Two weeks on, the Alvin Greene fiasco in South Carolina remains a profound mystery. How did the “completely unknown” Greene—a thirty-two-year-old “unemployed Army veteran” who “is facing a felony obscenity charge,” who “showed no signs of having waged an actual campaign,” who is living at home with his parents, and who had no visible means of coming up with the $10,440 filing fee he paid to get on the ballot—manage to win the Democratic nomination for senator in a 60-40 landslide over “a heavily favored former legislator and judge,” Vic Rawl?

Various theories have been offered, including the notion that African-American voters had some sort of Pavlovian response to a name that sounds like that of the great Al Green. (Not that “Rawl” doesn’t have a sonic echo of its own.) The state’s most prominent black politician, Congressman James Clyburn, the House majority whip, smelled a hoax. “I know a Democratic pattern, I know a Republican pattern,” he told CNN. “And I saw in the Democratic primary elephant dung all over the place.” We may never find out what was behind this odd episode, now that South Carolina Democrats have abandoned any effort to do something about it.

But so what? Wasn’t the execrable Republican incumbent, Jim DeMint, totally unbeatable anyway? Hasn’t everyone agreed all along that DeMint was going to win overwhelmingly in November, no matter whether his opponent was Alvin Greene, Vic Rawl, or Jesus Christ?

Well, not everyone.

Not, for example, Jack Bass, professor of humanities and social sciences at the College of Charleston, biographer of Strom Thurmond, and co-author of “The Transformation of Southern Politics.” Here’s Bass shortly before the primary, writing at The Hill:

Despite South Carolina’s national image as among the reddest of the red states, Senator Jim DeMint is less than a shoo-in for reelection. Three recent polls show his approval rating in the 48-52 range, barely ahead of President Obama in the state, with voters indicating significant concern about DeMint’s seemingly greater interest in stimulating a national ultra-conservative movement than in South Carolina issues and interests. Republican-leaning independents hold the key, and DeMint is facing an as-yet little known Democratic challenger, but one with strong credentials.

Bass goes on to construct a case that a Democratic challenger running a locally tailored campaign—a campaign aimed at older voters, women, African-Americans, and moderates—just might have an outside chance. His conclusion:

Jim DeMint remains the man to beat, but Vic Rawl gives every indication of being a stealth contender in November.

A few days later, South Carolina Dems got the stealth without the contender.

Obviously, Bass didn’t foresee the weirdness that was about to descend. Neither did anybody else. But Bass tends to know what he’s talking about when it comes to his native state (which he talks about in a deep-fried drawl that is highly persuasive to susceptible Yankees like me). And if Bass is right that taking DeMint’s seat was merely a long shot, as opposed to an outright impossibility, then somebody at the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and/or the White House political operation has some ’splainin’ to do.