Allan Williamson qualifies for State House District 82

I’m glad to hear that Allan closing in on the signatures necessary to qualify. He’s a hard worker and has my support in his bid for State House District 82. Congrats on qualifying Allan! Now go get ’em!

ATLANTA – Local businessman and political activist Allan Williamson has qualified and paid the $400 filing fee to run for State Representative of House District 82. Williamson is closing in on the nearly 1,300 signatures he needs to be on the ballot as an independent in the fall. Because the incumbent announced he would not run for re-election after the qualifying period closed, Williamson’s only chance to be on the ballot is to gather signatures via petition –an arduous task that is rarely successful in Georgia.

“I have met thousands of voters as my team and I have canvassed this district,” said Williamson. “This district is blessed with many involved and educated voters who all agree we deserve a choice in selecting our State House Representative.”Politically active for many years, Williamson has won numerous leadership awards. As a project manager for a technology company, he has overseen multi-million dollar projects from inception to completion. An active member of his community, Allan belongs to the Tucker Civic Association; hosted the Randolph Estates Garden Club and is a member of the Northlake GMAC Toastmasters.

“I look forward to representing a community where my family has a long history,” said Williamson. “My grandparents both graduated from Tucker High School and my dad grew up on Dresden Drive when it was still a dirt road. We need a Representative in this district who knows this area, understands its needs, and who will represent the district with honor.”

Williamson and his wife, Leah, have an infant son, Eli. They attend Briarlake Baptist Church.

House District 82 includes the communities of Briarlake, Brockett, Embry Hills, Evansdale, Hawthorne, Henderson Mill, Heritage, Lakeside, Livsey, Midvale, Northlake, Pleasantdale and Tucker.

Please visit for more information.


  1. gaconservative2010 says:

    I’ve met Allan and wanted to help him but he has a real problem with the truth. That’s why he lost his bid for Georgia YR Chair. He exaggerates EVERYTHING. He moved into the district just last year but claims lifetime roots, and he doesn’t have a college degree (come on GOP – let’s get some candidates that actually have some education) but is saying he does.

    Allan is not the kind of guy we need wearing the GOP banner, and he’s certainly not someone that the PP folks should be cheerleading for. I mean, remeber this:
    the guy couldn’t even write his own thoughts, he had to steal them from Levitas.
    Mark my words – he is a disaster waiting to happen. We should focus on real up and coming talent, not him.

    • Bugs Dooley says:

      Allan did not ‘lose his bid for Georgia YR chair’, he dropped out to run for HD 82. If you really were who/what you portray yourself to be, I would think you’d have known that

  2. CasualObserver says:

    Is Allan Williamson a Bad Candidate? A Liar? Or just Dumb?
    In the press release above, Allan Williamson says:
    “I have met thousands of voters as my team and I have canvassed this district”
    Not to nit-pick, but this is just another example of Allan being a little bit too liberal with his speech.

    The minimum numerical amount referred to by the word “thousands” is 2000 (just so you know Allan…)
    What does this mean in the context of his statement?

    Option 1) Allan Williamson is a Bad Candidate:
    Williamson, who needs around 1300 signatures, has spoken to at least 2000 voters and has not gotten enough signatures yet. Following these numbers means that AT MINIMUM 45% of the voters he has spoken to have REFUSED TO SIGN HIS PETITION (good luck getting their votes or contributions Allan!).

    Option 2) Allan Williamson is a Liar:
    Williamson just decided to LIE about the number of people he has spoken to across the district. Great job Allan, way to start lying to voters before you’re even officially on the ballot.

    Option 3) Allan Williamson is just Dumb:
    Williamson DOESN’T UNDERSTAND the meaning of the words he is using. Which could really help him out when he needs to represent the district on anything relating to budgets and finance (i.e. most things in politics).

    So it’s up for a PeachPundit Vote! ?
    A) Bad Candidate
    B) Liar
    C) Just Dumb

    • iamnotasocialist says:

      Fair point. I mean, a very fair point.

      Oh, and I just would like to bring back up the fact that he cannot think for himself, or at least the website indicates that.

      • Doug Grammer says:

        Perhaps he has met thousands of voters but not all of them live in his district.


        If I were running as an independent, I would get many more signatures than required and continue to go door to door up until the day my signatures were due. This way I could be campaigning by going door to door, getting more signatures than required, and getting votes.

        • CasualObserver says:

          Please reread the statement above- it actually says he’s met thousands of voters while canvassing the district.

          I’m assuming that the people he’s meeting are at least registered in the district, this sort of “target list” information is usually compiled by campaigns before they go knock on doors (if it wasn’t, we should probably question the intelligence of the people running the campaign… no surprise there…)

          Ill be dealing with Mike below- look for an answer to your second option there…

          • Doug Grammer says:


            I know what the statement said. You fail to consider all of the different ways voters can be met while canvassing a district. Most would assume that means going door to door. I am sure that’s happening, but it could also mean standing outside a walmart or other store. it would be very easy to met someone who doesn’t live in the district that way. There’s also the smaller chance that the people on who’s doors he is knocking on may have guests (other voters not from that district.)

            Going door to door on the Fourth of July weekend is not desperation. It’s smart politics. Any weekend spent going door to door is smart campaigning, but I would guess the campaign may take time out to go to some event, but as above, you may run into voters not in the district.

            • polisavvy says:

              Door belling has helped win many an election. It’s definitely a smart, prudent thing to do.

    • Mike Hauncho says:

      Casualobserver – That was quite an insulting comment to post considering you know nothing about Allan, his campaign activities, or the status of his petition collection.

      As a personal friend of Allan’s, and someone who has devoted hours to helping collect signatures for him, I can vouch that Allan has talked to “thousands of voters… in this district.” Just because he, and his team of volunteers, go door to door does not mean that each voter they talk to is going to sign the petition. Homeowners are skeptical of people who come to their door. Many try to act like they are not home and others do all they can to get the person on their doorstep to move along. Plus, when someone you do not know knocks on your door and asks for your signature, address, and other information most people will not provide that information to a stranger, and rightfully so. We don’t live in the 1950’s where everyone knows their neighbor. We don’t even answer phone calls anymore if we don’t recognize the number. While Allan has focused his attention on Republicans and Independents, he has also reached out to Democrats. Because of this, many do not want to allow a conservative candidate to get on the ballot to challenge the lone Democrat. That is there right, but it is no fault of Allan that they decline. Allan needs to collect roughly 1,300 signatures to be a valid candidate on the ballot in November. But, the Democrats will work hard to void as many signatures as they can. Allan is working to collect far more than the minimum number necessary to qualify, just in case some are thrown out.

      In the future, please provide positive criticism or ways in which we can make the system more accessible to third party and independent candidates. Let’s start with ballot access and why we should have ways for candidates to collect signatures online, securely and legitimately.

      You wrote out a long post about something you know nothing about and it showed. Please think before you post.

      • CasualObserver says:


        Thank you for dedicating a whole paragraph to the various excuses as to why Allan has thus far not been able to rack up enough signatures. Really, it was a pleasure to read.

        Did you actually say that people try to act like they are not home when Allan is at their door knocking? (line 9 of your post)

        Also- the incredible amount of structural errors in your writing make your points almost indiscernible. Please work on that, or have someone edit your posts for you…

        To help people follow that awful piece of writing, I’ll try to highlight your main points for you…

        A) Allan wants to get more signatures than he needs- which is why he hasn’t turned in his petition.

        B) I should provide constructive criticism of Allan’s campaign, and the bad/evil/awful system that is making it so hard for him to qualify.

        To keep it simple for you we’ll address these one at a time….

        A) If Allen had enough legitimate signatures to qualify, he wouldn’t have to ask his volunteers to give up time during 4th of July weekend, with their families, to go and collect signatures in the heat-wave. That is a sign of DESPERATION.

        B) On the subject of ballot reform..
        Why would I support giving someone like Allan Williamson, who has no significant leadership experience and one of the worst resumes I have ever seen in a candidate running for public office, an easy way onto the ballot?

        You wrote a long post in a language you apparently know nothing about and it showed. Please edit before you post. You look foolish.

        I may not be linguistically perfect, but I understand the difference between “their” and “there” (line 19 of your post). Work on it Mike.

        • Mike Hauncho says:

          You have proven my point exactly. You failed to see the reason for my post and the flaw of your original argument. You couldn’t even spell his name correctly and it is in the title of the thread.

          Since I don’t know you I have no way of knowing what your experience is with ballot access. If you have had experience with them you are well aware that many “legitimate signatures” are tossed out because someone wrote in the wrong box, abbreviated Atlanta (ATL), are did not write in what county they were in. Case in point, just look at what Mary Norwood has to go through in Fulton.

          Allan is not forcing anyone to collect signatures this weekend. His friends and supporters gladly do it because they know and trust Allan. If anything, that is good for Allan because he will have the opportunity to ask for support on a day that so many remember the importance of our freedom and our right to vote. It’s not “desperation,” its commitment.

          Ballot reform is not about who you think should be allowed on the ballot. I seriously doubt the Democrats and Republicans run their candidates past you for approval prior to qualifying. Ballot reform is about allowing candidates who meet the requirements of the position to run for office without the government making them jump through hoops. It also appears that you would support keeping those without a stellar resume off the ballot. That could include many minorities, candidates with disabilities, and those who grew up in low income households. Your very argument shows why we need greater access, not less. You would prefer to keep people down and out rather than give the voters the right to decide for themselves. Wow.

          • CasualObserver says:


            There is no flaw in my argument- which is why you didn’t address any of the points I made about the problems with Allan’s statements. You just kept rambling about ballot reform (not relevant) and making excuses for why Allan cant get signatures (because he’s a bad candidate).

            Maybe you’re just not reading what I’m saying.

            Its not a “Maybe”, I DO prefer to keep awful candidates like Allan down. They are a waste of everyone’s time and money.

            Oh, and collecting signatures on July 4th weekend because you don’t have enough is DESPERATION. You’re living in a fantasy world if you think otherwise.

            Keep rambling, it’s the only way you will be able to keep the conversation away from Allan’s failings, and just how bad of a candidate he is.

            • CasualObserver says:

              Could I also point out: ONE of the TWENTY times that Allan’s name appears in my post it’s misspelled. If thats the best you’ve got, your in some trouble.

              Keep changing the argument, Allan’s resume, education, and his history of lying will all shine through eventually.

  3. Sarah Scott says:

    So college degrees equal great candidates? I personally would much rather have a candidate that has real world experience and not just a paper hanging on the wall. Also, as a member of the GYR, I can state that Allan did not lose a bid to become Chairman. He appropriately left the slate when he decided to run for State Senate District 82.

    While I understand that any idiot can have a website, a good website either takes the services of a great consulting firm (see Landmark or Stoneridge) or nothing better to do than sit in front of a computer all day. Allan has a full time job, is a new father and is busy collecting signatures to get on the ballot.

    Maybe if Georgia had decent ballot access, Allan could focus on his platform and website instead of walking door to door collecting signatures.

    • gaconservative2010 says:

      college degrees don’t equal better candidates, but don’t you agree that it would be better for our GOP candidates to have them? Its an achilles heal for Karen. And, it’s not the lack of a college degree, its about him lying about it.
      What point are you trying to make on the website? It doesn’t even make sense. It’s not the DESIGN of the website, its the CONTENT. You don’t steal from others and pass it for your own. Do you get that?
      I know your trying to defend Allan but you make him sound like a crybaby who is so busy he can’t do anything right and he has this herculean task to get on the ballot. Guess what? He chose this!

      • Bugs Dooley says:

        Now you are accusing him of lying about a college degree; where is your proof of that?
        Oh thats right you are just a troll throwing random accusations out there and hoping one will stick. It’s a long time until November, why don’t you just put down that Hot Pocket, come out of the basement, and get a little fresh air and sunlight for a change?

        • CasualObserver says:

          Look above at my post. Allan provides us with plenty of reasons to think he’s lying.

  4. Sarah Scott says:

    As someone who has volunteered to go door to door requesting signatures I will attest that 6 out of 10 people refused to answer the door even when it was evident they were home.

    It is obvious that Casual Observer has never been a grassroots campaigner. He would know that even if you are with or campaigning for a well-known candidate, there are people who will not open the door or answer even the most innocuous of questions. It is the nature of campaigning door to door. Just like phone banking, we are interrupting a person at home. Yet in asking for signatures for ballot access we are requesting very private information.

    Why be so against having a conservative candidate on the ballot? Afraid your Democrat friend will lose in November?

Comments are closed.