GA-SEN 2022 Megathread: Werewolves and Vampires

[ProgressiveModerate]

Wasn't this the guy who just let America become a socialists country?

[ProgressiveModerate]

If Perdue was just entering the political scene in 2022, I could see his appeal, but after the GA runoffs, he's damaged goods. GA voters already rejected him, and Democrats already have a long list of attacks to use against him from the beginning. The GA runoffs proved that he has little suburban crossover, at least not anymore than your average R, and he can easily be painted as and out of touch rich traitor to Trump's base since he is literally the reason Democrats have a trifecta.

If 2022 is a good year for Republicans, partisanship alone might put him over the edge, but I really think he is far from the GOP's best option.

[ProgressiveModerate]

https://twitter.com/bluestein/status/1363835943816491010?s=20

Lol I feel like the GA GOP are going to put forward as their worst and dullest for this race. She was already defeated by radical liberal Raphael Warnock once. This is going to be a fun race to watch. Still tossup, but if the GA GOP continues to implode Warnock could hold on by a respectful margin

[ProgressiveModerate]

I gotta say, it feels like in pretty much every key Senate race, GOP recruits have been from meh to downright awful, and if they lose any of these races it'd be quite embarrasing.

This is the problem when you run somebody just because you think they're a cool football player when they know nothing about policy.

[ProgressiveModerate]

I gotta say, it feels like in pretty much every key Senate race, GOP recruits have been from meh to downright awful, and if they lose any of these races it'd be quite embarrasing.

This is the problem when you run somebody just because you think they're a cool football player when they know nothing about policy.

I was told candidate quality doesn't matter, the only thing that matters is it is a Democratic midterm.

Ultimately the overall dynamics of the year are the most important, and the GOP very well may win this race for that reason alone, however, candidate quality can still impact the margin a few % and ina  close race that can really matter. Also Walker is a great lightning rod for Dems and I struggle to see what's particularly notable about his appeal to GOP voters. It's not like because he's black he's suddenly gonna get massive swings in downtown Atlanta which is how many on the GOP seem to think whenever they run a canidate of colour.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Could Christian Walker (Hershel Walkers son) be a liability.

I don’t say this lightly but he seems like a really terrible person. He’s gay yet actively is against the lgbtq community and comes across as a spoiled brat and kinda crazy on his social media. He also spends tons of money on clothes and stuff and then complains about high gas prices. One post even tried to argue the lgbtq community isn’t impressed because he had a nice car and fancy clothes. Look it up and you’ll see what I mean

[ProgressiveModerate]

https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1536513537144770562

I feel like Walker's been focusing a lot on the culture war stuff rather than actual policy matters, which isn't surprising since he himself is a celebrity, not a politician or someone who's been heavily involved in public service.

Even stereotypical Republican talking points on policies dealing with such as guns and healthcare he's been pretty quiet on.

A Walker vs Warnock debate would really be gold.

[ProgressiveModerate]

https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1536513537144770562

Lol that interview is a funny look given Carson’s intelligence. But Walker is truly charismatic and seems like a nice guy, which is big

if you think walker is charismatic you probably also have CTE

He's charrismatic in his tone; he has quite a soothing pattern of speech that sounds friendly and welcoming compared to many people running for office

However, the content of what he says is not very charismatic, though that could vary based on ideology.

[ProgressiveModerate]

I'm guessing the entire right wing media ecosystem will likely just ignore the story of walker's discarded son? Even after Walker has made fatherhood a somewhat central theme in his (albeit incoherent) stump speeches/interviews?

Considering one of his sons is a literal lightning rod and the other he "abandoned", this seems like somethign waiting to bite him.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Glad to see Walker supports statehood for PR and DC. I wonder if him moderating on this issue could help win over white women in Cobb County.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Tilt R -> Lean R. The media holds Democrats to an impossible standard, and Republicans to no standard at all.

This is a bit ironic cause in this race Walker's gotten most of the bad press and Warnock has gotten mostly positive press.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Why is it that in 3 of the most key Senate races races, the GOP is nominating complete nuts that had clear problems even before the primary (GA, PA, and AZ)? Obviously, the GOP may still win all 3 of these races and one can argued their favored too, but they seem likely to run behind the baseline.

Some may argue that Ds holding the Senate doesn't matter if Rs still win the House (which they favored to do), and while there would be a brick wall in terms of policy, it would allow Biden 2 more years of appointments for things such as courts which is powerful.

Also RoJo really isn't acting like a Senator who's up for re-election in a swing state; he's heavily relying on the year carrying him. In 2018, sure people like Stabenow and Baldwin weren't particuarly being moderate heros, but at least they stayed on the downlow.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Christian Walker is trending on Twitter again. Yesterday he harassed singer Kehlani at the Starbucks drive through. Apparently he was also accosting workers over the display of pride flags.

https://theshaderoom.com/update-kehlani-says-christian-walker-was-losing-his-mind-over-gay-trans-flags-in-the-starbucks-window/

I believe it's 100% appropriate to judge a political candidate by how their children turn out. Walker's kid is entitled, vain, ignorant, spoiled, trashy, classless and stupid. It speaks volumes about his father.

I don’t mean this in the wrong way but both Walkers seem to have underlying problems with their mental state.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Honestly, I think attacking Walker has to be done strategically because otherwise it may come across as bullying to some.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Honestly, I think attacking Walker has to be done strategically because otherwise it may come across as bullying to some.

Walker is, of course, a pitiable individual, even if that doesn't make him any more worthy of being in the US Senate; football was horrendously unsafe when he played, and given his mental issues he really shouldn't have been allowed to play. He definitely shouldn't have been put in a position where that was his most viable path to success in life. As such, I don't really think it makes sense to "bully" him. What would you even say? Everyone knows it isn't his fault, but it's still relevant when thinking about who should be our Senator.

The people who should really be bullied, imho, are the Georgia voters who want to unseat a perfectly good incumbent for a man clearly in need of serious mental help because partisanship so fully controls their thought at this point. Most of them have no excuse.

I’m very curious to see how Warnock performs in a lot of the “moderate” Atlanta suburbs where he underran Biden in the special election despite doing better statewide. I have lost a lot of faith in places like Cherokee County which nets the GOP a lot of votes even though it’s been shifting left

[ProgressiveModerate]

If he refuses to attend debates, they should still be held with Warnock and an empty podium for Walker.

At the empty podium, play clips of Walker spewing nonsense in place of a live person. Get his insanity out there to more voters.

That would make for good ads

[ProgressiveModerate]

Walker acting as if "no one is talking about" abortion rights is a.... choice. Especially for suburban constituencies.

https://twitter.com/bluestein/status/1550217257774637057

I know, it's probably not a very popular opinion here and I'd love to be proven wrong, though I'm not fully convinced Roe / abortion is a deciding issue here. Sure, almost anybody has an opinion on abortion, though the issue itsself just affects a very limited number of people in their daily lives. On the other hand, inflation and affordability affects pretty much anyone.

I still consider Warnock a slight favorite because he's a strong candidate, I would just not bank on the abortion debate to save him. Dems must talk rising prices and other kitchentable issues.

It doesn't need to be "the" issue, but Walker effectively downplaying everything and saying that it doesn't matter at *all* on an issue that has overwhelming support (and with GA now fully implementing a 6-week ban), he's not only giving Warnock another thing to attack him on, but abortion rights are a huge issue for the exact voters who which GA is trending blue with, so activating them with these types of comments is just a terrible move imo.

Tbf, polling suggest in the Southeast outside of FL, abortion isn’t as much of a winning issue as it is elsewhere, and it only narrowly outperforms partisanship. It can be used for activating more Dems but won’t have the same electoral consequences as a place such as PA.

[ProgressiveModerate]

If control of the Senate hangs on a runoff in this seat again (which is very possible), how seriously do both sides take this race?

[ProgressiveModerate]

https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1558272854298431489

Sorry but did anyone else have a seizure trying to figure out what he's trying to say?

[ProgressiveModerate]

Not sure if others feel the same way, but I do think one thing that makes it difficult to for me to support Walker despite not loving the Dems' agenda is that I literally find it hard to understand and follow his thinking and speech. He seems to have half-formed "opinions" on substantive topics without really being able to articulate why those are the right policies and how those opinions (translated into policies) would lead to a better quality of life for Georgians. It just creates an overall impression for me that he's not really a serious candidate for Senator, which in turn makes it seem like Warnock is the safer choice.

Are you leaning Kemp for Gov, and what could Walker do to ultimately get your vote (or on the converse Warnock do to lose it).

[ProgressiveModerate]

I-

https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1559955661689085952

I think part of the issue with Walker is he doesn't really have any political or even public service achievements that would make him qualified for office. Noem is basically just saying vote for Walker cause... "he's been in every fight to save America" whatever that means.

This is the problem when you run celeberties. Also the way Noem is talking to him as if he's like a toddler or smtg is just lol.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Question for anyone on the ground or who has seen ads - is Warnock focusing on abortion? I feel like he has not been hitting Walker nearly enough on the issue, but maybe I just haven't seen ads about it.

Abrams is, Warnock isn't, in the ads I've seen.

Interesting. Feels like a total miscalculation on his part.

In Georgia? Not at all.

How so? Even a place like KS is overwhelmingly pro-choice, clearly.

Cause in the Southern states, large swaths of Dem voting rural blacks oppose abortion and are generally just culturally more conservative on social issues. Really the only place where abortion has support in the South is liberal cities and Atlanta alone isn't enough to carry the state (though it can get a Dem 80% of the way there).

[ProgressiveModerate]

I suppose I'm one of these "swing voters" but for me, it's less about wanting to be undecided / putting off a decision and more about conflicting emotions I'm feeling this cycle. On the one hand, I don't want the Democrats in charge of the budget and on the other hand I don't want Republicans in charge of my wife's body. Scandals that make me question if a candidate is fundamentally fit for office absolutely can sway my vote.

A bunch of Biden/Warnock/Ossoff voters are about to vote for Kemp next month. These revelations absolutely have an effect on these same swing voters.

Honestly there are some swing voters who want to look "undecided".

They truly Can by voting both for Kemp and Warnock and I think this is what they will do

If that is the case I would think you'd vote against Kemp and for Walker. Abortion will be controlled by the states. No national abortion ban is taking place in the senate. The votes aren't there for it and Biden would never sign it even if there were 60+ votes.

This is an incredibly short-sighted view that ignores the fact that Senators serve six-year terms. A second Trump presidency paired with a Republican majority in the House and Senate would very likely result in some sort of national abortion ban and the only real question is whether it would be six weeks, ten weeks, or fifteen weeks.

You see the GOP having 60+ senate seats along with a house majority and president? I sure as hell do not. They would need at least 62 seats. Collins and Murkowski would not vote for it and even in their wildest dreams if that were to ever happen I do not see any form of national ban taking place. State bans are much more likely which is why I would think someone from GA who is more concerned about abortion would vote against R's in the governors race and not the senate race.

If you don't think republicans would nuke the filibuster to pass a national abortion ban, you haven't been paying attention.

I was around in 2017 and 2018 a whole 4-5 years ago when they easily could have done so and did not. What merit is there to suggest they will? It will literally come back to bite them in the ass the next time the Democrats have the trifecta. GOP can pass tax cuts and judges with a simple majority and they have the supreme court on their side too. Nuking the filibuster would be beyond stupid by them. They have zero reason to do so.

Well, see, the premise of your argument is flawed as they most definitely NOT could have easily done so in 17/18 due to Murkowski/Collins/Romney. In a hypothetical situation like you put forth above where republicans have 60 seats, the filibuster is gone.

Just b/c something is "beyond stupid" does not mean the GOP won't do it. It was beyond stupid of them to overturn Roe in a midterm year in which they were supposed to cruise to victory, yet they did it (and don't tell me that the six votes to overturn Roe are not republican politicians in robes). It was beyond stupid of them to recruit and/or nominate the likes of OZ, Walker, Masters, Vance, Dixon, Mastriano, etc, etc, etc. It was beyond stupid of them to not convict trump in the Senate when they had the chance and kill the possibility of him ever becoming their party's nominee again, but instead he continues to inject himself into the news and hurt republicans. Yet they did all of these things.

Mitt Romney was not a senator then. He won in 2018 and become a senator once the democrats had the house and even prior to that Mitch did not even entertain the idea despite pressure from Trump. I really don’t know why you think there is a huge reason or motive for the GOP to end the filibuster. That would literally kill and screw them the next time Dems take over. There will always be senators on both sides with reservations and rightfully so.

The GOP did not overturn Roe, the courts did. Mississippi decided to sue and that’s how we got here. A No one in the GOP would decide to overturn Roe in a midterm year of all years and hurt themselves politically.

Also, GOP politicians did not nominate those candidates, Trump endorsed them,  and a good chunk of GOP voters not politicians were dumb enough to vote for them.

Curious, given the GOP's official position that if a democrat wins an election it was stolen, that you think that if there is ever another GOP trifecta that they would allow themselves to lose it by turning over power. This is almost pure fantasy at this point.

LMAO. The GOP purposefully appointed and confirmed three justices to SCOTUS that they knew would put aside the constitution and make up law out of whole cloth and rule based on their personal political and religious beliefs instead of the law to overturn Roe. Saying "the courts" (it was ONE court, btw) overturned Roe is a distinction with no difference. The "justices" are republican partisans in robes. The GOP overturned Roe. This can't be made any simpler or more plain to see.

If trump is solely responsible for all of the terrible GOP candidates then why has the party not thrown trump under the bus? Stopped defending him? Cut him off? Stopped paying his massive legal fees? B/c they agree with, support and in many cases recruited these horrible candidates.

I think the upcoming SCOTUS cases about Alabama's congressional map and the Independent State Legislature case will really show how hackish this court is since both those cases are directly about power in a way something like Dobbs wasn't.

In both these cases there's a pretty wide range of theoretical ways the court could rule, but a ruling that entirely guts what remains of VRA and a ruling that nearly fully embraces ISL, overturning redistricting commissions and locking out courts of doing their jobs, would be troubling

[ProgressiveModerate]

Was pleasantly surprised by some of Walker's performance. Obviously there was a still a good deal of idiocy to go around - the solution to rising insulin prices being cheap gasoline, the prop stunt, etc- but I entered with literally zero expectations, and he held Warnock's feet to the fire incredibly effectively on the abortion issue, he declared with no reservations that he would accept any outcome in November, and he didn't completely sh*t the bed. Obviously, accepting the result of an election is not something for which someone should be given much kudos, but it was still pleasing to hear in this day and age.

Somehow I don't think one side saying the issue should be with a woman and her doctor and the other side saying "why are you aborting babies instead of baptizing them" is going to be seen at parity with most rational people

Walker responding "You want taxpayer funding for abortion, so you're bringing the government right back into the room" upon Warnock saying the doctor's room was too small for a woman, her doctor, and the government was a fantastic rebuttal, and one that Warnock didn't even deny.

Warnock's position on abortion is something that I've always been very uncomfortable about with him. He's adopting the generic Democratic position on the issue, and I don't think I've ever heard him say that he was personally pro-life or that he didn't morally condone the practice. Yes, he's a Democrat, but he's also a pastor, and I've always struggled with how a man of God can support a practice such as that.

Because you're a pastor, you should be automatically be pro-life? Come on, that is some gross stuff. It's 2022, and there is nothing morally wrong with abortion. Stop it.

You need to stop it. Don't expect me to bend to your desires on this issue. I've been very clear about my stances with regards to abortion policy, but I'll reiterate my stances again, and note how they are at odds with those of the Democrats. I don't support taxpayer funding of abortion (which Warnock does), I support a 15-week ban on the practice (which Warnock and other Democrats don't), and I support strictures such as parental consent, parental notification, and licensing/safety requirements for abortion providers, as well as a mandatory waiting period.

I am a strong supporter of the Hyde Amendment. I don't think abortion should be entirely banned, and I also support the exceptions for rape, incest, and life/health of the mother. But I think the Democrats have become too extreme on this issue, and I surely don't support the Women's Health Protection Act. All of this weighs on how I decide to vote, and who I decide to vote for. On this issue, I don't agree with Warnock.

Yes, abortion is morally wrong, and yes, it should be permitted, at least to a certain extent, but not without limits, and it should not be regarded with praise.

I agree on this.

At the end of the day, abortion is mainly a medical/scientific issue.

While morals def have a role in the discussion Republicans sort of abused the morals of “killing” a fetus. They use this to paint anyone who disagrees with them as heartless.

On the flip side, democrats have made abortion synonymous with women’s rights and have used that to say if you disagree with our position, then you don’t support women and are sexist.

Very few countries have no restrictions on abortion but most countries have basic guidelines to allow it in most cases. Relative to the world, both sides are quite extreme on this issue which imo has gotten way more attention than it needs or deserves. Both sides just use it to get attention and messaging.

Again, I don’t mean this in the wrong way, but I feel like abortion doenst rise to the level of issues such as the economy/inflation, climate change, energy, taxes, general healthcare, gun violence+crime, LGBTQ rights, democracy, ect in terms of actually shaping our society. Yet it sucks up so much Oxygen.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Was pleasantly surprised by some of Walker's performance. Obviously there was a still a good deal of idiocy to go around - the solution to rising insulin prices being cheap gasoline, the prop stunt, etc- but I entered with literally zero expectations, and he held Warnock's feet to the fire incredibly effectively on the abortion issue, he declared with no reservations that he would accept any outcome in November, and he didn't completely sh*t the bed. Obviously, accepting the result of an election is not something for which someone should be given much kudos, but it was still pleasing to hear in this day and age.

Somehow I don't think one side saying the issue should be with a woman and her doctor and the other side saying "why are you aborting babies instead of baptizing them" is going to be seen at parity with most rational people

Walker responding "You want taxpayer funding for abortion, so you're bringing the government right back into the room" upon Warnock saying the doctor's room was too small for a woman, her doctor, and the government was a fantastic rebuttal, and one that Warnock didn't even deny.

Warnock's position on abortion is something that I've always been very uncomfortable about with him. He's adopting the generic Democratic position on the issue, and I don't think I've ever heard him say that he was personally pro-life or that he didn't morally condone the practice. Yes, he's a Democrat, but he's also a pastor, and I've always struggled with how a man of God can support a practice such as that.

Because you're a pastor, you should be automatically be pro-life? Come on, that is some gross stuff. It's 2022, and there is nothing morally wrong with abortion. Stop it.

You need to stop it. Don't expect me to bend to your desires on this issue. I've been very clear about my stances with regards to abortion policy, but I'll reiterate my stances again, and note how they are at odds with those of the Democrats. I don't support taxpayer funding of abortion (which Warnock does), I support a 15-week ban on the practice (which Warnock and other Democrats don't), and I support strictures such as parental consent, parental notification, and licensing/safety requirements for abortion providers, as well as a mandatory waiting period.

I am a strong supporter of the Hyde Amendment. I don't think abortion should be entirely banned, and I also support the exceptions for rape, incest, and life/health of the mother. But I think the Democrats have become too extreme on this issue, and I surely don't support the Women's Health Protection Act. All of this weighs on how I decide to vote, and who I decide to vote for. On this issue, I don't agree with Warnock.

Yes, abortion is morally wrong, and yes, it should be permitted, at least to a certain extent, but not without limits, and it should not be regarded with praise.

I agree on this.

At the end of the day, abortion is mainly a medical/scientific issue.

While morals def have a role in the discussion Republicans sort of abused the morals of “killing” a fetus. They use this to paint anyone who disagrees with them as heartless.

On the flip side, democrats have made abortion synonymous with women’s rights and have used that to say if you disagree with our position, then you don’t support women and are sexist.

Very few countries have no restrictions on abortion but most countries have basic guidelines to allow it in most cases. Relative to the world, both sides are quite extreme on this issue which imo has gotten way more attention than it needs or deserves. Both sides just use it to get attention and messaging.

Again, I don’t mean this in the wrong way, but I feel like abortion doenst rise to the level of issues such as the economy/inflation, climate change, energy, taxes, general healthcare, gun violence+crime, LGBTQ rights, democracy, ect in terms of actually shaping our society. Yet it sucks up so much Oxygen.

And it's likely because you're a man.

Why is so hard for people to grasp that abortion rights is not just about abortion - it's about a fundamental right of a person (women) to make a CHOICE about THEIR body?! That is the point! It is a women's right's issue. If you disagree with the right to choose, or Roe v Wade, then you're saying a woman doesn't have a *RIGHT* to what happens to *HER* body.

So yes, for WOMEN, it's likely a little more important than taxes for gods sake. Jesus christ, this should not have to be explained still.

Yes I am a man so this issue is less likely to directly impact me personally, but it doesn't exclude me from being able to have an opinion.

I do believe abortion is a right for women, my main issue is with elective abortions being covered by taxpayer dollars and late term elective abortions (though it's important to remember as is those are rare).

I understand why a lot of women are fearful about the issue after the SCOTUS ruling and these very strict laws in Republican lead states. But that doesn't mean that abortion should go unrestricted.

Ig another good example of a right we all have but is restricted is guns. Many gun owners see any action small or large as a potential infringement on their right to carry. But realistically, we need restrictions on guns because otherwise we have violence and death.