Mark Sanford Loses SC Seat In Primary

[angelatc]

A huge loss for the Freedom Caucus. We're losing ground now.

https://www.postandcourier.com/poli...cle_f2087f8e-6cc8-11e8-baa2-9fcd285d9c08.html

n a monumental upset fueled by a Donald Trump tweet, U.S. Rep. Mark Sanford lost his Republican primary to Katie Arrington, a one-term state lawmaker who made loyalty to the president the centerpiece of her campaign.

The defeat, which carries national implications, marks the first time Sanford has lost an election, which began with his first congressional bid in this very district in 1994.

President Trump — making a move unprecedented in South Carolina history — in a late afternoon tweet asked state voters to replace Sanford with Arrington, going so far as to say Sanford is "better off in Argentina," a reference to his adulterous affair when he was governor in 2009.

 

[RonZeplin]

Neocon Revival 2014 - The Alliance for A Strong America, Dick & Liz Cheney

Unfortunately Dick Cheney's Neocon Revival of 2014 lives on under the leadership of NYC progressive globalist President, Donald J. Trump.



KIckoff announcement for the Neocon Revival of 2014

 

[Swordsmyth]

He was the 7th best member of Congress, does anyone know how good she is?

 

[thoughtomator]

you need votes to get elected

you need to respond to the needs of the people to get votes

the opponent did it and he didn't

it's not that hard

 

[RonZeplin]

He was the 7th best member of Congress, does anyone know how good she is?

On par with Carpetbagger Liz Cheney (R-WY).

 

[thoughtomator]

I just saw that woman's picture... holy fucking shit on a pogo stick, that woman is ugly. Sanford must have screwed this up royally to get beat by that. Hell, you could win an election just by printing her name on a picture of her face and distributing it everywhere. DAYUM THAT UGLY ugly. I know they say politics is acting for ugly people, but they didn't mean THAT ugly. That's break the lens ugly. You really gotta fuck up to lose to ugly on that level.

 

[eleganz]

Mark was a bit too blunt, he should've played it Rand Paul style.

But he knew what was at stake and didn't reflect his constituents so he lost, nothing he could've done at the 11th hour, it was all about playing it cool. What a shame, I believe this is his first ever political loss?

 

[nikcers]

I just saw that woman's picture... holy $#@!ing $#@! on a pogo stick, that woman is ugly. Sanford must have screwed this up royally to get beat by that. Hell, you could win an election just by printing her name on a picture of her face and distributing it everywhere. DAYUM THAT UGLY ugly. I know they say politics is acting for ugly people, but they didn't mean THAT ugly. That's break the lens ugly. You really gotta $#@! up to lose to ugly on that level.

Sanford was essentially running against "Trump". Trump is going to politically destroy any opposition to the left, its far too late to do anything about it, Trump could literally shoot his vice president and get away with it.

 

[thoughtomator]

Sanford was essentially running against "Trump". Trump is going to politically destroy any opposition to the left, its far too late to do anything about it, Trump could literally shoot his vice president and get away with it.

How stupid does a person have to be to run against Trump right now? The man clearly has broad and deep popular support, and despite all the nail biting and fretting hasn't done anything to justify any Chicken Little fears of authoritarian dictatorship, which makes critics who claim he is look both silly and petty at once.

Hell, the man hasn't even pulled Jim Acosta's press pass, even though he long ago had more than enough justification and now is practically compelled to do it.

 

[nikcers]

How stupid does a person have to be to run against Trump right now? The man clearly has broad and deep popular support, and despite all the nail biting and fretting hasn't done anything to justify any Chicken Little fears of authoritarian dictatorship, which makes critics who claim he is look both silly and petty at once.

Hell, the man hasn't even pulled Jim Acosta's press pass, even though he long ago had more than enough justification and now is practically compelled to do it.

DRAIN THE SWAMP

 

[ThePaleoLibertarian]

For libertarian-leaning candidates, running against Trump is NOT a winning strategy. It didn't work for Rand during the primaries, it didn't work for this guy and it won't work for anyone else. A far better strategy is to try to sell libertarian ideas under a populist banner to try and ride the wave. Populism is big, left and right, throughout the Western world. Libertarians with political ambitions either need to use this fact to their advantage or realize they'll be neutered politically.

 

[spudea]

I think its pretty obvious he didn't want to win but was too prideful to retire like a Jeff Flake.

 

[nobody's_hero]

For libertarian-leaning candidates, running against Trump is NOT a winning strategy. It didn't work for Rand during the primaries, it didn't work for this guy and it won't work for anyone else. A far better strategy is to try to sell libertarian ideas under a populist banner to try and ride the wave. Populism is big, left and right, throughout the Western world. Libertarians with political ambitions either need to use this fact to their advantage or realize they'll be neutered politically.

But populism isn't hipster. Gotta go against the flow, even if the flow sometimes briefly flows in a direction that benefits us. As soon as it becomes popular, it isn't cool anymore, and we're out.

 

[euphemia]

Yes, just what we need--more sexual shenanigans in the Senate. Sanford is a philanderer. Dude neglected the affairs of the state of South Carolina to be with some Argentine broadcaster. Sanford is why you now have Nikki Haley taking down the Confederate flag and moving on to UN Ambassador. Who actually did a lot of the negotiating in the run up to the US/DPRK summit.

 

[juleswin]

But populism isn't hipster. Gotta go against the flow, even if the flow sometimes briefly flows in a direction that benefits us. As soon as it becomes popular, it isn't cool anymore, and we're out.

It seems to work for Trump and his fan boys. Trump sold his candidacy with populist policies but once in office abandoned just about every single one of those policies. His anti neocon, take care of America policies were all but abandoned once he became president.

On the other hand, can you give an example where Mark Sanford went against Trump on any and I mean any of his populist policies? Any president to be successful doesn't just need yes men like Rand, he needs people to hold his feet to the fire and encourage him to do the right thing.

 

[juleswin]

Yes, just what we need--more sexual shenanigans in the Senate. Sanford is a philanderer. Dude neglected the affairs of the state of South Carolina to be with some Argentine broadcaster. Sanford is why you now have Nikki Haley taking down the Confederate flag and moving on to UN Ambassador. Who actually did a lot of the negotiating in the run up to the US/DPRK summit.

I say he who is without sin cast the first stone, someone made a one time boo boo in life and we want to condemn them. trump is also a sexual deviant, and philanderer/adulterer. Also, it is a fact that we got Nikki Haley in the UN because of Trump, this is not the voters or another group of ignorant people who put her in position, it was Trump. So if you want to blame anyone for Nikki Haley, blame Trump.

 

[juleswin]

For libertarian-leaning candidates, running against Trump is NOT a winning strategy. It didn't work for Rand during the primaries, it didn't work for this guy and it won't work for anyone else. A far better strategy is to try to sell libertarian ideas under a populist banner to try and ride the wave. Populism is big, left and right, throughout the Western world. Libertarians with political ambitions either need to use this fact to their advantage or realize they'll be neutered politically.

Who could imagine that a candidate running in a primary would dare attack the front runner. I cannot imagine anything more blasphemous than that. The fact that it did not work for him doesn't mean that it is a bad strategy to criticize Trump. Watch this next coming election how many people who criticize Trump/go against Trump supported candidates kick ass.

You look weak and impotent if you are afraid to attack the front runner. In fact, I will go as far as to say that I will not vote for anyone who is too timid and weak to confront a front runner. Not saying that is all they should be doing but if they shy away from it, I will shy away from voting for said politician(actually, I don't vote anymore). Just saying

 

[Superfluous Man]

For libertarian-leaning candidates, running against Trump is NOT a winning strategy.

Apparently that's true. But another way you could say that is, "For libertarian-leaning candidates, being libertarian-leaning is not a winning strategy."

 

[nobody's_hero]

It seems to work for Trump and his fan boys. Trump sold his candidacy with populist policies but once in office abandoned just about every single one of those policies. His anti neocon, take care of America policies were all but abandoned once he became president.

On the other hand, can you give an example where Mark Sanford went against Trump on any and I mean any of his populist policies? Any president to be successful doesn't just need yes men like Rand, he needs people to hold his feet to the fire and encourage him to do the right thing.

I wasn't necessarily referring to Sanford here. To be honest, I've no idea what Sanford did or Trump did to put the two of them at odds.

I was making reference to the libertarians who recoil in horror at the mention of populism and see it more like a turd to be scraped off the boot than something that could actually propel them into power (or non-power, considering how they'd "rule"). Trump knows how to use populism to his advantage. I'd be taking notes. But, as I said, as soon as something becomes popular, for some people it loses its appeal, and I think that's a major problem which has plagued the libertarian party's attempt to break into the mainstream. ThePaleoLibertarian is absolutely right in his comment above. Either the libertarian party starts using populism to their advantage or they will continue to wallow in obscurity.

pop·u·lism
ˈpäpyəˌlizəm/
noun
noun: populism
support for the concerns of ordinary people.

Heavens no! Can't let the libertarian party be associated with that.

 

[oyarde]

Apparently that's true. But another way you could say that is, "For libertarian-leaning candidates, being libertarian-leaning is not a winning strategy."

That is also true . Take a hint from the dems and just hide a little .