GA- OpinionSavvy: Abrams +1

[Progressive Pessimist]

If Abrams manages to win it will be the most, rightfully so, talked about part of Tuesday's elections. Please make this happen, Georgia!

[Adam Griffin]

I'll eat crow if I have to but I believe Abrams is going to eke this out. Y'all don't know how long she has had paid canvassers on the ground talking to people that the polls would never pick up. Not to mention the Democratic Party of Georgia's volunteer based field apparatus and the plethora of organizations down here organizing for her. We will see in 7 days.

Is that apparatus good enough to keep running another month if it has to during a runoff?

I would argue that Democrats might have the advantage in a runoff situation, given how insanely fired up the party is. It's not like 2008 where not only was GA more Republican-leaning, but Democrats basically climaxed with Obama and went to sleep afterwards. This time around, Trump is still in office, and a veritable avalanche of money and volunteers will descend on Georgia as if it is a final stand for the Democratic Party.

Hard disagree. The same thing was true with the GA-06 special -- Trump was in office, he was swimming in cash, and the base was incredibly energized.

I think Abrams is toast if she doesn't get to 50. If she doesn't, we'll see the same thing we've seen in all of the high-profile specials of the last 18 months (sans Alabama): intense national focus on the race plus the realization that it's a close race and not a shoe-in Republican win will force enough of the reluctant Republican voters to turn out to counteract the Democratic energy and keep the seat red.

GA-6 is a gerrymandered Republican District. That is not comparable to a statewide race.

I mean...it's not so different. Obviously the state isn't redrawn every 10 years, but with voter purges, strict barriers to voting, etc, the end result is comparable in that the GOP is constantly maximizing its influence here at the expense of others.

[Adam Griffin]

I will say this, though: the polling at least (what little we've had in the past week or two) isn't following the usual trajectory. It's almost as if the suburbrons aren't flocking to Kemp last-minute like they always otherwise do...

Kemp hasn't exceeded 48% in a poll. Abrams has been at 48% in the past 2 polls (by the same pollster, which frankly isn't the best pollster, but alas). This is probably about as good as one can ask for in Georgia in polling: it's going to come down to whether these low-propensity voters show up.

[Zaybay]

I'll eat crow if I have to but I believe Abrams is going to eke this out. Y'all don't know how long she has had paid canvassers on the ground talking to people that the polls would never pick up. Not to mention the Democratic Party of Georgia's volunteer based field apparatus and the plethora of organizations down here organizing for her. We will see in 7 days.

Is that apparatus good enough to keep running another month if it has to during a runoff?

I would argue that Democrats might have the advantage in a runoff situation, given how insanely fired up the party is. It's not like 2008 where not only was GA more Republican-leaning, but Democrats basically climaxed with Obama and went to sleep afterwards. This time around, Trump is still in office, and a veritable avalanche of money and volunteers will descend on Georgia as if it is a final stand for the Democratic Party.

Hard disagree. The same thing was true with the GA-06 special -- Trump was in office, he was swimming in cash, and the base was incredibly energized.

I think Abrams is toast if she doesn't get to 50. If she doesn't, we'll see the same thing we've seen in all of the high-profile specials of the last 18 months (sans Alabama): intense national focus on the race plus the realization that it's a close race and not a shoe-in Republican win will force enough of the reluctant Republican voters to turn out to counteract the Democratic energy and keep the seat red.

The dynamic, however, is different. The race was between former secretary of state Handel, and random guy Ossoff, a guy who didnt excite Ds enough to win. Abrams can. It also should be noted that Trump was still, comparatively, popular in GA. The GCB was only around D+5-6 at this point. This race has a completely different tune.

[Calthrina950]

Lean R.

Agreed. At this point, I'm thinking that Georgia will go to a runoff, and that Abrams will lose that runoff. She is outperforming Hillary Clinton, which is not surprising, but is struggling to get that last 1-2% that she needs for an absolute majority. Georgia may not be ready for a Democratic Governor at this time, at least not for a few more years.

Georgia is ready for a Democratic Governor. People in your party keep purging the voters who are ready off the rolls. Or cut early voting hours. Or close their polling locations. Or seem their ID’s not acceptable.

In my party? I was just making an observation about this race, and it's not an unreasonable one. The polls have remained relatively inflexible throughout the year, and a runoff election would be more difficult for Abrams to win, given turnout differentials. I understand that you are a partisan Democratic activist, and that you strongly support Abrams, but you let your partisanship get in over your head.

Republicans purge voters who are not friendly to their party. That has nothing to do with my partisanship. It is a well documented fact. Leave your head in the sand if you want to.

My initial post wasn't even about voter suppression. Have you not forgotten that I earlier expressed my support for a firm reinforcement of the Voting Rights Act? Apparently, you have. Your arrogance and your overconfidence does not help anyone. I would rather Abrams win over Kemp, but Georgia's political conditions mean that she very could not. Rather than acknowledging that point of my argument, you immediately launch into attacks against me! What is it with the blatant partisan hacks on this website?

[Calthrina950]

Moreover, I would say that RFKFan68's statements are further proof of the poisonous effects of political polarization in this country. Aiming for the destruction of an opposing political party is, in my belief, beyond the bounds of reason. And engaging in such blatant partisanship makes its more difficult for you to attract independents and swing voters to your side. Abrams will need those voters to win, and having advocates making such hardline comments makes it more difficult to get those individuals into your camp.

[DrScholl]

No voters are making their decisions based on what is said on this message board. It is abundantly clear that Kemp has used his office to boost his chances of winning by trying to keep people who won't vote for him away from the polls. Republicans in other states have been doing this too. When you actively use authority to keep unfavorable voters away from the polls then it's time for your party to be out of power.

[Rookie Yinzer]

No voters are making their decisions based on what is said on this message board. It is abundantly clear that Kemp has used his office to boost his chances of winning by trying to keep people who won't vote for him away from the polls. Republicans in other states have been doing this too. When you actively use authority to keep unfavorable voters away from the polls then it's time for your party to be out of power.

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

I really really want Abrams to win. It would be so great.

[Adam Griffin]

Moreover, I would say that RFKFan68's statements are further proof of the poisonous effects of political polarization in this country. Aiming for the destruction of an opposing political party is, in my belief, beyond the bounds of reason. And engaging in such blatant partisanship makes its more difficult for you to attract independents and swing voters to your side. Abrams will need those voters to win, and having advocates making such hardline comments makes it more difficult to get those individuals into your camp.

Unfortunately, the vast majority of Georgia "independents" are the types who love to talk about civility and blame both sides for everything, yet when it matters, ultimately don the R avatar en masse. That sounds very familiar...

The people in this state who are up for grabs identify as "moderates", and historically are perfectly willing to back Democrats under most circumstances.

[💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)]

I'll eat crow if I have to but I believe Abrams is going to eke this out. Y'all don't know how long she has had paid canvassers on the ground talking to people that the polls would never pick up. Not to mention the Democratic Party of Georgia's volunteer based field apparatus and the plethora of organizations down here organizing for her. We will see in 7 days.

Is that apparatus good enough to keep running another month if it has to during a runoff?

I would argue that Democrats might have the advantage in a runoff situation, given how insanely fired up the party is. It's not like 2008 where not only was GA more Republican-leaning, but Democrats basically climaxed with Obama and went to sleep afterwards. This time around, Trump is still in office, and a veritable avalanche of money and volunteers will descend on Georgia as if it is a final stand for the Democratic Party.

Hard disagree. The same thing was true with the GA-06 special -- Trump was in office, he was swimming in cash, and the base was incredibly energized.

I think Abrams is toast if she doesn't get to 50. If she doesn't, we'll see the same thing we've seen in all of the high-profile specials of the last 18 months (sans Alabama): intense national focus on the race plus the realization that it's a close race and not a shoe-in Republican win will force enough of the reluctant Republican voters to turn out to counteract the Democratic energy and keep the seat red.

GA-6 is a gerrymandered Republican District. That is not comparable to a statewide race.

The gerrymandering has nothing to do with my argument.

What I'm saying is that basically, anybody who would vote for Abrams in a runoff will already be voting for her in the general. However, given the fact it's a midterm with a Republican in the White House, there will be a whole lot of potential Kemp voters who won't vote next week, but could be activated to vote in a runoff. Basically, if Abrams doesn't hit 50% the first time, there isn't going to be some trove of undiscovered voters/untapped demographics which will push her over the top in a runoff, whereas there will be untapped Kemp voters. That's basically the same dynamic that played out in GA-06 last year.

I'm not saying that Abrams can't hit 50 the first time, I'm just saying she has to. I believe you when you described the extent of her registration/mobilization -- we're talking about someone who literally had a job of enrolling new voters. That's encouraging, I'm just nervous because with the runoff she has a higher bar to clear than other Ds next week.

[Rookie Yinzer]

I'll eat crow if I have to but I believe Abrams is going to eke this out. Y'all don't know how long she has had paid canvassers on the ground talking to people that the polls would never pick up. Not to mention the Democratic Party of Georgia's volunteer based field apparatus and the plethora of organizations down here organizing for her. We will see in 7 days.

Is that apparatus good enough to keep running another month if it has to during a runoff?

I would argue that Democrats might have the advantage in a runoff situation, given how insanely fired up the party is. It's not like 2008 where not only was GA more Republican-leaning, but Democrats basically climaxed with Obama and went to sleep afterwards. This time around, Trump is still in office, and a veritable avalanche of money and volunteers will descend on Georgia as if it is a final stand for the Democratic Party.

Hard disagree. The same thing was true with the GA-06 special -- Trump was in office, he was swimming in cash, and the base was incredibly energized.

I think Abrams is toast if she doesn't get to 50. If she doesn't, we'll see the same thing we've seen in all of the high-profile specials of the last 18 months (sans Alabama): intense national focus on the race plus the realization that it's a close race and not a shoe-in Republican win will force enough of the reluctant Republican voters to turn out to counteract the Democratic energy and keep the seat red.

GA-6 is a gerrymandered Republican District. That is not comparable to a statewide race.

The gerrymandering has nothing to do with my argument.

What I'm saying is that basically, anybody who would vote for Abrams in a runoff will already be voting for her in the general. However, given the fact it's a midterm with a Republican in the White House, there will be a whole lot of potential Kemp voters who won't vote next week, but could be activated to vote in a runoff. Basically, if Abrams doesn't hit 50% the first time, there isn't going to be some trove of undiscovered voters/untapped demographics which will push her over the top in a runoff, whereas there will be untapped Kemp voters. That's basically the same dynamic that played out in GA-06 last year.

I'm not saying that Abrams can't hit 50 the first time, I'm just saying she has to. I believe you when you described the extent of her registration/mobilization -- we're talking about someone who literally had a job of enrolling new voters. That's encouraging, I'm just nervous because with the runoff she has a higher bar to clear than other Ds next week.

Gotcha. I’m of the belief that she will hit 50 next week and the pundits who regularly miss the mark ( ) won’t see her voters coming. We will have answers to our questions in just a few short days.

[Calthrina950]

Moreover, I would say that RFKFan68's statements are further proof of the poisonous effects of political polarization in this country. Aiming for the destruction of an opposing political party is, in my belief, beyond the bounds of reason. And engaging in such blatant partisanship makes its more difficult for you to attract independents and swing voters to your side. Abrams will need those voters to win, and having advocates making such hardline comments makes it more difficult to get those individuals into your camp.

Unfortunately, the vast majority of Georgia "independents" are the types who love to talk about civility and blame both sides for everything, yet when it matters, ultimately don the R avatar en masse. That sounds very familiar...

The people in this state who are up for grabs identify as "moderates", and historically are perfectly willing to back Democrats under most circumstances.

The reason why I adopted a Republican avatar was because of my exasperation with many of the posters on this forum. I decided to adopt a stance that would mark me off in clear contrast to them, and also because people on here have accused me of being a "fake moderate" or "not a true centrist".

As for Georgia, while I believe Abrams will lose, the demographic patterns do favor Democrats in the long run. By next decade, they will be far more competitive.

[Badger]

Moreover, I would say that RFKFan68's statements are further proof of the poisonous effects of political polarization in this country. Aiming for the destruction of an opposing political party is, in my belief, beyond the bounds of reason. And engaging in such blatant partisanship makes its more difficult for you to attract independents and swing voters to your side. Abrams will need those voters to win, and having advocates making such hardline comments makes it more difficult to get those individuals into your camp.

Go clutch your pearls elsewhere, sock.

[Calthrina950]

Moreover, I would say that RFKFan68's statements are further proof of the poisonous effects of political polarization in this country. Aiming for the destruction of an opposing political party is, in my belief, beyond the bounds of reason. And engaging in such blatant partisanship makes its more difficult for you to attract independents and swing voters to your side. Abrams will need those voters to win, and having advocates making such hardline comments makes it more difficult to get those individuals into your camp.

Go clutch your pearls elsewhere, sock.

And go take your insults elsewhere.

[Zaybay]

Moreover, I would say that RFKFan68's statements are further proof of the poisonous effects of political polarization in this country. Aiming for the destruction of an opposing political party is, in my belief, beyond the bounds of reason. And engaging in such blatant partisanship makes its more difficult for you to attract independents and swing voters to your side. Abrams will need those voters to win, and having advocates making such hardline comments makes it more difficult to get those individuals into your camp.

Go clutch your pearls elsewhere, sock.

And go take your insults elsewhere.

Cal, it would probably help your image on the forum if you didnt talk about poltical polarization and how its ruining the political climate in random threads. If posters assume you are a "fake moderate", and then you do this, it just kinda reinforces that image. You going from an indie to an R avatar has not helped this image.

Just my thoughts.

[Calthrina950]

Moreover, I would say that RFKFan68's statements are further proof of the poisonous effects of political polarization in this country. Aiming for the destruction of an opposing political party is, in my belief, beyond the bounds of reason. And engaging in such blatant partisanship makes its more difficult for you to attract independents and swing voters to your side. Abrams will need those voters to win, and having advocates making such hardline comments makes it more difficult to get those individuals into your camp.

Go clutch your pearls elsewhere, sock.

And go take your insults elsewhere.

Cal, it would probably help your image on the forum if you didnt talk about poltical polarization and how its ruining the political climate in random threads. If posters assume you are a "fake moderate", and then you do this, it just kinda reinforces that image. You going from an indie to an R avatar has not helped this image.

Just my thoughts.

I understand what you are saying, but as you can see from Badger's insults, such a pivot would be very difficult to make. And given that virtually everyone who has given me trouble on this website is on the left side of the spectrum, I feel it necessary to underline my opposition towards them. Badger and RFKFan68 are just two of the many individuals who hold values and beliefs that are antiethical to my own.

[Bidenworth2020]

Moreover, I would say that RFKFan68's statements are further proof of the poisonous effects of political polarization in this country. Aiming for the destruction of an opposing political party is, in my belief, beyond the bounds of reason. And engaging in such blatant partisanship makes its more difficult for you to attract independents and swing voters to your side. Abrams will need those voters to win, and having advocates making such hardline comments makes it more difficult to get those individuals into your camp.

Go clutch your pearls elsewhere, sock.

And go take your insults elsewhere.

Cal, it would probably help your image on the forum if you didnt talk about poltical polarization and how its ruining the political climate in random threads. If posters assume you are a "fake moderate", and then you do this, it just kinda reinforces that image. You going from an indie to an R avatar has not helped this image.

Just my thoughts.

I understand what you are saying, but as you can see from Badger's insults, such a pivot would be very difficult to make. And given that virtually everyone who has given me trouble on this website is on the left side of the spectrum, I feel it necessary to underline my opposition towards them. Badger and RFKFan68 are just two of the many individuals who hold values and beliefs that are antiethical to my own.

So, in other words, you became a republican avatar to trigger them? You are bending to their will.