August 6, 2025 • 16 mins
Bo and Beth welcome the Professor of Political Science at Winthrop University to get his thoughts on the Democrat and Republican conflict in Texas regarding re-districting. The latest on the Epstein files after Ghislaine Maxwell's commutation last week as well as the Trump administrations attempt to prosecute Hillary Clinton tied to the Russia collusion case.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
This is Good Morning BT, height thirty seven on WBT
Bowen Beth on a rainy Wednesday morning on the WBT hotline.
Right now, it's that time of the week where we
are happy to welcome to the show the director of
the Center for Public Opinion and Policy Research, also political
(00:23):
science professor longtime at Winthrop University at Scott Huffman back
on the WBT Hotline.
Speaker 2 (00:29):
Hi, Scott, Hey, hope you all are well. We are.
Speaker 1 (00:33):
We've got lots of things to talk about today. Of
course we're in North Carolina. I want to start with Texas,
and I know that that's not a surprise to you
because you've been watching what's happening to our west with
President Trump. But President Trump held a news conference yesterday
and I want to roll a clip from that.
Speaker 3 (00:48):
Texas Senator John Cornyn, Texas Senator John Cornyn is asking
for your help to force Democrats back to the state
and hold them accountable. Do you want the federal government
and the FBI to help locate and arrest these Texas
Democrats who have left the state.
Speaker 4 (01:02):
Well, I think they've abandoned the state. Nobody's seen anything
like it, even though they've done it twice. Before, and
in a certain way, it almost looks like they've abandoned
the state. It looks very bad. Yeah, go ahead, please
get involved.
Speaker 3 (01:14):
Should the FBI get involved.
Speaker 4 (01:15):
Well, they may have to. They may have to. No,
I know they want them back, not only the attorney general,
the governor wants them back. If you look, I mean
the governor of Texas is demanding they come back. So
a lot of people are demanded they come back. You
can't just sit it out.
Speaker 1 (01:31):
You have to go back. You have to fight it out.
That's what elections are all about. Been very curious about
your perspective on this because here in North Carolina, you know,
redrawing congressional districts. This is nothing new to us. We've
seen this play out at various times over the years.
But now in Texas you have a situation where it's
going to be fascinating to see what happens here because
(01:51):
you're searing other states, you know, threatening to do similar
things or things in retaliation. What do you make of
what's happening in Texas right now?
Speaker 2 (01:59):
Well, you know, to quickly gloss over the fact that
it's very questionable that the federal government has the authority
to hunt those folks down. That's more of a state's issue.
The issues over jerrymandering. Jerry mendering is redrawing district lines
really to help out one party or another. It comes
from eighteen to twelve Massachusetts Governor Elbert Jerry. There was
(02:23):
a redrawing at district lines and one of them in
Boston supposedly looked like a salamander, and so it became
called the Jerrymander. Thirty nine states the legislature redraws their
own districts, sort of like the fox drawing the security
system for the hen House. Texas is one of those.
(02:43):
North Carolina is one of those. So is South Carolina.
So that Texas wants to redraw the district lines, which
they can do at any time between one census and
the other, as long as it remains roughly the same
number of people, which right now is roughly seven hundred
and sixty five pound people per district. Now, the interesting
thing is about California talking about retaliation California, and I'm
(03:07):
sorry that this hurts people's feelings. California has a more
fair process where they have a non partisan independent commission
draw the district. Now, what Gavin Newsom wants to do
is circumvent that by putting it up for a vote,
which they can do. We don't vote on laws here.
Put it up for a vote to redraw the districts
(03:27):
to help the Democrats, but that would really get hung
up in the courts anyway. But that's sort of the
back and forth over this. You know, one another little
history fact. The Constitution says once representative for every thirty
thousand people. If we still followed that, we would have
over eleven thousand members of the House are representatives. So
(03:50):
in nineteen twenty nine they said it at four hundred
and thirty five. Also, Alaska, Vermont, Wyoming don't actually even
deserve a representative. They have were than seven hundred and
sixty five thousand people. But again the Constitution gives one
to everybody.
Speaker 5 (04:05):
So what kind of precedent do you think this is
going to end up? Setting? With the Democrats leaving Texas
so that this gerrymandering vote can't take place, and then
the governor saying, hey, we're going to bring these folks back.
We may even try to arrest these folks, but there
really is no legal precedent for that. But how does
this particular story end up changing the way that we
(04:28):
think about elections, or certainly the way that we think
about the majority in the US House of Representatives.
Speaker 2 (04:36):
There actually is precedent for members of a state legislature
leaving a state to avoid an issue being voted on,
and in those cases there was also the threat of
using state marshals. In this case, that'd probably the Texas
Rangers of going and forcing them bringing them back. It's
(04:59):
never gotten to that position, but there have been the
threats of that, so this actually has happened before wholly
actually doing it, actually arresting them, certainly as federal you
know law enforcement is used, that would be unprecedented. But
you know, fighting about redistricting absolutely at the request of
(05:21):
the president in order to you know, give one party
an advantage, that's unprecedented, even though every redistricting is about
giving one party an advantage in states where the legislature
draws it. This is Good Morning BT.
Speaker 1 (05:41):
News Talk eleven ten, nine to nine to three WBT
rain coming down across the Charlotte area Bowen Beth continuing
with Scott Huffman from Winthrop University, political science professor. We
talked to him every Wednesday and always a lot of
headlines in the queue to talk about. Here is one again. Yesterday,
President Trump held a news conference and the purpose of
(06:04):
it was to talk about a task force that was
being established to oversee the twenty twenty eight Olympic Games.
But as is the case, President Trump took questions about
everything at the end of this and another question was
about what's happening right now with the Epstein saga.
Speaker 6 (06:20):
Did you were you aware of and did you personally
approve the prison transfer for Gallaine Maxwell that your Justice Department.
Speaker 4 (06:26):
I didn't know her about it at all.
Speaker 1 (06:28):
No, I read about it.
Speaker 4 (06:29):
Just like you did.
Speaker 6 (06:29):
And do you believe that she's.
Speaker 4 (06:31):
Not a very uncommon thing?
Speaker 5 (06:32):
Do you believe that.
Speaker 6 (06:33):
She's credible to be listening to your deputy Attorney journal
sat down with her recently.
Speaker 4 (06:38):
Well, he's let me tell you, he's a very talented man.
Speaker 1 (06:41):
His name is Todd Blanche.
Speaker 4 (06:42):
He's a very legitimate person, very high I just very
highly thought of person, respected by everybody. And I didn't
talk to him about it, but I will tell you
that whatever he asked would be totally appropriate, and it's
not an uncommon thing to do that, And I think
he probably wants to make sure that people that should
(07:04):
not be involved or aren't involved or not hurt by
something that would be very very unfortunate, very unfair to
a lot of people. But I will say this, Todd
blanche is one of the most highly respected people you'll
ever meet. So I know this. I didn't discuss it
with him, but anything he talked about with her, or
the fact that he did that not unusual. Number one,
(07:25):
and most importantly, is something that would be totally above board.
Speaker 1 (07:29):
So President Trump saying yesterday that he did not know
about the transfer of Glenn Maxwell. And here's another thing
before I get your take on all of this, Doctor Huffman,
CNN this morning is reporting that tonight the Vice President jd.
Vance is going to host a strategy talk session with
members of the Trump administration about the Epstein story tonight
(07:50):
at his residence. So that's interesting to note as we
talk on a Wednesday morning, where what are your thoughts
on this story as it is right now a few
weeks into this.
Speaker 2 (08:00):
Well, you know, the story obviously is not going away,
even though you know there's a lot of things happening
where you know, the administration and others are hoping it's
going to fade away. The fact is even a lot
of Trump supporters really wanted to hear about this story.
And one of the reasons is why there's a lot
of Democrats on that list to Bill Clinton's on that list.
(08:22):
We know the flight manifest and we know Donald Trump
was on some of the flights. We know Bill Clinton
was on some of the flights. We know Bill Gates
was on some of the flights. So you know, we
know things like the flight manifest. The folks want to
know a little more now. Moving Maxwell to a lower
(08:42):
security prison where she'll have, you know, more rights, that
again raises more questions than it answers. And the fact
that the vice president is going to be talking to
a task force about this shows that this is not
going away anytime soon. It may fade, it may not
seem like as important to some of Trump's supporters than
(09:06):
it was during the election, when you know it was
the fiery issue, but it's not going away anytime soon.
Speaker 5 (09:15):
Does this Do you think that this moves any of
Trump's supporters away from him? Just the sheer move of
changing locations for Gallaine Maxwell to a lower security prison
because we know that she was found guilty of being
involved in this horrific process of human trafficking, of of
of bringing in young girls, of all of the pedophilia involved,
(09:42):
that she has involvement with this, and that she's you know,
being treated or getting better treatment. Now, do you think
this ends up causing a problem just this one particular move.
Speaker 2 (09:56):
Well, in short, yes, you know she's getting preferential treatment.
They talk to her before they talk to victims. You
know what it's going to do among Trump supporters. It
might lower his approval ratings. In fact, it likely will,
but that doesn't mean that they're not going to support
his policies over democratic policies. So even if they say,
(10:19):
you know, I don't approve of Trump, when they are
asked do you approve of how Trump's handling immigration? Do
you approve of how Trump is handling trade? They actually
do approve. So yes, it'll have a negative impact, you
by its followers, on his overall approval ratings, but it
will not have an impact on his agenda. And again,
(10:44):
it's not going anywhere right now. But we don't know
how long this is going to be a key issue,
and especially whether or not it's going to still be
an issue when we get to the twenty twenty six
midterm congressional elections.
Speaker 5 (10:58):
Now there's another legal headline that Trump supporters definitely want
to talk about. But Attorney General Pam Bondi is seeking
a grand jury review of the origins of the Trump
Russia investigation. Now, this certainly brings up a lot of
powerful political names and a story that has stuck with
President Trump since the twenty sixteen election. What do you
(11:20):
make of this moving forward? This discussion really made headlines
when Tulsea Gabbard came forward saying that there's new evidence.
Speaker 2 (11:29):
Right, and this is, you know, primarily Trump retaliation, which
he said he was going to do during his campaign.
He said, I'll be your retribution talking to folks. You know,
Trump always said Robert Mueller's investigation was a whit hunt,
and the Steele dossier about the russianclusion was discredited. Now,
(11:51):
we do know there was Russian interference in the election.
We do know they worked against Hillary. We do know
Paul mannifort from the Trump campaign as with Russian's internal
polling stuff. But that doesn't mean there was collusion. Now
Here's what the deal is with Gabbard's current statements. The
problem is John Durham was a special council appointed by
(12:15):
Trump and in short, his own Trump's own investigator determined
that the emails that supposedly showed the Clinton administration colluding
to make Trump look bad with this you know Russia hoax,
those emails that are the evidence Trump's own investigator found
were not credible. And these are what Tulsey Gabbard's bringing up.
(12:37):
So you know, the Russia issued Trump was not proven
to be colluding with Russia. There was contact with Russia,
Russia was involved, but the evidence that Hillary was pushing
the agenda those emails are found not credible by Trump's
own investigator. So this is this is a really muddled
(13:00):
issue at this point.
Speaker 1 (13:02):
So final thing here will localize it a bit and
at least to South Carolina as it relates to where
we're broadcasting from. Nancy Mace made it official a couple
of days ago that she is running for governor in
South Carolina. Not a surprise, but just like you know,
the week before we saw Ralph Norman officially make his announcement.
(13:23):
There is there are some polling numbers that show Nancy
Mace in early The early numbers are that she is
leading the pack. Now I don't know how much you
make of any kind of poll at this point in
the game right now. But the poll that we were
talking about yesterday, it shows Nancy Mace out in front
and Ralph Norman, if you believe these numbers, is kind
(13:43):
of an also ran at the moment. And of course
there are other people in this mix. But what do
you make of Nancy Mace as a as a gubernatorial
candidate in South Carolina?
Speaker 2 (13:53):
Well, right now, Nancy May is in the lead for
name recognition. More people know her name than any other name, really,
even including the Attorney general who is elected statewide, Alan Wilson.
But she is lobbing grenade after grenade at Alan Wilson,
and that's going to begin to define the gubernatorial race
(14:16):
someone like Ralph Norman or Pim Everett. But I really
think Ralph Norman is going to be able to come in,
build on his name recognition in the fifth District, get
known statewide. And here's the thing. He doesn't need to
be known by all the people in the state, just
the really fateful Republicans who are going to vote in
(14:36):
the Republican primary for governor. And he can do that
by traveling around the state man's a millionaire by traveling
around the state and talking to the parties. And right
now these folks are saying, well, Nancy Mace or Alan Wilson,
and you know they know Nancy Mace from her culture
war issues. But he can slide in between the two
(14:58):
of them as so sort of a more calming influence
than Pam Everett could. Could you know, attempt this as well,
she's the lieutenant governor. But I would not count Ralph
Norman as an also ran, certainly not at this point.
Early polling at this point really is more about name
recognition than it is about vote choice.
Speaker 1 (15:19):
Yeah, don't sleep on District five. We know this. I
mean his predecessor became the Chief of Staff in the
White House, Nick Mulvaney, of course, so you know that.
Speaker 2 (15:28):
Malvani and McK mulvaney turned out John Spratt, who was
the long, long, long, long time Democrat who represented the
fifth district. So Mick mulvaney flipped it. Ralph Norman is
now the sort of rock solid, very safe congressman that
he's obviously giving up that seat to run for governor.
(15:49):
But yeah, he can he can translate that into statewide
recognition among Republicans.
Speaker 1 (15:56):
We appreciate your analysis as always. Scott Huffman from Winthrop University,
also the director and founder of the Center for Public
Opinion and Policy Research. I hope you have a great week.
Speaker 2 (16:09):
Thank you y'all too,
This is Good Morning BT, height thirty seven on WBT
Bowen Beth on a rainy Wednesday morning on the WBT hotline.
Right now, it's that time of the week where we
are happy to welcome to the show the director of
the Center for Public Opinion and Policy Research, also political
(00:23):
science professor longtime at Winthrop University at Scott Huffman back
on the WBT Hotline.
Speaker 2 (00:29):
Hi, Scott, Hey, hope you all are well. We are.
Speaker 1 (00:33):
We've got lots of things to talk about today. Of
course we're in North Carolina. I want to start with Texas,
and I know that that's not a surprise to you
because you've been watching what's happening to our west with
President Trump. But President Trump held a news conference yesterday
and I want to roll a clip from that.
Speaker 3 (00:48):
Texas Senator John Cornyn, Texas Senator John Cornyn is asking
for your help to force Democrats back to the state
and hold them accountable. Do you want the federal government
and the FBI to help locate and arrest these Texas
Democrats who have left the state.
Speaker 4 (01:02):
Well, I think they've abandoned the state. Nobody's seen anything
like it, even though they've done it twice. Before, and
in a certain way, it almost looks like they've abandoned
the state. It looks very bad. Yeah, go ahead, please
get involved.
Speaker 3 (01:14):
Should the FBI get involved.
Speaker 4 (01:15):
Well, they may have to. They may have to. No,
I know they want them back, not only the attorney general,
the governor wants them back. If you look, I mean
the governor of Texas is demanding they come back. So
a lot of people are demanded they come back. You
can't just sit it out.
Speaker 1 (01:31):
You have to go back. You have to fight it out.
That's what elections are all about. Been very curious about
your perspective on this because here in North Carolina, you know,
redrawing congressional districts. This is nothing new to us. We've
seen this play out at various times over the years.
But now in Texas you have a situation where it's
going to be fascinating to see what happens here because
(01:51):
you're searing other states, you know, threatening to do similar
things or things in retaliation. What do you make of
what's happening in Texas right now?
Speaker 2 (01:59):
Well, you know, to quickly gloss over the fact that
it's very questionable that the federal government has the authority
to hunt those folks down. That's more of a state's issue.
The issues over jerrymandering. Jerry mendering is redrawing district lines
really to help out one party or another. It comes
from eighteen to twelve Massachusetts Governor Elbert Jerry. There was
(02:23):
a redrawing at district lines and one of them in
Boston supposedly looked like a salamander, and so it became
called the Jerrymander. Thirty nine states the legislature redraws their
own districts, sort of like the fox drawing the security
system for the hen House. Texas is one of those.
(02:43):
North Carolina is one of those. So is South Carolina.
So that Texas wants to redraw the district lines, which
they can do at any time between one census and
the other, as long as it remains roughly the same
number of people, which right now is roughly seven hundred
and sixty five pound people per district. Now, the interesting
thing is about California talking about retaliation California, and I'm
(03:07):
sorry that this hurts people's feelings. California has a more
fair process where they have a non partisan independent commission
draw the district. Now, what Gavin Newsom wants to do
is circumvent that by putting it up for a vote,
which they can do. We don't vote on laws here.
Put it up for a vote to redraw the districts
(03:27):
to help the Democrats, but that would really get hung
up in the courts anyway. But that's sort of the
back and forth over this. You know, one another little
history fact. The Constitution says once representative for every thirty
thousand people. If we still followed that, we would have
over eleven thousand members of the House are representatives. So
(03:50):
in nineteen twenty nine they said it at four hundred
and thirty five. Also, Alaska, Vermont, Wyoming don't actually even
deserve a representative. They have were than seven hundred and
sixty five thousand people. But again the Constitution gives one
to everybody.
Speaker 5 (04:05):
So what kind of precedent do you think this is
going to end up? Setting? With the Democrats leaving Texas
so that this gerrymandering vote can't take place, and then
the governor saying, hey, we're going to bring these folks back.
We may even try to arrest these folks, but there
really is no legal precedent for that. But how does
this particular story end up changing the way that we
(04:28):
think about elections, or certainly the way that we think
about the majority in the US House of Representatives.
Speaker 2 (04:36):
There actually is precedent for members of a state legislature
leaving a state to avoid an issue being voted on,
and in those cases there was also the threat of
using state marshals. In this case, that'd probably the Texas
Rangers of going and forcing them bringing them back. It's
(04:59):
never gotten to that position, but there have been the
threats of that, so this actually has happened before wholly
actually doing it, actually arresting them, certainly as federal you
know law enforcement is used, that would be unprecedented. But
you know, fighting about redistricting absolutely at the request of
(05:21):
the president in order to you know, give one party
an advantage, that's unprecedented, even though every redistricting is about
giving one party an advantage in states where the legislature
draws it. This is Good Morning BT.
Speaker 1 (05:41):
News Talk eleven ten, nine to nine to three WBT
rain coming down across the Charlotte area Bowen Beth continuing
with Scott Huffman from Winthrop University, political science professor. We
talked to him every Wednesday and always a lot of
headlines in the queue to talk about. Here is one again. Yesterday,
President Trump held a news conference and the purpose of
(06:04):
it was to talk about a task force that was
being established to oversee the twenty twenty eight Olympic Games.
But as is the case, President Trump took questions about
everything at the end of this and another question was
about what's happening right now with the Epstein saga.
Speaker 6 (06:20):
Did you were you aware of and did you personally
approve the prison transfer for Gallaine Maxwell that your Justice Department.
Speaker 4 (06:26):
I didn't know her about it at all.
Speaker 1 (06:28):
No, I read about it.
Speaker 4 (06:29):
Just like you did.
Speaker 6 (06:29):
And do you believe that she's.
Speaker 4 (06:31):
Not a very uncommon thing?
Speaker 5 (06:32):
Do you believe that.
Speaker 6 (06:33):
She's credible to be listening to your deputy Attorney journal
sat down with her recently.
Speaker 4 (06:38):
Well, he's let me tell you, he's a very talented man.
Speaker 1 (06:41):
His name is Todd Blanche.
Speaker 4 (06:42):
He's a very legitimate person, very high I just very
highly thought of person, respected by everybody. And I didn't
talk to him about it, but I will tell you
that whatever he asked would be totally appropriate, and it's
not an uncommon thing to do that, And I think
he probably wants to make sure that people that should
(07:04):
not be involved or aren't involved or not hurt by
something that would be very very unfortunate, very unfair to
a lot of people. But I will say this, Todd
blanche is one of the most highly respected people you'll
ever meet. So I know this. I didn't discuss it
with him, but anything he talked about with her, or
the fact that he did that not unusual. Number one,
(07:25):
and most importantly, is something that would be totally above board.
Speaker 1 (07:29):
So President Trump saying yesterday that he did not know
about the transfer of Glenn Maxwell. And here's another thing
before I get your take on all of this, Doctor Huffman,
CNN this morning is reporting that tonight the Vice President jd.
Vance is going to host a strategy talk session with
members of the Trump administration about the Epstein story tonight
(07:50):
at his residence. So that's interesting to note as we
talk on a Wednesday morning, where what are your thoughts
on this story as it is right now a few
weeks into this.
Speaker 2 (08:00):
Well, you know, the story obviously is not going away,
even though you know there's a lot of things happening
where you know, the administration and others are hoping it's
going to fade away. The fact is even a lot
of Trump supporters really wanted to hear about this story.
And one of the reasons is why there's a lot
of Democrats on that list to Bill Clinton's on that list.
(08:22):
We know the flight manifest and we know Donald Trump
was on some of the flights. We know Bill Clinton
was on some of the flights. We know Bill Gates
was on some of the flights. So you know, we
know things like the flight manifest. The folks want to
know a little more now. Moving Maxwell to a lower
(08:42):
security prison where she'll have, you know, more rights, that
again raises more questions than it answers. And the fact
that the vice president is going to be talking to
a task force about this shows that this is not
going away anytime soon. It may fade, it may not
seem like as important to some of Trump's supporters than
(09:06):
it was during the election, when you know it was
the fiery issue, but it's not going away anytime soon.
Speaker 5 (09:15):
Does this Do you think that this moves any of
Trump's supporters away from him? Just the sheer move of
changing locations for Gallaine Maxwell to a lower security prison
because we know that she was found guilty of being
involved in this horrific process of human trafficking, of of
of bringing in young girls, of all of the pedophilia involved,
(09:42):
that she has involvement with this, and that she's you know,
being treated or getting better treatment. Now, do you think
this ends up causing a problem just this one particular move.
Speaker 2 (09:56):
Well, in short, yes, you know she's getting preferential treatment.
They talk to her before they talk to victims. You
know what it's going to do among Trump supporters. It
might lower his approval ratings. In fact, it likely will,
but that doesn't mean that they're not going to support
his policies over democratic policies. So even if they say,
(10:19):
you know, I don't approve of Trump, when they are
asked do you approve of how Trump's handling immigration? Do
you approve of how Trump is handling trade? They actually
do approve. So yes, it'll have a negative impact, you
by its followers, on his overall approval ratings, but it
will not have an impact on his agenda. And again,
(10:44):
it's not going anywhere right now. But we don't know
how long this is going to be a key issue,
and especially whether or not it's going to still be
an issue when we get to the twenty twenty six
midterm congressional elections.
Speaker 5 (10:58):
Now there's another legal headline that Trump supporters definitely want
to talk about. But Attorney General Pam Bondi is seeking
a grand jury review of the origins of the Trump
Russia investigation. Now, this certainly brings up a lot of
powerful political names and a story that has stuck with
President Trump since the twenty sixteen election. What do you
(11:20):
make of this moving forward? This discussion really made headlines
when Tulsea Gabbard came forward saying that there's new evidence.
Speaker 2 (11:29):
Right, and this is, you know, primarily Trump retaliation, which
he said he was going to do during his campaign.
He said, I'll be your retribution talking to folks. You know,
Trump always said Robert Mueller's investigation was a whit hunt,
and the Steele dossier about the russianclusion was discredited. Now,
(11:51):
we do know there was Russian interference in the election.
We do know they worked against Hillary. We do know
Paul mannifort from the Trump campaign as with Russian's internal
polling stuff. But that doesn't mean there was collusion. Now
Here's what the deal is with Gabbard's current statements. The
problem is John Durham was a special council appointed by
(12:15):
Trump and in short, his own Trump's own investigator determined
that the emails that supposedly showed the Clinton administration colluding
to make Trump look bad with this you know Russia hoax,
those emails that are the evidence Trump's own investigator found
were not credible. And these are what Tulsey Gabbard's bringing up.
(12:37):
So you know, the Russia issued Trump was not proven
to be colluding with Russia. There was contact with Russia,
Russia was involved, but the evidence that Hillary was pushing
the agenda those emails are found not credible by Trump's
own investigator. So this is this is a really muddled
(13:00):
issue at this point.
Speaker 1 (13:02):
So final thing here will localize it a bit and
at least to South Carolina as it relates to where
we're broadcasting from. Nancy Mace made it official a couple
of days ago that she is running for governor in
South Carolina. Not a surprise, but just like you know,
the week before we saw Ralph Norman officially make his announcement.
(13:23):
There is there are some polling numbers that show Nancy
Mace in early The early numbers are that she is
leading the pack. Now I don't know how much you
make of any kind of poll at this point in
the game right now. But the poll that we were
talking about yesterday, it shows Nancy Mace out in front
and Ralph Norman, if you believe these numbers, is kind
(13:43):
of an also ran at the moment. And of course
there are other people in this mix. But what do
you make of Nancy Mace as a as a gubernatorial
candidate in South Carolina?
Speaker 2 (13:53):
Well, right now, Nancy May is in the lead for
name recognition. More people know her name than any other name, really,
even including the Attorney general who is elected statewide, Alan Wilson.
But she is lobbing grenade after grenade at Alan Wilson,
and that's going to begin to define the gubernatorial race
(14:16):
someone like Ralph Norman or Pim Everett. But I really
think Ralph Norman is going to be able to come in,
build on his name recognition in the fifth District, get
known statewide. And here's the thing. He doesn't need to
be known by all the people in the state, just
the really fateful Republicans who are going to vote in
(14:36):
the Republican primary for governor. And he can do that
by traveling around the state man's a millionaire by traveling
around the state and talking to the parties. And right
now these folks are saying, well, Nancy Mace or Alan Wilson,
and you know they know Nancy Mace from her culture
war issues. But he can slide in between the two
(14:58):
of them as so sort of a more calming influence
than Pam Everett could. Could you know, attempt this as well,
she's the lieutenant governor. But I would not count Ralph
Norman as an also ran, certainly not at this point.
Early polling at this point really is more about name
recognition than it is about vote choice.
Speaker 1 (15:19):
Yeah, don't sleep on District five. We know this. I
mean his predecessor became the Chief of Staff in the
White House, Nick Mulvaney, of course, so you know that.
Speaker 2 (15:28):
Malvani and McK mulvaney turned out John Spratt, who was
the long, long, long, long time Democrat who represented the
fifth district. So Mick mulvaney flipped it. Ralph Norman is
now the sort of rock solid, very safe congressman that
he's obviously giving up that seat to run for governor.
(15:49):
But yeah, he can he can translate that into statewide
recognition among Republicans.
Speaker 1 (15:56):
We appreciate your analysis as always. Scott Huffman from Winthrop University,
also the director and founder of the Center for Public
Opinion and Policy Research. I hope you have a great week.
Speaker 2 (16:09):
Thank you y'all too,
Popular Podcasts
New Heights with Jason & Travis Kelce
Football’s funniest family duo — Jason Kelce of the Philadelphia Eagles and Travis Kelce of the Kansas City Chiefs — team up to provide next-level access to life in the league as it unfolds. The two brothers and Super Bowl champions drop weekly insights about the weekly slate of games and share their INSIDE perspectives on trending NFL news and sports headlines. They also endlessly rag on each other as brothers do, chat the latest in pop culture and welcome some very popular and well-known friends to chat with them. Check out new episodes every Wednesday. Follow New Heights on the Wondery App, YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts. You can listen to new episodes early and ad-free, and get exclusive content on Wondery+. Join Wondery+ in the Wondery App, Apple Podcasts or Spotify. And join our new membership for a unique fan experience by going to the New Heights YouTube channel now!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!