Sunday, John O’Connor wrote in The State that Democrats will be looking to hang Gov. Mark Sanford around Republicans’ necks in the statewide elections next year. He also said:

To win a statewide election, a Democratic candidate has to find a special issue — one-term Democratic Gov. Jim Hodges tied his campaign to a lottery for education — while, at the same time, the Republican candidate has to implode, turning off conservative voters.

This did not sit well with S.C. political operative/blogger/woman-about-town Laurin Manning, who wrote:

Elections are full of variables: strength of the candidates, the general climate, the effectiveness of the campaigns (messaging, fundraising, ground game), etc. And no election year is identical to previous ones — as much as reporters want that to be the case for the sake of comparison and analysis.

Sure, it’s challenging for a Democrat to win a statewide election in South Carolina. But the idea that there’s only one way to get from 40% (which a Democrat running statewide with his eyes closed and his fingers in his ears can pretty much count on banking) to 51% and it necessarily depends on a confluence of factors that happened to prove a winning formula ten years ago just doesn’t make much sense.

While pointing to the last time Democrats had a solid year in state elections may take a decade’s look back, the proof is in the pudding.

It is generally accepted that for a Democrat to win statewide in South Carolina, they need a record turnout from blacks, over 90 percent of the black vote and about a third of the white vote.

In 1998, Democrats benefited from a number of things: a good year in general, the lottery issue, single-issue voters dissatisfied with Gov. David Beasley (eg. the Confederate flag issue) and absolute shit-tons of money from the video poker lobby.

For example, in a poker game a couple weeks ago, WR went into the final hand with a three of spades and a nine of clubs and decided to go all the way. Four spades came down, and WR won with a flush. That is where the state Democratic Party is every year, and 1998 was one of those years that the flush came down on the river.

Yes, it may not take a single issue to bump the white vote up to 33 percent, but that is needed, along with a slew of other factors that show 2010 will be a tough year for S.C. Dems, no matter how well the national party turns out.

Local political journalism, especially in South Carolina, is having troubles. On TV, there is not enough time to properly analyze important issues to voters. In previous years, one would go to newspapers for in-depth reporting, but that is not possible anymore.

For major papers, like The State, declining ad revenue and circulation have led the paper to cut back on staff, redistribute reporters to other beats and seriously limit the amount of pages in each edition. Newsprint and ink are expensive, and have been growing in cost with each passing year.

When it comes to smaller papers, the ad revenue is there. Small papers fill a news niche in which readers cannot get the same local news from any other media outlet. However, many smaller papers are purveyors of the status quo, unwilling to rock the boat (Wolfe Reports knows this from personal experience).

With the advent of the Internet, blogs and Web journalism, reporters and bloggers on the Web have jumped in to fill the void.

“It definitely seems that the political blogs are gaining influence in moving stories mainstream,” said Jennifer Read of the liberal blog Indigo Journal. “I know for us, for Indigo Journal, it’s been really great to see that candidates and progressive ideas have more voice. One thing that’s really interesting about Indigo Journal is that it’s a user-driven Web site. It’s opened up the process to a lot of lay people, and we’re noticing that we have a lot of people who aren’t necessarily politicos, not so much insider baseball anymore, more ordinary folks getting involved in the blogging process.”

Will Folks, former spokesman for Gov. Mark Sanford and proprietor of conservative blog FITSNews, agrees with the assessment that blogs and Internet reporting have taken up the slack for under-resourced and overstretched mainstream media.

One of the reasons he believes Web-based reporting has become more successful is its ability to give more access to anonymous sources. In recent years, newspapers have begun to discourage or outright ban journalists from using anonymous quotes.

“In fact, I have heard from several mainstream reporters, who got the same quotes I got, only they weren’t allowed to use them,” he said. “That benefits what we do. Obviously, there are people who don’t like the use of anonymous sources, but it’s a tradition that is established in the mainstream media, as well as the blogs, and I think being upset at blogs for using anonymous sources is pretty hypocritical considering the mainstream media is using them every day.”

Folks continued, “I was particularly disappointed in Sarah Palin the other day, ripping on anonymous blogs, blogs using anonymous sources. It’s part of the business. People want to tell you things, and they’re afraid of the consequences. You can say what you want about that on an ethical level, but if the information checks out, that’s the way it goes.”

While some journalists have bemoaned the development of blogs and their effect on the industry, Read said that the groups benefit from each other.

“I will say that I think it’s a mutually-beneficial relationship,” she said. “Obviously, we highlight articles that journalists write, and we help advance stories that they write. Also, now, it’s so easy to create a blog and put an idea out there, and we can float ideas…. Ross Shealy is a great example, with his investigative reporting on the [South Carolinians for Responsible Government] crowd.”

Folks, with a different perspective and citing a remark he heard from legendary S.C. reporter Lee Bandy, said reporters and bloggers have a duty to engage in an adversarial relationship with their subjects. He also said, though, that Internet reporting has become an established force.

“It’s definitely having an impact, it’s definitely here to stay, and I think that people can ignore it, but they do so at their own peril,” he said.