Do These Georgia Senate Candidates Think We're Stupid?

The U.S. Senate race in Georgia has devolved into pathetic attempts by many  of the candidates to define themselves and differentiate themselves from the others candidates.

Let’s be fair to them and their consultants: Most voters are indeed stupid and/or uninformed, primarily the latter. Many more are just apathetic. The proof? Watch how public opinion changes based on TV and web ads. This would not happen if voters researched their candidates. They either don’t care, or they are easily deceived.

It is disappointing that instead of running on detailed platforms, several candidates have decided to pander to the illogical among us.

Take Phil Gingrey for example. He has challenged all of the other candidates to follow him in taking this pledge: “Repeal ObamaCare or Go Home.”

Sure, that sounds great, but it is also pretty deceptive. First of all, no one person can repeal ObamaCare. No rational voter expects one person to repeal ObamaCare. Most are instead interested in having a candidate who will put every effort forth to repeal ObamaCare. That is what counts.  (On a similar note, Gingrey’s campaign signs proclaim: “Repeal ObamaCare, Save America.” In other words, Phil Gingrey is going to save America by repealing Obamacare, all by himself.)

Therefore, the premise of Gingrey’s pledge is faulty. And as for the second part of the pledge, let’s be honest: Gingrey is 71 years old. It is easy for him to promise to only serve one term, because at the end of his second term he would be 83 years old. Perhaps his blatantly dyed brown hair is going to fool some people about his age.

One of Karen Handel’s talking points is even more ridiculous. Her contention is that since Gingrey, Broun, and Kingston haven’t been able to change Washington all on their own, then they don’t deserve to be promoted to the Senate.

Again, it is painfully obvious that one (or three) person(s) cannot control Washington. A good question would be asking what these three Congressmen have done while in Congress, not what Congress has done while they were there.

David Perdue has been making similar claims. He contends that Handel, Broun, Kingston, and Gingrey are all career politicians, while he is the “outsider” who can get things done. Now, his claim does arguably apply to Kingston, who has held elected state or federal office for 29 years. But Gingrey has spent 11 years in that capacity, Broun 7, and Handel 3. Gingrey and Broun are doctors by trade. Broun also continues to serve in the military. Handel has had a long career in charity work.

The irony behind Perdue’s claim? He is running to become a politician. Probably to wrap up the tail end of his career.

As for his “outsider” claims, Perdue is probably more connected with the beltway than all of the candidates save for Kingston. He has connections as a millionaire CEO. His cousin is former Gov. Sonny Perdue, after all.

Kingston, unlike Perdue and Handel, is running on his congressional experience. And to prove that he has a good record, he routinely cites his rankings from the National Journal and the American Conservative Union.

Those sound like reputable scorecards, but the truth is quite the opposite. National Journal has absolutely no business determining how to score votes as conservative or liberal. Here is how their methodology works in a nutshell: the more you vote with the majority of your party, the better your ranking.  As for the ACU, their shameful scorecard has been documented here on RedState before.

To reiterate, a candidate’s resume is much less important than their rhetoric and record.

The only candidate with a proven Constitutional Conservative record is Paul Broun, and he is not afraid to tell you about it either. That is why I am supporting him. He doesn’t treat you like you are stupid, and while that may not be the winning strategy, at least I can respect it. If a candidate treats you like you are stupid, it’s most likely they won’t care about your opinion once they are in office.