What’s so peculiar about this office in SC vs. GA. The GA GOP won the office in the ‘90s as one of its first breakthroughs, and have controlled it ever since, but in SC, we still have yet to win it (I don’t believe a Republican has ever held the office). I’m not sure it’s such a great idea that it is even elected, as the teacher unions will do whatever it takes to buy the office for the rodents. It really should be an office directly accountable to the Governor.
But as for Miss Floyd, I don’t know a whole lot about her. While I’d favor her in a rematch with the Democrat victor, the fact that she got fewer votes than the erratic Andre Bauer is not very reassuring. Besides, absent Sanford, Bauer, and Ravenel, there are still 5 other statewide Republicans (Mark Hammond, the Sec of State; Atty Gen Henry McMaster; Comptroller Richard Eckstrom; Adjutant General Stan Spears & AG Commissioner Hugh Weathers), all of whom would have a better claim to running for federal office.
Finding a primary challenger for a maverick Republican is so much easier when you're not from the "anyone who doesn't agree with me 100% of the time should be drawn and quartered" kool-aid drinking school of thought. For example: In Rhode Island I rallied around Stephen Laffey to take on Linc Chafee. Is Stephen Laffey a true blue, 100% conservative? No, he's not. In fact, he's much more liberal than Graham. Laffey even distanced himself from conservativism. However, there was little doubt Laffey was a step up from Chaffee. Laffey agrees with me 60-70%, Chafee probably 10-20% of the time. Of course if I was going to scream treason and demand Laffey be lynched the moment he voted the "wrong" way on a judicial plan, or immigration bill, or torture compromise, I'd STILL be searching for a Chafee challenger today, because there just aren't alot of super pure 100% solid conservatives running around Rhode Island.
And unfortunately for you guys, you're going to find that out the hard way in South Carolina. It's more conservative than Rhode Island, yes, but as much as you guys want a prominent elected official who will do your bidding on every issue, their just aren't many running around. You guys were a lot more likeable on this forum when you understood who the REAL RINOs are -- the abortion-loving, gun-grabbing, gay-rights, tax-and-spend surrender monkey's in the GOP like Specter and Chafee. Now you've drank the Buchanan bridgage kool-aide where anyone who disagrees with you on a certain issue is a homosexual marxist globalist traitor. Dick Cheney was too liberal for the Buchanan brigagers, and now you guys are even going after Jon Kyl, who admit agrees with you 99% of the time but didn't do your bidding on one single bill. Hey fieldmarshaldj, so much for "this is not about a single-issue", eh?
You know the funny thing is, I know deep down inside you realize this "80% of Republican Senators are treasonous slimebags who must be purged, even if they agree with me the other 99% of the time" tilting-at-windmills stuff is a folly, which is why you make exceptions to your own rule of what kind of votes consitute a "RINO traitor". Otherwise your hometown boy Fred Thompson would be on the list, and we can't have that.
My advice to you is that you might want to learn from this Tom Ravenel (who you guys were begging to reconsider challenging "RINO traitor" Graham as recently as 48 hours ago), and do a little background check on these guys before you worship any prominent conservative official in the state as your savior to dethrone the "RINOs". I doubt you'll learn from this one though. Be prepared to end up with a lot more Ravenels in the future, as long as you insist on a stalin-like loyality where candidates MUST agree with you on EVERY issue or be "taken out" in the primary.