SPEAK OUT: Would Sanford Candidacy Be Bad for State?
Former governor getting most of the early attention in SC1 race.
The most-talked about candidate in the most-talked about race in South Carolina will have no shortage of obstacles if he’s to be elected.
Since letting it be known that he’s going to pursue the 1st Congressional Seat vacated by the ascension of Tim Scott to the Senate, former Gov. Mark Sanford has assumed the role of early frontrunner.
Sanford should be able to raise the most money of any of the candidates whose names are being floated as possible contenders. And none of the rumored names can match his name recognition. But, as everyone knows, Sanford’s name recognition is not simply due to his status as a former governor.
Multiple sources have told Patch that there is a sentiment within Republicans ranks in South Carolina for Sanford to stay out of the race and some of that sentiment comes from surrogates of elected officials.
Those uneasy about a Sanford candidacy point out that L’Affair Maria will have to be rehashed again and that will take away from the type of issue-based race that they believe is needed. The race is going to be brief anyway, they say, and spending time discussing Sanford’s private life won’t be helpful. The spectacle of A Sanford campaign won’t do any favors for South Carolina’s national reputation either.
Those who spoke to Patch could simply be planting seeds of doubt to benefit candidates they prefer, but some former Sanford loyalists aren’t too enthusiastic, either. Former aide Chris Drummond has already committed to work for the campaign of Teddy Turner.
One source told Patch that Sanford asked former wife Jenny to run his campaign—as she had run his previous campaigns for the House and Governor’s office. The former First Lady declined the offer.
So, would a Mark Sanford candidacy in SC1 be bad for South Carolina?
Keep up with all of Patch's coverage of South Carolina politics by following us on Facebook HERE and Twitter HERE
Galen Manapat
12:59 pm on Wednesday, January 9, 2013
I have this problem with Sanford. I loved him as a conservative fighting for some very important things. But I think he has shown poor moral character, more than once. He is fickle. According to Jenny Sanford's book, Sanford was probing (pre marriage) for other than traditional faithful marital arangements with then the unmarried Jenny. (So why did she marry him)? If Sanford is so immature that he could not wait until his governorship was over before a divorcing Jenny and going with the other lady, and if he did not weigh the cost of his actions on his own children, then to me he doesn't have all his marbles. He doesn't think straight about consequences. There is nothing that he could do in politics than a better person could not also do.
Jay Bennett
1:07 pm on Wednesday, January 9, 2013
The man has been in Washington and would be a great conservative, intelligent voice. Yes; he made a mistake but if everyone who is in Congress had made a "mistake" there wouldn't be any members By the way; don't always believe what an "ex" states in a book.
Cookies Mom
2:40 pm on Wednesday, January 9, 2013
Hiking on the Appalachian trail was a fraud perpetrated by Sanford and his staff when he was a sitting governor-that is why he would not make a good pick and why the people of this state should not elect him to any office. His mistake showed his lack of judgement and moral character, which are additional reasons why we should not vote for him. What his ex wrote in a book is immaterial; we have plenty of reasons provided by Sanford!
LPDR
1:14 pm on Wednesday, January 9, 2013
Is this guy high, or just stupid? Does he honestly think the people of SC have already forgotten how he embarrassed this state as Governor??? Why in the world would we give him a chance to do it again? Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
Cookies Mom
2:42 pm on Wednesday, January 9, 2013
I agree-if we are dumb enough to elect him to fill this spot, then we deserve to be a joke. I am about as likely to vote for him as Alvin Greene-LOL!
Shawn Drury
1:37 pm on Wednesday, January 9, 2013
Some great thoughts already...
van crause
2:27 pm on Wednesday, January 9, 2013
Ye without sin cast the first stone..........I don't care what Sanford did in his personal life .....go Sanford, We miss you now that we have to wait in lines at the DMV again, good old government arrogance....go stand in line and allow the civil servants to be rude, slow and obnoxious.
Cookies Mom
2:45 pm on Wednesday, January 9, 2013
It is not about what he did in his personal life-it is the fact that he went MIA while sitting as governor, which showed a callous disregard for his elected position and for his constituents. I think that also makes him obnoxiously arrogant. It would also make SC a laughingstock if we re-elected hi to any office.
Brad Jordan
2:58 pm on Wednesday, January 9, 2013
He used taxpayer dollars to fund his affair. He can't call himself a fiscal conservative any more.
Cookies Mom
3:00 pm on Wednesday, January 9, 2013
Great point!
reg
3:08 pm on Wednesday, January 9, 2013
That's exactly why I can't believe there are folks who support him, or who take this "so what?" attitude. He fraudulently used taxpayer funds to pay for it. How's that for "fiscal conservative"?
Add in that Appalachian Lie about his whereabouts, and that he made no notification to the Lt. Gov of his absence, that means he left our state at immediate risk with no avenue to response -- if there had been an emergency, there would have been no one present to authorize state response. We could have been left to float away/burn up/get blown away/die and all because he wanted to cover his tracks as much as possible in order to have a secret fling.
The only thing Mark Sanford thinks about is his own self-interests, and that doesn't fit the job description of "representative."
Ken
3:29 pm on Wednesday, January 9, 2013
Sanford screwed himself when he abandoned his office for a week and his wife and family to have a booty call with his "soul mate" after running for two terms as governor using his wife and kids as proof that he was a "family values" candidate.
Justice Prudence
3:34 pm on Wednesday, January 9, 2013
He had his turn in Congress, switched sides as a SC Governor. Lied about his GOVERNING "business" to the citizens of this mighty fine state. His entire life has been a facade, his political aspirations are in the crapper along with his buddy John Edwards. People certainly aren't that desperate nor stupid to even fathom having him serve as a voice for SC. It all seems so tawdry as well as reductive now doesn't it? Yep.
Tom Utley
3:40 pm on Wednesday, January 9, 2013
I don't think so. He's a limited government guy who would probably work to eliminate federal programs and reduce taxes, which is all I care about. He's a lot better than Chip Limehouse and the other statists in the race.
Cookies Mom
3:45 pm on Wednesday, January 9, 2013
The fact that he was having a booty call while on the taxpayer's dime does not concern you?
Tom Utley
1:26 pm on Thursday, January 10, 2013
It was not on the taxpayers' dime. The only thing he did wrong was not telling anybody where he was going, so people couldn't get in touch with him. Supposedly this is "dereliction of duty" or some nonsense. Personally I wish more politicians would just up and leave and never come back.
reg
2:35 pm on Thursday, January 10, 2013
The hell it wasn't on the taxpayer's dime. Wake up, Tomboy -- Sanford was found guilty of using state funds to pay for his personal travels. Were you in a coma when this went through the Ethics Commission and he had to pay $74,000 in reimbursements and fines? Using state funds to pay for business and first-class airfare to Argentina, personal use of state-owned aircraft; using state funds to reimburse himself for personal trips ....
maizenbluedoc
3:50 pm on Wednesday, January 9, 2013
When Sanford first came into the public spotlight, I supported him, but as time passed, it became more obvious he was not the person I thought he was. Personal indiscretions mey not alter the way a person performs official dutes (Example: Bill Clinton), but he was not honest with the people he represented. He also was not truthful. He displayed a propensity of not working with others to accomplish what was best for South Carolinians. I say NO to his quest as an elected official in this state. Let get a REAL job.
Pat Plaster
9:43 pm on Thursday, January 10, 2013
I agree. I'm not interested in giving him another elected position in SC.
Bella
3:56 pm on Wednesday, January 9, 2013
Did you know Sanford proposed the largest state budget in South Carolina history his last year in office? Yeah, not fiscal conservative enough for me.
Gretchen
8:51 am on Thursday, January 10, 2013
The STATE is growing at a very fast rate ... hence MORE PEOPLE MEANS a higher COST for everything.
stanley seigler
9:20 am on Thursday, January 10, 2013
re: not fiscal conservative enough for me [bella].
which means he'll probably make a good representative along with, 'The only good SC politician in DC Jim Clyburn.' (nan hahn say) and;
maybe even a great one like the ones gretchen reminded us of: 'John Kennedy, Bill Clinton'
BTW i though slick willie should have resigned...but that would have been a big mistake...he had us on the path to debt reduction w/ budget surpluses...how DID he DO IT...
Nan Hahn
4:00 pm on Wednesday, January 9, 2013
There's a saying: "Be careful what you wish for - you may get what you deserve". Sanford made a fool of SC once already. Are voters here so stupid that they're willing to risk it again? Oh, foolish me. These are voters educated in SC schools!
Cookies Mom
4:06 pm on Wednesday, January 9, 2013
I take exception to that-I was educated in SC, never did vote for Sanford, and there are plenty of snowbird transplants that voted for him. If we want to talk about other joke politicians, let's talk about a few NJ politicians that either thought with their zippers or sexted pictures of what was behind them-LOL! This state does not have a monopoly on stupid or else how do you explain Washington DC??????????????
Nan Hahn
5:02 pm on Wednesday, January 9, 2013
You're right about DC - just look at Lindsey Graham-cracker and Jim DeMented! The only good SC politician in DC is Jim Clyburn.
stanley seigler
11:51 pm on Wednesday, January 9, 2013
re: These are voters educated in SC schools!...
nothing to do voting pro/con sanford...but i too take exception...i graduated SHS (a zillion years ago)...then went to a pretty good college...
at this college, kids from prestigious yankee hi schools had to take remedial (pre freshman) math/english courses...
i didnt...had some great SHS teachers...as a smart-A kid i didn't deserve them.
Shawn Drury
4:04 pm on Wednesday, January 9, 2013
It seems like voters are just as annoyed by his affair as the fact that taxpayers dollars were involved. Is that fair to say?
For those of you opposed to Gov. Sanford, is there anything he could do to win you back?
Cookies Mom
5:20 pm on Wednesday, January 9, 2013
No, he is an unrepentent cheater and liar-his crocodile tears were not convincing.
Nan Hahn
5:02 pm on Wednesday, January 9, 2013
NO!
Cookies Mom
5:22 pm on Wednesday, January 9, 2013
The best thing DeMint did was to vacate the seat so that it could be filled by Tim Scott. There are plenty of numbskull politicians from other states-we don't need to repeat our mistakes.
Nan Hahn
8:20 pm on Wednesday, January 9, 2013
I would have preferred anyone other than Scott (preferably a Democrat).
Ronnie
7:18 pm on Wednesday, January 9, 2013
No one wants Mark Sanford back in the political picture on South Carolina. He needs to just keep his name away from SC. He made us a laughing joke to the rest of the country.
Cookies Mom
7:30 pm on Wednesday, January 9, 2013
Let's wish him adios so he can go be with his soul mate in Argentina!
Nan Hahn
8:16 pm on Wednesday, January 9, 2013
From your keyboard to God's monitor (LOL).
WJ Dunford
8:41 am on Thursday, January 10, 2013
LOL! Love that phrase and will borrow, with your permission.
maizenbluedoc
7:27 am on Thursday, January 10, 2013
Again, what should be a civil discussion evolves into a biased Democrat vs Republican and North vs South rant. What Sanford did was not good, and has little to do with which party he belongs, which schools he attended, or what state he was reared and/or resided.
Cookies Mom
8:03 am on Thursday, January 10, 2013
Lighten up; get a sense of humor; have a broomstickectomy!
reg
10:23 am on Thursday, January 10, 2013
funny, maize --- you want it to be a non-partisan and civil discussion *only* when it involves the crimes of a Republican. If a Dem got a traffic ticket, you'd be wailing non-stop about his party
Cookies Mom
8:49 am on Thursday, January 10, 2013
Broomstickectomy is in the public domain-feel free to use it!
Gretchen
8:56 am on Thursday, January 10, 2013
I have to laugh at all these people who are complaining about Sanford's morals. Are they the same ones who defend John Kennedy, Bill Clinton, and John Edwards and all the others who have done far worse things.? Are all these people "holier than thou"???
reg
10:03 am on Thursday, January 10, 2013
Kennedy, Clinton, Edwards et al didn't charge us taxpayers to pay for their affairs. *Sanford did.* (And since you seem to taking this to a partisan angle, neither of those three you cite took place in airport bathrooms or with underage boys who were congressional pages or with prostitutes or with their teenage stepdaughters)
Cookies Mom
8:56 am on Thursday, January 10, 2013
Gretchen-More people also means more revenues so I am not sure what point you are trying to make or what relevance it has to this topic?!?!?!?!
Gretchen
8:58 am on Thursday, January 10, 2013
Someone said SANFORD had the largest BUDGET the State of SC had ever had.
Cookies Mom
9:11 am on Thursday, January 10, 2013
I don't know which is more laughable-Sanford thinking that he is electable to any office or his announcement that he would bow out of the race in deference to his ex-wife if she decided to run. Frankly, I think he and his ex are soul mates since neither of them seems to think that any rules apply to them-he thumbed his nose at the citizens of this state while he was governor and she thinks she is immune from local ordinances. He has proven to be untrustworthy while in public office and she has no qualifications to run for election, unless someone thinks sympathy votes are enough to elect her. I wish they would both run, get soundly defeated, and then stay out of the public arena. Enough, already!
Gretchen
10:26 am on Thursday, January 10, 2013
ha ha you might be right. Maybe it's time to elect someone we NEVER HEARD OF .... who makes a good impression in spite of what the PRESS and NEWSPAPERS say about them. The Liberal media is just too powerful.
Cookies Mom
10:11 am on Thursday, January 10, 2013
To reg-any politician who carries on with this nonsense while in office is doing it at taxpayer expense. I did not take a partisan approach-there are idiots on both sides of the aisle and both genders who do not respect their marriages or their constituents.
reg
3:18 pm on Thursday, January 10, 2013
Thanks for the message; I didn't comment to you or in response to any of your comments, though.
Cookies Mom
12:59 pm on Thursday, January 10, 2013
No idea what you are rederencing-either make a valid point regarding the subject matter or find somewhere else to park your baggage.
Cookies Mom
1:34 pm on Thursday, January 10, 2013
Sanford was on the taxpayer's dime when he disappeared for a week-refused to disclose his true location-and left this state without someone in charge in case of an emergency. Most of his trips to central and South America were mere covers for booty calls to his soul mate-also on th taxpayer's dime. However, what should make him unelectable in my book, is that he proved himself to be an unreliable liar and cheat who cannot keep his zipper on lock-down when he is supposed to be conducting government business.
Cookies Mom
3:31 pm on Thursday, January 10, 2013
Reg-you accused me of making this a partisan debate, which I did not-I think there is some confusion about the order of comments and who was replying to what. I apologize if I am mistaken about the order of comments and replies. I think you and I agree about the basic issues, about not wanting Sanford in any office and about his shenanigans on the taxpayer's dime.
reg
3:46 pm on Thursday, January 10, 2013
Um, no -- my comment on "partisan angle" is addressed to Gretchen, who took this in this angle by bringing up Kennedy, Clinton and Edwards. My comment on "non-partisan" is addressed to maisenbluedoc, and in response to other conversations we've shared on other threads of this site.
So unless you're signing in under multiple user names (wink wink), my comments were not addressed to you (and even though you're not smart enough to be an active member of my fan club).
Cookies Mom
3:50 pm on Thursday, January 10, 2013
I am no Mensa candidate, but you can consider me a fan any time I do not recommend a broomstickectomy-LOL!
reg
4:08 pm on Thursday, January 10, 2013
as long as you're not DENSE-a, you're in. You can be 2nd Vice President, in fact.
Cookies Mom
4:18 pm on Thursday, January 10, 2013
I play 2nd to nobody, thanks. My husband keeps telling me he knew he married Miss Right-it wasn;t until after the wedding that he realized my first name was Always-LOL! Leave 'em in stitches, er, um, laughing that is, not heading to the ER.
John
3:47 pm on Saturday, January 12, 2013
Unbelievable
Clinton, while president encouraged a teen to have oral sex in the oval office and thats only a slight faux pas, while Mark Sanford had a indiscretion with an adult women and Dan Quail misspelled potato and both were universally condemned by the liberal citizenry. Go figure !!
reg
3:59 pm on Saturday, January 12, 2013
1) Clinton didn't bill taxpayers for his escapades (which were with a 23-year-old, *not* a teen --- keep the facts straight). He didn't violate any law, either.
2) Sanford *did* bill taxpayers for his affair, which is why a court ordered him to pay over $70,000 back to the State of South Carolina. He also violated code when he left without establishing a proxy (i.e., didn't notify Lt. Gov.) -- and had we been in any emergency that requires governor's orders, the whole state would've been left hanging waiting on his return.
3) NO ONE IS DEFENDING CLINTON. Only *you* (and one other who wants to misdirect this topic) bring him up ---
4) as for Quayle, don't get me started ....
stanley seigler
4:25 pm on Saturday, January 12, 2013
previous posted comment:
i though slick willie should have resigned...but that would have been a big mistake...he had us on the path to debt reduction w/ budget surpluses [then along came W]...how DID he DO IT...
ditto FDR and JFK...ie;
their morals escape me...but unless one is an extreme partisan, its hard to deny their contributions to our country...maybe sanford could be a great one too...course i wouldnt vote for a GOP...
BTW think it's good newt and edwards are no longer on the political scene...difficult to explain but, my opine, their morals re politics were different than FDR, JFK, clinton...maybe sanford.