How SC's Lindsey Graham, Annie Andrews plan to lock up Senate nominations early
U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who is running for a fifth term, and Democrat Dr. Annie Andrews aiming to oust Graham, are both the front-runners for their party's nominations in the 2026 election.
Disposing of competition early on will allow them to save money for a general election. The last time Graham ran for reelection, more than $200 million was spent during the cycle in what was at the time the most expensive senate race in U.S. history.
Graham and Republicans
Graham has already locked up endorsements from President Donald Trump, Gov. Henry McMaster and U.S. Sen. Tim Scott, and his campaign has a war chest of $15.6 million.
A superPAC that aligned with Graham ran a TV ad in October of last year promoting Graham's efforts to battle illegal immigration.
Graham has assembled a 90-person fundraising committee, and is working with several of the top South Carolina GOP consultants, including Push Digital, First Tuesday Strategies and Forward Communications, keeping them from Republican challengers.
His campaign hasn't been shy about spending money early on. Graham's campaign spent more than $1.7 million in the second quarter, FEC records show, while his campaign and joint fundraising committees brought in more than $2 million.
That spending includes $209,000 on digital advertising, nearly $403,000 on direct mail, $432,000 on media and $218,000 on polling, FEC records show.
'If you've got a good story to tell, tell it as soon as you can and as often as you can. Senator Graham has a good story to tell,' said Abby Zilch, spokeswoman for the Graham campaign.
His campaign has launched its first television ad of the campaign, with a 30-second ad airing on cable and streaming platforms. The ad prominently features Trump boasting about his signature tax cut and spending bill.
'I want to thank every member of the House and Senate who worked to get this bill on my desk,' Trump says in the ad. 'And Senate Budget Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, what a good man he is. He's a great patriot.'
Graham's team has been attending county GOP meetings to shore up support among party activists, touting the Trump endorsement and the importance of keeping a Republican majority in the Senate.
'The reason why we are here, more than anything, is not because of who might run against us. It's not about who's running against us. It's about us showing the relationship that we have with each and every one of you and we're here to serve South Carolinians,' Graham campaign Field Director Sam Densmore told the Richland County GOP in June.
But in a Republican dominated state such as South Carolina, Graham may always have a primary election. However, in each of his previous re-election bids, he clinched the nomination without the need to go to a runoff.
In this cycle however, Graham may be facing his toughest primary challenge. The far rightwing of the party has traditionally been critical of Graham and candidates such as former Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer and Greenville businessman Mark Lynch repeatedly have pounced on footage of Graham being booed at a Trump rally in Pickens.
Bauer and Lynch continue to hit Graham for being a globalist, when a wing of the party is pushing for America First and wants to avoid getting involved in international conflicts.
Graham may have been able to avoid the Bauer challenge.
According to senior senator's office, Graham spoke to Trump and the White House personnel office to get Bauer an ambassadorship to Eastern Europe or Central America after the former lieutenant governor reached out to the senator's office on a weekly basis for months. Ultimately an ambassadorship did not happen for Bauer before he opted to jump in the Senate race.
And Bauer now says he's going to put in the effort to visit each of the state's 46 counties to oust Graham.
'I'm gonna focus my attention on the people of South Carolina. I'm getting ready to hit the road, and I'm gonna cover this state like the Duke covers Dixie,' Bauer said.
'I think I can canvas the state better than anybody,' Bauer added. 'I love retail politics, and I'm going to go shake every hand of every voter I could possibly find in South Carolina.'
Bauer declined to disclose how his early fundrasing is going since entering the race on July 2. The third quarter reports are due in October.
'I think it's a lot less about money and it's a lot more about message and being able to show up at events and people receive you well. Let us not forget, I spoke for four minutes at a Trump rally to lots of cheers and applause. Lindsey Graham came behind me and spoke for six minutes of boos, and he was born in that county,' Bauer said.
Lynch put in $5 million of his own money for his bid. Outside of the millions he's put in, he has only raised $174,000 during his campaign, and only spent $195,000, FEC reports show.
Still he's putting up an appearance he's confident an anti-Graham sentiment is strong enough, releasing an internal poll from May, showing Graham only led Lynch 43% to 29%. Lynch's campaign paid Rasmussen Reports $5,000 in May for polling, FEC records show.
'We're all tired of Lindsey Graham and the state has said, the public has spoken that (Trump's) endorsement won't save Lindsey this time,' Lynch said.
Andrews building her Democratic campaign
Andrews, who kicked off her bid in May, is a pediatrician who lives in Charleston who ran against U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace in 2022 in the lowcountry congressional district. After her unsuccessful bid, Andrews built a brand posting videos to mock and criticize Republicans.
Andrews, who has made national television appearances on cable, has raised $1.2 million in her first month as a Senate candidate, according to her FEC report.
'With this kind of grassroots enthusiasm, we're not just building a campaign — we're building a movement that's rooted in hope, powered by people, and ready to take on the toughest fights,' Andrews Finance Director Renee Harvey said in a statement. 'The energy we're seeing across the state is incredible, and the best part is — we're only just getting started.'
The campaign, however, has burned a little less than half of that haul as an investment to build up a campaign infrastructure that can compete with Graham financially in a general election. Andrews also has assembled a group of veteran staffers, including several who worked on Jaime Harrison's 2020 campaign.
Her second quarter report includes nearly $328,000 in media advertising and $160,000 in text message outreach, FEC records show.
Andrews' fundraising is easily outpacing her Democratic opponents.
Andrews more productive quarter contrasted with Lee Johnson's struggles. Even though Johnson, a Greenville engineer, put in $500,000 of his own money into the campaign, he was only able to raise $67,000 in his two months on the campaign trail, according to FEC records. He ended his bid after spending $117,000.
Other candidates also don't appear to be fairing well financially.
Kyle Freeman, of Columbia, only reported having $654 cash on hand at the end of the second quarter.
Catherine Fleming Bruce, who ran for U.S. Senate in 2022 and state Democratic Party chair in 2023, did not raise any money in the second quarter and only had $5,000 cash on hand.
Brandon Brown, an education leader and small business owner in Greenville who joined the race in July, had a splashy kickoff with a well-produced launch video and social media presence.
His campaign manager Kerry Billings said $75,000 has been raised so far for Brown and they plan to run a lean budget to get them through the primary and a general election.
'We have a campaign of seasoned veterans behind Brandon who know that we're not in this for the short, immediate bump. We're in this long haul. We know that Annie got it first, and she created big momentum at the national level behind her campaign,' Billings said. 'But there's a lot of South Carolinians across the state who don't know who she is, and we feel that we're just going to take the case to her to South Carolinians come June.'
Solve the daily Crossword
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
New Photos Reveal Iconic White House Rose Garden Paved Over After Trump Makeover
President Donald Trump'slong-promised overhaul of the White House Rose Garden became reality in photos taken this week. The green lawn at the center of the garden, used for decades for White House events, has been replaced with what appeared to be white stone. Some foliage remained, with rose bushes and hedges bordering the new patio area. The changes fulfilled Trump's former vow to pave over the garden. He said the grass got too wet and the terrain made it hard for women to walk in high heels. This is the second time the Rose Garden has undergone big changes with Trump in office. In 2020, First Lady Melania Trump oversaw her own Rose Garden makeover, which involved adding pathways, planting new rose bushes and tearing out some of the garden's previous vegetation, including its beloved crab apple trees. While her updates drew some backlash at the time, the changes weren't nearly as stark as her husband's new redesign. This week, critics blasted the garden's new look on social media. That said, some people liked it, with fans noting that it includes drains shaped like American flags. Revamping the garden isn't the only thing on Trump's White House renovation docket. He also plans spend $200 million tearing down the East Wing to construct a ballroom. Related... New Photos Show Gravel Laid Over White House Rose Garden As Trump Reno Takes Root Trump Is Tearing Up Part Of The White House To Build A $200 Million Ballroom Trump Makes Good On His Much-Criticized Rose Garden Pledge


TechCrunch
16 minutes ago
- TechCrunch
Anthropic cuts off OpenAI's access to its Claude models
In Brief Anthropic has revoked OpenAI's access to its Claude family of AI models, according to a report in Wired. Sources told Wired that OpenAI was connecting Claude to internal tools that allowed the company to compare Claude's performance to its own models in categories like coding, writing, and safety. TechCrunch has reached out to Anthropic and OpenAI for comment. In a statement to Wired, an Anthropic spokesperson said, 'OpenAI's own technical staff were also using our coding tools ahead of the launch of GPT-5,' which is apparently 'a direct violation of our terms of service.' (Anthropic's commercial terms forbid companies from using Claude to build competing services.) Meanwhile, an OpenAI spokesperson said, 'While we respect Anthropic's decision to cut off our API access, it's disappointing considering our API remains available to them.' Anthropic executives had already shown resistance to providing access to competitors, with Chief Science Officer Jared Kaplan previously justifying the company's decision to cut off Windsurf (a rumored OpenAI acquisition target, subsequently acquired by Cognition) by saying, 'I think it would be odd for us to be selling Claude to OpenAI.'


CNN
17 minutes ago
- CNN
The Trump administration takes a very Orwellian turn
Donald Trump FacebookTweetLink Back in March, President Donald Trump signed an executive order targeted at the Smithsonian Institution that began as follows: 'Over the past decade, Americans have witnessed a concerted and widespread effort to rewrite our Nation's history, replacing objective facts with a distorted narrative driven by ideology rather than truth.' Despite the high-minded rhetoric, many worried the order was instead a thinly veiled effort to rewrite history more to Trump's liking. The order, for example, cited a desire to remove 'improper ideology' – an ominous phrase, if there ever was one – from properties like the Smithsonian. Those concerns were certainly bolstered this week. We learned that some historical information that recently vanished from the Smithsonian just so happens to have been objective history that Trump really dislikes: a reference to his two impeachments. The Smithsonian said that a board containing the information was removed from the National Museum of American History last month after a review of the museum's 'legacy content.' The board had been placed in front of an existing impeachment exhibit in September 2021. Just to drive this home: The exhibit itself is about 'Limits of Presidential Power.' And suddenly examples of the biggest efforts by Congress to limit Trump's were gone. It wasn't immediately clear that the board was removed pursuant to Trump's executive order. The Washington Post, which broke the news, reported that a source said the content review came after pressure from the White House to remove an art museum director. In other words, we don't know all the details of precisely how this went down – including whether the removal was specifically requested, or whether museum officials decided it might be a good way to placate Trump amid pressure. The Smithsonian says an updated version of the exhibit will ultimately mention all impeachment efforts, including Trump's. But it's all pretty Orwellian. And it's not the only example. Trump has always been rather blatant about his efforts to rewrite history with self-serving falsehoods and rather shameless in applying pressure on the people who would serve as impartial referees of the current narrative. But this week has taken things to another level. On Friday, Trump fired the commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics. This came just hours after that agency delivered Trump some very bad news: the worst non-Covid three-month jobs numbers since 2010. Some Trump allies have attempted to put a good face on this, arguing that Dr. Erika McEntarfer's removal was warranted because large revisions in the job numbers betrayed shoddy work. But as he did with the firing of then-FBI Director James B. Comey eight years ago, Trump quickly undermined all that. He told Newsmax that 'we fired her because we didn't believe the numbers today.' To the extent Trump did lay out an actual evidence-based case for firing McEntarfer, that evidence was conspiratorial and wrong, as CNN's Daniel Dale documented Friday. And even some Republican senators acknowledged this might be precisely as draconian and self-serving as it looked. Sen. Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming, for one, called it 'kind of impetuous' to fire the BLS head before finding out whether the new numbers were actually wrong. 'It's not the statistician's fault if the numbers are accurate and that they're not what the president had hoped for,' said Lummis, who is not often a Trump critic. Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina added that if Trump 'just did it because they didn't like the numbers, they ought to grow up.' Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska both worried that Trump's move would make it so people can't trust the data the administration is putting out. And that's the real problem here. It's not so much that Trump appears to be firing someone as retaliation; it's the message it sends to everyone else in a similar position. The message is that you might want that data and those conclusions to be to Trump's liking, or else. It's a recipe for getting plenty of unreliable data and conclusions. And even to the extent that information is solid, it will seed suspicions about the books having been cooked – both among regular Americans and, crucially, among those making key decisions that impact the economy. What happens if the next jobs report is great? Will the markets believe it? We've certainly seen plenty of rather blunt Trump efforts to control such narratives and rewrite history before. A sampling: He engaged in a yearslong effort to make Jan. 6 defendants who attacked the Capitol in his name out to be sympathetic patriots, even calling them 'hostages,' before pardoning them. His administration's efforts to weed out diversity, equity and inclusion from the government often ensnared things that merely celebrated Black people and women. He and his administration have at times taken rather dim views of the free speech rights of those who disagree with them, including talking about mere protests – i.e. not necessarily violence – as being 'illegal.' A loyalist US attorney at one point threatened to pursue people who criticized then-Trump ally Elon Musk even for non-criminal behavior. Trump has repeatedly suggested criticism of judges he likes should be illegal, despite regularly attacking judges he doesn't like. His term began with the portraits of military leaders who clashed with him being removed from the Pentagon. It also began with a massive purge of independent inspectors general charged with holding the administration to account. All of it reinforces the idea that Trump is trying to consolidate power by pursuing rather heavy-handed and blatant tactics. But if there's a week that really drove home how blunt these efforts can be, it might be this one.