Category: South Carolina

Fear & Loathing: Breakfast of Champions UPDATE: Rick Santorum Wins Iowa; Perry Will Quit and Endorse Gingrich

Posted on Comments

The National Affairs Desk at McDonald’s in Greenville, S.C.,
11:10 p.m., Tuesday, Jan. 18, 2012

NORTH CHARLESTON, S.C.
My 13-year-old son Jefferson and I got back here at 2:30 a.m, and woke up Ali Akbar, in whose hotel room we’re crashing through Saturday. The topics of discussion were (a) the Republican primary and (b) why Tabitha Hale hates me. But we didn’t talk long, because I was so dead tired that despite a day spent guzzling coffee I soon fell asleep.

Wednesday was one of those days when I wish I’d stuck with that forklift-driving job I had before I got into the news business. We set out early for the scheduled Newt Gingrich press conference in Columbia that didn’t happen.

After blogging about that debacle, we headed back on the road to Rock Hill, where Mitt Romney was scheduled for a 3:15 p.m. rally at Winthrop University. We got there in time, but Mitt was late — it was 3:44 p.m. before they finally introduced the singer who would perform the national anthem. We didn’t stick around to hear Mitt because we were due in Spartanburg for a Rick Santorum town-hall event at 5 p.m.

Do a Google Map search for directions from Rock Hill to Spartanburg and imagine, dear reader, what feats of vehicular prowess were required to drive that route in barely an hour. Somewhere between McConnells and Jonesville, we were just one special-effects stunt away from remaking Smokey and the Bandit.

Alas, there were no open drawbridges to jump. Continue reading Fear & Loathing: Breakfast of Champions UPDATE: Rick Santorum Wins Iowa; Perry Will Quit and Endorse Gingrich →

Newt Gingrich Mysteriously Cancels Press Conference at S.C. State Capitol

Posted on Comments

COLUMBIA, S.C.
This morning’s schedule showed that Newt Gingrich would have an 11:30 a.m. press conference here at the Statehouse, and I drove nearly 100 miles from Charleston to cover it but Newt was a no-show, and no one seems to know why. I’ll add more information as soon as I can find out what happened.

UPDATE: According to the British Guardian newspaper, the press conference was actually held at 10 a.m. But here’s what was on the Politico‘s campaign calendar:

And it wasn’t just me who got misled by this scheduling mixup. Ben Adler of The Nation was there, as were Dave Hogberg of Investors Business Daily, Stephen Dinan of the Washington Times, more than a dozen other reporters and multiple TV camera crews.

While I didn’t get to cover a press conference, I did find time to read the inscriptions on the famous Confederate monument at the Statehouse:

On the north side, it reads:

“This monument perpetuates the memory of those who true to the instincts of their birth, faithful to the teachings of their fathers, constant in their love for the state, died in the performance of their duty: who have glorified a fallen cause by the simple manhood of their lives, the patient endurance of suffering, and the heroism of death, and who, in the dark hours of imprisonment, in the hopelessness of the hospital, in the short, sharp agony of the field, found support and consolation in the belief that at home they would not be forgotten.”

On the south side:

“Let the stranger who may in future times read this inscription recognize that these were men whom power could not corrupt, whom death could not terrify, whom defeat could not dishonor, and let their virtues plead for just judgment of the cause in which they served. Let the South Carolinian of another generation remember that the state taught them how to live and how to die, and that from her broken fortunes she has preserved for her children the priceless treasure of their memories, teaching all who may claim the same birthright that truth, courage and patriotism endure forever.”

Some other reporters, desperate to get something useful from their dry run to the press conference we missed, decided to try the old campaign-coverage trick of interviewing a “typical” local voter:

Perhaps unknown to this camera crew, the man they’re interviewing is the infamous Will Folks, a disgraced Republican political consultant who once claimed to have had an affair with Gov. Nikki Haley.

So much for the “typical” voter, eh?

Who the Hell Does Newt Think He Is?

Posted on Comments

NORTH CHARLESTON, S.C.
Monday night in the spin room after the Fox News debate in Myrtle Beach, I had the opportunity to score a brief interview with Rick Santorum’s campaign manager Mike Biundo, which included this exchange:

RSM: A lot of people in the media are trying to play this up as Mitt versus Newt. They’re kind of low-rating your chances here.
BIUNDO: Well, they’ve been doing that all along, haven’t they? And we’re 2-and-0 versus Newt Gingrich right now. You know, you see what happened in Texas this weekend, and conservatives are starting to rally behind Rick’s campaign.

The fact that Santorum beat Gingrich in New Hampshire has been woefully underreported. As the Boston Globe pointed out, it appeared late on primary night and into the next morning that Gingrich had won fourth place. But when the final votes were tallied, Santorum took fourth by a margin of 138 votes, with 23,312 votes to Gingrich’s 23,174.

Meanwhile, as Byron York reported Monday, it is still quite possible that the final official count in Iowa will show that Santorum defeated Mitt Romney there, and Santorum is planning for a long campaign:

“This nomination is not going to be decided in two or three states, it’s going to be decided over a long primary process,” he said. “We’re optimistic that we can pull out a win here and stop this narrative that [Romney’s nomination] is inevitable.”

With that background, then, it is shocking to see what Newt said today during a campaign stop in Florence, S.C. :

A reporter asked the former House speaker if the former Pennsylvania senator should drop out of the race. “Well I would be delighted if he decided to endorse me,” Gingrich said, but added it was Santorum and Perry’s decision to make.
“So I am respectful that Rick has every right to run as long as he feels that’s what he should do, but from the stand point of the conservative movement, consolidating into a Gingrich candidacy would in fact virtually guarantee a victory on Saturday,” Gingrich said in Florence Tuesday. “And I’d be delighted if either Perry or Santorum wanted to do that.”

What the hell kind of talk is that, coming from a guy who placed fourth in Iowa (13%) and fifth in New Hampshire (9%), especially in regard to Santorum, who fought Romney to a standstill in Iowa?

Yesterday, Santorum was endorsed by Penny Nance of Conservative Women for America. Today, Santorum was endorsed by Richard Viguerie, a legendary figure in the conservative movement, and also endorsed by the chairman of the Berkeley County (S.C.) Republican Party.

Newt’s suggestion that Santorum should be “consolidating into a Gingrich candidacy” is preposterous and insulting, and enough to make me want to post this attack ad from Romney’s “super PAC,” just for spite:

Greetings from Charleston!

Posted on Comments

CHARLESTON, S.C.
Thirteen-year-old Jefferson and I were rolling leisurely south from Myrtle Beach on U.S. 17 — past pines and palmettos and live oaks draped in Spanish moss — when a black SUV passed us and I did a double take. I’d gotten just a quick glimpse at the driver as he passed, but my peripheral vision is excellent, and so I sped up until I was even with the SUV and confirmed that it was . . .

Tony Katz of All-Patriot Media, who actually Tweeted this coincidental sighting along the campaign trail. And as we approached the Charleston suburb of Mt. Pleasant, I signaled to Tony to roll down his window and shouted — as we were running parallel at about 60 mph — that this was where the Santorum campaign had its South Carolina state campaign headquarters, which was my initial destination for the day. Tony nodded and rolled on.

A few miles down the road, just before we reached the Arthur Ravenel Jr. Bridge into Charleston, we found Santorum HQ in a shopping center. As we pulled into the parking lot, we were greeted by two familiar faces: Rick Santorum’s two oldest sons, John and Daniel, carrying boxes out of the office. They explained that they were going to the post office to send out a mailing. So you see that the senator is not kidding when he talks about how his family helps with the campaign.

Jefferson and I walked inside the campaign office and saw press secretary Matt Benyon working in a corner, while other staffer were toiling away at their laptops — so much of campaign work nowadays is done by computer — and volunteers worked the phones. Jefferson helped himself to a Pepsi (the kid is drinking way too much soda on this trip), and I got a cup of coffee, and then I shot this brief video tour of the office:

We left the Santorum HQ and drove into Charleston, reached the Visitor Center, and I asked for directions to the nearest McDonald’s. We got back in the car and I missed the turn Spring Street, finally turning left at Huger Street, which took us over to Hagood Street — the rear entrance to the Citadel — and then we turned left and came down here for me to do a little blogging.

There will be another Republican presidential debate here Thursday (8 p.m., CNN) and meanwhile we’re going to be hanging out with Ali Akbar, who’s in town to help out with the Gingrich campaign. Of course, the Gingrichites are feeling pretty cocky these days, but I’d advise them to beware of outbursts like this:

Gingrich: ‘I Would Be Delighted’
With a Santorum Endorsement

This tendency toward hubris has struck Gingrich whenever he gets feeling confident. A couple of months ago, Jonah Goldberg dubbed this the “World Historical Newt” problem. Newt is 0-for-2 against Santorum so far and, while the latest Rasmussen poll shows Gingrich leading Santorum by five points in South Carolina, that’s not the kind of margin that entitles Newt to act as if he were already the pre-emptive victor. Some more headlines, via Memeorandum:

Mitt Romney to release tax returns,
estimates rate at about 15 percent
— Washington Post

TRANSCRIPT: Fox News Channel & Wall Street
Journal Debate in South Carolina
— Fox News

Rick Perry Camp Explains Suggestion
That Turkey Is Led By ‘Islamic Terrorists’
— ABC News

Perry: Santorum a ‘good Catholic’
— Politico

So now we’re in Charleston. More news later. Please hit the tip jar.

PREVIOUSLY:

Is Fox News the Problem?

Posted on Comments

MYRTLE BEACH, S.C.
After the debate last night, I talked to several people about the situation that we find ourselves in: Four days away from the crucial South Carolina primary and still we have three “not Romney” candidates — Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum and Rick Perry — dividing up the conservative vote. Another 10 to 15 percent of the GOP primary vote here will probably go to Ron Paul, and thus it is altogether possible that Mitt Romney could win with less than 30 percent of the vote.

And so I ask: Is Fox News the problem?

This thought came to me this morning as I watched “Fox & Friends” and saw how, in the apparent interest of being “fair and balanced,” they distributed their attention between the various candidates. Knowing what an enormous influence the network has among conservative voters, is it possible that coverage by Fox News has played a major role in the way this campaign has developed?

Consider, for example, the case of Rick Perry. Traditionally, it has been said that there are “three tickets out of Iowa” — i.e., the top three finishers in the Iowa caucuses go on to contend for the nomination — and yet Perry, who placed a weak fifth in Iowa and didn’t even campaign in New Hampshire, is still running here in South Carolina despite the fact that polls show him likely to get less than 10 percent of the vote.

Would such a doomed and hopeless candidacy — the zombie shuffle of the undead Republican — be possible if it weren’t for the fact that the Perry campaign can count on Fox News covering them as if they were still a legitimate contender? And isn’t the availability of Fox News airtime a valuable resource that has been exploited by the GOP candidates, enabling them to keep campaigning even when the money starts drying up? And how has Fox News coverage more generally shaped public perception of the campaign? Have the prejudices of Fox News producers, reporters, analysts and anchors exercised a perceptible influence, a thumb on the scale as it were?

These are large and complex questions that I don’t have time to explore adequately this morning, because I’m supposed to be checking out of this motel and driving to Charleston today. But I wanted to throw it out there — discuss among yourselves — preparatory to linking my latest column for The American Spectator:

Mitt Romney came under the most intense fire he’s faced in a televised debate Monday night, hammered from the outset by his four remaining rivals for the Republican presidential nomination. And, according to one of his top advisers, Romney won.
“Governor Romney demonstrated tonight why he’s leading in South Carolina [and] why he’s leading nationally,” Eric Fehrnstrom said in the “spin room” where reporters gathered to get the post-debate perspective of candidates and their surrogates. “You heard him give strong answers about his business record, about Afghanistan and foreign policy, about his entitlement plan. And I think what these debates have turned into is a ‘get Mitt’ show, and anytime something like that happens and Mitt Romney comes out of it unscathed, then I think you can fairly conclude that he’s the winner.”
Whether Romney was “unscathed” in the debate here was, of course, disputed by the other campaigns. Rick Santorum’s campaign manager, Mike Biundo said his candidate “did really well.… He had a very pointed exchange with Governor Romney, showed that he certainly has debate skills and understands and has a command of the issues, and I think you’re going to need that in the fall.” . . .

Please read the whole thing.

UPDATE: Via Memeorandum, the headlines:

Attacks fly in Republican debate
— The Hill

Forceful Attack Against
Romney in G.O.P. Debate
— New York Times

Santorum Rattles Mitt Romney
— Buzz Feed

SOUTH CAROLINA GOP DEBATE

Posted on Comments

MYRTLE BEACH, S.C.
UPDATE: 11:57 p.m. ET: The debate’s been over for an hour, and all the dudes who were just Twittering have left. Bandwidth is now excellent, but I’m on deadline for The American Spectator.

UPDATE: 10:42 p.m. ET: Rick Santorum says he voted 100% with the NRA: “lifetime A-plus rating.” Takes a shot at Ron Paul for voting against a bill to protect gun manufacturers.

UPDATE: 10:39 p.m. ET: Mitt Romney says he’s in favor of gun ownership, but does not threaten to shoot the Wi-Fi provider in the filing center, who is a varmint.

UPDATE: 10:33 p.m. ET: Wonderful discussion just now about Social Security reform. Bandwith issues on the WiFi again. I’m convinced Bain Capital should take over this WiFi system. IYKWIMAITYD.

UPDATE: 10:27 p.m. ET: Newt Gingrich pronounces Chile correctly: Chee-lay. Because he’s not “relatively stupid.”

UPDATE: 10:25 p.m. ET: Mitt Romney has a plan for everything — except fixing this f–king WiFi system, which is ruining my night.

UPDATE: 10:15 p.m. ET: Perry just suggested a “gong” would be appropriate for Ron Paul. Also, he name-checks Daniel Pearl.

UPDATE: 10:13 p.m. ET: Rick Perry talks Turkey. He wants to “go to zero” with their foreign aid.

UPDATE: 10:11 p.m. ET: Rick Santorum says, “President Obama has dealt with it about as badly as possible.” The question was about foreign policy and Syria, but the same answer could apply to anything Obama has done.

UPDATE: 10:08 p.m. ET: The past five minutes of debate were deleted by this hopelessly screwed-up WiFi system, which is controlled by warmongers on behalf of international bankers who don’t want you to know how awesome Ron Paul’s answers were.

UPDATE: 9:55 p.m. ET: Two guys in front of me, who are in here on media passes, aren’t writing a damned thing. They’re on Tweetdeck, however, chewing up bandwidth that I’d like to use to liveblog. Because they’re racist or something.

Meanwhile, Newt Gingrich is getting cheered for talking back to Juan Williams. Newt is pretty damned awesome in debates. Commercial break.

UPDATE: 9:52 p.m. ET: Excuse the long delay in liveblogging. The WiFi system here is discriminating against me. Because of Newt Gingrich, I think.

UPDATE: 9:41 p.m. ET: Ron Paul tries to distinguish between “military spending” and “defense spending,” and then wants to talk about “international banking,” but Gerald Seib of the Wall Street Journal won’t let him. IYKWIMAITYD.

UPDATE: 9:38 p.m. ET: Mitt Romney just talked for about what seemed like 15 minutes. Maybe it just seemed that way because it’s Romney.

UPDATE: 9:36 p.m. ET: Rick Santorum is asked about unemployment benefits, and gives a good answer. Newt Gingrich gets a similar question and gives an awesome answer.

UPDATE: 9:32 p.m. ET: Rick Perry is asked about voting rights, and comes down somewhere to the right of John C. Calhoun. I’m pretty sure I heard a few rebel yells amid the applause from the audience.

UPDATE: 9:30 p.m. ET: After the commercial break, Mitt Romney is asked about Jon Huntsman’s “perfectly lubricated weathervane” comment. Mitt answers that he is not perfectly lubricated, but in fact sometimes squeaks when the wind blows.

UPDATE: 9:22 p.m. ET: Rick Perry jumps in and says, more or less, “States Rights!” That’s always an applause line in South Carolina.

UPDATE: 9:21 p.m. ET: Rick Santorum is tearing Mitt Romney a new one over Romney’s “super PAC” ads claiming Santorum supports felon voting rights.

UPDATE: 9:16 p.m. ET: Ron Paul is asked about why all the 9/11 Truthers love him — wait, no. He was asked about his attacks on Rick Santorum and said the regular stuff Ron Paul always says. Santorum responds: I’m from Pennsylvania.

UPDATE: 9:14 p.m. ET: Mitt was asked about something. Blahblahblah job creation blahblahblah put Americans back to work blahblahblah.

UPDATE: 9:12 p.m. ET: Rick Perry was asked about his “vulture capitalism” attack on Romney. He wants to get rid of Dodd-Frank. Mitt gets to respond, and sounds suspiciously vulture-like.

UPDATE: 9:10 p.m. ET: The first question — with two follow-ups — went to Newt Gingrich, who was somewhat weaselly in his answers to questions about his attacks on Mitt Romney. Then Mitt got a chance to respond and sounded very Mitt-ish.

UPDATE: 9:08 p.m. ET: Sorry for the slow start on the liveblogging. More than 200 reporters in this media filing center, and the WiFi connection is strained to the max.

– – – – – –

We’re here at the Sheraton Convention Center on Oak Street, ready to bring you the liveblogging at 9 p.m.

South Carolina Pre-Debate Thread UPDATE: New Rick Santorum TV Ad in S.C. Hits Romney as ‘Just Like Obama’

Posted on Comments

MYRTLE BEACH, S.C.
We’re currently an hour and a half before the start of the South Carolina Republican presidential debate (9 p.m. ET, Fox News) and I’m set up here in the cavernous Media Filing Center at the Sheraton Convention Center. Thought I’d use this post to dump in a bunch of photos, videos, etc., beginning with this special video featuring my loyal assistant, 13-year-old son Jefferson:

Do what he says: It’s for the children!




UPDATE: The Rick Santorum campaign has just released this new TV ad in South Carolina:

The ad script:

Obama supported the Wall Street bailouts… So did Romney.
Obama gave us radical Obamacare… that was based on Romneycare. Obama’s a liberal on social issues.
Romney once bragged he’s even more liberal than Ted Kennedy on social issues.
Why would we ever vote for someone who is just like Obama? When we can unite around Rick Santorum. And beat Obama.

Mark Halperin of Time magazine: “Amazing to think about what would have happened if this ad had been run in Iowa for all of December with real money behind it.”

Yeah, but imagine the impact it will have during five days in South Carolina. Surge, baby!

UPDATE II: Just interviewed Santorum communication director Hogan Gidley about the new ad. “Rick said today, it’s time to draw a line in the sand,” Gidley said, acknowledging that Santorum didn’t attack Romney until after the pro-Romney “super PAC” started airing ads here which Santorum said included “lies” about his record in Congress. “Mitt tried to do this to Huckabee in 2008,” said Gidley, who was executive director of the South Carolina state GOP at the time. “We’re not going to put up with it.”

UPDATE III: A couple of photos from today:

Ron Paul is not a Truther. Nudge, nudge. Wink, wink.

Rick Perry has exactly three supporters in South Carolina.

UPDATE IV: Via Allahpundit, now it’s Newt Gingrich making the “nobody but me” argument that was for many months the special property of Rick Perry’s supporters:

“If you vote for Sen. Santorum, in effect, you’re functionally voting for Gov. Romney to be the nominee.”

Yeah: Vote for the twice-divorced Freddie Mac lobbyist supported “green energy” with Nancy Pelosi and who is, by the way, the most divisive public figure in the history of divisive public figures. Because only he can beat Romney. That makes sense, right?

LIVEBLOGGING HERE!

How Low Will They Go? This Low.

Posted on Comments

Rick and Karen Santorum greet supporters
in Myrtle Beach, S.C., Jan. 16, 2012

MYRTLE BEACH, S.C.
I just got through covering Rick Santorum’s speech to the Faith and Freedom Coalition event here. Afterwards, Senator Santorum, his wife Karen and their four oldest children — Elizabeth, John, Daniel and Sarah — greeted supporters here for tonight’s debate. The senator’s wife was kind enough to say a few words to my son Jefferson. who came along on this trip as my assistant.

So I came back to sit down and upload photos and video and check my e-mail, and there was an e-mail informing me that the Daily Beast has done a story about Mrs. Santorum’s ex-boyfriend from nearly 30 years ago, before she met her husband.

Stop and think about that for a minute, folks. I’m 52 — a year younger than the senator and a year older than his wife — and I’m thinking back to who I was and how I lived 30 years ago.

Would I want somebody doing a story based on an interview with one of my ex-girlfriends from back then? Would I want my wife and children and friends to read such a story?

Exactly what political relevance or news value this Daily Beast story has, I’m at a loss to explain, but I’m shocked that they would publish such a thing, especially considering how any critical inquiry into Barack Obama’s past associations was declared off-limits —  even racist — four years ago.

Update (Smitty): linked at The Camp of the Saints.