Georgia's Very Own Megathread! (v2)

[Co-Chair Bagel23]

Because he's at least not as bad as Jeff Sessions.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

If they're rich and hate poor people.

[kph14]

Because he's Herman Cain.

[Yellowhammer]

Because he would be a better governor than Stacey Abrams.

[smoltchanov]

Because he would be a better governor than Stacey Abrams.

Not a biggest fan of Abrams, but absolutely sure that's not true...

[RussFeingoldWasRobbed]

Because he's Herman Cain.

[Adam Griffin]

Alright, so I've finished my first draft of Georgia 2018 Abrams win benchmarks. I've decided for the time being to settle on a nominal win rather than a majority win, simply because I'm not sure where else it's feasible to stretch the numbers to get to 50%. Nevertheless, I did manage to get Abrams to 49.3% when all was said and done; in the end, this is equivalent to closing 223k of the 262k deficit Carter had in 2014. Obviously the easiest way for Abrams to get a majority with these figures as a baseline is if Kemp's raw turnout is lower than Deal's was in 2014.

I'm open to suggestions or recommendations in some parts of the state. Below is a map and the list with each county's benchmarks. I'll probably turn this into an interactive map in the next day or two.

County-by-County Benchmarks (2014 and 2018 Results + Swings)

[Medal506]

Because Stacey Abram's policies are better than Kemp's?

Wrong.

[Medal506]

I don't think anyone should vote for her no matter what race they are.

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

What benefit is there for any white person in Georgia to vote for Democrats Stacey Abrams in the 2018 gubernatorial election?

Maybe said white person decides to vote on the basis of the candidates character rather than the color of their skin? Just saying, could be?

[Beet]

What benefit is there for any white person in Georgia to vote for Democrats Stacey Abrams in the 2018 gubernatorial election?

Maybe said white person decides to vote on the basis of the candidates character rather than the color of their skin? Just saying, could be?

That's funny when black people vote 90% for black candidates, except for Steve Cohen.

[Fuzzy Bear]

to prove they arent racist

No voter has to prove anything to Stacey Abrams.  Or to Matt Kemp, for that matter.

Why should a black Evangelical not vote for Brian Kemp?  Why should a black Evangelical who is pro-life, etc. not support Matt Kemp, who is certainly the more socially conservative candidate?

If I were a Georgia voter, I'd probably vote for Abrams.  She's not an FF, but Kemp is kind of an HP.
It would, however, be in spite of people of this forum who have been absolutely horrible ambassadors on her behalf.  They're the type of people who will end up costing her just enough votes for her opposition to win.  

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

What benefit is there for any white person in Georgia to vote for Democrats Stacey Abrams in the 2018 gubernatorial election?

Maybe said white person decides to vote on the basis of the candidates character rather than the color of their skin? Just saying, could be?

That's funny when black people vote 90% for black candidates, except for Steve Cohen.

Black people also routinely vote 90% for white candidates. The white candidates do have to be Democrats though. And they vote pretty much 90% against black candidates like Tim Scott, Michael Steele, etc, when those candidates are Republicans.

So it seems to me that black people vote predominantly for Democrats and against Republicans. Who would have thunk it?

[Beet]

What benefit is there for any white person in Georgia to vote for Democrats Stacey Abrams in the 2018 gubernatorial election?

Maybe said white person decides to vote on the basis of the candidates character rather than the color of their skin? Just saying, could be?

That's funny when black people vote 90% for black candidates, except for Steve Cohen.

Black people also routinely vote 90% for white candidates. The white candidates do have to be Democrats though. And they vote pretty much 90% against black candidates like Tim Scott, Michael Steele, etc, when those candidates are Republicans.

So it seems to me that black people vote predominantly for Democrats and against Republicans. Who would have thunk it?

Fine, but by that argument a white person should not vote for Stacey Abrams because she's a Democrat.

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

What benefit is there for any white person in Georgia to vote for Democrats Stacey Abrams in the 2018 gubernatorial election?

Maybe said white person decides to vote on the basis of the candidates character rather than the color of their skin? Just saying, could be?

That's funny when black people vote 90% for black candidates, except for Steve Cohen.

Black people also routinely vote 90% for white candidates. The white candidates do have to be Democrats though. And they vote pretty much 90% against black candidates like Tim Scott, Michael Steele, etc, when those candidates are Republicans.

So it seems to me that black people vote predominantly for Democrats and against Republicans. Who would have thunk it?

Fine, but by that argument a white person should not vote for Stacey Abrams because she's a Democrat.

You mean because all white people are Republicans?

[Fuzzy Bear]

If they were Evangelical Christians and believed that Kemp's positions on many social issues were important enough to overlook his personality.

[°Leprechaun]

If they were Evangelical Christians and believed that Kemp's positions on many social issues were important enough to overlook his personality.

There's the problem right there. It's all about getting what you want. Throw ethics out the window. Moral relativism. That's politics. It happens on both sides, but that doesn't mean that both sides are equally culpable. The difference is that the GOP is the side that preaches "morality" and "family values" etc. This is nothing new in politics and I can understand pragmatism, it is wrong to demand that only one side be ethical. Neither side should be preaching what they preach unless they are consistent. I am not necessarily it's wrong to be pragmatic, but the problem is the holier than thou attitude of the GOP. They didn't care if Clarence Thomas was guilty because he was a Republican and yet they cared about Bill Clinton's private life.

[Fuzzy Bear]

If they were Evangelical Christians and believed that Kemp's positions on many social issues were important enough to overlook his personality.

There's the problem right there. It's all about getting what you want. Throw ethics out the window. Moral relativism. That's politics. It happens on both sides, but that doesn't mean that both sides are equally culpable. The difference is that the GOP is the side that preaches "morality" and "family values" etc. This is nothing new in politics and I can understand pragmatism, it is wrong to demand that only one side be ethical. Neither side should be preaching what they preach unless they are consistent. I am not necessarily it's wrong to be pragmatic, but the problem is the holier than thou attitude of the GOP. They didn't care if Clarence Thomas was guilty because he was a Republican and yet they cared about Bill Clinton's private life.

There are public policy issues that Evangelical Christians view as important that have the support of some unsavory persons.  I, personally, think focus should usually remain on policy.  The mistake Christians made was taking a short-cut on Clinton.  Of course he was a philanderer; the issue was POLICY. 

I don't particularly care for Kemp, and while I am an Evangelical Christian, I don't agree with all of Kemp's policy initiatives.  But there comes a point where the issue really is "Am I getting what I want?".  The issue, perhaps, is the virtue and goodness (or lack of same) in what I want.

[Adam Griffin]

Did somebody really merge both of bronz's GARBAGE THREADS into this sacred ground?

[Adam Griffin]

A post on the 2020 board reminded me of the straw poll we conducted at this year's Whitfield Kennedy-Carter Dinner. Approximately 150 people voted in the straw poll; here are the results:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[GeorgiaModerate]

A post on the 2020 board reminded me of the straw poll we conducted at this year's Whitfield Kennedy-Carter Dinner. Approximately 150 people voted in the straw poll; here are the results:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The link to the 2020 post is broken.

[libertpaulian]

Apparently, in Georgia's neighbor to the south, their Democratic nominee is leading in a poll by a margin of 5%.  If that's the case, Abrams has to be leading by 2-3% or so.

[Zaybay]

Apparently, in Georgia's neighbor to the south, their Democratic nominee is leading in a poll by a margin of 5%.  If that's the case, Abrams has to be leading by 2-3% or so.

I dunno, it could just be Gillum/DeSantis, and FL does have a better history of voting D in the modern political age.

[Technocracy Timmy]

Apparently, in Georgia's neighbor to the south, their Democratic nominee is leading in a poll by a margin of 5%.  If that's the case, Abrams has to be leading by 2-3% or so.

The bigger problem for Abrams is that she needs 50%+1 while Gillum can win with only a plurality of the vote.

[Rookie Yinzer]

Abrams’s advantage will never be shown in the polls. I’m ignoring them myself.