Alabama Throws Deal A Life Line

If any Georgia politicos are looking at today’s Alabama primary results, they are probably just trying to figure out who our next Governor will be “negotiating” with over our water in Lake Lanier. But if he’s been paying attention, Nathan Deal needs to be watching the performance of Tim James.

James, son of former Alabama Governor Fob James, was running a distant 4th place in polls as recently as the end of April. No online news story of the AL race mentioned him even as an also ran among the top three contenders. Then, Tim James decided Alabama needed to speak English. The ad went viral, and James vaulted to the top tier, running either first or second in the final polls.

Whether James is ultimately in the runoff or not, the effect of that ad will be studied for election cycles to come. A blatant appeal to broad-based xenophobia turned the Alabama Republican Primary for Governor around on a dime.

Back in Georgia, Deal’s campaign showed a flicker of life as the Arizona immigration law became a talk radio and cable news sensation. Immigration is the one issue Deal has claimed tireless efforts on, though the results from those efforts remain dubious and elusive.

The campaign Deal hoped to run is no longer available to him. His D.C. base of support, both in fundraising and for grassroots, is all but gone. Tom Price has already openly jumped shipped, and other D.C. establishment insiders are already quietly shifting support to either Eric Johnson or Karen Handel. No one wants to be on a ballot against Roy Barnes and his bankroll with a Gubernatorial candidate who has major ethics issues.

Thus, instead of running a coronation as a capstone to a long political career with the support of the D.C. and much of the GA political establishment, Deal now finds himself in a postion where his best option for nomination is to appeal to the base fears of the Republican base, and tap the anger of those losing their jobs and suffering through a bad economy and blame illegal immigrants.

In a 4+ person primary, it just might work. We’ll at least know shortly if it worked in Alabama.


  1. Locke and Load says:

    It wouldn’t surprise me at all to see Deal use this tactic. After all, the guy used the words “ghetto grandmothers” in a fundraising letter.

  2. ready2rumble says:

    Great year to be running on – elect me because of my decades of Washington experience.

  3. GOPwits says:

    I can honestly say that if someone ran that blatant of a racist ad I would not vote for them. I don’t vote for lowest common denominator xenophobe’s like that…

  4. HowardRoark says:

    “I’m crooked, but I’ll stop the brown people from taking yer jobs!” Seriously, not the worst campaign strategy I’ve heard of. He’s gonna need something.

    • ByteMe says:

      New Deal speech:

      I know you heard about “ghetto grandmothers” and how I used Congressional staff and the Lt. Governor to try to keep my no-bid state business going, but I’d just like to say… LOOK OVER HERE, THERE ARE BROWN PEOPLE LOOKING TO TAKE YOUR JOB!!! VOTE FOR ME!!

      I can honestly say that — given the quality of the average Georgia voter — it’ll probably work well.

      • Mozart says:

        The “New New Deal.” If Deal can just figure out how to get a Roosevelt to endorse him, he would have the governorship locked-up.

  5. GOPwits says:

    Another thing ol’ Dealio might want to look at in AL is how his DC homeboy Artur Davis lost the Democratic Primary… Seriously, being from DC and that culture and coming back to lead at home is just not something this country wants nor needs…

    In fact, I wish I had Republican alternatives to some of the career politicians we have up there now… Unfortunately, my patience with Isakson is wearing thin. He’s becoming more like Saxby everyday…

    • Carpet Capital says:

      Yeah, political experience is a terrible thing these days. Let’s just elect a bunch of uneducated, inexperienced people into office. That sounds like a great idea. I would love to hear your take on the so-called DC culture. Clearly we should just do away with Congress and let you make your own laws out of the comfort of your home since DC is apparently a foreign country to you.

      • GOPwits says:

        To suggest that only people in Washington DC are the ones who understand how to turn this country around and get it working again is EXACTLY the problem with Washington DC politicos…

        Thank you fo helping make my point just a little more clear for everyone…

        The real leaders and businessmen and women of America need to step up and replace the current culture of Washington, and yes, that includes some of our Republican brethren serving in office who have lost site of what it means to be a conservative and actually solve problems and not just talk about them…

        • Carpet Capital says:

          I never suggested they are the only ones to solve this country’s problems. But it’s dishonest to suggest there is some sinister DC culture that will pollute the electoral landscape. There are plenty of people working in DC who genuinely care about their constituents and are willing to listen to their problems and take those to heart. Yes, there are plenty of politicians in DC who only care about furthering their political career and being in the spotlight. There are also those who genuinely care and have their staff work tirelessly to help constituents with their social security, disability, and VA problems. Those people need help and their Congressman is there to help them.

          • hannah says:

            There are also people in D.C. courtesy of the “peter principle.” Having failed at every practical endeavor at home, they are shipped off by their cohorts to the Washington dole. South Carolina’s Joe Wilson is a good example.

            • BuckheadConservative says:

              This is the best, most clear post you’ve made on this site since I’ve been reading your comments. You’ve either put down the pipe or you’ve found a new, much better strain of grass. The “Peter Principle” is alive and well here in Ga as well.

        • Dave Bearse says:

          Please enlighten us with recent examples of “real leaders and businessmen and women” in Georgia “who understand how to turn this country around” by identifying what they have done at the state level in Georgia.

  6. Red Phillips says:

    “A blatant appeal to broad-based xenophobia”

    Please name me a single person who is actually phobic of foreigners? Xenophobia is a Cultural Marxist slur word.

    “appeal to the base fears”

    Yes. That is the only possible thing that drives opposition to immigration. Those base fears.

    Conservatives seek to conserve things. Immigration restrictionism is the inherently conservative position. Immigration does not conserve. It transforms. And mass immigration transforms radically. The unprecedented rates of mass immigration we have had since 1965 have been radically transformative. No true conservative can think this is OK.

    • Doug Grammer says:

      Or you could say that conservatives like to have the laws enforced, and don’t care for people who come into the country illegally.

      • hannah says:

        The problem with national boundaries for the purpose of excluding human migration is that they violate the inherent human right to move around freely. The practical problem with passing laws to restrict transit from one artificial territory to another is that the law-making body has no authority to govern the behavior of the citizens or residents of another country. A U.S. law saying that Mexicans can’t come here can’t be enforced on people in Mexico, unless we send an army to invade and conquer.
        Then there’s the problem that the Constitution DEMANDS equal treatment of all persons, regardless of citizenship or national origin, once they are present within the jurisdiction of the U.S. — i.e. where U.S. law applies.
        Finally, there’s the problem that under our system of government no-one is required to get a permit (permission) to engage in essentially good and socially useful behavior — i.e. work. A permit, as Justice Kennedy has said, “is not a matter of grace.” That is, if a permit is required to prevent some potential injury (like an incompetent operating a motor vehicle), then, once the conditions for issuing the permit have been satisfied, it must be issued. (Marriage licenses are a good alternate example of the principle in that, because society finds it useful to know and have a record of individually who are personally and permanently committed to each other, it promotes the recording of marriages by promising certain rewards [e.g. pension benefits] to individuals who comply). It’s very hard to get people to do the right thing — much harder than preventing a repetition of bad behavior by locking people up — and the usual, most successful tactic is to provide some sort of reward. Getting people to be good for nothing may be preferable, but less likely to succeed, if only because what some people consider good, others do not.
        If temporary workers have to get work permits, all workers will have to get work permit, if the “equal treatment” provisions of the Constitution are to be complied with. If non-citizen residents haven’t challenged their unequal treatment, it’s just a matter of time. Equality is a two-edged sword as long as there’s an elite that’s into deprivation. The vast majority of the people can be equally deprived, which is why one percent of the population now controls most of the nation’s assets.
        Threats sometimes work, especially when the threat is located in an unidentified source and can’t be checked. That’s why the threat from a foreign agent is often relied on. “If you don’t do what I tell you, some stranger will get your lunch.” Remember when the starving children in China were supposed to prompt the eating of an unappetizing lunch?
        What is the difference between erecting a “curtain” to keep people in and erecting walls to keep people out?
        Why is it better for foreigners to come here to play than to come here to work? Is it because the latter tap into a supply of money of which there is never enough? If so, why, now that we make money out of paper, a renewable resource, is there not enough money? Who’s making money artificially scarce? Is it the same people who “created” trillions by issuing derivatives?

        • Doug Grammer says:

          “…they violate the inherent human right to move around freely.” I stopped reading and started laughing after that.

          Party at Hannah’s house! It doesn’t matter if she wants us to come over or not! If she objects, we will tell her she’s violating our basic human right to move around freely! At a matter of fact, feel free to spend the night! We can use her bathroom and make her wait. We could all speak another language and change the voice on the answering machine. I would leave it at press 1 for English and 2 for INS. BYOF, bring your own flag. You can have kids kicked out of school for wearing an American flag on Cinco de Mayo, or as I like to call it, May the fifth, or Wednesday. The last time I checked it is not a holiday in this country unless you own a bar and want to sell more tequila. Feel free to use her gas, water, and electric services as well.

          By the way, the party at Hannah’s house never ends. Usual capacity is 4 people, so let’s keep at least 8 people there all the time. Move in, Stay a while. Get a job and send money home. And if you have a child while you are in Hannah’s house, your name goes on the deed to the property, to help protect the home that your child in now legally entitled to. Borders, laws, and use of resources don’t matter to Hannah.

      • Red Phillips says:

        From the standpoint of conserving things, legal immigration is no less a problem than illegal immigration. Immigration is not just a law and order issue. It is a maintaining cultural integrity issue.

        • ByteMe says:

          It is a maintaining cultural integrity issue.

          Let’s just all mull over in our minds what Red is saying here.

          • Progressive Dem says:

            It doesn’t take much mulling, but thanks for highlighting the motivation. Red probably has some first cousins in the Arian Nation.

          • Red Phillips says:

            Have you ever looked into how hard it is to immigrate to Japan, for instance? To become a Japanese citizen? It is virtually impossible.

            So a conservative in Japan should be perfectly OK with, even celebrate, millions of culturally dissimilar immigrants pouring into his nation? (Disregarding the issue of land mass and resources for the sake of this argument.) Of course not. So is that Japanese conservative a racist? No one ever bothers to even ask that question. The only countries that are supposed to throw open their doors to mass immigration are Western countries.

            So why this double standard? Why are Western countries racist if they want to restrict immigration but Japan’s total lack of immigration is disregarded? There is a name for this. It is called Cultural Marxism. It focuses its sights on us evil racist Westerners because its purpose is to undermine the West. That whole rebellion of the proletariat thing didn’t work out so well, so they’ll just take down Western Civilization a different way. And you are being their willing enablers.

            • Progressive Dem says:

              The United States is not an island nation of homogenious indigenous people that dates back to about 10,000 BC. Comapring the US to Japan is absurd. The US was founded for immigrants and would never exisisted or succeded without imigration. Some of my family immigrated here in the mid 1600’s, but I don’t have the right, nor do you, of deciding that only people from my culture can immigrate to America.

              “Cultural integirty ” is racism reincarated.

              • Red Phillips says:

                “The US was founded for immigrants and would never existed or succeeded without immigration.”

                No. America is an English colonial nation similar to Canada, Australia and New Zealand. It was “founded for” settlers. Immigrants have come over time obviously, but the rates (legal and illegal) since 1965 are historically unprecedented.

                But the Netherlands has a population density higher than Japan (I believe that is correct but the point stands even if it isn’t, as it is obviously densely populated.) and people still expect them to throw open their doors to immigrants. Just ask Theo van Gogh. Oh that’s right; you can’t because he is dead. Killed by immigrants. Why is the Netherlands different than Japan? Easy. The Netherlands is a Western nation and is therefore subjected to a different standard. Again, this is called Cultural Marxism and you are its shill.

                BTW, have you ever looked into Mexico’s immigration laws? Much stricter than ours. What a bunch of racist those Mexicans must be.


                • Progressive Dem says:

                  “America is an English colonial nation similar to Canada, Australia and New Zealand. It was “founded for” settlers. Immigrants have come over time obviously, but ..”

                  B.S. The US is not a member of the British Commonwealth. The settlers regardless of their origin were all immigrants. And your history is faulty. Who settled New Amsterdam? Who were the Pennsylvania Dutch? What’s the predominant language in the largest Canadian province? Who started the California missions? Who did Texas declare independence from? From which country did Jefferson purchase Louisianna? Who founded Saint Augustine, Saint Louis and New Orleans? Hint: they were not from England.

    • Progressive Dem says:

      “Conservatives seek to conserve things.” That’s rich. It’s usually liberals trying to conserve natural resources and the environment.

      Was it ok to transform the Jim Crow segregation era of “separate but equal” doctrine? Or should we have conserved that?

      A free-market conservative should like all this cheap labor flowing to keep labor costs down and prevent unions from organizing. Labor after all is a market, and should be free of “restrictionism”. You don’t want government regulating that market, do you?

      Red , are you really saying no true conservative can think it’s ok for Caucasians to be a minority in the US? That train has left the station.

      • hannah says:

        Conservatives are people who are afraid of change. So, change being the only constant, conservatives feel insecure. That’s why a promise of “national security” is attractive. Surely, if the whole nation is secure, every individual is secure. Moreover, if the whole nation is secure, then the individual can throw caution to the wind. It’s like being saved. Once the individual has been saved by the blood of Jesus, he no longer needs to be concerned about sin.
        Where does conservatives’ fear come from? That’s the question for which I have no answer.

        • GFW13 says:

          No thoughtful person could describe the conservative as fearful of change. Most obviously, the conservative champions a free market, and a free market offers nothing but change. The market is constant destruction and constant renewal. The conservative lives for change.

          But he understands that certain things are incapable of change; namely, human nature. And so he seeks to conserve an understanding and structure of government; namely, the limited, constitutional government established by the Founders. He seeks that form of government because he values individual freedom. He values individual freedom because he understands that it emphasizes creativity, meaning, optimism, and control of one’s own life, all of which are traditional American values, all of which provide the basis for a perpetually new, different, and happy outlook.

          On another note, I do not understand why this blog, especially Icarus, is so harsh on Nathan Deal. If it is not objectionable to do business with the state, then it cannot be objectionable to attempt to retain business with the state. If it was not scandalous for Deal to have a contract with the state (and I have not heard anyone argue that a politician should be prohibited from doing business with the state), then it can hardly be scandalous for Deal to argue in favor of preserving that contract. Eric Johnson also had a great deal of business with the state while he was a state senator, and he (I assume) worked to retain that business. Merely doing business with the state or working to preserve existing business with the state shouldn’t give offense. Of course, it is problematic if the “business” at issue is really a robbery of public funds, but I haven’t read that (about either Deal or Johnson).

      • Mozart says:

        Liberals “liberate” and Conservatives “conserve.”

        Boys have a penis and girls have a vagina.

        Let’s not mess with nature anymore than we have to, ‘k?

      • Red Phillips says:

        “A free-market conservative should like all this cheap labor flowing to keep labor costs down and prevent unions from organizing.”

        American conservatives should generally support free-markets, especially at the national level because the Constitution allows for very little regulation of the market. But conservatives should reject economic reductionism, economic man thinking, and atomistic individualism. Historically speaking those things are (classically) liberal ideas, and the fact that they have been incorporated into what we call conservatism is to some degree an accident of history and place. I am certainly not against the free-market, but economics should not trump all other considerations for conservatives.

        • Progressive Dem says:

          “the Constitution allows for very little regulation of the market” You do realize how riduculously out of touch you are with reality and the mainstream of America for the past 100 years? Americans want safe food, drugs, transportation, water, air, work-places and buildings. They want protection from con artists, financial scams, phony businesses and usury. Nobody wants to go to back to the Gilded Age. It was a disaster

          • Red Phillips says:

            “You do realize how riduculously out of touch you are with reality and the mainstream of America for the past 100 years?”

            I do realize how “riduculously” you need to use spell check. I corrected the quote I used in my other reply to you, but just figured I would let this one stand.

            But to your point, yes I do realize how out of touch I am with the “mainstream.” And I find it very sad that following the Constitution as intended is not mainstream. But my statement still stands. “The Constitution (as intended) allows for very little regulation” at the federal level. This is a true statement of fact. I don’t object to certain regulation. It should just be at the state and local level.

  7. James Fannin says:

    Deal, who supported Michael “tank driver” Dukakis after 8 years of Reagan and who now describes himself as a conservative Republican certainly has enough chutzpah but for someone who has represented the illegal alien capital of Georgia with all their chicken processors and raisers it would be the height of insincerity to suddenly feign concern over either illegal aliens in the 9th district or gambling in Casablanca. More likely we will see an ad by Eric Johnson along these lines “I’m an architect, did you all know that? Is this sinking in yet and why am I only at 5 percent? Heck, I build things because I’m an architect and I will build a fence to keep illegal aliens out and create jobs if we can just find enough illegal aliens to build it. “

  8. Progressive Dem says:

    I prefer this Tim James TV commercial. It explains those awkward pauses in his delivery.

  9. seenbetrdayz says:

    Xenophobia? Really? lol. It sounded like stating the obvious to me. —Almost like it was something that didn’t really have to be said but then again, for some people, it must have come as a shock that people in Alabama speak English (or at least some variation of it).

  10. ACConservative says:

    Poor Dale Peterson… those thugs and criminals conspired to keep him out of the Ag Commish’s office. Now poor Alabama will be run by someone who doesn’t give a rip.

    • GAPoliticsisfun says:

      As a career politician, Johnson was in leadership position in the state senate. Eric couldn’t get it done then, why should we trust that he can get it done as Governor?

      It’s all about who you trust. I don’t trust a career politician who used his lifelong political connections to funnel a $1,000,000 in contracts to his company, and than forgets to report $300,000 of it.

      • Mayonnaise says:

        And the Hillary Handel supporters continue to attack a private business that employs private citizens for providing private services. Gotta run, a ton of phone-banking to do today. 🙂

        • Mozart says:

          Exactly, Mayo. Perhaps the Handelistas wish to change government so that only government workers will design and construct buildings, and thus have a permanent government workforce, all centered around just building and maintaining government buildings.

          • John Konop says:

            It is corporatist on both sides like you guys destroying the country! A no bid insider business deal by politicians in power is not capitalism. In fact Adam Smith the father of capitalism warned about this behavior destroying the system in his famous economic book “Wealth of Nations”.

            • Mozart says:

              And, Albert Einstein, father of the atomic bomb, once said “To see with one’s own eyes, to feel and judge without succumbing to the suggestive power of the fashion of the day, to be able to express what one has seen and felt in a trim sentence or even in a cunningly wrought word- is that not glorious? It is not a proper subject for congratulation? (Albert Einstein, 1934)”

              • John Konop says:

                Why do you think a seating legislator federal or state should be able to bid on government work paid by tax payers? In the private sector it would be called a conflict of interest.

                • Mozart says:

                  Okay, educate me, John: Layout, point by point, the line of authority that would make a part-time legislator (like a state senator) have undue influence over, say, the public works official in charge of issuing an RFP and collecting the bids for a library being designed and built on a college university campus?

                  Lay it out. Don’t assume. Tell us how there is a “conflict of interest”.

        • Lady Thinker says:

          Phone banking for the Thief Johnson? Don’t forget to tell them about the unreported $280,000.

  11. Doug Grammer says:


    Is this thread your way of saying Deal is not as done as you had proclaimed?

    • Chris says:

      I think it was either Deal or the GOP’s chances of keeping West Paces Ferry are done.

      • Doug Grammer says:

        I thought that you were on the Deal Done bandwagon as well? I think that Deal has a good chance of winning, but he’s not the only GOP one that has a chance of winning.

        • Icarus says:

          He has no chance of winning a general election, and the only way he can win a primary isn’t anywhere near the strategy he started with.

  12. Cool Hand Luke says:

    “His D.C. base of support, both in fundraising and for grassroots, is all but gone.” “….other D.C. establishment insiders are already quietly shifting support to either Eric Johnson or Karen Handel. ”

    Icarus, aside from Price, what do you base this comment on?? Is there any truth to it all? Or is it another situation where you are spreading rumours to get your candidate, Handel, to make the run-off?

    For instance, both you and Handel approached one of Deal’s County Chairs in order to get her to jump ship. You told her that Deal’s own polling data showed him losing support and behind Handel. She checked with the Deal campaign and they told her what you said was a flat out lie.

    She felt very uncomfortable and didn’t appreciate being dealt with in such a fashion.

    It appears that much like Handel, her supporters will say anything to get votes……

    • Icarus says:

      “For instance, both you and Handel approached one of Deal’s County Chairs in order to get her to jump ship. ”

      I have absolutely know idea what or who you are talking about. I haven’t approached anyone. I’m asked my opinion often. I have no idea if I’ve talked to one of Deal’s county chairs, nor do I know who they are.

      But I will state that some of the people who originally were pushing me to support Deal are no longer interested in his candidacy.

      • Mozart says:

        That could mean a few different things, and you could not be accused of being dishonest on any one of them:

        1) Those people who originally pushed you to support Deal could have died, and thus are “no longer interested in his candidacy.”

        2) They are alive and are “no longer interested in his candidacy” because they moved to another state/country.

        3) They are alive and are “no longer interested in his candidacy” because they are still in the state and have changed their minds about Deal.

  13. slyram says:

    I had to watch the Alabama elections with Georgia on my mind. Artur Davis is a smart guy but Alabama isn’t ready for him being governor. He couldn’t get out of the Dem primary after voting against healthcare reform—he didn’t have automatic Black support after skipping a key Dem vote.

    Below is an article about House leader Jim Cyburn visiting the Augusta area after Barrow voted no on healthcare reform. But, Barrow was cool with Obama/Biden and Obama did that radio ad for him.

    Then I read that Andy Young and Shirley Franklin are supporting Roy Barnes. Of course, they respect Thrubert Baker but old friendships are old friendships. Will regular Black voters follow them and what does that mean for the Thurmond v. Isakson race? Isakson has some old connections in every Georgia community.

    And party switcher Rep. Parker Griffith only got 33 percent of the vote in the GOP primary. Remember, Black conservative Les Phillip was in that race and he only got 16 percent of the vote. He would have been better off running in Artur Davis’s old House seat.

    These national Dem groups are not tossing money to candidates who badmouth the Dem agenda. Putting on a D or R jersey doesn’t mean you get automatic support this year.

    They might mess with Barrow a little but Marshall should be seriously concern.

  14. rightofcenter says:

    With all due respect, to proclaim he has no chance to win a general is just stupid. If he is the Republican nominee, he will have an excellent chance to win. Actually, any of the candidates will have an excellent chance (even the Ox). Does that mean he will win? No, but I still think any of the Republicans have at worst a 40/60 chance of winning against Barnes. That is, unless there are pictures of them with a live boy or a dead girl.

Comments are closed.