Georgia Statewide General Election Preview, 2026

In this post, I provide in-depth discussion of all statewide partisan general elections in Georgia in 2026 and explain my ratings for each race. Included are three changes to my statewide ratings, all in favor of Democrats. I also talk a little bit about why, exactly, there are eleven statewide elections in Georgia this year.

One thing I noticed while writing this: Republicans didn't flip several of the statewide row offices until the incumbent Democrats quit, often to run for higher office. If Democrats do sweep the top five statewide races, the absence of Republican incumbents will be a major factor in their victory.

These are not necessarily my final ratings, and I am still working on writeups for a range of State Senate and State House races. To read those writeups and any updates to my statewide ratings, sign up below. It's free, but if you appreciate my work, I'd greatly appreciate either a paid subscription or a one-time tip. (Paid subscribers can also choose to only receive Georgia analysis.)

Ratings Changes

I have three ratings changes today, including moving the U.S. Senate race into the Safe Democratic column.

As a result, I now have the following ratings for statewide races:

I also expect all three constitutional amendments to pass, as briefly discussed at the end. As always, I reserve the right to make further changes until polls close, and I hope to provide a Tilt rating for the Labor Commissioner race by tomorrow.

Why does Georgia elect so many offices?

This portion is adapted from a long-form post that I hope to publish before the end of the year. I think it provides interesting context, but you can skip this section if you want by using the table of contents above.

Georgia has eight elected statewide executive officers along with a five-member utility commission that is elected statewide. That's not all: we also elect the nine-member Supreme Court and the fifteen-member Court of Appeals statewide, but those are nonpartisan races decided on the May primary ballot. The utility commission and the statewide courts have staggered six-year terms, so not all twenty-seven statewide elected officials are up at once.

Oh, and that's without counting our two U.S. senators.

Okay, but why? I threw together a timeline as part of a longer project I'm working on, which I expect to make into its own post sometime between the election and the end of the year. The longer post will also cover offices that are elected locally and offices that are no longer elected, among other things.

The 1799 Constitution actually didn't provide for any statewide directly elected offices. The Governor was elected by the General Assembly until an 1824 constitutional amendment, with the first direct election being held in 1825. Another 1824 law provided for presidential electors to be chosen by popular vote, which was first applicable at the 1828 election. For fifty years after that, the Governor was the only state-level official elected statewide by the people.¹

The 1877 Constitution, adopted after white supremacists retook control of the state, was the first to provide for multiple statewide elected offices. It provided for five: the Governor, the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the Comptroller General, as well as a Treasurer, who today is appointed.

Two more positions that survive today, the State School Commissioner (today Superintendent) and the Commissioner of Agriculture, were converted to elected offices in the early 1890s, as the South began to adopt Jim Crow laws formally disenfranchising Black residents. In 1896, voters approved a constitutional amendment to begin electing the Supreme Court, which also expanded the Court to six Justices. In 1898, they approved another amendment to hold statewide elections for local judicial officials, which were previously chosen by the General Assembly. I am not certain exactly how many judicial circuits existed in 1898, but by 1933, there were 33 judicial circuits. This ballooned the number of statewide elected offices to several dozen. Of course, what mattered in statewide races (and almost all local races) was the Democratic primary, not the general election.

More elected offices were added during the Progressive Era. In 1906, the Court of Appeals was created and the Railroad Commission, which had been established in 1879, became an elected body; the body, which today is the Public Service Commission, expanded to its present size of five members in 1907. 1907 is also the year the General Assembly adopted a comprehensive disenfranchisement bill, which prompted the resignation of William H. Rogers, the only Black legislator then serving. The Department of Commerce and Labor (today the Department of Labor) was created in 1911 with an elected Commissioner, and the Department of Insurance was created in 1912, with the Comptroller General designated by law as the Commissioner of Insurance. In 1913, the Seventeenth Amendment to the United States Constitution became law, providing for the direct election of U.S. Senators; as it happens, the Georgia General Assembly has never ratified the amendment.

Most recently, the 1945 Constitution provided for the first time for an elected lieutenant governor; Melvin Thompson, who won the inaugural election for the office in 1946, was immediately thrust into a dispute when Governor-Elect Eugene Talmadge died during the transition period. (Courts ruled Thompson should assume the governorship, and he served until a 1948 special election.) This change came shortly after a reform that lengthened the governor's term from two years to four.

By the 1966 election, the general election ballot included a senator, nine statewide executive officials, two Public Service Commissioners, two Associate Justices of the Supreme Court, three Court of Appeals judges, twenty-five superior court judges, and five district attorneys, not including special elections. That's a total of forty-seven regularly scheduled statewide elections. Of course, almost all of these were uncontested – at least, in the general election. Thirty-seven superior court judges and thirty-six district attorneys had been on the ballot in 1964, alongside three Associate Justices, two Court of Appeals judges, two Public Service Commissioners, and presidential electors.

Thankfully, voters adopted Amendments 18 and 19 at the 1966 election, which provided for superior court judges and district attorneys to be elected by only the voters in their circuits. We can thank George H. Carley, a Decatur lawyer who went on to spend nearly twenty years on the Supreme Court, for those amendments. The State Treasurer was removed from the Constitution in 1972; today that office is a gubernatorial appointment. Our current Constitution, adopted in 1983, removed specific references to an elected Comptroller General and instead provided for an elected Commissioner of Insurance; today, the Comptroller General is a distinct official and is appointed.

U.S. Senate

U.S. Rep. Mike Collins (R) is seeking to oust first-term Sen. Jon Ossoff (D). Both candidates are white. There are three write-in candidates, none of whom are likely to have any real impact. Collins has served since 2023, representing northeast and central Georgia, and he is the son of former Rep. Mac Collins; Ossoff's term began in 2021, and he previously worked for U.S. Reps. Hank Johnson and John Lewis. This race is about as close to Safe Democratic as a statewide partisan election in Georgia could possibly get, but I've held it at Likely Democratic since Collins won the nomination. In order to win, Collins would not just need a massive polling error of the sort we have never seen in Georgia; he would need everything we know about politics to be wrong.

Ossoff first came to prominence on the political scene in 2017, when he lost a close special election for U.S. House in the 6th congressional district to Karen Handel. Some considered his performance disappointing, especially as the seat went on to flip blue in the 2018 general election, but it was arguably quite impressive to essentially match Clinton's narrow loss in a district that had been very red both in previous elections and in the 2016 U.S. House election. Ossoff came away from the race with a national profile and donor list, which he successfully leveraged to win a surprisingly sleepy 2020 primary for the U.S. Senate seat then held by David Perdue. After finishing nearly 2% behind Perdue in the first round (49.7% to 48.0%), Ossoff prevailed in the runoff by a little over 1%.

In his single term, Ossoff's voting record has been that of a mainstream or even progressive Democrat. He notably voted for both the Laken Riley Act (on immigration) and the GENIUS Act (on cryptocurrency) last year, breaking with most Democrats, and when pressed on these votes he has generally failed to offer compelling substantive justifications, at least from my perspective. But considering his overall record, it seems unlikely Ossoff would have cast a decisive vote in favor of either bill.

He has been a fairly consistent vote against Trump's executive branch nominations, more so than many Democrats from much bluer states. As our state's first Jewish senator, his stance on Israel has also taken on prominence. He has sought to stake out a position that is critical of Israel's conduct without going as far as more left-wing Democrats, voting more than once to disapprove of some sales to Israel while approving of others at the same time and giving speeches emphasizing that supporting Israel doesn't mean giving a blank check to misconduct. It's not hard to imagine a scenario where in trying to straddle the line, he satisfied no one, and indeed some Jewish Democrats threatened to break ranks over Ossoff's stance. Ultimately, though, no public split materialized, which may be in significant part due to Ossoff's opponent. (I myself am half-Jewish, and I note that Ossoff may be more pro-Israel than the average American Jew his age.)

First-term senators are often advised to stake out a particular policy area to distinguish themselves, like pensions or farm bill reform. Upon being sworn in, Ossoff took the helm of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations and promptly began investigating abuses in Georgia's prison system. This is an unusual choice because, well, prisoners aren't a very popular constituency – most can't even vote! But they usually have relatives who can, and Ossoff's work shone a light on some truly abhorrent conditions. It also fits with a major biographical theme he's emphasized: his work as a documentary filmmaker exposing corruption.

Ossoff has leaned hard into criticism of money in politics and government capture by industry, and he clearly understands how serious a threat this problem poses to both our political system and to ordinary people's confidence in government as an engine for positive change. (This raises further questions about why he voted for the GENIUS Act, but he hasn't faced as much blowback for that vote as for the Laken Riley Act.)

He has also shown a remarkable willingness to swing hard against his opponents. In 2020, he showed up to a debate that incumbent David Perdue declined to attend and made use of the empty podium to great effect. He also criticized Perdue as corrupt. This year, he has been even more outspoken about his opponent's character.

Mike Collins has distinguished himself in the U.S. House primarily through his social media presence, although he notably did introduce the House version of the Laken Riley Act, which made it easier to deport people over minor crimes.² As for the social media, though, he has called January 6 a “peaceful” protest and posted white supremacist content, such as a 2025 tweet about Zimbabwe alluding to the apartheid state of Rhodesia. Because In spite of all this, he won Donald Trump's endorsement in the Senate primary. Popular outgoing Gov. Brian Kemp, who national Republicans had hoped to recruit, passed on the race but backed Derek Dooley, the son of longtime Georgia Bulldogs coach Vince Dooley; until recently, Vince was the last coach to lead the Dawgs to a national championship.

Collins led the first round of the primary 40.5% to 30.2%, with fellow U.S. Rep. Buddy Carter taking another 25.1%, and Collins prevailed over Dooley by an 11.1% margin in the runoff. Since then, several former or current staffers have been reported to have posted white supremacist content substantially more explicit than Collins's wink-and-nod approach, as has Collins's own son-in-law.

Ossoff has gone hard after Collins's white supremacist ties, not only in advertisements but even face-to-face. Ossoff has an unusual knack for projecting a sense of real moral revulsion – which, to be clear, I do not doubt is genuine, but it still takes skill to convey that. I think that's part of why he's able to come off as credible in accusing Collins of things that shock the conscience: he actually seems like his conscience has been shocked.

Ossoff has received some notable endorsements from Republicans. The most prominent is Valdosta Mayor Scott James Matheson, who faces a tough reelection battle next year, but others, like Tifton Mayor Julie Smith, represent much redder areas. I am not aware of any Democratic endorsements for Collins, although I wouldn't be shocked if a few nominally Democratic rural sheriffs have backed him.

Ossoff has led by a wide margin in fundraising, although there are many groups besides the candidates actively spending here, including the party committees and various super PACs. I note that generally speaking, I consider a candidate fundraising or spending disparity of less than 10:1 as having some predictive significance but not as completely dispositive. As of the final pre-election filing, Ossoff had raised a cumulative $113,758,335.97 and spent a cumulative $116,878,638.82 for the cycle, while Collins had raised $4,341,376.76 and spent $6,824,684.46. That is significantly worse than 10:1 in both categories. If other factors pointed to Collins pulling off the upset, I'd consider it as a possibility, but that simply isn't the case.

I've made it this far in forecasting without ever strictly defining my categories, but there's a notable inconsistency between my Likely Democratic rating here and my Safe Democratic rating in the RI-Gov race. While I think Democrats are near-locks in both races, I actually think an upset is more likely in Rhode Island, meaning at least one of those ratings should be adjusted. The reality is that I've never been wrong about a Safe rating, and I'd like to maintain that record, which disincentivizes me from issuing Safe ratings. From what I understand, there is a similar divergence between traditional “expert” forecasts, which generally have this race in the Likely Democratic column, and model-based forecasts, which have Collins with a very low chance of victory.

I've been doing this for a long time, though, and while that does incentivize hedging my bets, it also means I have a pretty good sense of what makes a safe race. Yes, Ossoff leads in the polls by a substantial margin, outside of a normal polling error. But every other metric also points to Ossoff. Safe is a high bar, and I think this qualifies. I'm moving the race to Safe Democratic, reflecting that there is not a realistic chance of the Democrat losing.

Governor

Billionaire healthcare executive Rick Jackson (R) and former Atlanta mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms (D) are squaring off to succeed Brian Kemp (R). Bottoms would be Georgia's first Black governor and first female governor and would be the first Black woman to serve as governor of any U.S. state. Jackson is white. There are also seven write-in candidates. Republicans have held the governorship since 2002, when Sonny Perdue defeated then-Gov. Roy Barnes (D); Perdue was the second Republican elected governor in Georgia's history, after Rufus Bullock in 1868. Kemp is now the third two-term Republican governor in a row and fifth Republican governor ever to serve.³

Jackson, who has not previously sought elected office, won a hotly contested primary runoff against Lt. Gov. Burt Jones by a 5.3% margin (receiving 52.6%) after having trailed by 6% in the first round, while Bottoms won the primary outright, receiving 56.2%.

For much of the election, I've expected a razor-thin margin in this race, although I'm not as sure about that as I once was. Until recently, Bottoms was running a minimal campaign and attempting to coast on name recognition. That worked just fine in a primary where none of the other candidates were willing to actually attack her. General elections are a different story. (I comment that Rick Jackson and Burt Jones savaged each other in the primary and it doesn't seem to have damaged Jackson's campaign much at all.) Jackson has been running a smart race, attempting to reach beyond typical Republican voters and appeal to Black voters in Atlanta and elsewhere. However, in the home stretch, Bottoms has been much more willing than Jackson to engage with news media and debates, which may provide her with a critical edge. She has also become significantly more competitive with advertising.

Bottoms has several issues to overcome. In the primary, she won based on name recognition outside of Atlanta. Within city limits, she barely finished ahead of Jason Esteves and fell well short of a majority. She has faced skepticism from her left, where many take issue with her approval of the lease for the public safety training center widely known as Cop City. On the other hand, many Republicans and moderate Democrats have expressed dissatisfaction with her leadership during the Black Lives Matter protests; a frequent refrain is that she let the city “burn”.

Look, if there weren't any actual historical examples of Atlanta burning, perhaps I'd let the hyperbole slide. But it simply isn't true. Atlanta didn't burn in 2020. I would know; I was here. There were a couple of isolated fires. Saying Atlanta “burned” under Bottoms is like saying it “burned” under Kasim Reed because I-85 caught on fire. (For my out-of-state readers, yes, that is a real thing that happened).

Bottoms has also been accused of “abandoning” Atlanta by serving only one term. I don't really understand this criticism. To the extent she left office in order to take a position in the Biden administration, sure, that's not a great look. But she finished the term she was elected to, and I actually think she was a fairly good mayor. It's no secret I have my issues with her as a candidate, but she championed closing the city jail, unlike Mayor Dickens, who promised to finish that job but is now attempting to sell the jail to the Fulton County sheriff. She also stood up to Gov. Kemp on mask mandates and won in court. By all accounts, it destroyed what had been a warm working relationship. Far too few politicians are willing to sacrifice their relationships with each other in order to do what's right for their constituents. Of course, it's probably smart for her not to emphasize this particular example, as it might just remind voters of the pandemic.

Both candidates have won hard-fought, close races before. Jackson, of course, won a tough primary runoff against Lt. Gov. Burt Jones even after both Trump and Kemp endorsed Jones. (I'm very curious what the outcome would've been if it hadn't rained on Election Day, but we'll never know.) Bottoms won an even narrower mayoral runoff in 2017 against Mary Norwood. It is worth noting that Bottoms's first-place finish in the first round of the 2017 election was widely considered an upset, as polls had Norwood finishing in first place. However, nonpartisan elections are very different from general elections, and I don't expect a similar gap. (Later polls in 2017 did show movement toward Bottoms.)

Jackson has led by a wide margin in spending, powered by his own massive fortune. But even after spending nine figures on the campaign, he's only managed a narrow polling lead, and that lead seems to have evaporated in the closing days: as of writing, Bottoms actually leads in the FiftyPlusOne average by 0.1%. Looking at individual contributions, using the State Ethics Commission's automatic calculator and subtracting out Jackson's self-funding, his lead isn't even 2:1 – he's raised $11,094,678.85 from individuals to $7,615,826.06 for Bottoms. (Individual contributions have some predictive value. So does spending, but spending large amounts in any particular spending category has diminishing returns.) And all this excludes the candidates' leadership committees, which can accept unlimited amounts per contributor; including those makes the picture significantly better for Bottoms. (I suspect fundraising for leadership committees is near-meaningless as a metric, but spending has been close, with Jackson's committee spending $22.1 million to $21.6 million from Bottoms's.)

As I said above, bruising primaries aren't always a negative on their own, but it probably doesn't help that Burt Jones still hasn't endorsed Jackson. When Trump rallied in Georgia last weekend, Jones was initially scheduled to attend, while Jackson planned to skip the rally. But after Jackson reversed course and announced he would join Trump, Jones bailed. (Gov. Kemp endorsed Jackson in August.)

One wild card is the write-in candidates. If the number of votes for eligible write-ins – that is, for the seven people who have complied with state requirements for write-in candidates – exceeds the margin between Bottoms and Jackson, the race will go to a runoff. This is exactly what happened in 1966, except that back then the General Assembly picked the winner in such a case. The write-in candidate that year was former Gov. Ellis Arnall. More recently, in 2016, a write-in candidate forced a runoff for Henry County Commission Chair, when the gap between the party nominees was a mere 97 votes.

This year, in contrast to 1966, none of the write-ins are serious candidates, having reported a grand total of $62.40 in spending between them. They do receive a significant boost from the state policy of posting a list of eligible write-ins next to every voting touchscreen. Looking at recent elections, in 2022 there were a mere 25 votes tabulated for the two qualified write-ins, although I would not be surprised if this figure is an undercount, seeing as the overall result was not in doubt. In 2018, I do not have data for the statewide write-in totals, but the four qualified write-ins combined for nine votes in Cobb County and twelve in Gwinnett. While I don't expect a blowout in the gubernatorial race, it would have to be extremely close – probably within a 100-vote margin, and almost certainly within 1,000 votes – for a runoff to occur. A runoff is thus very unlikely.

There have been various “Democrats for Rick Jackson” efforts, which have produced some media coverage, but they've failed to produce many notable Democrats for Rick Jackson. He has been endorsed by several sheriffs who use the Democratic ballot line, but the publicly announced sheriffs on that list – Ashley Paulk of Lowndes and Craig Peavy of Dooly – are from counties that already lean Republican in state races, and they are both white men, unlike a large majority of Democratic voters in their counties when it comes to statewide races. Jackson has also been endorsed by Mary Norwood, an independent who lost the close 2017 Atlanta mayoral race to Bottoms and currently represents much of Buckhead on the city council. Norwood is more or less seen as a Republican these days by many, especially after she filed an affidavit supporting Trump's 2020 election lawsuits, but her endorsement could be significant in Buckhead, an area that traditionally has substantial ticket-splitting.

I don't like to read too much into early voting data, but the data does suggest that the electorate this year will be favorable for Democrats. If Jackson does pull it off, he'll need both strong Republican turnout on Election Day and a strong performance with nonwhite voters and other Democratic-leaning voters. That's been a focus of his, but to some extent, the national environment and trends in Georgia have meant that this was Democrats' race to lose. In other words, it's not enough for Jackson to run a perfect campaign; Bottoms would need to make mistakes.

Here in reality, both candidates have had their missteps. And my gut feeling here, which I do fall back on when the data is unclear, has admittedly been back and forth. But I think the factors point to Bottoms narrowly pulling it off. My rating here remains Tilt Democratic, reflecting that I think the race is close to even but that Bottoms has a slight edge.

Lieutenant Governor

“The Lieutenant Governor shall be the President of the Senate and shall have such executive duties as prescribed by the Governor and as may be prescribed by law not inconsistent with the powers of the Governor or other provisions of this Constitution.” Ga. Const. Art. V, § I, Para. III.

The Lieutenant Governor also acts as governor in the event of the governor's temporary disability and ascends to the governorship in the event of a vacancy; however, if the vacancy is early enough in the term, a special election is held at the next even-year November election. All this is also laid out in the state Constitution.

The Lieutenant Governor's precise powers as President of the Senate and in the executive branch are not laid out in the Constitution, and many could be stripped relatively easily by a Senate majority or governor (respectively) of the opposite party. However, a number of duties, including important roles on the Code Revision Commission and the Legislative Services Committee, are laid out by statute and would thus require a law to remove.

State Sens. Greg Dolezal and Josh McLaurin are facing off here to succeed Burt Jones, who ran for Governor and lost the primary. Unusually for Georgia this year, both candidates are white men. Republicans have held this office since 2006, when Casey Cagle won an open-seat race as Democratic incumbent Mark Taylor ran for Governor. This year, both parties had competitive primaries that went to runoffs. On the Republican side, Dolezal beat three other state senators and a state representative, and on the Democratic side, McLaurin defeated a fellow state senator. Dolezal's opponents in the Senate were all closely aligned with the party establishment: Majority Leader Steve Gooch and Appropriations Chair Blake Tillery failed to make the runoff, and pres pro tem John F. Kennedy⁴ lost the runoff by 8.4%. Dolezal chairs the Transportation Committee, a significantly less powerful post, and is a hardline conservative; his opponents are hardly liberals or anything, but their conservative credentials were a bit weaker (with the possible exception of State Rep. David Clark).

As for McLaurin, he was generally believed to have the Democratic nomination sewn up when Sen. Nabilah Parkes announced a campaign at the last minute. (Parkes was previously running for Insurance Commissioner, and her exit left a scramble for that race.) McLaurin led by 2% in the first round, but a third candidate, Richard N. Wright, received 19%, forcing a runoff. As the runoff was held immediately before the General Assembly's special session, Parkes's decision to resign from the Senate in order to raise money for her campaign, leaving a vacancy Republicans nearly won, came under significant scrutiny; by contrast, McLaurin, who had begun fundraising far earlier, did not resign his position. McLaurin ended up winning the runoff by just under 10%.

The race presents an unusually strong ideological contrast for a statewide race in Georgia: Dolezal is one of the most conservative senators, and McLaurin is one of the most progressive. I note, however, that McLaurin also has a reputation for effectiveness. The State Senate very rarely sees any Republican defections on major legislation, but that changed this year, and in some cases McLaurin played a key role. He was also able to push through a law regulating vehicle booting last year, although further efforts this year stalled. In a streaming ad, McLaurin criticizes Dolezal for a nonsensical focus on “Sharia law”, which is in fact listed on Dolezal's website as a campaign issue.

This race has been a bit under the radar, but, we have some polling, which has been good for McLaurin. Quantus (Oct. 15-17, 755 LV, ±3.8%) found McLaurin down by 0.9% with 4.8% undecided, slightly ahead of Bottoms's performance in the same poll; that poll notably showed nonwhite voters much more likely to be undecided in the LG race. UGA, polling for the AJC (Oct. 7-15, 1,000 LV, ±3.1%) found McLaurin up by 3.0% with 17.5% undecided, but the undecideds had a more even racial distribution, and Democrats were the least likely to be undecided. And State Navigate (Oct. 23-27, 741 LV, ±3.8%), a new pollster that focuses on state-level politics, found McLaurin up by 4%, with 3% undecided and another 3% who had already voted but could not recall for whom. All quoted results are after pushing leaners, except that the AJC/UGA poll does not appear to have pushed leaners.

It is worth noting that the AJC poll uses the misleading term “statistical tie” to describe this race in its writeup. While the 3.0% lead they found for McLaurin is certainly within the margin of error, calling it a “statistical tie” is like saying that a 56% chance of rain is exactly equivalent to a coin flip. Yes, the outcomes within the 95% confidence interval range from a 3.2% Dolezal lead to a 9.2% McLaurin lead, but they're not all equally likely. In fact, assuming the margin of error was calculated using a normal distribution, their poll indicates there's about an 84% chance McLaurin has a lead. That being said, polls have sources of error beyond those accounted for by a pure statistical calculation, and the 17.5% undecided figure is large enough that the poll is of questionable utility.

Cumulative for the cycle, excluding loans, McLaurin has raised $975,245.04 and spent $774,274.57, while Dolezal has raised $3,555,795.08 and spent $5,913,684.59. Dolezal reports a total of $2,141,517.64 in individual contributions to $723,070.66 for McLaurin. Dolezal's leadership committee has spent a further $730,159.61, while McLaurin's has only spent $357.75 (not a typo). Obviously, you'd rather not be at a financial disadvantage, but McLaurin is well within the 10:1 threshold I mentioned earlier. As of Oct. 20, Dolezal had $1,400,510.49 in the bank to McLaurin's $220,970.47.

I do note that McLaurin does not seem to be running any television advertising, while Dolezal has spent six figures on it. However, Dolezal appears to only be airing ads on WSB-TV. This is the sort of area where the financial disparity could really matter in theory, but the limited nature of Dolezal's buy tempers its effectiveness. Still, if Dolezal manages to run ahead of the Republican candidates in the other statewide open races, this could be one reason why. On the flip side, though, McLaurin is running Facebook ads that have received hundreds of thousands of impressions, while Dolezal appears not to have run any Facebook ads since the primary. Advertising is much cheaper on Facebook than on broadcast, although I'd advise campaigns to do both if they can afford to. (Neither candidate is running YouTube ads.)

Since the end of the primary, the following groups have made independent expenditures in this race: SEIU COPE, NRA PVF, Greater Georgia Action, and Planned Parenthood Votes. All are joint expenditures that also list other candidates in other races.

I have had this race at Lean Democratic since June. At this point, I'm not certain there's a compelling reason for me to continue rating it differently from the other statewide open seats – but perhaps that means my other ratings are too conservative. My gut, which has rarely led me wrong, hasn't budged from the initial rating, and the data does support McLaurin being at least slightly favored, although the lack of television advertising gives me some pause. I'm keeping the race at Lean Democratic, reflecting that McLaurin is modestly favored but that an upset remains distinctly possible.

Secretary of State

The Secretary of State has a handful of constitutionally prescribed duties pertaining to elections and filing and publication of laws, with their remaining duties – which are quite extensive – being prescribed by statute. They run and certify elections in Georgia (but do not make most election regulations); oversee business registration at the state level; and oversee licensing of a variety of professions. Republicans have held this office since 2006, when Democratic incumbent Cathy Cox ran for Governor and lost the primary.

After incumbent Brad Raffensperger (R) ran for governor and lost the primary, this is an open race, with state rep. Tim Fleming (R) facing former Fulton County judge (and reality host) Penny Brown Reynolds (D). Fleming is white, and Brown Reynolds is Black. Both parties' nominations went to runoffs, with Fleming defeating former State Rep. Vernon Jones and Brown Reynolds defeating Fulton County Commissioner Dana Barrett. Neither runoff was very close, with each winner getting a little less than 65% of the vote.

Fleming is a mainstream Republican, and in nominating him, the party avoided the difficulties that would've arisen from choosing a hardcore right-winger like Jones⁵ or Kelvin King. But they also spurned Raffensperger's preferred successor, Gabriel Sterling, who would've probably been their best shot at holding the office, given Raffensperger's enduring popularity with Democrats.

Fleming is a backbencher in the legislature and has only been in office for four years, but he previously served as Deputy Secretary of State under now-Gov. Brian Kemp, working on reforms to the licensing process. Brown Reynolds, by contrast, has been out of elected office since 2009, but she had a role in the Biden administration.

Looking at cumulative finances, Brown Reynolds leads in individual contributions, $1,055,590.67 to $628,601.51. Expanding to total contributions except loans, Brown Reynolds leads more narrowly, $1,319,515.07 to $1,039,264.21. She has a narrow edge in total spending, $1,050,970.62 to $935,575.75. She also leads narrowly in both categories when only the 08/01-10/20 period is considered. Interestingly, it seems Brown Reynolds has the airwaves to herself, and neither candidate appears to be running Facebook or YouTube ads. As of Oct. 20, Brown Reynolds had $318,644.45 on hand while Fleming had $255,138.89. Independent expenditures are minimal here, with Brown Reynolds as one of several beneficiaries of an SEIU mailer and Fleming as the sole beneficiary of a Greater Georgia text message.

Both candidates say they are the best choice to protect our elections; unsurprisingly, Fleming focuses on election security, while Brown Reynolds focuses on voter access. Both candidates also say they will work to eliminate hurdles for businesses and licensees. Media coverage of the office has historically focused overwhelmingly on its electoral functions.

Both the AJC poll and the State Navigate poll asked about this race. The AJC, which appears not to have pushed leaners, found Brown Reynolds leading by 0.9% with 14.5% undecided, while State Navigate found her leading by 4% with 3% undecided and 3% unable to recall who they had voted for.

My initial Tilt Democratic rating was based on a sense that a generic Democrat would have an edge over a generic Republican in Georgia for election oversight, especially given recent setbacks to voting rights due to the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Louisiana v. Callais earlier this year. I think Fleming is pretty close to a generic Republican and Brown Reynolds is pretty close to a generic Democrat. The major thing that stands out is Family Court with Judge Penny, the reality show hosted by Brown Reynolds during her tenure as a State Court judge. But it doesn't seem to have materialized as a major campaign issue, although Fleming takes a veiled shot at the program on his website.

Considering that Brown Reynolds has an edge in polling, fundraising/spending, and advertising, I am moving my rating here to Lean Democratic, reflecting that Brown Reynolds is a modest favorite but could still lose.

Attorney General

“The Attorney General shall act as the legal advisor of the executive department, shall represent the state in the Supreme Court in all capital felonies and in all civil and criminal cases in any court when required by the Governor, and shall perform such other duties as shall be required by law.” Ga. Const. Art. V, § III, Para. IV.

The Attorney General is also required to have been an active member of the State Bar for at least seven years before taking office. After the governor, the Attorney General is the statewide officer with the strongest constitutional, rather than statutory, allocation of powers. They also have a variety of statutory duties, including an important role in open records enforcement.

Republicans have held this office since 2010, when incumbent Thurbert Baker ran for governor and lost the primary. This year, after incumbent Chris Carr (R), you guessed it, ran for governor and lost the primary, this is an open race; Senate Judiciary Chair Brian Strickland (R) faces House Democratic Caucus Chair Tanya Miller (D). Strickland is white, while Miller is Black. Strickland has no prosecutorial or public defense experience and has largely pointed to his legislative record, which is admittedly substantial. Miller has experience as a civil rights attorney, prosecutor, and public defender, although she has largely leaned into the first two.

Both the AJC poll and the State Navigate poll asked about this race. The AJC, which appears not to have pushed leaners, found Miller leading by 0.4% with 11.5% undecided, while State Navigate found her leading by 3% with 3% undecided and 2% unable to recall who they had voted for.

Looking at cumulative finances for the campaign, Miller reported a total of $1,365,257.79 raised from contributions (including $1,070,707.20 from individuals) and $869,486.46 spent, while Strickland has reported raising $2,339,808.00 from contributions (including $1,470,908.04 from individuals) and spending a total of $1,985,514.88. Both campaigns have authorized advertisements running on television, Facebook, and YouTube. Although Strickland has raised and spent more in the final stretch of the campaign, Miller notably outraised and outspent him during the 05/01-07-31 reporting period. As of Oct. 20, Miller had $570,996.43 on hand, while Strickland had $504,293.12 in the bank.

Independent expenditures are substantial here, especially compared to other downballot races. Most notably, the Georgia Realtors have spent $800,000 on direct mail supporting Strickland, and he appears to be the only beneficiary of these expenditures. Greater Georgia Action has spent heavily on advertising for Strickland, alongside Greg Dolezal, Rick Jackson, and Agriculture Commissioner Tyler Harper.

I started this race as a Pure Tossup, reasoning that a Democratic lean for a generic open seat might be successfully counteracted by Republican appeals to law and order for the particular office. However, Miller has done an impressive job neutralizing these appeals, even as Republicans attack Keisha Lance Bottoms's tenure as mayor on the same grounds. Miller has also gone after Strickland for his ties with a data center project in Henry County, where he lives; Strickland says that the project is dead, but it only seems to have died after he began his campaign. In my mid-October update, I moved the race to Tilt Democratic, where I am keeping it today.

Before I get into the “minor” row offices, if you've read this far, I'd appreciate a subscription. If you're not already signed up, you'll see a prompt right below this. If you're a current subscriber, thank you!

Commissioner of Agriculture

My initial rating in this race was Lean Republican. The Commissioner of Agriculture runs the Department of Agriculture and is prominently responsible for certifying gas stations, but the office also has meaningful enforcement authority affecting everyone from consumers to agricultural workers. Incumbent Tyler Harper (R) faces Katherine E. Juhan-Arnold (D). Harper is white, while Juhan-Arnold is Black. Harper won his first term four years ago in an open-seat race, receiving 53% of the vote to 45% for the Democrat. He previously served in the State Senate for ten years, representing a district in south Georgia. Juhan-Arnold has never held elected office.

Republicans have held this office since 2010, when longtime incumbent Tommy Irvin retired. His successor, Gary Black, held the office until running an ill-fated Senate campaign in 2022; Harper won the Republican nomination unopposed that year and easily prevailed in the general election. Juhan-Arnold won the two-way Democratic primary this year with 62%. (Harper had no opposition in this year's primary.)

Harper is a seventh-generation farmer and lives in Ocilla, in South Georgia, while Juhan-Arnold is the founder of a nonprofit farm focused on bringing fresh produce to low-income communities. In their sole debate, both candidates promised to apply scrutiny to data centers, and Juhan-Arnold said she would utilize federal grants currently not being sought. She also notably implied that Georgia-grown food was unsafe. In particular, she argued that Harper was failing to uphold food safety standards, citing a reduction in inspections, while Harper fired back that her criticism was an attack on the department's employees and was “disqualifying”. She also claimed Harper's statement that cyclospora had not been found on Georgia-grown lettuce was “false” and asserted that people who came to Atlanta for the World Cup did not trust our food.

Criticism of Harper over food safety could resonate, but it could also backfire if voters see the claims as baseless or conspiracist. Considering Juhan-Arnold is a clear underdog, though, taking a high-risk strategy of that sort may be a smart gamble – if you're on track to lose, there's nothing to lose from taking a risk. Well, except for the damage to confidence in Georgia food safety. Of course, this is all assuming voters heard anything from the debate at all.

I haven't talked about endorsements for a while, and that's because there hasn't been much to say – the more prominent statewide races, aside from the Senate race, haven't really had notable endorsers across party lines. But Harper has received a few notable Democratic endorsements, including two Black Democrats representing rural areas (Sen. Freddie Powell Sims and Rep. Patty Stinson) as well as former Gov. Roy Barnes. None of those endorsers are exactly progressives, and Barnes (at least) is no stranger to endorsing Republicans. But their endorsements give Harper credibility with moderates.

Looking at financials, since July 1, 2025, Harper has raised $1,315,682.33, including $791,166.08 in individual contributions, and has spent $345,162.74. (Archived filings indicate he had little activity in the cycle prior to July 1, 2025.) He had over $1M on hand as of October 20. Juhan-Arnold is delinquent on her filings and has not filed since the April 30 report, but I imagine she is well outside the rough 10:1 threshold I use as an indicator of viability. Unsurprisingly, it does not appear either campaign has run any television ads. Harper is running Facebook ads and seems to have the platform to himself.

As for independent expenditures, the six-figure Greater Georgia IE includes this race alongside Governor, Lieutenant Governor, and Attorney General, supporting the Republicans in all four races. (The SEIU mailer backing Democrats includes this race and all other statewide executive offices.)

That said, I am holding this race at Lean Republican. Harper has run an impressive campaign, and I expect he will be reelected, but at the end of the day, if Bottoms wins by a bit more than expected, Harper could well be swept out of office.

Commissioner of Insurance

The Commissioner of Insurance runs the Department of Insurance and also serves as the state Safety Fire Commissioner, in which capacity they certify elevators. As mentioned in the introduction, the elected office was known as Comptroller General for over a century.

Republicans have held this office since 1994, when John Oxendine narrowly defeated a Democratic incumbent; this is their longest winning streak for any statewide executive office, tied with State School Superintendent. This year, incumbent John King (R) faces perennial candidate Keisha Sean Waites (D). King is a former Doraville police chief and is the first Latino to hold statewide office in Georgia, although I'm not sure voters will realize that. King was appointed as acting commissioner by Gov. Kemp in 2019 to replace Beck, who was indicted by federal authorities for fraud almost as soon as he was sworn in. After Beck was convicted in 2021, Kemp formally appointed King to the vacancy, and King won reelection in 2022.

This is the nineteenth time Waites, who is Black, has run for office this century, and she has lost fourteen of those campaigns, although some were rather close. She has successfully won election to two offices (and been reelected), but she resigned from both those offices to run for a different job that was better-paying. Her most recent victory was for Atlanta City Council, where she won an at-large post in a 2021 runoff; since then, she has lost Democratic primaries for Fulton County clerk (2024) and for Public Service Commissioner (2025). Her voting record is generally progressive. King has never held or sought any other elected office. Although his social media posts tend to emphasize his support for other Republicans and for conservative policy, his platform is focused on accountability for insurers, with only a couple mentions of conservative policy. And one of those policies, tort reform, isn't exactly something the Republican base chants for at rallies.

I know at least one progressive Democrat in the state legislature who is voting for King, and it's not as if he's been a bad commissioner – although considering two of the four people to serve in the position this century are in federal prison, the bar is on the floor. Both candidates say they're committed to using the office as a consumer watchdog, and neither is (to my knowledge) active in the industries the office regulates, although Waites has yet to file her required financial disclosure.

One might expect King to boast some Democratic endorsements, but he hasn't really publicized any endorsements from either side, apart from prominent figures like Gov. Kemp. Looking at fundraising, King's filings include a massive amount of activity prior to the start of the campaign, which seems to be overcounted, which may be due in part to the change in filing platforms at the end of last year. Recalculating based on summary data, since July 1, 2025, he has raised $861,846.05 and spent $985,240.00, and he has six figures on hand.

Waites claims to have raised and spent $0.00 on the campaign, which raises the question of how she has a campaign website. In her past campaigns, she has twice faced investigation from the State Ethics Commission for filing false reports claiming she raised and spent $0, receiving thousands of dollars in penalties. In the 2024 case regarding her county clerk campaign, the Commission found that Waites had failed to report $65,529.44 in contributions and $65,627.07 in expenditures, including an unlawful contribution of $24,963 in City of Atlanta funds. It doesn't take a genius to conclude that Waites's filings this year aren't worth the hypothetical paper they're printed on.

To my knowledge, neither candidate is on television or YouTube, but King has run multiple Facebook ads with large audiences. The only independent expenditures reported here on either side are by the SEIU, which has sent mailers supporting the entire Democratic ticket.

After some consideration, I am moving this race to Lean Republican. It would be shocking in many ways if Waites wins, but the race simply isn't high-profile enough for her controversies to have penetrated with many voters. And King has run a somewhat more partisan campaign than the other well-situated incumbent, Tyler Harper. A small polling error in favor of Democrats would likely be enough for Waites to pull off the victory. And there's one major factor that should be a big boost to Waites: voters may confuse her with Keisha Lance Bottoms. All in all, I simply don't think there's enough data to support the Likely Republican rating.

State School Superintendent

My initial rating here was Tilt Republican. The state school superintendent runs the state Department of Education under the direction of the State Board of Education, which is appointed by the governor.⁶ Incumbent Richard Woods (R) faces Lydia Powell (D). As with most of the statewide races, Woods is white, while Powell is Black.

Republicans have held this office since 1994, when Linda Schrenko narrowly defeated a Democratic incumbent. (That's not the only thing Schrenko has in common with John Oxendine: she later went to federal prison, too.)

Both candidates have extensive experience in education: Woods has over 30 years of experience, including fourteen as a high school teacher, while Powell has 26 years of experience in “alternative, high achievement, and low income schools”. Woods was first elected in 2014, and he has fended off challenges in every primary and general election since. Powell was the Democratic nominee for Fayette County Board of Education District 1 in 2024, losing to the incumbent by 12.8%; for comparison, Harris lost District 1 by 7.0%.

Woods won a very crowded open-seat 2014 primary via runoff and went on to win the general election. In both 2018 and 2022, his predecessor, John Barge, ran against him in the primary; Woods defeated Barge with 60% in 2018 and 73% in 2022. In 2018, Woods defeated Democrat Otha Thornton by a 6% margin. In 2022, Democrats nominated Alisha Thomas Searcy, a charter school advocate. Teachers' unions responded by endorsing Woods, and he won the highest vote share of any statewide candidate that year, 54.2%, although his margin was narrower than Raffensperger's.

Both Woods and Powell narrowly prevailed in the primaries this year, but in very different ways. Woods received 49.9% of the vote in May and was forced to a runoff with Fred “Bubba” Longgrear, who was backed by several state legislators and had a significantly better-funded campaign. However, Woods managed to prevail in the runoff by 3%. By contrast, Powell captured 50.5% of the primary vote and managed to avoid a runoff.

Woods has generally not been one to seek out press attention, but he was at the center of a 2024 controversy over teaching AP African American Studies. That summer, he said districts would not be able to use any state funding to teach the course. He immediately came under heavy criticism from Democrats, and even Gov. Kemp sent Woods a letter asking several questions about the decision. Woods promptly reversed his position, but he simultaneously blamed Georgia's 2022 “divisive concepts” law for his original decision.

The two statewide teachers' unions, GAE and GFT, each endorsed another candidate in the Democratic primary, with GAE endorsing Anton Anthony and GFT endorsing 2018 nominee Otha Thornton. Neither organization was exactly quick to announce who it favored in the general election – in fact, they still haven't announced endorsements. GAE did eventually put out a webpage with its endorsements, but it's only accessible to members. However, the Cobb Association of Educators posted a handy graphic on Facebook that makes clear GAE has endorsed Woods.

Powell isn't a charter school advocate, and both candidates are skeptical of vouchers without expressing hardline opposition to the state's recently enacted program. So what's going on here? Many unions interact with politics in a very transactional manner, endorsing based on how much mileage they get from the endorsement rather than based on which candidate is the most pro-union. This is very noticeable in Democratic primaries, where unions heavily favor incumbents. Usually, this logic doesn't extend far enough for unions to endorse a Republican. But my working theory is that this is an exception.

There are likely other factors as well. Woods is a former public school teacher and is clearly viewed by unions as a somewhat safe choice. Powell is a relative unknown, and it is not immediately clear what type of schools her experience is from.

While Woods's long incumbency helps him on net – in fact, he's the only person on the statewide ballot who's won more than one statewide general election – it doesn't exactly seem like he has the Republican base locked down. It's one thing to win 51.5% of the primary vote in an open race, and another to win the same share as a three-term incumbent. Powell's weakness with unions hasn't exactly been a major news item, and even four years ago, when Democrats basically abandoned their nominee, Woods only won by 8%. And Woods hasn't exactly been an impressive fundraiser, although neither has Powell.

Looking at fundraising, Powell has not submitted her most recent campaign filing, like Juhan-Arnold and (effectively) Waites. However, through July 31, she reported raising a cumulative $14,935.50 and spending $17,281.22, and she claimed $5,402.49 on hand as of July 31. Woods, however, stands out from the other Republican incumbents seeking reelection. He reports that since July 1, 2025, he has raised $64,575.80 and spent $81,527.44. From August 1 to October 20, he raised $32,150.80 and spent $8,689.50, ending with $53,750.95 on hand. These are paltry sums for a statewide campaign, especially considering that Woods is the incumbent. He nevertheless has had enough money to run Facebook ads, and he appears to have that category to himself. As with Insurance Commissioner, the only reported independent expenditure here is the SEIU mailer. Given the GAE endorsement of Woods, it's worth noting that the SEIU is backing Powell.

Although I think it's not far from a coin flip, given how soon the election is, I'm holding the race at Tilt Republican. Overall, of the three elected Republican incumbents seeking reelection to statewide office, Woods is by far the most at risk of being swept out by a blue tide. But if the gubernatorial race is close or Jackson prevails, Woods will likely survive. And despite what I just said, he's not the only weak incumbent.

Commissioner of Labor

The Commissioner of Labor – hang on. Are you sitting down? Yes? Good. The Commissioner of Labor oversees the Department of Labor. Appointed incumbent Bárbara Rivera Holmes (R) faces Nikki Porcher (D). Holmes is the first Latina to serve in statewide elected office, although time will tell whether she becomes the first Latina elected to statewide office. Gov. Kemp appointed her last year to succeed Bruce Thompson, who died in office after effectively ousting former Commissioner Mark Butler; she previously served on the University System of Georgia's Board of Regents from 2018 to 2024. Porcher is Black and is a former public school teacher and current business owner. Neither candidate has previously sought elected office to my knowledge

Republicans have held this office since 2010, when incumbent Mike Thurmond ran for U.S. Senate and lost. This is normally a low-profile position, but it came under significant scrutiny during the COVID-19 pandemic due to a backlog of unprocessed unemployment claims. The General Assembly enacted legislation in 2021 that would have created a “Chief Labor Officer”, accountable to the General Assembly, to share the Commissioner's duties, but Gov. Kemp vetoed the bill, citing constitutional separation of powers concerns.⁷ Then-Sen. Bruce Thompson announced his campaign that summer, and Butler dropped out of the race in March of 2022.

Holmes faced no opposition in the primary this year. Porcher led a five-candidate field in the first round by a 5% margin, taking 30.8%, and won a runoff against Michelle “Michi” Sanchez with 61.7% of the vote (or a 23.5% margin).

There are several reasons to think that this is Democrats' best chance of ousting a statewide incumbent and flipping a lower row office. Appointed incumbents generally are weaker electorally than elected incumbents, and Democrats have done better in this contest the last two cycles than for the other three “minor” row offices. And although Porcher hasn't exactly been a strong fundraiser, she is not being kept at an arm's length from the ticket like some other downballot nominees, and she has backing from labor unions, including the AFL-CIO.

Speaking of fundraising, Porcher has raised a total of $79,212.92 and spent a total of $60,089.84 over the course of her campaign, and she reported $19,123.08 on hand as of October 20. Holmes has raised a total of $502,051.00 and spent a total of $210,384.88, and she had $291,666.12 as of the 20th. Narrowing to individual fundraising, Holmes has received $327,427.90 to $53,845.16 for Porcher. All these figures are well within the 10:1 threshold, although I'd rather be Holmes. It does not appear either candidate is advertising on television, Facebook, or YouTube.

As for independent expenditures, the Working Families Party has spent a small amount on mail and texts in support of Porcher, and the race is of course included on the SEIU mailer.

This is probably the hardest statewide race to handicap, and I'm leaving it as a Pure Tossup for now, but I hope to issue a final prediction before polls close.

Public Service Commission (Post 3)

The five-member Public Service Commission (PSC) regulates utilities. Members are elected statewide but must reside in particular districts; for clarity, I refer to the positions as “posts”, although they are labeled as “districts” on the ballot. Democrats currently hold Posts 2 and 3 after flipping them in the 2025 special election. In order to flip the majority, they need to retain this seat and flip Post 5. Normally, at least one PSC seat is on the ballot every cycle, but due in part to a Voting Rights Act lawsuit over the at-large election method and in part to the General Assembly slow-walking the election schedule, there were no PSC elections held in 2022 or 2024.

This seat was held by Democrat David Burgess until 2006, when he lost a close runoff to Chuck Eaton. Gov. Kemp named Eaton to a Fulton judgeship in 2021 and appointed Fitz Johnson as his successor. In the 2025 special election, Johnson faced no opposition for the Republican nomination, while the Democratic nomination went to a runoff, which was won by Peter Hubbard (over Keisha Sean Waites). Hubbard demolished Johnson in the special election, but Johnson is hoping for better luck in their rematch this year. In a unique dynamic, Johnson is Black and Hubbard is white.

Johnson only barely defeated Brandon Martin in this year's primary, and in a bizarre move for a challenger, he declined to attend a debate held by the Loudermilk Press Club, allowing Hubbard to have the stage to himself. (It is far more common for incumbents to skip debates.)

Looking at financials, Hubbard reports having raised $379,976.61 and spent $193,861.02 since January 1, while Johnson has raised $119,102.00 and spent $178,423.19 (recalculating to exclude 2025 data). As of October 20, Johnson had only $29,084.31 on hand, while Hubbard boasted a balance of $223,035.05. I am not aware of any television advertising for this race. Both candidates have run Facebook ads, although Hubbard appears to be dominating the category. Hubbard's campaign is also running a single YouTube ad.

Georgia Conservation Voters is running a single Facebook ad and heavy YouTube advertising to boost both Democratic candidates for PSC and attack the Republicans, and various other groups like the WFP are also spending in support of the Democratic PSC slate. At least one such group, GoodPower, is a dark money group and has refused to report its donors to the Federal Elections Commission, claiming all donations to the organization are exempt from disclosure because they are not technically earmarked for political spending. GoodPower shares its CEO and Massachusetts address with Action for the Climate Emergency, whose board of directors includes former Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, an outspoken advocate for climate action.

I think it's fair to say Hubbard's margin this year will be less than last year, when he received over 60% of the vote. But Johnson simply hasn't done what he'd need to do in order to win back the seat, especially when the gubernatorial race is tilting towards Democrats. If there's a polling error in favor of Republicans, though, he could pull it off. I'm holding this seat at Lean Democratic, reflecting that Hubbard is a modest favorite.

Public Service Commission (Post 5)

A brief recap: The PSC regulates utilities. Members are elected statewide but must reside in particular districts; for clarity, I refer to the positions as “posts”, although they are labeled as “districts” on the ballot. Democrats currently hold Posts 2 and 3 after flipping them in the 2025 special election. In order to flip the majority, they need to retain Post 3 and flip this seat.

Josh Tolbert (R) faces Shelia Edwards (D) for the open seat; both candidates have previously run for office in Cobb County and lost. Tolbert is white, while Edwards is Black. Republicans have held this seat⁸ since 1994, when Stan Wise narrowly beat incumbent Bobby Rowan. Wise served until resigning in February 2018. Gov. Deal appointed Tricia Pridemore to replace Wise, and she won reelection that November. Rather than seek reelection this year, Pridemore ran for Congress, losing the primary. After the primary was over, Pridemore resigned her seat, which is a bit ridiculous if you ask me. Gov. Kemp then appointed Wise, Pridemore's predecessor, to serve out the remainder of her term.

Tolbert ran last year in the special election for SD 35, the Cobb/Fulton seat vacated by Jason Esteves when he resigned to focus on his gubernatorial campaign. Tolbert, the sole Republican candidate, received 17.6% of the vote, narrowly achieving third place but finishing well behind the top two Democrats. Edwards ran in the 2024 primary for Cobb County Commission Chair against incumbent Lisa Cupid, receiving 30.6% of the vote. Back in 2020, Edwards ran for the District 4 post on the Commission, achieving first place in the first round of the primary (24.8%) but losing the runoff to Monique Sheffield by a 2% margin.

In this year's primary, Edwards won outright, defeating two other Cobb political figures with 55.7% of the vote, while Tolbert received 47.2% and advanced to a runoff, which he won with 59.8% of the vote.

Looking at finances, Edwards reports having raised a total of $178,591.68 and spending a total of $122,401.94; she had $56,189.74 on October 20. Tolbert has raised $132,097.39 and spent $113,373.92 and reports a $110,523.47 balance as of the 20th. Narrowing to individual contributions, Tolbert's total is slashed to $49,615.51, while Edwards's drops to $125,223.18. Interestingly, much of Tolbert's spending was during the primary, and he reported spending a mere $9,021.15 from August 1 to October 20. Edwards spent $93,532.51 over the same period, an edge of over 10:1. That doesn't magically mean Tolbert is doomed, but if he loses narrowly, he may regret sitting on six figures of cash.

Tolbert has run Facebook ads with substantial reach, while Edwards has not, and neither candidate is directly running YouTube ads. As for outside spending, it's largely the same story here as in the Post 3 race, as most outside groups are spending on both races. There's one exception, though: a group called Powering Georgias Future [sic] has spent just under $2 million to boost Tolbert and is running ads on Facebook ($54,066 total) and YouTube (likely similar). The group is not active in the Post 3 race. Even though Facebook and YouTube don't remotely account for all of the group's spending, I was unable to find records indicating any television or radio broadcast of the ads. Their YouTube ads, some of which I have received, claim Tolbert has a plan to keep rates down and hold data centers accountable. I was amused to note that one advertisement refers to Tolbert's “three-point plan” but only lists two of the points before cutting to a vote ask.

Unsurprisingly, Powering Georgias Future is funded entirely by a dark money group. In this case, that group is Competence Matters Inc., a 501(c)(4) that was registered with the Georgia government in July. Veteran GOP attorney Bryan Tyson is the registered agent of Competence Matters, and Powering Georgias Future is chaired by Rick Thompson of RTA Strategies, who is a prominent Republican compliance consultant.

I think Tolbert has a decent chance of holding the seat, but I'd consider it an upset if he does. My rating remains Tilt Democratic, reflecting that it is a tossup but that the Democrat is more likely than not to win.

Constitutional Amendment Summary

All Georgia voters are asked three questions on the ballot, all of which are constitutional amendments that were referred by the General Assembly. Georgia does not have a statewide ballot initiative process. There are often also statewide referenda that would not amend the Constitution, but there are none this year. The ballot language for constitutional amendments is set directly by the General Assembly and is not required to be neutral. The Constitutional Amendments Publication Board has prepared a PDF document containing the full text of all three measures and brief summaries of their effects, although it is not especially informative. (As an aside, if Democrats win the SoS and AG races, they would flip control of the Board.) I note that no constitutional amendment or statewide referendum has failed since 2016, when a sustained campaign soundly defeated a proposal that would have authorized the state to take over “failing” local schools.

Constitutional Amendment 1 would double the maximum acreage for a farm to qualify for certain tax benefits:

Shall the Constitution of Georgia, for the purpose of protecting family farmland, be amended so as to increase the maximum acreage to qualify for assessment and taxation as a bona fide conservation use property from 2,000 acres to 4,000 acres?

This question was referred by HR 32 (Ga. L. 2025, p. 1081), which passed the House 168-5 and the Senate 50-1. Although it has received some criticism, especially around the wording – many family farms are small enough to receive no benefit from the expanded eligibility – I anticipate it will pass.

Constitutional Amendment 2 would make all probate judge elections in the state nonpartisan:

Shall the Constitution of Georgia be amended so as to require that all probate court judges be elected in nonpartisan elections?

This question was referred by HR 251 (Ga. L. 2026, p. 1110), which passed the House 147-20 and the Senate 46-0. There are a variety of policy arguments for and against nonpartisan elections; I tend to lean in favor of partisan elections, especially for less prominent offices, as they provide voters with more information on the ballot. As mandated by the Constitution of Georgia, every county elects a probate judge in each year divisible by four; probate courts most notably handle estates and guardianships. Many counties in the state already have nonpartisan probate judge elections, and after a 2025 law made all magistrate judge elections nonpartisan, probate judges are the only remaining judges in the state who face partisan election, with the possible exception of the Columbus Municipal Court Judge. I anticipate this amendment will pass.

Finally, Constitutional Amendment 3 would authorize the legislature to create a dedicated “Next Generation 9-1-1 Fund” and dedicate certain revenue categories to the fund:

Shall the Constitution of Georgia be amended so as to authorize the General Assembly to dedicate certain existing revenues, including revenues reallocated by law, to a nonlapsing fund to be used exclusively for the expansion, maintenance, and operation of emergency 9-1-1 systems in this state?

This question was referred by HR 1243 (Ga. L. 2026, p. 1109), which passed the House 162-0 and the Senate 49-0. Generally, the Constitution of Georgia provides, at Art. III, § IX, ¶ VI (a), that all appropriations shall be for specific sums of money and bars direct appropriation of “the proceeds of any particular tax or fund or a part or percentage thereof” to any particular purpose. The General Assembly has nevertheless frequently sought to dedicate the revenue derived from particular fees or taxes to specified purposes, which long required a constitutional amendment. The 1983 Constitution was enacted with four exceptions to this general rule, and from 1986 to 2018, voters approved fifteen more exceptions and rejected four. In 2020, voters approved an amendment creating a process for the General Assembly to dedicate taxes or fees to particular purposes. However, that process imposes certain conditions, and it appears the General Assembly desire that the Next Generation 9-1-1 Fund not be subject to those conditions. I anticipate this amendment will pass.

If you've read to the end, I'd greatly appreciate either a paid subscription or a one-time tip. I have State Senate and State House previews coming up for Georgia, and even after the election, I'll have deep dives on election-related subjects and perhaps also on legislative and policy developments. In Georgia, every year is an election year, and I plan to have coverage of any special elections next year, as well as the regularly scheduled November municipal elections. If you're not in a position to sign up for a paid subscription, though, even the free subscriptions help as I work to build up a subscriber base. (You can sign up for a free subscription at the same link used for paid subscriptions.)

¹For a significant part of this time period, ending in 1845, Georgia elected part or all of its U.S. House delegation at large.

²Laken Riley was an Augusta University medical student murdered while jogging in Athens by a man who was unlawfully present in the United States. Her killer had previously been arrested for shoplifting and for driving a scooter without a license. I have consistently argued that the laws passed in response to her murder misidentify violence against women as an immigration problem. A recent report found that 2,381 women were killed by men in 2024 in the United States, and 86.9% of victims knew their killer.

³Republican Benjamin Conley became governor when Bullock resigned but was never elected. Republican Bo Callaway received the most votes in 1966, but he did not receive a majority, so the General Assembly picked between the top two candidates. Unsurprisingly, they picked Democrat Lester Maddox.

⁴The F stands for Flanders.

⁵Whether Jones is a sincere right-winger is a different question.

⁶This is the inverse of the structure of all local school systems in Georgia, where an elected school board appoints the superintendent.

⁷I think Kemp was probably correct, considering the Georgia Constitution's strong separation of powers language. I further note that the Constitution provides a clear remedy for an incompetent state official, one the General Assembly has shown little willingness to make use of: impeachment.

⁸I am counting by incumbent, not by seat/district number. Wise's seat was numbered 2 in the 1994 election but was numbered 5 by 2006.

Edits: None yet! You can reach me at eli@elium2.com for corrections. Any subsequent ratings changes will be posted separately, rather than as edits.