It’s Now Official; Scott Announces For GA 8th

State Capitol, Atlanta, GA—State Representative Austin Scott (R-Tifton) announces that he will qualify tomorrow as a candidate for Georgia’s Eighth Congressional District.

Scott will host a press conference at 10:00 tomorrow morning at the North Steps inside of the State Capitol to discuss his entry into the race.

Rep. Scott said he plans to open a campaign office in the district within two weeks.


  1. Doug Deal says:

    Since it is now official…

    Having spoken to, worked with and met all the candidates for 8th district I hereby endorse Austin for the nomination. He has been my dream candidate to knock off Marshall for over year now, and have been hoping he would change his mind.

    Each of the other candidates have something to offer and should be proud of themselves for having the courage to stand up and be counted, but Austin is the best candidate and also has the best chance of beating Marshall and help in sending the Democratic leadership packing.

    This is the goal that I think all the candidates share.

    • B Balz says:

      Well spoken, Doug. I will support Rep. Scott in the 8th.

      Good work, Icarus, many were really curious if Politico & Pete were correct.

    • Is that “Always and Forever” to the ends of the earth????

      “Austin is the best candidate and also has the best chance of beating Marshall and help in sending the Democratic leadership packing.”” What qualifies that?? Dropping from a race he had no chance in winning?

      • polisavvy says:

        You just can’t read the entire quote, can you? He said that if there was proof that Richardson had done anything unethical that he would be the FIRST to call for his resignation. If you are going to quote someone, why don’t you include the entire quote and not pick out what suits you best?

        • “”””Supporter of Glenn Richardson Speaker of the Georgia House of Representatives Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow.”””””

          After 14 years in the House, it really wouldn’t be too difficult to see the garbage that goes on under the dome. Oh wait, this is election season and all of our elected officials are now lilly white and clean as the wind driven snow…

          I’m not making an accusation, I am merely asking some questions that deserve to have answers. Enough is Enough of the political garbage. Time to get real.

      • ChiefofStaff65 says:

        He is using another company. He has been for awhile. Its a friend of mine who does great work.

        • I Am Jacks Post says:

          As long as he keeps the talking video people on his website, I’m 100% sold, regardless of which race he’d settled on.

  2. polisavvy says:

    I had planned to support him 100% for Governor. I will support him 100% for Congress. He is a good man and will make Georgia proud. Go get him, Austin!! 🙂

  3. Red Phillips says:

    So is Ick going to move to the 8th so he can vote for his man crush Scott?

    Jason Pye, are the Libertarians going to field a candidate in the 8th? In case Scott wins the nomination I need someone I can protest vote for in the general.

      • Red Phillips says:

        What’s the matter Doug? Tired of me arguing circles around you on the issues so you’ve given up arguing those?

        I am not a fan of Scott because I think he is a self-consciously “oh so thoughtful” centrist type. He is a potential future John McCain/Lindsey Graham style Republican.

        • Junius says:

          God forbid the GOP would allow any thoughtful centrists into the tent. Here’s a red meat talking point for ‘ya: Scott voted (on more than one occasion!) for a flag that had “Wisdom, Justice and Moderation” written right on it. What a spineless pinko.

          • Red Phillips says:

            Centrism ain’t going to restore the Republic. We are much too far down the line for that. I’m not so much against moderation as I am moderation as a pose. I’m not exactly sure how to tell the difference, but I think I know it when I see it.

        • ChiefofStaff65 says:


          Please list me 5 issues where Scott is a centrist.

          Additionally, please got o Tom Graves, who is considered a True Conservative wne put Austin Scott on those 5 Conservative principles.


          • Red Phillips says:

            Most notably he was with Barnes on the flag change from the first vote. Not just the later vote. If this is not “oh I’m so thoughtful and moderate” pandering I don’t know what is. More later when I have time.

            • ChiefofStaff65 says:

              Pandering? His district is a pretty die hard old Ga. Flag district. That is a strange method of pandering.

              • Red Phillips says:

                I didn’t suggest he was pandering to his district. Far from it. I suggested he was pandering to the “oh so moderate and thoughtful” self-congratulatory centrist crowd. You know. People like Ick. 🙂

            • polisavvy says:

              For your information, his decision about the flag was over the color green. Green as in money. Georgia had businesses who would not come to this state to do business because of the controversy surrounding the flag. If you are going to tell the story, then tell the story correctly.

              • John Konop says:

                Red Phillips,

                We are facing double digit unemployment, tax revenues falling off a cliff, broken education system, transportation headache…….And you bring up the flag!

                That is the definition of a perversion of priorities!

                • polisavvy says:

                  Didn’t you know, John? Some people have a one-tracked mind. I think if people are going to raise an issue like the flag that perhaps they should tell the truth behind the reason for the vote. Austin Scott stated his reason — the reason some businesses did not want to move their companies to Georgia. Some people need to just let it go.

                • Red Phillips says:

                  I didn’t “bring up the flag” preemptively although there would be absolutely no shame in it if I did. Follow the conversation. I initially said I hope the LP fields a candidate in the 8th so I will have someone to protest vote for if Scott wins the nomination. When asked why I said because Scott is a centrist/moderate. When ask for evidence of this I then brought up the flag which is indeed evidence for this. Am I to be faulted for proving my point?

              • Red Phillips says:

                I have no doubt that his decision was partially or primarily about satisfying the big money interest in Atlanta (Coke, Home Depot, etc.) and the Chamber. Do you really think that helps his case? So he sold out his heritage and his ancestors for a mess of pottage?

                • polisavvy says:

                  How can you use that as an argument for a vote which could have been detrimental to Georgia being able to attract businesses? I am about as Southern as you get. I have a very long family history in Georgia. We had a countless number of relatives who fought in the civil war and some who actually were plantation owners. I am sorry, but my heritage is very important to me. The difference between you and me is that my heritage is far more than a flag. I can’t speak for Austin Scott. You would have to ask him this question. However, if you ask enough people you would find out that the flag was a part of our heritage — it was not all of our heritage.

  4. TPNoGa says:

    I am happy for the people of the 8th. However, I am sad for me, as I am back to undecided for Governor. Dang, I don’t like any of the other candidates.

    • polisavvy says:

      You sound like my husband. He’s a little bummed. Me? I couldn’t be happier! He’ll make us proud in the 8th!

    • HowardRoark says:

      Same here, but I’m glad to have a serious candidate in the 8th now. I’ll settle on one of the remaining Guv guys and hold my nose.

      • polisavvy says:

        I know, we can all get excited now. After the gerrymandering of Barnes & Company, it will be great to finally feel like we have a Congressman we can count on to represent our interests — Austin Scott will be that Congressman!

    • Mayonnaise says:

      Ox = crooked shakedown artist
      Deal = crooked birther and grumpy old man
      Handel = pro-abortion and pro-gay
      McBerry = pro-child molestation
      Champman = in witness protection program

      Johnson = obvious choice for conservative Georgians

      🙂 🙂 🙂

      • Jim Bob says:

        Smoke’em, if you got’em. Because if Johnson gets elected you will be paying more for them.

        • gopgal says:

          Glad to hear it! Only 4 states have a lower cigarette tax rate than Georgia’s 37 cents per pack. By way of comparison, the overall state average is $1.40 per pack. In the major tobacco states’ that average is 40.2 cents per pack and all other states’ average $1.53 per pack.

          Perhaps my vote will move from the undecided column to one for Eric Johnson. Thanks for the info, Jim Bob.

          • polisavvy says:

            People in Georgia who smoke, like I do, should be very thankful that the tax is as low as it is here. The brand that I smoke here I pay $4.90 a pack, that same brand in Washington State was $9.75 and in California was $10.15.

              • AthensRepublican says:

                This was after he was already out of the Senate. He opposed the recent attempt to increase. Yes, you are correct though back in 2003 he did support it.

      • Tireless says:

        Agreed. ….Johnson is the only person in the race with a 20 year record of voting for core conservative legislation. The rest of the pack are big talkers with ZERO credibility.

      • TheSituation says:

        Mayo, I think my description better suits Johnson.

        Johnson = ethically challenged and Reynolds family hack

    • TPNoGa says:

      Sad to say, but I might end up voting for Barnes…{shiver}. Maybe if we have a divided government, it won’t be so easy to commit fraud. The Governor can watch the Legislature and the Legislature can watch the Governor. Could be a lot of fun watching Barnes deal with a GOP Legislature.

      • polisavvy says:

        I’m sad to say; but, I think that there are a lot of people feeling the same as you. Let’s hope that if he is elected that the “watching” game will actually work.

  5. ZazaPachulia says:


    I’m right there with you. Without Scott, this crowd of Republicans for governor is terribly disappointing. Not only is Barnes a better choice, but so is Porter and Poythress…

    Looks like I’m on the Otis Putnam bandwagon for the July 20 primary… feel free to pile on… there’s plenty of room.

  6. ZazaPachulia says:

    Oh, and for the record, this is what it looks like when a bright young politician sells out and switches over to the darkside.

    The Georgia GOP has been pressuring Austin to enter this race for well over a year. There’s all kind of backroom promises out there. Now all we can do is sit back and watch our once ethical crusader’s campaign chest grow fat…

    • polisavvy says:

      I think you are selling Austin Scott short. I believe he will enter the District as an ethical man and leave the District as an ethical man. Of course his war chest will grow — a lot of people want Marshall unseated. Don’t sell him short. Give him a chance, okay?

        • polisavvy says:

          It is kind of difficult to run “aggressively” when your hands are almost tied for three months because of session. Remember, he chose not to QUIT his elected position in order to run. It’s difficult to be aggressive in the money department when you aren’t allowed to collect any money during session. I guess we’ll just have to wait and see the aggressiveness of Austin Scott. Something tells me that the aggression will be there.

    • Jim Bob says:

      I realize quite a few of y’all are anti-establishment and distrustful(not saying that I am not). But, heaven forbid the “powers that be” (whomever they may be) or other folks might truly have Georgia and her people’s best interest at heart and thus might actually have some knowledge/expertise on these kind of things.

      I’m just saying, every once and awhile we need to cut some people some slack… (I’m sure that I will pay for this comment later on) 🙂

  7. Bill Mauldin says:

    Austin Scott is the perfect choice for this race, and is virtually assured to knock off Jim Marshall. It is a race he can certainly win, unlike the Governors race, and he already has a small war-chest and political following in this district to get the job done. All other candidates for the 8th District might as well save their time and money and bow out gracefully, and endorse and campaign for Austin. The state of Georgia can expect many years of quality service to come from Austin Scott, and I wish him and his family well in this race.

  8. TheCommonMan says:

    Thanks to Austin Scott’s last minute, trigger happy decision, Marshall will probably win another damn term.
    Angela Hicks could clean Martin’s clock, BUT Austin Scott realized that running for governor was about as effective as rearraging the deck chairs on the titanic, and switched his focus. Now, he’s just postoned the inevitable. If anything, he was less troublesome withering away in the goober race.

    • Part-Time Atlanta says:

      Sounds like the A-team staff isn’t feeling good about their chances…

      Scott is currently the strongest candidate to take on Marshall. Doesn’t mean he’ll win. He’s just the best the GOP have.

      • “””Scott is currently the strongest candidate to take on Marshall”””” Qualify that assessment.

        I see a bunch of people probably from outside of the district posting puff stuff…

          • Absolutely.

            I’ve said it on the Peach Pundit several times. There are two candidates who I have enormous respect for, Ken DeLoach and Angela Hicks. Both have worked the district quite well and have built sizable followings. Granted, the dollars have not flowed as well as they should. However, I do believe it would happen.

            I don’t know Rep. Scott. I’m sure he’s an admirable person. However, given the state of affairs of the legislature and watching how the gerrymandering is among politicians, I’m inclined to support a person who is desiring to serve from the heart, not political expediency.

            I certainly hope these two fine people stay in the race, because that is what they are passionate about. They’ve worked and qualified. I’m certain they can play this to the end. In politics, there are no guarantees. I’ve told anyone who is thinking about running for whatever, the race would be the hardest and the most enlightening thing they would ever do.

            If what they are seeking and passionate about isn’t immoral, illegal or unethical, who cares who enters the race if they believe in their cause? Both Ken and Angela are accomplished people in their field and are fine candidates. No disrespect to Diane Vann or Rep. Scott, I have never met either.

            In the end, the process works.

            • polisavvy says:

              You just admitted in your own post that you “don’t know Rep. Scott.” If that is the case, how can you be so sure that Austin Scott’s decision was not based on a desire to “serve from the heart?” Before I would criticize a candidate, I would probably read up on them. Had you done so, you would find that Austin is not your typical politician. He serves because he desires to do so, not for political gain or expediency.

  9. ZazaPachulia says:

    Hey Polisavvy, I liked Austin. I was planning on voting for him as our next governor. I can’t vote for him now… (I’m in the third)

    I’ve talked to the man several times. He told me candidly that he’d been pressured non-stop to challenge Marshall. He told me he wasn’t interested in paying lip-service to what the party wanted him to do. He was going to change the way the party operated in the Peach State… well, now the party has changed him. And it’s a crying shame.

      • polisavvy says:

        The party hasn’t changed him. Some people just need to get over it and realize that if he is elected Congressman for the 8th District that everyone could benefit from him being in that position — it doesn’t matter which district you live. I’m sure that John Linder’s decisions have been of benefit to me and to others who live outside his district. They are “State” Delegates to Congress.

  10. saltycracker says:

    Sure bet Austin was going to shift, figured LtG, but maybe he got a little postioning push from the GOP friends of Casey

    • ByteMe says:

      It’s not. Sure, you’ll still find people who think the war’s not over, but with each new generation, it dies out a little more until it becomes something used to sell cheap trinkets and tickets to performances.

      • ricstewart says:

        The Georgia flag issue is another one of the surefire election year tricks Republicans like to pull out every two years to distract voters from real issues:
        -Blame illegal immigrants
        -Blame gays
        -Bring up the long-dead flag issue
        -Blame terr’rists!

  11. Aggressive Opinion says:

    Can everyone please stop their crying?!?! Austin Scott is the best suited to take out Jim Marshall, period. Isn’t that the ultimate goal of anyone who cares about the 8th, Georgia, and the United States? Pelosi needs to be neutered (or is it spayed)? I can’t remember.

    • ByteMe says:

      “best suited”?? Seriously? Someone who jumps into the race at the last minute with not much cash or name recognition outside a portion of the district is somehow better suited than the people who have been working the entire district for a while, raising money, building support? What are you saying about them exactly?

      Given the choices, he might have been one of the top 2 possibilities for Governor or Lt. Gov, but climbing the hill in the 8th isn’t going to be the cakewalk some people in the echo chamber want you to believe.

      • aquaman says:

        The key phrase is “given the choices”. This whole election cycle is about which is the least empty suit or in Handle’s case pant suit.

        • ByteMe says:

          I’m less worried about empty suits as I am the idiots who want to do more damage to our already failing infrastructure and educational institutions, and our limited water supply.

      • EXACTLY!

        He would have been as competitive against the LG as he was in the governors race. Furthermore, some of these people are friends who are posting, but I do need to poiint out these same people were propping a campaign of an individual who never raised enough cash to require an FEC filing or qualified, yet was crisscrossing the district painting himself as a “Bruce Wayne” with a padded resume.

        I looked at some youtube videos of Scott speaking, as I had no clue who he was. He seems to be an honorable person and definitely has an excellent resume (CLU and ChFC) but as competitiive, no more than anyone else. Perhaps the state GOP made promises to infuse cash, where they said they wouldn’t previously? Perhaps the U.S. Senators have blessed him? He’s got the same fight as anyone else.

        • ByteMe says:

          I’m not comfortable taking your side in this fight 🙂

          I’m just getting bored with people thinking that Austin is the only person on the Planet GOP who can beat Marshall, especially by making the case that this particular election is about Nancy Pelosi and not unemployment, jobs, and DoD/DoAg spending in the district.

          • People are People and this is politics. There are no guarantees but have been rolling laughing while listening to the morning talk show host, who is 24 blessing Scott and pontificating the talking points on this board. The fact is there is ZERO advantage to Scott.

            The morning talk show host says, he’s proven he’s capable to raise money. The fact is he’s proven he can spend money…. He’s raised over $400,000 for his governors race and spent nearly all of it.

            • AnyoneElse2010 says:

              And couldn’t raise a penny for 100 and some odd days, and still has been able to pay a staff and run a great campaign. To me shows a lot of fiscal conservatism. I don’t care who your are no one could say that they believed that Scott could get as far as he did. He has propped himself up nicely to be a household name in Georgia politics.

          • Doug Deal says:

            Byte, there are several people who could beat Marshall, but they do not have what is commonly called “the balls” to risk being out of politics by giving up their current position to run against a tough opponent.

            • ByteMe says:

              Oh, I completely agree that Marshall’s district can be had, I’m just going against the echo chamber’s view that Austin is the best person to do this.

          • kyleinatl says:

            While I’m 50-50 on Marshall politically (though I do have immense respect for the man personally which helps), I’ll take Austin over Angela Hicks any day of the week, at the very least…he keeps the social conservative agenda out of his politics, something I really appreciate from a Republican these days.

    • “”””Austin Scott is the best suited to take out Jim Marshall, period””””

      What qualifies that statement? What polling data do you have that supports this. It is my understanding his gubernatorial campaign was broke, he has as much name recognition as anyone else and no hallmark legislation that anyone can point to that says he did much of anything in 14 years….

      This race is anyone’s to win. Now, if there are greater powers that somehow feel he is more qualified than anyone else, I wish they would present it.

      Anyone is welcome in the race, this is America, but to paint him as a political Jesus and that the others are simply neophytes is dissengenuous.

      • I’d just like to point out the logical inconsistency of pointing out that you know little to nothing about Austin Scott ad have never met Austin Scott to form an opinion about him, while in the same very thread attacking him claiming he does not have any hallmark legislation.

        From what I know of you, through mutual friends, you are a good fellow – but right now you’re talking out of both sides of your mouth. Either stick to “I don’t know enough about him” or stick to “He’s bad and here’s why.” Because it has to be one way or the other, don’t you think?

        • There’s nothing inconsistent with pointing out I don’t know much about Scott, other than he represents the southern tier of the district and ran for governor.

          I’m certainly not attacking him. I’m pointing out that, in my opinion, he’s no more attractive of a candidate than any other.

          • You keep raising questions, I don’t recall anyone – specifically myself – equating that to attacking someone. But there is a certain connotation to your questions, so much so that you had to add a disclaimer that you were not being accusatory.

            The inconsistency arises when you claim you don’t know much about Austin, but point out that he’s not more viable and that he spends money at a high burn-rate. That sounds you have substantial knowledge.

            To me, in my opinion, it seems like you are upset that Austin jumped int the race at this point.

            • “””….very thread attacking him claiming he ….””” Certainly not upset that he entered the race, heck who I am to tell someone not to do what they want to do?? I’m simply pointing out some softball questions that will need to be answered. Should he prevail, he’s going to be greeted with much harder questions than this.

              There are no inconsistencies. This district needs a strong candidate. After July, I’ll be a happy camper promoting our nominee aggressively. Hopefully, by that point I’m sold on one.

              • Let me rephrase myself as I have left some ambiguity; I differentiate from you asking/raising questions – and making statements that someone has had no hallmark legislation. I’m a little confused as to which you are doing at some points, are you only asking questions or are you making declarative statements?

                I regard the former as not attacking, and the later as attacking. However, I still stand by this:

                “The inconsistency arises when you claim you don’t know much about Austin, but point out that he’s not more viable and that he spends money at a high burn-rate. That sounds you have substantial knowledge.”

                You either know enough to make declarative statements, which you have but I have now inferred you did not intend them as such – or you are genuinely asking questions – which is what you have indicated. You can keep saying there isn’t an inconsistency – but when you say you have formed an opinion on something, but at the same time say you do not know enough about it – then there is a problem.

    • polisavvy says:

      I agree with you Aggressive. For those who think that Austin Scott can’t “catch up” are nutz. I have heard of many people who are sending money his way, coupled that with support of the NRCC and prominent republicans. Austin Scott will do just fine.

  12. John Konop says:

    I had the pleasure of meeting Bret Taylor the campaign manager for Austin Scott. A very bright guy who has a tremendous grasp of the issues, especially fiscally which speaks highly of Austin he has this type of talent helping him ie best and brightest.

    I also talked to Vivan Scott twice now and both times was very impressed with her grasp of issues and she also has very strong understanding on fiscal policy as well as education.

    In Washington we need the “A” team to face many tough issues today especially the fiscal mess. I will donate money to Austin even though he lives out of my district because we need serious smart leadership willing to shoot straight with American people. It seems like Austin is willing to take on the difficult issues and NOT play kick the problem down the road like many have on both sides!

    I suggest if you think we need strong leadership especially, in the fiscal area you help Austin, even if he is not in your district.

  13. benevolus says:

    I would like to think that this was all planned. AS would campaign statewide to get name recognition and develop some grassroots support, then, if the numbers aren’t working out, switch to a congressional race, which should be much more winnable. He will have presumably garnered some support from outside his district from people who want to see him succeed and advance. But it avoids the appearance of cravenly traveling around the whole state to get money for a district run. I think it’s a good strategy.

    Not sure it will be enough though. 8 may be “conservative” relative to a normal Georgia Dem, but how conservative can it be if Marshall keeps winning?

  14. Jeff Scott says:

    Angela Hicks could not have beaten Marshall. It’s as simple as that. Even with a cleared-out field, she couldn’t have done it. Her humiliating campaign missteps that prove that she is a rank amateur eventually would have done her in anyway. I’m sorry, but launching your campaign website by including your height and weight as qualifications for the job make you look nutty. Hosting your first event in Warner Robins at the home of City Attorney Jim Elliott, who brags about allegedly breaking state Open Records laws and admitted to breaking city ordinance in the shredding incident, shows that you don’t care about ethics in government. The worst part was that when I informed her campaign manager of Elliott’s indiscretions, I was told that they hadn’t been following it so they didn’t know what was going on. You have to look into the background of people you have to host events. That would have been great fodder for Marshall to use against Hicks.

    This is NOT a Goldwater/Rockefeller or Rubio/Crist or NY-23 case. This is not an ideological battle between the mushy moderate wing of the Republican Party and the true conservative wing. Austin Scott is not a part of the “status quo,” as he has proven in the State House. He has the guts to run a good campaign. He was the only candidate willing to call John Oxendine on his indiscretions, and honestly I’ll miss that in the Governor’s race. Austin Scott is a true conservative, and he can beat Marshall. That is something that nobody else in this race can say. Hicks should bow out, and DeLoach and Vann never should have entered the race to begin with.

    • “”””Angela Hicks could not have beaten Marshall. “”” Of course we all have an opinion, but I don’t think any of us are Miss Cleo and can foretell the future.

      Attempting to portray her as “nutty” is just plain assinine.

      • Doug Deal says:

        I agree. Angela’s early stuff was “homespun” but it was corrected when she got people helping her out. She is not a career politician, so cut her some slack, Jeff.

        People like Angela should be encouraged to get involved, not ridiculed.

        • Jeff Scott says:

          Doug, having a crappy website is one thing. I honestly don’t care what her website looked like. Posting your height and weight for the world to see and declaring it a qualification for elected office is a completely different story. It’s just…weird.

          And on the Elliott thing, she did have help. That was just a couple weeks ago. Look through some news archives if you’re going to use a government official’s house for your first real campaign event and find out what that government official has done in the past. Do they pose any potential liabilities? Jim Elliott did, and I told her campaign that. I was trying to do them a favor. They pled ignorance.

          That said, Hicks deserves a lot of credit for bowing out. She did the right thing for the district, and she should be praised for that. If today had come and gone and the race was between Hicks, DeLoach, and Vann, I would be supporting Hicks and wishing for the other two to suspend their campaigns to give Hicks the best possible chance of victory. I just wouldn’t have been optimistic.

          • polysnazzy says:

            sitting in front of a camera with a shirt and tie acting like you’re some inside commentator is just plain weird. don’t think your website is any better.

  15. Sarah Scott says:

    I find it odd that Austin just decided in the last 48 hours to run for Congress. What is also problematic is the line he gave me and others about not wanting to go to DC due to his young family. Has the family suddenly aged? Or did the writing on the wall make him decide to switch to a race he had a hope of winning?
    Angela Hicks is a good candidate. She has been working hard in the district to raise name recognition and campaign funds.
    I liked Austin, I thought he was a great guy…but unless he has more of a reason than ‘I think I can win’ for switching, he will be just another politician that will do anything to win.

    • Glen Ross says:

      If you’re alreaded decided for one of his opponents that’s fine. But don’t question the guy’s dedication to his family. That’s out of bounds.

      I’ve always been impressed with Austin. He’s a great guy, and would be a very effective Congressman. When you look at it like that, why shouldn’t he run?

      • ByteMe says:

        She didn’t question his dedication to his family. That’s a red herring meant to inoculate him from someone criticizing what he said in the past and how what he said obviously didn’t mean as much to him as it did to the people he said it.

        • Glen Ross says:

          She absolutely did with her whole “What about his kids?” If she’s miffed b/c he switched races and she thinks that’s wrong, say THAT. But a reference to his family is at best a misdirection and at worst a direct attack of the worst kind. Posts like that just proved what everyone suspected all along: A. Hick’s and company weren’t up to the task.

          • benevolus says:

            Well if Sarah is being accurate, it was AS who used his family as a reason. How can he use his family’s welfare as justification and then not be criticized when he abandons that reasoning?
            I am confident that he would have talked this over with his family and they are OK with it, so it’s not really about them, but politically it’s fair game. He brought it up. He tried to get a little of the “I’m a big family man” cred and now… not so much. It’s about his posturing, not their well-being.

          • ByteMe says:

            Glen you’re being disingenuous at best. Your quote of what she said is incorrect. Your attempt to redirect the criticism to make it about his family (which you then claim is off limits) is just an attempt to inoculate Scott from fair criticism of his actions and statements that went contrary to his actions.

    • polisavvy says:

      Sarah, why don’t you just be honest and disclose that you were never supporting Austin Scott from the beginning?

      • ByteMe says:

        Doesn’t matter in this case. What she’s saying is right, Austin initially used his family as an excuse for not running in the 8th and then suddenly he’s running in the 8th. So things changed, but don’t expect him to get a free pass for it.

        • polisavvy says:

          It matters to me that she keeps going on and on. There are a lot of people who are disappointed that Austin has decided to run for Congress, myself included. However, having said that, it has become apparent to me from reading her posts for a while now that she is has not been a true “fan” of Austin’s from the get-go. To yammer on and on about Austin switching is futile.

          Byte, I don’t expect him to get a pass on anything. He will be able to handle whatever comes his way. I’m sure that the question will come up in the future; but, you know as well as anyone that things change and minds can be changed for a variety of reasons. Whatever his reason, I guess you will just have to ask him. I’m sure that he would be more than happy to answer you.

        • John Konop says:


          In all due respect we are facing double digit unemployment, Medicare ready to implode, Social Security out of control, two wars we cannot afford, tax revenues in the toilet, immigration issues……..should we not focus on the real issues?

          • polisavvy says:

            Some, unfortunately, would prefer not to do that. It’s so much more productive to badger a man for changing his mind. I think that a good many people are being totally ridiculous about this whole thing. Austin did, in fact, discuss this matter with his family and with their encouragement came to this decision. That should be all that is said about the matter.

          • ByteMe says:

            Overkill, John.

            Glen went after Sarah for a fake reason, and I’m calling him on it. Savvy is defending Scott, because she’s a supporter. This entire thread is not about any real issues. If you want one of those, ask to have one started. In the meantime, the past few days of qualifying has been all “inside baseball” anyway.

            • John Konop says:


              You know I like and respect you, but what you posted sounds like a bad soap opera. BTW the thread is about Austin Scott jumping in the race. And you have the GOD given right to focus on non-sense or focus on what counts. And what I respect about you is you generally focus on the donut not the hole.

              BTW as you know I am on the independent side, not driven by party politics. And I will say that even when we disagree I always sense it is your opinion not a mindless party talking point.

              • ByteMe says:

                I’m bored while working on three different things at work, so I’m going waaaaay out of character and defending Sarah.

                There ain’t no doughnut out here to focus on and hasn’t been one for a few weeks. Like any good soap opera, you can go away from here for a few days and not much changed.

      • polisavvy says:

        Oh, God no. There is absolutely no way that a politician’s family could provide encouragement. That wouldn’t play into the whole “let’s castrate Austin” thing.

  16. ZazaPachulia says:

    Sarah, you just said it best.

    I’m surprised others on here aren’t as disappointed as we are.

  17. ZazaPachulia says:


    How is a red herring to be feel betrayed by a fibbing politician for whom you campaigned? One of the reasons why I was drawn to Scott’s campaign for governor was his seemingly uncompromising integrity and his common-sense solutions-based approach to every issue. He repeatedly told me and other supporters that he had “absolutely no interest” in running for Congress and he promised up and down that he was dedicated to fixing politics here in Georgia — specifically in the Georgia G.O.P. Scott even told us that he had been ignoring pressure by the party to run against Marshall. So, now, the party that was broken to the extent where he got us on board to ‘fix’ it has sweet-talked our crusader into doing exactly what he said he would not do.

    The notorious Richardson now, Richardson tomorrow letter was something I told myself I could overlook. This cowardly move I cannot.

    I don’t live in the 8th, but I won’t be supporting Scott for Congress. The signs that were in my yard two days ago are now in the back of my truck, bound for the dump.

    • Doug Deal says:

      I assume you worked for Angela and I assume she said that she would be in it until the end. Wasn’t that a “fib”? Why can everyone BUT Austin change his mind?

      The blame game could go on forever. Learn to live with disappointments and stow the whining. It does no one, especially Angela, any favors.

    • ByteMe says:

      Zaza, you misread what I wrote and to whom I was responding.

      The “red herring” is the part where criticism of changing his story about why he didn’t want to run for Congress is somehow off limits because it’s “question[ing] the guy’s dedication to his family.” That’s trying to use his family as a shield from criticism and a totally bogus argument, since that’s not what’s being criticized.

  18. ZazaPachulia says:

    Doug, I did not work for Angela. I don’t live in the 8th. I’m disappointed because the candidate I supported has left the governor’s race in what seems to me like an uncharacteristic and integrity-challenged cop-out.

    And I’m ticked because I’m going to be stuck voting for a libertarian or Roy Barnes for governor.

    • AnyoneElse2010 says:

      I just don’t believe that you can be mad at someone for making a decision. You are jumping to all sort of conclusions. Can’t it be possible that Austin talked with his family, prayed about it, and talked to close advisors and then decided that it would be best for Georgia and hmself to run for this seat. I know you are upset because you supported him, but there is no reason to jump to any conclusions. I think that you have to support a person because of how he has led and the character that he possesses and up until this point Austin has not given anyone any reason to doubt his leadership and character. I hope that you get past your anger, and focus in on someone trying to do something bigger then any of us “pundits” may ever know.

    • Doug Deal says:

      People change their mind. Anyone who claims to have never changed their mind is a liar or incapable of admitting a mistake or recognize changing conditions. This is an extremely important election and the control of the House is at stake. I am sure Austin recognized the seriousness of this and thought long and hard about the difference he could potentially make. Ross Tolleson, Alan Peake, and Cecil Staton passed. This is the reason Angela and the others could even entertain the thought of running in the first place. Those guys are as happy as clams to stick with their guarenteed positions and not have to risk anything while the country bleeds from its fiscal neck. Maybe next time, redistricting might make it automatic and easy for them. How heroic!

      Republicans have a long history and have become quite good high-tailing it away from a fight that isn’t already in their favor. Look how many Dem seats go unchallenged every year.

      Austin, on the other hand, put aside the great personal challenges that this difficult race entails because he apparently knows the stakes are too great to sit quietly in the shadows waiting for his “turn”.

      I am happy he switched.

      • polisavvy says:

        Thanks Doug for that post. I really hope that people will come to realize that Austin Scott is as honest as the day is long — sometimes to a fault. I know that this was a decision which he put a great deal of though into and one in which he had serious discussions with his family. Contrary to popular belief, he did not succumb to outside pressure. This was a decision he reached because he felt it would in the long run be the best decision for Georgia. I supported him for Governor, as you well know. I will support him for Congress. I am very thankful that I live in the 8th.

  19. ThePoliticiansWife says:

    Since I’m his wife, I believe I’m qualified to address some of the remarks I’ve read about Austin using his family as an “excuse” or a “shield.” I don’t recall seeing any of you in the room with us when Austin and I made the decision to run for 8th.

    • benevolus says:

      May I respectfully suggest that the issue is not your decision making process, but whether or not Mr. Scott told people he wouldn’t run for the 8th because he didn’t want to move his family to D.C.
      If he said that he probably owes some people an explanation about what has changed. If he didn’t say it, I guess this whole thing is a non-issue.

      • John Konop says:


        I am not part of Austin Scott campaign, and if it was him or anyone else I would say the something. As a father with two kids and a wife for over 18 years, one thing you learn is life changes and roll with the punches. And the truth is it is none of our business how the family came to the conclusion. All I care about is the issues and policy.

        And this type of non-sense is why I did not make a very good politician. I am more about the bottom line!

    • Doug Grammer says:


      I think you and Austin are great people. These decisions are not made quickly or lightly. I am sure you both talked about it and prayed about it. I think Austin can win the Eighth. When the primaries are over, I will try come down and go door to door with you. I might even bring friends.

  20. sethweathers says:

    I think bringing his family into it makes no sense. Nobody knows what conversations they had that brought them to this decision. I’m sure Vivien was 100% behind the decision or Austin wouldn’t have agreed to go to DC. I know lots of Congressmen who have their wife join them on trips to DC. Stick to the issues, which is, can he beat Marshall, if he can, it’s a great step forward for the party as a whole. Imagine if each state was able to pick off just one Democrat seat!

    • AnyoneElse2010 says:

      Agreed. The crazy thing is that Georgia has a great chance of picking off two. Marshall and Bishop. If Liz Carter can keep her big MO going we have a possiblity of picking up three. I won’t hold my breath against Hank Johnson though.

      • polisavvy says:

        Just think that if all 50 states could do the same as Georgia has the potential to do. Would be pretty cool, wouldn’t it?

Comments are closed.