Gubernatorial Race 2018 (Atlanta, Evans, Clayton: values, percentages, resident)

[CaliDreaming01]

Originally Posted by bryantm3

republicans really have lost their **** over the past few years. they're willing to do anything to win because they see themselves as fighting for the moral soul of america, but they can't see that in the process of doing that, any moral high ground they had has been decimated. and now you've got people on the left like michael moore saying that the democrats should act like the republicans because it's the only way they're going to win, and winning is all that counts anymore.

if both sides don't tamp down their worst impulses you are going to start seeing people peel off the extremes and committing acts of domestic terrorism for political purposes. we cannot just keep ramping this up and expect a good result to come out of it.

Originally Posted by sciblue

It's really hard for me to see how these things (among others) are extreme:

1) A woman's right to autonomy over her own body
2) Clean air, water, and soil
3) Inexpensive healthcare
4) Equal rights for GLBT citizens
5) Fairness in elections
6) Complete separation of church and state as our forefathers invisioned
7) Equal pay for equal work
8) Term limits for elected officials
9) Protection of our natural resources

I definitely don't think Democrats should be just like Republicans in their tactics. But I also think that we shouldn't be trying to be the exact opposite of them. There are times when anger is warranted. If we truly believe that the issues sciblue listed are important, then the people *should* be angry. There is a difference between righteous anger and bullying anger. I would be just as disgusted at Democrats if they started being as hateful as the Republicans, but standing up for your beliefs is not that.

Originally Posted by seussie

It’s not about him saying something wrong. It’s about how easy it is to warp and twist the words to mean something else

Interesting point on who gets to be most mad. But Black Democrats, especially those of the CBC, don’t have such problems. Though Holder resigned years ago, I still see his rhetoric participating in a longterm tradition. Statements the likes of Maxine Waters and Holder get to be those driving Fox News segments, despite them not being the face of the so-called younger white “violent antifa” that gets their panties in a bunch. The stereotype of black violence against whites isn’t negligble here. I simply hope the soundbyte dies down. And yeah, things are going to be said no matter what. But I like that Abrams hasn’t walked the Democratic line in such a way to acknowledge this kind of mess, even if it is bad for her mainstream image. That she hasn’t said one word about Holder yet commented on Pressley speaks mountains.

I definitely see what you're saying. However, I think a lot of times Dems are so worried about how Republicans are going to twist things that they just stay silent on matters that are important to them. Or worse, are afraid to take certain positions that further their ideals.

I love that Abrams is staying focused on her message and is not getting into a mudslinging contest. I think she is in a position she's in because she's not afraid to say that she is a Progressive, or that she supports Bernie Sanders. I think it's okay for Republicans to take swipes on trivial issues as long as you right on substance and you're unafraid to stand up for them.

Also, I had not read anything about her comments on Pressley. Could you fill me in? I was aware that Pressley was stumping for her but I'm unfamiliar with the particular comment you're referencing in your post.

[CaliDreaming01]

Originally Posted by bryantm3

regardless of how you feel about abrams, do you feel like she's more of a georgia-first candidate or representative of the national democratic party?



there is something about her to me that is more genuine. jon ossoff by comparison came off to me as hand-picked by the national party, no off the cuff remarks and the same tested campaign slogans and talking points, basically just a seatwarmer and yea vote for the national democratic agenda. he gave me an uneasy feeling and i didn't vote for him in the primary or the special election last year.


stacey is different. you know where she's at. she's not one of these hillary clinton types where the platform is vague so people can see whatever they want to see into it, and you have no idea who you're really putting in office.

Yes, I totally agree. I don't think she is an establishment type at all. The CW was always that she never had a chance and that Stacey Evans was the Dems only hope. The only acceptable strategy for Dems was to appeal to white suburban women, and of course Abrams totally blew that strategy out of the water.

She seems to be more in the mold of Bernie Sanders--although the amount of money she's taken from groups she refuses to name is worrying to me. Still, she is not afraid to call herself a progressive and to take left of center positions, so for now it's all good with me.

Because she seems to be bucking the CW she does seem to be more authentic. I think voters crave authenticity and this is why Trump is so popular. I think his base loves that he is not afraid to be his dumb, narcissistic, bullying, woman-hating self rather than the carefully crafted, polished and controlled candidates we're so used to seeing. .

[bryan85]

In the Gubernatorial race, I'm voting for Goober!

[bu2]

Originally Posted by hilltop180

Just watched some of her interviews. I think Kemp may be the one who is nervous about the debates. She speaks really well. Kemp just doesn't sound very likable.

From people who met him in person, he is a pretty likable, but low key guy. She is a pretty good speaker.

[ronricks]

Originally Posted by CaliDreaming01

Yes, I totally agree. I don't think she is an establishment type at all. The CW was always that she never had a chance and that Stacey Evans was the Dems only hope. The only acceptable strategy for Dems was to appeal to white suburban women, and of course Abrams totally blew that strategy out of the water.

She seems to be more in the mold of Bernie Sanders--although the amount of money she's taken from groups she refuses to name is worrying to me. Still, she is not afraid to call herself a progressive and to take left of center positions, so for now it's all good with me.

Because she seems to be bucking the CW she does seem to be more authentic. I think voters crave authenticity and this is why Trump is so popular. I think his base loves that he is not afraid to be his dumb, narcissistic, bullying, woman-hating self rather than the carefully crafted, polished and controlled candidates we're so used to seeing. .

Not sure why people keep trying to repeat false narratives. Whites (both male and female) are far more likely to vote for a black candidate then blacks (both male and female) are to vote for a white candidate. If you want to see evidence of this in our state look no further than the last Atlanta mayoral election.

[JPD]

Originally Posted by ronricks

Not sure why people keep trying to repeat false narratives. Whites (both male and female) are far more likely to vote for a black candidate then blacks (both male and female) are to vote for a white candidate. If you want to see evidence of this in our state look no further than the last Atlanta mayoral election.

I already tore this nonsesne statement apart a few weeks ago, and here you are making it again. You have no shame.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by JPD

I already tore this nonsesne statement apart a few weeks ago, and here you are making it again. You have no shame.

Yah, that is one of the most ridiculous statements I've read in a while. The most simplest look at historic voting records refutes it.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by CaliDreaming01

I definitely don't think Democrats should be just like Republicans in their tactics. But I also think that we shouldn't be trying to be the exact opposite of them. There are times when anger is warranted. If we truly believe that the issues sciblue listed are important, then the people *should* be angry. There is a difference between righteous anger and bullying anger. I would be just as disgusted at Democrats if they started being as hateful as the Republicans, but standing up for your beliefs is not that.




I definitely see what you're saying. However, I think a lot of times Dems are so worried about how Republicans are going to twist things that they just stay silent on matters that are important to them. Or worse, are afraid to take certain positions that further their ideals.

I love that Abrams is staying focused on her message and is not getting into a mudslinging contest. I think she is in a position she's in because she's not afraid to say that she is a Progressive, or that she supports Bernie Sanders. I think it's okay for Republicans to take swipes on trivial issues as long as you right on substance and you're unafraid to stand up for them.

Also, I had not read anything about her comments on Pressley. Could you fill me in? I was aware that Pressley was stumping for her but I'm unfamiliar with the particular comment you're referencing in your post.

You are LONG past overdue to start being disgusted.

[ronricks]

Originally Posted by JPD

I already tore this nonsesne statement apart a few weeks ago, and here you are making it again. You have no shame.

You didn't tear anything apart. A nonpartisan election showed us what I have stated. Talk about no shame.

[ronricks]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

Yah, that is one of the most ridiculous statements I've read in a while. The most simplest look at historic voting records refutes it.

No, present time refutes it. We aren't living in 1950 anymore. This is 2018.