Georgia's Very Own Megathread!

[nolesfan2011]

Yep I agree, if only the Dem candidates had any money to compete in those type of races.

Registration drives are critical but Dems still need to realize they are gonna have to win some more of the white vote to win the state, especially white men. Even if it is just suburban whites that would make the difference.

I think they should go try and get the rural vote again, simply because GA isn't as split of a state as VA, CO and NC are. It is still considerably more "southern" than either of the states that went for Obama in the south. So you can't just fuse a coalition of increased minority turnout coupled with affluent whites (mainly northern blue state expats, NOVA is like Maryland really).

The GA GOP is also having an identity battle between the rural and suburban Republicans, and the ones who are socially based or economically based. Romney Republicans vs. Santorum Republicans basically and on some issues like immigration, they have sided with the suburban Republicans over the rural ones.

With the immigration bill, they ticked off a lot of otherwise socially and economically conservative farmers who relied on the cheap labor undocumented immigrants provided, in favor of the suburban Republicans who were hollering about "benefits" and stuff.

The problem is Dems never made a play for that crowd, and messaged horribly, focusing on "racism" and "bigotry" related to the immigration law, rather than the economic and social impacts, which white voters especially rural ones are more concerned about.

Those farmers and such were never reached out to.

And yes South and Central GA does have rather high poverty rates among both whites and blacks, and plenty of people utilize medicare/medicaid, food stamps etc. even while the GOP rants and raves against them, its Dems who stick up for those programs. But again that point is never made and people aren't reached out to.

Price and Woodal's districts are way too Republican than they should be. They have a growing minority population and a ton of soft Republicans who vote GOP but are fine with things like gay marriage. A pro business Democrat, maybe a CEO, who possesses an air of independence on economic issues while holding the party line on social issues could certainly give Price a run for his money in the affluent 6th district, although I'm not sure he or she could win- just give the GOP a good scare.

Another thing that caught my eye. Obama lost Georgia by 300K votes. Which is a lot, but I can almost guarantee you that there are at least 300,000 or more Democratic leaning minorities out there (blacks, hispanics, asians) who could close the gap if they just bothered to register and vote in elections. Maybe making Georgia competitive isn't just about winning over moderates, maybe it's more about activating the fast growing minority population.

I have another question for you guys about the game plan: Should the Democratic Party here in GA try to fuse a coalition between minorities, Atlanta, and moderate suburbanites as we have seen in places like Virginia (NoVa) or should they try to appeal again to white voters in rural Georgia?

On the one hand, the moderate suburbs could be low hanging fruit if the Democrats here made a play. They're probably most likely to be turned off by the antiquated social views of the GOP. We've seen the same plan work in Northern Virginia and the Research Triangle. Many suburban areas of Atlanta are just as affluent and well educated so it makes some sense.
   
On the other hand, the Georgia GOP is increasingly becoming dominated by tea party types in the suburbs and exurbs (the "no new taxes EVER" crowd). Perhaps Democrats could convince rural voters that the Georgia GOP isn't taking care of their needs anymore. It seems to me like these voters in poorer areas are actually fine with activist government if they think it benefits them- one of the reasons Sanford Bishop does so well and John Barrow held on to his seat this year.

Whaddya think?

[freepcrusher]

I would think that a lieberdem of sorts would be the best bet for what the dems could run in GA.

[Adam Griffin]

Price, Handel, or Graves, I really don't care. Any of them would be better than Shameless.

(I throw in Graves purely for his PATRIOT Act extension and NDAA votes.)

Only if you want an actual theocracy in the state of Georgia.

I find the concept of Baker or Reed for either Governor or Senate interesting, but I still believe that we are not at the point where we can elect an African-American as a Senator or Governor. Other statewide offices seem to be less affected by race. I'm still going for a long-shot Jason Carter or hell, maybe even Carol Porter (although her and Dubose are divorced now).

[MaxQue]

Does Jason Carter is of any relation to Jimmy Carter, this being Georgia?

[nolesfan2011]

Jason is Jimmy's grandson

Does Jason Carter is of any relation to Jimmy Carter, this being Georgia?

[nolesfan2011]

PPP GA senate poll is out http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2012/12/chambliss-vulnerable-in-a-primary.html

"Only 38% of Republican primary voters say they want Chambliss to be their nominee next year, compared to 43% who would prefer someone more conservative. But Chambliss stomps most of the people who've shown the most interest in taking him on. He leads Congressman Paul Broun by a 57/14 margin in a head to head, has a 50/22 advantage over Congressman Tom Price, and leads former Secretary of State Karen Handel 52/23."

"By far and away the Republican who would pose the greatest threat to Chambliss in a primary, if he changed his mind about running, is Herman Cain. Cain would lead Chambliss 50-36 in a hypothetical match up. Cain has a 68/20 favorability rating with GOP primary voters, which compares quite favorably to Chambliss' 45/36 approval spread. Other long shot candidates we tested against Chambliss were Allen West, who trails 47/26, and Erick Erickson who trails 51/22."

"Chambliss is extremely weak with Republicans describing themselves as 'very conservative.' 61% of them would like to replace him, compared to only 23% who would like to see him nominated again. He would trail Cain 68/19 with that group of voters."

[nolesfan2011]

"In terms of the general election the Georgia Senate race is somewhat reminiscent of the Indiana contest this cycle- if Chambliss is the nominee the seat is probably safe for the GOP, but if someone far to his right wins the primary the Democrats might have a chance if everything goes their way.

The only Democrat who comes particularly close to Chambliss is 2002 foe Max Cleland, who despite being quite popular with a 50/27 favorability rating, only musters a tie at 45. Chambliss leads former Governor Roy Barnes 48-40, Congressman John Barrow 50-37, Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed 52-37, and State Senator Jason Carter 52-34. Those folks are all of a higher caliber probably than who the Democrats will be able to get to run, and they still don't come all that close.
The reason Chambliss does so well against all of those folks is that he actually has a fair amount of appeal to Democrats. 28% approve of him, a lot more crossover support than we see for most politicians these days. If Chambliss was taken out in the primary, it's likely the Republicans would end up with a nominee who doesn't have that going for them. We tested Tom Price against all the Democrats as well and he would trail Cleland 47-39 and Barnes 46-40 while leading Barrow only 40-38, Reed 43-38, and Carter 42-36. It could have the potential to be a race if Chambliss does get primaried."

"-Chambliss' cross over appeal to Democrats would make him hard to defeat in a general election. But given the very real possibility of him losing to an extreme conservative candidate in the primary it might benefit Democrats to get a Joe Donnelly caliber candidate who doesn't have a lot to lose into the race, just in case..."

PPP GA senate poll is out http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2012/12/chambliss-vulnerable-in-a-primary.html

"Only 38% of Republican primary voters say they want Chambliss to be their nominee next year, compared to 43% who would prefer someone more conservative. But Chambliss stomps most of the people who've shown the most interest in taking him on. He leads Congressman Paul Broun by a 57/14 margin in a head to head, has a 50/22 advantage over Congressman Tom Price, and leads former Secretary of State Karen Handel 52/23."

"By far and away the Republican who would pose the greatest threat to Chambliss in a primary, if he changed his mind about running, is Herman Cain. Cain would lead Chambliss 50-36 in a hypothetical match up. Cain has a 68/20 favorability rating with GOP primary voters, which compares quite favorably to Chambliss' 45/36 approval spread. Other long shot candidates we tested against Chambliss were Allen West, who trails 47/26, and Erick Erickson who trails 51/22."

"Chambliss is extremely weak with Republicans describing themselves as 'very conservative.' 61% of them would like to replace him, compared to only 23% who would like to see him nominated again. He would trail Cain 68/19 with that group of voters."

[nolesfan2011]

So in short, though the GOP alternatives save Cain and Handel probably have lowish to medium name recognition, they are still trailing, though they haven't announced they are running so I dunno.

Broun wouldn't win, West won't run, Erickson/Cain aren't running, I do think Price could win though and I don't see where Handel would fit in all this.

Nathan Deal also declined to fully endorse Chambliss the other day.. saying it was "too early" basically, which isn't a good sign when the sitting governor is cautious to endorse the sitting senator. (Deal is under no real primary threat though).

Also worth noting State Senator Chip Rogers is going to resign to "spend more time with his family" so maybe he will primary Chambliss?

On the Dem side, Cleland is old he isn't going to run, Barrow and Reed probably don't want to lose their jobs to run, especially Reed who has a lot of influence as mayor of a big city like Atlanta and doesn't wanna give that up for an underdog senate race.  Same goes with Carter who is still trying to move up in his political career and can't afford a setback.

Barrow also has party base issues, so may have unity problems, not to mention Chambliss is picking off 1/4th of Democrats which is just not good, and shows how weak the party still is because of poor messaging and agendizing.

I really think Dems are gonna get a weaker candidate than they realize.. maybe ex- blue dog central GA rep Jim Marshall who is out of a job and has nothing to lose or Thurbert Baker who is also not in elected office.  

Even if Tom Price is the nominee, I still don't see Dems beating him because they won't have the money for one thing.

"In terms of the general election the Georgia Senate race is somewhat reminiscent of the Indiana contest this cycle- if Chambliss is the nominee the seat is probably safe for the GOP, but if someone far to his right wins the primary the Democrats might have a chance if everything goes their way.

The only Democrat who comes particularly close to Chambliss is 2002 foe Max Cleland, who despite being quite popular with a 50/27 favorability rating, only musters a tie at 45. Chambliss leads former Governor Roy Barnes 48-40, Congressman John Barrow 50-37, Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed 52-37, and State Senator Jason Carter 52-34. Those folks are all of a higher caliber probably than who the Democrats will be able to get to run, and they still don't come all that close.
The reason Chambliss does so well against all of those folks is that he actually has a fair amount of appeal to Democrats. 28% approve of him, a lot more crossover support than we see for most politicians these days. If Chambliss was taken out in the primary, it's likely the Republicans would end up with a nominee who doesn't have that going for them. We tested Tom Price against all the Democrats as well and he would trail Cleland 47-39 and Barnes 46-40 while leading Barrow only 40-38, Reed 43-38, and Carter 42-36. It could have the potential to be a race if Chambliss does get primaried."

"-Chambliss' cross over appeal to Democrats would make him hard to defeat in a general election. But given the very real possibility of him losing to an extreme conservative candidate in the primary it might benefit Democrats to get a Joe Donnelly caliber candidate who doesn't have a lot to lose into the race, just in case..."

PPP GA senate poll is out http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2012/12/chambliss-vulnerable-in-a-primary.html

"Only 38% of Republican primary voters say they want Chambliss to be their nominee next year, compared to 43% who would prefer someone more conservative. But Chambliss stomps most of the people who've shown the most interest in taking him on. He leads Congressman Paul Broun by a 57/14 margin in a head to head, has a 50/22 advantage over Congressman Tom Price, and leads former Secretary of State Karen Handel 52/23."

"By far and away the Republican who would pose the greatest threat to Chambliss in a primary, if he changed his mind about running, is Herman Cain. Cain would lead Chambliss 50-36 in a hypothetical match up. Cain has a 68/20 favorability rating with GOP primary voters, which compares quite favorably to Chambliss' 45/36 approval spread. Other long shot candidates we tested against Chambliss were Allen West, who trails 47/26, and Erick Erickson who trails 51/22."

"Chambliss is extremely weak with Republicans describing themselves as 'very conservative.' 61% of them would like to replace him, compared to only 23% who would like to see him nominated again. He would trail Cain 68/19 with that group of voters."

[Bacon King]

Chip Rogers's district is within Tom Price's House seat, for the record. Rogers is in a good position here because he can run for Congress if Price challenges Chambliss, or run for Senate if Price doesn't! He'd easily be the frontrunner for a GA-06 special election, and with his relatively high profile and conservative record in the General Assembly as Majority Leader he'd easily become the Tea Party candidate and Chambliss's main opponent.

Also, LOL in at that PPP poll. Allen West, who doesn't even live in the state, gets double the support of Handel and Price, two candidates who are actually serious about running! Honestly, though, it's far too early in the process for things like this to matter much, before Chambliss's opponents have even had a chance to campaign or boost their name recognition. As far as the Republican primary goes, the only number that really matters is that only 38% of Republicans actually want to keep Chambliss versus a generic "more conservative" alternative. This non-Chambliss majority will be easy pickings for other candidates when they start campaigning. Remember that Price actually has more money than Chambliss in his campaign account right now, and that Handel also has a record of being a strong fundraiser. At this point, I'd even say it's more likely than not that Chambliss loses in the primary.

I suppose the fact that a majority of the GOP would vote for Cain might also be meaningful, if it's enough to persuade the Reverend Doctor Herman Cain to restart the CainTrain Express and run for the seat. We'll see if it does, I guess.

As far as the general election numbers go, though, they are surprisingly very promising! Chambliss and Cleland tied? Barnes six points ahead of Price, and Cleland eight points ahead of him? Granted, it's probably fool's gold, as the crosstabs show that the undecideds in all those matchups skew towards conservatives and Romney voters. Still, it does show that some electoral potential exists.

In regards to fundraising, nolesfan, one would assume that the DSCC would be dropping a lot of money into this race if the polls keep showing this race as competitive in 2014, especially if Chambliss goes down in the primary. Also, I'd imagine a heated Chambliss v. Price v. Handel primary would cause all three to spend a ton of money and go very negative, so the eventual nominee will have a damaged image and much less money than most Republicans would have saved at that point.

Hell, at this point I wouldn't mind seeing Roy Barnes run for this Senate seat, just because he's good at fundraising and would probably clear the field. It'd be nice for a Georgia Democrat to have a financial advantage, not to mention a year-long head start in campaigning for the general election (remember, primary runoffs aren't until August! ).

[Adam Griffin]

Speaking of Chip Rogers:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.myfoxatlanta.com/story/20259570/outgoing-ga-senate-leader-chip-rogers-resigns

[Bacon King]

OH YEAH! I had forgotten Chip Rogers and Tommie Williams pulled that coup against the Hall County Boys.

Yeah, no doubt Cagle gets all his authority back, either directly or via proxy: the State Senate leadership is once again firmly in the hands of the Deal/Cagle/Ralston triumvirate that currently commands the GA GOP. It looks like Rogers and Williams both stood down because they could sense the inevitable, while their coup colleague Bill Cowsert resoundingly lost his PPT bid to David Shafer, a staunch Deal/Cagle ally. Nathan Deal's senior floor leader in the Senate, Ronnie Chance, is now Majority Leader, while his other floor leader, Butch Miller (from Hall County itself!), is now Caucus Chairman.

[Frodo]

The GA GOP is also having an identity battle between the rural and suburban Republicans, and the ones who are socially based or economically based. Romney Republicans vs. Santorum Republicans basically and on some issues like immigration, they have sided with the suburban Republicans over the rural ones.

With the immigration bill, they ticked off a lot of otherwise socially and economically conservative farmers who relied on the cheap labor undocumented immigrants provided, in favor of the suburban Republicans who were hollering about "benefits" and stuff.

Do you think a lot of what you said here (rural vs. suburban split) can be applied next door to the Alabama GOP?  

[Barnes]

OH YEAH! I had forgotten Chip Rogers and Tommie Williams pulled that coup against the Hall County Boys.

Yeah, no doubt Cagle gets all his authority back, either directly or via proxy: the State Senate leadership is once again firmly in the hands of the Deal/Cagle/Ralston triumvirate that currently commands the GA GOP. It looks like Rogers and Williams both stood down because they could sense the inevitable, while their coup colleague Bill Cowsert resoundingly lost his PPT bid to David Shafer, a staunch Deal/Cagle ally. Nathan Deal's senior floor leader in the Senate, Ronnie Chance, is now Majority Leader, while his other floor leader, Butch Miller (from Hall County itself!), is now Caucus Chairman.

Ah yes, the triumvirate.

[old timey villain]

The GA GOP is also having an identity battle between the rural and suburban Republicans, and the ones who are socially based or economically based. Romney Republicans vs. Santorum Republicans basically and on some issues like immigration, they have sided with the suburban Republicans over the rural ones.

With the immigration bill, they ticked off a lot of otherwise socially and economically conservative farmers who relied on the cheap labor undocumented immigrants provided, in favor of the suburban Republicans who were hollering about "benefits" and stuff.

Do you think a lot of what you said here (rural vs. suburban split) can be applied next door to the Alabama GOP?  

Alabama doesn't have as many suburban Republicans, since it's a largely rural state. The only largely suburban area that packs some punch would be Shelby County, a bedroom community for Birmingham. But that group pales in comparison to rural conservatives.  By and large, Alabama Republicans are likely to stay united in the future because they're much more dominated by rural interests.

[Barnes]

The GA GOP is also having an identity battle between the rural and suburban Republicans, and the ones who are socially based or economically based. Romney Republicans vs. Santorum Republicans basically and on some issues like immigration, they have sided with the suburban Republicans over the rural ones.

With the immigration bill, they ticked off a lot of otherwise socially and economically conservative farmers who relied on the cheap labor undocumented immigrants provided, in favor of the suburban Republicans who were hollering about "benefits" and stuff.

Do you think a lot of what you said here (rural vs. suburban split) can be applied next door to the Alabama GOP?  

This doesn't exactly answer your question, but the GA Legislature is more clearly divided between Senate and House Republicans, with the Democrats be almost completely insignificant. This isn't exactly the answer you were looking for, but the entire party in the legislature is very divided.  

[old timey villain]

Also, regarding the rural/conservative split in Georgia- the next Democratic nominee for governor or senate needs to make an issue of the immigration law, but paint it in economic terms instead of social. Someone mentioned this earlier, but there are a lot of rural GOPers who really don't like it.

I was working for my college news station last year and I was assigned to do a story about the economic impact of the law. We drove about 20 minutes out of Athens and went to a pine straw business. We walked in, there were bucks heads mounted on the walls, the TV was set to Fox News and the owner came out dressed head to toe in camo.

He then told us that he was a hardcore Republican but absolutely hates the law. He told us that a few weeks prior, INS came to the pine forest where his workers were harvesting straw and rounded up about 10 of his illegal immigrant employees and immediately deported them and told him he had to call the workers' families and inform them of the deportations. Not only did he mention the financial loss but he also got emotional when he talked about making those calls. He was pissed, and I'm sure a lot of people like him still are.

[Bacon King]

^^^ I agree entirely cope. Last year, after the immigration bill first came into effect, South Georgia had a record drought with an unprecedented degree of crop failure, but the labor shortage was so bad farmers STILL didn't have nearly enough manpower available to pick everything before the harvest season ended.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Could that give the Democrats an opportunity in South Georgia?


Its the Feds fault all the way around. If they had dealt with the issue, none of the states would be doing this.

[Barnes]

Could that give the Democrats an opportunity in South Georgia?

Not in the short run, no.  The GO has really ensconced itself in the lower half of the state, and it's not really a possibility that effective inroads can be made there in the near future.  In general, voters down there don't really connect (or do, but don't care anyway) their anger with their policies of the Republicans and their ability to vote them out for the Democrats.

[nolesfan2011]

Yep, Alabama (and Mississippi and Louisiana) has much less of a urban/rural divide, they are simply states that are more rural.  Georgia just happens to have Atlanta metro area+ a few other decently sized cities.  Georgia is also the largest state in the deep south, and really the Tennessee GOP is more like the GA GOP, that would be the best comparison.

The GA GOP is also having an identity battle between the rural and suburban Republicans, and the ones who are socially based or economically based. Romney Republicans vs. Santorum Republicans basically and on some issues like immigration, they have sided with the suburban Republicans over the rural ones.

With the immigration bill, they ticked off a lot of otherwise socially and economically conservative farmers who relied on the cheap labor undocumented immigrants provided, in favor of the suburban Republicans who were hollering about "benefits" and stuff.

Do you think a lot of what you said here (rural vs. suburban split) can be applied next door to the Alabama GOP?  

Alabama doesn't have as many suburban Republicans, since it's a largely rural state. The only largely suburban area that packs some punch would be Shelby County, a bedroom community for Birmingham. But that group pales in comparison to rural conservatives.  By and large, Alabama Republicans are likely to stay united in the future because they're much more dominated by rural interests.

[nolesfan2011]

Very good point on the immigration stuff, I disagree that South GA isn't reachable though, the problem is the state party (and by proxy its candidates) don't seem to message well at all.  When the law was being debated they spent for time rallying about "racism" and "racial profiling" and "hate" instead of about economic impact and impact on the state's "job creators" (farmers, restauranters, other small business).

The focus on hispanics and race seemed to get x2 as much as attention as the economic issues did (probably influenced by the demographics of the state party at this point).  Meanwhile the farmers and business owners were pleading that the law would be a disaster (and disparaging their Republican elected officials who wanted to replace migrant workers with prison labor).

The Dems could have stepped up and been a strong voice of opposition for the farmer, the old populist/greenback party messaging of little guy vs. the big guy, but they didn't.

I still think it is reachable though if the candidates message better and differently, and especially get away from the Metro Atlanta orbit.

The problem with the packing of the Dems is that they all got packed into Metro ATL+ a few other larger cities and don't seem to understand rural Georgia anymore (They get crushed in far north GA too). They think Georgia is just "modern" Atlanta+ a bunch of backwards rednecks (Yes, I've heard this sentiment expressed before at Dem meetings) and they don't even try.

Really Dems could get a lock on both the hispanic vote, and the rural vote if they handle it right, different messages for different audiences. The fact is though, many white voters probably feel the Dems are just accusing them of being racists and nobody wants to hear that.

We need to be encouraging unity not just us vs. them. '

Plus connect a personal level (like that story you mentioned about the pine straw guy). The big thing is though, in a lot of these rural seat races, the Dems aren't even running candidates anymore, and the GOP is running unopposed.

Lastly, the State Dems are still too obsessed with national issues and orbit than the local stuff. They need to be acting like West Virginia, North Dakota, Nebraska, North Carolina etc. Democrats.  Rally around local issues and concerns (like the immigration issue, education, college funding etc.) instead of "make the rich pay their fair share!" "stand with our President" memeing all day.

Could that give the Democrats an opportunity in South Georgia?

Not in the short run, no.  The GO has really ensconced itself in the lower half of the state, and it's not really a possibility that effective inroads can be made there in the near future.  In general, voters down there don't really connect (or do, but don't care anyway) their anger with their policies of the Republicans and their ability to vote them out for the Democrats.

[nolesfan2011]

I mean just look at the State Party facebook page https://www.facebook.com/georgiademocrat. A majority of the posts are about Obama/Romney and Boehner/House GOP.  Not even state level stuff.  That just doesn't connect with people when 55% of the state is conservative/Republican. 

They also bash the GOP more than they run off their own issues, which again isn't that effective. It just comes off as weak.

On the plus side, they have done pretty well with Women (probably do the GA GOP pushing atrocious anti choice laws in the legislature) but they haven't connected with the poor and unemployed as much as they should.

GA has a pretty high poverty rate, across all race and age demographics, meanwhile the GOP has been determined to slash benefits and make it harder for people to qualify (food stamps, drug testing for welfare, education cuts, unemployment benefit cuts, refusal to expand medicaid).  Dems really should be hitting home on those issues, with LBJ/FDR style "we care about everyone" politics.

[Adam Griffin]

PPP just released its first GA 2014 Governor poll. The results are at least somewhat optimistic; Deal is weaker than some might have expected.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The numbers look much better when you consider the results of the previous Senate poll:

Barrow vs. Chambliss: Chambliss +13
Barrow vs. Deal: Deal +4

Reed vs. Chambliss: Chambliss + 15
Reed vs. Deal: Deal +7

Carter vs. Chambliss: Chambliss + 18
Carter vs. Deal: Deal +8

[Bacon King]

Also in the new poll:

• Blacks are more likely to support gay marriage than whites
• Nobody thinks the Falcons need a new stadium, and don't want the government to help pay for it either.
• Tech fans are more liberal than UGA fans.
• Young people in Georgia are extremely polarized. 45% say gay marriage should be legal, but 46% think Georgia should secede because of Obama's election.

[Adam Griffin]

Also in the new poll:

• Blacks are more likely to support gay marriage than whites
• Nobody thinks the Falcons need a new stadium, and don't want the government to help pay for it either.
• Tech fans are more liberal than UGA fans.
• Young people in Georgia are extremely polarized. 45% say gay marriage should be legal, but 46% think Georgia should secede because of Obama's election.
  

I was amazed at the 2008 exit polls; basically it suggested that there isn't that much of a difference between the 18-29 and 65+ crowds:

18-29: 48% Obama, 51% McCain
65+: 46% Obama, 54% McCain

Also, apparently 15% of African-Americans in Georgia want to secede from the union because of President Obama's re-election!