Georgia is so inelastic that once Democrats break through in multiple races, it's a signaling point that the demographics are reaching critical mass. Nunn and Carter are helping us cheat by moving it up a cycle so to speak, but the argument by and large still stands.
After that happens, the Republicans will have at most one cycle to reclaim any territory before they lose it forever. In other words, if Nunn/Carter win in '14, Republicans can fight hard to keep Georgia's EVs for the Republicans - and the Senate seat - in '16, but '18 would likely be a clean-sweep of all statewide offices for Democrats (save for the very most popular incumbents). It also won't help that every statewide officer will be finishing their second term, a common retirement point, in '18 (except State School Superintendent).
In the example above, though, I think a Dem win in the Gov/Sen races in '14 is a lot harder than a win in '16; that case may be the actual end of Republican dominance in the state if we succeed in Nov.
My friend, it doesn't bode well to make such sweeping statements.
Sure, there are enough trends to indicate that there is a Democratic majority about to emerge, but let's not ignore the possibility that the GOP can (and most likely will) address such changes in a way besides saying "nah uh uh!" Or more to the point, all they need is an economic shift in the demographics that will upset the balance in the state.
No offense, but your analysis about the FOREVER DEMOCRATIC Georgia is a bit in the hackish realm. Nunn and Carter winning in 2014 is no more of a testament to permanent political realignment as Walsh and Curley winning in 1934. Sure, a victory can happen in 2014, 2016, or 2018, but it's not some definite end to GOP hopes . . . . .
forever.
