Skip to main content

Reposted from Laura Clawson by pat208
Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal.
Gov. Nathan Deal (R-GA)

While Indiana and Arkansas have been in the headlines as they've passed discriminatory "religious freedom" bills and then had to walk them partway back, the Georgia legislature let a similar bill die quietly this week—or at least go into a prolonged coma, since it could come back in the next legislative session. But if it does, Republican Gov. Nathan Deal is suggesting that it doesn't have to create the controversy of Indiana and Arkansas:
“As close as a state can stay to the original federal language, the safer you are,” said Deal, who voted for the federal legislation while a member of Congress in the 1990s. “It has been interpreted in the courts, so by having that model you narrow some of the arguments about what it does or does not do.”

He called the anti-discrimination clause “the most important” addition.

“And that is a delicate thing to do,” he said. “There’s been so much hyperbole. It’s hard to identify what can you say without saying too much, what can you say without saying too little, and what will people read into either version.”

That's not exactly a strong "don't discriminate because discrimination is bad" statement, but if the threat of lost business and reputation is what it takes to keep more states from passing laws allowing anti-gay discrimination in the name of religion, so be it.

Sun Mar 29, 2015 at 01:02 PM PDT

The American Civil War, 2015.

by StellaRay

Reposted from StellaRay by pat208

There is no Godwin's Law for evoking the Civil War in a discussion of politics. To most Americans, the Civil War was a seminal event in this country, one accompanied by the prerequisite amount of blood and death to qualify as a war, and one that was then, and this is now.

Yes, one must be very careful to not diminish the pain and loss of that war by unjust comparisons to it. This I believe, is Godwin's point. No, we have not taken up arms against each other for the better part---although there are more and more exceptions to that in a country gone hog wild with their guns. And no, our sons are not being slaughtered fighting each other in their own country. Things to be thankful for.

But there are too many places where the comparison is fair. Start with the fact that what drove us to a Civil War was the conflict between state rights and federal mandate. I cannot think of any time since the Civil war where that conflict is as intense as it is now.

Yes, one can site many examples of the battle between states rights and federal mandate in the long and bitter aftermath of the Civil War. Certainly the south continued to fight for their states' rights long after the Civil war, including Jim Crow laws, and school segregation, to name but a few.

But they did not win those battles, this country won them. Jim Crow laws became illegal, segregated public schools became illegal. A whole host of abusive legislation became illegal. Today, as we see the spread of civil rights laws to protect the LGBT community, today's republicans have done a darn good job of putting it all up for grabs again.

There are a sickening amount of examples. Let's talk about Indiana's new "right to be a bigot" law. A law that argues that a state has the right to undo federal law---remember, we aren't just talking about gay marriage here, we're talking about gay Jim Crow laws. Because that's exactly what this is, masquerading as religious rights. Oh, the mind blowing and perverse ironies and hypocrisies.

Then there's Rick Scott's Florida where it is now against the law to use the words "Climate Change" in any state related communication. Really?!?! How could this happen? Is it not in direct opposition to the first amendment? Sure, we all know we can't say whatever we want at work. Because if we did that willy nilly we'd probably lose our jobs. But that's a whole lot different than making what you can and can't say at work a law. Again, this is state triumphing over federal mandate.

In fact, the republicans have honed state power to a sharpened pencil point, and they are getting away with it. State by state they argue that they can do whatever they damn well can legislate. Exactly what the south argued before the civil war---that they had a right to legislate to their majority, and their states' needs, including ownership of other human beings.

This post is unapologetic in in it's concentration on the cultural civil war. Some here demean that as in "Democrats are OK on social issues, but that's not important enough to make them different than republicans. I say it is.  

From voting rights, to gay rights, to union rights, to women's rights and religious rights, republicans are waging a war against the idea that certain things are inalienable to who we are as a country, as a union. They are waging this war because state power is their refuge against a changing world---the refuge of scoundrels, those that would seek to divide for power and profit, utterly shameless about the consequences for the union. Same as the southern states before the Civil War.

I'm sure you've all heard, read and experienced anecdotally how bitter and divided our politics have become. So many people I know bemoan this state of affairs, throw up their hands and say "I hate politics. It's all just too nasty these days." Pundits love to talk about it too. I'm looking at you Chris Mathews, just for starters, you who just can't get over the fact that things aren't as civil as you deemed them to be in your hay day. Wake up and smell the coffee, man.

Wars aren't civil. And there's nothing civil about what's going on in this country today. It's as serious as a heart attack. More insidious than all out war, and as corrosive and degrading to us on its own timeline, and in its own way.

So I don't apologize to those who just want us all to be nicer about all this. I don't apologize to friends and family who look askance at me sometimes, cock an eyebrow at my passionate expression of my concerns. Many of them are very good people with very good intentions, but sometimes I just want to take them by their well intentioned and oh so civil and preciously uninvolved collars and shake them alive. I want to say the question is why the hell aren't you scared to death about what's happening in your country?

And of course, I have absolutely no patience for the "no labels" people. Are you kidding me? If you can't label yourself as firmly against something, then it really doesn't matter what you're for. Some things cannot be compromised with. In my book you better damn well stand up and say "label me" as for this, and against that, and damn the torpedoes.

This site is a small island of sanity for me, despite our disagreements, because there are a lot of people here who are outraged. But it is a small place, and I would like to read more, and hear more about how outraged we damn well should be, and much less about how nice we should be about it.

Reposted from Phoenix Woman by pat208

Not only did Democrats and sane Republicans in the Georgia legislature figure out how to stop a bad law, they provided a template for pro-equality activists in other states to do the same.

Specifically, they found a way to not only stop the law, but at the same time prove that the law, a near-carbon copy of "religious freedom" laws Republicans are pushing in state legislatures all over America, was not intended to protect freedoms, but instead take them away.

Follow me past the pro-equality cupcake and I'll explain.

Continue Reading
Reposted from Chachy by pat208

Hey, so you know how everyon'e always going on about how demographic change will eventually deliver this or that red state to the Democrats? Because minorities keep growing as a share of the electorate, and a number of red states actually have large minority populations, and Republicans keep systematically alienating all of them through an unamenable ideology, not to mention flat-out racism? Well, wouldn't it be interesting to know just which red states are poised to slip into the D column, and when?

Good news! Now we can kinda figure it out. Because AEI, Brookings, and the Center for American Progress recently formed an alliance of cross-ideological wonkery to produce a report called States of Change: The Demographic Evolution of the American Electorate, 1974-2060 (pdf). (CAP has a fantastic interactive graphic here.) It traces changes in the composition of the population, as well as the electorate, along a number of demographic lines - and it does it for every single state. That means we can predict what the composition of the electorate is going to be in any state in the country, for any given year, out to 2060; and with some reasonable estimation as to the Democratic voting rates within each group, we can figure out when this much-ballyhooed demographic change will actually tip some of these states into the Democratic column.

So! Want to know when North Carolina, Arizona, Georgia, and Texas are actually gonna turn blue? Head o'er the fold to find out...

Continue Reading
Reposted from Kerry Eleveld by pat208
Add Georgia—with Republicans in control of both legislative chambers and the executive—to the list of GOP-led states trying to pass a bill that will expand religious "freedom" at the expense of just about every marginalized group in the country.

These bills, typically called Religious Freedom Restoration Acts (RFRAs), have flourished recently as a backlash to the success of the marriage equality movement. But the Georgia bill's breathtaking breadth shows why this expansion of religious "freedom"—very much playing off the Supreme Court's ruling in Hobby Lobby last year—will turn into a license to discriminate against anyone (not just LGBT Americans) on the basis of one's religious beliefs.

Without getting into legal jargon, these bills generally aim to keep the government from protecting certain groups of people from discrimination, as long as someone claims they discriminated due to their religious beliefs. Georgia's definition of those beliefs is particularly problematic since it comes down to: because I said so. Jay Michaelson explains:

Georgia’s RFRA also specifies that “exercise of religion” can be just about any “practice or observance of religion, whether or not compelled by or central to a system of religious belief.”
The law's language also makes it particularly difficult for the government to meet the legal test of having a good reason, or a "compelling governmental interest," for saying someone can't discriminate against others as long as that person says they did so based on their religious beliefs.
The combination of these factors has led to a curious result: a law so strict that it will lead to a host of unintended consequences—and has even led some Republicans to oppose it.

Some legal commentators have said that the law would give a pass to spousal and child abusers, as long as the husband (or father) has a religious pretext. Which is easy to provide; the Christian Domestic Discipline Network, for example, offers a host of rationales for “wife spanking.” And let’s not forget Proverbs 13:24: “He who spares his rod hates his son. But he who loves him disciplines him diligently.”

Georgia has numerous laws protecting child welfare, which is arguably a compelling state interest. But are such laws really the “least restrictive means” of protecting it? Not necessarily. At the very least, the laws offer a novel defense against assault and battery.

Everyone should be paying attention to these religious "freedom" laws. As LGBT activists have noted, they amount to nothing more than a "license to discriminate." Though some are specific to LGBT Americans, many are not. And most importantly, right-wing conservatives are seeking to expand the definition of what qualifies as a "religious liberty" and is also legally defensible as an act of religious liberty. These laws will have consequences for virtually every marginalized group in the nation.

Tue Mar 17, 2015 at 10:05 AM PDT

Georgia Bans the Box!

by nancyjones

Reposted from nancyjones by annrose

Yesterday Georgia became the first southern state to ban the box.

This policy, signed into law by Governor Nathan Deal through an executive order, postpones questions about a job applicant’s criminal history until it is demonstrated that he or she is one of the most qualified candidates. The policy also requires that the applicant have the opportunity to explain his or her criminal history before denial, and that only a relevant conviction will be used as the basis for disqualification.    - See more at:
I am so proud of the people at North Decatur Presbyterian Church who worked so hard to make this happen. I know lots of people think Christians are assholes but I'm here to tell you that there are plenty of good church people around.

I grew up in North Decatur Presbyterian Church and I have no doubt that the spiritual nurturing I received there has played a significant role in my activism for civil rights and economic justice.

We humans are social animals and we ALL gravitate towards labels that identify our core values. Christian, Muslim, Jew, Hindu, Buddhist are all big labels that can serve good or evil, can be beneficial or detrimental, depending on the motivations of the individual adherents.

Today I am celebrating the good work of some loving Christians in Georgia. Thank, Kos, for giving me a forum to do so.

Reposted from Hunter by pat208
And these are the twins, Tina and Scout. Pay no attention to Darryl, he's been pouting all day.
Meanwhile, in Georgia:
Republican Rep. Tom Kirby, who has served since 2012, has posted a list of his top issues on his website. Among them he lists the "ethical treatment of embryos," which he notes includes a call to ban the mixing of human and jellyfish DNA.

The website states:

"We in Georgia are taking the lead on this issue. Human life at all stages is precious including as an embryo. We need to get out in front of the science and technology, before it becomes something no one wants. The mixing of Human Embryos with Jellyfish cells to create a glow in the dark human, we say not in Georgia. This bill is about protecting Human life while maintaining good, valid research that does not destroy life." [...]

He also said he has not seen evidence that anyone in Georgia is trying to create human-jellyfish hybrids. "I've had people tell me it is but I have not verified that for sure," he said. "It's time we either get in front of it or we're going to be chasing our tails."

Our literal tails, in fact.

To be honest, even though Kirby cites this as one of his "top issues" it sounds more to me like good, old-fashioned bigotry. If I am a parent and want my child to glow in the dark so that they are easier to find, that is my God-given right as a parent. If I want my child to be able to raise prodigious welts on anyone who might brush up against them, I again do not see what business government has in getting involved with that. (My child has the right to bear arms, and so I should be able to splice in the genes of a Remington rifle if Remington ever comes up with a licensing plan for such a thing.) Rep. Tom Kirby sounds like he is against freedom.

If, and I say if, science ever perfects the art of mixing human and animal DNA, the lines of people lining up to get themselves or their children-to-be "enhanced" would stretch for miles. Would you like to be part lion? Of course you would. Would you like to be able to breathe underwater? Welcome to the varsity swim team, little Billy. The entire human race would sport flowing, prehensile tails within a few generations, the most notable differences being whether individual families went with tiger stripes or a more sedate palette. There are people already who get artificial horns embedded in their heads—think how much more satisfied they would be with authentic cattle horns. And what could be more hipster than being able to photosynthesize?

So no sir, to me it sounds like Mr. Tom Kirby is just prejudiced against our little jellybaby friends. Sting him, my pretties. Sting him and show him the error of his ways.

Reposted from Daily Kos by pat208
Kelvin Cochran at podium
Just prior to Thanksgiving, Atlanta Fire Chief Kelvin Cochran was suspended without pay by Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed. At issue was a book Cochran penned titled Who Told You That You Are Naked? The 162-page book is a compilation of lesson plans Cochran had written for local Baptist men’s bible study groups. It is chock full of fundamentalist Christian doctrine, arguing that "men who carry the curse of condemnation and deprivation cannot fulfill their purpose as husbands, fathers, community and business leaders." You will not be surprised just who he considers "condemned."
• “Uncleanness — whatever is opposite of purity; including sodomy, homosexuality, lesbianism, pederasty, bestiality, all other forms of sexual perversion.”

• “Naked men refuse to give in, so they pursue sexual fulfillment through multiple partners, with the opposite sex, the same sex and sex outside of marriage and many other vile, vulgar and inappropriate ways which defile their body-temple and dishonor God.”

As disgusting as it is that Cochran compared homosexuality to pederasty and bestiality, he is entitled to his Neanderthal opinions. The problem arose due to the fact he proudly identified himself as the Atlanta fire chief in the book, declaring that his first priority as chief was to run the department "to cultivate its culture to the glory of God."

Atlanta, we have a problem.

It's all below the fold.

Continue Reading
Reposted from pdc by poopdogcomedy
U.S. Sen. Johnny Isakson, R-Ga., speaks to the media during an election night party for Georgia Republican U.S. Senate candidate David Perdue, Tuesday, Nov. 4, 2014, in Atlanta. (AP Photo/David Goldman)
Game on then:

Georgia’s soon-to-be senior senator is formally announcing he will seek a third term at 11 a.m. on Monday at the state capitol. Expect Gov. Nathan Deal, Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle and House Speaker David Ralston to attend in a show of GOP unity behind his bid.

Isakson has been eager to put to rest rumors that he wouldn’t run for another term – and scare off any potential GOP rivals. Among them is former Florida Rep. Allen West, though he has dismissed such talk, and a gaggle of ambitious up-and-coming Republicans.

Several rising Democratic contenders are also closely watching the race, though it’s unclear whether a marquee candidate would risk challenging Isakson. He handily defeated Rep. Denise Majette in 2004 after surviving a tough GOP primary, and trounced Democrat Michael Thurmond six years later.

Isakson, who will turn 70 in December, told us earlier that he’s hired key campaign staff and is prepared for the long road ahead. - Atlanta Journal-Constitution, 11/11/14

FYI, Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed (D. GA) has stated that he won't run against Isakson. Michelle Nunn (D. GA) may give it another shot or outgoing Rep. John Barrow (D. GA) might be a formidable candidate. While Democrats came up short in Georgia this year, it's clear the Georgia GOP is on borrowed time:

The electoral results in Georgia are similar to many of the trends observed at the national level.  Both incumbent GOP Governor Nathan Deal and Senate candidate David Perdue managed to win more than 50 percent of the statewide vote and avoid an eventual runoff between the top two finishers.  Deal finished with 52.8 percent of the vote compared with Democrat Jason Carter’s 44.8 percent, whereas Perdue did slightly better with 52.9 percent of the vote compared to the 45.2 percent of the vote won by Democratic challenger Michelle Nunn.  These figures for the winning Republican candidates are somewhat higher than many of the pre-election polls suggested, but can most likely be explained by the increased turnout in the state.  According to statewide data, turnout reflected 49.9 percent of registered voters in Georgia, which is quite high for a midterm and most likely a function of both the gubernatorial and Senate race appearing on the statewide ballot.

This number is particularly impressive given the national turnout rate was considerably below 40 percent, as is typical in midterm elections.  However, the higher turnout rate in Georgia did not help Michelle Nunn’s chances in the end.  Though she received over 90 percent of votes from African-Americans, less than 30 percent of African-Americans ultimately participated in this election.  Even more problematic for the Democratic candidate was the fact that only about one quarter of white voters cast their ballot in her favor.  Therefore, it is not surprising that David Perdue managed to win in such a convincing fashion despite the pre-election polls that suggested a very close race.

Early in the evening, it looked like Deal and Perdue were going to run away with the election.  Nevertheless, neither race was called until much later in the evening.  After all the ballots were tallied statewide, Perdue ended up carrying 126 of the 159 counties in Georgia, whereas Nunn managed to carry 32 of the counties (with one county—Baker—ending in a tie between the two Senate candidates).  Despite this disparity, Nunn still managed to win over 45 percent of the vote since she did quite well in urban areas especially around Atlanta.  Although the electoral outcome will most likely be disappointing for the Carter and Nunn campaigns, they can both take solace in the fact that both exceeded the 40 percent threshold of many previous Democratic statewide candidates.

This result appears to confirm the conventional view that demographics in Georgia are changing, which could open the door to the possibility of Democratic statewide victories in the foreseeable future.  In 2008, Jim Martin, the Democratic candidate for the Senate, rode the Democratic wave to nearly 47 percent of the vote forcing a runoff against incumbent Saxby Chambliss where he would eventually lose.  However, Nunn managed to garner a similar level of support during a Republican wave, which could easily be seen as the silver lining to a dark election night for Democrats across the nation.  If they continue to field viable candidates in future statewide races, it may only take a few more election cycles before Republicans lose their hold on those seats in Georgia. - The London School of Economics and Political Science, 11/10/14

Stay tuned.
Reposted from pdc by poopdogcomedy
Senator Johnny Isakson (R. GA) recently discussed what he wants to do in the U.S. Senate now that the GOP has control:

“The first thing I’d send the president is the Keystone (XL) Pipeline,” Isakson said, referring to the long-delayed project to bring Canadian crude to the U.S.

The next thing he mentioned may come as a surprise. Last year, Reid invoked the “nuclear option” to eliminate the filibuster for many presidential appointments. Rather than expand it, as some have speculated a GOP majority might do, Isakson said he favors reversing it: “I think the 60-vote threshold makes sense.”

Time for transitioning to power is short. Isakson rattled off five major issues with deadlines on or before May 31: the debt ceiling, the reimbursement rate for doctors who treat Medicare patients, the budget, appropriations bills, and the highway trust fund for transportation infrastructure.

These, Isakson said, are “five things the Democrats have looked the other way on” for years under Obama. Add a reform for corporate taxes that have been driving companies overseas through “inversions” and other maneuvers, and there are plenty of opportunities for the GOP to make progress. - Atlanta Journal-Constitution, 11/6/14

Yep, Isakson proved that the GOP is Hell-bent on preventing Obama from filling the vacancies and aren't serious about governing. Figures. While I'm certainly disappointed that Democrats failed to win both the Governor race and the U.S. Senate seat this year, don't write off Georgia as a place Democrats can make gains. It's shifting in their direction:

Future elections in Georgia are going to be more heavily influenced by Metro Atlanta voters, as that area already comprises more than half the state’s population and the share will continue to grow.

There are several counties in Metro Atlanta – Fayette, Forsyth, Cherokee, Coweta and Hall – that are reliably Republican on election day, just as there are counties – Fulton, DeKalb and Clayton – that have significant black populations and support Democratic candidates.

But there are more and more counties that are becoming swing counties as the state’s demographics change.

Cobb and Gwinnett counties could always be counted upon in past elections to deliver solid majorities for Republican statewide candidates. But take a look at the change in voting performance between the 2010 and 2014 midterm elections (those are comparable election years because there was a race for governor and for the U.S. Senate at the top of each ballot).

In 2010, Gwinnett voters delivered 62.4 percent of their votes to Sen. Johnny Isakson and 57.5 percent of their votes to Nathan Deal in the governor’s race. In this week’s election, however, the Republican Senate vote dropped to 54.2 percent and the governor’s race vote to 54.5 percent.

Cobb County voters in 2010 gave 63.4 percent support to Isakson and 55.1 percent to Deal (Deal’s total was depressed somewhat because his opponent, Roy Barnes, was a Cobb resident). By 2014, Cobb’s Senate vote dropped to 55.4 percent Republican and the governor’s vote was 55.7 percent, about the same level as when Roy Barnes’ name was on the ballot.

In both of these populous, Republican-leaning counties, the percentage of support for GOP statewide candidates dropped by several points in four years and is approaching the 50 percent level.

Three smaller counties that once could be counted in the Republican column — Douglas, Henry, and Rockdale – have now become true swing counties.

Douglas voters went 53.9 percent for Isakson in 2010 but just 46.1 percent for Perdue on Tuesday. In the governor’s race, Douglas support for Deal dropped from 49.1 percent in 2010 to 46.4 percent in 2014.

Henry County gave 56.1 percent of its vote to Isakson in 2010 but only 48.8 percent to Perdue in 2014. Similarly, Deal’s support in Henry dropped from 55.1 percent in 2010 to 48.6 percent four years later.

Rockdale County voters went 48.8 percent for Isakson in 2010 but only 39.8 percent for Perdue this year. Deal’s support declined from 44.1 percent in 2010 to 40.2 percent in 2014.

Even among the solidly Republican counties, there has been a slight erosion of support for GOP statewide counties.

Cherokee: 81.4 percent of its vote for Isakson but 76.3 percent for Perdue. Deal slid a little from 76 percent to 75.1 percent support over four years.

Forsyth: 85.2 percent support for Isakson but 79.5 percent for Perdue. Deal went from 81.2 percent to 79.3 percent.

Hall: 81.2 percent for Isakson and 76.5 percent for Perdue. Deal went from 80.2 percent to 78.3 percent in his home county.

Fayette: 68.9 percent for Isakson in 2010 and 61.9 percent for Perdue in 2014. Deal declined from 64.6 percent to 61.8 percent.

Coweta: 75.1 percent for Isakson to 70 percent for Perdue. Deal dropped by a point, from 70.7 percent to 69.7 percent.

Democratic majorities are growing, if slowly, in Fulton, DeKalb and Clayton counties.

Fulton: Democrat Michael Thurmond drew 56.4 percent of the vote in the 2010 Senate race, while Nunn pulled 64.8 percent of the vote in the Senate contest this week. Barnes got 60.8 percent of the governor’s race vote four years ago, but Jason Carter got 63.1 percent this year.

DeKalb: The Democratic Senate vote went from 71.6 percent for Thurmond to 78.3 percent for Nunn. Barnes got 74.5 percent of the vote while Carter got 76.9 percent.

Clayton: Thurmond received 78.9 percent of the vote, but that went up to 84 percent for Nunn. Barnes got 79.6 percent of the vote and Carter upped that to 82.3 percent. - Georgia Report, 11/6/14

We shall see what 2016 brings but Georgia is not a lost cause for Team Blue.
Reposted from pdc by poopdogcomedy
So we've been told that a runoff between David Perdue (R. GA) and Michelle Nunn (D. GA) would be bad for Democrats' chances because history in not on Team Blue's side when it comes to runoff. But FiveThirtyEight believes a runoff would be good for Nunn's chances:

Georgia U.S. Senatorial candidates Republican David Perdue, Democrat Michelle Nunn and Libertarian Amanda Swafford, from left to right, participate in a live televised debate at WSB-TV Sunday, Nov. 2, 2014, in Atlanta. (AP Photo/David Tulis)
FiveThirtyEight projects Perdue to get 49.7 percent of the vote Tuesday, Nunn to get 47.7 percent and Libertarian Amanda Swafford to get 2.6 percent. Swafford’s standing has slipped slightly in recent polls, from about 4 to 3 percent. Furthermore, our research has found that third-party candidates polling in the low-to-mid-single digits often slightly underperform their polls on Election Day. (This property is accounted for in our projection of Swafford’s vote share.)

Of course, there’s uncertainty in that forecast. Perdue is close to enough to 50 percent of the vote that he could fairly easily surpass it and win outright Tuesday. Specifically, our forecast gives him a 44 percent chance of doing so. Nunn, however, would need to beat her polling projection by 2 to 3 percentage points. There’s only about an 8 percent chance of that. The other 48 percent of the time, the race will go to a runoff.

What would Nunn’s chances be in that event? There are two complications in figuring this out.

First, we’d have two more months of campaigning. That increases the degree of uncertainty. Perhaps Nunn could find a new line of attack against Perdue. Perhaps Perdue would trip himself up, as he nearly did in October after comments he made about outsourcing. Or maybe Nunn would lose by 12 points. But higher uncertainty is good news for the trailing candidate.

The other complication is even wonkier. Conditional upon the race going to a runoff, Nunn will probably have slightly beaten her polling forecast Tuesday. Nunn trails Perdue by 2 percentage points in the FiveThirtyEight forecast. If she does any worse than that, her margin of defeat could be larger than Swafford’s vote share, which means Perdue would win the race outright. But if she does a little better Tuesday, she’ll secure a runoff.

Put another way, the race in Georgia will only go to a runoff if it was very close to begin with. And that suggests a runoff would be close as well. (The model assumes there’s some correlation between the Nov. 4 and runoff outcomes.) Thus, the FiveThirtyEight forecast gives Nunn a 36 percent chance of winning a runoff conditional upon one occurring — better than her chances of winning Tuesday. - FiveThirtyEight, 11/3/14

Not sure I agree with that analysis but maybe they're right. Nunn though seems confident that she can avoid a runoff:

Democrat Michelle Nunn says her campaign is preparing to win her battle for the Senate “the first time” and avoid a runoff election in January.

In an exclusive interview with NBC News, Nunn said she’s confident that she’s pulled together a broad enough coalition to reach the 50 percent mark in her contest with Republican David Perdue.

“We feel huge enthusiasm, excitement and energy and we really believe that we are going to win tomorrow and do it the first time,” she said. - NBC News, 11/3/14

Nunn's not the only one who feels confident:

Carter – the Democratic candidate for governor — offered a similar prediction while campaigning with U.S. Rep. John Lewis at the Sweet Auburn Curb Market.

“Given the giant turnout that we have seen, we feel like we are going to avoid a runoff also and that we are going to win tomorrow on Election Day,” Carter said. “We are excited where we are.”

While their Republicans opponents, Senate hopeful David Perdue and Gov. Nathan Deal, are flying around the state Nunn has kept it “low to the ground,” as she says.

“We’ve been traveling the state for the last 15 months,” Nunn said. “We want to end the way we began. We don’t have a huge RV that says ‘Outsider’ on the side. We have our minivan to go talk to Georgia families and voters. We are very confident. Very excited. We see tremendous enthusiasm and momentum.”

Logan Fowler, a Mercer sophomore studying political science, stood to the side of the rally in his bow tie and blazer. He said Nunn has helped him reveal his true self.

“I’ve been a closeted Southern Democrat for too long,” Fowler said. “I’m a proud supporter now.” - Atlanta Journal-Constitution, 11/3/14

But if there is a runoff, prepare for this:

If a Jan. 6 runoff occurs, a vast network of super PACs on both sides of the partisan aisle are prepared to unleash a barrage of hard-hitting TV ads to influence voters if partisan control of the Senate still hangs in the balance.

Republicans must have a net gain of six seats today to become the majority in the Senate. As the races come down to the wire, some of the most competitive, in addition to this one in Georgia, are in Alaska, Iowa, Kansas, North Carolina, Colorado and Arkansas.

The candidates may also be heading for a courtroom because a state judge ruled last week against civil rights groups seeking to force the Georgia secretary of state to account for about 40,000 voter registrations that were filed but apparently have not appeared on the voting roles. Most of them were African Americans who tend to vote for Democrats.

Nunn faces an uphill battle because Democrats in Georgia have lost all five runoffs for various offices since 1992. Thanks to recent demographic changes, Nunn's chances in the runoff are considered better than most Democrat candidates in the South, where 49 percent of the nation's Republicans live. Between 2000 and 2010, 80 percent of the new residents who arrived in Georgia were non-whites, Census data shows.

If a nine-week runoff takes place, Nunn and Perdue are expected to argue over who is best qualified to help Georgia bounce back from the 2008 recession. In September, Georgia's unemployment rate of nearly 8 percent was the highest in the nation. The U.S. rate-- just under 6 percent--was the lowest in six years. - Women's E News, 11/4/14

But then again, the GOP's voter suppression tactics could also greatly backfire:

It was a stray comment at the end of a conversation, but it said volumes about how a controversy over voter registration in Georgia might prompt African-American voters to head to the polls Tuesday.

I was walking out of the Rev. Raphael Warnock’s third floor office at the historic Ebenezer Baptist Church in the Sweet Auburn neighborhood east of downtown.

As we neared the door, Warnock was speaking about allegations that Georgia’s secretary of state, Brian Kemp, has lost some 40,000 new voter registrations sent in from majority black counties. Kemp has called the complaint “frivolous.” But a coalition of groups, including Warnock’s church and the state and national NAACP, are pressing the issue.

“We hate what (Kemp’s) doing,” Warnock said, “but at the end of the day, he may have done us a favor.” Warnock predicted “historic African-American turnout” on Nov. 4.

“And we have him and his shenanigans to thank," said Warnock.

Warnock’s executive assistant, Esther Harris — who had been listening — looked up from her computer. “Amen,” she said. “Because I wasn’t going to vote.”

Warnock looked surprised that a staffer at what was once Martin Luther King Jr.’s home church hadn’t planned to vote, and the two of them began a conversation as I walked down the hall to an elevator. There I could hear, through the closed door, Harris’ voice rising as she again explained her newfound determination to cast a ballot: “Because of this, I’m going to vote!” - Yahoo News, 11/3/14

What is clear is Perdue is walking a tight rope right now and being incredibly cautious:

Perdue canceled an interview Monday with NBC News, citing a schedule logjam. But reporters were able to reach him at an airport hangar in Atlanta after a campaign event Monday night.

"What this is is another distraction to the people of Georgia away from the critical issue, and that is that the ... policies of this administration are not producing jobs here at home," Perdue said as he headed for a car.

Asked three times by NBC News whether he had ever outsourced jobs, Perdue refused to answer, saying only that he was "energized" by the support he'd received during the campaign,

Then he got into the car and was driven off. - NBC News, 11/3/14

Another thing to consider is the GOP may not appear to be as united behind Perdue:

The week before an election is when partisans normally rally behind their party’s choice. So most Georgia Republicans are keeping their complaints to themselves. But those who spoke with Yahoo News made clear that even if Perdue can pull out a win, there is a reckoning for the state party coming after the election.

And there’s a chance Perdue could actually lose. If neither Perdue nor Democrat Michelle Nunn gets above 50 percent, they will compete in a runoff set for Jan. 6 that could potentially decide control of the U.S. Senate.

One of the main Republican critiques of Perdue is that after the July runoff, the nominee and his campaign scorned those who had supported other candidates in the primary.

“Since the spring, I have said Perdue’s greatest liability was a personal and campaign arrogance,” wrote Georgia native Erick Erickson, the outspoken founder of and a talk radio host, on his blog in October.

Erickson recounted private conversations with Georgia political and opinion leaders who said their offers to help the Perdue campaign had been ignored. “People who opposed Perdue in the primary, reached out after it was over to pledge support, then never heard back,” Erickson wrote.

Chip Lake, a Georgia political consultant who worked for one of Perdue’s rivals in the primary, Rep. Phil Gingrey, said the bigger problem for Perdue’s campaign after the primary was a lack of time to unify the party.

“I don’t know that he’s been reluctant to reach out,” Lake said. “It’s just a multitude of factors, including time. Because of how expensive a state like Georgia is, David’s had to spend a lot of time on the phone raising money to match what Michelle has been able to put up.

“Time was just not on their side, given that they had such a bruising competitive primary and Michelle Nunn didn’t,” Lake added. “That’s clearly worked against him as he attempted to heal a lot of the wounds that were created by individuals that might have been with another candidate.”

But the discontent is real enough that one anonymous Republican told The Hill that having to vote for Perdue is “disgusting,” and that many others in the party feel the same way. - Yahoo News, 11/2/14

We shall see. Runoff or no runoff, Nunn's run a great campaign and maybe Nunn can break Democrats bad luck with runoffs. We'll see. Still time to help with GOTV efforts for Nunn and Carter's campaigns. Click here:
Reposted from Daily Kos by poopdogcomedy
Occupy Wall Street joined the NAACP as thousands marched in midtown Manhattan on December 10, 2011 to defend voting rights.
Voting has become a major challenge for some of Georgia's would-be voters. There are the 40,000 missing registrants, who a judge refused to assist, and who are just out of luck. And actual, registered voters hit an Election Day roadblock when they were trying to find their polling place earlier today: The Republican Secretary of State's voter information website crashed.
Some users reported they could get the site’s splash page to load, but when they entered their information, they were told that no match could be found in their county for their information. […]

Republican Sec. of State Brian Kemp’s office maintains the website. Kemp stated earlier this year that the job of Republicans is to block the Democratic Party’s efforts to organize and mobilize black and Latino voters into a viable voting bloc.

"Democrats are working hard, and all these stories about them, you know, registering all these minority voters that are out there and others that are sitting on the sidelines," Kemp told supporters in July, "if they can do that, they can win these elections in November."

Both the senate race between Republican David Perdue and Democrat Michelle Nunn and the governor's race between Democratic State Senator Jason Carter and Republican incumbent Gov. Nathan Deal are too close to call in the polling. The My Voter Page came back online as of about 9:45 ET, but for several hours this morning kept would-be voters in the dark.
Sign up right now to make GOTV calls to Democratic voters in the toss-up states that will decide control of the Senate.

I'm sorry, I can't make phone calls, but I will chip in $3 to Daily Kos to help fuel Get Out The Vote efforts.
You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.


Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site