South Carolina Governor 2026: the ads, and who's paying for them
Alan Wilson (Republican), Jermaine Johnson (Democrat), Walid Hakim (Green) and Michael Addison (United Citizens) are the candidates for governor of South Carolina in the November 3, 2026 general election. Semblen has analyzed 9 ads in this race; 5 used at least one manipulation technique, most often glittering generalities and transfer.
Alan Wilson (REP), Jermaine Johnson (DEM), Walid Hakim (GRE), Michael Addison (UCP).
On the ballot as listed by Ballotpedia. 9 ads analyzed, 5 with at least one technique in the copy.
Newest first. The paid-for-by line is the advertiser's own filing. Updated 2026-10-08.
A small box with these findings and the newest ads, updated as new ads are analyzed. Free for newsrooms, blogs and campaigns alike; it links back here.
Follow the South Carolina Governor race
An email when new ads come in from either side or the outside groups: the techniques, the words doing the work, and who paid. And each debate's analysis the morning after. One-click unsubscribe.
Semblen is free to read and has no ads. If this page was useful, you can support it.
Money in this race
Candidates for governor report their fundraising to South Carolina's state campaign-finance office, not the FEC. This page doesn't cover those reports yet, so it shows no money figures.
The ads
9 ads, newest first. Video transcripts are shown as the model read them, without caption cues like [music].
Showing the 1 ad paid for by Jermaine Johnson for Governor. Show all 9 ads
Paid for by Jermaine Johnson for Governorfrom 2026-10-038 variantsspend $3,300–4,892314,000–386,092 impressions
Faith, conviction, and the promise of brighter days ahead. That’s my solemn promise to you, South Carolina. But to get there, we can’t keep doing the same thing – and electing the same folks – over and over. It’s time to be brave enough to do things differently. I’m Jermaine Johnson, and I know that South Carolina is worth fighting for. That’s why I’m running for Governor.
Glittering Generalities: Vague, emotionally positive words used as rhetorical flourish without specific policy substance — for example: Faith, conviction, and the promise of brighter days ahead and South Carolina is worth fighting for.
Flag-Waving: Patriotic, religious, or in-group identity invoked to validate a position.
Slogans: Catchy phrase used to compress a complex position into an emotionally loaded shorthand.
Bandwagon Appeal: Implies that continuing to elect the same people is a collective mistake that must be corrected, pressuring conformity away from incumbents — for example: 'electing the same folks – over and over'
False Urgency: Creates a sense that the moment demands immediate action and change, implying delay is not an option — for example: 'It's time to be brave enough to do things differently'
Glittering Generalities
Flag-Waving
Slogans
Bandwagon Appeal
False Urgency
Looks up the ad's factual claims in fact-checkers, primary sources and wire reporting. Takes up to a minute.
An email when new ads come in from either side or the outside groups: the techniques, the words doing the work, and who paid. And each debate's analysis the morning after. One-click unsubscribe.
An ad is on this page because its own "Paid for by" line is a campaign in this race; or it ran mostly in SC and names a nominee for governor — unless its sponsor is a campaign for some other office (a U.S. Senate or House campaign included), or it also names SC's Senate nominees, in which case it is on the Senate race's page. Ads from outside groups appear alongside the campaigns' own.
The candidates are the ones certified for the November ballot, from the source linked at the top. Governors are state offices, so there are no FEC filings behind this page: no money figures, and outside groups are placed on a side only when they are a campaign or a party committee.
Campaigns run one text as many separate ads. Identical text from the same sponsor is one card here, marked with its number of variants.
A technique is a specific manipulative move in the wording, found by our model and explained in one line. It is not a claim that the ad is false.
Claims are checked when a reader asks: press "Check this ad's claims" on a card. The check runs once and its result is shown to everyone afterwards. The ten ads with the most money behind them in each race are checked ahead of time.
Claim verdicts say what the cited sources say. A verdict that an ad is wrong or misleading is shown only when it cites an established fact-checker or an institutional record — Congress, a federal agency, a court — and its confidence is not low; a weaker one is not shown at all. Each verdict shows what it rests on and how confident it is. If we got one wrong, press Disagree: a verdict that readers dispute and no one defends comes down.
Video ads come from the campaigns' own YouTube channels; the transcript is analyzed. Meta ads are analyzed on their text; their video and images are not, yet.
Get notified as this improves — new detection models, the browser
extension, and new features. Occasional email, no spam.
Semblen LLC · 5900 Balcones Drive STE 100, Austin, TX 78731 · unsubscribe any time