Gubernatorial Race 2018 (Commerce, White: asbestos, pre-k, budget)

[JPD]

Originally Posted by BR Valentine

White college-educated suburban women is the group where she has a realistic shot at flipping votes. Chasing rural reliably Republican white voters would be a huge waste of time and money.

So you're saying her strategy is to just keep using the same losing strategy?

[JPD]

Originally Posted by stoxdiamond

Real world scenario and flipping old white conservatives to vote for a black woman don't go along in the same sentence. It's way easier to convince a young apathetic voter to go to the poll.

That's what Democrats always do and it has proven not to work very well.

[BR Valentine]

Originally Posted by JPD

So you're saying her strategy is to just keep using the same losing strategy?

I expect Kemp to win and she’s not going to persuade rural white voters to vote for her. That said, the strategy she’s pursuing of focusing on turning out people who lean Democrat but have a lower voting propensity is the most sensible strategy. She has to be wildly successful with it to win. To the extent that she can grab some suburban women along the way she’ll help herself. And those are the only white voters she has any reasonable expectation of flipping. In short, the two tactics aren’t mutually exclusive.

[JPD]

Originally Posted by BR Valentine

I expect Kemp to win and she’s not going to persuade rural white voters to vote for her. That said, the strategy she’s pursuing of focusing on turning out people who lean Democrat but have a lower voting propensity is the most sensible strategy. She has to be wildly successful with it to win. To the extent that she can grab some suburban women along the way she’ll help herself. And those are the only white voters she has any reasonable expectation of flipping. In short, the two tactics aren’t mutually exclusive.

They're not mutually exclusive, but they are the same strategies that the Democrats have been employing unsuccessfully for a long time. Her message is not new, and her strategy is not new. So, as much as I'd love to be wrong, I see a pretty easy Kemp win.

[ronricks]

Originally Posted by BR Valentine

I expect Kemp to win and she’s not going to persuade rural white voters to vote for her. That said, the strategy she’s pursuing of focusing on turning out people who lean Democrat but have a lower voting propensity is the most sensible strategy. She has to be wildly successful with it to win. To the extent that she can grab some suburban women along the way she’ll help herself. And those are the only white voters she has any reasonable expectation of flipping. In short, the two tactics aren’t mutually exclusive.

Whites of any persuasion be they urban or rural are far more likely to vote for Abrams than blacks are for Kemp.

[AtlJan]

Originally Posted by BR Valentine

White college-educated suburban women is the group where she has a realistic shot at flipping votes. Chasing rural reliably Republican white voters would be a huge waste of time and money.

I'm that demographic. I agree with pretty much everything Brian Kemp is running on. I just tried to read about Stacey Abrams's views on her website and it is a hot mess. She doesn't seem to be able to say anything without two pages of verbiage. Not sure what she stands for, but am hazarding a guess that it's too liberal to move me from Kemp. If she were for lowering taxes and easing the burden of government regulation, etc., then she would have said it, but I wasn't reading that. . . .It's not like white college-educated suburban women are drifting in the wind. Most of us have solidified our views, on one side of the political spectrum or the other. Why would they be easier to shift than white college-educated suburban men?

[0nyxStation]

Originally Posted by JPD

They're not mutually exclusive, but they are the same strategies that the Democrats have been employing unsuccessfully for a long time. Her message is not new, and her strategy is not new. So, as much as I'd love to be wrong, I see a pretty easy Kemp win.

You guys make Georgia sound like a very racist backward place. Im not saying that it is or it isnt just saying what I am reading here.

[BR Valentine]

Originally Posted by AtlJan

I'm that demographic. I agree with pretty much everything Brian Kemp is running on. I just tried to read about Stacey Abrams's views on her website and it is a hot mess. She doesn't seem to be able to say anything without two pages of verbiage. Not sure what she stands for, but am hazarding a guess that it's too liberal to move me from Kemp. If she were for lowering taxes and easing the burden of government regulation, etc., then she would have said it, but I wasn't reading that. . . .It's not like white college-educated suburban women are drifting in the wind. Most of us have solidified our views, on one side of the political spectrum or the other. Why would they be easier to shift than white college-educated suburban men?

There is a massive amount of data showing that white college-educated voters have been drifting away from the Republican Party over the past 15 years. That change is most pronounced among women. The gender gap among white college-educated voters is at a historic high. You are just one data point. It’s not as apparent in Georgia but in other locations with high a concentration of college-educated white voters, suburban Philadelphia for example, Republicans have lost what was a sizeable advantage among those voters twenty years ago. Trump was the first Republican candidate in PA history to lose in all four suburban counties surrounding Philadelphia.

Pew has done a good job over the years of tracking these trends - Wide Gender Gap, Growing Educational Divide in Voters' Party Identification | Pew Research Center

The challenge for Abrams is that white non-college educated voters are the single largest block of voters in Georgia and those voters here have a much higher than average propensity to be evangelicals who are at this point completely out of reach for any Democrat.

[CaliDreaming01]

Originally Posted by BR Valentine

White college-educated suburban women is the group where she has a realistic shot at flipping votes. Chasing rural reliably Republican white voters would be a huge waste of time and money.

I used to think that suburban white women were the key to Democratic victories, but the 2016 election changed that for me forever. About 70% of white women voted for Trump in 2016. No wonder Democrats stay losing.

Originally Posted by BR Valentine

I expect Kemp to win and she’s not going to persuade rural white voters to vote for her. That said, the strategy she’s pursuing of focusing on turning out people who lean Democrat but have a lower voting propensity is the most sensible strategy. She has to be wildly successful with it to win. To the extent that she can grab some suburban women along the way she’ll help herself. And those are the only white voters she has any reasonable expectation of flipping. In short, the two tactics aren’t mutually exclusive.

Well stated.
.

Originally Posted by AtlJan

I'm that demographic. I agree with pretty much everything Brian Kemp is running on. I just tried to read about Stacey Abrams's views on her website and it is a hot mess. She doesn't seem to be able to say anything without two pages of verbiage. Not sure what she stands for, but am hazarding a guess that it's too liberal to move me from Kemp. If she were for lowering taxes and easing the burden of government regulation, etc., then she would have said it, but I wasn't reading that. . . .It's not like white college-educated suburban women are drifting in the wind. Most of us have solidified our views, on one side of the political spectrum or the other. Why would they be easier to shift than white college-educated suburban men?

With 70% of white women feeling exactly the way you do, I wonder why Democrats continue to focus on flipping suburban white women.

Originally Posted by 0nyxStation

You guys make Georgia sound like a very racist backward place. Im not saying that it is or it isnt just saying what I am reading here.

I find that Southern whites in a way are more tolerant than whites elsewhere even if it doesn't appear that way on the surface. White and black southerners interact with each other on a daily basis. It's easier to appear not to be racist when you're never around someone different than you.

[cparker73]

Originally Posted by AtlJan

If she were for lowering taxes and easing the burden of government regulation, etc., then she would have said it, but I wasn't reading that.

Why do you want to lower taxes? It's something politicians promise, but lowering taxes means you're cutting an essential service like education or infrastructure, which Georgia desperately needs to make investments in. And what regulations are in the way of what's considered one of the most business friendly states in the country, which is why we have so many Fortune 500 companies headquartered here?

Come back to comment after you've actually taken time to read her platform on her well-organized site.