Handel Confirms Four #GA6 Debates

We have received a press release from Karen Handel’s campaign announcing four confirmed debates between her and Jon Ossoff. Three of the four debates will be televised.

Mrs. Handel stated: “I look forward to several robust debates on the issues so that the people of the 6th District can be informed about the stark contrast between my record of results, and my opponent’s false claims and flimsy resume.

The Handel campaign also stated: “Karen is looking forward to the opportunity to debate Jon Ossoff and his ever-changing policy positions and inflated expertise. The Handel campaign calls on Jon Ossoff to confirm the debates, as he has promised, and give the voters of the 6th District the opportunity to hear from the candidates. This schedule maximizes that opportunity.

The debates are:

  • WSB TV: June 6, 2017
  • WABE/PBA30: June 8, 2017
  • CNN/Atlanta Press Club: June 13, 2017
  • WSB Radio: June 15, 2017

86
Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
8 Comment threads
78 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
14 Comment authors
davidmacEllynnAndrew C. PopeThe EigerTerry S Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Terry S
Terry S

Will Mrs. Handel announce her position on climate change and the Paris Accord?

74% of GA06 voters think CO2 should be regulated as a pollutant.

The Eiger
The Eiger

“74% of GA06 voters think CO2 should be regulated as a pollutant.” Then please stop breathing and save us all from your hot air.

Noway2016
Noway2016

Holy sh*t!!! Welcome back,
Senior E!!

Terry S
Terry S

Dear Eiger, please reply with respect to a respectful factual inquiry.

Sarcasm and rudeness debase our political conversation and make it hard to find common ground.

Thanks, Terry

The Eiger
The Eiger

I’m sorry to have hurt your overly sensitive feelings. I’m not the one who continues to come to a blog and ask the same question a million times and wonder why Karen Handel doesn’t reply to you. Show up to one of the debates and ask the question. You can say voters care about this issue and I’ll continue to tell you that no, they don’t. Also, I’m still waiting on that ocean front property in Valdosta I was promised in college to materialize. Still waiting. Meanwhile the guy who invented the internet preaches to me about how terrible I… Read more »

Terry S
Terry S

Thanks Eiger, but I have a very thick skin. And this is only the second time I’ve mentioned this.

Do you have any idea why she refuses to make a statement of her position? Do you have any idea what she thinks? I am inviting a conversation.

Andrew C. Pope
Andrew C. Pope

To play political realist… she’s trying to walk a thin line between Trump voters and traditional Republicans that will keep Trumpers motivated to turn out without bleeding the middle and center right to Ossoff. Staking out an actual position on climate change or AHCA (what’s up Eiger), runs the risk of alienating one group or the other. It’s either alienate Trump voters by taking a position opposite his or alienate moderates by endorsing unpopular actions like AHCA or pulling out of the Paris Agreement. The better path is to just stay quiet on issues, attack Ossoff to try and depress… Read more »

The Eiger
The Eiger

It’s crazy that Andrew and I are agreeing. That should tell you all that you need to know. Taking a hard position on anything during a campaign is usually not smart. The AHCA and climate change are two things that are not the greatest things to campaign on. People may not like how campaigns are run, but campaigns based on issues that people don’t care about (climate change) aren’t winning campaigns. You have to win to have a chance to govern. Some people are good at campaigning and not governing. Others are good at governing, but not the running. You… Read more »

Terry S
Terry S

I understand Andrew that she is trying to avoid taking a position. But Ossoff has a position on gun control. And he is frequently attacked for it.

I think anyone who wants to be a MOC should have the courage to state their opinion on some of the largest issues of our time.

I want to know what she stands for.

Andrew C. Pope
Andrew C. Pope

Hey, I agree with you. But political strategy doesn’t always conform to our ideals about what a candidate for office should do.

The “don’t talk about actual issues” strategy worked for Gianforte in MT and Handel is banking on it working here.

Terry S
Terry S

Which is precisely why Congress can’t get anything done. Too many Mocs trying to avoid anything “controversial”. It’s their job to take on hard things!

Voters should demand answers from their representatives. That’s my objective. To get answers, not vote for a party label.

Terry S
Terry S

Andrew, I would like to contact you about a possible speaking engagement. Please email me at [email protected].

bethebalance
bethebalance

I think someone will ask the question, and if prepared, she’ll have a canned answer that walks the line she needs to walk, which will probly be something like the science is still unclear, but she will appropriately follow the science. On another post, someone else offered a different version of thte line that she should walk. Regardless, a vague prescription will probly be all that she needs to get by the issue.

ScottNAtlanta
ScottNAtlanta

Did someone ask you to be sensitive? Not rude? ROFL…thats funny. They must not know you very well.

Lea Thrace
Lea Thrace

Dude. While I get that you are annoyed that this is a topic that Terry S brings up, it really was rude and disrespectful for you to respond like that. That’s not you sir. You are reasoned and factual when you disagree. Dont change that.

The Eiger
The Eiger

Someone has to step in for Harry everyone once in a while now that he is gone. I apologize that the words I typed hurt someone’s feelings.

Lea Thrace
Lea Thrace

someone else around here has the jacka$$ market cornered. You dont need to go that route. I like seeing your thoughtful comments sir! 🙂

Noway2016
Noway2016

Listen, before you say something that actually offends me…Lol!

The Eiger
The Eiger

Thank you for that. I do honestly apologize. I will do better.

Progressive Dem
Progressive Dem

This news is more evidence this race is slipping away from her.

Andrew C. Pope
Andrew C. Pope

Ossoff has agreed to them too, correct? Maybe that’s a better headline than just reposting Handel press releases?

ScottNAtlanta
ScottNAtlanta

More important, ask about her support of the AHCA. She said she would have voted for it. Ask why. She would do well to not come across as smug as that press release implies. She isnt the best debater around.

The Eiger
The Eiger

This is a much better question to ask than about climate change. Because people actually care about health care and the AHCA polls around 12%. This is how I would respond if I were Karen. Yes, I would have voted for the AHCA. According to a recent HHS report from data collected by the previous administration, premiums have risen in GA by 106% since Obamacare was implemented. They have doubled nationally as well. States like OK, AK and AL have had their premiums tripled. Doing nothing is not a viable solution. Real people are hurting because of the collapse of… Read more »

Terry S
Terry S

Eiger, I care about climate change. I have a constitutional right to express that and to ask the candidates in my district about it.

The strategy of burying the issue will not work forever.

A better question is why do you WANT to bury it?

Conservatives and evangelicals also care about climate change.

Look up Katherine Hayhoe.

The Eiger
The Eiger

I understand that you are a single issue voter and will be voting for Ossoff. That is perfectly fine and there is nothing whatsoever wrong with that. If I were Karen I would answer your question like this. “I feel the science on climate change is certainly lacking at the moment and is constantly changing. I do believe that humans have had an affect on the climate. This is a given, but to what extent is in question still. We can all do a better job of making sure we leave a cleaner and healthier planet than the one we… Read more »

Terry S
Terry S

The problem Eiger is that is not factually correct. 99 percent of all peer reviewed climate science studies agree that climate change is real, its manmade and its bad.

I don’t know about you but I wouldn’t describe that as “unsettled”.

It’s like arguing cigarettes are good for you.

And there lies the problem. 99 % of studies, 98% of climate scientists, and 75% of voters agree about climate.

It’s difficult to understand why candidates want to claim the science is “unsettled”. Do you have an answer for that?

The Eiger
The Eiger

Thanks. Please vote for Ossoff. I only bang my head against one wall at a time on one issue. Andrew and healthcare is all I care to handle right now. I’m not doing this with you. I’ve said what I wanted to stay. Lea told me to be nice so I’m going to walk away before I tell you to hold your breath again.

Terry S
Terry S

Thanks Eiger. You know you aren’t required to reply every time I post? Nor even read what I write?

Enjoy your evening.

Andrew C. Pope
Andrew C. Pope

Eiger has been on edge ever since the CBO dumped on AHCA for a second time, so don’t take it too personally, Terry.

Note that Eiger didn’t cite actual provisions of Paris that he thinks will lead to job losses here in the US or give China an “unfair advantage.”

The Eiger
The Eiger

Do you still honestly think I comment on things that I have not read? Article 4, Section 4 states: Developed country Parties should continue taking the lead by undertaking economy-wide absolute emission reduction targets. Developing country Parties should continue enhancing their mitigation efforts, and are encouraged to move over time towards economy-wide emission reduction or limitation targets in the light of different national circumstances. Section 5 states: Support shall be provided to developing country Parties for the implementation of this Article, in accordance with Articles 9, 10 and 11, recognizing that enhanced support for developing country Parties will allow for… Read more »

Andrew C. Pope
Andrew C. Pope

China has committed to a 60-65% reduction in carbon intensity (CO2 emissions per unit of GDP) and have committed to best efforts to reach peak energy use before 2030. That is an overly ambitious, but achievable goal. They’ve also committed to increasing forest carbon stick by 4.5 billion cubic meters (247 million acres) by 2030, which would lead to a carbon sink equivalent to taking 770 million cars off the road. Despite the spin you and your boy Trump are trying to put on this thing, China has skin in the game and they’re making significant commitments towards combatting climate… Read more »

The Eiger
The Eiger

“China has committed to a 60-65% reduction in carbon intensity” and you honestly believe that?

Andrew C. Pope
Andrew C. Pope

Based on my experience, yes. China recognizes that climate change poses a significant threat to their continued development. It also recognizes green energy and green technology are huge economic opportunities for them. By being aggressive on decreasing carbon intensity and overall emissions, they stand to benefit economically in the long run. Let’s not discount the ability to be the leader on this issue, now that the US is abandoning its position. That means future climate agreements will be made on Chinese terms, not America’s… same thing is happening with Asia-Pacific trade rules post-TPP

Andrew C. Pope
Andrew C. Pope

In addition, China is on pace to hit peak emissions by 2020 (their initial goal was 2030). India, which promised to cut carbon intensity by 33-35% is now on pace to cut it by 42-45%.

Like I already mentioned, there is economic opportunity in innovation. New technology in India has made solar power less expensive than energy from existing coal plants. The cost of green energy in India (and China) will only decrease as innovation increases.

The GOP’s theory, that China and India wouldn’t follow through on their commitments, has proven false.

The Eiger
The Eiger

So what you are saying is that they are already doing all of this without an agreement that hold us to a different standard than China and others? So why again do we need to be a part of it?

Ellynn
Ellynn

By walking away, we give away the power of leading and our seat at the head of the table. We no longer control the direction or the right to make deals in the United States favor. The smaller countries will start to look towards others to help them. In the void, who takes our place at the head of the table?

Andrew C. Pope
Andrew C. Pope

First, the Agreement is already in force. Further, the Durban Platform, which started the ball rolling on the Paris Agreement was adopted in 2011. So this isn’t just China or India acting absent some international commitment. Second, if you’re sincerely asking why the US needs to be a party to this treaty, I think an intro to international affairs course would better serve you with the requisite foundational knowledge for understanding multilateral diplomacy. Here’s a cliff’s notes version: Having the world’s most important country involved carries significant symbolic weight and creates political pressure for other countries to commit to (and… Read more »

The Eiger
The Eiger

“y walking away, we give away the power of leading and our seat at the head of the table. We no longer control the direction or the right to make deals in the United States favor. The smaller countries will start to look towards others to help them. In the void, who takes our place at the head of the table?” That is actually pretty funny. That’s what republicans say about leading with our military around the world against bad actors. But it’s okay to do it with climate change but not with our military against people like Assad? The… Read more »

The Eiger
The Eiger

“Having the world’s most important country involved carries significant symbolic weight and creates political pressure for other countries to commit to (and follow through on) their commitments” But that doesn’t apply to the military and stopping bad actors from murdering their citizens?

Ellynn
Ellynn

I don’t think giving up any of the standing of our country on a world stage is okay on any subject. I was not a fan of saying we had a line in the sand and I was really not a fan when we made one but then didn’t do any more then make a deal for the chemical weapons which relied on Russia to confirm it. I can not say what a better course would have been, but staging a football like technical timeout to take an object off the field (which really did need to be done) was… Read more »

Andrew C. Pope
Andrew C. Pope

There you go again, responding to having your argument discredited by changing the frame of the conversation. At no point have I criticized the notion of taking a leadership role with our military. I would note that the US military has led, and continues to lead, the rest of the world. That leadership is direct, through military action or active involvement with alliances like NATO. That leadership is also indirect, through training and advisory work or the provision of weapons and technology. Leadership does not always entail putting American lives at risk through active combat. You seem to be implying… Read more »

The Eiger
The Eiger

Bye Felicia

Andrew C. Pope
Andrew C. Pope

Did you have to Urban Dictionary that one again?

Pro tip: burns are less effective when you recycle them from someone else

The Eiger
The Eiger

It really isn’t a burn. And yes I knew what it was the first time you used it. You forget we are the same age and I watched Friday just like you did.

Whatsben
Whatsben

If Karen Handel can say that with feeling I’ll be blown away. Listen, I know that what your saying is technically true, but my understanding is that by block granting it to the states your putting them in a position where they will not be able to fully fund Medicaid, so on paper it might not be a cut but in action it will be. I mean wasn’t Paul Ryan bragging to Rich Lowry that, they had been dreaming of eliminating entitlements since they were in college and they finally were getting the chance with the AHCA. I don’t know… Read more »

The Eiger
The Eiger

“I know that what your saying is technically true, but my understanding is that by block granting it to the states your putting them in a position where they will not be able to fully fund Medicaid.” Under the AHCA will states that expanded Medicaid have to figure out what to do with able bodied individuals without kids? Yes, Medicaid wasn’t intended for them and by adding them to the Medicaid rolls those states are only harming the needy. The AHCA allows states to determine what is best for their patient population. It takes away many of the DC strings… Read more »

Whatsben
Whatsben

So it’s not true that the CBO said that the amount spent on Medicaid would go down by $834 Billion because of the termination of the expanded matching funds and switching to a per capita based cap on payments to the states? I know that the CBO is far from exact but that would be one hell of a whiff. By the way, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with calling a cut in the increase in spending a cut. People were basing their budgets around that future increase in spending. I don’t understand how you can say that Medicaid… Read more »

Dave Bearse
Dave Bearse

It’s usual GOP accounting. It’ll be the largest tax cut ever, yet the deficit won’t increase and they’ll be no cuts in spending.

The Eiger
The Eiger

Even the CBO, which is pretty terrible at predicting what will happen, says the AHCA reduces the deficit. Also, how can republicans be accused of both drastic cuts to Medicaid and not cutting anything at the same time? Explain the mental gymnastics in your thought process to get to that conclusion. Please.

The Eiger
The Eiger

“I know that the CBO is far from exact but that would be one hell of a whiff.” They were off on current enrolment in the exchanges by 100%. So yeah. They are good at whiffing. If you think that a cut in the reduction of “projected” increase in spending is a cut then you are right. We will never agree on this. “I don’t understand how you can say that Medicaid is not intended for “able bodied adults without kids” , when a law was passed to include them.” That was not the original intent of Medicaid. Instead of… Read more »

Whatsben
Whatsben

Also if I was Ossoff I would respond by saying, that if we’re serious about fixing Health Care, we shouldn’t start off with a huge tax giveaway. We should take the money we do have and fix the problems that exist. Doing nothing or throwing everything in the trash and starting over is a false choice.

The Eiger
The Eiger

“Throwing money at this will not fix it. That is what Obamacare did. Now we are $20 trillion dollars in debt as a country and are still trying to fix the problem that we were told would be fixed by just throwing money at it. It has to stop and I intend on helping to do that.

Whatsben
Whatsben

“I’m not talking about throwing more money at the problem, I’m talking about taking the money we have and figuring out a way to spend it better.”

Andrew C. Pope
Andrew C. Pope

“… but first Imma cut taxes for millionaires and take healthcare away from 24 million Americans.”

Sorry, Eiger, I just couldn’t let the sleeping dog lie.

The Eiger
The Eiger

I’ve already explained multiple times why the 24 million number is a lie. There aren’t even 24 million people covered by Obamacare. How can that many people lose insurance? Also the CBO says if you buy a plan off the exchange you actually don’t have coverage. In what world does that make sense?

But keep being intellectually dishonest if you must.

Andrew C. Pope
Andrew C. Pope

People currently in the marketplace and people currently covered by Medicaid expansion will be presented with plans that have actuarial values lower than those of Obamacare plans. With no EHB requirements and no actuarial value requirements, insurers are free to offer plans that don’t actually cover your medical needs. While the GOP will count these people as “insured,” the CBO rightly recognizes that it ain’t insurance if it doesn’t actually cover anything. Further, the CBO estimates that, by 2026, a 64 year old making 175 percent of the poverty line ($26,500 per year) will see his premium increase from $1,700… Read more »

The Eiger
The Eiger

Citing the CBO to me is like citing Wikipedia on a college paper. It doesn’t work because there are some may places for it to be false.

Just because the umpire doesn’t get every call right doesn’t mean a ball is actually strike if he called it that way. It was a bad mistake that could have cost someone the game. Same with the CBO.

davidmac
davidmac

>Just because the umpire doesn’t get every call right doesn’t mean a ball is actually strike if he called it that way. It was a bad mistake that could have cost someone the game.

This is where your analogy breaks down. The rules of baseball don’t provide for appealing an umpire’s judgment call. Period. MLB 9.02(a). Ergo, if the umpire rules it a strike, it’s a strike, regardless of the actual physical location of the ball.
It may have been a fatal flaw that ends a game in disappointment for one team, but it was still a strike.

The Eiger
The Eiger

Wow, okay. It’s kind of sad you went and looked up the MLB rules but have nothing of substance to say about the CBO. I will repeat what I said earlier.

Just because an umpire calls a ball a strike doesn’t make the ball miraculously move and go over the plate.

davidmac
davidmac

The CBO is a useful punching bag for anyone who doesn’t like their numbers, Eiger. And honest analysts conclude, as Andrew has pointed out time and time again, that the reason the enrollment numbers are lower is more related to the failure to expand Medicaid and to Congress’ actions to sabotage risk corridors than to the calculations the CBO made. As always – if the facts are on your side, pound the facts; if the law is on your side, pound the law; if neither are on your side, pound the table. I hope your table is well-reinforced and structurally… Read more »

The Eiger
The Eiger

“that the reason the enrollment numbers are lower is more related to the failure to expand Medicaid and to Congress’ actions to sabotage risk corridors than to the calculations the CBO made.” You talk about having facts but all you do is simply blame others. States that could not afford to expand are the reason the CBO was wrong? Is that what you are saying? So you are saying 1) the CBO is bad at predicting behavior and 2) the failures of the ACA are all republicans fault? Come on. That has to be a joke. I have the facts… Read more »

davidmac
davidmac

“These data do not take into account premium tax credits.”

Ok then.

The Eiger
The Eiger

What’s your point? Are you saying that premiums have not doubled and HHS is lying? Also, do you subtract your homeowners tax credit from you monthly mortgage payments when calculating your monthly budgets? No you don’t. It’s the same thing.

davidmac
davidmac

Nope, I subtract it from my withholdings on my W-4, so it directly does affect my monthly budget. Thanks for playing.

Andrew C. Pope
Andrew C. Pope

Sorry, I was watching clips from Friday (thanks for the rabbit hole, Eiger) and didn’t see that people were continuing to bicker over the same nonsense people have been bickering about since the last time the GOP introduced a bad healthcare bill… The numbers Eiger cites don’t include Obamacare subsidies. That’s because it’s easier for Eiger’s argument if you don’t think about the fact that Obamacare subsidies rise to meet increases in premium costs (this has to do with how subsidies are tied to income and the average cost of premiums… I’ve been through this before, if you don’t remember,… Read more »

The Eiger
The Eiger

That’s fine. We are $20 trillion in debt but will just keep paying for ever increasing costs. That seems to be okay with you all. It’s okay if premiums double or triple. The government will pay the for the increase. I’s okay if Medicaid is taking care of people that it wasn’t intended to take care of. The government will pay for it. It’s okay if insurance companies are forced to sell a product that people don’t want to buy. The government will bail the insurance companies out. It’s okay if more doctors aren’t taking Medicaid. The government will try… Read more »

Andrew C. Pope
Andrew C. Pope

But it isn’t a “debate.” You and me (and others) just make the same points over and over and over again. I guess the “new” thing you’ve added is pointing to the national debt as if healthcare is the sole driver of that figure. Never mind proposed GOP tax cuts that are going to blow open the deficit (unless you share Mulvaney’s mathmatical illiteracy and Trump’s promise of 3% GDP growth). Never mind the AHCA’s own contributions to the national debt. Never mind how ACA has slowed the rate of increase in healthcare costs or has extended the solvency of… Read more »

Dave Bearse
Dave Bearse

Just as throwing money to the military isn’t going to protect us from terrorism.

The Eiger
The Eiger

Agreed. Where have I ever said it would?

Dave Bearse
Dave Bearse

Didn’t say that you did—just drawing a parallel, though the comment could be understood to have that implication.

ScottNAtlanta
ScottNAtlanta

“Yes, I would have voted for the AHCA. According to a recent HHS report from data collected by the previous administration, premiums have risen in GA by 106% since Obamacare was implemented. They have doubled nationally as well. States like OK, AK and AL have had their premiums tripled. Doing nothing is not a viable solution. Real people are hurting because of the collapse of the exchanges. That has to be addressed. The AHCA does that. ” Problem with that is that premiums were rising at a 33%/yr rate prior to the ACA and many people didnt have rising premiums… Read more »

The Eiger
The Eiger

Again, President Obama said your premiums would go down if the ACA was passed. They obviously have not gone down. I do not want to go back to 2010. I’ve never said that’s where we need to be. I’m also not the one that said your premiums will go down. That was Obama. Fact Small businesses are not the 1%. The AHCA doesn’t give a tax cut to the CEO of Goldman, but does give a tax cut to the local car dealership that is the largest employer in a small town in middle Georgia. Fact. Will the US government… Read more »

davidmac
davidmac

> The AHCA doesn’t give a tax cut to the CEO of Goldman
False.
http://www.atr.org/list-obamacare-taxes-repealed
HR 1628 repeals the 3.8% investment income surtax.

The Eiger
The Eiger

Why didn’t you list the other taxes it repeals? I’ll rephrase. The 1% aren’t the ones being harmed by Obamacare, small businesses are. The AHCA is the largest tax cut to small business in the history of our country. Small businesses also employee people. -Abolishes the Obamacare Individual Mandate Tax which hits 8 million Americans each year. -Abolishes the Obamacare Employer Mandate Tax. Together with repeal of the Individual Mandate Tax repeal this is a $270 billion tax cut. -Abolishes Obamacare’s Medicine Cabinet Tax which hits 20 million Americans with Health Savings Accounts and 30 million Americans with Flexible Spending… Read more »

davidmac
davidmac

Because my point was to show you were wrong in what you stated as a “fact.”

Also, Congratulations! You accept all the numbers from the CBO’s score! I’m glad we could agree on that.
These data are directly from Table 2 (p. 38) of the CBO’s official score on HR 1628 as passed the House.

The Eiger
The Eiger

I don’t accept the CBO numbers. I actually think they will be larger. Heaven forbid working individuals get a tax cut. But I have actual work to do now. Ya’ll keep living in the dream world that the ACA is working and not a complete failure. Until next time.

Lea Thrace
Lea Thrace

All these reasonable answers to questions regarding climate change and healthcare reform. Too bad nobody is going to actually give a reasonable answer. Because its not worth it to be truthful or impactful when it comes to politics.

*sigh*

back to the regularly scheduled mudslinging yall!

augusta52
augusta52

I saw some email appeal earlier this week in which she claimed she was trailing in (unspecified) public polling 44% to 47%. She probably would not be seeking debates if she were 20 points ahead….frankly, with less than 3 weeks to go til the special and with early voting underway, it seems a bit late to be planning debates..on the other hand, there can’t be that many voters in CD 6 undecided at this stage.

Noway2016
Noway2016

Are these the same pollsters who predicted Gov. Carter and Sen. Nunn? Handel wins by five.

Dave Bearse
Dave Bearse

Should be interesting. Handel has some established Views, unlike squishy views on ACHA or climate change. GA-6, as with its extraordinary education level for a GOP district, isn’t the type of district where an NRA endorsement or her well known anti-abortion views cache they have in typical GOP districts.

But she’s got wiggle room on the gay thing going for her, what with her being a Log Cabin Republican and then being opposed to gay marriage.

augusta52
augusta52

Noway says Handel wins by 5—Ok, then tell us what Ossoff gets in each county; he got 41 percent in Cobb, 48 in Fulton and 59 in DeKalb in round one, and then tell us what percentage of all votes cast in the special will be from each county? In Round one, Fulton accounted for 45% of the votes totals, Cobb 32 and DeKalb 23.

ScottNAtlanta
ScottNAtlanta

Last poll by Survey USA had Ossoff up by 7%
They have an A rating by 538 and skew in neither direction.

Dave Bearse
Dave Bearse

In my opinion, Ossoff’s floor is 49%, leaving Handel almost no room to maneuver. My speculation is that Ossoff increases margins in DeKalb, and at least holds relative margins in Fulton and Cobb.