South Carolina: Republican Success, Democratic Decline
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15763/issn.2374-7781.2005.26.0.109-130Abstract
In 2004 South Carolina continued to play an increasingly familiar role: a critical battleground state in the presidential nomination process but a minor, generally ignored player in the general election. South Carolina has become such a reliable source of eight electoral votes for Republican presidential candidates that the state no longer figures in presidential campaign strategies. Republican presidential candidates assume that the state will be a nearly fail-safe “red state” with little or no effort, and Democratic presidential candidates assume with a high degree of certainty that the state will once again be a Republican stronghold, regard-less of what happens elsewhere. In the 2004 presidential election these assumptions quickly turned into hard facts early on in the election cycle. Indeed, beginning with the 1964 presidential election, Republican presidential candidates have carried the state in ten of the eleven presidential contests to date, with only 1976 standing as the lone exception (when Georgia neighbor Jimmy Carter carried the state).References
Bandy, Lee. 2000. Hollings Says He'll Run for Seventh Term in 2004. Columbia The State, August 15.
Bandy, Lee. 2003. Kerry Kicks Off Campaign for President in S.C. Columbia The State, September 3.
Bandy, Lee. 2005a. Sanford Run for White House Likely. Columbia The State, February 6.
Bandy, Lee. 2005b. Sanford-for-President Talk Still Has Legs. Columbia The State, September 25.
Barbour, Clay. 2004a. Edwards Keeps Vow to Visit Palmetto State. Charleston The Post and Courier, September 23.
Barbour, Clay. 2004b. Kerry Keeps Cropping Up in Senate Debate. Charleston The Post and Courier, October 19.
Bauerlein, Valerie. 2004. How Edwards Made S.C. Believe. Columbia The State, February 8.
Black, Earl, and Merle Black. 2002. The Rise of Southern Republicans. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Broder, David. 2004. S.C. Shows Power of Economy in 2004 Vote. Columbia The State, February 8.
Center for Responsive Politics. 2005. Total Raised and Spent, 2004 Race: South Carolina Senate. (Accessed at http://www.opensecrets.org/races/summary.asp?ID=SCS1&Cycle= 2004.)
Frank, John. 2005. Don't Look Now, But Race for White House is On. Charleston The Post and Courier, August 29.
Holland, Jennifer. 2004. Beasley, DeMint Make Final Dash for Votes. Columbia The State, June 22.
Kropf, Schuyler. 2004a. DeMint Leads Senate Race by Wide Margin, Poll Finds. Charleston The Post and Courier, October 3.
Kropf, Schuyler. 2004 b. Anti-gay Rhetoric Not New Among S.C. Republicans. Charleston The Post and Courier, October 10.
Kropf, Schuyler, and James Scott. 2004. Dean, Kerry Spar in S.C.O - Exchange on Health Care Issues Enlivens Debate. Charleston The Post and Courier, January 30.
McDonald, Michael P. 2004a. The Numbers Prove that 2004 May Signal More Voter Interest. Milwaukee Journal Sentinel Online, November 27 (accessed at http://www.jsonline.com/news/editorials/nov04/278724.asp).
McDonald, Michael P. 2004b. Up, Up and Away! Voter Participation in the 2004 Presidential Election. The Forum 2, article 4 (accessed at http://www.bepress.com/forum/vol2/iss4/art4/).
Moreland, Laurence W. 1994. South Carolina: Republican Again. In The 1992 Presidential Election in the South: Current Patterns in Southern Party and Electoral Politics, eds. Robert P. Steed, Laurence W. Moreland, and Tod A. Baker. Westport, CT: Praeger
Moreland, Laurence W., and Robert P. Steed. 1997. South Carolina: Elephants Among the Palmettos. In The 1996 Presidential Election in the South: Southern Party Systems in the 1990s, eds. Laurence W. Moreland and Robert P. Steed. Westport, CT: Praeger.
Moreland, Laurence W., and Robert P. Steed. 2002. South Carolina: Republican, Primarily. In The 2000 Presidential Election in the South: Partisanship and Southern Party Systems in the 21st Century, eds. Robert P. Steed and Laurence W. Moreland. Westport, CT: Praeger.
Moreland, Laurence W., Robert P. Steed, and Tod A. Baker. 1986. South Carolina. In The 1984 Presidential Election in the South: Patterns of Southern Party Politics, eds. Robert P. Steed, Laurence W. Moreland, and Tod A. Baker. New York: Praeger.
Moreland, Laurence W., Robert P. Steed, and Tod A. Baker. 1991. Different Cast, Same Drama in the Palmetto State. In The 1988 Presidential Election in the South: Continuity Amidst Change in Southern Party Politics, eds. Laurence W. Moreland, Robert P. Steed, and Tod A. Baker. New York: Praeger.
National Conference of State Legislatures. 2005. Women in State Legislatures 2005. (Accessed at http://www.ncsl.org/programs/wln/2004ElectionInfo.htm.)
Rainey, John S. 2005. Lindsey Graham's Fight to Hold the Center Shows Courage. Charleston The Post and Courier, June 29.
Sheinin, Aaron Gould. 2003. Hollings Won't Seek Re-election: "A Time...To Ho Home." Columbia The State, August 5.
Sheinin, Aaron Gould. 2004. Candidates Jockey for Crucial Second Place. Columbia The State, May 19.
South Carolina Employment Security Commission. 2004. Workforce Trends Newsline (press release of November 19, 2004).
Steed, Robert P. 1997. South Carolina. In State Party Profiles: A 50-State Guide to Development, Organization, and Resources, eds. Andrew M. Appleton and Daniel S. Ward. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
Steed, Robert P., and Laurence W. Moreland. 1999. Ideology, Issues, and the South Carolina Party System, 1980-1996. The American Review of Politics 20:49-74.
Steed, Robert P., and Laurence W. Moreland. 2003. South Carolina: Party Development in the Palmetto State. The American Review of Politics 24:91-108.
Steed, Robert P., and Laurence W. Moreland. 2006, 3rd ed. South Carolina: Change and Continuity in the Palmetto State. In The New Politics of the Old South, eds. Charles S. Bullock III and Mark Rozell. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
Steed, Robert P., Laurence W. Moreland, and Tod A. Baker. 1992. The South Carolina Party System: Toward a Two-Party System. In Government in the Palmetto State: Toward the 21st Century, eds. Luther F. Carter and David S. Mann. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Institute of Public Affairs.
Steed, Robert P., Laurence W. Moreland, and Tod A. Baker. 1995a. Party Sorting at the Local Level in South Carolina. The National Political Science Review 5:181-196.
Steed, Robert P., Laurence W. Moreland, and Tod A. Baker. 1995b. South Carolina: Toward a Two-Party System. In Southern State Party Organizations and Activists, eds. Charles D. Hadley and Lewis Bowman. Westport, CT: Praeger.
Talhelm, Jennifer. 2004. Parties Pursue Female Voters in Senate Race. Columbia The State, October 17.
United States Elections Project. 2005. 2004 Voting-Age and Voting-Eligible Population Estimates and Voter Turnout. (Accessed at http://elections.gmu.edu/Voter_Turnout_2004.htm).
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with American Review of Politics agree to the following terms:
The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
Attribution: other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
Non-Commercial: the materials may not be used for commercial purposes;
Share Alike: If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.
with the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.
The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a pre-publication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access). Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
The Author represents and warrants that:
the Work is the Author’s original work;
the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
the Work has not previously been published;
the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.
