Michelle Nunn says She Won’t Necessarily Vote for Harry Reid as Democratic Leader

There was another chance for Michelle Nunn to define who she would be as a U.S. Senator. And in typical fashion, she declined to do so.

At the Georgia Chamber of Commerce event on Thursday, Nunn came under fire from David Perdue who said of her: “she’ll be nothing more than a proxy for Harry Reid and Barrack Obama. And nothing will change.”

Well Nunn wasn’t having any of that, firing off this burning response:

“The only team I’m playing for here is Georgia.

“I look forward to changing the composition in the leadership of the Senate. The way that we’re going to change Washington is to bring more people to recognize – to have the humility to recognize – that there are good ideas on both sides of the aisle…

“I will vote for the Democratic leader that I think best represents our capacity to get things done and move things forward…”

Things like this are why Michelle Nunn will lose the election. She seemingly flat out refuses to make any positive definition of what Michelle Nunn will be qua Senator Nunn. We have fluffy videos of her non-profit work and her personal life. But on every issue she’s done some wishy-washy dance down the middle while offering up some fluff.

I will now list every candidate in Georgia or elsewhere who has won using that strategy:

Regardless of how much Nunn says otherwise, she’s going to vote for Reid for leader (or whomever else the Democrats nominate). How do I know this? Because everyone votes for the nominee, especially freshman legislators, regardless of what they say on the campaign trail. So just be honest with voters. They might even respect and *gasp* vote for you.


  1. Michael Silver says:

    Someone should ask her …… Is Senator Reid doing a good job and should he be re-selected to lead the Senate? If not, will she vote for Senator McConnell?

    We all know she’s going to vote for Senator Reid, as you pointed out. Maybe we all get lucky and she votes “present”.

  2. Stefan says:

    Perdue is trying to run against Obama and Reid because it is his strongest argument. Running against Michelle straight up is a bad idea. If Michelle can defuse the argument that she and Reid are in lock step she might as well do so. I see your point that it is likely she will vote for Harry Reid and the Democratic majority hangs over the entire election, but this election isn’t, or at least shouldn’t be, about Obama and Reid. It should be about Michelle Nunn and David Perdue.

    • Ed says:

      Dude, we totally agree. IMO, these are both strong candidates who are running terribly weak campaigns. My beef is just that she’s got to start saying who she is instead of always deflecting. I don’t care *what* you believe, just give me something to work with.

      • Ken says:

        Ed, Has it occurred to you that Michelle Nunn can’t honestly say what she believes or who she’ll support because either 1) she hasn’t decided (which raises the question of why she’s running unless it’s for power); or, 2) she knows the majority of voters won’t like the answers.

        Once she comes clean with her positions then there will be plenty to run against.

        • Ed says:

          She won’t say anything because she’s too afraid to take a stance–it’s a classic move and a guaranteed way to lose. And when it comes to this, the vast majority of voters can barely recognize their own representatives. The vast majority of voters in Georgia probably have minimal opinions about Harry Reid beyond how you would expect them to feel once they know he’s a Democrat.

          • Ken says:

            Having just engaged in a discussion with a liberal on FB who thinks control of the US Senate doesn’t matter, then I can scarcely disagree with you.

            I think David Perdue should wrap Harry Reid and Barack Obama around Michelle Nunn’s throat like a bowtie.

            • Ed says:

              “Having just engaged in a discussion with a liberal on FB”

              My condolences (And I meant for getting in a political discussion on FB).

              • Ken says:

                Thanks, Ed. I appreciate that.

                With only six weeks left, I’m not sure Georgians will even know who the candidates are by November. I anticipate an unprecedented barrage of negative ads followed by TV screens filled with 39 mm holes.

  3. Mastodon says:

    Sorry, the election is not about individuals Perdue or Nunn. It is about who controls the Senate. She will help Dems control the Senate, caucus with the Dems and vote for Reid .

    • Stefan says:

      While I respect you as a metal band, I disagree with your point. We absolutely need a centrist caucus to defeat the stalemate in the Senate. If you have votes available from the other side of the aisle you can actually move good legislation forward. We have an opportunity to elect someone you can pitch good ideas to. Michelle has shown that she cares about outcomes, which is why she’d be great as a Senator. The guys we have up there now often care nothing for the actual result of their policies and actions. Keep in mind that Perdue is the result of kicking out Chambliss because he was too willing to work with others to achieve legislative goals. He won’t make the same “mistake” that Saxby made.

  4. Jon Lester says:

    Considering how quickly she sided with Democratic leadership and announced her support for bombing Syria last summer, why would she give any more thought to voting for majority leader?

  5. Bobloblaw says:

    Winning candidates dont make comments like this. They dont have to.

    BTW she will vote for Harry Reid or else shell be on the worst committees.

  6. saltycracker says:

    Agree, her statement is exactly what voters are turned off about…..as is her discredited pillow talk.

    Perdue is more likely to be his own man, but voters are going to need to see it, from a positive direction.

  7. Billy Jack says:

    Ms. Nunn’s greatest appeal coming into this race appeared to be that she was authentic. But that authenticity has faded as she has declined every opportunity to reveal where she stands on issues of concern to her prospective constituents and to say how she’ll vote if elected. I think she would have won more votes than she would have lost if she’d just come out and ‘fessed up and said “I’m Michelle Nunn, I’m a progressive Democrat, and proud of it!” Instead, we get ads with GHW Bush and Zell Miller. Her campaign will provide an enduring tribute to the old adage “Sometimes the smart play is not the smart play.” (okay, it’s not old…I just made it up. But it does fit:)

  8. objective says:

    unsure why the quoted comments are seen as so evasive or non-definitive.
    she states quite clearly she will vote for a Democratic leader, but seeks a moderate one.
    we don’t know all potential leadership candidates, from either party.
    sure, she’s dancing on the line of voting/not voting for Reid, but she’s diplomatically stating she would like an alternative.

    • Ken says:

      She’s “diplomatically stating” she knows the majority of Georgians loathe Harry Reid.

      Michelle Nunn chose to run as a Democrat, not as an independent. She chose to run as a Democrat because she is a Democrat; albeit a particularly craven one who runs from her party whenever possible during an election, but after the election she will huddle up with Harry Reid to support leftist judicial nominations, Obamacare, and every idiotic “green” proposal that comes down the pike.

  9. objective says:

    still not sure why everyone complains about the middle, even if its squishy.
    that means decisions can be based on actual circumstances.
    it means compromise is not only the goal, but possible.
    it means pragmatic solutions that incorporate bipartisan policy aspects.
    why must ppl be pre-committed to go to extremes?

    • Ken says:

      It also means people without solid philosophical foundations who have not thought through underlying principles. It means poll-driven politicians who are so insecure in their own beliefs that they are not qualified to lead anywhere but IN the polls.

  10. Ken says:

    Michelle Nunn, “I will not necessarily vote for Harry Reid for Senate Majority Leader . . . until he assures me he is NOT from the planet Melmack – and then I will do everything he asks.”

  11. Dave Bearse says:

    And how did the GOP candidates to a question about voting for the leadership? Kingston and Gingrey, who knew better, responded like Nunn.

    The other GaGOPers? Firm commitments against. Hardly unexpected from party of NO candidates though.

    The state’s Congressional delegation, like its economy under the GOP, is in decline. If you thought things would be improving because Broun was gone, you’d be wrong. Hice more than fills that void. I was no fan of Gingrey, but Loudermilk is unlikely to be a step in the right direction.

    Perdue wins, and either he’ll harm the state’s standing by voting against McConnell, or his perhaps first official act will be to do the opposite of what he said he’d do when campaigning. It’s a lose-lose of his own making.

    Quite the executive, that Perdue! Doing what it takes for personal benefit. Doing for the state, not so much.

    • Michael Silver says:

      That assumes McConnell gets re-elected. My dad is deep in Dem politics in KY and they are thinking Grimes will pull it off.

      His two reasons that he mentioned was that Obama’s war of coal has so devastated employment in Eastern KY, that Obamacare has turned out to be a hugely popular program since the people are getting essentially free health care because they are unemployed.

      Lexington is so filled with naturalized immigrants from socialist countries, that those votes will sway the election her way since they love Obama and Socialism.

        • Michael Silver says:

          The AJC hasn’t run a poll there yet. Just you wait.

          Grimes will be 8 points over McConnell when the AJC is done, along with finding out that Kentuckians hate Daniel Boone, coal, and guns.

Comments are closed.