State of the Governor’s Race

From the Associated Press:

After a week of news about Deal’s deep financial woes, Georgia Republicans are growing anxious about their nominee, who’d already been battered by ethics allegations during the summer primary season.

Democrats are pouring money into the race — the Democratic Governors Association announced it plans to spend another $1 million in the state, on top of $500,000 it has already spent. Republicans are running a barrage of ads linking Deal’s Democratic opponent, former Gov. Roy Barnes, to President Obama.

A new poll taken even before revelations about Deal’s financial troubles showed the race to be a dead heat.

“He should step down as the nominee,” said Tom Perdue, a well-known Georgia GOP campaign operative who ran U.S. Sen. Saxby Chambliss re-election race in 2008.

“People in the party feel betrayed and they feel cheated because if they had known about all of this earlier, there would have been a different nominee.”

Still, the Georgia race suddenly seems to be a tossup following back-to-back news stories about Deal’s finances.

H/T to Progressive Dem.

122 comments

  1. MediaGuyAtl says:

    Toss up? King Roy is in! The Dems should spend their money somewhere else. I’m thinking within a week, Deal will be down in the polls. What a raw Deal the Republicans got on this one! Pardon the pun, but this is absolutely stunning.

    The Christian Coalition is not buying Deals excuses and Tom Perdue, if the AP is right, pretty much seals the Deal..

    I know, sorry for the puns but it’s hard to avoid, especially when you are dealt a losing hand!

    • “The Christian Coalition is not buying Deals excuses and Tom Perdue, if the AP is right, pretty much seals the Deal..”

      Besides Saxby, no one in Georgia pays attention to the womanizing a** hole that is Tom Perdue. CC is basically a nonfactor in Georgia. All of the passion and workers left when Sadie exited or have joined with Reed’s Faith and Freedom group now.

      • ACCmoderate says:

        Yeah, because if there’s one guy that you should be following it should be the morally upright Ralph Reed.

        • I was making a comment about the ineffectiveness of the present day CC in Georgia. They have all abandoned the organization for other groups. I could give two poops about Ralph Reed.

          “Jerry Luquire, head of the Georgia Christian Coalition, said Deal must do more to clear up the confusion surrounding his finances. Luquire said voters — wrongly or rightly — have been left with the impression that “something is wrong.””

          Like Tyler and some of the frequent posters on PP, Jerry Luquire is still whining about his ill-advised support of the losing candidate in the GOP Primary. It’s hard for some folks to move on. Life is short guys, get over it.

          • CobbGOPer says:

            “Life is short guys, get over it…” and vote for Nathan Deal. Fixed that for you.

            And no, think I’ll just leave that box blank. But I WILL vote for Carol Porter.

      • Won’t be a runoff. This tide will turn faster than you Dumcrats can blink. Deal wins easy, and it’ll be an early night. The fun will be watching GOP House returns and seeing your girl Nancy give up the gavel.

        • ACCmoderate says:

          It’ll be awesome watching O’Donnell, Angle, and Paul all winning election to the Senate.

          Wait, no it won’t. Those people are an insult to such a venerable institution.

          • Bill30097 says:

            ACCmoderate? You are as moderate as Comrade Obama you phoney litard. Having a murderer such as Ted Kennedy was the insult to the “venerable” institution!

              • ACCmoderate says:

                Certainly no less than Rand “segregation isn’t so bad” Paul or Christine “it’s totally cool to pay my rent with campaign donations” O’Donnell.

                Byrd renounced his membership in the Klan and became a leader on a number of Civil Rights advancements. Paul apparently thinks that the segregation and discrimination that Byrd renounced and later fought against wasn’t so bad.

                As for Christine O’Donnell, if God didn’t want us masturbating, he would have given us shorter arms.

                  • Gerald says:

                    He is wrong on O’Donnell, but right on Byrd. Also, Republicans have a history of double standards regarding the former KKKers and segregationists that remained Democrats like Byrd, and the ones who became Republicans. If Byrd had switched parties and moved to the right (instead of remaining a Democrat and going further to the left), we’d never hear about his KKK background from the GOP. (Although I do admit, we’d hear plenty about it from the left.)

                • DTK says:

                  @ACCmoderate

                  If you can find a quote where Paul said “segregation isn’t so bad” I’ll give you $100.

                  If you were fluent in political theory, you’d understand Paul’s objection to the Civil Rights Act on libertarian grounds. Ultimately, I think this position is wrongheaded, but it’s intellectually defensible, and it doesn’t spring forth from racial animosity.

                  • Gerald says:

                    Two things.

                    Lots of segregationists began looking for politically acceptable ways to support and promote de facto segregation after they finally accepted the reality that de jure segregation (i.e. Jim Crow laws) was never coming back. For a lot of these, libertarianism became very attractive, because libertarianism allowed them to cast discrimination in terms of freedom of association, freedom of contract, and small government instead of explicitly racial terms, but they ultimately had the same goals as the segregationists did. The issue is that pretty much all of these types had no use for libertarianism before the Civil Rights Act began to be enforced (quite the contrary, a lot of them were Democrats) and they most certainly wouldn’t be libertarians if Jim Crow were still the rule of the day. And a lot of them had no use for the Republican Party after its influential evangelicals began to embrace integration. Bottom line: Ron Paul and the rest of these Ludwig von Mises Institute types were segregationists and racialists who found refuge in libertarianism. The von Mises institute, Paul supporters, and Paul himself used to traffic in some very nasty racist stuff not so long ago before they were forced by a variety of factors to adopt a race neutral form of libertarianism. Still, a lot of the original undercurrent remains. For instance, the von Mises people still bitterly resent Abraham Lincoln, and are reflexively anti-war as a result. That is the first point.

                    The second point is that Rand Paul is not his father. As a result, he is untainted by the race-baiting (and Jew-baiting) of Ron Paul’s past, and also of the original von Mises ideology. So, when he objects to the Civil Rights Act on libertarian grounds, he is sincere, more Barry Goldwater than the von Mises people including his father. Naive and impractical mind you (by, for instance, consider that the bigots still demanded that blacks pay taxes and fight in a military to support a society that systematically denied blacks equal rights and opportunity before the Civil Rights Act) but sincere. I guess you can say that where Ron Paul is a pure paleocon, Rand Paul is a paleocon that has been influenced by neoconservatism.

                    • DTK says:

                      @Gerald

                      Good post. I agree wholeheartedly that plenty of segregationists used whatever argument they could find to fit their personal disapproval of integration, including libertarian ones.

              • CobbGOPer says:

                Yeah and Strom Thurmond was such a standup guy right? That guy was dead five years before his people decided they could finally retire his lifeless corpse.

  2. The Barnes machine is rewriting history from every angle. It is important that we need to have a unified voice detailing why it is imperative that Nathan Deal is elected governor.

    1. Reapportionment: Georgia is poised to gain 1 or 2 NEW congressional districts. If you recall the damage Barnes did the last go around had Georgia looking like and Barnes will certainly be accommodating to Democrats
    2. Appointments: The governor makes Judicial Appointments as well as many other state government service appointments. A Barnes administration is going to take care of Barnes contributors and Democrats.
    3. 2012 – We don’t need Georgia becoming a doormat for Obama.

    Nathan is a fine upstanding individual.

    • jm says:

      1. Deal is not a “fine upstanding individual.” If he was, we would have known about all this earlier. Also, if he was, he wouldn’t have quit the House the way he did. Its as much about perception as it is about reality. He ran away because he was going to be investigated. Brave men don’t run away.

      2. People vote for several reasons. Most of us probably vote on party lines and the issues, that’s because we are political beings. Civic minded citizens who vote often vote based on who’s got character. Still others vote when their pissed off, or to vote against somebody, some vote based on names that they know, or people they’ve met, or for a friend running for office, and some vote based on the alphabet – whose name comes first on the ballot. And then some people who would vote, just stay home, which hurts the guy they would have voted for.

      3. What they don’t look for – words like “reapportionment”, and “judicial appointments”,

      • Barnes is an ambulance chasing, dirt bag trial lawyer who earns money from the misfortunes of others. He made millions off of contracts with the state using his connections as the “former boss.”

        People aren’t dumb. They will read between the lines. They see a good man being eaten up and spit out by the media and Roy’s sleazy personal attacks on his family.

        They will hear the heart felt statements of Congressman Deal’s youngest daughter coming to the defense of her parents. http://blogs.ajc.com/political-insider-jim-galloway/2010/09/22/a-note-from-nathan-deals-daughter-now-its-personal/

        Voters don’t sit around any more and accept petty attacks just because they hear a TV or radio spot. They will get this one right.

        I have been trying tirelessly to get y’all ready for the inevitable, so once again I need everyone, including Tyler, to repeat after me…”Governor Deal, Governor Deal, Governor Deal, Governor Deal!”

        • ACCmoderate says:

          A. Deal’s daughter is spouting the same “the big bad media is bullying us” crock that her daddy is.

          B. You never answered me before Luke, what is the problem with trial lawyers and why are they detrimental to our judicial system? Furthermore, why is Deal no less sleazy for being a criminal defense lawyer and putting potentially guilty individuals back on the street?

        • kyleinatl says:

          Someone should tell Katie Deal that when you run for Governor, these kinds of things come out and no amount of whining and crying is going to change that. If you can’t stand the heat…

          • The public has a right to defense and a right to seek damages. People know the difference from an honest attorney and one like John Edwards (Roy’s Boy), that “channells the spirit of a dead girl in the court room” to gain sympathy from a jury and millions for himself. If you and Roy want to defend trial lawyers to the business owners of Georgia, please, please, go down that road.

            Who knows maybe there are enough smokers that still want to sue tobacco companies for making the menthols so tasty, and maybe there are enough folks in Georgia who want to seek damages for that hot coffee that fell in their laps this morning. I could be wrong.

            “Governor Deal, Governor Deal, Governor Deal, Governor Deal, Governor Deal…”

        • Gerald says:

          You can support Deal and acknowledge that he has severe ethics issues. Quit claiming that he is “this good man being chewed up and spit out by the media.” It was REPUBLICANS who first raised Deal’s ethics issues, and it was for that reason that Tea Party types and a lot of reform-minded REPUBLICANS and CONSERVATIVES backed Karen Handel. However, the establishment came out for Deal, big time, and you guys were stuck with him. Fine. But you know perfectly well that if these same ethics issues were being made against a Democrat, you’d be all over them. Just because Deal has ethics issues doesn’t mean you need to have them to. Your party nominated a flawed candidate. Get over it and move on.

      • Doug Grammer says:

        Jm,

        It’s acceptable for KH or EJ to leave their posts to seek Gov., but not ND?

        I’ll agree with you on your second point, but you sort of disprove your third point. People vote for several reasons.

    • bowersville says:

      I’m growing weary of the partisan hackery. This election is not about your partisan BS.

      Let me capitalize this so you know I’m shouting.

      IT’S ABOUT GEORGIA AND WHAT’S BEST FOR GEORGIA. I DON’T CARE WHAT’S BEST FOR PARTISANS, I CARE ABOUT WHAT’S BEST FOR GEORGIA.

    • ACCmoderate says:

      1. Even if Barnes is governor, reapportionment will still be carried out by a Republican legislature and will still require the approval of the DOJ. If anything, we might get a Congressional map that is a lot more fair than the recently gerrymandered monstrosities we’ve had in the past.

      2. What makes you believe that Barnes will appoint judges in some overly biased manner? Better yet, what makes you think that Perdue hasn’t for the past 8 years? What makes you think that Barnes’ political backers are any less capable of doing their jobs than the friends and allies that Perdue has appointed?

      I’ve met and conversed with a number of judges in this state, some appointed by Barnes some appointed by Perdue. All of them are astute legal minds and good judges.

      Additionally, in terms of the national Democratic party, Barnes is a conservative Democrat. You aren’t going to see someone like Elena Kagan getting nominated for a judgeship here in Georgia.

      3. Last I checked, the people are still going to be voting in 2012. Having Barnes in office in 2000, didn’t assure Al Gore a victory in that year’s presidential election.

      The only way Barnes’ election in 2010 positively impacts Obama in 2012 is if the crushing reality of Barnes as governor causes every Republican in the state to move to Alabama.

      Then again, maybe Barnes will attract enough high-paying, well-educated jobs here to the state to throw off the balance between Democrats and Republicans. Or, Obama’s stimulus will finally work and he’ll ride to a landslide victory. It seems, Maurice, that in attempting to instill fear about Barnes, you’ve instilled all of us here at PP with the hope for his eventual election.

      • Doug Grammer says:

        Barnes will veto any fair maps. He doesn’t like them. Then it will go to the DOJ and President Obama’s judges to draw the lines. Good luck on getting fair lines from them.

        Those maps could put more Dems in federal office, and help raise $, for President Obama.

        • Gerald says:

          Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong wrong wrong. The DOJ and Obama judges would be overruled by a Supreme Court that has at least 5 and as many as 7 judges that are on record as opposing partisan gerrymandering. The Supreme Court stepped in to stop a Texas redistricting process that had gotten out of control a few years ago, remember? And the court has shifted to the right since then.

          • Doug Grammer says:

            So you want to trust the SCOTUS with the maps for Georgia? How far does it shift to the right with Justicies Kagan and Sotomayor? 4 out of the last 6 appointees have been by Dem Presidents. Filing with the SCOTUS for fair maps is a step we don’t have to take and money we don’t have to spend if we elect Congressman Deal.

            I notice you didn’t say “Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong wrong wrong., Gov. Barnes likes fair maps.”

            • Gerald says:

              4 of 6 judges have been appointed by Democrats, but all 6 appointees have simply replaced someone with the same ideology as before. Clinton’s 2 and Obama’s 2 replaced liberal judges, and Bush’s 2 replaced conservative judges. However, Roberts and Alito are more conservative than Rehnquist and particularly O’Connor, while the Clinton-Obama judges aren’t as liberal as the ones that they replaced (a fact that the left is very disappointed with … they want another Earl Warren badly).

              But the Supreme Court is not going to draw a map. Instead, as the Texas case just a few years ago (and this was before Alito replaced O’Connor on the court) showed, the SCOTUS is not going to allow blatant partisan gerrymandering by either the state legislature or the DOJ. So, because state legislature will still be Republican, the worst that we could get from Barnes on the redistricting front would be district lines guided mainly by geography as opposed to party. Some, like Jim Wooten, claim that such an approach would still slightly favor the Dems because of Georgia still being under the voting rights act. But if you were to go by geography instead of partisanship, I cannot imagine a map that would give Georgia more Democratic representatives than Republican ones, voting rights act or no voting rights act.

              • Doug Grammer says:

                So the SCOTUS has NOT shifted to the right, it has stayed where it was/is.

                Gov. Barnes does NOT have a track record of drawing lines based on geography. View the maps that are provided and explain them in geographical terms.

        • “Barnes will veto any fair maps. He doesn’t like them.”

          Could you show some sort of evidence of this? I’d like to see where Barnes has ever said he didn’t like fair maps.

          • Gerald says:

            There is plenty of evidence, the best example being that multi-member district scheme that he implemented FOR THE METRO ATLANTA AREA ONLY in order to keep the state legislature under Democratic control. It was the most blatant attempt to disenfranchise voters from a single party (GOP) and a single race (whites) since before the voting rights act, and he got away with it only because multi-member districts are legal and have long been used for nonpartisan purposes, so it was impossible to prove that Barnes implemented a representation plan that has plenty of precedent for legitimate uses elsewhere for partisan and racist reasons here.

            Look, I don’t like the idea of Barnes presiding over another round of redistricting either, and I am not even a Republican. However, the GOP made their own bed on this issue by refusing to nominate Handel, who has no ethics problems, had the support of Sarah Palin and the Tea Party and the metro Atlanta moderates, and would have a 10 point lead over Barnes, and Barnes would be totally completely unable to run attack ads against her because there is nothing to attack her on.

            But the Georgia GOP primary voters decided to run with the GOP establishment that has been soundly rejected in other states (Florida, South Carolina, Delaware, New York, Nevada, Alaska, Kentucky). They created this problem for themselves, so no point bringing up the Barnes bogeyman specter. If Barnes was so bad and defeating him was such a priority, they should have nominated someone without a history of severe ethics problems.

            • Doug Grammer says:

              Gerald,

              Do you get tired of being wrong on facts? I can’t speak for the rest of the state, but I remember multi-member districts in NW Georgia.

              Barnes isn’t the bogeyman. He’s the real thing. He’s approved unfair maps before. You are dreaming if you think that Gov. Barnes wouldn’t be attacking Sec. Handel if she had won the nomination. That’s all he’s done since the primary has been over. The reason? He’s down and the only way he thinks he has a shot is to sling mud. Yes, I think he’d sling mud at a woman. Congressman Deal is our nominee. Some haters/whiners may not like it, but he is. Out of the two people running (who have a shot at winning) only one has proven he likes unfair maps: King Roy.

          • rightofcenter says:

            David,
            You must be really young. Do a little research on the abomination of redistricting that took place in 2000 at the hands of King Roy.

        • ACCmoderate says:

          Wow. Where to begin…
          The DOJ only pre-clears the maps, they don’t get to draw new ones. Any map not approved by the DOJ will be re-drawn by Georgia… not Obama’s judges.

          Any cases involving secion V preclearance are tried in front of the US District Court in DC. None of the judges on that bench were appointed by your buddy Obama.

          It’s safe to assume that Barnes understands the political realities of having a Republican controlled legislature. He’s not going to hold out for a steadfastly liberal electoral map.

          At the same time, the GOP understands those same poltical realities. They’re not likely to push an overly gerrymandered map that is sure to get vetoed.

          The result is, hopefully, a map that is fair and reflective of the people who call this great state home. I don’t think that’s too much to ask for.

    • CobbGOPer says:

      And by the way, reapportionment is the purview of the legislature, not the governor. And I don’t expect anything to change in that arena, regardless whether Roy wins. So take that strawman arguement somewhere else.

      • Doug Grammer says:

        Reapportionment has to be approved by the Gov. All bills are passed by the legislature and then sigend by the Gov. The GOP members won’t have enough votes to override a veto of fair maps.

  3. GOPwits says:

    Deal has misled the public about his financial situation including failing to disclose loans on required disclosure forms. He has huge ethical shortcomings in the fact that if not for the state of Georgia and the special arrangement for the salvage business, he would not have the millions to loan his daughter and son-in-law. Additionally, we know that by looking at how he ran his congressional office that he doesn’t know how to follow the rules of his office.

    If Barnes wins, there will more than likely still be a Republican House and Senate to keep a check on his ego and power. I’d rather have someone that I disagree with as opposed to someone who not only needs the job and the house, but is a crooked politician only out for himself.

    It seems irrational to trust someone who cannot manage their own affairs to manage the state’s affairs.

  4. kolt473 says:

    King Roy like Dirty Harry, playing for keeps, wheres the KINGS money coming from? SEIU, OUT OF STATE? Atlanta has serious problems like all cities states do. KING ROY will fatten his nest egg if he regains control, corrupt party leaders have ran the decent ones off. I’m revisiting Monds he’ll probably siphon off votes from Barnes. I wish KAREN HANDEL still in, say how about a write-in vote for HANDEL? ANY TAKERS?

    • “KING ROY will fatten his nest egg if he regains control.”

      Hell, he’s done pretty good fattening it off of Croy Engineering contracts with the state for the past eight years. $5 million last year alone.

      “It’s good to be the King!” – Mel Brooks, History of the World Part 1.

      • ACCmoderate says:

        Oh, you mean the stake in Croy Engineering he sold? You mean the money he made as a private citizen? Darn that Roy Barnes for being a successful businessmen, we don’t need successful people running this state! We need people with at least 4 million dollars of debt.

        At least Roy gets rid of his cash cows before running for office. Deal, well he’s the polar opposite… he gets into office and then sets up lucrative cash cows.

          • Gerald says:

            Neither Roy or Deal are anywhere near as good as the Bush family, who have been at this game for decades. Look it up. And you voted for Bush twice right? And his father twice also if I am correct? And his father twice when he was Reagan’s VP, right? Casting stones from glass houses …

            • Well, with membership in the Skull and Crossbones Society, you get access to Saudi Kings, Texas oil fields, baseball clubs, etc. It’s all just handed to you without question. Then you and your fellow Bilderbergers get together and manipulate foreign currencies…

              You’re smart Gerald.

              • Gerald says:

                You did a great job at mocking me, but you did a horrible job at disputing the facts on their merits. Oh gee, I wonder why? Because they are 100% true. The Bush family has been playing their political connections for profit for nearly 100 years. But it’s OK when Republicans do it, right?

        • GOPwits says:

          Facts really get in the way of some of the partisans don’t they?

          Roy Barnes sold his interest in the engineering firm to prevent a conflict of interest.

          Nathan Deal created a business (salvage yard) after the State Senate created a program to inspect totaled cars’ titles so that he could benefit from the largess of the state. Remember, he was the Democratic President Pro Tem at the time the legislation passed and he created his business. This special relationship enabled Nathan Deal to become a millionaire. It is from these millions that he was able to help his family (a noble gesture mind you).

          Not to mention, Deal used his position and office as a Member of Congress to try and protect this gravy train (special relationship with the state).

          Only recently, have we found out that this was only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to Deal’s shortcomings. He’s got more debt than he’s worth and is clearly going to have to sell everything he owns just to meet the loans that are coming due, unless of course he refinances the loan and pays it off with his government funded pension.

          Barnes by contrast made his money in his profession – like it or not – as an attorney – a very successful one at that. Ask anyone who has been up against him in a courtroom – an ambulance chaser he is not.

          Bottom line – Nathan Deal is misleading the public and cannot be trusted. Georgia needs a Governor who has learned from his mistakes and who will lead with transparency, ethics, and integrity.

      • Gerald says:

        Oh please. Republicans – including Nathan Deal – do this stuff all the time. You just whine when Democrats do it. Where’s the complaints over the Republicans that got rich off all those Iraq reconstruction contracts? So, it’s OK for you to complain about it but not Cynthia McKinney?

  5. hewhoone says:

    Where are all those establishment Republicans and Huckabee supporters that supported Deal now? Would Eric Johnson like to comment on the candidate he endorsed in the runoff?

    • Uh,,,, Mr. Day, Roy Barnes, in his campaign ads has indicated his agenda is to strip tax credits from business. Now, pray tell, how does eliminating tax credits from the JOB CREATORS do a darn thing for Georgia’s economy and the middle class. The fear is if this self serving Obama loon gets elected. If I remember correctly, your man promised the moon and stars to everyone. His fat cat pals cleaned up, while the rest of the nation watches the national debt destroy our society and our economy.

      Roy Barnes probably ought to write a few books and put out some infomercials on how to amass $16,000,000 in 8 years. Seems the only one benefitting in Georgia is Roybama….

      • ACCmoderate says:

        Again, screw Barnes for making money as a private citizen. We’ve got a guy that is smart enough with money that he can make $16 million in 8 years on one side and a guy who is so inept with his pocketbook he racks up $5 million in debt in a shorter amount of time.

        Which one should be in charge of our tax dollars.

        • rightofcenter says:

          ACC,
          According to his financial records, Roy Barnes has over $5 million in debt. So you may want to reword your argument.

      • Gerald says:

        And what has cutting all these taxes done for the economy? A lot of you are doing your best to ignore the fact that the economy tanked while a tax-cutting Republican president was in the White House and a tax-cutting Republican governor was running Georgia, and both of them had large congressional majorities. Are we supposed to judge them by their results, their record, or are we simply supposed to cut taxes whether it actually works or not?

        We cut taxes, and it didn’t result in job growth, and wage growth hasn’t occurred in over 10 years, even during the brief periods of economic growth that we had during the Bush presidency. And after 8 years of flat wages and an economy that alternated between expansion and contraction, the bottom completely fell out. That’s what happened despite all those tax cuts. Period.

  6. lucyknowling says:

    Any voter that would vote for Deal must be brain dead. Anyone that has those kind of personal financial problems will not have the ability to focus or dedicate themself to handle the problems of this state. Also who’s to say that he would not sell the state up to the highest bidder for his personal gain. Don’t see alot of morality in his actions!

  7. macho says:

    I don’t think Nathan should step down, since there would be no other Republican nominee. A mediocre Deal is still better than a partisan Barnes.

  8. GOPGrassroots says:

    Perdue is just hacked off that no real candidates want anything to do with him.

    Chris Cates up in the 9th…lol

  9. ACCmoderate says:

    I’ve stopped caring about why he lent the money.

    I just want him to be a man and fess up that he made a mistake instead of playing the victim and crying about the big, bad media.

    Leadership (which is what we ultimately want from a Governor) requires the ability to stand up and admit your own shortcomings. Crying and complaining is called cowardice.

  10. Progressive Dem says:

    Deal’s problems are going to depress turnout in Georgia. This will impact the congressional races, and help Marshall and Bishop. Thanks Nathan for doing your part to keep the House Democratic.

  11. Scott65 says:

    Getting back to the point of this post… If the Republicans think that pairing Roy Barnes with Obama is a winning strategy…I hope they’ve got a good plan B. That is the most ludicrous thing I’ve ever heard. Anyone with half a brain knows they are not at all similar, and that strategy will fail in GA. As long as the subject is Deal and his finances…and I’m guessing Democrats will try and keep that as the subject, Deal loses, and I dont see that narrative changing anytime soon. Any declaration that Deal will win easily is moronic at best. He has a lot of work to do to change the current message

    • jackson says:

      Barnes gave OVER the maximum legal amount to get Obama elected. Obama had to return the extra contributions. If that doesnt say he wasnt excited about Barack Obama, I dont know what does.

      I do think its funny that ya’ll say he made millions off the state (no true) but that is he also about to go bankrupt. Make up your mind. Is he really rich or really poor?

      The fact of the matter is the Bankruptcy of his daughter was public record over a year ago. Blaming him for not making it part of his campaign platform is ludicrous. All that info was available. Jsut because the press was/is to lazy to do their job and waited for Barnes to feed it to them is not Nathan Deal’s fault.

      But again, I make my point that I have made on other posts, ya’ll are so easily manipulated by Barnes into talking about non-issues that you actually dont even discuss what he did. Last in education. First in job losses. In state tuition for illegal aliens. Drivers licenses for illegal aliens. Lobbying state officials and making millions doing it. But the hater are right, we really need to be talking about how his son in law didnt fill out his paperwork right.

      BTW, after millions spend on tv and thousands of internet ads, he’s still losing to Nathan Deal, without Deal even putting up a commercial. So why are people talking about Deal even considering getting out of the race. Yeesh. Ya’ll really are pretty dumb.

      • AubieTurtle says:

        People who make millions, legally or illegally, ethically or unethically, go bankrupt all the time. I’m not sure why you think the two things are mutually exclusive.

  12. Sick of Partisan Politics says:

    OK – so most of us that aren’t die-hard fans of the University of Democrat or the University of Republican will agree – both Barnes and Deal are very poor choices with serious ethical problems…

    At times it seems as if this is college football and not something as important as RUNNING THE STATE OF GEORGIA.

    Democrats and Republicans – Give us better candidates!

    • Doug Grammer says:

      The primary is where political parties (who have a chance of winning) pick their nominees. You may not like them, but Deal and Barnes are the nominees. Now it’s up to the voters to decide from them which will be Governor. It will be one of them.

        • Doug Grammer says:

          What part of what I said isn’t true? If I am in the Mafia, shouldn’t I be getting paid? I can make the claim the Ninth is the most Republican District in the state and one of the top GOP Districts in the nation. I support our nominees and I am still thinking sweep.

      • Meanwhile voter participation, activism, and public trust go right down the toilet. Ya know, some folks are going to actually have to live under the government one of these “nominees” creates. Forgive them if they’re a bit worried they’ve been given sh*t choices.

        Keep those blinders on, old man.

        • Doug Grammer says:

          The Ninth voted more in the GOP primary and in the GOP run off than any other C0ngressional District. I’m not worried if CD’s that are likely to support someone else don’t come out in full force. If the people who support my candidate vote and the ones who support someone else stay home. That’s just fine with me.

          If you don’t understand that, you are the one wearing blinders, young guy.

  13. GOPwits says:

    It’s sad that the only reason anyone can make for voting for Deal is reapportionment. Well, as I’ve said many times before, facts are really getting in the way of things around here.

    So, for the record, the legislature draws the maps and the Governor signs or vetos the plan. Even if the Republican legislature drew insanely partisan maps and Barnes vetoed them, it would be up to the Republican Legislature to AGAIN redraw the maps.

    I really hope that we can stick to some facts around here…

    • Doug Grammer says:

      Reapportionment is not the only reason to vote for Congressman Deal, but reapportionment is the only issue that should be guaranteed to stay in effect for the next 10 years, it will have implications on Georgia’s congressional make up, and on the composition of the state legislature. I think that makes it important. When FPP wants to talk about issues such as jobs, taxes, transportation, and so on, we can discuss those issues one at a time a look at the differences between Gov. Barnes and Congressman Deal on those issues. In the meantime, I’m trying to keep my head low so I don’t get hit with the mud that’s being thrown.

Comments are closed.