And the Winner is…umm…?

Last night CBS Atlanta hosted Georgia’s first 2010 Republican Gubernatorial Debate. The debate can be viewed uncut here.

We live-blogged the event and then went about the remainder of our day. Then I wake up this morning and get 2 newsletters from 2 different candidates saying they both won the debate.

From Austin Scott:

Austin Scott wins first GOP debate
Focuses on job creation, education, ethics

“I’m going to take the politics out of deciding what’s good for our children and the education system,” Scott said, when asked about how to improve education in Georgia.

“I understand the issues being faced by this state,” he said. “To create jobs, I will eliminate the corporate income tax in Georgia. Think about the message that sends to the nation and the world: Georgia is ready for business.”

Throughout the debate, Rep. Scott’s focus was on three key issues: the economy, education, and ethics. These three areas have formed the basis for his platform for governor of Georgia.

He was mentioned by name by the panelists and moderator more times than any other candidate.

From Eric Johnson:

Eric Johnson Wins First Debate

Like Georgians, Johnson’s Focus Summed Up In One Word: “Jobs”

“As Governor, jobs will be my first priority, my second priority, and my third priority,” said Johnson. While substantively answering questions posed on different topics, he also tied every single one of his answers back to jobs and improving our state’s economy.

“There are those who say we are in a hole too deep to get out of. That our state and our nation’s best days have come and gone,” Johnson said after the debate. “But I reject that view. With the right leadership and the right vision, we can ensure that Georgia will emerge from this recession faster than the rest of the nation and be stronger than ever before.”

The glaring similarity between the two candidates is not that both seem to be declaring victory in the debate, but that jobs are on their minds and the minds of Georgians. According to the Georgia Department of Labor, Georgia’s unemployment rate is 10.2%. With unemployment in the double-digits, it’s no wonder that the first debate focused on jobs. Georgians are facing tough times and jobs and job creation will continue to be a central issue in the upcoming elections.


      • BuckheadConservative says:

        I’d say anyone who got credit for going, and didn’t get negative publicity yesterday definitely beat the Ox.

    • Debra says:

      Chapman, Handel, and the rest were terrible. The best statement made was from Senator Jeff Chapman. He said “People are like tea bags, you never know what flavor you get until you put it in hot water. I’ve been in a lot of hot water as a County Commissioner and now as a Senator because I was standing up for the rights of people. I understand you don’t pay taxes because you want to. You pay them by force. If you don’t believe me, don’t pay them and see what kind of force they’ll use on you” I loved it!

      • Ken in Eastman says:

        I agree that was a nice statement and it struck a chord, but overall Sen. Chapman looked lost.

        I almost did something I seldom do, I almost felt sorry for a politician.

      • ByteMe says:

        You may not need details, but I don’t accept the idea that any of these clowns (and the clownette? 🙂 ) have any idea how the government can help create and foster jobs.

        • LoyaltyIsMyHonor says:

          Of course they do…with “tax cuts”; “cutting spending”; and governing as a “Reagan Republican.” Just say those 3 things in a Republican debate and you too can claim to be the “winner.”

          Obviously you haven’t referenced the Republican Talking Points memo in awhile. 😉

          • ByteMe says:

            I try not to. I have 2 little kids, so I can get meaningless gibberish all day without listening to politicians.

          • Mad Dog says:


            Republican Talking Points … must include “I am a real Conservative” and as Scott Brown proved yesterday in Massachusetts … praise Ted Kennedy and never ever call Curt Schilling a Yankees fan.

  1. drjay says:

    the real winners are the voters of ga for having a chance to see and hear all the candidates on the gop side, they all had moments where they looked really good…

  2. I’ll take the reverse approach and say that it’s a toss up on who loss the debate… Ox or Deal. I choose Deal… he probably would have done better if he would have went hunting too.

    • ‘cont.

      If Nathan did go hunting with Ox they could have flipped a coin to see who gets to shoot whom in the face… result, one could get the sympathy vote and the other could get the “finally, actually doing something good for the average Georgian” vote.

  3. Lawton Sack says:

    Nathan Deal has claimed victory also in a campaign email received this morning:

    Rising above petty barbs and innuendo, leading Republican Nathan Deal was the clear winner in Tuesday night’s GOP debate in Athens. Deal demonstrated why his proven, conservative experience uniquely qualifies him as the candidate with the courage to stop President Barack Obama where he can and lessen the pain Obama inflicts on Georgians at the national level with lower taxes, less government and a stronger economy here at home.

    Deal also emphasized the importance of both keeping and attracting jobs in Georgia.

    “I will be the face, I will be the ambassador, I will be a governor who goes out and tries to relocate jobs,” he said.

    In his closing remarks, Deal stressed his experience at every level.

    “I will be a governor who will serve with courage that is tempered by a servants heart,” he said. “I promise to you that working together we can improve the quality of life for our state, brighten the future for our children, and we can make Georgia a beacon of prosperity for the rest of the nation.”

  4. Joshua Morris says:

    I had to listen on radio, so please correct me if I misheard.

    McBerry said something about the Corps of Engineers “digging a hole.” That was kinda funny to me, because what they actually did was build a dam. The “hole” (at least at Lake Lanier) is a valley. And did I hear Chapman use the word, “worser?”

    I know these have nothing to do with the prevailing issues, but judging the grammatical skills and analytical thinking of a potential future governor is key, I think.

    • Lawton Sack says:

      Yes, Chapman said worser.

      McBerry said (paraphrasing) that the Corps of Engineers owns the hole that they dug, but the people of Georgia own every drop of rain in that hole that the Lord blesses the State of Georgia with.

    • Doug Deal says:

      McBerry is not about analytical thinking anyway, he is about attracting as many zenophobes, racists and people still living in 1859 to his “campaign” by appealing to their hatred so that he can seperate them from their money.

      He has never been and never will be a serious candidate seeking to win.

      • Red Phillips says:

        Doug, “zenophobes” starts with an x.

        So a policy position like states rights is “racist,” not what one actually thinks about or how they act toward other races? Interesting.

        • Doug Deal says:

          Wow, you won that argument Red. That will teach me to type a reply on my cell phone. It’s sad that a spelling correction is the only thing that you could claim.

          The racist part is how you refer to blacks, people from other countries, people of other Christian and non Christian faiths and how you guys push the non historic anti-civil rights flag for the sole purpose of poking minorities in the eye.

          Just read your organizations web sites and discussion forums. Anyone who can be involved in such an organization who does not realize the racist things that go on around him is at best willfully ignorant. At worst a monster deserving to be shunned by the good people of the state. Which are you?

          • Red Phillips says:

            “for the sole purpose of poking minorities in the eye.”

            First of all, those who defend the state flag we had before Scalawag Barnes PCed out and changed it are not doing so to poke minorities in the eye. That is simply absurd and hysterical PC grandstanding. I have never once heard a defender of the flag suggest such a thing. What we are defending is our heritage against assaults on it from the forces of Cultural Marxist political correctness that are assailing Western Civilization and Christianity. In my opinion it certainly is an attempt to poke the eye of the PC Gestapo.

            Secondly, you are obviously getting your info from the SPLC or some other PC smear artist organization, and haven’t looked closely at the site. The site no longer has a disscussion forum and hasn’t for years. The site once had a largely unmoderated forum that anyone could sign up for and a lot was said about a lot of things. Of course the PC thought police were always snooping around for any evidence of wrong think to use against the League. That is why the forum was discontinued. Because it didn’t necessarily reflect the views of the League and was more trouble than it was worth.

            The League, which was originally founded by a bunch of academics, was modeled after Umberto Bossi and the Lega Nord (Northern League) in Italy. Early on there was an attempt by some to make the League racialist and that attempt was rebuffed.

            If you had bothered to look hard you would see that the League website addresses race specifically in the FAQ section, and it is far from scandalous.

            I invite everyone here to visit the League website and see for themselves.

  5. John Konop says:

    If you talk to the small business community the problem is the lack of capital. The issue is not about taxes because they have no money for real expansion. And if you have credit the value of the money is 4 to 5 times higher than a tax break.

    If we focus on shifting money to help with SBA loans and reformed our education system to have a work ready high school and college graduates instead of a soaring drop out rate you will see jobs, jobs, jobs…………

    • John,

      I don’t know who you’re talking to but what I’m being told is that it is indeed the tax code & regulations and the cost of complying with it is the #1 issue with small businesses. Borrowing money to pay for such things have NO return on investment in a down economy. The internal revenue department once told me when I complained about all the taxes being paid due to having employees, even though the company was just breaking even, they said “the company isn’t making money, but your employees are.” I responded that the money was coming from the same damn pot…. idiots!

      I’ll see if I can find the poll that I use to have that supports my claim. Tax code and regulation compliance was listed as the #1 cause for new business failures… as opposed to market pressures and competition.

      • ByteMe says:

        DNA, don’t know who is telling you this, but you’re being told wrong. Small businesses do not care so much about the tax code as they do about competitiveness with other businesses in their market, availability of supplementary cash flow (as needed), and consistency of rules (don’t keep changing them or keep them under discussion for long, because you can’t plan for it).

        Paying taxes is an expected cost of business and unless it’s exorbitant relative to what is paid by other businesses in the same market, it’s a “don’t care”, just because it’s not a competitive advantage or disadvantage to getting business done. If your business can’t afford the cost of taxes along with the cost of materials and still make a profit, it’s better for you to get out of the business, because the margins aren’t worth the risks.

        And I write that as a small business owner that works at the operational level with lots of small businesses around the country.

        • Byte,
          I don’t completely diagree with you, but your model refers to the larger corperate model… I was refering to new smaller startups and small mom and pops that so many politicians say they care about. But you are right, they do “constantly change the rules” to protect the larger companies from having to compete with them.

          • ByteMe says:

            I also was referring to small businesses, not larger ones (the companies I work with average between 10 and 3000 employees). The rule changes affect them, lack of short-term cash affects them, competitiveness issues affect them, lack of educated employees affects them, but taxes? Not as long as they’re not outrageously different than what their competitors are paying.

        • John Konop says:


          Let me help you with the concept. Company a gets a large new relationship with future business flowing in and now the company needs money asap to fulfill the order, increase capacity, hire people ie jobs……

          The company was able to go to a bank and get a loan, BL……..Now they cannot fulfill the orders because they cannot get the money. How would any tax break fix this problem? And I am sure if you talked to small business people like I do all day they would tell you this is choking them And it also affects other small businesses all around the food chain.

          It is not complicated no money for growth no jobs!

          • Mad Dog says:

            John, John, John …

            Got to have demand for consumer goods before ANYONE gets an order.

            And if you want to finance your new customers with no interest by advancing them an order on speculation, open a bank. Or you can call it a receivable.

            There’s plenty of money out there from the SBA. Just not for speculation.

          • John Konop says:


            If you had a clue about the environment in the lending industry you would know most banks are just rolling-over BL, loans…..for business not seeking new business. The offers that are being made require way to much up front capital. As I said talk to small business people and ask them like I do every day!

            We have to many from both sides that play in theory and avoid the real world.

          • John Konop says:


            During the last decade as I warned years ago banks were lending on over valued assets if it all with irrational credit limits. Now it has swung the opposite way with banks asking for to much down to help cover up for their past sins to help balance out the toxic assets.

            Many small healthy businesses are not borrowing the many because it would cost too much (mainly diluting ownership) to come up with extra liquidity needed for the loans, BL…….. Instead of expanding the healthy small business are just seating tight or downsizing which hurts ie jobs. And when the healthy small business decides not to expand via the cost of money it starts a downward spiral from business not else healthy which only hurts the job market more via the lack of purchasing because of the lack of money.

            That is why if we shifted tax abatement money toward helping with down payment not the risk quality it would drive growth for most and help the job market.

        • DTK says:


          I agree with the points you’ve made, but I don’t agree that taxes are wholly irrelevant to many small businesses.

          The unemployment tax hikes have killed many small businesses, and it’s no solace that their competitors have been hit hard too. There are some small businesses that would like to add payroll right now, but can’t because of the unemployment tax hikes.

          This is a good example of unintended consequences. When Barnes and the Legislature cut the unemployment tax when it was running such a huge surplus, it conditioned small businesses to not having to pay the tax. When the tough times inevitably rolled around again, these same businesses have had a hard time adjusting to paying the increased fees. We can agree that it’s not smart for these business owners to “forget” about these taxes, but it doesn’t lessen the fact that it’s happened.

          I’d also argue with the notion that small business owners who are S-Corporations don’t care about income taxes. If you raise taxes on their personal income, they’re still going to find a way to pay themselves the same amount, even if it means cutting back on business expenditures. Oftentimes, this will mean cutting payroll, which is not good for the average worker.

          • ByteMe says:

            You have made good points, but drawn the wrong conclusion. You are using taxes as your example and claiming it’s taxes that are the problem. I would contend that the issue your hypothetical businesses are having trouble with is business environment consistency. In other words, if you haven’t planned for your inputs to cost more, you will be at a disadvantage when your inputs (including taxes, raw materials, labor) cost more than your competitors. However, if your competitors are in the same boat as you, then it’s less of a problem than you think.

            As for your second example, every small business owner I know would take a pay cut in the short term if it meant they could have a more profitable business in the long term. Every one. If hiring someone will make me more money and I have enough work for them, then I will hire that person regardless of taxes, provided the amount to be made is significantly more than the cost to hire. Entrepreneurs are risk takers provided there’s a decent prospect of a payoff for the risk.

            However, you should see John’s example above to understand what a real business owner has to go through to ramp up production for a big new order and the serious economic headwind they face.

          • DTK says:


            I agree wholeheartedly about businessman wanting consistency from policymakers more than actual, substantive policies. That’s why I presonally detest philosophical pragmatism and “bold, persistent experimentation” from politicians. That’s why so much capital is sitting on the sidelines right now; there’s no telling what policies Washington will implement in regards to health care, the environment, or with taxes. The smart thing is to wait. That’s why the economy is stagnant. It’s not a lack of total demand that’s slowing our economy; it’s an imbalance in coordination between buyers and sellers that’s the problem. And this coordination problem is exacerbated by policy inconsistency.

            But I’ll say that the businessmen you describe sound like the “rational” man in some economics textbooks, rather than flesh and blood businessmen.

            I would argue that most small business owners acted perfectly rational when they DIDN’T plan ahead and take account of sharply increased unemployment taxes. Business owners who “planned for [their] inputs to cost more” by assuming the unemployment tax would come back soon, would have been at a disadvantage to their competitors, rather than the other way around. The moratorium lasted a plenty long time, and it was the businesses that acted like the tax would perputually be low were the ones who benefitted most. In this case, playing it safe and socking away money because you assumed unemployment taxes would eventually be high would have hurt business owners. The only prudent thing to do in the face of these incentives was to actually spend this money. Bad outcome, I know, but that’s why I called it an unintended consequence.

            As for your second point about tax hikes on S-Corp. owners, I think your phrase “provided the amount to be made is significantly more than the cost to hire” says it all. I would argue that this is an assumption most business owners cannot make, at least not with a high rate of success on a regular basis. In light of this, most business owners look at the short-term gains, and take the cash for themselves rather than gamble on long-term prognostications about whether they’ve gauged the market correctly.

  6. Jobs Jobs Jobs says:

    It’s about time someone goes-for-broke on the issue of school choice, vouchers, and the privatization of our school system. Make these teachers compete for higher pay in the free-market. Make it financially easier for parents to homeschool. Look at parents as sub-contractors and you’ll save the state a ton of money.

      • Joshua Morris says:

        What in the world does falsifying financial statements at a giant energy corporation have to do with school choice?

      • ByteMe says:

        No, my opinion is that leaving education to an enterprise that has a financial incentive to cheat or to disappear without a trace whenever the business becomes inconvenient to the owner… is just not acceptable.

          • ByteMe says:

            Lord knows that little cheat didn’t cause the entire school to go out of business and leave 800 students wondering how they were going to get their diploma.


          • ByteMe says:

            One out of… how many just in Georgia? How about in the nation, how many have lost accreditation?

            Now tell me how many businesses have gone out of business this year?

            You should get that cough checked.

          • Joshua Morris says:

            You can’t be serious. Too many school systems all over this Nation are getting by with graduating kids every year that don’t know how to read. If they were businesses, they would be failures. To lose accreditation, a system has to literally break down to the point that is completely dysfunctional. Businesses fail long before that point.

          • ByteMe says:

            First of all, it depends on what you mean by “success”. For business, it’s profits. For schools, it’s bodies graduated. If a school gets paid and measured by how many people they graduate, what do you think they will do? Graduate as many as possible, of course. Same with businesses: if the incentive is to graduate as many as possible, then that’s what they are going to do as well.

            But take it the next logical step now. What happens if a private school fails, say, in the middle of a school year? In your world, where do these kids end up for the rest of the school year, given that the money to send them to the school is gone?

          • Joshua Morris says:

            A concerned parent’s definition of success would not be the number of bodies graduated.

            The situation you mention would be a potential problem, but it’s miniscule compared to the failures of the current system. It’s something that can be dealt with.

          • ByteMe says:

            Sounds like you don’t have an answer either. But you’re ready to create thousands of “puppy mills” to take taxpayer money and use it to educate kids. You really need to think harder about this before saying it’s gotta be better, just because Georgia can’t seem to do a better job of it (other states do a MUCH better job of it). Perhaps the problem isn’t “government schools”, but “Georgia schools”.

          • Joshua Morris says:

            Just like a progressive liberal… using the ultra rare situation to try to make good policy look bad. No policy is perfect, but you’d rather keep the failures in order to avoid having to address a minor issue.

          • ByteMe says:

            You’re still trying to think with your eyes shut. Just like Joshua Morris.

            And now you know why I make fun of you.

    • Huge f-ing 🙂 .

      Let all tax money, while it is still being paid out, follow the child. If the government schools want to keep the students and the money that comes with them, they’ll actually have to be good enough at the service they offer for the parent to choose to keep sending them there. There is not a parent I know that wouldn’t very much appreciate more options. What I’m referring too would be similar to the university/college system… state, private and home schooling would compete on a more level playing feild.

    • John Konop says:

      Back to reality 90% or more of kids go to public schools just from a logical understanding of logistics how could vouchers fix the problem? You understand you could not build schools fast enough. Also as someone who uses a private school, elementary education is around 12k and high school around 16k for a good private school. The public schools uses about 11k per pupil, please help us understand who will make up the difference in this economic environment between the cost of private and public schools? BTW the voucher is only worth I think like 3 or 4k?

      • Ken in Eastman says:

        First of all Catholic Parochial schools cost far less.

        Second, if you’re right and it’s too little money, then there will be little of it spent.

        I believe there are middle-income families who might take advantage – and people can always choose a better school system with the money. There are some Clayton County families who would have liked that option a couple of years ago.

        • ByteMe says:

          Catholic schools are usually heavily underwritten by the diocese.

          As to your second point, so basically you’re admitting it’s just a giveaway to rich people, since the poor people would never be able to afford a private school on the money available.

          • Ken in Eastman says:

            What in the world makes you think I will admit to something? In fact, depending on how this goes, I may be me, or maybe not. I may be someone else altogether who, obviously, then would not be me and then this would not sound like a very bad Monty Python skit, probably with Eric and John – neither dressed as women.

            Actually, I think it’s a leg-up for middle-income people and people stuck in bad public school districts who want to go to better public school districts. *wink, wink* *nudge, nudge* Alright, then!

        • ByteMe says:

          $14-16K is the norm around here for both semi-religious and non-religious private schools. Check those Christian schools to see who is underwriting their costs.

          • 1magnoliapeach says:

            Having sent my own children to several different “Private” schools, Secular and Christian, I can vouch that the annual cost easily runs 14K-20K a year per child. Trying to provide an education for a child with learning disabilities can be a frustrating experience in the public school setting. As a public school teacher myself, I can attest that I am not rich! Furthermore, the financial sacrifice was made without any vouchers by this taxpaying homeowner.

      • Back to reality 90% or more of kids go to public schools just from a logical understanding of logistics how could vouchers fix the problem?

        Of that 90%, most have NO other choice, but home schooling. Introducing competition, not only provides more choices, but also gives incentives to “invent a better mouse trap” which will put pressure to drive cost down.

        John, if you can come up with more/better ways to introduce competition to our education system, I’m all ears… but all I’m hearing from central planner types from the left and right is just more and more of the same, resulting in a more limiting environment… which guarantees, less efficiency/productivity at a greater cost…. funny how government protected monopolies always do that… regardless of the sector/service/entity being discussed.

        • John Konop says:

          Daniel N. Adams,

          That is not true. What I propose for years is using the tech/ vocational private and or public schools starting in 7th grade to help create a work ready high school graduates. Why not let them set the requirements over the state since they are required to meet graduation and placement rates to meet federal lending guidelines?

          If you did this instead of forcing all the kids on a one track 4 year college bound system or out you would see a lower drop out rate and kids contributing to the work force faster.

          Macon has already tested the idea and it is working!

          Georgia District Seeks to Duplicate Public Charter School Success

          Macon….”We were extremely impressed with the number of students taking courses there and how they coordinated with the technical college and the business community,” Carpenter said. “We feel the setup helps a student jump start a career.”

          The immediate benefits from the career academy include lower dropout rates, higher graduation rates and a more skilled labor pool in the county, he said.

          The Newnan school’s Web site states the county’s dropout rate has fallen by half since it opened, and the graduation rate for students in dual enrollment programs is 98 percent.
          Coweta’s SAT scores halted their decline and now exceed the state average, according to the school.

          “The career academy will offer different benefits to the community, businesses, students and the school system,” Wall said. “We feel it will increase our high school graduation rate, lower the dropout rate, offer better courses for students, make them better prepared for post-secondary education, and give them real-world experience while they’re still in school.”

          Carpenter and Wall said the academy, at first glance, may seem like a vocational-technical school. But there is a big difference: the active participation of the business community.

          “It is very much like the vo-tech programs of the 1970s, with some of the same components, but it will be better,” Wall said. “The business and community partnership in this is much stronger than in the past.”…….

  7. inlimine says:

    What exactly did Deal say about the BIRTHER issue? He “had to” send the letter? He got a little puffed over the question, did he not?

    I kept hoping Dawn Hobby would ask Karen Handel about something related to education so she could squeeze her cheeks and hope no one mentioned the phrase “college degree.”

    The “debate” wasn’t a debate at all, was it? There were maybe 2 minutes of debate, if that.

  8. Lawton Sack says:

    Ray McBerry’s response to the debate, via campaign email:

    The first “official” debate of the 2010 Georgia Governor’s race took place last night on the UGA campus before a live audience and was televised on a network of radio and television stations across the state… and the results could not have been better for our Campaign! Immediately following the debate, Ray was the only candidate to be swarmed by new fans and supporters, as he exited the platform. Some wanted their pictures taken with Ray, some asked him to sign the “Tenth Amendment” in their pocket Constitutions, and nearly all of them said that we now had a new voter and supporter! A flood of new volunteers came in from around the state through, even before the debate was over; and additional tickets were purchased for the upcoming Tenth Amendment Summit! Despite comments from some of the more moderate political online pundits across the state, it was overwhelmingly obvious from the response of the live audience that the ONLY candidate able to excite those seeing and hearing the debate was our own Ray McBerry. While the moderates looked on in disdain, there was an excitement that swept through the audience every time that Ray answered a question with a clear, constitutional response. It was quite clear that the only constitutional conservative in the race is Ray McBerry, and word is now beginning to spread like wildfire across the state. It won’t be a secret for long… the only Republican willing to take a strong conservative stand and to articulate the message clearly enough to beat Roy Barnes in November is Ray McBerry!

  9. StephenLocustGrove says:

    I was at the debate last night. Karen Handel was very very nervous as was Scott. Jeff Chapman is the worst candidate ever. Seems like a nice guy, but I didn’t learn anything about him. The career politicians never answered the questions especially Handel, Johnson, and Deal. At the GDA forum a couple of weeks ago Johnson said and I quote “He was going to spend 2 Billion dollars on transportation” Where the heck is planning on the getting the money? I will answer for all you establishment GOPer’s. Me and you!!! Ray McBerry was the only candidate that was swarmed by people attending the “debate” afterwards. Karen Handel made a B line towards the door and I’m pretty sure she was the first one that left. All in all there was no real loser in my view except Johnson, Deal, Handel, Scott, and Chapman.

    • AthensRepublican says:

      Thankfully, Ray McBerry does not stand a chance of ever becoming Governor or holding any other position of influence. Though, he could become a good test study for the effectiveness of Governor Perdue’s mental health intiative.

  10. Ludwig Von Beachbum says:

    Actually Oxy probably did himself a favor by not attending. He would have lost more support had he did .

    As far as who looked good appearance wise, they all looked bad. The camera angle was terrible and way too close.

    I gather some of you thought it was a negative to not look like a politician and act or speak like one.

    Interesting that if it were not for all of us bi+ching about how politicians act there wouldn’t be anything to write about here.

  11. John Konop says:

    You guys are all wrong about the debate; OX had the biggest shoot heard around Georgia last night and he was not even at the debate. Was this his strategy from his new brain trust team?

Comments are closed.