Home→General→Constitution Party Nominee in South Carolina Special Legislative Election Polls 16% in Two-Party Race

Constitution Party Nominee in South Carolina Special Legislative Election Polls 16% in Two-Party Race

Posted on August 30, 2011 by admin

On August 30, South Carolina held a special election to fill the vacancy in the State House, tenth district. Constitution Party nominee Dave Ballard polled 16.0%; his only opponent, Republican Joshua Putnam, polled 84.0%. See this story.

Comments

Constitution Party Nominee in South Carolina Special Legislative Election Polls 16% in Two-Party Race — No Comments

Libertarian Voter on August 30, 2011 at 9:23 pm said:

And? How is this significant?
Cody Quirk on August 30, 2011 at 10:23 pm said:

Did Dave even campaign at all?
RJ on August 31, 2011 at 1:09 am said:

Just a name on the ballot.
Scott West on August 31, 2011 at 7:51 am said:

Reading the article you will see that this special election is actually the third election contest for the seat following the Republican primary and run-off. This is an argument for voting reform, like IRV, though other cases could be made. Turnout was low, and is the focus of general complaints, but no remedies are mentioned.

Interestingly, with a much greater turnout in the general election, the same Constitution Party candidate got the same percent result: 15%, also in a two person race.
Richard Winger on August 31, 2011 at 8:40 am said:

yes, turnout yesterday was only 5.25% of the registered voters.
Craig M. on August 31, 2011 at 12:39 pm said:

Dave, Thank you for running. The Constitution Party needs to be seen as the alternative to the Democratic-Republican Party, and this was a step in that direction.
Cody Quirk on August 31, 2011 at 9:12 pm said:

Usually the IAP candidates do better then this in Nevada two-way races.
An Alabama Independent on September 2, 2011 at 10:56 am said:

Well, if the CP candidate had not “echoed” his GOP opponent, he might have gotten 26% of the vote. And if he had reached out to the working voters of the district, and let them know he agrees they pay the “brunt” of all taxes – not the Republicans as they claim – he might have gotten 46% of the vote. And if he had really campaigned like a real populist who cared about the people of his distict, instead of the “silk-stocking” Reublicans who run it, he might have won. Oh well, a good day dream doesn’t hurt anything.