Predictions: Georgia turns blue next election? (Atlanta, Alpharetta: restaurant, vs., move to)

[Bullbear]

Originally Posted by RainyRainyDay

Really, they're objective because they say they are? Apparently Obama took issue with those rankings: Obama Pushback on National Journal Rankings - Political Punch

The source I provided, however, gave individual and averaged rankings from eight well-known conservative sources. You didn't comment on that. So those eight sources were all wrong, and the NJ's ranking, which seems out of line with the facts, is "objective"?

Of course Obama took issue with their rankings. He knows being labelled the most liberal is a HUGE negative. After all, if its not a negative, he would be wallowing with pride in that moniker, would he not?

The "facts"? So now "well-known conservative sources" are the source of "facts"? Wow, that is quite a change for you, isnt it? I wonder what other "facts" I can glean from these so-called conservative sites.

Interesting! The site that gathered your "facts, "Vote From Abroad.org" states the following about itself:

"This website is owned and operated by Democrats Abroad.

Democrats Abroad is the official Democratic Party organization for the millions of Americans living outside the United States. We work to advance the principles of our Party by spreading the Democratic message to Americans abroad and encouraging them to vote for Democratic candidates back home."

Hilarious. Who is spreading propoganda now???

[waronxmas]

Originally Posted by Bullbear

I moved (back to) Atlanta from a northern city a few years ago.

Im not a democrat.

I am an Atlanta native, but had lived elsewhere for a time.

I ASSUME that many of these people coming from NYC,LA, etc are actually native Atlantans/Georgians who are just moving back to their home state/city. And returning with their conservative values intact. That is MY assumption.
.

That would be correct, it is your assumption. Demographic and voting trends suggest otherwise.

[RainyRainyDay]

Originally Posted by Bullbear

Of course Obama took issue with their rankings. He knows being labelled the most liberal is a HUGE negative. After all, if its not a negative, he would be wallowing with pride in that moniker, would he not?

The "facts"? So now "well-known conservative sources" are the source of "facts"? Wow, that is quite a change for you, isnt it? I wonder what other "facts" I can glean from these so-called conservative sites.

Interesting! The site that gathered your "facts, "Vote From Abroad.org" states the following about itself:

"This website is owned and operated by Democrats Abroad.

Democrats Abroad is the official Democratic Party organization for the millions of Americans living outside the United States. We work to advance the principles of our Party by spreading the Democratic message to Americans abroad and encouraging them to vote for Democratic candidates back home."

Hilarious. Who is spreading propoganda now???

Huh, which of the conservative rankings on that site is incorrect?

[Bullbear]

Originally Posted by RainyRainyDay

Addendum: Just think about it logically. Everyone knows the US is basically a slightly-right-of-center country. Neither party would be so crazy as to nominate a presidential candidate from their extreme ideological fringe. It just wouldn't go over with the voters. Republican attempts to paint Obama as very liberal are misrepresentation for political purposes.

See my post above about your so called "facts".

Democratic attempts to paint Obama as not very liberal are misrepresenation for political purposes.

[Bullbear]

Originally Posted by RainyRainyDay

Huh, which of the conservative rankings on that site is incorrect?

Hoss, the data was twisted and turned by the democratic party, via its "Vote From Abroad" subsidiary, in order to present Obama as not liberal and attract more votes.

Most reasonable people trust an organization that presents itself as objective and has been rating senators for over 25 years versus a CLEARLY partisan source, owned by the democratic party, that is blatantly trying to twist the data to its advantage.

If you cant see the obvious, I cant help you.

[Bullbear]

Originally Posted by waronxmas

That would be correct, it is your assumption. Demographic and voting trends suggest otherwise.

Voting trends? You mean like the Mass race where the dems lost a seat held by Teddy Kennedy for nearly 3 decades to a nearly unknown republican? Or the failure of Halter to defeat his opponent despite Unions spending $10M? Gosh, the trends are quite illuminating, arent they?

[waronxmas]

Originally Posted by Bullbear

Voting trends? You mean like the Mass race where the dems lost a seat held by Teddy Kennedy for nearly 3 decades to a nearly unknown republican? Or the failure of Halter to defeat his opponent despite Unions spending $10M? Gosh, the trends are quite illuminating, arent they?

What does any of that have to do with Georgia?

[Bullbear]

Originally Posted by waronxmas

What does any of that have to do with Georgia?

If a very liberal voting state (Mass) can vote in a republican, it has implications for the entire country, including GA. You will see.

[MiamiRob]

Originally Posted by suprascooby22

Also the Republicans will pick up the states they lost in 2008 like Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, etc...

I don't know about NC or Virginia but I doubt Florida will ever be a Republican stronghold like it was in the past. In case you didn't notice our own Governor Crist jump the GOP ship and leads in the polls for the Senate race.
By the way the Kennedy seat in Massachussets that went to a Republican is a different breed from the crazy Repubs in the South.

[waronxmas]

Originally Posted by Bullbear

If a very liberal voting state (Mass) can vote in a republican, it has implications for the entire country, including GA. You will see.

I really don't see how. Senator Brown's victory was quite simple: He ran a better campaign than his opponent. Also, Massachusetts has a history of voting for Republicans and it is nothing new. While Ted Kennedy held his seat since the 60s, the state regularly elected Republicans to state office. Governor Patrick was the first Democrat to be Governor since 1983. Prior to him four Republicans held that position. What's the difference? New England Republicans are social liberals and would pass for Moderate Democrats most other places in the country....no matter how much Mitt Romney tries to act like he isn't.

So if the future of Georgia are Liberal Republicans, I'm cool with that. But they are a dying breed and Moderate and Conservative Democrats take their place in the South.