Gubernatorial Race 2018 (Atlanta, Savannah: arena, winter, root canal)

[Iconographer]

Originally Posted by markjames68

President Trump’s tweets change message more often than the weather.

She may energize the progressive base, but that only works in a blue state. Georgia may get there, but it’s not even purple yet. Her attitude - whether true or not - comes across as a sore loser. Hollywood will love her but the average voter here will remember.

And yet, Trump conceded his grudging respect for Abrams and the hard-fought campaign that she waged...something he didn't have to do.

"The president tweeted hearty congratulations to Kemp on his election victory after Stacey Abrams ended her bid for Georgia governor. But he also congratulated the Democrat on waging a campaign that fought “brilliantly and hard.”

“She will have a terrific political future!” he exclaimed."

https://www.ajc.com/blog/politics/tr...860DB0dBWFKiK/

Frankly, I think that by doing this he is sending a veiled suggestion to the feckless Mr. Kemp. Unless he wants to see his administration slowly sink into a quagmire of scandal and accusations of corruption, he better start building bridges himself.

[markjames68]

Originally Posted by Iconographer

Don't you love the "if you don't like it, get the hell out" Republican Mantra that is always the fallback for a crumbling argument?

Don’t you love the “I’m moving to Canada” Democratic mantra that is always the fallback when their candidate loses?

https://www.newsday.com/entertainmen...ent-1.12588837

[markjames68]

Originally Posted by Iconographer

And yet, Trump conceded his grudging respect for Abrams and the hard-fought campaign that she waged...something he didn't have to do.

"The president tweeted hearty congratulations to Kemp on his election victory after Stacey Abrams ended her bid for Georgia governor. But he also congratulated the Democrat on waging a campaign that fought “brilliantly and hard.”

“She will have a terrific political future!” he exclaimed."

https://www.ajc.com/blog/politics/tr...860DB0dBWFKiK/

Frankly, I think that by doing this he is sending a veiled suggestion to the feckless Mr. Kemp. Unless he wants to see his administration slowly sink into a quagmire of scandal and accusations of corruption, he better start building bridges himself.

I don’t disagree at all with the need to build bridges. If anything positive came out of this election for the Republicans it’s hopefully that they realized that Jim Crow is dead and they need to actively campaign with a positive message not just fear, uncertainty and doubt.

[green_mariner]

Originally Posted by Iconographer

Don't you love the "if you don't like it, get the hell out" Republican Mantra that is always the fallback for a crumbling argument?

I heard some conservatives say they would leave Georgia if Abrams got elected.

[budgetwise5]

Originally Posted by markjames68

Some excellent and cogent points.

I am closest to being a Libertarian in that I prefer my government to be fiscally conservative and socially stay out of people’s lives. I do not support many of the Republican “family values” positions. At the same time, I don’t vote for a candidate because they are LGBTQ or LGBTQ-friendly.

But in a 2 party system voting Libertarian doesn’t really mean much unfortunately. In GA it’s 1%.

Here’s the rub - I’m not against concepts like Medicare for all or a $15 an hour minimum wage. But I’d like it to be explained how it will be paid for and implemented. I saw in NY Cuomo’s “free college” message, but only to families making $125K or less. Sounds good except that high achieving kids from low income families already get free rides to top schools like Harvard due to their huge endowments. And then there are restrictions for those who are even eligible for NY’s program. In the end it’s really more window dressing and a veiled tax hike.

The R party line is “no”. That’s not realistic or helpful.

The D party line is “pay your fair share”. Which means their definition of “rich” (meaning anyone but their traditional voting base).

If Abrams or any candidate came out and said “if we increase the state income tax by 2% we can extend Medicare to everyone”, and the numbers would be reasonably true, that’s a point to discuss.

Instead I see a litany of “helping the underserved” benefits without any accounting of how it gets implemented. Which means another progressive tax implementation.

And coming from NY previously where the income tax is high, sales tax is high, cost of living is high, property taxes are exorbitant...that is NOT what Atlanta or Georgia wants to aspire to be.

I’ve also seen the comparisons of an ideal situation to Scandinavia. GA is closest in population to Sweden, so maybe that’s a country to model. But everyone pays there - huge taxes for everyone, not just the top tier.

I don’t disagree with any of the points you have made. Both parties have a very bad habit of only addressing symptomatic bandaids or short-term relief of problems instead of addressing the causes or attempting to fix the problem.

With college tuition, administrators, rising costs of technology/labs and of just plain greed drive tuition higher. Most jobs, even those that two decades ago didn’t require a college degree, and likely don’t require a college education, now require a degree for employment, so the idea of just not sending a majority of kids to college isn’t feasible. We already have a shortage in certain fields such as STEM, and even skilled labor jobs require trade school and skills that not everyone can be taught or might excel at (we can’t all be mechanical engineers or welders).

Having industries that require education fund technology such as Google, Apple, etc., funding computer and robotics labs in colleges to offset the costs makes sense, since they reap the benefits and the profits of those skills and education. Hospitals and pharmaceutical companies can fund biology and chemistry labs in undergraduate school. Most schools rent out their facilities to sports teams, corporations and other parties, some with so much profit that they can cover their operation costs and turn a profit without even charging tuition. Offering “free tuition” (which isn’t free, because they then raise the costs of room and board, books and all other incidentals) at the cost of higher taxes does NOTHING to address the causes of the rise of tuition, and does nothing to offset that.

With regards to healthcare, both parties argue over who should pay for healthcare insurance, or how healthcare insurance should be structured, but that is only one piece of the pie regarding the rising costs of healthcare. There are far more people profiting from a broken system that have absolutely no incentive to change it, that unless there is a revolution or extreme activism and consumer demand, nothing will change. Fighting about healthcare insurance is like treating the symptoms of cancer without actually doing anything to try to prevent it or to cure it, but no one sees that.

Neither party has done anything to address immigration reform or DACA children, but the chants and debates about walls and caravans continue; nothing actually changes or get addressed, it’s all emotions, headlines and division.

Both parties run in circles without doing more than lip service or some regulations volleyed back and forth ever 4 to 8 years that do nothing to address the problems we face, but everyone keeps voting for this broken system that shows no signs of improving.

I’m also from NY, and I agree with you on the points you mentioned, particularly regarding progressive taxes. I also support spending if it can be justified and accounted for, and I absolutely hate that republicans are so happy to cut taxes without cutting spending; as that is the most fiscally irresponsible of all. At least the D’s raise the taxes to cover their spending, but the 2018 tax cuts were accompanied by an increase in military spending, plans for this expensive wall (did a wall work anywhere else in the world? - and people have boats, planes, tunnels and ladders), and worse of all the tariffs, which are just taxes on the consumer.

I did vote libertarian, not because I’m a “big L” libertarian (I’m not), but I’m just so tired of being offered two poor candidates and being asked to choose between the lesser of two evils, or against the other party instead of for anything other than more of the same. I agreed with Metz that there was almost a runoff, and I was voting to send a message that I am tired of these two broken parties, neither of which represent most of my views or solutions. I really wish that more people had seen it that way, instead of this “I must defend against the other evil party” mantra that they all get suckered into.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results.

[demonta4]

Originally Posted by markjames68

Conceding after waiting for every last vote to be counted is irrelevant.

Conceding at all is irrelevant. There’s absolutely no need to, whoever wins is going to win. Every candidate should wait until all votes are counted.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by Iconographer

And yet, Trump conceded his grudging respect for Abrams and the hard-fought campaign that she waged...something he didn't have to do.

"The president tweeted hearty congratulations to Kemp on his election victory after Stacey Abrams ended her bid for Georgia governor. But he also congratulated the Democrat on waging a campaign that fought “brilliantly and hard.”

“She will have a terrific political future!” he exclaimed."

https://www.ajc.com/blog/politics/tr...860DB0dBWFKiK/

Frankly, I think that by doing this he is sending a veiled suggestion to the feckless Mr. Kemp. Unless he wants to see his administration slowly sink into a quagmire of scandal and accusations of corruption, he better start building bridges himself.

No. Even President Trump can be gracious at times. Governor-elect Kemp said something similar.

Its just Democrats who have trouble with the concept of being gracious. You don't seem to understand the concept. You can respect someone you don't agree with. Abrams did a good job to come so close. The Nunn/Carter dream team didn't.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by AnsleyPark

Something tells me that Ms. Abrams views her quest for reformed voting laws more important than her political future. Imagine - someone putting principle over fame and fortune. I suggest that litigating this matter is a better (and likely more effective) social outcome than organizing mass protests that hinder commerce and could lead to violence. That is, in large part, why we have a judicial system.

I disagree. She sees litigation and her "not for profit" organization as her political future. It will keep her in the public eye. It will give her a salary. And it will give her a database for her next run for office.

I've yet to see any evidence that anyone was denied an opportunity to vote. It doesn't appear a lot even had to do provisional votes. More people voted in this gubernatorial election than ever before. And here are some factual numbers on the purged voters. Its really hard to get facts through all the sensational articles. There are some better articles somewhere than this one, but I had to go through about 5 pages of yellow journalism just to find this one:
https://www.macon.com/opinion/opn-co...220553825.html

As for the lines, that's up to the local boards. And again, I see lots of times thrown out there, but no specifics. So its like anything you see on twitter or the internet, you have to have a healthy skepticism. Maybe there was a widespread problem. Maybe there were a couple problems. And if its a problem in heavy Abrams districts, its mostly in Democratic run counties like Fulton and Dekalb, not to "voter suppression." Those are the counties Ms. Abrams' district is in, so these are her colleagues running the local elections.

[Fountain-of-youth]

Georgia gubernatorial election, 2014 Map



Georgia gubernatorial election, 2018 Map

[demonta4]

What I’m seeing is the urban areas becoming more blue and the rural areas becoming more red. This doesn’t really explain why she lost though, she had more votes than any other Democratic candidate in Georgia. I think we underestimated Kemp’s ability to register new voters, and purge ones that would be beneficial toward Democrats.