant as a stick..and totally immersed in pop culture mythology…doled out to fools like you, so you can be manipulated to vote for the modern-day slave-owners who control you….

Penus Williams February 24, 2014 at 3:23 pm

I have got to stop asking myself how stupid you can be. You seem to be taking it as a challenge.

GrandTango February 24, 2014 at 3:40 pm

So you agree that the Ancient Roman Civilization was superior to the United States???…

Or are you so F*#king stupid, you post an empty comment, and you are too vapid to answer a simple question so I can ascertain what you believe???

PS: Mary never answered about abortion…And I want to ask if she favors third-term abortion…and do you…as you D@m* the US for crimes you imagine we are guilty of…(in your F*#king pea brain, anyway)….

Mommy Tang February 24, 2014 at 8:38 pm

say it T, type it T. FUCK. Implying a word, disguising a word, yet still using it to make your point or to vent your anger clearly illustrates your low IQ, confused mental condition and unstable perch on life.

Relax, make a choice and live with it YOU FUCKING TWAT.

Ha Ha February 23, 2014 at 6:47 pm

“Can the Libertarians Party candidate emerge as a credible challenger to the states failed two party system?”

Short answer?No

Longer answer?No and No

Reply
Torch February 23, 2014 at 7:05 pm

Two words, already lost. Not enough powder to fire a cap pistol in the Libertarian party..

Reply
Mike at the Beach February 23, 2014 at 7:14 pm

How to compute chance that Libertarian candidate takes SC gubernatorial race:

Divide percentage chance that Mace, Connor, et al. will defeat Sugarbritches Graham in US Senate primary (0%) into millions of dollars that will be raised by this Tea Party-in-disguise candidate ($0.05m). To wit, 0 / 0.05 = ZERO.

However, chance that this mystery candidate shoots self in face by “pulling a Ross Perot” and slicing juuuuuust enough of the tin-foil-hat crowd off of the straight R ticket to put Vinnie in the G Mansion = at least possible. That’ll show ’em!

Reply
Tabman February 24, 2014 at 10:53 am

Mike, it’s me – Tabman

Reply
Votecounter February 23, 2014 at 7:20 pm

Haha, Sheheen should be so lucky. Can any of you fools count votes?

Reply
Gregory Geddings February 24, 2014 at 8:13 am

Hey, who needs to count when Diebold makes the voting machines?

Reply
RogueElephant February 24, 2014 at 9:46 pm

I think it was Stalin who said; It dosen’t matter who votes, or how many votes. What matters is who counts the votes.

Reply
euwe max February 24, 2014 at 10:54 pm

Wasn’t it Ken Keasy that said You don’t lead by pointing and telling people some place to go. You lead by going to that place and making a case.

Reply
jimlewisowb February 23, 2014 at 8:13 pm

” eyeing Haley’s vulnerable right flank”

Damn right skippy. I’ve eyed her right flank, her left flank, her mountain peaks and her valley of death

Don’t know whether they are vulunerble but it does appear the trails are well traveled

Reply
Uh huh February 23, 2014 at 8:15 pm

A properly run libertarian campaign would be one where a loss was assumed but arguments were made for long term educational purposes.

A properly run Libertarian campaign(capital L), who the hell knows what that is? I’d say no one, including the Libertarians as well.

Reply
Limbaughsaphatkhunt February 23, 2014 at 9:17 pm

I hardly think you can make the case that Haley is a RINO. Calling her a RINO and looking for somebody even further to the right would be like cleaning your pool by filling it up with pure bleach and adding a couple of gallons of water at the end.

Still, I expect the Libertarian Goobernor candidate to get around 3 to 5%…as they always do, everywhere they run.

Reply
Smirks February 24, 2014 at 9:18 am

Calling her a RINO and looking for somebody even further to the right
would be like cleaning your pool by filling it up with pure bleach and
adding a couple of gallons of water at the end.

Then when people choose to swim in a different pool, claim their pool didn’t have enough bleach again.

Yes, this is essentially what right wing media preaches on a daily basis.

Reply
Frequent Guest February 24, 2014 at 12:18 am

A credible candidate/campaign is actually something you libertarian tards can do for by electing oil Vince. Living under Democrat governance will be educational. And then next time we hopefully will not nominate frauds like Trikki Nikki.

Reply
Hello George February 24, 2014 at 12:40 am

“A credible candidate/campaign is actually something you libertarian tards can do for by electing oil Vince.”

You must be one of those brilliant Sheheen strategists.

Reply
The Colonel February 24, 2014 at 3:58 am

“…If the party’s nominee fails to raise money, then another abysmal 1.3 percent showing is likely. However if a legitimate candidate can get on television with a consistent message – anything is possible…”
Yeah – 19% of the vote.

Reply
Hangin' Low February 24, 2014 at 7:27 am

Low Country businessman. Self-financed campaign. Is Tommy Ravennel a Libertarian? Well, I guess he is against drug and alcohol enforcement.

Reply
okay February 24, 2014 at 9:08 am

A libertarian candidate is the only way Sheheen wins. While you may not like Haley, she is the better option for conservatives. A libertarian can’t win, only will take away a small portion of the conservative vote.

Reply
UGH February 26, 2014 at 11:59 am

These days, Libertarians are taking more and more of the Democrat votes. In fact, in the recent VA election, 2/3 of the Libertarian votes came from liberal voters.

Research pre-comment is always a good idea.

Reply
JimBob February 24, 2014 at 9:25 am

Oh poor Nicki, do you think she can sleep at night knowing she just lost 692 votes, statewide?

Reply
Gregory Geddings February 24, 2014 at 7:24 pm

692 votes? WTF? A bit on the optimistic side aren’t we?

Reply
miss suzanne February 24, 2014 at 10:17 am

Darla Moore?????

Reply
gottadobetter February 24, 2014 at 10:43 am

They will need a candidate with more credibility than Moultrie. He is a weirdo. He is not someone I would leave my kids with. No way.

Reply
Robert Ritchey February 24, 2014 at 11:11 am

The argument that a Libertarian cannot win but can cause a Repulican to lose is not mathematically sound and here is why:

2010 General Election
2,631,459 Registered Voters
1,365,480 Ballots Cast
51.89% Voter Turnout

Nikki Haley – 51.37%
Vince Sheheen – 46.91%

The key factor is that 48.11% did not turn out to vote. We could estimate that they are largely split 50/50 Republican to Democrat. That means that the two dominant parties only get half their voters to turn out. That being said you cannot blame the out come of an election, where that last candidate only got 1.3% of the vote, on that candidate. If they were to get 19% of the vote as was mentioned here that still leaves an additional 27% of the vote that could go to the two dominant parties. Yes, I know, you will never get 100% turnout but you cannot blame someone else when only half your team shows up to play the game. Libertarian Ideology is on the rise even within the Republican Party. I voted Republican all my life until now. I will no longer vote for people who will “Keep us Safe” and “Tell us what is best” at the expense of my Liberties. I also do not subscribe to the fear mongering that goes on within the two dominant parties.

Reply
Yes, No, Maybe? February 24, 2014 at 9:20 pm

Seriously,aren’t you just a little disappointed that the Constitution has failed?

Reply
Robert Ritchey February 24, 2014 at 10:22 pm

The Constitution has not failed. We have not followed it. There have been cases where it was circumvented since its inception. You actually have to complete an experiment before you can conclude any results. There is nothing wrong with the Constitution, We need to actually follow it as the law of the land and see where it takes us instead of using it as a punch line or convenience to justify a position.

Reply
euwe max February 24, 2014 at 10:52 pm

The Constitution has not failed. We have not followed it.

——
sounds like the following part should have been included.

Reply
Yes, No, Maybe? February 24, 2014 at 11:44 pm

Exactly. That one flew right over his head.

euwe max February 24, 2014 at 11:49 pm

Faith cannot accept contradiction.

Yes, No, Maybe? February 24, 2014 at 11:47 pm

One other thing for you to consider. The Supremes have gone to great lengths to rule on the Constitutionality of too many things to list. My favorite being the “general welfare” clause.

So are you now claiming that the Supremes are not following the Constitution? If that is your claim, what is your remedy? The Constitution gave them the very power to decide what the Constitution is/means.

Seriously, you haven’t thought your statement through fully.

If you think “getting back to the Constitution” is a remedy for government, you’ve ignored the history of our own country…which is sad.

Reply
Robert Ritchey February 26, 2014 at 8:08 am

So you are saying that because of this the Constitution was never valid? I am advocating for the return to the original intent of the words in the Constitution not the way they have been acted upon or interpreted incorrectly so many times. My remedy is to return to a better way of thinking and acting toward each other.

Bill February 25, 2014 at 9:08 am

The Constitution has not failed, there is nothing wrong with it and we are following the Constitution just fine. I am really sick of listening to the teanut view of the Constitution. Governing is complex, the document is complex, the philosophies upon which our country was founded are complex. I think we are doing a great job. No document can encompass centuries without flexibility. The drafters new this.
We just need to fight to keep the tea nuts from taking the country back to the 1890s.

Reply
Robert Ritchey February 26, 2014 at 8:12 am

I am not a tea nut or religious fanatic and I am tired of people that think everything is just peachy ;)

Barry1234 February 25, 2014 at 9:16 am

Everyone has a right to waste their money.

Reply

Leave a Comment