Georgia's Very Own Megathread!

[Progressive Pessimist]

Unrelated to statewide races, but the lunatic GOP primaried state rep Jason Spencer was on Baron Cohen's show, screamed the n-word dozens of times and bared his ass to the cameras.

Oh my...

This guy made a literal ass out of himself. His "impersonation" of a Chinese man was the most shocking part to me. I couldn't believe what what I was seeing, especially when he starts saying Japanese words and phrases. How stupid are these people? It seems like they'll do anything for a Mossad agent. 

The timing of this with the runoff is pretty impeccable, by the way. I'll take any sort of embarrassment for Republicans at every level, in every state. Keep it up, Cohen!

[Progressive Pessimist]

Lol are there videos to all this stuff in the links or do we have to wait until SBC makes another Borat-esque film and releases it?

It's a TV show that airs on Showtime. Two episodes have aired so far.

[RogueBeaver]

I literally posted the Showtime clip from YouTube lol.

[Rookie Yinzer]

Lol are there videos to all this stuff in the links or do we have to wait until SBC makes another Borat-esque film and releases it?

https://youtu.be/4k4pMTsa1Kw

[_]

Lol are there videos to all this stuff in the links or do we have to wait until SBC makes another Borat-esque film and releases it?

https://youtu.be/4k4pMTsa1Kw

Sacha might have helped Abrams with this I think, Kemp's response is horrible.

[Rookie Yinzer]

Lol are there videos to all this stuff in the links or do we have to wait until SBC makes another Borat-esque film and releases it?

https://youtu.be/4k4pMTsa1Kw

Sacha might have helped Abrams with this I think, Kemp's response is horrible.

I wish but this will forgotten tomorrow after the nominee is chosen. LOL. Spencer lost his primary so he's not even going to be in the Legislature in 2019. Abrams and co. will be blasting Kemp's voting suppression record for the next three months. That issue is a rallying call for African-American voters.

I'll also be glad Kemp is the nominee because he's on record outright refusing to expand Medicaid. Cagle was more ambiguous about it (I think he wants a work requirement).

[_]

Lol are there videos to all this stuff in the links or do we have to wait until SBC makes another Borat-esque film and releases it?

https://youtu.be/4k4pMTsa1Kw

Sacha might have helped Abrams with this I think, Kemp's response is horrible.

I wish but this will forgotten tomorrow after the nominee is chosen. LOL. Spencer lost his primary so he's not even going to be in the Legislature in 2019. Abrams and co. will be blasting Kemp's voting suppression record for the next three months. That issue is a rallying call for African-American voters.

I'll also be glad Kemp is the nominee because he's on record outright refusing to expand Medicaid. Cagle was more ambiguous about it (I think he wants a work requirement).

Ah well, hopefully even if this is forgotten by voters the image of Kemp being scum sticks in their minds.  I imagine she'll do very well against Kemp, he's rather clearly the "Firebrand" candidate and if he's refusing to expand medicaid that'll probably hurt a bit in the suburbs.

I'll be "bold" and say Lean D for Abrams if Kemp is the R.

[South Dakota Democrat]

Lol are there videos to all this stuff in the links or do we have to wait until SBC makes another Borat-esque film and releases it?

https://youtu.be/4k4pMTsa1Kw

Sacha might have helped Abrams with this I think, Kemp's response is horrible.

I wish but this will forgotten tomorrow after the nominee is chosen. LOL. Spencer lost his primary so he's not even going to be in the Legislature in 2019. Abrams and co. will be blasting Kemp's voting suppression record for the next three months. That issue is a rallying call for African-American voters.

I'll also be glad Kemp is the nominee because he's on record outright refusing to expand Medicaid. Cagle was more ambiguous about it (I think he wants a work requirement).

Ah well, hopefully even if this is forgotten by voters the image of Kemp being scum sticks in their minds.  I imagine she'll do very well against Kemp, he's rather clearly the "Firebrand" candidate and if he's refusing to expand medicaid that'll probably hurt a bit in the suburbs.

I'll be "bold" and say Lean D for Abrams if Kemp is the R.

I'll go pure tossup.

[South Dakota Democrat]

Lol are there videos to all this stuff in the links or do we have to wait until SBC makes another Borat-esque film and releases it?

https://youtu.be/4k4pMTsa1Kw

Sacha might have helped Abrams with this I think, Kemp's response is horrible.

I wish but this will forgotten tomorrow after the nominee is chosen. LOL. Spencer lost his primary so he's not even going to be in the Legislature in 2019. Abrams and co. will be blasting Kemp's voting suppression record for the next three months. That issue is a rallying call for African-American voters.

I'll also be glad Kemp is the nominee because he's on record outright refusing to expand Medicaid. Cagle was more ambiguous about it (I think he wants a work requirement).

Ah well, hopefully even if this is forgotten by voters the image of Kemp being scum sticks in their minds.  I imagine she'll do very well against Kemp, he's rather clearly the "Firebrand" candidate and if he's refusing to expand medicaid that'll probably hurt a bit in the suburbs.

I'll be "bold" and say Lean D for Abrams if Kemp is the R.

I'll go pure tossup.

I'll go Lean R.

That's fair.

[JRP1994]

Something several of y'all need to remember is that Georgia isn't first past the post. It's a runoff state in the general unless the winning candidate gets 50% + 1. And the Libertarian candidate usually gets somewhere around 2-3% of the vote in Georgia.

If election night looks like this:

Abrams: 49%
Kemp: 47%
Libertarian: 3%
Other/Write In: 1%

Abrams probably loses because runoffs have been a political death sentence for GA Dems recently. The question isn't whether Abrams can get more votes, it's whether she can get a majority the first time with third party candidates included.

[Zaybay]

Something several of y'all need to remember is that Georgia isn't first past the post. It's a runoff state in the general unless the winning candidate gets 50% + 1. And the Libertarian candidate usually gets somewhere around 2-3% of the vote in Georgia.

If election night looks like this:

Abrams: 49%
Kemp: 47%
Libertarian: 3%
Other/Write In: 1%

Abrams probably loses because runoffs have been a political death sentence for GA Dems recently. The question isn't whether Abrams can get more votes, it's whether she can get a majority the first time with third party candidates included.

This is not necessarily true. If a runoff were to occur, only voters who are enthusiastic, or regular voters would show up. Its quite possible that, due to the nature of the Trump era, it will be Abrams' voters who will show up. In special elections in GA, Dems have over preformed in runoffs, so I dont see why that would change for Abrams.

[JRP1994]

Something several of y'all need to remember is that Georgia isn't first past the post. It's a runoff state in the general unless the winning candidate gets 50% + 1. And the Libertarian candidate usually gets somewhere around 2-3% of the vote in Georgia.

If election night looks like this:

Abrams: 49%
Kemp: 47%
Libertarian: 3%
Other/Write In: 1%

Abrams probably loses because runoffs have been a political death sentence for GA Dems recently. The question isn't whether Abrams can get more votes, it's whether she can get a majority the first time with third party candidates included.

This is not necessarily true. If a runoff were to occur, only voters who are enthusiastic, or regular voters would show up. Its quite possible that, due to the nature of the Trump era, it will be Abrams' voters who will show up. In special elections in GA, Dems have over preformed in runoffs, so I dont see why that would change for Abrams.

That's fair, but even in incredibly favorable environments for Democrats with extremely high enthusiasm, runoffs in Georgia have been huge disappointments. See: 2008 general election vs runoff here in Georgia

[Zaybay]

Something several of y'all need to remember is that Georgia isn't first past the post. It's a runoff state in the general unless the winning candidate gets 50% + 1. And the Libertarian candidate usually gets somewhere around 2-3% of the vote in Georgia.

If election night looks like this:

Abrams: 49%
Kemp: 47%
Libertarian: 3%
Other/Write In: 1%

Abrams probably loses because runoffs have been a political death sentence for GA Dems recently. The question isn't whether Abrams can get more votes, it's whether she can get a majority the first time with third party candidates included.

This is not necessarily true. If a runoff were to occur, only voters who are enthusiastic, or regular voters would show up. Its quite possible that, due to the nature of the Trump era, it will be Abrams' voters who will show up. In special elections in GA, Dems have over preformed in runoffs, so I dont see why that would change for Abrams.

That's fair, but even in incredibly favorable environments for Democrats with extremely high enthusiasm, runoffs in Georgia have been huge disappointments. See: 2008 general election vs runoff here in Georgia

2008 was 8 years ago. Georgia was still Likely R, while it was MT, MO, ND, and SD that were close. GA has been trending pretty D for a while, it voted R+4 in a D+2 year.

[ON Progressive]

Something several of y'all need to remember is that Georgia isn't first past the post. It's a runoff state in the general unless the winning candidate gets 50% + 1. And the Libertarian candidate usually gets somewhere around 2-3% of the vote in Georgia.

If election night looks like this:

Abrams: 49%
Kemp: 47%
Libertarian: 3%
Other/Write In: 1%

Abrams probably loses because runoffs have been a political death sentence for GA Dems recently. The question isn't whether Abrams can get more votes, it's whether she can get a majority the first time with third party candidates included.

This is not necessarily true. If a runoff were to occur, only voters who are enthusiastic, or regular voters would show up. Its quite possible that, due to the nature of the Trump era, it will be Abrams' voters who will show up. In special elections in GA, Dems have over preformed in runoffs, so I dont see why that would change for Abrams.

Dems have done horribly in state legislative specials in GA outside the Nov 7, 2017 elections though. They got creamed in both January specials. We couldn't even force a runoff in the 111th House District, a 50-47 Clinton seat, and way underperformed Clinton in SD-17 (she lost it 56.5 to 40.8, we lost overall 65.6 to 34.4 in the special).

We also didn't improve on Clinton at all in SD-32 in 2017, and underperformed Clinton in HD-175 in Feburary (Clinton got 36.6% in 2016, and we only got 23.5% in the special).

Low turnout elections like runoffs and special elections hurt Dems in GA, plain and simple.

[Del Tachi]

Final projection for today's runoff:

(✓) Secretary of State Brian Kemp - 56.3%
Lieutenant Governor Casey Cagle - 43.7%

Geography of the vote:  Very similar to the 2014 runoff between Kingston and Perdue.  Kemp does his best south of the Fall Line and in East Georgia, whereas Cagle's best numbers come from Hall County and some northern ATL suburbs.  I'll predict that Cagle will still win the big GOP counties (Cobb, Fulton, Gwinnett, Cherokee, etc.) but his margins will be small enough that they'll be erased by Kemp's big wins in the more rural parts of the state.

[Zaybay]

Something several of y'all need to remember is that Georgia isn't first past the post. It's a runoff state in the general unless the winning candidate gets 50% + 1. And the Libertarian candidate usually gets somewhere around 2-3% of the vote in Georgia.

If election night looks like this:

Abrams: 49%
Kemp: 47%
Libertarian: 3%
Other/Write In: 1%

Abrams probably loses because runoffs have been a political death sentence for GA Dems recently. The question isn't whether Abrams can get more votes, it's whether she can get a majority the first time with third party candidates included.

This is not necessarily true. If a runoff were to occur, only voters who are enthusiastic, or regular voters would show up. Its quite possible that, due to the nature of the Trump era, it will be Abrams' voters who will show up. In special elections in GA, Dems have over preformed in runoffs, so I dont see why that would change for Abrams.

Dems have done horribly in state legislative specials in GA outside the Nov 7, 2017 elections though. They got creamed in both January specials. We couldn't even force a runoff in the 111th House District, a 50-47 Clinton seat, and way underperformed Clinton in SD-17 (she lost it 56.5 to 40.8, we lost overall 65.6 to 34.4 in the special).

We also didn't improve on Clinton at all in SD-32 in 2017, and underperformed Clinton in HD-175 in Feburary (Clinton got 36.6% in 2016, and we only got 23.5% in the special).

Low turnout elections like runoffs and special elections hurt Dems in GA, plain and simple.

We have preformed, on average, worse in GA and other southern states, than in the Rust Belt, or great plains.

But Im not talking about special elections, where the average overpreformance for Dems is D+3-4, Im talking about runoffs. In every single one, the Dem has overpreformed the R results. And when we are likely to see large D turnout for the gubernatorial race, especially against a heavily damaged candidate, then the Ds could lose the general, and win the runoff, its not that out of the question.

Also, I would be careful comparing Clinton numbers to the special elections. Clinton over performed in many suburban areas in the South, mostly due to Trump, and these voters may not be Democrats deep down. For instance, Clinton won the FL senate chamber, both PA chambers, and many others, because these Suburbanites voted for her. The Rust Belt has seen the opposite, where these voters who voted against Hillary are going back to the Democrats. It would be better to use both Obama'12 and Clinton'16 numbers, as that illustrates that, yes, while these were under performances for Ds, they were over performances of Obama in 2012, indicating that there is still a shift.

[Rookie Yinzer]

Something several of y'all need to remember is that Georgia isn't first past the post. It's a runoff state in the general unless the winning candidate gets 50% + 1. And the Libertarian candidate usually gets somewhere around 2-3% of the vote in Georgia.

If election night looks like this:

Abrams: 49%
Kemp: 47%
Libertarian: 3%
Other/Write In: 1%

Abrams probably loses because runoffs have been a political death sentence for GA Dems recently. The question isn't whether Abrams can get more votes, it's whether she can get a majority the first time with third party candidates included.

This is not necessarily true. If a runoff were to occur, only voters who are enthusiastic, or regular voters would show up. Its quite possible that, due to the nature of the Trump era, it will be Abrams' voters who will show up. In special elections in GA, Dems have over preformed in runoffs, so I dont see why that would change for Abrams.

Dems have done horribly in state legislative specials in GA outside the Nov 7, 2017 elections though. They got creamed in both January specials. We couldn't even force a runoff in the 111th House District, a 50-47 Clinton seat, and way underperformed Clinton in SD-17 (she lost it 56.5 to 40.8, we lost overall 65.6 to 34.4 in the special).

We also didn't improve on Clinton at all in SD-32 in 2017, and underperformed Clinton in HD-175 in Feburary (Clinton got 36.6% in 2016, and we only got 23.5% in the special).

Low turnout elections like runoffs and special elections hurt Dems in GA, plain and simple.

This is true. The Dem special election success has been largely on the back of older, ancestral white Democrats and high intensity from angry white liberals. I believe Pres. Griff explained the underperformance like this: a lot of the Democratic vote in those areas were young, black voters who have moved from out of state or from ITP. They are just not going to turn out in special elections. The older population is disproportionately white. My state senate district was 75-25 Obama in 2012 but we recently had a Republican in the seat after a special election but when Hillary was on the ballot the Democrat won 70 percent easily and will face no Republican opposition in November.

Alabama shows black voters and young voters will turn out for a special election if there is investment and it is a marquee race. Abrams will have millions being poured into tv, digital, and field and the prospect of electing the first black governor in the Deep South and the first black woman Governor is going to drive turnout plain and simple.

[Adam Griffin]

EDIT: well, I just noticed RFK covered the broader dynamic in the post above regarding the electorate differences; I wouldn't have bothered had I saw that beforehand!

Yeah, I've written walls of text about this dynamic before so I don't really want to replicate the effort too much, but GA has a specific electoral composition that not only makes it different than most other states, but even different than most other Deep South states. It's not just a heavily non-white electorate, but also a much younger non-white electorate. It's much easier to dominate and improve in specials and run-offs when the Democratic electorate is older and whiter.

Besides the lack of enthusiasm manifesting in state legislative specials...

* Incomplete results; do not have data for Clinton margins in all special elections

...there is the broader issue (as it relates both to these special elections and any applicable run-offs) that enthusiasm doesn't produce better outcomes in low-turnout GA elections, whether they're locally-based or statewide. Maybe in heavily-white districts (Democrats have tended to do better in GA in the heavily-white HD & SD specials compared to 2016), but that's not reflective of most winnable districts or the state at-large.

And just like in 2008 or any other year, that enthusiasm factor gets its load blown on Election Night. 2008 was a much more enthusiastic cycle in my opinion and GA Democrats went from losing by 3 to losing by 15 just a few weeks later (and it could definitely be argued that Jim Martin/2008 GA had a more elastic electorate than exists today). Whether we have a good night or bad night nationally, that energy will have dissipated long before the runoff occurs (and GAGOP voters generally have a good track record of pushing it into high-gear when they're threatened electorally).

[Co-Chair Bagel23]

Poor Stacy, he planned and worked so hard for this.

[IceSpear]

Poor Stacy, he planned and worked so hard for this.

LOL, at first I was really confused by this post.

All these Stacys vying to be governor of Georgia, and it's very possible not a single one makes it. I guess Stacy didn't stand a chance against Chad Brian Kemp.

[Co-Chair Bagel23]

I give Lowell a 25-30% of winning tonight, probably done for, but I still think he is still a tad underestimated. I expected Brian to win by around 55-45. Expect Lowell to do well in the Atlanta area and put up fights in the smaller cities, maybe winning a couple hick counties, but otherwise getting braised like a longhorn elsewhere.

[Zaybay]

Im interested to see the runoff numbers for this race, and the retention from the original election. Could be great insight into what would occur from a general election runoff.

[Alabama_Indy10]

Come on Kemp!

[Co-Chair Bagel23]

Awesome, the time is now!

[Zaybay]

Awesome, the time is now!

Time was changed, results on NY released at 730 now.