♪ > Welcome to a " This Week in South Carolina" Special Report, I'm Gavin Jackson.

This is our final show before Election Day on November 3rd.

And the race for the U.S.

Senate is essentially tied between incumbent Republican Senator Darline Graham and Democrat Doctor Annie Andrews.

The first Congressional District race to replace Representative Nancy Mace between the Republican Charleston County Councilwoman Jenny Honeycutt and the Democrat, former Rear Admiral Nancy Lacore is also incredibly close.

Meanwhile, the race for governor appears to be playing out closer to historic norms, with Republican Alan Wilson leading Democrat Jermaine Johnson.

For context, President Donald Trump won this state by 18 points in 2024 and the first district by 13, and he visited for the second time in eight days this week.

But this week, I'm taking you on the final days of the campaign trail to find out what candidates and voters are saying.

We also hear from Democratic strategist Antjuan Seawright, Republican pollster Walt Whetsell, and political science professor Doctor Samantha Pettey on the historic nature of the U.S.

Senate race, in which voters will elect the first woman to represent the state in the U.S.

Senate.

But let's go on the trail in Pendleton, where President Trump spoke last week.

More than 3,000 people turned out to hear President Trump in a livestock arena as he rallied for Senator Darline Graham, his hand-picked successor to the late Senator Lindsey Graham, Darline's brother.

Trump went hard against Graham's opponent, Dr.

Annie Andrews, using slurs and harsh rhetoric.

> Annie Andrews should have her medical license revoked.

Take it away.

[applause] You have to go out and vote for Darline Graham.

She's you, she's solid, she's great.

[applause] Graham did not use any anti-transgender slurs to describe her opponent, but did call her names.

> She is pouring millions of dollars into deceptive ads, spreading blatant lies about her record and hiding her radical past.

But South Carolinians know the difference between telling the truth and complete BS.

And that's not what I wanted to say, I wanted to say something else.

[applause] Let's call it what it is, she's a fraud who's prescribing bad medicine.

[applause] Gavin> On Sunday, Andrews spoke to a group in Manning.

She's had an aggressive campaign schedule and officially visited all 46 counties during her 18 months campaigning.

Dr.

Andrews> You know, I think it's important to take a step back and think about why they're spending the millions of dollars that the National Republicans flooded into this state, why they're spending that money to spread these lies about me, rather than talking about Darline's plan to lower gas prices and grocery prices.

Where is her health care plan?

It's because she has no plan.

Gavin> When I asked her about Trump and Graham's remarks, Andrews brushed them off and focused on a core campaign message.

> And as I said,the first time the president called me names, if calling me names will lower our gas prices and our grocery prices and keep our rural hospitals open, he can call me all the names that he wants, but that's not gonna get the job done.

Gavin> Republican unity was a key message at Congressman Russell Fry's 'Freedom Fry' in Myrtle Beach Monday night amid splits in the party over Graham's candidacy.

Even Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, home to its own Democratic push against an unpopular Republican, warned of what division would mean for Republicans.

> You're standing up and fighting because you care about South Carolina and you care about this country enough that we need to all line up.

We all need to all unify.

We need to all win in November.

Gavin> On the second week of his statewide bus tour, Republican gubernatorial nominee Attorney General Alan Wilson continued those calls for unity, taking up a chunk of time in which candidates are making their closing arguments to voters.

> My hope and my prayer for our State is that we come together because it's not just about voting for an individual.

I believe Darline Graham will be a great senator.

I believe she has the capability, but it's more important that we vote for someone who will support a majority in the U.S.

Senate, because what's at stake is very existential in a threatening way to our values here in South Carolina.

So we need to come together as a family.

Gavin> Democratic gubernatorial nominee, State Representative Jermaine Johnson and his running mate Sam Skardon, continued holding multiple daily grassroots events.

Johnson remains hopeful, though he faces steeper odds than Andrews.

> Right, so the truth is, these individuals have been a single-party rule for 24 years.

They have had the governor's mansion, they've got a supermajority in the House, a supermajority in the Senate.

They control all the constitutional offices.

They control every single Congressional district, with the exception of Congressman Clyburn.

They've got all the department heads, all the appointed positions.

I mean, they control pretty much everything in South Carolina, but yet our infrastructure is the worst in the country.

You know, our education, still 43rd in education, a higher homicide rate than California.

Gavin> The tight Senate race is also impacting the open first Congressional District race to replace Representative Nancy Mace.

Charleston County Councilwoman Jenny Honeycutt, the Republican nominee, campaigned with Wilson and Graham in Goose Creek on Tuesday.

> And guys, all government is local.

I'm running because I understood.

I saw it from the front lines in Charleston County.

We have to have a federal representative that understands our needs.

I'm so proud to have the endorsement of over a hundred of our local officials.

Those are ones that don't even run on Republican-Democrat tickets.

They know that I have the record and results to be able to lead and I look forward to doing that in Congress.

Gavin> Former Rear Admiral Nancy Lacore, the Democrat, a 35-year Navy veteran who was fired by Department of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth last August, turned formidable political candidate mobilized her troops with the help of Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear earlier this month.

> Now, as a three-star, I worked in the Pentagon, so I had a front row seat to the dysfunction in DC.

I watched our budget become a political weapon, national security become a talking point instead of a responsibility, and too many public servants cast aside because of politics.

And now, we are in another unconstitutional forever war that has done nothing but hike up already high costs and put our servicemen and women in harm's way unnecessarily and it has to stop.

Gavin> There has been record breaking early voting turnout, and millions of dollars in last minute spending have flowed into the state from national groups hitting the airwaves and mailboxes during the final days of election 2026.

Walt Whetsell is the owner and president of Starboard Communications, a public affairs and political consulting firm.

He is plugged into South Carolina politics and has been watching and polling the big races closely this year.

I spoke with him about the close nature of this midterm election.

> Yeah, it's a headwind for Republicans.

I think everybody would admit that.

The political environment, people are anxious about economic issues, in particular.

People are anxious about what's going on in Iran and the impact, practical impact of gas prices and diesel prices.

I think it's, I think it's a fair... it's fair to point that out.

I think the Democrats have largely been successful in keeping their focus on that issue and not getting tempted to, you know, go down other rabbit trails.

But remember, South Carolina, we start off, I'm not a chess player, but I think there are 16 pieces on the chessboard on each side.

You gotta remember, we start off with all 16, the dems start off with 11 or 12.

That's how the game starts.

So ultimately I think it will be fine, but sure, it's a more difficult environment.

We're going to be the victim of what we were the successor of in 2022, in terms of some of the Statehouse seats and winning in some of these districts that we didn't think we had a shot at winning in, right?

It just, it'll make a 2 or 3 point difference.

I don't think it's gonna make a 13 or 18 point difference.

Gavin> Okay.

That bigger difference, I mean, you look at these polls and you're seeing that I mean, you're seeing that New York Times poll that just came out today, saying that Graham and Andrews are 48% each.

Pretty solid polling outfit there too.

You see other polls that have been saying that, how accurate is that in your opinion?

And if you want to contrast and compare to maybe some polling that you've been doing, where does that fall?

How do we make sense of these?

Walt> So New York Times and I don't wanna be uber critical, they did not include the libertarian, the constitutional, or The Citadel even went so far in their poll, "I plan to write-in Ralph Norman" was in the script.

So 48-48, four undecided, I mean, you've met the libertarian, you've met the... She's gonna get a few votes.

I don't know if she's gonna get lot, but she's gonna get a few that will be impactful in those numbers.

The Citadel poll that came out 2 or 3 days ago, had all that in there.

And it was, you know, 45-42 with the other three options listed.

I think that's probably more accurate.

And I don't know if they just missed that or didn't think about it or doesn't think it's relevant, and it usually isn't.

But I do think, again, in this environment, you saw her in your debate.

She held her own, I thought.

<Yeah> And so she's gonna pick up a few of those, a few of those undecided votes, for sure.

Gavin> Does she peel off Republicans or more Democrats?

Walt> I don't know, it's hard to tell.

And because it's still such a small number, you can't really dive into the data and come up with a conclusive answer to that.

> And Walt, you were doing polling, you were doing polling for years now, but back in 2020, that big race between Senator Lindsey Graham, Democrat Jaime Harrison, you were one of the few, maybe the only polling outfit that got it right, because it did come out be ten points because everyone kept saying "It's neck and neck," just like we're saying right here.

132 million dollars later it was still a ten point difference for Lindsey Graham.

> Yeah.

I mean, look, I don't know whether it's just the local knowledge, I was talking to one of these national pollsters the other day who asked me how Beaufort County was going.

I'm like... <We don't have that county.> [laughter] North Carolina, not South Carolina.

So I think it's a little bit of just local institutional knowledge.

But look, the secret sauce is who's the sample, right?

The questions are, you look at any of these polls, they ask the same question.

They use the same methodology, texting or phones or whatever.

The differential factor is, who are you calling?

And so even in the New York Times poll, you know, they had African-Americans voting at 26, I think.

That's a stretch, I think.

Gavin> I mean, there might be some motivation with Dr.

Jermaine Johnson at the top of the ballot too, <Correct> but still, like you're saying.

<For sure> But what you've seen in the past.

Walt> And I think they were persuaded to go that high because of the early, early voting.

<Okay> I mean, the first week of early voting, black turnout was 29.5 of that early vote tranche.

That's a big number, that's a scary number for Republicans.

I remind our clients, Democrats have always done early voting better.

We had a leader of our party who for a number of years suggested Election day should be Election day, not election month or election week.

And so I think some of our, of Republicans, is just sort of built-in ideology about early voting and so I'm not sure it's reflective.

But they're turning their vote out it feels to me.

And I think that's reflective in some of the tightness of some of these polls.

Gavin> When you look at the polls and also look at, you know, like we were just talking about Dr.

Johnson, Jermaine Johnson and Alan Wilson, AG Wilson at the top of the ticket.

Why are so many people willing to split their ticket and then potentially give the Democrats, you know, a close race here, possibly a win.

Walt> I just think it's in our DNA.

Gavin> The independent streak.

Walt> It's an independence, and it's a revolutionary streak.

Gavin> Okay, 250 there we go.

Walt> We start wars here.

It's in our, it's kind of in our blood.

And I think the, you know, particularly the Senate race has a little bit of that, you know, they've made, Annie Andrews has made a big deal about the Washington influence on this race, whether it's PAC money or Trump's visits for her or whatever.

I think that strikes some South Carolinians in that, in that mode of their revolutionary DNA.

You know, just kind of bucking the system and so I think that's some of it.

Gavin> And then the write-in Ralph, I mean, we're talking about that bucking it too, is that really gonna have enough momentum to really offset things?

Obviously every vote counts, but I mean, do you think there's gonna a substantial portion that's gonna actually resonate.

Walt> Hard to poll.

So I'm answering you anecdotally, not empirically.

Hard to poll.

In the polling we've done that we have included, "I plan to write-in another candidate," consistently for the past week and a half or two weeks that's been around 1.7.

So no is the answer in a typical year.

Is 1.7 impactful?

In a year where these numbers are as tight as they are, I still think the polling is getting, lots of polling is getting it wrong on that level.

So I don't think it's gonna make a difference.

But 1.7, if the margin is 5 or 6, you had four undecided in New York Time, 1.7 is a significant portion of that.

Gavin> And when you look at that, I mean, what can you tell us about what you're seeing in polling that you're seeing in terms of how close that Senate race is?

Walt> We have it internally, you know, 4 or 5 points to Darline's benefit.

Tighter than, to your point, six years ago.

That's largely just again, the... the political environment is just very different from 2020 or 2022.

> I recently spoke with Democratic strategist Antjuan Seawright, CEO of Blueprint Strategies, about Democrats chances of winning any statewide seats, something they haven't done since 2006 with the superintendent of Education race, in which Jim Rex won.

> I think in this environment when you think about candidate quality, you think about the unpopularity of the Republican brand from a policy standpoint, personality standpoint, political standpoint, I think it's a 45-45 jump ball with 10% of the people politically unhoused or politically homeless who are looking for a home.

I think the difference between elections before and elections now, is that voters are actually holding the brand and the people in charge accountable for their material well-being.

If you think about South Carolina, one of the poorest states in the country even though we're red and the way we have benefited from the federal government in the past is not the same, because there's a group of people who have come in and brainwashed or bojangle, the people of South Carolina, into thinking that government is bad, they need no government.

Yet those services are critical for the survival of everyday South Carolinians.

The best example I can use is the Child Care Assistance Grant that's been no longer available.

That impacted 50,000 households.

Another relevant example is the mere fact that the largest cut to SNAP benefits in American history will have a 100 million dollar impact on South Carolina.

That does not even speak to the 600,000 South Carolinians that benefit from those Affordable Care Act tax credits, that're now seeing their premiums, co-pays, and deductibles.

And if you think about "diesel cost Darline," "drive up your costs Donald," those things have tremendous impact on how people view their politics and their policies.

Gavin> Antjuan, let's go back to 2020, where Democrats again had high hopes of beating Senator Lindsey Graham then, and Democrat Jaime Harrison lost by ten points after spending 130 million dollars.

What's different this time around?

Antjuan> The environment's different.

The toxicity of the Republican brand, in part, is different.

They are in charge.

Voters have a tendency to vote against the people in charge when the people in charge are not giving them what they want or what they promised.

Every single major issue that South Carolinians supported Republicans on in the last presidential election and down the ballot, they have failed to deliver on those things, including lowering the high cost of living.

Arguably it's worse in a poor rural state like South Carolina than even some blue states.

And so when you have people having to think twice about whether they purchase medicine, gas, pay for their childcare, or what foods they eat or do not eat, that is problematic.

And the only persons you can point to are the people who have the power levers or levers.

Those are Republicans for 24 years in South Carolina now, nationally, every branch of government, including the United States Supreme Court.

> The president is set to visit the state for Darline in hopes of boosting those needed low propensity voters.

But it also alienates those independent voters as well.

The president is also facing tough numbers himself.

There's been no real move on making life affordable as promised.

In fact, things like gas and diesel have gone up because of another foreign war.

And so Republicans don't seem to be exactly energetic here.

> Well, voters and leaders in South Carolina do not fear Donald Trump the same way they do in other places.

And there's a streak of independence that we've always enjoyed in South Carolina from a policy, politics, and a personality standpoint.

Yes, Donald Trump may be popular in a presidential election and in a primary, but in a general election, a competitive general election, you have to bring along not only your base, but independent voters, independent thinkers, and people who did not support you in a primary.

That's called a coalition.

That's called a broad coalition.

To this point, Darline Graham has not demonstrated that she can do that, however, Annie Andrews is demonstrating that she can put together a unique coalition that will make her competitive, so much so competitive that Republicans are prioritizing of all the places on the map, they're having to prioritize South Carolina.

Gavin> Wrapping up, Antjuan, Republicans always tend to come back home, more so than Democrats.

But there's such a fracture, with that contentious primary in August and Congressman Ralph Norman and now the Write-in Ralph movement, do you really think that Republicans won't come back home, but will vote for maybe Alan Wilson at the top of the ticket, but will still split it when it comes to the Senate race?

Antjuan> The couch will get some votes, the third party candidate will get some votes, write-in candidates, a write-in potential will get some votes, Annie Andrews will suck off some Republican votes, and Darline Graham will not get some independent votes.

And so the question then becomes, where are the independent thinkers that in South Carolina usually break with the brand, the Republican brand?

Where are the independent voters who do not believe she deserves to be South Carolina's senator for the next six years?

And then where are the politically unhoused or the political homeless who may not trust the Democratic national brand, who may not feel comfortable being associated with the extremism that we see on the right and so they're roaming, looking for temporary political shelter?

I believe they will find home in an independent thinker like Dr.

Annie Andrews, who's pledged she has no allegiance to any particular party, but her interest is people, the same thing that is reflective of her in her career.

> Republican Senator Darline Graham made history as the first woman senator from South Carolina, when Governor Henry McMaster appointed her two days after her brother Lindsey's death on July 13th.

Now she, along with Democrat Dr.

Annie Andrews and Libertarian Dr.

Kasie Whitener, are competing to become the first elected woman to the U.S.

Senate from South Carolina.

Dr.

Samantha Pettey, political science professor at the Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts, teaches women in politics, campaigns and elections, and political psychology.

She spoke with me about the historic nature of this race.

> Yeah, really historic.

And I watched the debate and, you know, Senator Graham pointed that out.

And I think she was the only candidate to point out the makeup of the stage, because it is a big moment for South Carolina to have three women... in a debate together.

And frankly, one I thought was very respectfully done.

They all were willing to hear each other and certainly disagreements happened.

But, you know, I was looking at South Carolina from the angle of like, my research as well, and the state legislature, there's not many women in the state legislature.

And so I was thinking about why this is the first time you have a woman senator.

And it's like, well, you know, there's usually a political ladder that folks climb and you start low and you move up.

And what strikes me as this case is that it's historic in many ways, right?

So there's these women, major party nominations, but none of them have like that typical path of prior office holding experience.

But they're all qualified in their own ways, and they're trying to emphasize that in the debate and the campaign trail as well.

So it's an interesting race to follow.

Gavin> When we talk about women and minorities breaking barriers, it is significant and important, but in this Senate race, it seems like it's barely been mentioned, except for that moment on the debate stage.

Is this a new political approach to these moments?

Is that a result of the demonization of DEI making these historic moments maybe less so important, or is it just more of a focus on the merits of the candidate?

Dr.

Pettey> So, you know, in many ways it's very much expected that a woman is going to win.

And I think, you know, going back to my earlier how the context of the race matters, you know, Partisanship is gonna play a role, right?

So I think your point is astute with, you know, the DEI-ness of it, and a Republican candidate who is, you know, a favorite to win in a southern red state, is probably not going to want to emphasize being the first woman as much as maybe a Democrat would.

But again, I think because it's a woman-versus-woman race, the emphasis on that is maybe diminished because it's inevitable, if that makes sense.

Gavin> When you look at the past and Nikki Haley being elected the first female and minority governor back in 2010 and then reelected in 2014, do you think that helped pave this path, especially for voters?

I might sound naive to say this, but it sounds like saying we had a woman governor before means that we can elect a woman to the U.S.

Senate and be okay and not worry about gender, and those old norms that we used to tie to them.

Dr.

Pettey> Yeah, there's great research on this.

It's like, called "the role model effect."

And the emphasis is, it is on governors.

So it's this idea that you can't really see yourself in this position without somebody else looking like you.

So the fact that Nikki Haley ran successfully, and made her way up through the Republican Party, you know, U.N.

Ambassador.

And so, like, coming from a state and knowing this prominent woman in the Republican Party, it makes it so that even Democratic women feel like they can, you know, take a chance and run and... you know, Andrews ran in 2022, right?

Again, and South Carolina won.

So, you know, it's not even just a partisan effect, it's visible women at high positions like governor and now eventually senator.

It has a down-trickle effect.

So maybe the fact that, you know, we haven't had a senator long term in South Carolina, we might see more trickling up through the state legislature, as well.

So there's definitely good reasons for that.

> And Dr.

Pettey, wrapping up and looking at that first Congressional district where two women are running to replace Congresswoman Nancy Mace, there's Republican Jenny Honeycutt and Democrat Nancy Lacore.

So whoever wins, that will continue on that seat.

And along with Sheri Biggs in the third Congressional District in the upstate, and the winner of the Senate race that will make three of the nine members of our delegation women, that's a first.

Will that lead to a role model effect, like you're saying.

And is there a need for more women in politics?

> Yeah, I mean, so the researchers kind of divide this into maybe two spaces.

One is descriptive representation, and maybe that goes back to that role model effect where people who look like you, they tend to have a shared experience so they might be better at representing you.

And frankly, the fact that you'll have three women in the same congressional delegation, they can work together, too.

And I think what's hurting the women representation side is on the Republican side.

So the more women Republican... the more female or women Republicans you can elect to Congress, the more that female Republican voice will be heard, at a policy level.

So we would call that substantive representation.

So, yeah, go ahead.

Gavin> And I was gonna say, there's a possibility it could be a Democrat, yeah.

Dr.

Pettey> And I think Andrews is kind of playing that card, from what I gather, Dr.

Andrews from, you know, the debate stage and how she is framing herself, right?

She's certainly running as a Democrat, but... not a, I'm from Massachusetts, I would not see her campaign in Massachusetts, right?

She is a fairly moderate Democrat, yes.

Yes, well, you have to run and win the race.

So, yeah.

And again, like, there's some shared experience there that they'll all be South Carolina women and they can work together.

And, you know, at the end of the day, I do think the three women on that debate stage do want to do good things for South Carolinians.

So whatever that delegation looks like, I would imagine those three women work together at some level.

There is a bit of research historically that women tend to cross the aisle a little bit more.

But you know, that is also very dependent upon who's winning the House, who's winning the Senate.

So in theory, if this blue wave comes and Democrats win House and/or Senate, you might also see South Carolinian, Republican women working with Democrats.

Again, partisanship matters.

They're not going to flip flop and change their policies, but there might be more room for compromise than otherwise.

Gavin> Visit SCvotes.gov for more information on voting.

And you can also watch our coverage from the campaign trail at Youtube.com/@SCETVNews.

For South Carolina ETV, I'm Gavin Jackson.

Be well South Carolina.