The Democratic candidate for the Georgia governorship is a Black woman running on an "unapologetic progressive" platform

[Wanderfound]

@anon75430791

When the full-on election campaign gets under way, it’s not going to be pretty.

It’s already not pretty; the Evans campaign and the Georgia Democratic establishment were drawing straight from the GOP/Dixiecrat playbook during the primary.

http://peachperspective.com/2018/05/16/desperate-evans-mimics-republican-voter-fraud-attack/

[roomwithaview]

@Boundegar

Not sadly at all.

It’s just sad that it took so long!

[Melz2]

Yeah, it is.

[roomwithaview]

@blissinfinite67

a democrat with balls

[Melz2]

They’re on her chest.

[roomwithaview]

@Melz2

They’re on her chest.

Oh, that is clever, I’m gonna save that one!

[Wanderfound]

@milliefink

I know that I too took part here in anticipating how her opponents will run her down and try to drag her through the mud, but is there anything else to say about her run besides that?

Firstly: woo! Go Stacey!

Secondly:

https://staceyabrams.com/her-vision/

Thirdly:

http://peachperspective.com/2018/05/17/senator-bernie-sanders-endorses-stacey-abrams/

[Hanglyman]

Good. “Unapologetic progressive” is what the Democratic party should be all about. Being pro-human, pro-environment, pro-science and making things safer, cleaner, more efficient and more fun is not something anyone should ever have to apologize for.

[Wanderfound]

Reposting from another thread:

https://www.thenation.com/article/the-revolutionary-implications-of-stacey-abramss-victory/

Recognizing that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results, Abrams chose a sounder strategy, backed up by mathematical data and aligned with population trends. In the last gubernatorial election, there were 1.5 million eligible people of color who didn’t cast ballots. It’s that pool of voters that Abrams is focused on to close the gap. About 80 percent of Georgians of color vote Democratic, the return on investment from mobilizing those voters is well worth the investment. And last night’s results proved the success of the strategy. If Evans’ efforts to woo whites couldn’t even garner enough Democratic support to prevail in a primary election, how did she expect to win in the general election?

Equally important as which voters to target is the question of how to attract that support. What Abrams is proving is that the way to increase voter turnout is by inspiring progressives, not coddling moderates and conservatives. Towards that end, she has unapologetically championed progressive causes that many Democrats continue to tiptoe away from. While consultants propound anachronistic notions of distancing candidates from “special interest” groups and “identity politics,” Abrams unequivocally embraced the whole litany of constituencies and causes that comprise the stripes of the modern-day rainbow coalition. She publicly and repeatedly expressed solidarity with and welcomed support from LGBTQ groups, labor unions, pro-choice groups, and gun-control advocates. She even explicitly condemned white supremacist Confederate monuments.

[Wanderfound]

Anoa’s latest on the Georgia race:

Opinion | Stacey Abrams' Campaign Is A Road Map For Democrats In Red States

Yet Abrams’ win should not be limited only to conversations about historical firsts. The success of Abrams’ campaign should be a mandate for the future of Democratic politics and campaigns.

Given the choice between the same failing Democratic playbook of trying to win over moderate conservatives and a bold vision grounded in building a new winning coalition, voters overwhelmingly chose the latter. And by both mobilizing the existing base of the Democratic party and expanding on that coalition by engaging new voters, Abrams reduced the turnout gap between Republican and Democratic voters to just 54,000 votes ― compared to nearly 300,000 the last time both primaries were contested, in 2010.

[emo_pinata]

She seems like what I would call a true centrist, and is basically my ideal candidate. She’s running on a platform that the Democrats as a whole is beginning to adopt nationally involving voting rights and taking money out of elections - very easy targets for everyone to get behind that even a cynic has to admit benefits Democrats strategically. I hope she excels in the general election.

The odd thing is that she ain’t particularly progressive, but she is honest (or at least earnest) and seems to have integrity (certainly well above her political opponents. Evans’ desire to use black people to get white people to vote for her was particularly disturbing and yet I bet Abbot lowers the bar even further.

[d_r]

@anotherone

Good for her. In my neck of the woods

I’m heartbroken over the Texas 21st, but I think some blame is on those who branded an earlier candidate as “the progressive” (he wasn’t). They should have been supporting Wilson from the beginning.

[fnordius]

I think she’s already well equipped to deal with those fnords, as I doubt this is the first time someone has tried to smear her. And hey, the people that are receptive to those fnords would have voted against her anyways.

No, really I am actually slightly optimistic. I mean, it was going to be an uphill battle for the Dems, red state and whatnot, so why not go for a candidate that can energise the activists and stop listening to those who advise trying to be palatable to people who wouldn’t vote for you anyways? I even think the Establishment not openly supporting her is smart in the sense that it would actually harm her, make her look more milquetoast.