Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Lindsey Grahamís fourth GOP challenger Bill Connor announces run at Myrtle Beach Tea Party event
thestate.com ^ | November 11, 2013 | Jamie Self

Posted on 11/12/2013 5:32:03 AM PST by cotton1706

COLUMBIA — U.S. Army veteran and Orangeburg attorney Bill Connor announced his candidacy for U.S. Senate Monday at a Myrtle Beach Tea Party meeting.Connor joins Spartanburg state Sen. Lee Bright, Easley businessman Richard Cash and Charleston PR executive Nancy Mace as the fourth candidate challenging U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham in the June GOP primary.The only one of Graham’s challengers to run a statewide race, Connor ran for lieutenant governor in 2010 and lost in a runoff.A Monday news release on Connor’s newly launched website said that “Unlike some, Bill Connor wears the label of Tea Party Republican proudly.”In a video posted on Connor’s website and timed with his announcement, Connor says, “A small federal government our founders intended was for citizen legislators, people who would take time away from their families and businesses for a few years, do what’s right for our country’s future,” then come home and live under the laws they pass.“After nearly two decades in Washington Lindsey Graham’s values and votes look more like they came more from a congressional conference table,” Connor says in the video, accusing Graham of supporting conservative causes near election time.

(Excerpt) Read more at thestate.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Government; Politics/Elections; US: South Carolina
KEYWORDS: 2014midterms; elections; hesafag; sc2014
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-77 next last

1 posted on 11/12/2013 5:32:03 AM PST by cotton1706
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: cotton1706
Lindsey Graham’s fourth GOP challenger Bill Connor announces run at Myrtle Beach Tea Party event

Opposition and choices are great, but I can't help but wonder if Linda Graham is secretly supporting some of these challengers in hope that they will splinter the vote in the primary with him coming out on top.

2 posted on 11/12/2013 5:34:44 AM PST by The Sons of Liberty (Who but a TYRANT shoves down another man's throat what he has exempted himself from?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Sons of Liberty

You are correct. It also splits up the Anti-Graham money 4 ways.


3 posted on 11/12/2013 5:36:55 AM PST by Old Retired Army Guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: The Sons of Liberty
If Graham doesn't get 50% of the vote, it goes to a run-off election. The more to take away votes from Graham and keep him from 50% the better.

/johnny

4 posted on 11/12/2013 5:39:26 AM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

4 challengers — Divide the conservative vote and conquer. Is South Carolina a plurality wins the primary state or is there a run-off?

If not a run-off state, You gotta hand it to the GOP-E; they have truly perfected the game they play.

I would imagine that at least one of those “conservatives” are plants. The others are just dunces, if they don’t realize the necessity of narrowing the field all by themselves.


5 posted on 11/12/2013 5:40:21 AM PST by xzins ( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Retired Army Guy
Actually, it splits Graham's money 4 ways. He has to fight 4 challengers and waste money in the initial primary vote. When it goes to run-off, it's one on one, if Graham doesn't get 50% or more of the initial vote.

/johnny

6 posted on 11/12/2013 5:41:13 AM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: xzins
SC is a run-off state. And it has a sore-loser law. Graham can't run under another party if he loses the primary.

/johnny

7 posted on 11/12/2013 5:42:07 AM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: xzins

There’s a runoff if no candidate get’s over 50%. In a five person race, it’s unlikely Graham would be able to top 50%. Then we take him out in a runoff as we did Dewhurst!


8 posted on 11/12/2013 5:42:35 AM PST by cotton1706
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: The Sons of Liberty

The way around this problem is for the Tea Party to present the four challengers with an agreement, that by a date certain, whichever of them leads in a “pre-primary”, as judged by a poll of the Tea Party membership, or even registered Republicans, will become the single nominee, and the others agree to drop out and give their support to him.

They either sign the agreement, or they are immediately cut off, and are no longer endorsed by the Tea Party, and those who do sign can call them “spoilers”, and reject them as nothing other than agents trying to get Graham re-elected as a “dirty trick”.

Yes, it is serious, but it is also good strategy. If a candidate cannot control their ego enough to support another candidate who is better than they are, they do not deserve to be elected.


9 posted on 11/12/2013 5:44:44 AM PST by yefragetuwrabrumuy (War on Terror news at rantburg.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

I absolutely wish our presidential election required a run-off if no one over 50%.


10 posted on 11/12/2013 5:44:50 AM PST by xzins ( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: The Sons of Liberty
I can't help but wonder if Linda Graham is secretly supporting some of these challengers in hope that they will splinter the vote in the primary with him coming out on top.

It doesn't work that way in a run-off primary. The more the better is the rule if you're trying to take down an entrenched candidate. That is how Cruz beat Dewhurst in TX. Dewhurst easily got the plurality of votes but he didn't get 50%. Thus, he had to face a run-off against Cruz alone. The contrast destroyed him. We can do the same to Lindsey

11 posted on 11/12/2013 5:45:00 AM PST by Paine in the Neck (Is John's moustache long enough YET?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: The Sons of Liberty

I agree that we need a much narrower field. True tea partiers should sit down with tea party candidates and figure out a strategy of quickly determining the most viable tea party candidate and uniting around him or her.

Let them run but they should agree to exit the race when it becomes apparent who is the strongest tea party candidate.


12 posted on 11/12/2013 5:47:19 AM PST by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: yefragetuwrabrumuy
If all the challengers keep Graham from getting 50%, which is likely, then it will go to a run-off election where one challenger will be facing Graham.

No need to narrow the field down just yet, the primary is designed to do that.

/johnny

13 posted on 11/12/2013 5:49:20 AM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: The Sons of Liberty

In South Carolina, if no candidate receives 50% or more of the vote, there will be a runoff. Therefore, it’s not a bad thing to pack the field when attempting to unseat an entrenched incumbent.


14 posted on 11/12/2013 5:49:44 AM PST by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
It will be apparent after the first round of voting which is the strongest challenger to Graham, and there will be a run-off. This is a run-off type primary. The more the merrier at the beginning. They just need to keep Graham from getting 50%.

/johnny

15 posted on 11/12/2013 5:51:01 AM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

Diluting the opposition isn’t going to accomplish anything but assure another term for Graham. Conservatives need to coalesce behind a single opponent.


16 posted on 11/12/2013 5:55:34 AM PST by ScottinVA (Obama is so far in over his head, even his ears are beneath the water level.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry
In South Carolina, if no candidate receives 50% or more of the vote, there will be a runoff.

Wish we had that law here in VA.

17 posted on 11/12/2013 5:56:21 AM PST by ScottinVA (Obama is so far in over his head, even his ears are beneath the water level.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

Out with the old MILK and in with the new TEA.


18 posted on 11/12/2013 5:56:42 AM PST by jetson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ScottinVA

The plan is to keep Graham under 50% so there’s a runoff. The second person will likely be Lee Bright, who’s gaining strength. Then in a one on one contest between Graham and Bright, we take out Graham.

Similar to the Dewhurst/Cruz race in Texas last year.


19 posted on 11/12/2013 5:57:38 AM PST by cotton1706
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ScottinVA

The time to unite behind a single opposition candidate in primarying Graham would be the runoff vote. Packing the field to get there is solid strategy.


20 posted on 11/12/2013 5:58:05 AM PST by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

Exactly. And you want a strong candidate to emerge from the vetting process. No more Herman Cain surprises, please.


21 posted on 11/12/2013 6:05:50 AM PST by SC_Pete
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper
You know what would really be funny? A runoff -- without Graham, after he finished third.

Well, that's not going to happen. I'd like the chances of ousting Graham a lot better if one of the Republican Congressmen jumped into the race. Joe ("You lie!") Wilson, or Mick Mulvaney, or best of all, Trey Gowdy.

22 posted on 11/12/2013 6:08:13 AM PST by southernnorthcarolina ("Better be wise by the misfortunes of others than by your own." -- Aesop)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706
The plan is to keep Graham under 50% so there’s a runoff. The second person will likely be Lee Bright, who’s gaining strength. Then in a one on one contest between Graham and Bright, we take out Graham. Similar to the Dewhurst/Cruz race in Texas last year.

It's certain that almost all votes for any of the challengers is a vote against Graham. This plan's success depends on ALL of the supporters of the challengers remaining a block against LG, regardless the second place finisher. The best thing that could happen, and I hope it does, is that LG finishes THIRD in the primary.
23 posted on 11/12/2013 6:10:30 AM PST by Resettozero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: southernnorthcarolina
I would love it if Graham didn't make it to the run-off.

/johnny

24 posted on 11/12/2013 6:10:46 AM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: The Sons of Liberty

BINGO, too many challengers spoils to soup.


25 posted on 11/12/2013 6:11:32 AM PST by a fool in paradise (America 2013 - STUCK ON STUPID)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: a fool in paradise
Not in a run-off election. Which is what SC has. The more the merrier to keep Graham from getting 50%.

/johnny

26 posted on 11/12/2013 6:12:20 AM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Terry McAwful knows what works. I wouldn’t be surprised to see a major “third party challenger” in 2016 when Hillary Clinton runs.


27 posted on 11/12/2013 6:13:08 AM PST by a fool in paradise (America 2013 - STUCK ON STUPID)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

Exactly, keep him under 50%


28 posted on 11/12/2013 6:13:56 AM PST by CPT Clay (Follow me on Twitter @Clay N TX)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

When is the primary? Runoff?


29 posted on 11/12/2013 6:18:01 AM PST by CPT Clay (Follow me on Twitter @Clay N TX)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: CPT Clay

The primary’s on 6/10/14.


30 posted on 11/12/2013 6:19:09 AM PST by cotton1706
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Resettozero

“The best thing that could happen, and I hope it does, is that LG finishes THIRD in the primary.”

Oh, absolutely this would be the best possible outcome. He would be removed from power. And he would be free to vote with the democrats openly for the remainder of the year.


31 posted on 11/12/2013 6:20:46 AM PST by cotton1706
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: southernnorthcarolina

I’ve met Bill Connor. Lt. Col, SC National Guard, Afghanistan vet, solid conservative, good resume IMO.

Trey Gowdy has said it’s not his time to try for the Senate yet. He is being very effective as part of the House majority.

Flimsey Tinkerbelle will be pulled down into a runoff by the sheer weight of primary contenders (thank you, S.C. laws). When he is forced to attack other Republicans, he will be exposed as a snippy little drama queen; his faux conservatism won’t wash as the real conservatives give him what for. They’ll hang McCain around his neck for starters.


32 posted on 11/12/2013 6:21:51 AM PST by elcid1970 ("In the modern world, Muslims are living fossils.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

“If Graham doesn’t get 50% of the vote, it goes to a run-off election. The more to take away votes from Graham and keep him from 50% the better.”

And that is the key. Think runoff Ted Cruz had with the establisment Dewhurst.\

And now we Texans have given you Ted Cruz. (accolades).


33 posted on 11/12/2013 6:22:33 AM PST by bestintxas (Obamacare = Obamascrew)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706; alarm rider; Alex1977; at bay; Babsig; BILL_C; bnelson44; ColdOne; DesScorp; G.Love; ...
The more the merrier.

For those of you complaining about splitting the vote, etc., learn how a primary is run in South Carolina. Go here, scroll down a little and read the red text.

Uber RINO Lindsey Ping
"Republican by day, Democrat by night."


Want on or off this ping list?
Just FReepmail me


34 posted on 11/12/2013 6:23:12 AM PST by upchuck (I've got maternity care via Obamacare! Now, if I could just figure out how a male gets pregnant...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

“Let them run but they should agree to exit the race when it becomes apparent who is the strongest tea party candidate.”


That’s a good strategy for states without a runoff, but in SC, we want as many candidates as possible so as to keep Graham below 50% in the first round and force the runoff. Having a single “TEA Party candidate” (who won’t have anywhere near the name ID as Graham) running against Graham likely will result in Graham winning the primary by 54%-46% or something; having several candidates running, all of whom bring out their supporters, should keep Graham below 50% and permit conservatives to coalesce around the second-place finisher and beat Graham in the lower-turnout runoff.


35 posted on 11/12/2013 6:28:47 AM PST by AuH2ORepublican (If a politician won't protect innocent babies, what ma kes you think that he'll defend your rights?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: xzins

“I absolutely wish our presidential election required a run-off if no one over 50%.”


You mean in each state, so potentially 50 runoffs? Because there’s no way that I would give up the Electoral College for a national vote, with or without a runoff.


36 posted on 11/12/2013 6:30:40 AM PST by AuH2ORepublican (If a politician won't protect innocent babies, what ma kes you think that he'll defend your rights?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

If Lindsey Graham is held below 50% and Bill Connor finishes second, how long before the Harpootlian and the SC Democrat Party changes Bill’s name to Bull? BTW, does Harpootlian still say that Lindsey Graham is “too light in the loafers” to be a Senator, or do SC Democrats wisely shut up and not look a gift horse in the mouth?


37 posted on 11/12/2013 6:34:57 AM PST by AuH2ORepublican (If a politician won't protect innocent babies, what ma kes you think that he'll defend your rights?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706
And he would be free to vote with the democrats openly for the remainder of the year.

I hear ya. I doubt it, though. If he runs for Statewide office again in S.C., it will have to be as a Republican (SCGOPe). Party leaders in some other States would welcome him to run as a Democrat in their State. If he did this thing, at least I wouldn't continue to have indigestion every time he is introduced on TV as "South Carolina Senator..."
38 posted on 11/12/2013 6:41:11 AM PST by Resettozero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

>>SC is a run-off state. And it has a sore-loser law. Graham can’t run under another party if he loses the primary.

I just wish it wasn’t an open-primary state. All the rats will be voting for Graham in the primary.


39 posted on 11/12/2013 6:43:29 AM PST by vikingd00d (nulla seruitus turpior est quam uoluntaria -- Seneca)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: AuH2ORepublican

Yep. A do-over with the top two names on each ballot.

We don’t have an electoral college in the way it was originally designed in which they actually selected the president by delegate voting

Article II

Section. 1. The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two Persons, of whom one at least shall not be an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves. And they shall make a List of all the Persons voted for, and of the Number of Votes for each; which List they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the Seat of the Government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the Certificates, and the Votes shall then be counted. The Person having the greatest Number of Votes shall be the President, if such Number be a Majority of the whole Number of Electors appointed; and if there be more than one who have such Majority, and have an equal Number of Votes, then the House of Representatives shall immediately chuse by Ballot one of them for President; and if no Person have a Majority, then from the five highest on the List the said House shall in like Manner chuse the President. But in chusing the President, the Votes shall be taken by States, the Representation from each State having one Vote; a quorum for this Purpose shall consist of a Member or Members from two thirds of the States, and a Majority of all the States shall be necessary to a Choice. In every Case, after the Choice of the President, the Person having the greatest Number of Votes of the Electors shall be the Vice President. But if there should remain two or more who have equal Votes, the Senate shall chuse from them by Ballot the Vice President [Modified by Amendment XII].

The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.

Article. [XXIV.]
[Proposed 1962; Ratified 1964]
Section. 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

Section. 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.


40 posted on 11/12/2013 6:44:31 AM PST by xzins ( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: vikingd00d
Texas is an open primary state, too. Dems voted for Dewhurst in the primary, but not in enough numbers to get him over 50%. I'm not too worried about dems affecting the race.

/johnny

41 posted on 11/12/2013 6:45:30 AM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

Sounds like someone working for LG, trying to divide the anti-Lindsey vote.


42 posted on 11/12/2013 6:46:20 AM PST by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vikingd00d
I just wish it wasn’t an open-primary state. All the rats will be voting for Graham in the primary.

You are correct. We have not been successful yet in getting this open-primary law modified. But it may get changed one year soon because of decisions still being made about who will pay for State primaries in the future.
43 posted on 11/12/2013 6:48:04 AM PST by Resettozero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper
Sounds like someone working for LG, trying to divide the anti-Lindsey vote.

Opinion, or what did you read or hear that makes you think that way? Not disagreeing with you; just don't know the facts yet.
44 posted on 11/12/2013 6:50:05 AM PST by Resettozero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper
It doesn't work that way in run-off elections. The more the better at the start of the primary. Whatever it takes to keep Graham under 50%.

/johnny

45 posted on 11/12/2013 6:51:11 AM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: The Sons of Liberty

I think you might be right


46 posted on 11/12/2013 7:00:21 AM PST by GeronL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
Nope. SC is a run-off election state. The more the merrier at the beginning of the primary.

/johnny

47 posted on 11/12/2013 7:09:35 AM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

good


48 posted on 11/12/2013 7:10:03 AM PST by GeronL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry

Lindsey’s ace-in-the-hole is not only the support of the popular John McPain but Democrats can legally “cross over” and vote for Lindsey and thus offset the conservative opponents! I am reasonably sure that Lindsey will win it all! People in SC are really uninformed.


49 posted on 11/12/2013 7:43:16 AM PST by Theodore R. (The grand pooh-bahs have spoken: "It's Jebbie's turn!" to LOSE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

God loves a runoff my man.

wish we had them here in Davy Crockett land


50 posted on 11/12/2013 8:22:11 AM PST by wardaddy (i loved White Queen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-77 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson