In Georgia, it’s Still Time for David Perdue

Posted: Nov 03, 2014 1:11 PM
In Georgia, it’s Still Time for David Perdue

In May, I wrote that it was time for Georgia to send someone like David Perdue to the Senate. If anything, the course of his general election campaign versus Michelle Nunn has only reaffirmed that.

All of the attack ads in the world can’t change the facts. David Perdue’s story is that of the American Dream, and he will be a refreshing voice in Washington. He’s spent a lifetime creating jobs, turning around businesses, and witnessing first-hand what can happen when big government takes a sledgehammer to common-sense. An oft-cited point from his supporters is that he has no reason to be doing this. Only after a successful career is rolling up the sleeves to run for office, not for his legacy but for the next generation’s opportunity at leaving one of their own.

That’s a different kind of pedigree, and it’s one we could certainly use. Newspaper endorsements across Georgia have echoed the sentiment, with The Savannah Morning News dubbing his resume filled “with practical, real-world experience.”

Ultimately, the attacks trumpeted on Perdue’s career have been little more than nonsensical distractions. Their grounded in his daring to be honest about the realities of a global economy. How dare a candidate do something like that?

Most would agree that Democratic Senate nominee Michelle Nunn has not waged a bad campaign. She’s raised millions of dollars from national forces to portray herself as anything but one of them. Barring the leak of a campaign memo riddled with embarrassments and tailor-made attack ads, she’s avoided any major rhetorical gaffes.

(Minus refusing to admit how she would have voted on Obamacare, denying the existence of items in her own memo, and repeatedly dodging questions about EEOC complaints, but I digress.)

That’s the thing, though. The key phrase in all of that is “has not waged a bad campaign.” Georgia, and the country, deserve better than a senator who has waged an effort meant to deceive, distract, and distort.

You can find that in one of the bigger controversies in her campaign. Nunn has repeatedly run ads featuring an image of herself with former President George H.W. Bush. He has repeatedly asked her to stop doing so, and endorsed Perdue following his clinching the nomination. In their final debate, Nunn was asked why she is still running ads featuring a former president, a Republican, and someone who has implored her to stop doing so. Her response was that it showed how bipartisan she was.

In what universe does defying the wishes of a member of the opposite party regarding his likeness, one who is supporting your opponent, equate to bipartisanship? Michelle Nunn’s version of bipartisanship gets better, though. Her campaign has refused to permit her to interact with Fox News in any capacity. John Roberts was to moderate a debate between the candidates, but was forced out because Nunn’s campaign refused to participate in a debate tinged with Fox News. Because bipartisanship and an independent voice, not another run of the mill national Democrat, right?

The reality of it is all too clear; Nunn’s first vote would be for Harry Reid as majority leader, she would stand in opposition to replacing Obamacare, and the Peach State would be stuck with an ineffective senator who constantly tailoring her policy stripes towards her own political gain. That’s stale, tired, and reeks of yesterday – not the change of the status quo we so desperately need right now.

The direction that would come from sending Michelle Nunn to the Senate is simply one we cannot afford. There’s a better choice in this race; that’s David Perdue. His experience, record, and reasons for running validate voting for him and sending him to Washington, and I think Georgians are going to agree with me on Election Day.