Someone named Jay Newton-Small has written a piece for Time, linked on Yahoo’s home page, which offers an absolutely mind-boggling summation of yesterday’s primaries.
Apparently, in a few of the primaries, the incumbent Republicans won. Some of those incumbent Republicans were the ones supported by GOP establishment, rather than the Tea Party movement (whatever it exactly is, and I’m still not sure exactly what it is except a convenient target for liberals to make obscene comments and straw man arguments against).
Joe Wilson and Jim DeMint won the nominations for re-election by landslides. While both are incumbents, both are huge in the “Tea Party” side of things, and both are known for bucking the rules of DC Decorum.
The article tries to say that Nikki Haley is an “establishment” candidate. She’s got the support of Sarah Palin and the Tea Party folks. Yes, she’s also supported by Jenny Sanford, but Nikki’s a lowly state representative who’s also non-white and a woman in a state that is still dominated by the sociopathic White, Episcopalian, Charlestonian good-old boy network embodied in Mark Sanford and Andre Bauer.
You can hardly say SC’s gubernatorial primary was anything for or against “incumbents,” since there was no incumbent. The closest thing to an incumbent was the aforementioned Lt. Gov. Bauer, who suffered a landslide loss, coming in far behind his many challengers.
And the Tea Party is a grassroots movement, though to liberals it’s the Second Coming of Karl Rove, so it really is unclear what the Tea Party is or stands for, and it comes off sounding like GOP only louder.
The same fissures that divide Republicans already can be seen even with those who identify with the Tea Parties, particularly when it comes to “patriotism” and war: are Tea Parties essentially a new wave of libertarianism, supporting a paleoconservative opposition to globalism and emphasis on protecting our own country? Or are they represented by mainstream Republican war hawking and jingoism? I honestly don’t know, since I’ve never been to a Tea Party Rally, and from what I’ve read online, the people involved themselves don’t seem to know.
Right now, all we have is a primary election, and the only trends we can look at are state by state. I mean, if Arnold Schwarzeneggar–whom one commentator said would be a Communist in many “blue states”–can be Republican governor of California, how can California’s Republican primaries be indicative of other states?
The real issue should not be who won but voter turnout. While South Carolina is generally a “Red State,” Richland County is generally considered a “Blue County”–it’s urban, and has a high African American population.
While Joe Wilson gets a lot of support nationwide for his infamous “You Lie” statement, I’ve heard a lot of anger against him in these parts. I’ve had several papers by African American students condemning him. I would expect that to show up in the general election, not the primary. However, there was a huge Republican turnout in Richland County, with a very low Democrat turnout.
This would seem to indicate where the real anger lies, by which parties are getting the overall votes in the primaries.