Political Insider

By Tim

June 21, 2006 08:08 PM | Link to this

It was inevitable. Two candidates want the same job. The polls show one falling behind the other. So, the thing goes negative. Meanwhile, the Republican Governor sits there and smiles.

By TitletownUSA

June 21, 2006 08:34 PM | Link to this

It’s not quite that simple Tim. One campaign is about ideas. But some of the folks running it look like rank amateurs compared to the other side.

Cox started off talking about issues. She’s got proposals for things like healthcare, education, bio fuels, etc. Other than healthcare, which has all of the charm and appeal of a Bill and Hillary lovemakeing session, I don’t see Taylor doing much of anything except wallowing in mud. But Cox’s campaign team just doesn’t measure up. Throw in the news media which seems to be interested more in the rhetoric from both sides than the issues themselves.

In this case the better candidate happens not to be the better mudslinger. Meanwhile Taylor is comfortable in the mud like any pig would be.

By Observer

June 21, 2006 09:40 PM | Link to this

You are right that Cathy’s campaign is an amateur hour run by children. For example, what kind of an idiot tells a newspaper he’s a “spokesmonkey”, or allows his campaign’s staff to? Someone who needs about 10 years of seasoning.

You may not like “negative” information, but would we be better off if we did not know the flaws of the people who will make very, very significant, sometimes momentous decisions, about our collective futures? Of course it is important to know that Cathy thought a sales tax on food was no big deal. It demonstrates her lack of sympathy and moral imagination. One interesting thing about Mark is, despite his flaws, he has “risen above” his privileged background. I share your disgust with candidates who distort the truth or focus on the trivial. Mark’s first ad may have done some of that. If you read the whole article, it’s a little ambiguous (but also pretty clear that at a minimum Cathy was pandering). But there’s no such defense against the second ad, and it’s very relevant stuff.

Cathy est mort. It’s not because anyone was lied to. It’s because they were told the truth.

By RightMe

June 22, 2006 10:27 AM | Link to this

Cathy should learn to never argue with a stupid person. First they will drag you down to their level. Then they beat you with experience.

As Titletown observed, that’s exactly what’s happened here. Cox has a great vision for the state of Georgia, but she allowed Taylor to drag her down into the depths of deception, name-calling, and dirty campaigning. Now she’s there, Taylor is whooping her.

Cox’s campaign needs to turn things around, and in a hurry…

By Melissa

June 22, 2006 12:56 PM | Link to this

Cox has put her foot in her mouth again. I mean I guess she would have liked to see evidence that people were starving before she would do anything about a problem. Compassion, now that’s what I look for in a Governor.

By BW

June 22, 2006 06:09 PM | Link to this

Right Me… Um, Cathy attacked first, then Taylor answered.

By observer

June 22, 2006 08:50 PM | Link to this

Um, wrong. Taylor attacked first.

By RiverRat

June 22, 2006 10:53 PM | Link to this

When Cox did her “I’m not the Big Guy” bit, everyone rightly acknowledged that it was the first negative ad of the campaign. A weak, unsubstantiated ad, but negative none the less. Not to mention the whole wikipedia thing and going at Taylor’s family. (which she hasn’t really stopped, come to think of it.)

By observer

June 23, 2006 08:11 AM | Link to this

Sorry, but the first “negative” ad of this campaign was Taylor’s. He jumped out there and accused Cox of not supporting the lottery and HOPE scholarship.

By justin

June 23, 2006 10:42 AM | Link to this

It’s clear that Mark Taylor went negative first. Not only was his website about Cathy’s lottery vote registered on the Wednesday before CC launched her “I am NOT the Big Guy” ad, but he had his ad up about that almost the same day. My guess is that he was planning to go negative so early because he was receiving so much bad press for skipping out on recent opportunities to debate Cathy and answer tough questions from the media.

By Rip

June 23, 2006 12:02 PM | Link to this

I live in a county in south Georgia. The towns Big Lawyers have Taylor signs on their cars and yards. The BIG GUY HELPING THE BIG GUY. I’m a little guy so my vote will be for COX.

By Leah

June 23, 2006 12:07 PM | Link to this

With a lot of “big guy” corporate backing, Wal-Mark Taylor will be tough to beat in the next few weeks. But the little guys still have the last say.

By truerblue

June 26, 2006 06:07 PM | Link to this

Did anyone out there bother to read the AJC story on Sun.25th about Mark Taylor-kind of a bio? Am I the only person shocked to find out that he still gets an allowance from his Father every year? 100k for working a couple of hours per month at the family business! Also I was shocked to read that he doesn’t even own a home but instead lives with his Father on West Paces Ferry Road—doesn’t even get the master bedroom. 49 years old—unbelievable! Does anyone in Georgia think that a guy who has never had any responsibilities; rent or mortgage, a real job, etc. can actually lead the people? He is a big ole Brat still taking a bottle from his Daddy and has obviously raised his son the same way. He also admits in this same article that he drove under the influence with his son at his side as he was growing up—no wonder the kid chose to be with his Dad at 14. The fact that he did a fair amount of drugs also came out in this article—did the kid have a role model or what? He never stood a chance because if the lifestyle was good enough for Dad—it was good enough for him. How sad! Here’s a SALUTE to all the parents that set good examples for their children—you are more qualified to be Governor of Georgia in my opinion!

By LWD

June 26, 2006 08:06 PM | Link to this

Well said truerblue….

By Andrew

June 28, 2006 10:19 PM | Link to this

I don’t understand why neither candidate is going after the larger target — Sonny Purdue.

I’ll end up voting for Purdue because despite his lack of caring/desire to screw over state employees, he at least has a plan and doesn’t want to develop an idea that may not work (like Taylor’s early ads for free health care for children).

Cathy Cox graduated from my college’s law school, so she isn’t stupid at all. But going in attack ads with Mark Taylor just isn’t very smart. Mark Taylor isn’t capable of engaging Cox (or Perdue for that matter) in a debate.

What Cathy had to say (that was taken out of context) honestly didn’t sound that bad. The whole thing about eliminating state sales tax on groceries is difficult to determine the economic impact….which is what I saw Cox’s comments being about. Unless you’re buying $300 (or more) worth of groceries every week, then it shouldn’t be a problem. I don’t know if other people saw the same thing or if it’s just me. Not what Mark Taylor intended for the ads to convey. But who knows….maybe Taylor has an economist that can verify his findings. Doubt it.