Georgia's Very Own Megathread!

[junior chįmp]

The "experts" are going to blow 2018 because they are making predictions based off of the assumption that the status quo which has existed under our current party system will continue to exist and be reflected in upcoming elections. They seem to think that this muh polarization and culture war will keep going on forever but it won't. The Reagan era is over and and anyone who makes predictions thinking the same Red state / Blue state dichtonomy that has existed since the 2000s is a dope.

But wouldn't there be varying levels of truth to the old way of thinking about things until a new order is established? The only time since the country has been powered by electricity where the political landscape blew up practically overnight was during the Great Depression, and even then, despite Democrats taking over almost every single state for at least a brief while, a lot of them starting reverting back to form by the end of the 30s. It doesn't seem like there is any GD-level event yet to disrupt the system that much.

And even if a realignment is right around the corner, it doesn't seem like it is here yet. 2020 would sound like a better bet for that. And still, even if that is the case, realignments are still partially built on existing voting habits. Reagan's was built on the existing GOP coalition + working class whites, which had started shifting years beforehand. A Democratic realignment now would be built on Millennials and college educated voters, with some sizable chunk of working class voters probably breaking away from the GOP.

This isn't really true. The 1994 midterms are a good example....not a single model or poll predicted it because there were underlying generational changes happening that the pollsters didn't see coming or fail to account for.  The 2018 midterms appear to be going the same way....the massive women/millennial vote appear to be ignored by the clown pundits. Think of Trump as a great depression that will affect the end result in ways that can't be measured.

Trump is an unknown/unknown. No predictive model can account for such a disgusting jackass. All of these predictive models account for the idea that you'll have 2 respectable textbook candidates (something like Jeb vs Hillary). Nowhere in American history do you have such a disgusting turd like Trump thrust upon the American electorate WITH the voting rights that the average American has today.

I can't predict for sure what's going to happen but the idea that business like usual will continue under a Trump presidency is insane. The results of AZ-08 should of been proof of that.

[Bacon King]

Abrams internal has her up 48-43 over Cagle and 49-40 over Kemp.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

https://www.georgiapol.com/2018/05/31/abrams-leads-both-republicans-in-first-general-election-poll/

this is beautiful and amazing and perfect

[Bacon King]

I had voted for Evans because I fully doubted Abrams' GOTV setup and her appeal beyond the Democratic base.  I had thought that the big uptick for Democrats in the early voting in the north Atlanta suburbs would be highly favorable for Evans.

I now realize this is not the case.  Abrams dominated throughout the state, and the primary vote between the two parties was the closest it has been in several years.  

Even though I think it will be difficult for her to win, she has the ability to make an impact on making Georgia a two-party state again.  She has to do whatever possible to make inroads in those areas that are going to be very hostile to Democrats (not to mention a black woman).  I keep bringing this up--it's the Obama strategy of having some impact on rural Iowa which allowed him to cut the expected deficits in those areas and to win the state twice in 2008 and 2012.

At the very least, it will make the downstream races very competitive--with good chances to pick up the Lieutenant Governor (perhaps the most powerful position in the state) and SOS.

Does the LG in Georgia enjoy similar powers to the LGs in Mississippi and Texas?

Since nobody has answered this: yes, but it's not at all set in stone by the state constitution, it's mostly just norms and rules within the state Senate itself.

Zell Miller was the most powerful person on the state government when he served his four terms as Lieutenant Governor*. In 2002 however when the GOP took over the State Senate they completely neutered the LG role, giving most of his former powers to the Senate President Pro Tempore or the Senate Majority Leader directly (a certain up and coming guy named Tom Price).

In 2006 however Casey Cagle was elected Lieutenant Governor. The State Senate had become gridlocked, fighting back and forth for the powers formerly held by the LG, everyone fighting over who was allowed to sit on which committees and everything else. It became so hectic that the leaders within the party decided to unilaterally give Casey Cagle all the powers and more that the office previously held. As thing stands now the Lieutenant Governor is basically the dictator of the State Senate.

So yes the office is very strong on paper but don't doubt for a second that a Democratic Lieutenant Governor could once again find themselves as nothing more than a figurehead if the Republicans in the State Senate demand it.




* = in many ways the most powerful person in state government was the late, great Tom Murphy, the Speaker of the House from 1972 to 2002, who in some ways had even more authority over the House than the Lieutenant Governor held over the Senate. During the first half of his Speakership however he shared power more-or-less equally with Zell Miller. Sometimes even the entire outcome of an entire legislative session was decided in a private meeting of the two men. I consider Zell the more powerful member of the partnership only due to the executive functions also held by his office. It's only after Miller finally became Governor that Tom Murphy used his seniority over the new LG to firmly establish himself as the dominant member of the duo, thereafter becoming the most powerful person in the state)

(at Georgia State I took a class called Georgia Government; the professor was Tom Murphy's chief of staff for most of his reign. I learned so many great anecdotes from him)

[KingSweden]

I’ve read about Tom Murphy - sounds like he was quite the character.

Anyways, thanks for the detailed response!

[Rookie Yinzer]

This is really weird but for the number crunchers out there, can you guesstimate how Milton, Fulton, and Campbell counties would have voted in 2016 with their pre-1929 boundaries?

[Adam Griffin]

This is really weird but for the number crunchers out there, can you guesstimate how Milton, Fulton, and Campbell counties would have voted in 2016 with their pre-1929 boundaries?

Give or take a few points:

Milton: Clinton 49-46
Fulton: Clinton 76-19
Campbell: Clinton 85-13

Estimates are based off of 2008 totals and inferring general trends in '12/'16 for each broader area.

[Rookie Yinzer]

This is really weird but for the number crunchers out there, can you guesstimate how Milton, Fulton, and Campbell counties would have voted in 2016 with their pre-1929 boundaries?

Give or take a few points:

Milton: Clinton 49-46
Fulton: Clinton 76-19
Campbell: Clinton 85-13

Estimates are based off of 2008 totals and inferring general trends in '12/'16 for each broader area.

Thanks you're awesome! I wanted to see if Trump won the old Milton area barely, but a small Clinton plurality seems about right. I also wanted to see how far to the left old Fulton and Campbell would go. Campbell would have just barely been the most Democratic county in the state, just a tinge to the left of Clayton.

[Adam Griffin]

This is really weird but for the number crunchers out there, can you guesstimate how Milton, Fulton, and Campbell counties would have voted in 2016 with their pre-1929 boundaries?

Give or take a few points:

Milton: Clinton 49-46
Fulton: Clinton 76-19
Campbell: Clinton 85-13

Estimates are based off of 2008 totals and inferring general trends in '12/'16 for each broader area.

Thanks you're awesome! I wanted to see if Trump won the old Milton area barely, but a small Clinton plurality seems about right. I also wanted to see how far to the left old Fulton and Campbell would go. Campbell would have just barely been the most Democratic county in the state, just a tinge to the left of Clayton.

No trouble at all! At second glance, I feel one of those projections at minimum is off unless the voter distribution in the county is way different than the population. Based on the old 2010 population estimates, it would suggest Clinton easily cleared 70% of the vote, which didn't happen. I'm not sure which might be off, though. I have a hard time seeing Clinton sink below 85% in a 85% black area (Campbell), and the swings in north Fulton had to be at least several points greater than the county as a whole...however, maybe my estimates for Milton are too generous.


Looks like Low-Energy Cagle is coming up with a new name for his opponent:

 

[Progressive Pessimist]

This is really weird but for the number crunchers out there, can you guesstimate how Milton, Fulton, and Campbell counties would have voted in 2016 with their pre-1929 boundaries?

Give or take a few points:

Milton: Clinton 49-46
Fulton: Clinton 76-19
Campbell: Clinton 85-13

Estimates are based off of 2008 totals and inferring general trends in '12/'16 for each broader area.

Thanks you're awesome! I wanted to see if Drumpf won the old Milton area barely, but a small Clinton plurality seems about right. I also wanted to see how far to the left old Fulton and Campbell would go. Campbell would have just barely been the most Democratic county in the state, just a tinge to the left of Clayton.

No trouble at all! At second glance, I feel one of those projections at minimum is off unless the voter distribution in the county is way different than the population. Based on the old 2010 population estimates, it would suggest Clinton easily cleared 70% of the vote, which didn't happen. I'm not sure which might be off, though. I have a hard time seeing Clinton sink below 85% in a 85% black area (Campbell), and the swings in north Fulton had to be at least several points greater than the county as a whole...however, maybe my estimates for Milton are too generous.


Looks like Low-Energy Cagle is coming up with a new name for his opponent:

 

Not only is that pun terrible (and I love puns!) but couldn't Cagle at least try to use a less awkward picture? He looks like he's holding in a fart.

[Adam Griffin]

Not only is that pun terrible (and I love puns!)but couldn't Cagle at least try to use a less awkward picture? He looks like he's holding in a fart.

I assure you: that's just the way he looks!

In reality, what it really looks like he's always trying to hold in is a classic case of Gay-Face™ from peeking out too much.

[💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)]

Not only is that pun terrible (and I love puns!)but couldn't Cagle at least try to use a less awkward picture? He looks like he's holding in a fart.

I assure you: that's just the way he looks!

In reality, what it really looks like he's always trying to hold in is a classic case of Gay-Face™ from peeking out too much.

Why is Cagle doing so well? So much of politics is image and identity, but Cagle looks like he should be running for the PTA in Brooklyn. Like, as much as I dislike Kemp, at least he looks and sounds like a man's man in a primary that is (I would assume) dictated in part by how much masculinity you can exude. What's going on here?

and before I get flamed to death: I'm not saying that having masculine characteristics makes one a better candidate, I'm saying that my expectation is that it would give one a competitive advantage in a Republican primary race.

[Adam Griffin]

Why is Cagle doing so well? So much of politics is image and identity, but Cagle looks like he should be running for the PTA in Brooklyn. Like, as much as I dislike Kemp, at least he looks and sounds like a man's man in a primary that is (I would assume) dictated in part by how much masculinity you can exude. What's going on here?

and before I get flamed to death: I'm not saying that having masculine characteristics makes one a better candidate, I'm saying that my expectation is that it would give one a competitive advantage in a Republican primary race.

The short and sweet of it is: Cagle has been Lt Gov for 12 years and GAGOP voters are much more mainline as a whole than in many other Southern states. I've written multiple times in previous pages and threads about how Cagle is actually the loonier of the two when you get down to brass tacks, but there is a substantial segment of GAGOP voters who will defer to the incumbent or "mainline" candidate, and of those, a huge portion are lobotomized in effect (i.e. basically assuming that whoever has the blessing of the establishment and/or who is the incumbent must be the more reasonable candidate).

In this case/additionally, Cagle has also campaigned as the mainline option (despite being the more extreme; while Kemp, the more moderate of the two, has flanked to the right to try to win) and has been able to do so successfully due to the power of incumbency and the state establishment siding with him because of said incumbency.  

Remember, Georgia is substantially urbanized compared to many other states. While there are plenty of nuts and weirdos of that classic Southern variety here, the share of GOP voters statewide who come from metro areas isn't that much smaller than it is for the Democrats. At least on the surface, these people like to believe they're more dignified than their rural and/or reactionary, Tea-Party, Trump-loving counterparts.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Cagle & Kemp continue to fight over which of them loves guns more:

https://politics.myajc.com/blog/politics/new-gun-fight-erupts-race-for-gop-race-for-governor/1OpxqSSMn3fYdeFxMCOeEL/

[libertpaulian]

Cagle & Kemp continue to fight over which of them loves guns more:

https://politics.myajc.com/blog/politics/new-gun-fight-erupts-race-for-gop-race-for-governor/1OpxqSSMn3fYdeFxMCOeEL/

This is beginning to feel like the Alabama primary in which Moore and Brooks had to out-conservative each other during the runoff while Jones was out on the campaign trail making an identity for himself.

[QAnonKelly]

This runoff is really indicative of how the state is changing. Cagle in theory should have done well in the Atlanta area but he really underperformed. There’s not enough votes to carry them over the finish line there anymore. Abrams outright won Gwinnett and Cobb was only 300 votes short of being a win for her. In yesteryear they’d be going to those two counties and fighting it out to win but they both have to go crazy to court rural voters. All while Abrams has six more weeks all to herself to get out there and do her thing. Cagle will win if he gets out of the runoff but I could see her eeking out a win against Kemp.

[Rookie Yinzer]

Clay Tippins has Cagle on audio admitting he backed an education bill he thought was bad policy because it would hurt a group that would have poured money into Hill's campaign if he made the run-off.

https://www.wsbtv.com/news/2-investigates/secret-recording-cagle-says-he-backed-controversial-bill-for-politics-not-policy/764972739

Get on it Kemp!

[QAnonKelly]

Clay Tippins has Cagle on audio admitting he backed an education bill he thought was bad policy because it would hurt a group that would have poured money into Hill's campaign if he made the run-off.

https://www.wsbtv.com/news/2-investigates/secret-recording-cagle-says-he-backed-controversial-bill-for-politics-not-policy/764972739

Get on it Kemp!

Lol what a colossal mistake on Cagle’s part. This is gonna be all Kemp talks about for the next six weeks

[Politician]

Cagle & Kemp continue to fight over which of them loves guns more:

https://politics.myajc.com/blog/politics/new-gun-fight-erupts-race-for-gop-race-for-governor/1OpxqSSMn3fYdeFxMCOeEL/

This is beginning to feel like the Alabama primary in which Moore and Brooks had to out-conservative each other during the runoff while Jones was out on the campaign trail making an identity for himself.

Governor Abrams in sight.

[KingSweden]

Clay Tippins has Cagle on audio admitting he backed an education bill he thought was bad policy because it would hurt a group that would have poured money into Hill's campaign if he made the run-off.

https://www.wsbtv.com/news/2-investigates/secret-recording-cagle-says-he-backed-controversial-bill-for-politics-not-policy/764972739

Get on it Kemp!

Lol what a colossal mistake on Cagle’s part. This is gonna be all Kemp talks about for the next six weeks

It would be malpractice for Kemp not to hammer him over this

[Progressive Pessimist]

Clay Tippins has Cagle on audio admitting he backed an education bill he thought was bad policy because it would hurt a group that would have poured money into Hill's campaign if he made the run-off.

https://www.wsbtv.com/news/2-investigates/secret-recording-cagle-says-he-backed-controversial-bill-for-politics-not-policy/764972739

Get on it Kemp!

Lol what a colossal mistake on Cagle’s part. This is gonna be all Kemp talks about for the next six weeks

Wow that's some petty politics right there. Cagle really might be more evil.

[ON Progressive]

Clay Tippins has Cagle on audio admitting he backed an education bill he thought was bad policy because it would hurt a group that would have poured money into Hill's campaign if he made the run-off.

https://www.wsbtv.com/news/2-investigates/secret-recording-cagle-says-he-backed-controversial-bill-for-politics-not-policy/764972739

Get on it Kemp!

This primary is going to get nasty, and I'm all for it.

[Young Conservative]

Cagle & Kemp continue to fight over which of them loves guns more:

https://politics.myajc.com/blog/politics/new-gun-fight-erupts-race-for-gop-race-for-governor/1OpxqSSMn3fYdeFxMCOeEL/

This is beginning to feel like the Alabama primary in which Moore and Brooks had to out-conservative each other during the runoff while Jones was out on the campaign trail making an identity for himself.

Governor Abrams KEMP in sight.

[Thunder98]

Clay Tippins has Cagle on audio admitting he backed an education bill he thought was bad policy because it would hurt a group that would have poured money into Hill's campaign if he made the run-off.

https://www.wsbtv.com/news/2-investigates/secret-recording-cagle-says-he-backed-controversial-bill-for-politics-not-policy/764972739

Get on it Kemp!

This primary is going to get nasty, and I'm all for it.

A bloody GOP Runoff should help Abrams a lot.

[Adam Griffin]

Wow that's some petty politics right there. Cagle really might be more evil.

Trust: he is.

[QAnonKelly]

Hill finished 7 points behind Kemp. That’s not insurmountable, he very easily could have gotten that bump from an extra $3m