A Democratic gamble in the Atlanta mayor’s race

The final days of a suddenly compelling race for mayor of Atlanta have been dominated by the two actors with the most cash on hand.

One is Mary Norwood, the councilwoman from Buckhead who — according to a last round of polling — could become the first white mayor of Atlanta since 1974. The other is the Democratic Party of Georgia.

Norwood’s presence isn’t hard to fathom. Her campaign is tightly knit, and she’s been on citywide ballots twice before. Perhaps most important, Norwood saved up her nickels and dimes for an October blitz of TV ads that her rivals haven’t been able to match.

But the unusual decision by the Democratic Party to enter the nonpartisan contest on behalf of former state Sen. Kasim Reed and Atlanta City Council President Lisa Borders is more complicated.

Even those who support the decision by the state party’s chairwoman, Jane Kidd, concede that it could risk the longtime — and mutually beneficial — relationship between the party and the city of Atlanta.

Kidd’s explanation is simple. Norwood, she said, is a closet Republican — and as such shouldn’t be the mayor of a Democratic town.

“As far as we’re concerned, Mary Norwood’s a Republican. She’s been trying to dodge the issue of her partisan allegiance,” Kidd said. “We’re concerned that she’s not being truthful about her party affiliation. We think that she should be called out on that.”

On Thursday and Friday, the Democratic Party mailed two well-crafted fliers to thousands of Atlanta voters. One featured Norwood and an elephant in the room. The other piece of mail lumped the mayoral candidate with the Republican bugaboos Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin and George W. Bush.

Both Democratic fliers urged recipients: “Vote for Kasim Reed. Vote for Lisa Borders.”

Norwood responded with a television ad that belittles her own attendance at a 1999 state GOP convention as a delegate and declares accusations of Republicanism as “not true.” Norwood also cannily invokes Barack Obama’s name and appropriates his call for “change and accountability.”

“It’s long overdue,” she says in the ad.

Norwood’s best alibi may be state Republican Chairwoman Sue Everhart. “She’s not an activist. I’ve got no indication that she’s a Republican,” the chairwoman said of Norwood last week. “But we’d be happy to have her.”

For most of this year, both Borders and Reed have operated on the assumption that one of them would face Norwood in a four-week runoff campaign.

The Democratic Party’s entry into the contest coincided with new polling that indicated the possibility of an outright victory by Norwood on Tuesday.

So, while Kidd and other Democratic officials say that their participation in the city contest was based on principle alone, it is fair to assume that the purpose of the party’s entry into the race was to keep Norwood under 50 percent on election night — and give one of two African-American candidates in the race a chance to regroup.

This is where the gamble is, say ranking members of the Democratic Party.

The argument in favor: To African-Americans, the mayor’s office remains a highly prized symbol. Maynard Jackson’s legacy is closely tied to that of Martin Luther King Jr. and the civil rights movement.

Set aside, at least for a moment, the bare-knuckled issue of race. The loss of the mayor’s office to someone considered a less-than-authentic Democrat is certain to discourage the all-important African-American vote in 2010.

The argument against: Even if Norwood doesn’t capture a majority of votes on Tuesday, odds are that she’ll win the runoff, which will be held five lonely days after Thanksgiving. The finish will be a smaller replay of the Saxby Chambliss-Jim Martin runoff in the U.S. Senate race last year.

Democratic interference isn’t likely to change the outcome. And rather than having a mayor-elect who might have been wooed into Democratic ranks, you’ll have one who’ll be plenty steamed.

In addition, you may have lost a chance — which will also be important in 2010 — to extend a hand to independent voters weary of Republican rule in Georgia.

What has Democratic strategists queasy is the fact that they’re flying blind. They don’t know whether their attacks on Norwood will rally the troops — or offend them.

The demographics of the city have shifted so radically over the past decade that the city’s voting population has become as inscrutable as the oracle of Delphi.

“What’s the political landscape in Atlanta?” one Democrat asked last week. “We’ll find out Tuesday.”

Editor’s note: Given the impending Atlanta mayoral election, instant commenting has been closed on the Political Insider blog. Readers are invited to submit comments on all posts, which will be published as soon as possible after review.

For instant updates, follow me on Twitter.

45 comments Add your comment

A Political Demographer

October 31st, 2009
3:24 pm

We Democrats haven’t been losing statewide races in Georgia because we lost at turning out our base. We do just fine at that. We lose because we (or at least the Democrats at Pee-Wee’s Playhouse on Spring Street) don’t know how to win at persuasion. And this move in Atlanta doesn’t help. We need to stand for something that moves ordinary hard-working families. Maybe if we had put the effort and time and money spent diddling in the City race into getting Blue Dogs like Barrow and Marshall into line behind Obama and Healthcare we’d be taking some preliminary steps on the way to winning next year’s persuasion wars.

Krooked Kasimmm

October 31st, 2009
3:27 pm

Please don’t vote for Kasim. His interests are not aligned with Atlanta. http://www.notkasim.blogspot.com

Will Jones - Atlanta Jeffersonian Exegesis

October 31st, 2009
3:30 pm

Proverbs 6:16
There are six things which the LORD hateth, yea, seven which are an abomination unto Him:
17 Haughty eyes, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood;
18 A heart that deviseth wicked thoughts, feet that are swift in running to evil;
19 A false witness that breatheth out lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.

Mary Norwood’s been caught out lying denying she voted for her cousin George W. Bush, who in turn had no problem shedding innocent blood on 9/11 and afterwards.

A spirit of evil is upon America and making Obama elect is only the beginning of the solution.

G-d knows it, and the people of Atlanta better know it too.

Good Atlantans, White and Black, must now rally: Lisa Borders is who we need to elect next Tuesday.

Wow, Just Wow

October 31st, 2009
4:34 pm

Count me among the “offended” by the Dem state party’s actions. To say that a pro-choice, pro gay marriage candidate would be welcome in the GOP at any level is pure and utter lunacy. Everhart knows that and so does Kidd.

Donny Fairlplay

October 31st, 2009
4:55 pm

“it is fair to assume that the purpose of the party’s entry into the race was to keep Norwood under 50 percent on election night — and give one of two African-American candidates in the race a chance to regroup.”

I would say that it’s fair to assume the the Democratic Party wanted to give a Democrat a chance in the election, nothing to do with race.

Trying to make the connection of Democrat/Black/Southside and Republican/White/Northside is Reed’s game. I’m sad to see you fanning the flames, Galloway

Jim Daws

October 31st, 2009
5:09 pm


The attacks on Mary Norwood by chairperson Jane Kidd on behalf of the Democratic Party of Georgia are both unjust and dishonest. At a time when Atlantans are struggling to solve issues critical to the city’s future, Kidd is attempting to divide the city for partisan benefit.

Atlanta Professional Fire Fighters’ president Jim Daws responded, “Mary Norwood has worked selflessly for more than two decades to make our city a better place. In the best Atlanta tradition, she has built bridges between black and white, rich and poor, and sought only to make Atlanta live up to it’s best aspirations and ideals. Mary has been a champion for neighborhoods and the working families that the Democratic Party claims to represent. These divisive, manipulative attacks are unworthy of the Democratic Party and certainly have no place in Atlanta politics.

“Atlanta’s Fire Fighters call on all candidates in this race to renounce these unfair distortions of the truth. Whether you agree with her or not, or think you could do a better job as mayor, Mary has always displayed good faith and she is one of our own.”


October 31st, 2009
5:09 pm

The race calculus from Jane Kidd seemed to omit the reality that the new mayor and the city of Atlanta must work with the suburban counties and with the legislature. When Jane Kidd and Reed chose a race code word and a partisan injection, they are admitting that they are not serious about governing well or wisely. Reaching for the race card, overtly or not, is bad for Georgia and bad for Atlanta.
Should Reed win, his task of building consensus is infinitely more difficult. Help for MARTA just evaporated. Regional cooperation is on life support. The racist get out the vote radio ad on election day will finish it off. Just ask Shirley if her half hearted apology for her race baiting ad for Eaves was enough to regain the support of the rest of the region.

Morehouse Guy

October 31st, 2009
5:48 pm

Now, how has this become something connected to Senator Reed? The mailers say “Vote for Lisa Borders. Vote for Kasim Reed.” This was done independent of these two campaigns.

Secondly, how would a vote for Reed or a Reed mayoralty undermine his ability to develop regional consensus around the issues that matter to the City of Atlanta when Senator Reed has been doing just that for the past eleven years in the state legislature?

And what makes anyone think that Mary Norwood would be able to build regional support for her agenda, which has included the imposition of a commuter tax? Come on, folks.

[...] A Democratic gamble in the Atlanta mayor’s race. Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Retrieved on 2009-10-31. [...]

Andre Walker

October 31st, 2009
6:19 pm

As a duly elected state Democratic committee member from Fulton County, I feel compelled to make known the facts behind the Georgia Democratic Party’s entry into the Atlanta nonpartisan, mayoral election.

Article II, section 1 of the state Democratic Party charter says, “The State Committee shall be the highest authority of the State Party.”

That same section also reads, “The State Committee shall have general responsibility for the affairs of the State Party.”

And Article IV, section 2, paragraph one of the state Democratic Party charter says, “The Chair shall carry out the programs and policies of the State Committee, preside over the meetings of the State Committee and Executive Committee, provide general administrative direction to the Executive Director, and serve as an ex-officio member of all committees of the State Party.”

There are many who seem to believe that Jane Kidd, in her official capacity as the Georgia state Democratic Party chairman, had the authority to approve the campaign literature advocating the defeat of Atlanta mayoral candidate Mary Norwood.

At no time did the highest authority of Georgia’s Democratic Party approve the anti-Norwood mail piece; make it a policy of the state Democratic committee to become involved in the nonpartisan Atlanta mayoral election; or enact a program that included the expenditure of funds to pay for the aforementioned mail piece.

I encourage any interested individuals to review the official record of proceedings for the October 3, 2009 state Democratic committee meeting. These documents are open for inspection by the general public as are all official Georgia Democratic Party records.

Liberal Independent

October 31st, 2009
6:21 pm

I hope Jane Kidd has some plan to replace the support of thousands of democrat and independent Mary Norwood supporters whom she successfully alienated from the state party with her disgusting, sleazy attack on Norwood. You miscalculated Ms. Kidd. If the state GOP had intervened in the non-partisan mayoral race, you’d be screaming like a stuck pig. For the state party to recover in time to elect a democrat Governor, you need to take responsibility for a stupid move and step down. This is one liberal democrat who won’t be contributing one cent to the state democrat party.

Will Jones - Atlanta Jeffersonian Exegesis

October 31st, 2009
6:43 pm

Those who would elect a known liar to holy public office should be identified and excluded from any party worth joining.

The Democratic Party of Georgia now has a clear mandate to be the party of probity and moral authority in its attack against the transparently obvious undercover “Republican,” Mary Bush Norwood, whose claim to be unable to recall whether she voted for her cousin George W. Bush, for president, is a patent lie.

So much the better for those wishing a more enlightened political environment in Atlanta and Georgia.

Annuit Coeptis


October 31st, 2009
7:00 pm

What bothers me is not the fact that Norwood is a republican, but rather the fact that she is overtly lying about it.

Angry Taxpayer

October 31st, 2009
7:37 pm

newA – Mary is not a Republican and she ain’t lying about it. But after your treatment of her, maybe she will be converted along with thousands of other independents and conservative Dems you just spat on. I expect while you lost the battle (Mary is still going to win) you really lost the bigger war. You and people like you have allienated thousands by intervening in a non-partisan race that provides an opportunity for discussion among all view points. Your candidate could not win – so you make hit pieces disguised as a partisan attack. Your pieces had slush fund and all kinds of garbage that had nothing to do with partisan ID. It really makes people mad.

The Republican Party will gladly accept the allienated conservative dems and independents into the fold. I suggest the State Dem Party cut their losses while they can and ask for Kidd’s resignation.


October 31st, 2009
7:48 pm

Many in Atlanta will only vote their color. It’s a second class city and will never be more with a black majority.

A Political Demographer

October 31st, 2009
8:15 pm

How has this move by the DP Ga been connected to Reed? What is widely thought to be the case several days into this mess is that several Democratic legislators who had backed Jane Kidd in her election bid to become head of the Party AND who are intimately involved in Reed’s campaign convinced her to do this. This widespread understanding, if true, means that the Reed campaign and the State Party violated Georgia’s laws on campaign contribution limits – the political equivalent of money laundering. They have foolishly handed the Republicans a stick to beat us with.


October 31st, 2009
8:17 pm

Give me a break Andre, are you seriously going to pretend that you or anyone outside of state party staff needed to approve a mailer? How many Obama or Martin mailers did you approve last year? A big, fat zero, that’s how many.


October 31st, 2009
9:28 pm

When your campaign depends on playing the race card, when even the mention of being a hated republican makes the candidate unacceptable, the city is going it alone. Kidd gave Reed a code word to play the race card. The suburban counties have no desire to cooperate with a race baiter.
Now that the mayor’s race is a partisan election, you should expect partisan relationships with the rest of the state. Good luck with that.


October 31st, 2009
9:29 pm

Jane Kidd just committed political suicide.


October 31st, 2009
9:32 pm

If a woman who campaigned in the neighborhoods for years, is well known in the city and who supported democrats in every election can’t withstand the racist rants of the desperate and the cynical, then Atlanta is truly lost.

Andre Walker

October 31st, 2009
10:35 pm


There is a distinct difference between campaign literature used in a partisan election and campaign literature used in a nonpartisan election.

When there is a Democratic nominee, it is understood that the resources of the Georgia Democratic Party will be used to ensure our Party’s nominee defeats the Republican candidate.

In the nonpartisan Atlanta mayoral election, however, there is no Democratic nominee. There is no Republican nominee. So what business is it of the state Democratic Party to involve itself in an election where it has no direct vested interest, especially considering the fact that candidate recruitment in advance of next year’s partisan elections is quite anemic.

There are at least three additional state Democratic committee members who have publicly expressed either shock, disappointment or outright displeasure at the fact that the state Democratic Party chair unilaterally decided to insert Georgia’s Democratic Party into a nonpartisan election without the consent of the Party’s highest governing authority.

And, I might add, that neither the Clayton, DeKalb or Fulton county Democratic committees have endorsed a single candidate in any of the nonpartisan elections this year. Don’t you find it odd that the state Democratic Party chairman is involved in an election that none of the county Democratic committees are involved in?


October 31st, 2009
11:10 pm

I donot care if Norwood is republican or democrat…after seeing the evil,angry,ugly,mean-spirited attitude displayed by Reed and Borders,neither got my vote…I voted Friday for Norwood; I have talked to many of my friends about their demeanor; we all agree we donot want a mayor lacking integrity…they voted for Norwood.

Wow, Just Wow

October 31st, 2009
11:28 pm

I’m with Andre. And I refuse to believe this is not a coordinated attack. Reed’s second campaign office is located in the same 1100 Spring St. building at the State Dem Party. If they worked together in any way, it’s a violation of campaign finance law. Of course, State Rep. Rashad Taylor (Reed’s deputy campaign manager) used to work for the state party and Reed’s Finance Consultant Kristin Oblander is a well known state dem operative. Her office is in the same building. I don’t know what the truth is, but it all stinks…

Will Jones - Atlanta Jeffersonian Exegesis

November 1st, 2009
12:48 am

Our Creed includes “Annuit Coeptis:” Divine Providence blesses our endeavors. Don’t we wish as Atlantans that G-d’s blessings be poured out on our city?

Atlanta is the best city in America and has, thereby, the onus of leadership. We’re called “The Buckle of the Bible Belt” for good reason: People come to Atlanta to find G-d.

As the good example afforded to us with our election of President Obama, other nations of the world, by free choice, can also adopt the utopian Jeffersonian Whig ideals, the pinnacle of Western Civilization out of the Age of Reason which spurred the American Revolution enshrined in the Mottoes of Our Creed.

Truth and Justice must rule alone with the sovereign People in America under only the Creator G-d.

This is American Exceptionalism.

No other nation can top it. Only We, can destroy it.

Through the election for mayor on Tuesday we are now, as is every Electorate, being sifted from a divine and cosmic, yet very real, earthly perspective.

Shall we make elect a woman who has lied directly to us of the votes she never cast for Democratic nominees for president during the period she was an elected delegate to a Republican convention? What true Atlantan, Georgian, or Southerner, White or Black, Jew or Gentile, could possibly not see such an event as an invited curse on our city?

Who but others of easy virtue and blind to Truth would wish it so?

Should one lead us who can’t seem to mention her faith or congregation in her campaign literature, let alone her words? What has stoppered her tongue? Her life shows no grace. Why should we good and decent Atlantans impute to her what Divine Providence affords to each individual through families when the only one she has is the one which as a five-generation tributary clan of the Rockefellers and the Roman Anti-Christ just smashed our nation, the Bushes?

A Bush as Mayor of Atlanta?

Forbid it G-d, all true Atlantans pray.

Theoretically “non-partisan,” this is a choice between true and false, good and evil: it is definitely “partisan.”

Let us choose the side of G-d, truth, justice, and the good.
Let us choose a successful mother, a righteous daughter, a woman of proven integrity: one of our own, Lisa Borders.

Obama supporter, Democratic Party supporter

November 1st, 2009
3:10 am

Kidd should resign even before her turn is up. To compare Norwood with Gingrich or Palin or Bush is similar to comparing Max to Osama or portraying him as a coward. They both have no place in honorable politics. Many of us are Democrats and democratic party loyalists backing Norwood. We also think highly of Reed and Borders, unlike Kidd and the party. Norwood backs neighborhoods and is hated by the development community and that alone should merit Democratic Party support. All 3 are qualified to be Mayor. That brochure was a waste of our money. Kidd has had a good record before this, but nothing justifies her decision. If she can’t distinguish the need to go after ultra right wing zealots like most of the Republican party in Ga. and at least stay neutral with decent people and non ideologues like Norwood, you must wonder about her judgement.


November 1st, 2009
4:47 am

Count me an another alienated by this partisan action. I’d been reviewing who to vote for and was between Norwood and Borders for the most part, but actions like this push me harder towards the Norwood camp.
I want a more nonpartisan actor. I don’t want another Shirley. I want someone who can work more broadly and isn’t as polarizing, So this seemingly unwarranted attack from Jane Kidd makes me think Norwood is the best choice.
Norwood is not a Republican, that much is clear, but attacking her for not being far left and calling that republican is offensive to many moderates that choose not to follow party lines.

Moving to Newnan

November 1st, 2009
10:42 am

Read the fliers closely: Vote Kasim Reed. Vote Lisa Borders. Vote Reuben McDaniel. The order isn’t alphabetical. It’s political. Reed laundered money through the party to do this hit job. They threw in moderate Dem Borders and first time candidate McDaniel to avoid breaking the campaign laws. But don’t be surprised. Reed pulls this race bait card out every four years – lest we forget that that this is EXACTLY what he did to Robb Pitts and we saw a replay when his brother Tracy ran Karen Webster’s ill-conceived campaign against Karen Handel with the same tactics. And that John Eaves diatribe by Franklin was a classic Reed tactic.

If you enjoy race baiting, shady deals and underhanded tactics, just wait until you give Reed and his brother the keys to the city. Blacks will vote on Dec. 1 after being whipped into a frenzy by the pastors about the loss of jobs they were never gonna get. Whites will stay home, discouraged by the sudden devolution of Norwood’s masterful if duplicitous campaign (regardless of party, she lies about what she knew or didn’t know – a PTA mom who thinks she can be principal). Borders will go back to Grady and raise millions more because she’s a business person who likes but doesn’t love politics. Spikes…whatever.

Under the Reed Mayoralty, Atlanta will return to its corrupted roots and I’ll just wait for the first indictment. Good riddance, Atlanta. You get what you deserve.


November 1st, 2009
10:43 am

I have no quarrel with the Democratic party jumping into the fray. They want people elected who support their views. But their tactics are juvenile and dumb. If the Democratic Party does not like Norwood, explain why she is unsuited to be mayor. Give specifics about her policies, positions, capabilities, and potential. Don’t just say she’s bad because she is a Republican (which may or may not be true). In this election for mayor of Atlanta, most people will vote based on the issues or their perceptions of the candidates, not because of a label attached to a candidate.
P.S. I dislike Mary Norwood.


November 1st, 2009
10:47 am

A VIEW FROM AN OUTSIDER LOOKING IN. With all the sound bytes coming from everywhere about racism in America, the loudest sounds are coming from right there in Atlanta. I AM a Bible believing man of God who tries to live his life with integrity. The view from out here shows that one thing is very clear. MOST of the so called “black Christians” who are against Miss Mary are just doing a horrible job of hiding THEIR racism behind their fake faith in our Lord and Savior Jesus and our Father in Heaven. I STRONGLY suggest that all of you think about how you are going to explain yourselves before the Lord some day, for you will all sit in judgment before Him some day.


November 1st, 2009
10:49 am

ONE LAST THING> I thought reverends ad pastors are not supposed to get involved in politics.

Daily Pundit » Racism and Socialism

November 1st, 2009
11:18 am

[...] A Democratic gamble in the Atlanta mayor’s race | Political Insider But the unusual decision by the Democratic Party to enter the nonpartisan contest on behalf of former state Sen. Kasim Reed and Atlanta City Council President Lisa Borders is more complicated. [...]

Julie Brown

November 1st, 2009
11:22 am

The State Democratic Party gave Shirley Franklin via the Fulton County Democratic Party $20.000 in her 2001 election. Robb Pitts did not cry wolf.

Julie Brown

November 1st, 2009
11:28 am

Those who choose to vote for Norwood, that is you right. However, let’s be clear, she is a republican and she only voted for democratic candidates when she decided to run for Atlanta City Council and she knew at that time she wanted to run for Mayor. She went to visit Billy McKinney (Cynthia McKinney’s Dad) at his home 21/2 years ago trying to drum up support in the African American community.

What I find interesing is, she wanted to meet with the members of the Nation of Islam in private and not publicly. Why is that, I thought she was for ALL ATLANTAN’S?


November 1st, 2009
12:37 pm

I thought rejecting a candidate based on her race was racist. Seems to me that Atlanta is moving backwards in attitudes … the “city too busy to hate” … apparently no longer.

Will Jones - Atlanta Jeffersonian Exegesis

November 1st, 2009
1:01 pm

Any who say Norwood “is not a Republican” despite her need to lie straight to the voters of her inability to recall whether she voted for her cousin, is also a liar.

Jane Kidd is an idiot!

November 1st, 2009
2:12 pm

SaneDem you don’t know what you are talking about. First off, the Martin campaign and Obama campaign paid for those ads. In addition the DSCC paid for Martin chum in the run-off not the State Party. There’s such a thing as campaign finance laws. In any case, the Norwood piece was paid for by the State Party. Therefore, any state committee member is entitled to get some answers from Kidd.

David Burge

November 1st, 2009
6:10 pm

I had an interesting robocall today. I am a Republican voter living in Buckhead. The caller said it was from the “Republican Action Coalition” and went on the criticize Mary Norwood for putting down Republicans in her recent TV ad. It quoted her saying she supports Obama and also how much she disliked attending the 1999 GOP state convention. I wonder if this was from a real GOP group (never heard of the “Republican Action Coalition”) or was just a group trying to suppress Mary’s Buckhead vote.


November 1st, 2009
9:40 pm

Here,we go again the BS from 1100 Spring.Jane Kidd should be kicked out NOW.But,Kidd was open Pandora’s Box.Now,all Mayor,City COuncil,and Judge race will be affected.

I,tired of the BS that comes from 1100 Spring,but seems that powers that be WILL NOT do anything to clean it up.

[...] and brand Mary Norwood as a Republican. The state Democratic Party has even gotten in on the act by mailing some overtly partisan, anti-Norwood [...]

Ten Races To Watch

November 2nd, 2009
3:12 pm

[...] a candidate needs to receive a majority of the vote to avoid a December run-off.  The recent entry of the state Democratic party into the race in support of Borders and Reed because of questions [...]


November 2nd, 2009
3:56 pm

A special thanks goes out to Jane Kidd.

It’s time for Democrats to stop being well-mannered wimps. The Democratic Party needs to support its base and forget about being bi-partisan. The Republicans are rabidly partisan, so why waste any time trying to appease them? I just wish she had exposed Mary ” The Fraud” Norwood a lot earlier. How can you not recall who got your vote for president? Please. Look at how the AJC trashed Vernon Jones and Cynthia McKinney and did everything possible to derail their campaigns. But with Norwood, the AJC has sat back and pretended they didn’t know Norwood was a Republican. All they had to do was check her voting record, which of course we know they did. But they didn’t want to discourage the blacks and progressive whites who have been fooled by Norwood. It’s a blatant double standard. And Republicans will continue screaming “race card”, as a way of stopping people from speaking out against their racism. Norwood has been at City Hall during the entire Franklin adminstration and has done nothing.


November 3rd, 2009
6:10 am

When will the American people grow up? Who cares what party you’re from. Are you just sheep listening to the garbage? It’s past time to vote the best people in office. Not the crooks, white or black. We’re a nation in deep trouble and politics got us there. Use your brain not yiur color.


November 3rd, 2009
6:20 am

Julie Brown yo’re clearly raciist. This city’s corrupt and broke under you black democratic rule and it;s people can’t afford your kind anymore. Raise proporty taxes that’s what “Shirley-Girl” did before she failed.

SWest Atl

November 4th, 2009
7:49 am

Count me as not an offended Democratic voter, but an irritated Independent voter. That should worry the Democratic Party more. Party has it’s place, but it’s not in a non-partisan Mayoral race. The race up until now had been relatively clean. It focused on what people were good at, and what they wanted to do for the city. The Democratic Party threw the first bucket of mud. Way to go Jane Kidd, should we expect your mud slinging to start for the Governors race now too? Good luck Barnes, you’re aligned with her now!


November 12th, 2009
5:34 pm

@Jane Kidd is an idiot!

Actually, you’re wrong. The reason Obama and Martin had to be on the same mailer was because it would have been a violation of campaign finance law for the party to do lit for a single candidate above a certain amount. Check the lit from last election that featured them both and then check the “Paid for” tags. The only idiot is the person who opened his mouth without knowing what they were talking about.