Constitution Party’s Baldwin campaigns in South Carolina

Constitution Party presidential nominee Chuck Baldwin “is scouring South Carolina this week looking for voters who are scared of Democrat Barack Obama or distrustful of Republican John McCain,” the Spartanburg Herald-Journal reports. Baldwin “has been excluded from most major national polls and has scored very low on the ones that have included his name. He’s hoping to change that.”

But Spartanburg County Republican Party Chairman Rick Beltram, who attended “most of” Baldwin’s Tuesday speech before a crowd of about 30, “predicted Baldwin would win less than 1 percent of the vote in South Carolina come November. ‘That party has never shown up as more than an asterisk,’ he said.”

16 thoughts on “Constitution Party’s Baldwin campaigns in South Carolina

  1. Sivarticus

    Sad to say, but Beltram is probably right. South Carolina is not a friendly state to liberty-minded candidates. I think Ron Paul wound up with less than 5% there in the primary. I would be surprised if even Barr breaks 2% there.

  2. Trent Hill

    Baldwin is not a protectionist by any normal meaning of the word. He supports a 10% revenue tariff, which (i’v been told) is not a protective tariff, even according to the most stringent of free-traders, Austrians.

  3. chinese_conservative

    If Beltram had nothing to fear why would he show up. He is afraid because even if Chuck Baldwin only gets 1% it could make a difference this November.

  4. G.E.

    A 10% tariff would destroy the economy and is absolutely protective, I don’t care what anyone says. Just think of the logic: We “need” some revenue, so let’s get 100% of it from taxing imports. That isn’t “protective?” Come on!

  5. G.E.

    The sad thing being, Spence, that the South once was for FREE TRADE, and they even fought a war over it.

  6. Trent Hill

    GE,

    You’ll not find me defending Baldwin on that issue–though it is certainly more free-trade oriented than any previous CP presidential candidate. 10% is considerably lower than a protective tariff. As for your cute little rant about wether it is “protective” or not–Dilorenzo says it isnt, I’ll take his word over yours.Hell, i’m pretty sure YOU’LL take his word over yours.

    I prefer proportional taxation from the states–or, if that isnt possible, a VERY low revenue tariff. No higher than 3%.

  7. G.E.

    DiLorenzo knows more about economics than I do, but so does Walter Block (and Block probably knows more than DiLorenzo). That doesn’t mean I, a layman, can’t disagree with one or the other when they disagree or even when they don’t.

    Your definition of “protective,” that it is a set x%, is false. Protective is about intent. Deriving all revenue from tariffs is obviously protective. Giving domestic goods an advantage = protective.

  8. Trent Hill

    GE,

    Baldwin claims it ISNT a protective tariff,and that is solely for revenue. In fact, he claimed that in the interview YOU conducted.

  9. sff

    I know Beltram. He goes to events for non-republicans regardless of which party it is. I don’t agree with Beltram’s politics, but as far as county chairs go he does do his job.

    And South Carolina is NOT full of “brown-shirt welfare statists.” There are quite a few Libertarians here, but like every other state there just aren’t enough of us yet to make a difference.

    Baldwin’s trip certainly didn’t get any press that we were aware of. No one I know even knew he was in the state — not that we’d go see him.

    On the other hand, the announcement on Tuesday that Bob Barr will be in Charleston on Sept 30th was covered by radio and the local newspaper. Even NPR mentioned it in their local news the next day. (I don’t listen to state funded radio, but a number of people — mostly democrats — mentioned it to me on Wednesday)

    Stewart

  10. Spence

    I’m quite aware of what the South once stood for. The South also used to be solidly democratic, black voters used to be in the pocket of Republicans, just as both parties had their current roles reversed. How times change. But it’s not the people who change, it’s merely the labels they call things.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *