South Carolina Democrats Make History: A Senate Victory That Changes the Balance of Power
By Javar Juarez | Editor-in-Chief, Columbia Urban Broadcast Network / New Progressive Journal | November 4, 2026
South Carolina Democrats did something many political insiders had spent years telling them was nearly impossible. They sent Annie Andrews to the United States Senate, helped change the balance of power in Washington, and gave South Carolina a new place in national Democratic politics.
They did it while Republicans held on to the Governor's Mansion and every statewide constitutional office. They did it while Jermaine Johnson, a young Black legislator who helped bring new energy to the Democratic ticket, came within 100,000 votes of becoming governor.
And they did it in a state where Democratic candidates have spent years fighting for the money, national attention, and political support routinely directed toward neighboring states.
This was not the sweeping victory Democrats wanted. But it was a major victory with consequences extending far beyond South Carolina.
The Democratic Party now has a United States senator from South Carolina. That brings representation, access, influence, and a six-year opportunity to build political power in a state national Democrats have too often treated as an afterthought.
We cannot allow Johnson's defeat to overshadow what South Carolina voters accomplished. Neither can we celebrate Andrews's victory without examining why so many voters supported her but rejected the Democratic candidate for governor.
Both stories belong to the same election.
The People Built This Victory
Before the election-night numbers had settled, an unnamed senior Democratic official was already turning Andrews's victory into praise for party leaders and the Democratic National Committee's presidential primary calendar.
A screenshot shared with this newsroom shows a post attributed to Symone Sanders Townsend crediting Andrews's campaign and years of organizing by Congressman Jim Clyburn, former DNC Chair Jaime Harrison, and South Carolina Democratic Party Chair Christale Spain. Johnson goes unnamed. The statement presents the victory as validation of South Carolina's place on the 2028 presidential primary calendar.
The account leaves out the most important source of political power: the people.
In my interview with Harrison before the election, the former DNC chair made that point himself.
“The power is the people,” Harrison told me.
He compared the people to the sun and elected officials to the moon.
“They reflect our light.”
Political parties do not create voters. Consultants do not own communities. Political leaders cannot claim exclusive credit for the work of thousands of organizers, volunteers, candidates, and citizens who made this election possible.
Giving the people credit does not diminish the work of party leadership.
Harrison described Spain's efforts to raise money, support canvassing, organize phone banks, and help finance the party's campaign operations. Those efforts helped build the foundation for a statewide campaign that delivered a Democratic Senate victory.
Thousands of people also spent months knocking on doors, making calls, registering voters, attending community meetings, and encouraging their neighbors to participate.
I have seen that work firsthand.
Across South Carolina, community organizations, local activists, and political organizers have spent years building relationships that do not disappear when an election ends. Their work rarely receives the attention given to consultants and political insiders, but those relationships are essential to successful campaigns.
Andrews won the Senate race, and her campaign earned credit for that achievement. Harrison, Spain, Clyburn, and the Democratic Party contributed to the larger effort.
But this victory belongs first to the voters who made it happen.
South Carolina Won More Than a Senate Seat
The significance of Andrews's victory extends beyond her winning margin.
South Carolina now has a Democratic United States senator serving a six-year term as Democrats prepare to take control of Congress.
Control of the House and Senate determines which party sets committee agendas, leads investigations, advances legislation, and holds many of the positions that influence federal policy.
Committee chairs oversee hearings, investigations, and the movement of legislation. Their decisions affect health care, education, transportation, housing, energy, and economic development.
As congressional leadership changes hands, Andrews's election creates opportunities for South Carolina to build relationships with lawmakers who influence national policy.
South Carolina's rural counties, historically Black communities, public schools, small businesses, and working families have serious needs. A Democratic senator cannot solve those problems alone, and a change in congressional leadership does not guarantee federal funding.
But representation creates access. Communities gain another opportunity to bring their concerns before people who shape legislation and federal priorities.
Andrews will have a Senate office, staff, constituent services, and the authority of a statewide elected federal official. Those resources can serve communities across South Carolina, regardless of party affiliation.
South Carolina is no longer simply asking national Democrats to believe a statewide victory is possible. Its voters have delivered one.
The Fight for Money and National Investment
The election raises serious questions about how national Democrats invest in South Carolina.
For years, states such as North Carolina and Georgia have attracted major political spending, national campaign operations, and sustained attention from donors and party organizations.
South Carolina has often been treated differently, despite now delivering a U.S. Senate victory and competitive results in other statewide races.
Harrison told me that some donors who supported white party chairs stopped contributing when Black chairs took over, raising questions about racial disparities in political fundraising. Christale Spain now leads the South Carolina Democratic Party amid those financial and political pressures.
Andrews won a Senate seat. Nancy Lacore won South Carolina's First Congressional District by 3,308 votes. Johnson received nearly 960,000 votes in the governor's race.
Those results reflect serious organizing, campaign infrastructure, and work on the ground.
South Carolina has demonstrated that it can deliver a major federal victory. National Democratic leaders now face questions about how they intend to support the political infrastructure that helped produce it.
Jermaine Johnson's Defeat Cannot Be Ignored
Andrews received 1,042,362 votes. Republican Darline Graham received 951,165. Andrews won by 91,197 votes.
Johnson received 959,001 votes. Republican Alan Wilson received 1,050,190. Johnson lost by 91,189 votes.
Only eight votes separate the size of those opposite margins.
Andrews received 83,361 more votes than Johnson. Wilson received 99,025 more votes than Graham.
In all 46 counties, Andrews outpolled Johnson. In every county, Wilson outpolled Graham.
These are unofficial election-night results, pending certification.
Charleston gave Andrews 11,167 more votes than Johnson. Greenville's gap was 10,833. Horry's was 6,136. Lexington's was 5,848. Richland's was 5,817.
Those five counties accounted for nearly 48% of the statewide gap between the two Democrats.
The difference also appears in the candidates' vote shares. Andrews's share of all valid votes exceeded Johnson's by 6.23 percentage points in Charleston, 5.03 in Lexington, and 4.95 in Greenville.
Seven counties voted for Andrews for Senate and Wilson for governor: Barnwell, Calhoun, Clarendon, Colleton, Greenville, Jasper, and York.
Greenville gave Andrews a 4,797-vote victory while Johnson lost there by 19,570 votes. The Democratic margin shifted by 24,367 votes between the two races.
York gave Andrews a 3,983-vote victory while Johnson lost by 5,607.
These results challenge the familiar argument that South Carolina is simply too Republican for a Democrat to compete statewide.
They also raise a question party leaders must answer: Why did Andrews reach voters Johnson could not?
The county results allow us to establish a minimum number of split-ticket ballots.
In each county, we can add Andrews's votes to Wilson's votes. When their combined votes exceed the number of ballots cast, some ballots must have supported both candidates.
Using the reported ballot totals, those county overlaps add up to at least 40,794 Andrews–Wilson ballots, assuming the candidate counts and ballot totals cover the same voters.
The actual number could be higher. The 83,361-vote gap between the Democrats does not represent a count of voters switching sides. Some voters supported other candidates or left a race blank.
But thousands of voters supported a Democrat for Senate and a Republican for governor.
I want to know why.
Race Remains Part of the Story
Andrews is a white woman. Johnson is a Black man. Voters elected one and rejected the other.
I have spent too much time reporting on South Carolina to pretend race has no place in this examination.
In “Heritage or Harm?”, I traveled to Edgefield and examined the public honors given to men who fought to destroy Black political power. I reported on the Red Shirt Shrine and connected that history to the fight over the Clementa C. Pinckney Hate Crimes Act under Shane Massey's Senate leadership.
The 2023 bill passed the House 84–31, cleared the Senate Judiciary Committee, and ended the session without a vote by the full Senate.Official legislative history
South Carolina has preserved monuments to white power while Black citizens have had to fight to get their concerns heard. That history informs my understanding of the barriers Black candidates face here.
The county totals cannot identify which voters acted out of racial prejudice. They cannot separate race from money, campaign reach, policy differences, or the strength of the Republican opponents.
Harrison acknowledged differences between the Senate campaigns. He praised Andrews's work and noted that she faced a weaker Republican opponent than he did in 2020.
But those differences do not erase the racial questions raised by this election.
South Carolina Democrats cannot celebrate Black voters and organizers while ignoring the barriers Black candidates may face within their own party. The political establishment should face the same scrutiny as voters, donors, and campaigns.
Jasmine Crockett raised similar concerns in CUBN's interview and coverage of the South Carolina NAACP gala. She spoke about racism within the Democratic coalition and the demands placed on Black voters. CUBN's Crockett coverage
We do not need to know every voter's motive to demand answers.
Show us where the campaign money went. Show us which candidates received staff, advertising, and donor support. Show us where organizers knocked on doors and which communities received sustained attention.
The records can help explain what worked, where the party fell short, and what needs to happen next.
Johnson Helped Build Something Larger Than His Campaign
Harrison recognized Johnson's contribution.
“I'm so proud of Jermaine,” he told me.
He described coaching Johnson and helping him prepare for debates. He spoke about Johnson's hardships, his concern for his family, and his ability to connect with people who understood those same struggles.
Harrison credited Johnson with bringing younger voters into the campaign. He described Andrews and Johnson as a strong combination. When we discussed the redistricting fight, he agreed that it had helped stir people to act.
I covered Johnson in communities and at the Statehouse. CUBN documented his work with young people and his role in the fight over congressional maps.
I believe he helped give this campaign its energy.
Johnson received nearly 960,000 votes. He outpolled the Democratic nominees for secretary of state, treasurer, and agriculture commissioner while trailing several other Democratic statewide nominees.
His defeat calls for a serious review of the entire campaign. But his political contribution should not be measured only by the office he failed to win.
He helped engage younger voters, challenged the political establishment, and participated in a statewide campaign that brought new attention to Democratic politics in South Carolina.
The question now is whether the party will continue building relationships with those voters or allow that work to fade between elections.
The Turnout Numbers Raise Another Question
Before anyone blames turnout, we need to examine the numbers.
Richland County's election records reveal a discrepancy that demands an explanation. The county workbook reports 281,359 registered voters and 57.71% turnout, while the statewide workbook lists 257,888 registered voters and 62.96% turnout. Both report exactly 162,368 ballots cast.
The reports differ by 23,471 registered voters for the same county and election. Both turnout percentages are mathematically correct, but the records do not explain why the registration totals differ.
South Carolina election officials owe the public a clear explanation of which voters were counted and why the figures differ. CUBN has contacted Richland County election officials for answers and is awaiting their response.
Neither report tells us how those who stayed home would have voted.
The Real Test Begins Now
South Carolina Democrats have spent decades trying to prove that their state can compete in national politics.
On November 3, voters gave them something more valuable than another promise of what might happen someday.
They gave them a United States senator.
They helped change control of Congress.
And they created an opportunity for South Carolina to become part of a much larger national political conversation about power, public investment, and the future of the country.
The party cannot afford to waste that opportunity arguing over who deserves the most credit.
It needs to strengthen its organizing networks, support its candidates, expand its donor base, and build relationships that can turn this victory into lasting political influence.
Harrison spoke directly to that responsibility when we discussed elected Democrats who had grown comfortable in office.
“Run a damn campaign,” he said.
He argued that their work helps other candidates on the ballot. He also challenged people who seek office, lose, and walk away.
His challenge applies to everyone: party leaders, donors, candidates, elected officials, and the rest of us who say we want a different South Carolina.
Give Andrews credit for winning. Give Johnson credit for the work he did. Give Harrison and Spain credit for the help they provided. Ask hard questions about where that help fell short.
Above all, recognize the people who exercised their political power.
The election is over. The responsibility that comes with winning is just beginning.
South Carolina now has a seat in the United States Senate, and Democrats are preparing to lead both chambers of Congress. The people who made that possible should expect more than speeches, celebrations, and promises.
They should expect results.
Harrison said elected officials reflect the people's light.
Now the people of South Carolina deserve to see that light reach Washington and return home as real progress.
Javar Juarez is Publisher and Editor-in-Chief of the Columbia Urban Broadcast Network (CUBN), an independent investigative news outlet based in Columbia, South Carolina, and a member of the South Carolina Press Association.
