Tomorrow South Carolina Voters Decide Between Colbert's Sister And The Obsessive Sex Fiend

Actually, it's not all of South Carolina. We're talking about SC-01, along the coast, a district that's not as crazy and extremist as the up-country congressional districts where talk of secession is still a hot topic. It's next door to SC-06, into which the legislature managed to gerrymander every conceivable African American in the area. SC-06 gave Obama 70.9% of its vote in November and reelected Jim Clyburn without opposition. Of South Carolina's 6 other--basically all white-- districts Obama went above 40% in only two-- SC-05 (with African-American-majority Fairfield and Lee counties as well as Democratic-leaning Chester and Sumter counties) and SC-01, where Obama actually won Charleston County. Nevertheless, if Colbert Busch wins Tuesday, there would only be three Democrats in Congress representing redder districts: Mike McIntyre (Blue Dog-NC), whose district has a PVI of R+12, Nick Rahall (D-WV), whose district has a PVI of R+14, and Jim Matheson (Blue Dog-UT), whose district has a PVI of R+16. SC-01 has a PVI of R+11. The three of them-- particularly the two Blue Dogs, vote with the GOP on crucial roll calls far more frequently than they vote with Democrats. Boehner and Cantor know they can count on Matheson and McIntyre and, to a lesser degree Rahall, whenever push comes to shove. Judging by her campaign statements, Colbert Busch is more likely to fall in around Rahall than McIntyre and Matheson. Unlike them, she's socially liberal-- pro-marriage equality, pro-Choice, pro-immigrant, pro-background checks, for example-- and then goes all GOP when it comes to economic issues. She's made some pretty nasty anti-union statements: “I’m proud to live in and support a right-to-work state" and “This is a right-to-work state and NLRB had no business telling Boeing where they can locate" and she's managed to attack Obama on Chained CPI-- although you might interpret that as backing Bernie Sanders and Alan Grayson-- and on Obamacare, which she says needs "an enormous fix," which most progressives also agree with.

Sanford's campaign is all about trying to make voters forget he's a corrupt philanderer and a serial liar and think he's running against Nancy Pelosi. Colbert's sister is no Nancy Pelosi, not by a longshot. Nor is she some backward sleazy Blue Dog, willing to say anything to get elected. Polling hasn't been going her way lately. Late in April-- before the big right-wing money started pouring into the district (as well as the slimy smear campaign), she was clearing pulling away from Sanford and looked like a sure winner. She had a 9% margin and 56% of poll respondents had a favorable opinion of her-- as opposed to Sanford's 56% unfavorable rating. A more recent poll-- though not as reliable as the PPP poll cited above-- shows the race exactly tied, 46-46% with 7% undecided.

If money is going to decide the race, it's likely Colbert Busch will win. The NRCC, embarrassed by Sanford's ethical problems, pulled out and the DCCC and their House Majority PAC have invested very heavily. Colbert Busch outraised Sanford by around $400,000 but she burned through it faster, leaving Sanford with a $30,000 advantage of cash-on-hand in the final week.

Both campaigns had donors-- individuals and PACs-- from a variety of interest group areas, and both saw support from traditional backers of their respective parties. Lawyers and law firms were the top backers of Colbert Busch's campaign, giving her $38,250. She also picked up support from the education industry and industrial unions. Given her famous brother, it's no surprise to see that donors from the TV, movies and music industry chipped in $13,200.

Sanford received his greatest support from the securities and investment industry, which sent his campaign $54,000, followed by the real estate industry, which sent him $51,000.

Besides raising far less money than Colbert-Busch, Sanford is taking a huge hit when it comes to outside spending. According to OpenSecrets.org's profile of the race, outside groups have spent more than $929,000 on independent expenditures against Sanford. Conservative groups have spent only about $15,000 to help him. Meanwhile only about $4,600 has been spent by outside groups attacking Colbert Busch, while $1,500 has been spent upporting her.

The DCCC has chipped in $458,234 (of which $214,849 came in last week) and their SuperPAC, House Majority PAC put in another $425,851 (including $165,027 last week). Last week a right-wing anti-Choice "women's" group, Independent Women's Voice put down $96,584 slamming Colbert Busch (ad below), a candidate who is viewed with disgust and contempt by most women, regardless of political leanings. And FreedomWorks kicked down $1,614 last week. In teh last couple of days, wealthy Republicans have helped Sanford close the money gap and the last minute poll by PPP shows the race even-- with Sanford momentum.

PPP's final poll of the special election in South Carolina's 1st Congressional District finds a race that's too close to call, with Republican Mark Sanford leading Democrat Elizabeth Colbert Busch 47-46. The 1 point lead for Sanford represents a 10 point reversal from PPP's poll of the race two weeks ago, when Colbert Busch led by 9 points at 50-41.

Sanford has gotten back into the race by nationalizing it and painting Colbert Busch as a liberal. A plurality of voters in the district-- 47%- say they think Colbert Busch is a liberal compared to 43% who characterize her as ideologically 'about right.' Colbert Busch's favorability rating has dropped a net 19 points compared to 2 weeks ago, from +25 then at 56/31 to +6 now at 50/44.

While Colbert Busch is seen as too liberal, 48% of voters think that Sanford's views are 'about right' on the issues compared to just 38% who see him as too conservative. Sanford's also seen some repair to his image over the course of the campaign. Although he's still unpopular, sporting a -11 net favorability rating at 43/54, that's up a net 13 points from our first poll in March when he was at 34/58.

Alan Grayson (D-FL) asked his own donors to contribute to Colbert Busch's campaign and to support her efforts to beat Sanford. He was relieved she's at least pro-choice and pro-marriage equality, even if they don't see eye to eye on any number of issues. (Grayson, for example, is a major union supporter.) But his feelings are that if there's any chance to beat a Republican with a Democrat, it's worth the effort. "I'm going to ask you to support her campaign because the last thing that we need in the U.S. House of Representatives right now is another Republican. And the thing that we do need is more Democrats. Seventeen more Democrats, to be exact... Let's take back the House."

Read More

Tick, Tick, Tick... Will The GOP Actually Lose A South Carolina House Seat In Less Than A Week?

I suspect that Rand Paul was less reluctant about following Papa Paul in endorsing habitually dishonest South Carolina philanderer Mark Sanford than I was in endorsing Elizabeth Colbert Busch. After all, he's more of a party hack than I am and, after all again, the Tea Party Establishment has rallied 'round Sanford after opposing him in the primary. Tuesday the Koch brothers' FreedomWorks, one of the groups Rand is dependent on, got on board.

GOP congressional candidate Mark Sanford was formally endorsed Tuesday by Sen. Rand Paul, a Tea Party favorite whose support could help in the final days of the special election for South Carolina's 1st District seat. The senator's father, former Texas congressman Ron Paul, threw his support behind Sanford last week.

"More than anything, Washington needs strong and consistent voices for fiscal responsibility and liberty," the younger Paul said in a statement. "Mark has proven during his time in office that watching out for taxpayers and holding the line on spending are his top priorities."

Sanford, a former South Carolina governor, faces Democrat Elizabeth Colbert Busch in a May 7 election for his old House seat. Once the favorite in the race, Sanford has had to deal with renewed attention on his 2009 extramarital affair and the loss of support from the House GOP campaign committee.

The small-government, anti-tax Tea Party movement might be waning in some areas, but South Carolina has been one of its strongholds. It's also the site of the important "first in the South" presidential primary, and Paul has been trying to make inroads in some of these early states as he considers a 2016 White House bid.

Tonight, South Carolina's hugely unpopular governor, Nikki Haley, headlined a fundraiser for Sanford, her one and only event for her controversial ex-guru. (When she was running for governor, she scrubbed references to Sanford from her campaign website after his scandals became public.)

The event is Haley’s first with her one-time mentor in his race against Democrat Elizabeth Colbert Busch, a political newcomer and sister of TV comedian Stephen Colbert. The appearance by South Carolina’s first female governor comes as Sanford is trying to overcome a huge gap among women who favor Colbert Busch by 20 percentage points, according to a poll released last week.

The fundraiser is at the home of luxury car dealer Tommy Baker, according to a copy of the invitation obtained by the S.C. blog GOPwrite.com. The event costs from $250 a person to $2,600 for a couple to attend.

...Democrats said Monday that Sanford and Haley, who was cleared last year by two S.C. House investigations into allegations that she used her post as a Lexington state representative for her personal financial benefit, both are “ethically challenged.”

“Haley and Sanford are two peas in an ethically challenged pod, who have proved time and again that they can’t be trusted to act in the best interests of the people or our state,” the S.C. Democratic Party said in a statement Monday.

Read More

Colbert's Sister-- Next Tuesday

I'm rooting for Colbert's sister-- and not just because she's Colbert's sister. And not just because Mark Sanford is likely to be one of the worst members of Congress-- far worse, in fact, than he was when he was in Congress the first time. Colbert's sister, thoroughly embraced as she is by the DCCC, doesn't need any help from Blue America and there's nothing to make me think she would qualify for a Blue America endorsement any way-- the way these guys have-- but... I'm still rooting for her because there's a lot of room between someone as good as Alan Grayson, Keith Ellison and Donna Edwards and someone like Mark Sanford.

From what I can tell, if I lived in South Carolina's first congressional district, I'd go beyond rooting for Colbert's sister; I'd probably even vote for her a week from today. She's a normal, decent Democrat on social issues-- pro-Choice, pro-equality, etc-- and kind of like a New Dem type on the economic issues. Like I said last week, I don't know if Colbert Busch will wind up voting with Republicans half the time. But it's what I suspect from watching the campaign. Still, that's better than voting with Republicans 100% of the time, which is what we can expect from Sanford. She's already come out in favor of marriage equality and background checks and her approach to Chained CPI was pretty good as well: “Not only does President Obama’s plan fail to put our finances back in order, it would cut benefits for our seniors, which is wrong. I believe that our seniors earned their Social Security by putting money away every single paycheck for a lifetime-- knowing that they could count on Social Security when they retired... Simply put, Social Security doesn’t contribute to the deficit, and politicians should keep their hands off the trust fund." If she has to, for the sake of election in South Carolina, attack Obama from the right, it's cool she can do it from a populist anti-bankster perspective.

Right wing propagandist John Fund writes that even if South Carolina voters know too much about Sanford for comfort, they don't know enough about Elizabeth Colbert Busch and if the turnout is really, really low, Sanford still has a chance to win.

The local and national media haven’t delved into Colbert Busch beyond her platitudes, and so far she’s avoided being tagged with any liberal labels. Her success at flying under the radar may serve as a model for other Democratic candidates in 2014. She plans to participate in only one debate during three months of campaigning. Some 500 of her pre-campaign tweets have been airbrushed away but thanks to the nonpartisan Sunlight Foundation have been returned to the public record. In them, her favorite topics include “backing equal rights for our LGBT [Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender] friends” and supporting President Obama’s proposed hikes in the minimum wage. Regarding Obamacare, she mocks its Republican opponents: “GOP Logic: Providing health care to all Iraqis is sound public policy. Providing health care to all Americans is socialism.”

South Carolina is the least unionized state in the country, but Colbert Busch 1.0 was a big fan of unions, even tweeting that she wanted the support of the AFL-CIO. Unions opposed Boeing’s plans to build a new plant in right-to-work South Carolina, but Colbert showed no misgivings about seeking union support: She eagerly accepted donations from the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, who tried to use the National Labor Relations Board to block Boeing’s move. “The voices of the union and all unions need to be lifted up,” she declared in a video she sent to union leaders as she prepared to run. “Nobody is recognizing that, and I promise to be that voice for you. Know that I hear you. Know that I’m working closely with your team.” Tara Servatius, a talk-show host and columnist for Charleston’s City Paper, concludes: “Bottom line, Elizabeth 1.0, the deleted version, is a hard-core liberal Democrat.”

So, yeah... let the DCCC use their money ($458,000) to push her, but-- what the hell-- vote for her next Tuesday instead of watching Sanford win this blood red district. They both fought for the center in their one debate, which was last night. Here's a small piece from it-- not especially interesting.

Read More

South Carolina Closets

After he wrote Over-Lawed to explain a run-in with a complicated securities law, Jay Stamper's thoughts must have turned to whatever other skeletons he had in his closet. Actually, Lindsey Graham has a closet. A more apt metaphor for Stamper might be... the Parisian catacombs. There are a lot of skeletons but regrettably, for him, few involve women, another thing he has in common with Lindsey Graham.

Anyways, like most people in their late 20’s, Stamper had experimented with purchasing the domain names of Republican members of Congress and linking them to websites promoting cannibalism, nudism and mail order brides. As part of our vetting process while we're thinking about helping him in his race against Graham, I asked Stamper about his brush with Republican Party cannibalism. Years later, he probably wishes he never did it-- just my guess-- but he was still chuckling at his attempt at political satire.

Congressman and future CIA director Porter Goss was put in the awkward position of having to explain why his name led to a site promoting the conversion of human breastmilk into cheese.

Childish stunts? Pranks committed by someone with too much time on their hands? Incredibly satisfying. Check on all counts. I enjoyed baiting Republicans in the press and inventing elaborate motivations ranging from radical activism to moneymaking. My friends thought it was hilarious. In my more pretentious moments, I would put on a black turtleneck and think of myself an avante garde performance artist for the internet age. As usual, my motivations were multiple: genuine anger at a Republican Congress that had just impeached the president, the thrill of seeing my name in print for the first time, satisfaction at tweaking authority. I enjoyed the controversy. I even found a monetary angle, putting the names up for sale on Ebay. In the end, I’m not particularly ashamed of having done it but not overly proud of it either, mostly because it could have been so much funnier.

Funnier? Like this?

The Colbert Report
Get More: Colbert Report Full Episodes,Indecision Political Humor,Video Archive

Read More

Monday Bits-- Colbert's Sister Going To Congress? Will Nestlé And Wall Street Ever Be Held To Account?

PPP shows Elizabeth Colbert Busch opening a more significant lead (16% as of this afternoon) over disgraced ex-Governor Mark Sanford in the first district congressional special election. Voting is on May 7th in the carefully gerrymandered red district, who's voters gave Obama 40.2% in November, while right next door in the 6th district-- into which the state's racist legislature dumped every African-American voter they could find-- Obama won 70.9%. Although John Boehner endorsed Sanford on April 9, less than a week later the NRCC, which he controls, announced that due to Sanford's on-going behavior issues, it would no longer support him or invest in his race, despite the hundreds of thousands of dollars being poured into the district by the DCCC and their House Majority PAC. The new DCCC as:



I don't know if Colbert Busch will wind up voting with Republicans half the time. but it's what I suspect from watching the campaign. Still, that's better than voting with Republicans 100% of the time, which is what we can expect from Sanford. She's already come out in favor of marriage equality and her approach to Chained CPI was pretty good as well: “Not only does President Obama’s plan fail to put our finances back in order, it would cut benefits for our seniors, which is wrong. I believe that our seniors earned their Social Security by putting money away every single paycheck for a lifetime-- knowing that they could count on Social Security when they retired... Simply put, Social Security doesn’t contribute to the deficit, and politicians should keep their hands off the trust fund."

Our Contest Ended Today

Nick Ruiz (FL) wound up with 50 donors so he won the $1,000 PAC check from Blue America. Daylin Leach (PA) had 40 donors, Carl Sciortino (MA) had 38 donors, Andy Hounshell (OH) 31 donors and Ken Sanders (TX) 29. The average donor contributed approximately $53. And the Saving Social Security page now has $9,140 on it. We randomly selected one contributor to thank with the 311 platinum award disc. And that winner is Joyce Bullock from Glenside, PA, who contributed $12.


Wall Street And It's DC Allies Will Enslave Us All... If We let Them

Jeffrey Sachs isn't a radical. He's a kind of mainstream economics professor at Columbia University. The audio on this video was shot April 17 at a conference, "Fixing the Banking System for Good." It sounds like he's almost come around to a less corporate/establishment point of view about how corrupt and criminal Wall Street is, even to the point of advocating out loud the need for "separating the politicians from the (Wall Street) crooks, but maybe that's so close together that they can't actually be separated; maybe it's just the same community." Maybe?

I meet a lot of these people on Wall Street on a regular basis right now. I’m going to put it very bluntly. I regard the moral environment as pathological. And I’m talking about the human interactions that I have. I’ve not seen anything like this, not felt it so palpably. These people are out to make billions of dollars and nothing should stop them from that They have no responsibility to pay taxes, they have no responsibility to their clients, they have no responsibility to people… counterparties in transactions. They are tough, greedy, aggressive, and feel absolutely out of control, in a quite literal sense. And they have gamed the system to a remarkable extent and they have a docile president, a docile White House and a docile regulatory system that absolutely can’t find its voice. It’s terrified of these companies.

...[T]he financial markets are the number one campaign contributors in the U.S. system now. We have a corrupt politics to the core, I’m afraid to say… and both parties are up to their necks in this. This has nothing to do with Democrats or Republicans. It really doesn’t have anything to do with right wing or left wing, by the way. The corruption, as far as I can see, [is] everywhere...

And Speaking Of Antisocial, Nihilistic Greed... Nestlé

Nestlé has been claiming for some time that it invented the medical uses of herbs that have been used medicinally for centuries. And they want patents.

The world’s largest food company, Nestlé, is seeking a patent on the use of Nigella sativa to prevent food allergies, claiming the plant seed and extract when they are used as a food ingredient or drug. Commonly known as habbat al-barakah in Arabic, and frequently called “black seed,” “black cumin” or “fennel flower” in English, Nigella sativa is an ancient food and medicinal crop.

The Swiss giant’s claims appear invalid, as traditional uses of Nigella sativa clearly anticipate Nestlé’s patent application, and developing country scholarship has already validated these traditional uses and further described, in contemporary scientific terms, the very medicinal properties of black seed that Nestlé seeks to claim as its own “invention."

It was already being used in King Tut's time, when the Swiss were still sheltering and shivering around open fires in Alpine caves, gnawing on bones.

In claiming use of Nigella sativa against food allergies, Nestlé’s scientists have not innovated beyond what was already known in traditional medicine from Egypt to India and beyond. Moreover, prior to Nestlé’s claim, researchers in those countries used formal scientific methods to demonstrate the efficacy of traditional use of black seed to treat allergy symptoms.

Those simple facts, however, have not deterred Nestlé from advancing its claim. In November 2011, Nestlé’s patent application in Europe was published. Other national (or regional) applications may exist but have yet to be published. Recently, the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) released a search of scientific literature related to the application, and found problems with Nestlé’s claim to have made an invention, citing some of the same research that is noted in this report. The PCT opinion, however, is not binding on national patent offices, and Nestlé may submit modified claims. Thus, while the opinion is a blow to Nestlé’s application, it doesn’t mean that the claims are dead.

Like well-known biopiracy cases before it, such as patents on uses of neem, Nestlé’s unashamed attempt to appropriate traditional knowledge reflects an ethical lapse and shows profound problems with the company’s intellectual property practices. It can be hoped that Nestlé’s claim will be turned down by patent authorities, but the fact that patent claims over traditional knowledge that preceded it have result in patents shows that intellectual property offices sometime share industry’s disrespect for traditional knowledge. Indeed the fact that a corporation with the resources of Nestlé would pursue a patent on such an obviously pilfered “invention” at all is indicative of the need to improve patent review standards so that such applications are not worth filing in the first place.

Fighting for people over profits is how the blog SumOfUs introduced Nestlé’s ambitious claims.

In a paper published last year, Nestlé scientists claimed to “discover” what much of the world has known for millennia: that nigella sativa extract could be used for “nutritional interventions in humans with food allergy."

But instead of creating an artificial substitute, or fighting to make sure the remedy was widely available, Nestlé is attempting to create a nigella sativa monopoly and gain the ability to sue anyone using it without Nestlé’s permission. Nestlé has filed patent applications-- which are currently pending-- around the world.

Prior to Nestlé's outlandish patent claim, researchers in developing nations such as Egypt and Pakistan had already published studies on the same curative powers Nestlé is claiming as its own. And Nestlé has done this before-- in 2011, it tried to claim credit for using cow’s milk as a laxative, despite the fact that such knowledge had been in Indian medical texts for a thousand years.

Don’t let Nestlé turn a traditional cure into a corporate cash cow.

We know Nestlé doesn’t care about ethics. After all, this is the corporation that poisoned its milk with melamine, purchases cocoa from plantations that use child slave labor, and launched a breast milk substitute campaign in the 1970s that contributed to the suffering and deaths of thousands of babies from poor communities.

Read More

Are South Carolina Republicans Going To Hand Elizabeth Colbert Busch A Path To Victory Today?

Today is run-off day in South Carolina's first congressional district, a strip of coast below Myrtle Beach and Georgetown almost as far as Savannah's suburbs (including white Charleston south of Calhoun Street). On Saturday we pointed out that underdog Curtis Bostic had Man-On-Dog Rick Santorum campaigning for him-- as well as hilarious endorsements from Ann Coulter, religious right charlatan James Dobson, and the district's former congressman, once-removed, Henry Brown.

Conventional wisdom has it that this deeply red district-- Romney beat Obama 58.3-40.2% (mostly because the latest GOP gerrymander ghettoized all the African-American neighborhoods into SC-06 next door, where Obama won 70.9-28.1%)-- could be in play. In November Tea Party Republican Tim Scott was reelected 62-35% but the seat is now open because he was appointed to the Senate seat vacated by Jim DeMint. Districts this red aren't normally in play. But because disgraced ex-governor Mark Sanford appears likely to win the primary, mainstream voters will have to decide if they're buying in to his pious claims of redemption. Too implausible? South Carolina is the capital of the Culture of Personal Crisis, where everyday is Jerry Springer Day and where celebrating pious claims of redemption, no matter how opportunistic, are a standard way of life.

The general election is May 7, so there will be plenty of time for voters to mull this over. But it certainly appears that Republican primary voters have already made up their hive mind. It looks like by the end of the night, the Colbert Busch camp will be celebrating. Her only real chance lies in a Sanford primary win. Even with Coulter's stark prediction that if Sanford is the nominee, Colbert Busch will win the seat-- oddly reminiscent of her prediction about a Romney debacle-- GOP voters just cannot resist that Culture of Personal Crisis drama-- not even with Pat Boone endorsing Bostic!

He finished a distant second in the first round of voting, with 13 percent, compared to Sanford’s 37 percent.

And despite the high-profile endorsements, there are no clear evidence Bostic has done much to rally the voters who backed other candidates in the first round of voting.

“It's Sanford's to win-- he's a professional politician and knows how to run a race,” said Katon Dawson, a former head of the South Carolina Republican Party.

Just one of the 14 other Republicans who ran for the seat has backed Bostic, while six have endorsed Sanford.

Bostic emerged from first round of voting flat broke and has been able to spend only $40,000 on television during the runoff, while Sanford is flush with cash and has advertised heavily.

Those watching the race closely say Sanford remains the heavy favorite to win, but note that the likelihood of an extremely low turnout could play to Bostic’s advantage.

“It's two days after Easter, it's spring break in the low country, and neither one has a ton of extensive get-out-the-vote, I know for a fact,” Dawson said. “Still, it would be the surprise of the year if Curtis wins.”

A recent poll from the Democratic firm Public Policy Polling showed Sanford leading Bostic by 53 to 40 percent, though special elections and House primaries are notoriously hard to predict.

Politico's Alex Isenstadt is also predicting that the final match-up will be between Colbert Busch and Sanford. "[I]f polling proves accurate, Sanford’s universal name ID, bigger war chest and carefully tailored plea for redemption to the district’s large contingent of social conservatives will prove too much for his little-known rival to match."

How Sanford has managed to bring himself back from the political wilderness is just the latest test of voters’ willingness to look beyond their elected officials’ transgressions. Sanford purposefully crafted a message of remorse and redemption that he believed would resonate with socially conservative voters who dot the district.

His personal troubles, Sanford tells voters, have made him a more religious person. He said at the debate that he had failed “very publicly”-- but insisted that he’s learned from his mistakes.

“I think, by and large, people are forgiving, especially if they believe your repentance is real. If they believe you are asking for forgiveness authentically and sincerely, then I think people are willing to give people a second chance. I’ve been around the governor, and it seems authentic and sincere to me,” [South Carolina GOP Chairman Chad] Connelly said. “I do think the people of the 1st Congressional District know him well. He’s run there before, and they’ve supported him. If there’s any group that’s willing to give him a second chance, this is it.”

...Sanford is also benefiting from simply being better known than his opponents. At the restaurant, he was treated like a celebrity as diners asked to have their photo taken with him. And as he stumped at the Charleston strip mall, it was hard to find a passerby who didn’t do a double take when the former governor walked by. Many of them stopped to talk with Sanford and to offer him their congratulations.

Long known for his love of retail politics, Sanford ate it up. He asked some voters for their phone numbers so he could call later to discuss the issues they were interested in. Bostic, by contrast, has struggled to draw sizable crowds. Even a joint appearance last week with former GOP presidential candidate Rick Santorum, a favorite among Christian conservatives, was sparsely attended.

“I just think Bostic has too little, too late,” said Warren Tompkins, a longtime Republican strategist in the state. “I think Sanford is going to win by a pretty significant margin.”

Colbert Busch is holding her breath. The latest PPP survey of the district shows her and Bostic tied 43-43%-- but shows her beating Sanford 47-45%. Over the weekend, The State did an in-depth look at Colbert Busch and found her pretty credible as a person and a candidate, also focusing on her strategy:

South Carolina’s 1st Congressional District changed in 2011 when lawmakers created a new, 7th Congressional District anchored in Horry County.

The Republican strongholds of Horry and Georgetown counties were removed from the 1st District. Remaining are Beaufort, Charleston and Hilton Head Island.

“Dropping Horry and Georgetown, it has made this district much more Libertarian-leaning, much more fiscally conservative to the point that social issues aren’t nearly as important to the average Republican voter,” said Scott Buchanan, a political science professor at The Citadel in Charleston. “I don’t think it’s necessarily making it friendly for Democrats, but making it more friendly for those who run a fiscally conservative platform. People more willing to give you a pass on the social issues.”

It appears Colbert Busch is shaping her campaign along that model. She supports gay marriage, telling The State newspaper in an interview “this is a matter of civil rights and this is a matter of equal protection under the law.” And she supports “a tough but fair path to citizenship” for the country’s millions of undocumented immigrants, including having them pay back taxes.

“This is about keeping the best and the brightest in our country. We have to find a sensible way to be able to keep them here,” she said.

And when she starts talking about fiscal policy, she sounds more like a Republican-- drawing on her 25 years of business experience, railing about the nation’s $16 trillion debt and saying on her website that “if Congress were a business, our leaders would be fired.”

She said she is not in favor of new taxes “in the short term” but did not say if, or when, Congress should raises taxes to address the budget deficit. She says she is against the budget sequester-- the $85 billion in automatic spending cuts that went into effect March 1-- pointing out the federal government first needs to get rid of fraud, waste and abuse, especially in the Medicare program.

She says the Medicare program-- health insurance for anyone over 65-- could save $24 billion a year if Congress would allow the program to negotiate with pharmaceutical companies on prices. And she cites studies from the federal Government Accountability Office and the nonprofit Rand Corporation estimating Medicare has $142 billion in overpayments and fraud, waste and abuse each year.

“Here is ... $166 billion that we know from the GAO is in fraud, waste, overbilling and pharmaceuticals, right? And that’s just one part of the entire budget. But that one part is twice what the sequester is,” she said. “We have to look through the entire budget, find out where else are we overpaying.”

She added that “being fiscally conservative is not unique to any party”-- which is true, especially when you are potentially running against Mark Sanford. The former governor probably won’t win over many social conservatives because of his lying and cheating on his wife in 2009. But conservatives love his record on fiscal issues, which Sanford would undoubtedly make a major part of his campaign should he win on Tuesday.

Brad Friedman points out another advantage Republicans have in the May 7th general election-- they control the vote counting apparatus, "the state's oft-failed, easily-hacked, always 100% unverifiable touch-screen voting systems. The candidate announced as the 'winner' of that election, based on those unverifiable voting systems, will either be the one who received the most votes from SC voters in the 1st Congressional District-- or the one who didn't. There will never be any way for anybody to know for sure one way or the other."

UPDATE: Latest Polling

One of the most consistently accurate polling companies in the country, Celinda Lake Partners, was out with a new poll late yesterday, paid for by the Colbert Busch campaign, showing Colbert Busch beating Sanford in a general election match-up 47-44%, just slightly better than the PPP survey from last week.

LAST UPDATE: No Surprises From GOP Primary Voters

Sanford won everywhere but Beaufort County, taking 26,066 votes (57%) to Bostic's 20,005 (43%). Keep in mind what Ann Coulter predicted: "If, in some horrible twist of fate that's been stalking Republicans, Sanford wins the runoff, he will lose the general election. Worse, he might win, making Republicans look like utter hypocrites on family values.

"In any event, so many resources will have to be diverted to save an easy Republican House seat that even if Sanford wins, some other Republican candidate will lose a close election after having to beg for money.

"And the payoff is: Yay! We win one of the most Republican districts in the country with a high-risk candidate!"

"The Republican Party owes Sanford nothing. He had a chance and he blew it. National Review wasted five years of cover stories on how awesome he was, but he never accomplished anything of substance."

Read More