WEBVTT 00:00.266 --> 00:13.880 align:left position:50%,start line:93.33% size:50% ♪ 00:13.980 --> 00:15.749 align:left position:12.5%,start line:0% size:87.5% Welcome to This Week in South Carolina. I'm Gavin 00:15.849 --> 00:18.018 align:left position:0%,start line:0% size:100% Jackson. This week Senator Lindsey Graham's 00:18.118 --> 00:19.652 align:left position:12.5%,start line:0% size:87.5% Judiciary Committee held hearings on the 00:19.753 --> 00:22.322 align:left position:12.5%,start line:0% size:87.5% nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme 00:22.422 --> 00:25.792 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Court. We talk with Kirk Randazzo of USC for more 00:25.892 --> 00:28.695 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% about how those hearings went. Also, we speak with 00:28.795 --> 00:30.663 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% Gibbs Knotts. He's a professor of political science at 00:30.764 --> 00:32.665 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% the College of Charleston to hear about the 00:32.766 --> 00:34.467 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% record breaking fundraising going on in the U.S. 00:34.567 --> 00:37.070 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Senate race. Now, more from this week. 00:37.170 --> 00:39.372 align:left position:37.5%,start line:86.67% size:62.5% Days ago, the World Food Program 00:39.472 --> 00:41.841 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% run by former governor David Beasley 00:41.941 --> 00:45.278 align:left position:25%,start line:0% size:75% won the 2020 Nobel Peace Prize. For its 00:45.378 --> 00:51.651 align:left position:12.5%,start line:0% size:87.5% efforts to combat hunger, for its contribution to 00:51.751 --> 00:55.255 align:left position:12.5%,start line:0% size:87.5% bettering conditions for peace in conflict 00:55.355 --> 00:58.158 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% affected areas, Beasley received word of the 00:58.258 --> 01:01.261 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% award while traveling for the W.F.P. in Niger. 01:01.361 --> 01:04.130 align:left position:0%,start line:0% size:100% It's because of the W.F.P. family. 01:04.230 --> 01:05.432 align:left position:25%,start line:0% size:75% They're out there in the most 01:05.532 --> 01:08.368 align:left position:12.5%,start line:0% size:87.5% difficult complex places in the world whether it's 01:08.468 --> 01:11.438 align:left position:12.5%,start line:0% size:87.5% war, conflict, climate extremes. It doesn't 01:11.538 --> 01:13.907 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% matter. They're out there and they deserve this 01:14.007 --> 01:18.344 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% award. And wow! Wow! Wow! Wow! At the start 01:18.445 --> 01:20.280 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% of the week, the Supreme Court confirmation 01:20.380 --> 01:22.482 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% hearings of Judge Amy Coney Barrett got under 01:22.582 --> 01:25.351 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% way with questioning concluding on Wednesday. 01:25.452 --> 01:27.654 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% And Senator Lindsey Graham's Judiciary Committee. 01:27.754 --> 01:29.489 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% The hearing's had a cordial tone in the socially 01:29.589 --> 01:32.092 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% distanced committee room. Republicans like Graham 01:32.192 --> 01:34.861 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% heralded Barents pro life views. While Democrats 01:34.961 --> 01:37.297 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% weren't able to get Barrett to make open declarations 01:37.397 --> 01:39.799 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% about her beliefs, rather saying that they won't 01:39.899 --> 01:42.001 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% influence her ability to interpret and apply the 01:42.102 --> 01:44.170 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% law in the originalism in textualism 01:44.270 --> 01:45.872 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% interpretation methodologies she 01:45.972 --> 01:49.809 align:left position:12.5%,start line:0% size:87.5% subscribes to. But I want to be careful to say that 01:49.909 --> 01:52.078 align:left position:12.5%,start line:0% size:87.5% if I'm confirmed, you would not be getting 01:52.178 --> 01:55.682 align:left position:12.5%,start line:0% size:87.5% Justice Scalia, you would be getting Justice Barrett. 01:55.782 --> 01:57.617 align:left position:12.5%,start line:93.33% size:87.5% And that's so because 01:57.717 --> 02:00.687 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% originalists don't always agree and neither do 02:00.787 --> 02:02.856 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% textualists. Graham even mentioned during the 02:02.956 --> 02:04.724 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% hearing about the record breaking fundraising of 02:04.824 --> 02:07.460 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% his opponent. Democrat Jamie Harrison shattered 02:07.560 --> 02:10.096 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% records with 57 million dollars raised in 02:10.196 --> 02:12.365 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% the third quarter alone, something no Senate 02:12.465 --> 02:15.268 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% candidate has ever done before. Graham raised just 02:15.368 --> 02:17.704 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% half of that at 28 million dollars, 02:17.804 --> 02:19.506 align:left position:12.5%,start line:93.33% size:87.5% a senate GOP record. 02:19.606 --> 02:21.608 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% Meanwhile, thousands of people continue to cast in 02:21.708 --> 02:23.910 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% person and mail in absentee ballots during 02:24.010 --> 02:26.246 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% the second week of voting. We spoke to some voters 02:26.346 --> 02:30.116 align:left position:12.5%,start line:0% size:87.5% in Jasper County. I voted for Donald Trump 02:30.216 --> 02:32.285 align:left position:12.5%,start line:0% size:87.5% I think it takes a businessman to make the 02:32.385 --> 02:36.389 align:left position:12.5%,start line:0% size:87.5% economy better. And I like what he's done so far. 02:36.489 --> 02:38.358 align:left position:25%,start line:0% size:75% I'd like to see everyone just kind of 02:38.458 --> 02:41.027 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% move forward and give them an actual chance if 02:41.127 --> 02:42.562 align:left position:12.5%,start line:0% size:87.5% he gets four more years. 02:42.662 --> 02:44.063 align:left position:12.5%,start line:0% size:87.5% The country's in great 02:44.164 --> 02:48.968 align:left position:12.5%,start line:0% size:87.5% turmoil. It needs to be a reckoning and needs to be 02:49.068 --> 02:51.804 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% a coming together of both parties for the benefit of 02:51.905 --> 02:53.973 align:left position:25%,start line:0% size:75% the people of the United States. You know a 02:54.073 --> 02:56.543 align:left position:12.5%,start line:0% size:87.5% lot of people don't like his mouth. I do. Cause he 02:56.643 --> 02:58.378 align:left position:0%,start line:0% size:100% doesn't take anything, like somebody else would. 02:58.478 --> 03:01.047 align:left position:12.5%,start line:0% size:87.5% He stands up to everybody and he tells it the way it is. 03:01.147 --> 03:03.783 align:left position:12.5%,start line:0% size:87.5% Straight out. That's my personal opinion. As the 03:03.883 --> 03:05.852 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% second week of voting comes to a close, more 03:05.952 --> 03:07.887 align:left position:37.5%,start line:86.67% size:62.5% than 358 thousand absentee 03:07.987 --> 03:10.390 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% ballots have been cast, putting the state on 03:10.490 --> 03:13.092 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% track to shatter its 2016 record of 03:13.193 --> 03:17.497 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% 503 thousand ballots cast absentee. 03:17.597 --> 03:18.531 align:left position:0%,start line:93.33% size:100% Now, to discuss the latest 03:18.631 --> 03:20.099 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% on the confirmation hearings of Judge Amy 03:20.200 --> 03:21.868 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Coney Barrett and the Senate fight for the 03:21.968 --> 03:24.304 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% Senate race. I'm joined by Kirk Randazzo. 03:24.404 --> 03:26.339 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% He's an expert on judicial politics and the 03:26.439 --> 03:28.007 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Chairman of the Political Science Department 03:28.107 --> 03:29.676 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% at the University of South Carolina, 03:29.776 --> 03:32.245 align:left position:12.5%,start line:0% size:87.5% Professor, welcome back. Thank you for the 03:32.345 --> 03:34.914 align:left position:0%,start line:0% size:100% invitation. Appreciate being here. So, professor we're 03:35.014 --> 03:36.516 align:left position:12.5%,start line:0% size:87.5% taping on Thursday morning. All the 03:36.616 --> 03:38.484 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% questioning of Judge Amy Coney Barrett has already 03:38.585 --> 03:40.119 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% taken place by the senators. 03:40.220 --> 03:41.754 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% There were a lot of attempts to 03:41.854 --> 03:43.356 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% try and pin her down on multiple 03:43.456 --> 03:45.158 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% topics, multiple hot button issues. I want to 03:45.258 --> 03:47.660 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% get your opinion on what you saw this week. If we 03:47.760 --> 03:50.129 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% really got any insight further on on what she 03:50.230 --> 03:52.031 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% stands for what she believes, whether 03:52.131 --> 03:54.634 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% personally or you know on the bench. 03:54.734 --> 03:58.137 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% Yeah, I think what we saw this week is 03:58.238 --> 04:01.140 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% exactly what everybody expected going into this, 04:01.241 --> 04:04.577 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% like you said democratic senators were going to 04:04.677 --> 04:08.748 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% try and pin her down on particular topics, 04:08.848 --> 04:13.253 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% potential cases. And she was going to be as 04:13.353 --> 04:16.322 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% evasive as possible and I think she did a 04:16.422 --> 04:20.560 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% remarkable job at dodging questions. She did not 04:20.660 --> 04:23.129 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% want to answer. But I think at the end of the 04:23.229 --> 04:28.501 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% day, we didn't really learn anything new and 04:28.601 --> 04:31.704 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% that just means that everyone's 04:31.804 --> 04:35.475 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% sort of suspicions about her temperament, her 04:35.575 --> 04:39.779 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% judicial philosophy and more importantly, how 04:39.879 --> 04:42.949 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% her appointment might change the Supreme Court. 04:43.049 --> 04:45.084 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% I think those suspicions are still out there. 04:45.184 --> 04:48.021 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% So when it comes to these hearings, if we're never 04:48.121 --> 04:49.789 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% really gonna get into the meat of 04:49.889 --> 04:51.324 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% some of these things with these judges. 04:51.424 --> 04:53.459 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% She's not the only one to have done this. 04:53.559 --> 04:55.228 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% To not really show her hand too much. 04:55.328 --> 04:56.896 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% It's kind of what they need to do. 04:56.996 --> 04:58.531 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% They're kind of protected in some respects. 04:58.631 --> 05:00.400 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% So, what's the purpose of these hearings, I guess 05:00.500 --> 05:03.503 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% when it comes down to it if we're not gonna get really into 05:03.603 --> 05:06.072 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% some of the thoughts? Well you know it's somewhat unfortunate 05:06.172 --> 05:09.175 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% that Judge Barrett and some others before her 05:09.275 --> 05:12.345 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% have invoked Ruth Bader Ginsburg in this so 05:12.445 --> 05:16.883 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% called Ginsburg rule about not commenting on 05:16.983 --> 05:21.220 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% issues. What Ginsburg actually refused to 05:21.321 --> 05:25.758 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% discuss were cases that had already been appealed 05:25.858 --> 05:29.062 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% to the Supreme Court and senators were trying to 05:29.162 --> 05:33.032 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% pin down how she might rule on those specific 05:33.132 --> 05:37.036 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% appeals. Ginsburg was actually very revealing 05:37.136 --> 05:40.940 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% about her overall judicial philosophy, how 05:41.040 --> 05:45.578 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% she felt about prescedent, how she felt about 05:45.678 --> 05:49.849 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% issues that didn't have any pending litigation. 05:49.949 --> 05:53.052 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% and you know appointees or nominees 05:53.152 --> 05:56.389 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% since her have kind of taken those words out of 05:56.489 --> 06:00.393 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% context and sort of taken things to an extreme. 06:00.493 --> 06:03.696 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% And right now I think we have basically 06:03.796 --> 06:07.567 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% confirmation hearings that look more like a 06:07.667 --> 06:11.404 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% show or a circus kind of act than anything 06:11.504 --> 06:14.974 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% designed to reveal matters of substance. 06:15.074 --> 06:17.076 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% I guess we maybe even get some insight on 06:17.176 --> 06:19.045 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% their temperament at least. 06:19.145 --> 06:21.080 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% Do we even get any of that? Or did anything 06:21.180 --> 06:24.851 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% stand out of note this week. I think 06:24.951 --> 06:27.987 align:left position:37.5%,start line:86.67% size:62.5% we got well depending on how you 06:28.087 --> 06:30.556 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% may want to phrase it, we either got more or less 06:30.656 --> 06:32.825 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% information about her temperament than say 06:32.925 --> 06:35.895 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% Brett Kavanaugh. I mean we we saw in the Kavanaugh 06:35.995 --> 06:40.700 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% confirmation that his temper flew and and was 06:40.800 --> 06:44.337 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% released relatively easily. Judge Barrett is 06:44.437 --> 06:48.408 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% much more measured in her response, much more 06:48.508 --> 06:52.712 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% calculating and strategic in terms, not just of what 06:52.812 --> 06:56.082 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% she says but how she says things. 06:56.182 --> 06:59.185 align:left position:37.5%,start line:86.67% size:62.5% And so whether this is the 06:59.285 --> 07:02.889 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% approach that she would use if confirmed to the 07:02.989 --> 07:07.427 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% to the court, I think it's probably relatively safe 07:07.527 --> 07:10.730 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% to say that the answer is yes. 07:10.830 --> 07:14.967 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% but where I think again the concerns we may lay 07:15.067 --> 07:19.439 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% involved her judicial philosophy this notion of 07:19.539 --> 07:23.476 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% originalism and what that might actually mean for 07:23.576 --> 07:27.380 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% individual rights. And one of her biggest 07:27.480 --> 07:29.649 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% proponents obviously Senate Judiciary Chairman, 07:29.749 --> 07:32.318 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Lindsey Graham, our state senator. Big cheerleader there, 07:32.418 --> 07:34.454 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% really wanted to make sure this went through we 07:34.554 --> 07:36.289 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% are going through. Sounds like they'll have a 07:36.389 --> 07:38.624 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% confirmation vote next week. What are your thoughts on 07:38.724 --> 07:40.893 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% how he handled this process and maybe some 07:40.993 --> 07:42.595 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% comments we heard from him. He was even 07:42.695 --> 07:45.131 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% trying to interject some South Carolina politics 07:45.231 --> 07:46.799 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% in there when we're talking about the Affordable 07:46.899 --> 07:48.668 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% Care Act. He even brought up the 07:48.768 --> 07:51.204 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% fundraising by his opponet Jamie Harrison, which was kind of 07:51.304 --> 07:53.372 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% odd because it didn't have much to do - 07:53.473 --> 07:54.841 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% I don't think they were talking 07:54.941 --> 07:57.210 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% about Citizens United but that's always right there too. 07:57.310 --> 07:59.178 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% What were your thoughts on how Senator Graham 07:59.278 --> 08:02.248 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% handled this this whole confirmation process? 08:02.348 --> 08:05.618 align:left position:25%,start line:0% size:75% There were times that Senator Graham had 08:05.718 --> 08:09.288 align:left position:12.5%,start line:0% size:87.5% some comments that that were a bit confusing for me. 08:09.388 --> 08:11.757 align:left position:0%,start line:0% size:100% One, right off the bat, he 08:11.858 --> 08:16.162 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% tried to sort of replay some recent history and 08:16.262 --> 08:19.265 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% he lamented that the fact that these confirmations 08:19.365 --> 08:23.336 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% used to be bipartisan, that Ginsburg herself 08:23.436 --> 08:26.172 align:left position:12.5%,start line:93.33% size:87.5% received 97 votes, 08:26.272 --> 08:28.541 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% that Scalia's confirmation was 08:28.641 --> 08:33.045 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% unanimous. And he tried to use that as a 08:33.145 --> 08:37.183 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% way to sort of lament at the current 08:37.283 --> 08:41.153 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% state of affairs, not necessarily realizing 08:41.254 --> 08:44.323 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% that the current state of affairs is really the 08:44.423 --> 08:48.794 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% result of some brazenly partisan politics being 08:48.895 --> 08:51.831 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% played by members of the Senate from both parties, 08:51.931 --> 08:55.334 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% not just from Republicans, although the Republicans 08:55.434 --> 08:58.704 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% I think you know they're the current majority. 08:58.804 --> 09:01.507 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% And I think they bear responsibility for the 09:01.607 --> 09:05.478 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% current situation. But some of the other 09:05.578 --> 09:09.549 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% aspects that the Graham tried to bring up that 09:09.649 --> 09:12.752 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% weren't necessarily necessarily related to 09:12.852 --> 09:17.089 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Judge Barrett, like the Affordable Care Act and 09:17.189 --> 09:19.792 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% the fact that South Carolina is not getting 09:19.892 --> 09:22.595 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% money. But you know the states of California, 09:22.695 --> 09:26.799 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% Texas, New York are getting a vast share of money to 09:26.899 --> 09:29.435 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% then have another senator come back and say well 09:29.535 --> 09:32.071 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% you know that's because South Carolina decided 09:32.171 --> 09:36.509 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% not to opt in to the Medicaid expansion. 09:36.609 --> 09:40.079 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Yeah, I think Lindsey has been bringing some 09:40.179 --> 09:43.916 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% anecdotes into this process that are probably 09:44.016 --> 09:48.087 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% best left alone. And that doesn't even mention the 09:48.187 --> 09:51.090 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% the gaffe that he had yesterday when he was 09:51.190 --> 09:54.594 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% talking about the good old days of segregation, 09:54.694 --> 09:56.762 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% even though I think he meant that tongue in 09:56.862 --> 10:00.099 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% cheek and was very sarcastic, 10:00.199 --> 10:03.002 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% given the current environment and 10:03.102 --> 10:06.372 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% the political protests that have been going on. 10:06.472 --> 10:09.542 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% Those comments as sarcastic as they might be, 10:09.642 --> 10:12.945 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% sound incredibly tone deaf to people who are 10:13.045 --> 10:17.083 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% struggling for some kind of recognition 10:17.183 --> 10:21.954 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% of their rights. And I'm surprised that 10:22.054 --> 10:25.424 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Senator Graham sort of went down those paths. 10:25.524 --> 10:27.760 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% Yeah, you're talking about that that comment he made, 10:27.860 --> 10:29.261 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% like you said, sarcastically that's what 10:29.362 --> 10:31.097 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% he says it was, even though it was 10:31.197 --> 10:34.734 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% really pretty straightforward. We know him to be sarcastic 10:34.834 --> 10:37.370 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% of course. But that also came after you know last 10:37.470 --> 10:39.605 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% week during that forum. It was a debate, turned into 10:39.705 --> 10:41.407 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% a forum when he mentioned about, if you're 10:41.507 --> 10:44.110 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% black and conservative, you can go anywhere. 10:44.210 --> 10:46.612 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% It was a longer statement, obviously that 10:46.712 --> 10:49.348 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% was about seven seconds out of about a minute forty long 10:49.448 --> 10:51.917 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% discussion about you know conservatism and 10:52.018 --> 10:54.186 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% being black and in South Carolina, the nation. 10:54.286 --> 10:56.555 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% But that was the clip that stuck just like this 10:56.656 --> 10:58.724 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% is the clip that is sticking too. And I'm 10:58.824 --> 11:00.326 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% assuming that Jamie Harrison's just gonna go 11:00.426 --> 11:02.061 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% and raise more money off of this. 11:02.161 --> 11:04.030 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% We've been seeing him be able to use these 11:04.130 --> 11:07.333 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% viral moments to his advantage. And you know again this 11:07.433 --> 11:09.402 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% is something that has garnered millions of views, 11:09.502 --> 11:11.804 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% thousands of tweets and relikes and likes. 11:11.904 --> 11:14.106 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% So, I'm just wondering, you know, did this campaigning 11:14.206 --> 11:16.409 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% effort, you know, this this attempt to try 11:16.509 --> 11:18.110 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% and campaign at the same time as 11:18.210 --> 11:20.846 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% hold these hearings, seems like it's backfired a little bit. 11:20.946 --> 11:22.314 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% This is going to be the 11:22.415 --> 11:24.450 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% biggest take away at the moment. Yeah, and this 11:24.550 --> 11:27.486 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% was something that we talked about when when we 11:27.586 --> 11:31.190 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% had our conversation, previously. The fact that 11:31.290 --> 11:34.026 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% we're holding these confirmation hearings in 11:34.126 --> 11:38.097 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% the middle of a campaign, you know first of all 11:38.197 --> 11:40.800 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% this this part is unprecedented. We've had 11:40.900 --> 11:45.638 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% situations actually over a dozen, where vacancies 11:45.738 --> 11:48.374 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% have occurred in an election year and a 11:48.474 --> 11:51.377 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% confirmation has gone through. 11:51.477 --> 11:55.648 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% But prior to Judge Barrett's nomination, none of those 11:55.748 --> 12:00.252 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% confirmations have ever happened past July. And so 12:00.352 --> 12:03.022 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% here we are now in October, just a couple 12:03.122 --> 12:07.226 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% weeks away from election day and everybody, Lindsey 12:07.326 --> 12:10.362 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Graham included really should be out on the 12:10.463 --> 12:14.400 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% campaign trail, not necessarily in a Senate 12:14.500 --> 12:17.403 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% chamber doing a confirmation. And as you 12:17.503 --> 12:21.207 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% see his words are being used against him. 12:21.307 --> 12:25.077 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% In a campaign, whenever you can get your opponent's words 12:25.177 --> 12:29.014 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% to speak for themselves, in a way that puts your 12:29.115 --> 12:32.785 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% opponent in a bad light, that's really political 12:32.885 --> 12:35.321 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% gold, right there. And I think Jamie Harrison has 12:35.421 --> 12:40.626 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% been very smart, very savvy, very quick to jump 12:40.726 --> 12:43.863 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% on those moments. And here's yet another one 12:43.963 --> 12:47.066 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% that Lindsey just added to that pot. Yeah and 12:47.166 --> 12:49.702 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% you already saw that with his previous statements on 12:49.802 --> 12:51.570 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% you know court appointments during election 12:51.670 --> 12:53.439 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% years, as well. Hold me to my words. 12:53.539 --> 12:56.609 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% Hold me to it. Stop the tape. And "mark my words." Exactly! 12:56.709 --> 12:58.377 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Professor, we have less than a minute left. 12:58.477 --> 13:00.346 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% I want your thoughts on just where this process 13:00.446 --> 13:02.314 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% goes from here at this point. We don't have 13:02.414 --> 13:04.583 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% judicial filibusters anymore after 2017. 13:04.683 --> 13:07.186 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% What's it gonna be like? We have a vote 13:07.286 --> 13:09.321 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% scheduled for the 22nd. What do you see 13:09.421 --> 13:11.490 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% going forward? Can Democrats do anything to 13:11.590 --> 13:13.225 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% try to hold this up. We're three weeks, 13:13.325 --> 13:15.094 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% less than three weeks away from election day. 13:15.194 --> 13:17.129 align:left position:0%,start line:0% size:100% How do you see this all going forward? 13:17.229 --> 13:22.701 align:left position:12.5%,start line:0% size:87.5% So, you know as as far as good news as far as any 13:22.802 --> 13:25.237 align:left position:12.5%,start line:0% size:87.5% procedural maneuvers available to the 13:25.337 --> 13:29.241 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Democrats, there really aren't many. About the 13:29.341 --> 13:32.378 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% only trick that they might be able to play is 13:32.478 --> 13:37.983 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% to simply not show up for any of the votes and hope 13:38.083 --> 13:41.086 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% that some Republicans maybe ones that have 13:41.187 --> 13:46.125 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% tested positive for COVID-19 also can't be there 13:46.225 --> 13:48.427 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% or you know a couple other Republican 13:48.527 --> 13:51.564 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% senators like Collins and Murkowski who have said 13:51.664 --> 13:54.466 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% that they would vote, no. Maybe that would be 13:54.567 --> 13:58.170 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% enough to not have a quorum or at least not 13:58.270 --> 14:01.440 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% have a majority that would be present in order 14:01.540 --> 14:05.611 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% to vote for Judge Barrett. But absent from something like 14:05.711 --> 14:07.346 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% that, there's really nothing that the 14:07.446 --> 14:10.182 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Democrats can do to prevent this. The only 14:10.282 --> 14:12.618 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% thing we have to do is let Senate procedure play 14:12.718 --> 14:15.521 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% out and there has to be a certain amount of time 14:15.621 --> 14:19.024 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% allotted before some vote comes up or 14:19.124 --> 14:22.161 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% before a motion comes up and then debate before 14:22.261 --> 14:25.130 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% the vote can come up. Those are really the only 14:25.231 --> 14:27.933 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% processes that are left to play out. So looks 14:28.033 --> 14:30.369 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% like smooth sailing from here then. 14:30.469 --> 14:33.005 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Pretty much. Yeah I think so. Well, I think so. Well, 14:33.105 --> 14:35.474 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% thank you very much. Kirk Randazzo, he is an expert on 14:35.574 --> 14:37.176 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% judicial politics and chairman of the political 14:37.276 --> 14:38.911 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% science department at the University of South 14:39.011 --> 14:42.314 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Carolina. Thanks again. Thank you. 14:42.414 --> 14:44.149 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% The Senate race between Senator Lindsey Graham 14:44.250 --> 14:46.352 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% and Democratic challenger Jamie Harrison continues 14:46.452 --> 14:49.722 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% to break fundraising records. And to discuss this 14:49.822 --> 14:51.724 align:left position:0%,start line:93.33% size:100% I'm joined by Gibbs Knotts. 14:51.824 --> 14:54.193 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% He's a professor of Political Science in the College of 14:54.293 --> 14:56.228 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% Charleston to discuss these fundraising records and of 14:56.328 --> 14:58.163 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% course the state of play with this race 14:58.264 --> 15:01.033 align:left position:0%,start line:0% size:100% right now. Gibbs, welcome back to the show. Hey, thanks for 15:01.133 --> 15:03.702 align:left position:12.5%,start line:0% size:87.5% having me get so we're looking at these numbers 15:03.802 --> 15:05.871 align:left position:12.5%,start line:0% size:87.5% they're astronomical. I mean we're looking at 15:05.971 --> 15:07.673 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% 57 million dollars from Jamie Harrison 15:07.773 --> 15:09.842 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% the third quarter. Senator Graham raised a little 15:09.942 --> 15:12.511 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% bit less than half of that at 28 million. 15:12.611 --> 15:14.613 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% What is your take when you see these numbers? 15:14.713 --> 15:16.849 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% What does that mean about this race and just how 15:16.949 --> 15:20.019 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% important it is. I mean I knew this was going to be 15:20.119 --> 15:22.488 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% a race that got some attention but no where in 15:22.588 --> 15:25.824 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% my wildest dreams did I expect this type of money 15:25.925 --> 15:28.727 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% coming in, especially for a democrat. 15:28.827 --> 15:30.729 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% You know, this is not California. This is not 15:30.829 --> 15:33.032 align:left position:37.5%,start line:86.67% size:62.5% New York. You know this is South 15:33.132 --> 15:36.535 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Carolina. We got some solid media 15:36.635 --> 15:38.938 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% markets in Columbia and Greenville and Charleston 15:39.038 --> 15:41.974 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% but again nothing like some of these larger 15:42.074 --> 15:45.077 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% states. And so, and just it's mind blowing that 15:45.177 --> 15:47.379 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% there's been this much money raised. Not one 15:47.479 --> 15:49.281 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% quarter of 57 million dollars for 15:49.381 --> 15:52.885 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Harrison is just you know unbelievable if there's 15:52.985 --> 15:55.254 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% that much money in this race. And Gibbs when we 15:55.354 --> 15:56.855 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% talk about media markets, it's not like 15:56.956 --> 15:58.991 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% we're in the most expensive media market. Everyone's talking 15:59.091 --> 16:01.126 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% about Beto O'Rourke when he was raising you know such 16:01.226 --> 16:04.129 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% high sums for the the Senate race in Texas. 16:04.229 --> 16:06.365 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% And then you talk about multiple major media 16:06.465 --> 16:08.000 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% markets in Texas whereas we're talking about 16:08.100 --> 16:10.169 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% here in South Carolina where you know Charleston, 16:10.269 --> 16:12.004 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Columbia, Greenville, Spartanburg. 16:12.104 --> 16:13.772 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% So, we are seeing that he is spending 16:13.872 --> 16:15.374 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% that money according to the #*FCC. 16:15.474 --> 16:16.575 align:left position:0%,start line:93.33% size:100% He has about eight million 16:16.675 --> 16:17.977 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% dollars on hand going into this 16:18.077 --> 16:21.313 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% last quarter here, Jamie Harrison does. So it's going 16:21.413 --> 16:23.849 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% out the door pretty quick too. Yeah, it is. And you 16:23.949 --> 16:26.185 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% know certainly social media is another thing. 16:26.285 --> 16:28.654 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% You know, whether you click on a Youtube video, watch 16:28.754 --> 16:31.523 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% a new story, anything you do on social media you're 16:31.623 --> 16:34.093 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% going to see something political. And a lot of 16:34.193 --> 16:36.628 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% it's going to be Jamie Harrison or Lindsey Graham. 16:36.729 --> 16:38.664 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% Jamie Harrison is all over social media, as well. 16:38.764 --> 16:42.735 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% And then Gibbs when we look at that and the spending, 16:42.835 --> 16:44.470 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% do you think that it is a disadvantage? 16:44.570 --> 16:46.472 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% I mean you hear from Senator Graham say this 16:46.572 --> 16:48.607 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% money is coming from out of state. This is coming 16:48.707 --> 16:51.110 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% from people, you know in California, New York these 16:51.210 --> 16:53.579 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% you know the radical left trying to defeat me. 16:53.679 --> 16:55.080 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Obviously, these people can't vote in South 16:55.180 --> 16:57.149 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% Carolina, so it's a little bit of a different 16:57.249 --> 16:58.817 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% momentum there when we talk about money versus 16:58.917 --> 17:01.487 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% the polling. But is that a negative? Or do you think 17:01.587 --> 17:03.722 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% it's just a matter of just how nationalized 17:03.822 --> 17:06.225 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% this race has become. It's more of a referendum 17:06.325 --> 17:08.027 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% on Lindsey Graham who people have seen to 17:08.127 --> 17:10.562 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% through the Kavanaugh hearings and in his evolution on 17:10.662 --> 17:13.198 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Donald Trump over the years. I think it's a good 17:13.298 --> 17:15.701 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% campaign tactic for Lindsey Graham to say 17:15.801 --> 17:17.503 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% it's a disadvantage and to point it out, 17:17.603 --> 17:19.605 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% but at the end of the day, I 17:19.705 --> 17:21.974 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% think if you have the money, you can take it. 17:22.074 --> 17:24.610 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% Look, I think the proof is in the pudding. You know 17:24.710 --> 17:27.946 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% the polls have been closed. The fact that a Democrat is 17:28.047 --> 17:30.382 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% within striking distance in a red state like South 17:30.482 --> 17:33.552 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% Carolina, shows what money can do. It's a tribute to - 17:33.652 --> 17:36.855 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% Jamie Harrison's campaign is a tribute to 17:36.955 --> 17:41.727 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% his candidacy, how how compelling he is and his 17:41.827 --> 17:44.263 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% personal story. But look the underlying 17:44.363 --> 17:46.765 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% fundamentals in South Carolina 17:46.865 --> 17:49.201 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% help out the Republican Party. Every statewide 17:49.301 --> 17:52.471 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% elected official is a Republican right now. 17:52.571 --> 17:56.008 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% So, you know look I don't see that the closeness of 17:56.108 --> 17:58.177 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% this race would have been possible without these 17:58.277 --> 18:01.413 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% resources. It has given Harrison the ability to go out on 18:01.513 --> 18:04.516 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% television, tell this story and make sure 18:04.616 --> 18:07.252 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% people know who he is. He had he not run for office 18:07.352 --> 18:09.488 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% before. He had been head of the South 18:09.588 --> 18:11.356 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% Carolina Democratic Party, but he was not a 18:11.457 --> 18:13.459 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% household name in the way that 18:13.559 --> 18:15.194 align:left position:12.5%,start line:93.33% size:87.5% Tim Scott or Nikki Haley, 18:15.294 --> 18:18.163 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% or even Mark Sanford was. So, I do think that it 18:18.263 --> 18:20.399 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% has really helped him. And certainly, you know, he's 18:20.499 --> 18:23.102 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% better off for it, even if it has come largely from out 18:23.202 --> 18:25.270 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% of state. And we don't even know how much money 18:25.370 --> 18:27.005 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% he's raised in this final quarter. We won't 18:27.106 --> 18:29.408 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% know that for some time after election day. But we have 18:29.508 --> 18:31.577 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% seen, you know, big moments for Jamie Harrison 18:31.677 --> 18:33.378 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% because he's able to capitalize on that first 18:33.479 --> 18:35.414 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% debate with that plexiglas partition. 18:35.514 --> 18:38.283 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% That got attraction all over, you know. Then, you 18:38.383 --> 18:39.852 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% know, you'd here's some responses from Senator 18:39.952 --> 18:42.521 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Graham, you most recently in their last debate turned 18:42.621 --> 18:45.257 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% to forum talking about race and that kind of got 18:45.357 --> 18:47.626 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% a little convoluted, a seven second clip there 18:47.726 --> 18:49.561 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% saying that if you're black and conservative you can 18:49.661 --> 18:52.197 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% go anywhere. That went national. All these moments that 18:52.297 --> 18:56.068 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Jamie keeps capitalizing on to his advantage, 18:56.168 --> 18:58.036 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% it's just interesting to see how that scenario is playing out. 18:58.137 --> 19:01.206 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% You'd think for Senator Graham maybe running for a fourth term, 19:01.306 --> 19:04.009 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% this seems like a very precarious situation he's been 19:04.109 --> 19:07.279 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% in considering the challenges he's seen over the past. 19:07.379 --> 19:10.349 align:left position:0%,start line:0% size:100% Yeah, I think it all goes back to the decision that he made. 19:10.449 --> 19:13.752 align:left position:0%,start line:0% size:100% You know, once Trump got elected he seemed to shift to the right. 19:13.852 --> 19:17.222 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% He obviously went from being a harsh critic of Donald Trump 19:17.322 --> 19:20.692 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% to a close ally of the President. And again, I think 19:20.792 --> 19:25.030 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% that helped Lindsay Graham fend off primary challenges. 19:25.130 --> 19:27.733 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% I mean, I think Lindsay Graham, in a lot of his career 19:27.833 --> 19:29.835 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% he was always worried, who's going to challenge him 19:29.935 --> 19:32.237 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% in a primary? Who's going to run to his right? 19:32.337 --> 19:34.373 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Who's going to say that Senator Graham is not 19:34.473 --> 19:37.009 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% conservative enough? No one's thinking that anymore. 19:37.109 --> 19:40.646 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% Obviously, you know, he coasted through the primary but he 19:40.746 --> 19:43.515 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% opened himself a little bit in the general election. 19:43.615 --> 19:46.318 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% What he probably never anticipated was somebody 19:46.418 --> 19:49.021 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% raising the kind of money that Jamie Harrison's raising 19:49.121 --> 19:52.057 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% and he never anticipated, you know, it being this close. 19:52.157 --> 19:56.161 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% He always had a general election cushion 19:56.261 --> 19:58.163 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% I still think this is a race that 19:58.263 --> 20:00.432 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% still probably leans Republican. I sort of think 20:00.532 --> 20:02.701 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% is it a toss up or is it leans Republican? 20:02.801 --> 20:05.637 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% It's like toss up slash leans Republican. It's probably 20:05.737 --> 20:08.473 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% right between those but I do think 20:08.574 --> 20:11.877 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% Lindsey Graham is getting all he 20:11.977 --> 20:13.879 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% could handle. I think it's probably very 20:13.979 --> 20:16.615 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% surprising to him that he's in such a 20:16.715 --> 20:18.951 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% competitive race, the fourth time he's running 20:19.051 --> 20:20.619 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% for Senate. And he was in the U. S. 20:20.719 --> 20:22.754 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% House before that. And so he has a long history in 20:22.854 --> 20:25.090 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% South Carolina politics. But this is certainly 20:25.190 --> 20:27.426 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% going to be his closest election. And Gibbs when we 20:27.526 --> 20:29.261 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% look at it being a close election you know 20:29.361 --> 20:31.997 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% it's important but he won by seventeen points and 20:32.097 --> 20:33.865 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% you know back in 2014 obviously things 20:33.966 --> 20:35.934 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% have changed since then in the state of the 20:36.034 --> 20:38.870 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% country in political politics as a whole. 20:38.971 --> 20:40.639 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% But I'm wondering what is maybe a narrow 20:40.739 --> 20:42.841 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% path to victory when we look at this? When we're 20:42.941 --> 20:44.409 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% talking about squishing this with some of 20:44.509 --> 20:46.545 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% his previous supporters, are we looking at the fact that 20:46.645 --> 20:49.014 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% Bill Bledsoe who was a Constitution Park 20:49.114 --> 20:51.550 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% candidate who is no longer running but still 20:51.650 --> 20:53.652 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% technically on the ballot, so people can vote for 20:53.752 --> 20:55.420 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% for him if he wants a little bit 20:55.520 --> 20:58.323 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% more conservative candidate there. You know that can 20:58.423 --> 21:00.859 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% be peeled a couple percentage points there. 21:00.959 --> 21:02.494 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% I mean what could what could hypothetically 21:02.594 --> 21:05.297 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% happen here if we look at some numbers? 21:05.397 --> 21:07.299 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% I look at the South Carolina first 21:07.399 --> 21:09.801 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% Congressional district with Joe Cunningham back in 2018. 21:09.901 --> 21:12.170 align:left position:12.5%,start line:93.33% size:87.5% I think that's a model. 21:12.271 --> 21:15.741 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% That's a formula that Harrison could pull together. 21:15.841 --> 21:17.776 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% Now one of the big differences is Graham's 21:17.876 --> 21:20.279 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% an incumbent and Joe Cunningham was running 21:20.379 --> 21:22.547 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% against Katie Arrington, who was not an incumbent. 21:22.648 --> 21:24.883 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% She had knocked off Mark Sanford but you know Joe 21:24.983 --> 21:28.320 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Cunningham is able to win among college educated folks, 21:28.420 --> 21:30.889 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% people living in the suburbs but also get 21:30.989 --> 21:33.325 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% strong and solid support from the African American 21:33.425 --> 21:35.827 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% community as well. So, Jamie Harrison has to 21:35.927 --> 21:38.797 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% start with the base of the Democratic Party, 21:38.897 --> 21:40.999 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% African American voters in South Carolina and 21:41.099 --> 21:43.869 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% then add to that and he's got to be able to win 21:43.969 --> 21:46.305 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% some of the suburban areas. He's gotta be able to win 21:46.405 --> 21:49.107 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Mount Pleasant and Daniel Island. You know some 21:49.207 --> 21:52.110 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% places, you know, at least do better 21:52.210 --> 21:55.213 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% in some of the upstate areas that surround Greenville 21:55.314 --> 21:57.783 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% and Spartanburg counties. And so yeah I do think 21:57.883 --> 22:01.453 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% there is a path for Jamie Harrison but it's 22:01.553 --> 22:03.455 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% going to be a challenge. And again it's 22:03.555 --> 22:06.491 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% that is the underlying fundamentals of the 22:06.591 --> 22:08.794 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Republican support in South Carolina and the 22:08.894 --> 22:11.530 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Republican Party in South Carolina has done a really 22:11.630 --> 22:14.833 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% good job over several decades at you know, 22:14.933 --> 22:17.602 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% fundraising having to get out the vote operation, 22:17.703 --> 22:21.506 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% fielding candidates who are compelling and 22:21.606 --> 22:24.209 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% have a lot of experience. And so again you know 22:24.309 --> 22:26.144 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% it didn't just happen overnight. 22:26.244 --> 22:28.747 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Republicans built this strength starting you 22:28.847 --> 22:31.650 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% know back in the time of Carroll Campbell and have 22:31.750 --> 22:34.586 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% just kind of built on it brick by brick and so 22:34.686 --> 22:36.088 align:left position:37.5%,start line:86.67% size:62.5% they're a juggernaut in South 22:36.188 --> 22:39.257 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Carolina. It's still a tall order for Jamie Harrison. 22:39.358 --> 22:41.360 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Gotcha there, so but it's still - would you say 22:41.460 --> 22:43.261 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% it's kind of a wake up call for both 22:43.362 --> 22:45.430 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% parties when we talk about running statewide at this point? 22:45.530 --> 22:47.566 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% I mean to have such incredible numbers this 22:47.666 --> 22:49.468 align:left position:37.5%,start line:86.67% size:62.5% must give Democrats hope, who you 22:49.568 --> 22:51.670 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% know they're seeing this money raised that you know 22:51.770 --> 22:53.638 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% some of it's making its way back into 22:53.739 --> 22:56.208 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Democratic Party coffers, so they'll be able to have a 22:56.308 --> 22:58.176 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% more realistic attempts in the future at some of 22:58.276 --> 23:00.445 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% these statewide offices but also for Republicans 23:00.545 --> 23:03.081 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% thinking Hey where's this coming from? This is a 23:03.181 --> 23:05.484 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% possibility that you know a statewide offices up for 23:05.584 --> 23:08.253 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% grabs for the first time in a long time. 23:08.353 --> 23:10.389 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Definitely a wake up call for Republicans. They 23:10.489 --> 23:13.024 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% don't have it completely in the bag. Yeah I think a 23:13.125 --> 23:15.927 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% good sign for Democrats. Yyou know we have some 23:16.027 --> 23:18.130 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% good candidates run before statewide on the 23:18.230 --> 23:20.432 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% democratic ticket but you know no one's been able 23:20.532 --> 23:22.434 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% to raise the type of money. You know 23:22.534 --> 23:24.903 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% this is good for South Carolina. I think that you 23:25.003 --> 23:28.440 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% don't want one one party to be in complete control 23:28.540 --> 23:30.509 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% to have no accountability. And you know we think 23:30.609 --> 23:33.245 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% about the old old south with the Democrats they 23:33.345 --> 23:35.480 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% dominated. There was no challenge to the Democratic 23:35.580 --> 23:37.482 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Party. The only race was really in the democratic 23:37.582 --> 23:40.318 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% primary. You know now, you know since the two 23:40.419 --> 23:42.954 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% thousands it's really been very unlikely for a 23:43.054 --> 23:44.723 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% Democrat to win. Republicans kind of 23:44.823 --> 23:47.159 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% have it in the bag, in many statewide - you know 23:47.259 --> 23:49.628 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% most of the statewide contests. And so it's 23:49.728 --> 23:52.464 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% good for democracy that small D. democracy 23:52.564 --> 23:54.232 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% when we have competitive elections. 23:54.332 --> 23:56.968 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% I think it holds whoever is in office a little more 23:57.068 --> 23:58.870 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% accountable. Gibbs we have about two minutes left 23:58.970 --> 24:01.072 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% but I want to just touch on what you were 24:01.173 --> 24:02.441 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% mentioning about some congressional district races 24:02.541 --> 24:04.676 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% too. I want to look at the first Congressional district 24:04.776 --> 24:06.745 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% there. Republicans obviously had a target on 24:06.845 --> 24:08.847 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Joe Cunningham's back there since day one after 24:08.947 --> 24:11.650 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% he won election in 2018, but we're seeing 24:11.750 --> 24:13.852 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% some polling from you know the DCCCs, you 24:13.952 --> 24:16.455 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% know independent expenditure arm showing 24:16.555 --> 24:18.256 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% that he's a thirteen percent margin over Nancy 24:18.356 --> 24:20.459 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% Mace. Obviously, this is you know a paid for 24:20.559 --> 24:22.727 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% poll, but it's kind of interesting to see 24:22.828 --> 24:25.230 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% just a big margin there. And then you also look at 24:25.330 --> 24:26.932 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% the second congressional district here where you 24:27.032 --> 24:29.568 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% have Adair before Burroughs who's running against 24:29.668 --> 24:32.270 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Joe Wilson in the second district, who just raised 24:32.370 --> 24:35.040 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% what 913 thousand dollars in the third quarter, 24:35.140 --> 24:37.676 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% which is a pretty big sum. It was a record breaking some for 24:37.776 --> 24:39.611 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% her and you know she's raised over two million 24:39.711 --> 24:41.746 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% dollars in the cycle. So, it's interesting to see 24:41.847 --> 24:44.115 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% these pockets of Democrats kind of 24:44.216 --> 24:46.017 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% really giving these Republicans in the 24:46.117 --> 24:48.487 align:left position:12.5%,start line:0% size:87.5% majority a run for their money. Yeah I mean we're 24:48.587 --> 24:51.957 align:left position:0%,start line:0% size:100% five of seven, the current house members Republican. 24:52.057 --> 24:54.326 align:left position:12.5%,start line:0% size:87.5% And so you know Joe Cunningham has had a target 24:54.426 --> 24:56.795 align:left position:12.5%,start line:0% size:87.5% on his back. Nancy Mace in a lot ways is a 24:56.895 --> 24:58.797 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% dream candidate, first woman to graduate from 24:58.897 --> 25:02.501 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% the Core cadets of the Citadel, a sitting state 25:02.601 --> 25:05.103 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% member of the South Carolina House of 25:05.203 --> 25:07.506 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Representatives and so certainly a compelling 25:07.606 --> 25:10.542 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% candidate. It's a district that Donald Trump won by 25:10.642 --> 25:12.844 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% thirteen percentage points back in 25:12.944 --> 25:17.249 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% 2016 but again, Joe Cunningham is a good 25:17.349 --> 25:20.185 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% candidate for this district. He's you know 25:20.285 --> 25:22.053 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% you know spoken out against Pelosi, spoken 25:22.153 --> 25:24.956 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% out about his party, tried to reach across the aisle, 25:25.056 --> 25:27.692 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% tried to you know build himself as somebody who 25:27.792 --> 25:30.428 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% is it's Low Country over party as his 25:30.529 --> 25:33.532 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% campaign theme. And so I doubt that it will be 25:33.632 --> 25:36.368 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% that much of the victory. It was just extremely close 25:36.468 --> 25:38.770 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% back in in 2018 but again 25:38.870 --> 25:40.639 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% things are looking good for Joe Cunningham right 25:40.739 --> 25:43.141 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% now. And I think it's a tribute to the 25:43.241 --> 25:44.843 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% strong campaign that he's running and his 25:44.943 --> 25:47.579 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% ability to raise money. Yeah a lot to watch for 25:47.679 --> 25:49.714 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% in the less than three weeks ago for election 25:49.814 --> 25:51.716 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% day. And Gibbs, you're gonna be joining us on 25:51.816 --> 25:53.752 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% election night too. So, I'm looking forward to that for 25:53.852 --> 25:55.754 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% election night coverage on November third and 25:55.854 --> 25:57.389 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% that's Gibbs Knotts. He's a political science professor 25:57.489 --> 25:58.990 align:left position:25%,start line:86.67% size:75% at the College of Charleston. Gibbs thanks 25:59.090 --> 26:01.893 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% again for joining us. Thanks Gavin. 26:01.993 --> 26:03.895 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% Tostay up to date on the latest news throughout 26:03.995 --> 26:05.697 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% the week, check out the South Carolina Lede. 26:05.797 --> 26:08.199 align:left position:0%,start line:86.67% size:100% It's a podcast that I host and drops multiple times a week. 26:08.300 --> 26:10.769 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% You can find it on South Carolina public radio.org 26:10.869 --> 26:12.904 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% or wherever you find podcasts. 26:13.004 --> 26:14.906 align:left position:12.5%,start line:86.67% size:87.5% For South Carolina ETV. I'm Gavin Jackson. 26:15.006 --> 26:16.408 align:left position:12.5%,start line:93.33% size:87.5% Be well, South Carolina. 26:16.508 --> 26:17.509 align:left position:50%,start line:93.33% size:50% ♪