Why didn’t he use all that money to at least get a top three spot in Iowa?
*********************
Because Iowa is meaningless! as is New Hampshire. In the past 30 years, the candidate who has won SC wins the nomination— that’s where one spends the money.
(correcting prior misquote from your post- apologies)
One point Mark Sanford made is that Iowa has very low (5%) unemployment, vs SC at more than 10%. In that since, SC will be a much better barometer for issue-voters, in addition to being a true primary not a “glorified straw poll”.
No offense taken.