South Carolina didn't always look like such hostile territory for Obama. He never had much hope of winning the state in the general election, but his decisive primary victory there in 2008 helped propel him to the Democratic presidential nomination. While he lost the state in November by nine percentage points to Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), his performance nevertheless represented the best Democratic presidential showing in nearly three decades.[...]
While the state has also elected loose-cannon Democrats like Sen. Fritz Hollings, whose seat DeMint won when Hollings retired in 2004, it's no accident that its high-profile politicians tend to be Republicans these days or that they don’t feel bound by the constraints felt by their colleagues in more politically competitive states.And here's my chance to answer the question. (I sure will.)
"It has traditionally been a pretty deep-red state and I think that Republican politicians feel that there's not a limit to what they can do or say when it comes to Democratic elected officials, particularly the president," said former Democratic Gov. Jim Hodges, who was defeated by Sanford in 2002. "In most places, they play the sport of politics every two or four years. In South Carolina, they play it every year. It is more important than football, to some degree."
You wanna know what's wrong? How about the fact that the rest of the country has written us off and won't fund the insurgents? This is what happens. You are looking at the result of liberals being left HIGH AND DRY.
I'm sitting right here. My blog struggles... it might be the only progressive blog in the upstate. I know for a fact it isn't the only one in the whole state--but there aren't many. Support? Hello? I almost ran for the Green Party candidacy (for Congress) some years ago, but realized I could not afford it, especially if it meant taking significant time away from my job. Anybody home?
We have been left twisting slowly, slowly in the wind.
I constantly hear and read about how the national parties and various progressive organizations fund actions, bloggers and activities in affluent, liberal areas. Why? They ain't the ones that need the money, people and accompanying resources, you know?
I have witnessed the rather amazing and ostentatious spectacle of both major parties invading my state repeatedly during the Democratic and Republican presidential primaries, throwing away more money than the Saudis. They inject obscene amounts of money into those campaigns, but as I said, will not fund the insurgents. WE DON'T EVEN HAVE AN AIR AMERICA RADIO STATION IN THE UPSTATE. (My repeated emails about that were totally ignored; I didn't even rate a reply. Thanks!) Basically, the answer from national progressives has been to ignore upstate South Carolina progressives "on the ground"--and please pay attention...THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS.
We need resources, offices, money, support. We have a radio station that is dormant that could be put to use. We have people ready to work, and radical organizations already in place. I have mentioned countless groups on this blog. YOU HAVE IGNORED US. The rich Republicans have colonized the state, and have gained enormous power that they have taken nationally, to challenge progressive change. We might have put a considerable dent in their influence, but we have no way to do that. We have been hobbled by them at every turn; they run ALL the major media outlets. At the town hall meeting I attended, as I said, there was a total of three "out" progressives. The rest were silent, inside, unorganized. I know there had to be at least another three. That might have been enough for us to feel safe raising a sign or banner, making our presence known to others and starting a necessary dialogue with local moderates. AND we could have gotten ourselves on TV or radio. As it was, we were too afraid.
WE NEED HELP. SOS.
Just answering the question.
I certainly don't expect anything to change as a result of this blog post. It would involve modern-day privileged progressives getting off their spoiled asses and doing something gutsy, as progressives did back in the day of the Freedom Riders. It would take NERVE, and kids with privilege do not appear to have any nerve left, as they did during the Civil Rights and Anti-War movements. (In fact, we do not have any appreciable anti-war movement, do we?) We need people to move to the state; we need people to share their knowledge and liberal connections with us.
What's the matter is that you wrote us off, and the rich saw that you did. As a result, you gave them a whole state to play with.
How do you like the consequences?