an unemployed unknown who ran his own campaign won the Democratic primary for a US Senate seat in South Carolina....either his competition must have been Satan himself or the Dem voters in SC are morons.

Quote :

"Alvin Greene, a relative unknown, shocked Democrats in the Palmetto State on Tuesday night by winning the chance to face Sen. Jim DeMint, a Republican, this fall with a commanding victory over state lawmaker Vick Rawl in the Democratic primary. South Carolina Democratic Party Chair Carol Fowler on Wednesday asked Greene to withdraw from the race for U.S. Senate because of recently revealed court records which show the 32-year-old unemployed veteran was arrested last November in Columbia, S.C., for allegedly showing obscene photos to a college student."

Quote :

""As far as we know he has done no campaigning," state party spokesperson Keiana Page said. "We have no idea how he won.""

OMG FAUX KNEWS
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/09/surprise-south-carolina-democratic-senate-nominee-refuses-step-aside/

maybe we need to re-think this "everyone over the age of 18 can vote" thing...especially in SC

6/10/2010 10:27:21 AM

He also has a pending felony charge for showing obscene material to a college student.

Hooray for Jim DeMint

6/10/2010 10:31:25 AM

probably same way Alan Keyes got nominated to run in Chicago...

When there is no chance of general election victory, you see some pretty oddball primaries.

6/10/2010 10:32:12 AM

How dare he challenge the oligarchy!

6/10/2010 10:32:49 AM

Quote :

"How dare he challenge the oligarchy!"

there arent enough rolllyeyes in the world.

6/10/2010 10:34:12 AM

Man that guy is complete idiot. He responded to a question about TARP with a "what's that?". Then he went on to talk about foreign policy on Korea and was just a complete fool.

And to not step down when the party asks you to because you're not electable is a douche move.

6/10/2010 10:36:19 AM

Well, there are two scenarios here:

1.) The incumbent was corrupt, voters ousted him even at the risk of an unknown. The system worked.

2.) Voters chose randomly. Democracy failed.

Either is equally likely. Since 1 is the better scenario, I chose it. The establishment would be more threatened by 1 though. They'll pass regulations to eliminate undesirable candidates before the primary from now on. The oligarchy continues.

The republicans will be equally outraged with they get replaced with teabaggers next election.

[Edited on June 10, 2010 at 10:40 AM. Reason : .]

6/10/2010 10:39:04 AM

are you really comparing an unemployed, possibly crazy, charged sex offender with the Tea Party?

6/10/2010 10:44:00 AM

smc: posting incoherent musings since 2002

6/10/2010 10:44:06 AM

^^You mean those racist, unemployed, white supremacists?

[Edited on June 10, 2010 at 10:46 AM. Reason : I mumbled incoherent musings to myself as I lurked before 2002.]

6/10/2010 10:45:07 AM

Quote :

"Well, there are two scenarios here: 1.) The incumbent was corrupt, voters ousted him even at the risk of an unknown. The system worked. 2.) Voters chose randomly. Democracy failed. Either is equally likely. Since 1 is the better scenario, I chose it. The establishment would be more threatened by 1 though. They'll pass regulations to eliminate undesirable candidates before the primary from now on. The oligarchy continues. "

smc your logic is flawed. Vick Rawls was not an incumbent (do you have any idead what that means)

6/10/2010 10:49:11 AM

Homer's Idead

6/10/2010 10:52:12 AM

He was obviously the Democratic party's choice. Might as well be incumbent. Just another yes man.

This is fantastic.

If enough minorities/liberals show up to vote this guy could win the general.

6/10/2010 11:04:27 AM

thought this was a wild connection of synapse

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/ynews_pl2500

Quote :

"Shortly after his Yahoo! News interview, the Associated Press reported that Greene was arrested in November on the obscene photo complaint. Charges are pending, and he hasn't entered a plea. One could, of course, note that such charges wouldn't necessarily hurt a candidate in a Palmetto state election season that's featured plenty of sensational sexual charges. Greene's candidacy has raised suspicions that he may have been induced to run by Republican operatives in order to sow dissension in the Democratic ranks. It's not uncommon in South Carolina for Republicans to recruit African-American challengers to run against white frontrunners in Democratic primaries in the hope of drumming up racial tensions. (Greene is black.) The straw candidates aren't supposed to win — they're just supposed to create a racially divisive primary to damage the candidate's ability to put together a coalition in the general election. It's nothing new to Nu Wexler, the former executive director of the South Carolina Democratic Party. "In 2004, on the last day you could file to run in the primary, we were wrapping things up when an SUV with a Bush-Cheney sticker dropped off three black guys who came in to file to run in some local races, and they all paid the filing fee with sequentially numbered cashier's checks from a local credit union," he said. In 1990, famed South Carolina political consultant Rod Shealy was convicted of violating campaign laws after recruiting a black candidate to run in a GOP primary for lieutenant governor in the hope of drawing out racist voters — a maneuver he thought would bolster support for his candidate. Greene denies that he's a plant. But even if he is, the lack of an actual campaign seems to indicate that whatever plan he might have been a part of was quickly abandoned. Wexler says there may never have even been much of a strategy: "You have consultants doing this kind of thing just because they get bored, and they want something to tell good stories about. It's almost like fraternity pranks." Greene's success is a testament both to the lackluster quality of the campaign run by Rawl (who raised $186,000 and ran ads) and to the, um, peculiar voting habits of South Carolinians. State Democratic Party Chairwoman Carol Fowler speculated to AP that Greene won because his name came before Rawl's on the ballot. Wexler says Greene is a "big name in South Carolina." We called the South Carolina Democratic Party to ask if it intends to support Greene's candidacy, but haven't heard back. It could attempt to challenge Greene's win by claiming that he didn't pay the filing fee out of his own pocket — which, if true, would be a federal crime. "It puts them in a tough position," Wexler said. "You can't exactly start challenging the filing fees of every candidate.""

[Edited on June 10, 2010 at 11:28 AM. Reason : +]

6/10/2010 11:20:33 AM

Quote :

"Either is equally likely. Since 1 is the better scenario, I chose it. The establishment would be more threatened by 1 though. They'll pass regulations to eliminate undesirable candidates before the primary from now on. The oligarchy continues."

1) You chose 1 eh? Glad I now know what really happened.

2) You can't just pass regulations on who can run in the primary to eliminate "undesirable candidates" dumbass.

3) The person running against him could have easily crushed this guy, its his own fault. They thought this guy wasnt a threat and blew him off. Its pretty damn easy to find out if a guy has a felony.

6/10/2010 11:23:24 AM

Quote :

"You can't just pass regulations on who can run in the primary to eliminate "undesirable candidates" dumbass. "

Sure you can. See the above article about filing fees. Jim Crow is still in effect when it comes to running for office.

6/10/2010 11:41:17 AM

Guys. It's South Carolina. It doesn't matter who the democrats choose, they aren't going to win shit.

6/10/2010 11:56:26 AM

Oligarchy.

6/10/2010 12:26:30 PM

^this is about South Carolina, not the federal government

6/10/2010 12:37:56 PM

Quote :

"State Democratic Party Chairwoman Carol Fowler speculated to AP that Greene won because his name came before Rawl's on the ballot. Wexler says Greene is a "big name in South Carolina.""

This

6/10/2010 2:33:16 PM

If you guys aren't following him on twitter yet, you need to be. If it turns out to be a real twitter account (I'm confident it's really him) then this is going to be a fantastic Senate campaign. I can't wait to see him and DeMint go at it in a debate.

http://twitter.com/AlvinGreeneSC

6/10/2010 3:35:11 PM

Scenario 1: Greene steps down. There is another forgettable boring Senate campaign in SC. DeMint wins.

Scenario 2: Greene stays in the race and produces some fantastic comedy. DeMint wins.

I like #2.

6/10/2010 4:07:15 PM

^^

Sorry, that page doesn’t exist!

6/10/2010 9:09:34 PM

First Joe Wilson, now Alvin Greene. SC surely knows how to pick 'em...

6/10/2010 9:28:04 PM

Democrats.

6/10/2010 9:29:26 PM

no matter how or why this went down, it is profoundly sad.

6/10/2010 10:05:14 PM

well the twitter account has been taken down for now and his website now says its an "unofficial" website so i was definitely wrong about that one. the question i haven't heard him asked yet is how in the hell did he get a poli sci degree from South Carolina? someone from the state party needs to get to this guy fast and start helping him out bc this can only get worse by the looks of two interviews he did today:

http://www.therightscoop.com/disaster-keith-olbermann-interviews-alvin-greene

http://www.therightscoop.com/trainwreck-shep-smith-interviews-s-c-s-newest-democrat-senatorial-candidate

6/10/2010 10:40:40 PM

This guy is the real deal. An honest to god Mr. Smith headed to Washington. Today is a great day for democracy.

6/10/2010 10:48:46 PM

Just saw a more apt comparison on twitter, Chauncey Gardiner.

6/10/2010 11:05:12 PM

Jim Demint is the most conservative US Senator from the most conservative state. It doesn't matter who you field as a Dem candidate, you're not going to unseat this guy two years into an Obama Administration. any money spent on a Dem for challenging DeMint's senate seat, is wasted money.

i haven't looked at the election numbers, but I bet less than 10% of the registered Dem voters even showed up to vote for the primary. Historically, these sorts of primaries tend to attract only the most extreme voters, people who would support a dark horse candidate because they have a near-pathological grudge against the status quo.

6/11/2010 2:21:56 AM

Well, in South Carolina, if I remember correctly, no matter the party affiliation, you can vote in whatever primary you want. Perhaps, and this is a stretch, maybe a few Republicans just happened to vote for this guy. Either way, as said above, it really isn't going to matter. I would also love to see 1 debate.

The local news story (from Charlotte) was great. The girl he showed porn to basically said he asked do you like football. She said yeah. When she said yes, he had her look on the computer, where there was porn, haha.

Also:

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/06/10/who-is-alvin-greene/

Quote :

"Who Is Alvin Greene? By KATE PHILLIPS Just when it seemed political events in South Carolina couldn’t turn more bizarre, calls are mounting for investigations and for the withdrawal from the Senate race of Alvin Greene, who has become known as the “stealth candidate” after mysteriously becoming the state’s Democratic nominee on Tuesday. On Thursday, not only did more officials urge Mr. Greene to quit the contest against Senator Jim DeMint, the Republican incumbent, but top lawmakers — like Representative James Clyburn — began suggesting that Mr. Greene was a “plant.” Mr. Clyburn, the House Democratic majority whip, also called for a federal investigation because of reports that Mr. Greene, who is on unemployment, paid more than $10,000 of his own money to enter the race. “There were some real shenanigans going on in the South Carolina primary,” Mr. Clyburn said on a radio show. “I don’t know if he was a Republican plant; he was someone’s plant.” The first startling disclosure was made by The Associated Press, which reported that Mr. Greene had been charged with a felony in a case involving showing pornographic images to a college student. Mr. Greene, 32, was largely silent about that on Wednesday as more and more media tried to contact him and officials began calling for him to withdraw from the race. (In interviews on Thursday, he wouldn’t comment on the charge, saying he was innocent until proven guilty. And he said he wouldn’t step down.) Carol Fowler, a state Democratic Party leader, revealed in interviews that she had questioned Mr. Greene’s use of a personal check for that $10,400 for filing fees to enter the race. The Root.com and some local TV stations have now published and broadcast interviews on Thursday in which Mr. Greene, who says he has been unemployed since he was discharged from the military nine months ago, speaks in platitudes about his campaign and contends that he traveled the entire state to get his message to voters. But, he’s not specific at all in the interviews about where or how he campaigned. He even concedes in one of the television interviews that he never held a campaign event, didn’t attend any larger Democratic primary gatherings and didn’t even have a campaign Web site. And he never filed any financial reporting forms. Asked how he won, he said South Carolinians could relate to him more than any other candidate. Mr. Greene was also asked about the cash he used to pay the filing fee, especially given the fact that he’s receiving unemployment benefits and also is represented in criminal court by a public defender. He said it was his own money. But Mr. Clyburn’s remarks fueled even more suspicions after The Hill newspaperr published what the lawmaker had said on the Bill Press radio show. “I would hope the U.S. Attorney down there would look at this,” Mr. Clyburn said. “Somebody gave him that $10,000 and he who took it should be investigated, and he who gave it should be investigated.” That seems to be the growing consensus among state and local officials. The Post and Courier in Charleston interviewed several puzzled lawmakers and Mr. Greene’s Democratic opponent for the nomination, Vic Rawl, a former state lawmaker. (He spent about $250,000 on his campaign for the Senate nomination, and didn’t take Mr. Greene’s candidacy seriously until he began winning Tuesday night, the newspaper notes. (Mr. Greene received 59 percent of the vote.) So how did this come about? Was it his top ballot position? The fact that he’s African-American, which some have suggested might have swayed the sizable numbers of black primary voters? Or was it something else? Here’s what the Post and Courier reported from its interviews: State Representative Bakari Sellers, D-Denmark, suggested Greene might have benefited from being listed first on Tuesday’s ballot, but Fowler said the party’s two relatively little-known Senate candidates in 2008 polled at nearly 50-50. State Senator Robert Ford, D-Charleston, who lost his gubernatorial bid Tuesday, said race could have played a role. The Democratic primary electorate is majority black, as is Greene, but not Rawl. “Vic Rawl had money, but he didn’t have enough. He wasn’t able to identify himself with black voters,” Ford said. “No white folks have an ‘e’ on the end of Green. The blacks after they left the plantation couldn’t spell, and they threw an ‘e’ on the end.” If outside forces played a role in Greene’s win, they’ve covered their tracks well so far. The race didn’t seem to tilt based on any last-minute mailing, robocall or word of mouth through established Democratic networks. “Whatever happened, it was damn stealthy,” Rawl said. Top Democratic officials in the state are noting that tomorrow (Friday) is the day the election returns must be certified. If Mr. Greene were to withdraw, Mr. Rawl could easily be named the nominee, according to news reports."

[Edited on June 11, 2010 at 2:54 AM. Reason : Facepalm]

6/11/2010 2:43:15 AM

Someone embed this please kindly. As someone pointed out the SC primary is open to both parties. After watching this I'm having some difficulty believing there isn't something odd going on here. This guy is somehow worse than Bobby Jindal.

<object width="420" height="245" id="msnbc2f01c6" classid="clsid27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=10,0,0,0"><param name="movie" value="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32545640" /><param name="FlashVars" value="launch=37627925&width=420&height=245"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><param name="wmode" value="opaque" /><embed name="msnbc2f01c6" src="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32545640" width="420" height="245" FlashVars="launch=37627925&width=420&height=245" allowscriptaccess="always" allowFullScreen="true" wmode="opaque" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" pluginspage="http://www.adobe.com/shockwave/download/download.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash"></embed></object><p style="font-size:11px; font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; color: #999; margin-top: 5px; background: transparent; text-align: center; width: 420px;">Visit msnbc.com for <a style="text-decoration:none !important; border-bottom: 1px dotted #999 !important; font-weight:normal !important; height: 13px; color:#5799DB !important;" href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com">breaking news</a>, <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032507" style="text-decoration:none !important; border-bottom: 1px dotted #999 !important; font-weight:normal !important; height: 13px; color:#5799DB !important;">world news</a>, and <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032072" style="text-decoration:none !important; border-bottom: 1px dotted #999 !important; font-weight:normal !important; height: 13px; color:#5799DB !important;">news about the economy</a></p>

6/11/2010 6:30:07 AM

Quote :

"they threw an ‘e’ on the end.” "

6/11/2010 7:14:18 AM

Quote :

"Mr. Clyburn, the House Democratic majority whip, also called for a federal investigation because of reports that Mr. Greene, who is on unemployment, paid more than $10,000 of his own money to enter the race."

WTF? $10,000 just to run for office? If the federal government should investigate anything, it should be why it costs $10,000 just to run.

6/11/2010 7:48:30 AM

^
I agree.

Quote :

"...filing fees. Jim Crow is still in effect when it comes to running for office."

Same with patent applications.
It's pretty sad that these two very powerful things are designed to be only for the rich.

6/11/2010 8:05:45 AM

Convincing 200 people to donate $50 towards their campaign should be a prerequisite for any Senate primary candidate.

6/11/2010 9:36:35 AM

Or perhaps we should repeal the 17th Amendment....

6/11/2010 9:51:49 AM

In 2008 the two dem senate candidates may have polled at nearly 50% each, but they also had almost identical last names as far as ballots go, Conley and Cone, hence why their race was so tight. Conley won by something like 1,000 votes statewide.

I, too, am starting to wonder about this more and more, but I really just think it was a matter of people randomly picking a name and his did show up first. Anecdotal story, but I spoke with a friend of mine in SC who voted in the dem primary yesterday and he admitted he just randomly voted for Greene bc his name was first on the ballot. It's like other commenters have pointed out though, it didn't matter who came out of this primary, DeMint is going to win, so this is all basically political theater, albeit fantastic political theater.

6/11/2010 10:08:58 AM

Quote :

"Convincing 200 people to donate $50 towards their campaign should be a prerequisite for any Senate primary candidate."

No, it really shouldn't.

6/11/2010 1:43:20 PM

Quote :

"WTF? $10,000 just to run for office?"

It's there to make sure you are serious before they print your name on tons of ballots.

You can always run for $0 and be a write-in candidate.

6/11/2010 1:48:44 PM

Quote :

"State Senator Robert Ford, D-Charleston, who lost his gubernatorial bid Tuesday, said race could have played a role. The Democratic primary electorate is majority black, as is Greene, but not Rawl. “Vic Rawl had money, but he didn’t have enough. He wasn’t able to identify himself with black voters,” Ford said. “No white folks have an ‘e’ on the end of Green. The blacks after they left the plantation couldn’t spell, and they threw an ‘e’ on the end.”"

Someone should show this article to Steven Greene in the Political Science department.

6/11/2010 1:58:52 PM

Hahaha, good point. He's possibly the whitest professor I've ever had. I'm frequently amazed he doesn't burst into flames when he steps outside.

6/11/2010 3:54:12 PM

This makes me sad for the political system, the voters of SC, and for Alvin Greene.

6/11/2010 5:58:47 PM

this folks; is magical

6/12/2010 5:53:23 AM

I suppose it's possible that this primary is symptomatic of a larger anti-incumbent (or, in this case, anti-recognized-name) trend, which seems especially popular among more conservative electorates. If ever a democratic primary were to be considered "a conservative electorate," South Carolina seems like the place.

But then, I base this on nothing except some earlier musings. For all I know South Carolinians are really as stupid as we say they are.

6/12/2010 6:04:03 AM

Every time I consider it, I unfortunately come the same conclusion that it'll never happen, but...
I wish candidates were anonymous -- we'd vote just on their message and positions on issues, not their identity or personality.

I mean, after all, the point of democracy isn't to develop elected officials into highly-skilled vote-getters -- it's to develop them into highly-representative issue-addressers.

6/12/2010 6:22:00 AM

perhaps this is just some Republican-sham to force the most unqualified candidate to run against the incumbent and make it impossible for the "vote-against-the-incumbent" folks to vote against the incumbent

6/12/2010 2:42:40 PM

^^I wish the opposite, actually. I think it would be great if there were no names on the ballots, and every office was filled by write-in / type-in.

If you spell the name incorrectly, too bad.

This election result is the outcome of mass stupidity and racism. Greene got 60% of the vote, which is roughly the percentage of Democrat primary voters who are black.

I don't pity the voters or the party. They got what they deserved. The proportion of democrats who don't encourage such idiocy is very small. I guess I feel sorry for that 2%.

6/12/2010 3:24:49 PM

Quote :

""State Senator Robert Ford, D-Charleston, who lost his gubernatorial bid Tuesday, said race could have played a role. The Democratic primary electorate is majority black, as is Greene, but not Rawl. “Vic Rawl had money, but he didn’t have enough. He wasn’t able to identify himself with black voters,” Ford said. “No white folks have an ‘e’ on the end of Green. The blacks after they left the plantation couldn’t spell, and they threw an ‘e’ on the end.”""

lol, wat? I didn't know Nathanael Greene was black.

6/12/2010 4:07:24 PM

Just goes to show that Democrats are racists too.

6/12/2010 6:15:47 PM