Stacey Adams is a Black Woman….
Former Georgia House Minority Leader Stacey Abrams (D) has won her state’s Democratic gubernatorial primary, making her the first woman to win a major-party nomination in Georgia as she seeks to become the first African-American female governor in U.S. history.
Abrams led former state Rep. Stacey Evans (D) by 74 percent to 26 percent of the vote with 31 percent of precincts reporting. The Associated Press has called the race.
Abrams, a Democratic rising star who’s long been talked up by party leaders, has spent years working to expand Georgia’s electorate by pushing to register more young and minority voters in the quickly diversifying state.
She easily bested Evans in this race after getting heavy support from the pro-choice EMILY’s List as well as a bevy of top surrogates including Sens. Cory Booker (D-NJ), Kamala Harris (D-CA) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT).
The race pitted two competing visions for the future of the Democratic Party against each other; Evans called for the Party to lean into a progressive vision and to excite new voters while Evans, who is white, stressed a more moderate message aimed at winning back the state’s long-dead Democratic coalition that was rooted in moderate white voters.
Abrams faces an uphill battle in her race for governor in the Republican-leaning state….
There are like 100 tweets from pundits cautioning that Adams has like a 30% chance of winning the Georgia Governor’s office come November….
30% chance is wildly optimistic.
A Black woman being elected Governor of a very red state like Georgia where the Democrats have been unsuccessful in electing a Governor or Senator in many years and racial politics lay just beneath the surface?
More like oh 5% and that’s fairly charitable.
If Abrams is elected Governor of Georgia it would be in a Democratic tsunami!
I’d give her about 30% if her opponent winds up being Brian Kemp, who seems to be running as a politically incorrect conservative cartoon character (gee wonder where that comes from) and less of a chance than that against the more substantial Casey Cagle.
There was lots of talk over the past two cycles about how Democrats had real chances in Georgia (with either a white man or a white woman), so I do not see why this would be any different unless one is claiming that the Democrats who voted for the white candidates (Carter’s grandson and Nunn’s daughter) would not vote for a black candidate. Black Democrats have been elected statewide in Georgia before.
The argument is that Abrams can best rally the base and turn out new voters.
But she is probably too left, for reasons other than race, to win.
Yes there has been a lot of “talk.”
What does that have to do with anything?
Democrats haven’t elected a Governor of Georgia in Twenty years ,nor have they been particularly competitive.
In 2014 the Democratic candidate received 44% of the vote,four years earlier 42% and that was for Roy Barnes who had earlier in the Nineties won Governor elections
There is no reason at all to believe that Abrams has even as good a chance as they did .So,no a 1 1in 3 chance is very optimistic.
Absent a major Democratic sweep and ahuge Black turnout ,along with some very changed voting patterns in Georgia ,there is no reason at all to think she has much of a chance to be elected Governor of Georgia
Then it’s more apt to say that Georgia has a problem electing Democrats than it is to stay they have a problem electing African-Americans.
Back in the 90s and into the last decade, black Democrats were easily elected in Georgia to Attorney General and Labor Commissioner (maybe something else too.)
Back in the Nineties there were many more historical Democrats,mostly people born in the twenties, thirties and forties.This was particularly pronounced in rural southern areas .
While some of these people voted for Republicans for President (see Nixon and Reagan),they still considered themselves Georgia Democrats (or Alabama Democrats, Mississippi Democrats,etc) and generally voted a Straight ticket in local and statewide races.
As this folks died out, their offspring who had been voting consistently Republican in presidential elections ,while often splitting their tickets in local and state elections ,not only began voting Republican fairly consistently ,but actually started calling themselves Republicans.
Georgia is almost a classic Republican State today.
All this “talk” about the Democrats making a comeback has been due to an influx of Hispanics.in the Peach State.For all this “talk” there exists no actual evidence to support that theory.
What’s the main difference?
Democrats have moved to the left and are continuing to do so, as the nomination of Ms. Abrams shows.
But that’s about ideology, not race.
And it’s also true that Ms. Abrams will wind up doing better in November than her white, more moderate opponent would have, because people (namely the Bernie Sanders crowd) will be more likely to come out to vote for her, and perhaps they could reap some benefits down the ballot.
I expect that every statewide winner in Georgia though this fall will be Republican (and that Ted Cruz, for all his faults, in TX, will win by double digits)
As much as you wish to deny it, there exists a racial component in southern elections.
Many of the people who moved into the Republican Party in the Deep South States were driven to do so by the perception that Blacks were coming to dominate the Democratic Party .No serious political scientist would deny this.There have been several volumes written on the subject by among others Earl and Merle Black , well known experts on southern politics.
I often find your “need” to absolve some (not all) in these southern Republican parties of racial reasons for their move into the GOP somwewhat baffling.
Having read many of your posts here and on the old site,I’m afraid you would find much of the language used and the racial views expressed in many areas in the Deep South in County Republican parties upsetting to say the least.Prominent national Republican and,to their credit many southern Republican leaders have commented on it.
It’s a lot better than it was twenty years agoI will admit but some of it is still there.
But believe what you want.
I am and always have been opposed to any instances of racism in the Republican Party (and of course it goes both ways such as the latter racial battles among Democrats in Chicago (and other places) in which someone we know was involved… but anyway), there are many other factors.
A lot of northerners moved to southern states like Georgia and thus took Republican leanings with them. Long after the Civil Rights Movement, white southerners in those states were still voting heavily for Democrats in many cases. People don’t get more or less racist interchangeably depending on what party they are voting for.
There have been other profound cultural and sociological changes in the country, other than racial strife, over the past 50 plus years, and many domestic and foreign policy related issues that have lead southerners away from Democrats and towards the GOP.
If we look at 1972 and Nixon vs. McGovern as a baseline (which makes sense since southern whites went heavily for Carter in ’76), we can see that there was a clear divide coast to coast in the country between perceptions of the parties that went far beyond race.
There is no denying that there were racial issues among Democrats in Chicago – and that has been well publicized, but there were racial issues among Republicans in Chicago too. In fact, the GOP nominee against Harold Washington (was it Bernard Epton?) had a racial slogan “before it’s too late”. Since you claim to be consistent, it is not clear why you when you speak about the Washington election, you don’t like to talk about what the Republicans said and did. As if only the Democrats were racists.
Epton, who was of course a sacrificial lamb (and a liberal Jewish Republican) before Washington was picked saw his campaign basically taken over by the remnants of the Democrat machine who were mad at the primary results and wanted to stop Washington by any means necessary.
So yes, a lot of white Democrats voted for Epton for racial reasons. Epton hated that slogan and regretted that he felt like he had no choice but to be in bed with those types. It’s not something he developed himself. He barely even campaigned.
Epton had been active in the Civil Rights Movement. He definitely did not expect to come as close as he did.
Interestingly, or morbidly, he died of a heart attack less than three weeks after Harold Washington did.
Jack, of course, is completely right. It will be near impossible to elect a black Governor of Georgia in this election cycle. But, I am pleased and proud to see the Democratic Party running qualified women for office in record numbers this year.
I find it odd that someone who says they have always opposed racism in the Republican Party could have supported the dog whistle racial Romney campaign in 2012 or would still continue to make excuses for our racist President as he refers to people of color as “animals.” After all, Trump became President on the back of the “Kenya Birth Certificate” theory and, of course, over 50% of the self identified Republicans still believe Obama was born in Africa. Although I doubt if they could find Kenya on the map. No, the statement in opposition to racism is inconsistent with the facts — because it is a tried and true Republican electoral strategy to use racial fears to win elections.
As Jack has confirmed in the past, the Republican Party, especially in the South, is motivated in large part by racial prejudice. There is no other explanation for the rise of Trump — none.
The trip to Southwest France is going very well. Twelve of our oldest friends are here for a belated birthday party and sightseeing. Last night we went to a local restaurant here and met several American ex-pats sitting at the bar with anti-Trump buttons on. They were very happy to know that we were all Democrats who shared the same sentiment. But, they were also quick to add that most people with passports (only about 15% of the American people) appear to be Democrats since most are highly educated.
My friend, who just retired as Charlie Baker’s Chief of Staff, is here with his wife. He tells me Charlie’s Republican primary opponent is a neo-Nazi Republican who is running against Charlie because the Governor isn’t sufficiently pro-Trump. The crazy Republicans have come out of the woodwork in large part because of Trump and they aren’t going away anytime soon.
Finally, because I need to get out for the day, I just read Jeff Flake’s comments from yesterday.
Putting aside the fact that he is retiring (because he was on track to lose his re-election), he did belatedly speak the truth. Not only is Trump a serious danger to our Republic, but the Congress “is utterly supine in the face of the moral vandalism that flows from the White House daily.”
So, tell me again why any of these cowards should be re-elected??
The far-right primary opponent of Charlie Baker that Keith’s friend was referring to is Scott Lively, who managed to win the minimum percentage of state GOP convention votes to get onto the ballot (I’m not sure what percentage that is, but for a Democratic candidate, it’s 15% of the Democratic state convention’s delegates.)
Scott Lively is not only a Trumpist but a genuinely crazy bigot. He’s the guy who went to Uganda on a mission that started the agitation in that heavily-Christian country to impose the death penalty for homosexual acts (with heavy penalties for advocating or defending homosexuality, or as they would call it, sodomy). Fortunately (and no doubt partly because of counteracting international pressure), these Draconian laws have since been repealed.
For more, consult (for example) The Boston Globe
http://www.bostonglobe.com
CG will continue to choose to believe that Harry Reid caused Trump’s rise. He will claim to be against racism, as he continues to call GHWB a great president – even though serial sexual assaulter GHWB with the help of Atwater ran racist ads to get elected. And he will defend Bernard Epton as not being a racist who allowed his campaign to have overtly racist messages – which he also blamed on the Democrats.
Blaming Reid for the rise of Trump is like blaming the Jews for the rise of Hitler.
The comment on the rule of law and Trump….Here…
This article is completely and utterl7y confused, no doubt under the pressure of deadlines:
First, the extract (presumably earlier) that James cited says:
The race pitted two competing visions for the future of the Democratic Party against each other; Evans called for the Party to lean into a progressive vision and to excite new voters while Evans, who is white, stressed a more moderate message aimed at winning back the state’s long-dead Democratic coalition that was rooted in moderate white voters. [emphasis added by me, DSD]
So going to the full article in hopes that it would have corrected earlier errors, I now read:
The race pitted two competing visions for the future of the Democratic Party against each other; Evans called for the Party to lean into a progressive vision and to excite new voters while Abrams, who is white, stressed a more moderate message aimed at winning back the state’s long-dead Democratic coalition that was rooted in moderate white voters. [Emphasis again added — DSD]
This seems to double, rather than cancel, the error.
¶ As best as I can guess, what should have seen the cyberlight of day is something like this:
[Former Georgia House Minority Leader Stacey] Abrams called for the Party to lean into a progressive vision and to excite new voters while [former state Rep. Stacey] Evans, who is white, stressed a more moderate message aimed at winning back the state’s long-dead Democratic coalition that was rooted in moderate white voters.
Confirmation and/or clarification & correction much appreciated.
As for Stacey Abrams, I saw her talk to Judy Woodruff on the PBS New Hour last night, and was struck by how she seems unable to answer any question in simple direct English, instead of some canned campaign sound-bite that makes the listener’s mind drift.
This must be the effect of 11 months of straight campaigning, but I doubt that it will help her general-election campaign.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/stacey-abrams-democrats-cant-win-by-pretending-to-be-republicans
¶ Last night’s News Hour also had a revealing interview with James Clapper, former Director of National Intelligence and of the National Security Agency.
Russians not only affected the outcome of the 2016 presidential election — they decided it, says James Clapper, who served as the director of national intelligence in the Obama administration, and during the 2016 vote.
“To me, it just exceeds logic and credulity that they didn’t affect the election, and it’s my belief they actually turned it,” he told the PBS NewsHour anchor Judy Woodruff on Wednesday.
Clapper, who chronicles his life and career in his new book, “Facts and Fears: Hard Truths From a Life in Intelligence,” said Russians are “are bent on undermining our fundamental system here. And when a foreign nation, particularly an adversary nation, gets involved as much as they did in our political process, that’s a real danger to this country.”
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/russia-turned-election-for-trump-clapper-believes
Full Transcript:
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/russia-turned-election-for-trump-clapper-believes#transcript
Interesteing guy in James Clapper….
Just a sidebar….
I watched he do a wiggle on TV back a year and half ago in front of Congress….
He knew then that the NSA or whoever DID have listening on sveral of the people that frequented Trump’s HQ in Trump Tower…
I don’t remember how the question was worded exactly….
But he was asked if the US Government was spying or had a op doing so at the tower ….
I remember looking at Clapper’s body language ….
He said ‘No’….
But I knew that his answer was NOT completely truthful….
If I knew that?
The Consgressmen in the room knew that…
But couldn’t pursue the point…
I’ve stated here…
It IS a fact….
The FBI and others in the intelligemce community DID have active listening on going on several of the people that where associating with the Trump campaign and transition ….
That listening had been on going before the election and for some before the campaign…
Let me state here…
From point of view that FBI’s concerns have been revealed to be true…..
Several people that have states evidence have confirmed them….
Except for Trump himself…
There is a wide acknowledgement that Russian assets along with other countries , it has come to light, DID influence the 2016 American Presidential election….
Clapper, Mueller, Comey* and others where doing their jobs and should be commended for seeking out and finding the truth….
Not called political hacks…
* (Comey also has shown a serious lack of common sense in mouthing off about Clinton, but FAILLING to mouth off about Trump probes….)