Georgia's Very Own Megathread! (v2)

[Hammy]

I'm getting tempted to rate Georgia Safe R because it's become increasingly clear that nothing resembling a free or fair election is going to take place, especially with the guy running for office being in charge of running the election.

[Adam Griffin]

I'm getting tempted to rate Georgia Safe R because it's become increasingly clear that nothing resembling a free or fair election is going to take place, especially with the guy running for office being in charge of running the election.

If it's any consolation in this specific/largest case, even if all 53,000 pending registrations resulted in voided applications or invalidated votes, the net margin (based on the usual percentage of newly-registered voters who actually show and the racial composition of the electorate) would only shift by about 8,000 votes.

Furthermore, I'd point out that with the DMV now registering everybody as they renew or obtain licenses, the share of registrations that'd produce actual votes will likely be even smaller than the historical norm. Presumably a good share of these registrations are people who were AVR'd when they got their new licenses. It all depends on the composition of how these registrations were processed, of course (something I do not know).

Granted, this election may be really close and those 8k votes could make a huge difference in not one but two situations (holding Kemp below 50% and/or Abrams clearing 50%), but considering that a good deal of these individuals are going to receive correspondence from Democrats about their current situation and will likely get the problem fixed and/or vote provisionally, the real difference margin-wise should be minimal (i.e. a few thousand net votes max).

[Adam Griffin]

According to Georgia Votes, an additional 5,121 valid votes were received compared to yesterday; today's accepted ballot total (returned minus rejected) stands at 50,386 votes: 1.98% of total 2014 turnout.

The white share of the vote continues to grow, as the black share of the electorate has shed nearly a full percentage point in the past 2 days. Additionally, the 65 and up share of the electorate fell another one-half point since yesterday, continuing a trend over the past several days.

9,048 new ballots were requested since yesterday, bringing the total of requested ballots to 183,060.

Returned VBM totals are 117% higher than at this point in 2014 (up from 115% yesterday).

Code:

White	22551	44.8% (+0.3)
Black	20735	41.2% (-0.3)
Latino	1221          2.4% (0.0)
Asian	1499	         3.0%  (-0.1)
Other	4380	         8.7%  (+0.1)

Female	29486	58.5% (0.0)
Male		20049 	39.8% (0.0)
Unknown	851	        1.7%   (+0.1)

18-29	 3334	6.6%   (+0.1)
30-39	 2724	5.4%   (0.0)
40-49	 3798	7.5%   (0.0)
50-64       11566	23.0%  (+0.3)
65+          28186       55.9%  (-0.5)
Unknown	   778        1.5%   (0.0)

[Adam Griffin]

I'm gonna do my best to update this every couple of days (with the next update obviously coming after the first day of in-person early voting on Monday), but here's an animated GIF showing the racial composition of early vote by county for both October 10 and October 12:

[Adam Griffin]

I mentioned on the previous page a couple of days ago that the white share of the early vote is actually larger in the core metro than outside of it, and the trend is still holding - in fact, the gap is widening. Granted, the electorate has gotten a bit whiter overall since that update, so the non-core area has become a tad whiter, too, but still:

"The Big 5" (Fulton/Dekalb/Clayton/Gwinnett/Cobb) VBM Returns
44.4% White 45.1% White

GA Outside "The Big 5" VBM Returns
44.1% White 44.5% White

And here are the 2017 Census estimates:

"The Big 5" (Fulton/Dekalb/Clayton/Gwinnett/Cobb) 2017 Pop
37.2% White

GA Outside "The Big 5" 2017 Pop
61.5% White

[Adam Griffin]

Are the white people in Fulton County much more D leaning than whites in the rest of the state? Whites are at a very high 60% there rn. Could just be energized white liberals though

EDIT: I just found out the answer to that question myself by looking at demographics of the county. I was shocked to see it was plurality white. Clinton probably nearly won whites in Fulton County

Fulton whites were 42% Obama in 2008, 37% Obama in 2012 and 46% Clinton in 2016. Ideally, we'd need to know exactly where in Fulton those white votes were coming from to make an educated guess. It's a geographically large county that spans a slew of different communities, so those numbers hide the true gulf (case in point).

[GeorgiaModerate]

https://twitter.com/bluestein/status/1050868748092153856

[GeorgiaModerate]

I just got a robopoll with preference questions about the Governor, LG, and AG races, favorability questions for Trump, Kemp, and Geoff Duncan (Republican LG candidate), and a few demographic questions. 

[ON Progressive]

https://twitter.com/TPM/status/1050849181924040704

Brian Kemp bringing on the dog whistles, just as you would expect from a Republican.

[QAnonKelly]

How are you guys voting on the amendments? I’m definitely voting yes on 1, probably no on 2-4, and probably yes on 5

[GeorgiaModerate]

How are you guys voting on the amendments? I’m definitely voting yes on 1, probably no on 2-4, and probably yes on 5

I could go either way on 4 (it pretty much already exists in state law, so it seems unnecessary to make it an amendment).  Agree on the others.

[Adam Griffin]

Yeah, it wouldn't surprise me at all if Kemp et al purposefully made the "53k" issue a noisy one so they could feign outrage and potentially disenfranchise voters. Essentially, nothing changes for those who meet the requirements to vote under normal circumstances (i.e. they just have to show a photo ID when they vote), but if some of these people hear about how some registrations might not be valid and find they're one of them, then they might not show up...

[Holy Unifying Centrist]

How are you guys voting on the amendments? I’m definitely voting yes on 1, probably no on 2-4, and probably yes on 5

No on everything

[Adam Griffin]

FWIW, I got some clarification on some of the amendments since I made my original post a couple of weeks ago. I may try to summarize my county party's position on each of them (we made formal endorsements). It's worth noting that Abrams says to vote yes on every one of them, as does the Democratic legislative caucus. However, particularly in the case of Abrams, it's to be expected: some of those sound really bad if you vocally oppose them (even if they're redundant or fundamentally bad, like codifying Marcy's Law into the Constitution).

[Antonio the Sixth]

Yeah, it wouldn't surprise me at all if Kemp et al purposefully made the "53k" issue a noisy one so they could feign outrage and potentially disenfranchise voters. Essentially, nothing changes for those who meet the requirements to vote under normal circumstances (i.e. they just have to show a photo ID when they vote), but if some of these people hear about how some registrations might not be valid and find they're one of them, then they might not show up...

A grassroots-heavy campaign like Abrams' should easily be able to counter such disinformation, though... right?

[Holy Unifying Centrist]

Actually, I might vote "yes" on Amendment 5. Not quite sure yet.

[Rookie Yinzer]

Lovely sight in Monroe, Georgia.

[_]

Lovely sight in Monroe, Georgia.

Okay that's nice.

Now a question as a non-Georgian too lazy to look back in the thread, what are the 5 Amendments up for votes and what would they do?

[GeorgiaModerate]

Now a question as a non-Georgian too lazy to look back in the thread, what are the 5 Amendments up for votes and what would they do?

Good summary here: https://www.allongeorgia.com/georgia-state-politics/breakdown-the-5-constitutional-amendments-on-the-november-2018-ballot/

[OneJ]

Lovely sight in Monroe, Georgia.

snip

#RednecksforStacey

But I'm curious. Why Abrams?

[Adam Griffin]

Yeah, it wouldn't surprise me at all if Kemp et al purposefully made the "53k" issue a noisy one so they could feign outrage and potentially disenfranchise voters. Essentially, nothing changes for those who meet the requirements to vote under normal circumstances (i.e. they just have to show a photo ID when they vote), but if some of these people hear about how some registrations might not be valid and find they're one of them, then they might not show up...

A grassroots-heavy campaign like Abrams' should easily be able to counter such disinformation, though... right?

In theory, yes.

Georgia (or was) the only state in the country to have a full-time voter protection agency setup by the state party, which has been running non-stop for almost 2 years (and was also present around election time in 2014 & 2016). Between them and the campaign, a hefty portion (if not all; depends on whether VR contact info is up-to-date for everybody) will be contacted by the campaign in-person or via phone to alert them of the situation. Nevertheless and even with friendly explanations of what it means and how it can be resolved, it'll undoubtedly turn off some people I imagine.

In my opinion, Abrams should have used her segment on Morning Joe to explain to those 53,000 voters that effectively nothing has changed, and that all they need to do is show their photo IDs when they go vote (as they would have to do anyway). Instead, she spent that time talking about how bad both Kemp and the situation were.

[Rookie Yinzer]

In my opinion, Abrams should have used her segment on Morning Joe to explain to those 53,000 voters that effectively nothing has changed, and that all they need to do is show their photo IDs when they go vote (as they would have to do anyway). Instead, she spent that time talking about how bad both Kemp and the situation were.

I agree with this! It seems they're banking on it spurring turnout to reject Kemp resoundingly rather than it lowering turnout because people will think the race is rigged for him and their vote won't change it. What I will say is while the 53k are important, the Abrams campaign already has a targeted universe that will theoretically get them to 50% +1. Any new voters registered after the deadline for the May primary were not factored into the equation and would simply be icing on the cake for Abrams in the event that her team succeeds in turning out who they need to.

[QAnonKelly]

AJC has a new poll out exclusively of women tomorrow.

[Virginiá]

In my opinion, Abrams should have used her segment on Morning Joe to explain to those 53,000 voters that effectively nothing has changed, and that all they need to do is show their photo IDs when they go vote (as they would have to do anyway). Instead, she spent that time talking about how bad both Kemp and the situation were.

IIRC, they have the list of people, so they can always send them mailers explaining the situation and maybe even call some of them too. That would probably be worth the money.

Maybe they can even use the situation to goad them into voting by reminding them how much the other party doesn't want them to vote.

[Beet]

AJC has a new poll out exclusively of women tomorrow.

I have an idea. They can partner with the AARP and get a solid majority of the electorate.