Georgia's Very Own Megathread! (v2)

[Podgy the Bear]

All of this handwringing about Abrams' post-election actions will mean nothing in a few weeks.  The fact of the matter is the Democratic Party is truly ascendant in Georgia.   Need to keep the focus on getting a runoff win for John Barrow and work on 2020 at all levels.

[libertpaulian]

All of this handwringing about Abrams' post-election actions will mean nothing in a few weeks.  The fact of the matter is the Democratic Party is truly ascendant in Georgia.   Need to keep the focus on getting a runoff win for John Barrow and work on 2020 at all levels.

At least you guys have somewhere to rise up.  Here in Indiana, our Democrats are basically wiped off the map and have to start clean.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

All three blacks lost statewide.

[Podgy the Bear]

All of this handwringing about Abrams' post-election actions will mean nothing in a few weeks.  The fact of the matter is the Democratic Party is truly ascendant in Georgia.   Need to keep the focus on getting a runoff win for John Barrow and work on 2020 at all levels.

At least you guys have somewhere to rise up.  Here in Indiana, our Democrats are basically wiped off the map and have to start clean.

We need to take out some of the excess vote out of California and New York and systematically move them to red states like Indiana (and definitely places like Wyoming, the Dakotas, and Alaska). That's 10 (!) Senate seats there.

[libertpaulian]

All of this handwringing about Abrams' post-election actions will mean nothing in a few weeks.  The fact of the matter is the Democratic Party is truly ascendant in Georgia.   Need to keep the focus on getting a runoff win for John Barrow and work on 2020 at all levels.

At least you guys have somewhere to rise up.  Here in Indiana, our Democrats are basically wiped off the map and have to start clean.

We need to take out some of the excess vote out of California and New York and systematically move them to red states like Indiana (and definitely places like Wyoming, the Dakotas, and Alaska). That's 10 (!) Senate seats there.

Well, there are plenty of Chicagoans that are moving into Indiana, which helps.

The loss of Joe Donnelly is disheartening.  Makes me wonder if we're going to be a one-party state forever.

[ON Progressive]

All of this handwringing about Abrams' post-election actions will mean nothing in a few weeks.  The fact of the matter is the Democratic Party is truly ascendant in Georgia.   Need to keep the focus on getting a runoff win for John Barrow and work on 2020 at all levels.

At least you guys have somewhere to rise up.  Here in Indiana, our Democrats are basically wiped off the map and have to start clean.

We need to take out some of the excess vote out of California and New York and systematically move them to red states like Indiana (and definitely places like Wyoming, the Dakotas, and Alaska). That's 10 (!) Senate seats there.

Well, there are plenty of Chicagoans that are moving into Indiana, which helps.

The loss of Joe Donnelly is disheartening.  Makes me wonder if we're going to be a one-party state forever.

There's no such thing as a state that'll be one party forever, but it seems like it might be gone for a generation.

[RussFeingoldWasRobbed]

KKKemps voter suppression has worked. It makes me sick. And Republicans are telling us to concede an election they rigged? Screw them!

[P. Clodius Pulcher did nothing wrong]

KKKemps voter suppression has worked. It makes me sick. And Republicans are telling us to concede an election they rigged? Screw them!

[Virginiá]

There's no such thing as a state that'll be one party forever, but it seems like it might be gone for a generation.

Indiana was fairly competitive in the 90s and 2000s, but polarization and gerrymandering have foreclosed on those opportunities for now. I think Democrats can somewhat bounce back in the future though, once the country has depolarized a bit and Millennials and post-Millennials take over as the dominant generations. Going to be a while

[Bacon King]

I'm going to be blunt here and call out all these Republicans ITT whining about "optics", "temper tantrums", "entitlement" and "graceless moves". Your faux outrage is nothing more than hypocritical histrionics. You are embarrassing yourselves; don't be surprised when everyone stops taking you seriously.

For at least two decades the go-to Republican strategy in close/contested elections has been this:

If the Republican has a narrow lead:
1. attack the Democrat as a sore loser
2. demand the "result of the election is respected"
3. attempt to suppress/interrupt the remaining vote count
4. demand absolute adherence to insanely strict deadlines to abrogate the democratic contest
5. when courts step in to ensure all votes are counted, attack them as liberal "activists"
6. push propaganda that delegitimizes the democratic process; character assassination on Democrat

if the Democrat has a narrow lead:
1. refuse to concede under any circumstances
2. attempt to abuse the judiciary to overturn the will of the electorate
3. Yell loudly about fraud even when there is no evidence of it
4. dig your heels in for months to prevent the Democratic winner from timely taking office
5. attempt to commit blatant fraud if possible (most obvious example here is AL 2002)
6. make up lies to delegitimize the Democrat ("Christine Gregoire "found" a box of ballots in her trunk")

I have no doubt that every single one of you attacking Stacey Abrams have also been defending Bruce Poliquin in Maine as he demands to change the entire electoral system so he can "win"

This election was full of extremely suspicious irregularities from the very start and a heavy dose of skepticism should be applied to literally anything Brian Kemp has said either as a candidate or as the Secretary of State, especially because he didn't even pretend to respect the boundaries between those two roles. He repeatedly abused his role as the putatively "neutral" arbiter/administrator of the electoral process to fraudulently push the election in his own favor, going as far as to fabricate claims of "democratic hacker investigations" and suppress the minority vote for spurious reasons.

For our democratic process to have even the faintest trace of legitimacy, it is absolutely essential for the judicial system to thoroughly examine every questionable element of this election. Stacey Abrams is a bona fide Profile in Courage here: taking an unpopular stand to ensure the ideals of our republic are respected and every vote is fairly counted. If you think she's doing this for selfish reasons or a sense of entitlement then you fundamentally misunderstand who Stacey Abrams is as a person. She knows she's facing a wall of institutionalized Republican corruption designed to keep itself in power at all costs. She knows the hyperactive and highly funded right wing propaganda machine will dedicate every moment of this process to a character assassination that will ruin any future she could have otherwise had in statewide politics. If she was acting out of self interest she would have dropped out fairly quickly. She's making a principled stand here, to shine a light on the pitiful excuse for a democracy that exists in our state.

Besides it's not like there's any rush for her to step out of the race so the complaints about how she's "stalling" or whatever don't even make sense. Nathan Deal is still governor until the second week of January. Any potential runoff election isn't until December and realistically they'd easily be able to hold the election with a just a few days' prep time. Hell, worst case scenario, it'd be trivial for a court to delay the gubernatorial runoff so it occurs on the allocated date for federal office runoffs.

[Bacon King]

Check out this tweet thread for a great example of the voter suppression that was going on

https://twitter.com/_cingraham/status/1063464261173870592

[Virginiá]

I'm going to be blunt here and call out all these Republicans ITT whining about "optics", "temper tantrums", "entitlement" and "graceless moves". Your faux outrage is nothing more than hypocritical histrionics. You are embarrassing yourselves; don't be surprised when everyone stops taking you seriously.

For at least two decades the go-to Republican strategy in close/contested elections has been this:

If the Republican has a narrow lead:
1. attack the Democrat as a sore loser
2. demand the "result of the election is respected"
3. attempt to suppress/interrupt the remaining vote count
4. demand absolute adherence to insanely strict deadlines to abrogate the democratic contest
5. when courts step in to ensure all votes are counted, attack them as liberal "activists"
6. push propaganda that delegitimizes the democratic process; character assassination on Democrat

if the Democrat has a narrow lead:
1. refuse to concede under any circumstances
2. attempt to abuse the judiciary to overturn the will of the electorate
3. Yell loudly about fraud even when there is no evidence of it
4. dig your heels in for months to prevent the Democratic winner from timely taking office
5. attempt to commit blatant fraud if possible (most obvious example here is AL 2002)
6. make up lies to delegitimize the Democrat ("Christine Gregoire "found" a box of ballots in her trunk")

I have no doubt that every single one of you attacking Stacey Abrams have also been defending Bruce Poliquin in Maine as he demands to change the entire electoral system so he can "win"

This election was full of extremely suspicious irregularities from the very start and a heavy dose of skepticism should be applied to literally anything Brian Kemp has said either as a candidate or as the Secretary of State, especially because he didn't even pretend to respect the boundaries between those two roles. He repeatedly abused his role as the putatively "neutral" arbiter/administrator of the electoral process to fraudulently push the election in his own favor, going as far as to fabricate claims of "democratic hacker investigations" and suppress the minority vote for spurious reasons.

For our democratic process to have even the faintest trace of legitimacy, it is absolutely essential for the judicial system to thoroughly examine every questionable element of this election. Stacey Abrams is a bona fide Profile in Courage here: taking an unpopular stand to ensure the ideals of our republic are respected and every vote is fairly counted. If you think she's doing this for selfish reasons or a sense of entitlement then you fundamentally misunderstand who Stacey Abrams is as a person. She knows she's facing a wall of institutionalized Republican corruption designed to keep itself in power at all costs. She knows the hyperactive and highly funded right wing propaganda machine will dedicate every moment of this process to a character assassination that will ruin any future she could have otherwise had in statewide politics. If she was acting out of self interest she would have dropped out fairly quickly. She's making a principled stand here, to shine a light on the pitiful excuse for a democracy that exists in our state.

Besides it's not like there's any rush for her to step out of the race so the complaints about how she's "stalling" or whatever don't even make sense. Nathan Deal is still governor until the second week of January. Any potential runoff election isn't until December and realistically they'd easily be able to hold the election with a just a few days' prep time. Hell, worst case scenario, it'd be trivial for a court to delay the gubernatorial runoff so it occurs on the allocated date for federal office runoffs.

!!!!!!This!!!!!! I think we can all remember McCrory & friend's graceful concession, where he started accusing thousands of voters of fraud when he fell behind in the count, and then literally got sued for defamation. Or a Wisconsin Supreme Court race where John Doe emails revealed Republicans plotting how to handle the extremely close result, mentioning that they should scream about fraud non-stop to cast doubt, even though they very clearly knew the accusations were baseless and merely a political tactic. Or a more recent example of graceful winner Rick Scott, who actually wanted to impound voting equipment and sent cops to "supervise" the recount and sniff out """fraud""". Or who better than Republican Overlord Donald J Trump, who beat everyone at this game by starting the process of fraud accusations and doubt-casting month(s) before the election even took place, as he thought he was going to lose. It just goes on like this.

This is even more meaningful when you consider that the entire messaging strategy Republicans have pursued with regards to voter suppression laws is that even without evidence of fraud, they must pass restrictions anyway to restore "integrity" to our elections, and boost public confidence in them. Yes, that's right. As they scream about fraud merely as a cheap ploy to save face, helping to destroy trust in our elections, they turn around and point to the trust they have ruined and say, "look! they've lost faith in our elections! we must pass voter ID to restore trust!"

All of this is hands down one of the worst parts of American politics. Such respectable behavior, clearly.

[Rookie Yinzer]

I'm going to be blunt here and call out all these Republicans ITT whining about "optics", "temper tantrums", "entitlement" and "graceless moves". Your faux outrage is nothing more than hypocritical histrionics. You are embarrassing yourselves; don't be surprised when everyone stops taking you seriously.

For at least two decades the go-to Republican strategy in close/contested elections has been this:

If the Republican has a narrow lead:
1. attack the Democrat as a sore loser
2. demand the "result of the election is respected"
3. attempt to suppress/interrupt the remaining vote count
4. demand absolute adherence to insanely strict deadlines to abrogate the democratic contest
5. when courts step in to ensure all votes are counted, attack them as liberal "activists"
6. push propaganda that delegitimizes the democratic process; character assassination on Democrat

if the Democrat has a narrow lead:
1. refuse to concede under any circumstances
2. attempt to abuse the judiciary to overturn the will of the electorate
3. Yell loudly about fraud even when there is no evidence of it
4. dig your heels in for months to prevent the Democratic winner from timely taking office
5. attempt to commit blatant fraud if possible (most obvious example here is AL 2002)
6. make up lies to delegitimize the Democrat ("Christine Gregoire "found" a box of ballots in her trunk")

I have no doubt that every single one of you attacking Stacey Abrams have also been defending Bruce Poliquin in Maine as he demands to change the entire electoral system so he can "win"

This election was full of extremely suspicious irregularities from the very start and a heavy dose of skepticism should be applied to literally anything Brian Kemp has said either as a candidate or as the Secretary of State, especially because he didn't even pretend to respect the boundaries between those two roles. He repeatedly abused his role as the putatively "neutral" arbiter/administrator of the electoral process to fraudulently push the election in his own favor, going as far as to fabricate claims of "democratic hacker investigations" and suppress the minority vote for spurious reasons.

For our democratic process to have even the faintest trace of legitimacy, it is absolutely essential for the judicial system to thoroughly examine every questionable element of this election. Stacey Abrams is a bona fide Profile in Courage here: taking an unpopular stand to ensure the ideals of our republic are respected and every vote is fairly counted. If you think she's doing this for selfish reasons or a sense of entitlement then you fundamentally misunderstand who Stacey Abrams is as a person. She knows she's facing a wall of institutionalized Republican corruption designed to keep itself in power at all costs. She knows the hyperactive and highly funded right wing propaganda machine will dedicate every moment of this process to a character assassination that will ruin any future she could have otherwise had in statewide politics. If she was acting out of self interest she would have dropped out fairly quickly. She's making a principled stand here, to shine a light on the pitiful excuse for a democracy that exists in our state.

Besides it's not like there's any rush for her to step out of the race so the complaints about how she's "stalling" or whatever don't even make sense. Nathan Deal is still governor until the second week of January. Any potential runoff election isn't until December and realistically they'd easily be able to hold the election with a just a few days' prep time. Hell, worst case scenario, it'd be trivial for a court to delay the gubernatorial runoff so it occurs on the allocated date for federal office runoffs.

Bless you. If Abrams had overcome Kemp's voter suppression (helped by the state legislature at every turn) and won with just enough to escape a runoff, the GOP would have been turning over every rock for every vote and accusing Abrams and "Atlanta liberals" of stuffing the ballot box. They're full of it and I am actually damn proud Abrams didn't officially concede. The election was a sham and it's no surprise that most of the nefarious actions came from counties that are becoming blue but still have election offices teeming with hyper-partisan Republicans.

[Calthrina950]

This race rubs me the wrong way because the Republicans engaged in voter suppression.

That being said, Abrams seems like an entitled person. When she first announced, a bunch of national orgs came in and endorsed her right away, and when her primary opponent tried to speak at DKos they were shouted down with racial appeals. Then she got a ton of media hype, including a TIME cover. Now that she has lost (and that was clear on election night), she has dragged it out and is refusing to really concede, basically acting like the sorest loser ever.

Compare that to someone like Lucy McBath, who actually has a heartwrenching personal story and took a brave stance, and redeemed a Democratic humiliation from 2017, all with far less hype. I'd much rather see McBath run for Governor in 2022 than Abrams.

I agree with much of what you say here. The concerns that have been raised about voting in Georgia are legitimate and cause for concern, especially given the state's history. But Abrams has disgraced herself and her campaign by not acting with more class. And all of the hype and adoration which she received from the national media get into her head, just like O'Rourke and Gillum were deluded.

[Xing]

Yeah, Republicans care nothing about consistency, and when systems/outcomes favor them, they won, get over it. When they don't, it's very unfair and the Democrats are cheating. We all knew that already. However, if Abrams' statements rub people the wrong way, why don't you all suggest what she's getting wrong? Do you deny that Kemp tried to tip the scale in his favor? Do you see nothing wrong with Kemp's tactics, and do you honestly believe that there was not an effort to suppress the vote? If you do think that there was anything fishy about this election, then Abrams calling him out while ending her campaign is 100% justified.

[Adam Griffin]

In retrospect, we can now of course see that the election outcome was calcified months (if not years) ago. Sadly, it was fairly obvious last Wednesday that the votes just wouldn't be there; ensuring this doesn't happen again is the single biggest (and only) guarantee for future victory. I fully expect that a Republican legislature in conjunction with a Republican SoS will move to eliminate mail voting altogether, restrict early voting periods and change the appointment method of county boards of election to suit their needs.

I'm not aware if we have any stats on the 53k pending voters and how many actually voted, but the difference between none of them voting (the original intent) and having a similar turnout to the rest of the voter base based on likely partisan makeup would have put this question of a runoff within just a few thousand votes alone. Add to that hundreds of thousands more for whom no remedy prior to the election existed, and you get the picture. The GAGOP is going to see that - unlike in previous recent elections - their suppression efforts actually made a difference between win and loss this time, and they will be emboldened by it to pursue more.

[Alabama_Indy10]

I’m just glad the love fest around here can finally end.

Why does people liking a candidate bother you?

It’s not liking them that bothers me. It’s the obsession that many people seemed to have. The earlier pages of this thread are much worse.

I think it's the historic nature of her candidacy.  Plus, she had a very likable charm.  The fact that she was scandal-free, unlike the man running for governor directly to her south, was also a positive for her.

I believe you're right about most of this. I just got sick and tired of every move she made being covered extensively in this thread and the extreme confidence that many seemed to have.

[Adam Griffin]

Were there any notable losses in any of the metro counties of Republican Supervisors of Elections? Or are those all appointed

In GA (at least in almost every county; some exceptions - like mine), the formal Board of Elections is comprised of equal numbers of appointments from the county Democratic and Republican committees/parties, with an equivalent or tie-breaking number of "non-partisan" appointments being made by the governing authority of the county (usually the county commission; sometimes a judge). These appointees usually serve four-year terms.

In most cases, the balance of power skews toward whoever wins majorities in the county, with some exceptions. Virtually no county lacks bipartisan representation on these county boards. Most counties have 2:1 partisan representation based on which party controls the county commission and/or usually wins majorities countywide.

However, the chief registrars (the actual executives handling day-to-day operations) are usually hired either by the board or by the county commissions.

[GP270watch]

 It's sad that in 2018 Black Voters are still dealing with voter suppression tactics. This country is spineless and soulless when it comes to race. Abrams did everything she was supposed to do in fighting and calling out this nonsense. Her defeat is on those who engage in unfair elections and others who stand silent and allow it to happen.

[Adam Griffin]

The final certified results (including certified write-ins):

Code:

1,978,408	        BRIAN KEMP		50.2209%
1,923,685	        STACEY ABRAMS	48.8318%
37,235		TED METZ		        00.9452%
24			BOBBY WILLIAMS	00.0006%
24			ROD MACK		00.0006%
21			BOBBY WALDREP	00.0005%
12			DAVID BYRNE		00.0003%

3,939,409         TOTAL                     

[Bidenworth2020]

I like Stacey, she ran an incredible campaign and she should be proud of herself,
I think she has a bright ahead of her
however, I do think she could've conceded graciously

think about what Kemp did to effect this election. He purged the voters, did everything in his power to give him the win. And Abrams should "graciously concede"? That is surrendering, IMO.

[Dr. Arch]

I like Stacey, she ran an incredible campaign and she should be proud of herself,
I think she has a bright ahead of her
however, I do think she could've conceded graciously

think about what Kemp did to effect this election. He purged the voters, did everything in his power to give him the win. And Abrams should "graciously concede"? That is surrendering, IMO.

My point of view exactly. Kemp doesn't deserve a "gracious" concession.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Kemp is and always will be an illegitimate Governor.

[Calthrina950]

Kemp is and always will be an illegitimate Governor.

How?

[Antonio the Sixth]

Kemp is and always will be an illegitimate Governor.

How?

The only reason he avoided a runoff is through massive voter suppression.