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”. South Carolina has had an amazing string of voting for the eventual winner.
With Mitt almost guaranteed to win in New Hampshire, this sends a great deal of attention and scrutiny south to South Carolina. Everyone is now asking what the vote will be like there.
This has brought into focus a question I’ve been pondering for some time now. Exactly what part does expectations play in the voting of South Carolina? Does the South Carolina vote make the winner, or does the eventual winner make the South Carolina vote?
To put it another way, when a voter in the South Carolina Presidential Primary steps up to the voting booth, does he vote for the person he thinks will be the best nominee, or does he vote for the person he thinks will be the nominee?
Thoughts?
January 6th, 2012 at 12:49 pm
I think South Carolina votes who it thinks will be the nominee. Can you please post the new CNN poll that shows Romney 37%, Santorum 19%, Gingrich 18%?
January 6th, 2012 at 12:52 pm
I think SC is a big media market with a nice mix of Establishment and grassroots Conservatives that takes a lot of money and support to win.
January 6th, 2012 at 12:54 pm
Good question. It’s a winning streak that some voters, I’m sure, don’t want to break. Having said that, I think the majority would still vote their preference.
I would say that South Carolina is a good indicator of Super Tuesday results, and that Super Tuesday is the event that makes the final determination on the nominee.
January 6th, 2012 at 12:55 pm
I think it’s the latter, and I disagree with the idea that South Carolina is really the decider. John McCain really won the 2008 race in New Hampshire. I knew as a Romney supporter that it was really all over after that. It’s beating expectations in Iowa and winning New Hampshire that really decides it.
January 6th, 2012 at 12:59 pm
This is a political rule-of-thumb that is only true because of the small sample size. S. Carolina has only been important since 1980. Which means there have only been 8 primaries. Of those 8, 3 included incumbent presidents who won all 50 states.
Of the remaining 5 you have Reagan’s near inevitable win in 1980 and 1988 when S. Carolina actually went rather late compared to other years.
That leaves only 3 times that S. Carolina has really mattered in presidential politics. 1996, 2000, and 2008. Color me not impressed with an early state getting it right 3 times.
January 6th, 2012 at 12:59 pm
As much as the SC GOP would wish to claim otherwise, I think it’s more the eventual winner makes the South Carolina vote.
I believe SC Republicans give a higher standing to the “next-in-line” candidate than perhaps any other state. Most SC voters are conservative in the sense that they will choose the “safe” choice, as opposed to, say, Iowa that has a history of somewhat more risky choices.
January 6th, 2012 at 1:00 pm
What would be the point of voting for someone who you thought was going to be the nominee, as opposed to voting for someone who you wanted to be the nominee? Nobody gets a prize just for voting for the eventual nominee.
To be sure, there are some opportunities for strategic voting in the primaries. You might vote for someone who wasn’t your favorite candidate, because you think the person you are voting for has a better chance of winning the nomination. But in that circumstance, you’d probably be voting to stop some other candidate. At worst, you’re going to vote for your second-least-favorite candidate on the ballot — it would never do you any good to vote for your least favorite, even if you thought your least favorite was likely to be the nominee.
January 6th, 2012 at 1:00 pm
BTW, let’s recall that S. Carolina almost went to Huckabee last time. And I doubt he would have won the nomination even with S. Carolina.
January 6th, 2012 at 1:05 pm
Of course they vote their preference–out of the top 2-3 candidates made viable by IA and NH.
January 6th, 2012 at 1:05 pm
Joshua:
You doubt the bandwagon effect? Psychologists have done experiments that support that people are more likely to vote for the person they thing is going to win.
People love to be associated with a winner.
January 6th, 2012 at 1:07 pm
Mark –
One think to think about is that nobody has pulled the IA + NH win before going into SC. So the formula has to be allowed some leeway at this point. That being said – I think once Mitt gets his win in NH the double bump (IA + NH) will get him the win in SC and then it will be all over but the clean up.
January 6th, 2012 at 1:08 pm
7 “What would be the point of voting for someone who you thought was going to be the nominee, as opposed to voting for someone who you wanted to be the nominee?”
It’s basically the same reason why there has been a floating flavor of the month, and the reason why you will find more Green Bay Packer Fans than Cleveland Brown fans all over the country. People want to get behind and support a winner.
January 6th, 2012 at 1:13 pm
perry is pulling a fred thompson. his dividing presence in south carolina will keep anyone from coalescing against mitt, just like they couldn’t against mccain. thanks renobs!
January 6th, 2012 at 1:14 pm
Romney is ahead in South Carolina?! Well that’s pretty much it. Seemed impossible to most of you, but obviously Romney believed.
January 6th, 2012 at 1:16 pm
Since 1980 when South Carolina has always chosen the Republican nominee, it has always chosen between Iowa and New Hampshire winner, no one has one both IA and NH on Republican side. So it has been more like IA+SC or NH+SC that makes the winner, not SC alone.
January 6th, 2012 at 1:20 pm
That’s an insult to Thompson. Perry is barely drawing a pulse in S. Carolina at the moment.
January 6th, 2012 at 1:21 pm
15 to continue:
So since IA+NH victory could be enough without SC this time, but hopefully Romney wins SC too.
January 6th, 2012 at 1:29 pm
I wonder what Craig for loser’s opinion might be on SC.
January 6th, 2012 at 1:41 pm
South Carolina “blesses” the expected nominee, their role is not like Iowa where they have really quirky voters that are interested in making a religious statement to the rest of the nation.
The latest polls in South Carolina tell me this thing is over. I don’t see ANY candidate (especially a field this fractured) being able to make up this much lost ground to Romney in two weeks, especially since the latest “NotRomney” has yet to be really vetted.
January 6th, 2012 at 1:48 pm
Latest polls from New Hampshire and South Carolina deserve a
HUCK…..A…..BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!
I just can’t stop smiling! Heh heh!
January 6th, 2012 at 2:04 pm
Seems to me the best time to crest in the polls is just before voting begins. Those that peaked too early (or too late, ahem, Huntsman) won’t take the prize. Say what you want, like him or leave him, but the Romney campaign has done a great job of laying low and coming on strong when the time was right.
It really has been an interesting campaign to watch.
January 6th, 2012 at 2:26 pm
We shall soon see. If they go for Mitt, Palmetto Staters will show themselves to be mindless sheep with little depth or character. If they vote for Perry, they will demonstrate exquisite taste, unimpeachable analytic skills, and profound wisdom.
January 6th, 2012 at 2:37 pm
Marque.
#22
Is that an endorsement?
C’mon, I count on you to be another incorruptible voice of despair masquerading as cynical indifference!
You aren’t going to start shilling, are you?
January 6th, 2012 at 2:45 pm
It is an interesting piece of trivia that has no simple explanation, and likely has no significance.
I know one thing. Mitt is going to win the nomination whether he wins South Carolina or not.
January 6th, 2012 at 3:16 pm
23. Matt. LOL!
January 6th, 2012 at 3:37 pm
7. “Nobody gets a prize just for voting for the eventual nominee.”
That’s what Intrade is for.
January 6th, 2012 at 5:48 pm
26 – Santorum 2012!