Primary Challenges

From InsiderAdvantage (an organization that needs to learn about <title> tags)

Word is that House Speaker Glenn Richardson could pick up at least two potential opponents in his race to return to the House and serve a third term as Speaker.

Other top Republican House Leaders who might or are likely to face GOP opposition include Appropriations Chair Ben Harbin, Rules Chair Earl Ehrhart and Rep. Chuck Martin of Alpharetta.

On the Senate side, potential opponents have arisen for two Cobb Senators, Judson Hill and John Wiles. Longtime Senator David Shafer has an opponent potentially eyeing his seat.

I’d like to state for the record, that while there are some facebook pictures of me floating around, I have no intention of seeking the Senate seat for the 48th district.

28 comments

  1. rabuncountyman says:

    They left out Nancy Schaefer. One of her two primary challengers went to her, asked if she was going to run and would not run against her. Nancy said she was not running for the 50th District Senate seat. Now she is running. I guess her word is not her bond.

  2. Icarus says:

    I guess the real question is, “Will David Shafer win with 80% or 85% of the vote?”

    It will be nice to have some of the porkers on the House side have to run a real campaign that, though they will most likely win, will hopefully remind them that “returning the people’s money in the form of much needed local projects” is not why they were elected.

  3. Painterman says:

    If the Speaker does draw opposition, it will be a total waste of money and time for them. The Speaker will not lose his district. I live there and know it well. I say let the rats come out and show themselves. It’s always better to know who and where your enemies are than guessing.

  4. Just the Facts Please says:

    Expect Mike Crotts to run against John Douglas. This will be the second time around for Crotts, who again claims to live in the district. Last time the courts ruled otherwise.

  5. shep1975 says:

    Tommy A2B, I heard the guy planning on running against Shafer is named “Sandoval” or something like that.

    Farris, is that a Princess Bride reference?

  6. Progressive Dem says:

    Shafer, Wiles and Hill all voted against the Transportation SPLOST. They can each explain why they are willing to condem their constituents to sit in more traffic.

  7. shep1975 says:

    Let me say for the record that I am NOT running against Wiles or Ehrhart. I do not know who is running against Ehrhart, but I know there are people who are long time activists in the Cobb GOP who are also not people I would say are on the fringe trying to find a challenger to him. I will say for the record I was heavily recruited and did not have to think about it. I may not agree with Earl 100% of the time, but I agree with him more than enough to keep him in there for another 2 years.

    I will be interested in seeing though if they found someone to qualify against him.

  8. John Konop says:

    I have gained respect for Earhart from reading his comments on the PP. He should comment and debate more often.

    BTW Shep you should ron for ofice some day and I would send you money.

  9. Bill Simon says:

    Progressive Dem,

    From what I undersand, the bill was shoved down their throat at the 11th hour and they had ZERO chance to review the bill.

    I’m certain you’ve heard of legislators (no! say it ain’t so!) in the well about the content of such-and-such a bill, and people just trust them and vote in favor of the bill, then come to find out there was a serious “gotcha” aspect of the bill that HAD they taken the time to review it, they would have balked at the whole bill.

    I’m sure YOU’RE one to always believe EVERYTHING everyone tells you about something, right?

  10. Dave Bearse says:

    Bill:

    It’s not like transportation funding concerns and the proposal came out of the Senate woodwork at the last moment. The bill the Senate turned down, whatever its flaws, was not much changed from proposals that had been circulating for over a year now.

    The Senate and Senate leadership had the whole session to weigh in and make its concerns known. “Shoved down their throats” comes off as an excuse for a lack of concern, or lack of Senate leadership, take your pick.

    Furthermore, the bill would take years to implement, so it’s not like it couldn’t be revisited or even repealed next session without doing damage.

  11. joe says:

    Dave,

    Do you realize that you just said—pass it now and repeal it later?

    You must be a frigtardian politician.

  12. Bill Simon says:

    Dave,

    Right…that one bill was the ONLY bill they were looking at. None of those other thousands of bills introduced, hundreds of committee meetings they attended, none of that occupied their time at all, did it?

    But, hey, you would have people vote on bills, again, like Progressive Dem, without ever reading them.

    I bet you sign contracts too without ever reading them too, right?

  13. Brian from Ellijay says:

    No one should run against Judson, Wiles or Shafer. They would get crushed.

    From what I understand, Tommy Williams, Eric Johnson, and the Chips all voted against this also.

    Sounds like leadership wasn’t lined up behind it.

  14. Jason Pye says:

    The bill the Senate turned down, whatever its flaws, was not much changed from proposals that had been circulating for over a year now.

    That’s not accurate at all.

    The bill that passed the House and was killed by the Senate was a regional proposal . The Senate passed a county level only proposal near the beginning of the session.

Comments are closed.