Cathy Cox Goes to Washington

Georgia Secretary of State Cathy Cox was in Washington this week seeking support for a possible U.S. Senate run, err, umm, as part of a panel on the “mechanics” of the November elections.

With only a few weeks left as Georgia’s secretary of state, Cathy Cox was part of a panel discussion with other election experts at the Pew Research Trust offices in D.C.

She cautioned against making paper voting receipts the “official


  1. Mojo says:

    In my opinion Cathy Cox is, at this moment, the most likely Democratic nominee. Vernon Jones is too controversial. Roy Barnes is too divisive. Max Cleland has already ruled it out. Cox could also claim a “what if” slogan of what could have happened if she were the nominee this year and not Taylor.

  2. Cathy Cox is one of the reasons why the Georgia Democratic Party was so badly divided this year.

    Do not think that Georgia Democrats will forget how she was such a sore loser after the Democratic gubernatorial primary.

    Her political clout in this state is probably somewhere between the “Free Huey” movement and the Save the Spotted Owls fund.

  3. liberty21 says:

    Cathy Cox is not your ideal candidate for US Senate . Being a sore loser does not get you a senate nomination or making up smear campaigns about your opponent during the primaries. The only ideal Democratic candidates i know that always get above 50% everytime they run in elections including this year’s election are Attorney General Thurbert Baker and Labor Commissioner Mike Thurmond.

  4. SevenHillsDem says:

    In response to a “what if” scenario: she still would have lost. I’m convinced Jesus Christ himself could not have defeated Sonny Perdue.

    I agree with Andre that by shunning Mark Taylor, she hurt the Democratic Party this time around as well as hurt herself in a future run for public office. Jim Marshall is the best candidate for Senate–not controversial, moderate enough to win in Georgia, smart and articulate on domestic and international issues, and very popular in rural Georgia.

    That sounds like a winning combination to me.

  5. Mojo says:


    How do you know she would have lost? Are you freaking Nostradamus? Jim Marshall CANNOT run for U.S. Senate, Democrats would probably still lose and that Congressional seat would go Republican in a heartbeat.

  6. liberty21 says:

    If i was the state chairmen of the Democratic Party of Georgia (DPG) I wouldn’t run a congressmen because of the fear of a GOP seat gain. I would ask Mike Thurmond or Thurbert Baker to consider a run for US Senate. Even they lose to Saxby Chambliss it won’t be a landslide loss like Denise Majjete in 2004 against Johnny Isakson. They would probably receive 45, 47, or 49 % of the popular vote. I do not think Cathy Cox, Vernon Jones, or Max Cleland would come anywhere near 45% against Saxby Chambliss

  7. SevenHillsDem says:

    Okay, she would have done better because Mark Taylor would have actually endorsed her rather than crying like a sore loser. But, she would not have beaten Sonny Perdue.

    As far as the Senate seat, I think we will be able to win it. With higher turnout, money from the DSCC, a Presidential candidate that’s worth two cents, and Saxby’s mediocre to bad record could mean that a well-financed moderate who is smart, experienced, and has gravitas has the potential to knock him off.

    Barrow, Marshall, Baker, and Thurmond are arguably our four biggest “rock stars.” We need to make sure all four of them are helping take this state back for the Democrats.

  8. Mojo says:


    You are the master prognosticator. I bet you win the lottery every week.

    If Barrow or Marshall runs then they would most likely lose and that particular seat would swing to the GOP. Great plan.

    Run Thurbert Baker and remove the main judicial obstacle to a crooked Perdue and a crooked Georgia Republican Party. Again, great plan.

    Run Mike Thurmond…okay, that is a good plan.

  9. atlantaman says:

    “I wouldn’t run a congressmen because of the fear of a GOP seat gain. I would ask Mike Thurmond or Thurbert Baker to consider a run for US Senate. ”

    Wouldn’t that mean the Dems would lose the Labor or Attorney General’s office then?

  10. rugby_fan says:

    What often leaves me stunned is that Sec. Cox seems opposed to the concept of paper trails, as if they are some great evil force.

    Is there anyone else who is opposed to having votes on paper? I don’t know of anyone, other than her.

  11. Mojo says:

    I don’t understand CC’s aversion to a paper trail. With the potential for disaster (see Florida 13th) it seems that any cost associated with implementing a paper trail is easily offset by securing votes in an election. That is one reason why I liked Karen Handel, her support of a paper trail.

  12. atlantaman says:

    “I don’t understand CC’s aversion to a paper trail.”

    Because that would be admitting to the fact her big project and all the money that was spent on it was a major f-up. In her desire to be one of the first states to get electronic voting, and the publicity associated with it, she basically made us a test case for all the other states.

  13. atlantaman says:

    “I would say AG or LC for a Senate seat is a fair trade off.”

    I would agree with you on that statement, but you’re assuming Baker or Thurmond would win the Senate seat.

    I’m not sure the Dems want to lose the AG. Could you imagine what an investigation into Tommy Irvin’s office would reveal?

  14. It would probably conclude that it is the best run Ag commissioner office in the country and he is the best ag commissioner. You’re right though, that finding would be devastating to Republicans.

    We keep the Atty Gen’s office exactly so that this investigation doesn’t happen, because if it did we might actually win some elections in Georgia.

    And we couldn’t let that happen. We must snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

  15. SevenHillsDem says:


    Our bench is thinning by the hour and we need to start using our talent wisely rather than let them sit around and do nothing.

    Roy Barnes and Max Cleland are both smart and would be decent candidates if they weren’t washed-up has-beens.

    Find me someone better than Baker, Marshall, Barrow, or Thurmond and you win.

    Smart-ass retorts don’t help anything.

  16. atlantaman says:

    As a Republican, but trying to be as objective as possible about it I would say Baker, Marshall, Barrow and Thurmond are your best bets. Maybe Shirley Franklin could pull some of the soccer mom vote, but I suspect she’s too liberal to appeal statewide.

    I think the idea of a moderate/conservative African American candidate is the best hope for the Dems. Not the Atlanta/Dekalb kind that invoke Bull Conner and Martin Luther King whenever the going gets tough – which Thurmond and Baker to my knowledge do not fit that mold.

    The candidate could count on the hardcore support of liberals and blacks and then hopefully peel off a few swing voters with some moderate to conservative stands. I liked Baker’s “Tough as Nails” commercials – thought it was very effective. Perhaps Sanford Bishop would also fit this mold.

    I think Vernon Jones believes this strategy, which is why he’s out there calling himself a conservative – the problem is that he’s not a conservative.

  17. atlantaman says:

    “Shirley Franklin is not a liberal.”

    Where does she stand on the following issues:

    Gun Control
    Minimum Wage
    Affirmative Action
    Illegal Immigration
    Fair Tax
    Property Tax
    School Choice
    White People

    I know where she stands on the minimum wage and white people.

    Before all the libertarians and Goldwater Republicans want to challenge me on the issues I named, take a chill pill, relax and realize that most folks gauge those issues (well some of them) as to what a current conservative is today – doesn’t mean you have to be 100%.

  18. rugby_fan says:

    As she has never had to express stances on almost every single one of those issues I could not tell you. I know I know, say what you wish…I do know that she is a centrist by all means, and is a member of the DLC.

    On specific issues, I wish I could point to examples but I can’t. I apologize.

  19. atlantaman says:

    I’m sure she considers herself a centrist, most liberals consider themselves moderate as they believe everyone must think like they do.

    I’m going to guess she’s liberal on at least 75% of those topics. That’s Shirley’s biggest problem. Being a city mayor is more nuts and bolts, if she were to ever run statewide and start having to take a stand on the previous issues she’d start losing a lot of folks.

  20. rugby_fan says:

    Um, I am going to disagree with you, only because she’s governed moderately trying to build consensus.

    I won’t just say; well I am sure she thinks she is a moderate but I doubt it because I don’t want her to be a moderate and liberalism is frightening.

    There is no reason to say that she wouldn’t be a moderate/centrist. Unless it has to do with being a woman, black, Democrat, a black woman who is a Democrat.

  21. atlantaman says:

    You say she is moderate but have no proof and I’m not talking about this anecdotal consensus building crap – I can’t believe you would even say that after the Eaves ad.

    Here is what I know:

    Gun Control – Liberal: she’s part of that ridiculous group that wants to sue the gun manufacturers.

    Affirmative Action – Don’t know for sure, but are you going to tell me with a straight face she isn’t for minority set aside programs?

    Minimum Wage – Liberal: She actually wanted to force contractors to pay their employees a higher minimum wage then the federal gov. Let’s be honest, nobody over 18 with a brain makes minimum wage, it’s a nod to the Unions who have contracts based on multiples of the minimum wage.

    I don’t know for certain where she stands on the other issues, but I’ve got my thoughts.

  22. Mojo says:


    But smart ass retorts are my speciality. Besides, I already gave my opinion, notice I said that Mike Thurmond as the candidate was a good plan. Read to the end, my friend, read to the end.

  23. David says:

    Marshall against Saxby? Interesting, though Saxby has already whipped him once in a Congressional race…

  24. RuralDem says:

    I think a Marshall vs Saxby race would be interesting. The fact that Saxby beat him 6 yeras ago in a Congressional race does not mean much.

    I think it would be better for Marshall to stay in the House for now. At least until moderate Democrat’s name pops up around the district as a replacement if Marshall decided to seek another office. A liberal will not be elected in that district.

Comments are closed.