JUNE 25, 2010 – That something odd is going on with the South Carolina electorate isn’t a controversial statement. But trying to peg what actually is happening is more difficult.

Not only have Republicans given the party’s gubernatorial nod to a second-tier state representative who was little known before she shot to rock star status after appearing with Sarah Palin and vociferously denying allegations of marital infidelity. But state Democrats tapped an unknown, unemployed man facing a felony charge to be their standard bearer for the U.S. Senate race in November.

Truth, it surely appears, is much stranger than political fiction in South Carolina.

Some see what’s happening as the result of an impatient, relatively uninformed electorate that’s off its political Ritalin for controlling its attention deficit disorder. Instead of a campaign filled with substance, these voters seem more intrigued with the shallow Hollywood back story and gossip of campaigning. One moderate wag observed, “They want a Twitter response to campaigns – everything in 140 characters or less.”

“The electorate is, no doubt, tired and frustrated – - anxious for new faces and new ideas,” said University of South Carolina political scientist Mark Tompkins. “So we’ve seen some representatives of traditional politics punished (U.S. Rep. Bob Inglis) or neglected (Attorney General Henry McMaster) in favor of fresh faces.”

Because primaries tend to be low turnout elections, results also are skewed toward true believers, which means a more representative, broader sample of the electorate likely will vote in the fall.

“My hunch is that some of the moderate and traditional Republican electorate stayed home, while an unusual group of folks turned out,” Tompkins said. “By definition, they’re not strongly attached to political life. They could be easily disenchanted or persuaded by new events and arguments, although I don’t expect that to happen.”

GOP political strategist Trey Walker explained what happened in the June elections simply:  “SC voters have always loved to stick it to the man.  Be it the antebellum era ‘bourbons,’ the progressive era ‘elites’ or the modern era ‘Good Ole Boys,’ they’ve always had a reoccurring role as the foil on election day.”

Conservative analyst Ashley Landess disagreed with the notion that the electorate was malleable and impatient this year.

“Voters didn’t respond to weak messaging or extremely negative campaign tactics,” said Landess, president of the S.C. Policy Council. “Instead, they were organized and engaged in voting for reform and against the ‘system’ itself.

She said she thought voters wanted reform because they were tired of the state’s “terrible spending decisions” – always a focus for the Council – and a still-emerging frustration with how business is conducted in Columbia.

Free Enterprise Foundation President Robert E. Freer Jr. said suggesting that South Carolina’s electorate seemed easily-influenced was unwarranted because voters had finally figured out that we have to pay the bills nationally.

“Entitlements are not ‘entitlements’ if there is not the money flowing from real commerce to pay for them,” he said. “This [“great middle”] portion of the electorate, when added to those who are naturally suspicious of strong federal mandates, has created a particular alchemy that you describe as creating amazement and disbelief in reading the electoral tea leaves.”

So who really knows what’s going on out in voterland?

Veteran political observer Jack Bass says we’ll just have to wait until November for voters to process what’s happening, such as judgment issues about Republican gubernatorial candidate Nikki Haley and leadership concerns about Democratic rival Vincent Sheheen.

“A further question, especially among independent voters, is how tired are they of South Carolina being viewed nationally as a joke,” Bass said. “The ultimate question may be how much weight independent voters give to ‘It’s time for a change.’”

Andy Brack is publisher of StatehouseReport.com and CharlestonCurrents.com.