Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Law with June Grasso from Bloomberg Radio
Speaker 1: Judge Spirit Mr Really, if the Court construes a statute
Speaker 1: in a particular way in order to avoid a constitutional question,
Speaker 1: wouldn't Congress be free to come back and say no, no, no,
Speaker 1: that is what we meant, and in this case, for example,
Speaker 1: we did want to rely on the commerce power. Justice
Speaker 1: Amy Coney Barrett was direct when asking questions during her
Speaker 1: first week of Supreme Court oral arguments and perhaps less
Speaker 1: professorial than one might expect from a longtime academic. Of course,
Speaker 1: Barrett is no stranger to oral arguments after her time
Speaker 1: as a judge on the Seventh Circuit and as a
Speaker 1: clerk for the late Justice Anton and Scalia. Court watchers
Speaker 1: learned a little about Barrett from her questioning. With one
Speaker 1: exception joining me is Kimberly Strawbridge Robinson Bloomberg Law. Supreme
Speaker 1: Court reporter Kimberly explain how the first arguments are usually
Speaker 1: a chance for people to see how aggressive a new
Speaker 1: justice will be and the new dynamic on the court,
Speaker 1: and why that didn't happen with Justice Barrett right. So
Speaker 1: typically a new justice often kind of take the backseat
Speaker 1: during their first arguments you kind of lay low at
Speaker 1: the you know, and the hang of being a justice.
Speaker 1: But we have some notable exceptions. In particular justice such
Speaker 1: Mayor and Justice Courses were very vocal in their first sittings,
Speaker 1: and they remained so on the Supreme Court bench for
Speaker 1: Justice Sparrett, those things are a little different because the
Speaker 1: court is hearing arguments remotely and instead of having this
Speaker 1: kind of script for all style or justice just just
Speaker 1: jump in whenever they're ready. The justices are taking turns
Speaker 1: asking questions, and so we don't really know what kind
Speaker 1: of justice or what kind of question or justice Sparrett
Speaker 1: is going to be in fancy actually gets into the courtroom. Also,
Speaker 1: you missed the facial expressions that people who are actually
Speaker 1: in the room can see in body language. That's right,
Speaker 1: and some of the justices are very big on their
Speaker 1: body language. And so the justice that comes to my
Speaker 1: mind it is justice, so you know, you can often
Speaker 1: see exactly what he's thinking about an advocates argument or
Speaker 1: about another justice is questioning right on his face. He
Speaker 1: doesn't take any precautions to really cover that at all.
Speaker 1: And of course we missed that one while on the phone.
Speaker 1: And I remember Justice course a cutting in to correct
Speaker 1: the Chief Justice and then cutting in again to correct
Speaker 1: his correction of the Chief Justice. That's right. And so
Speaker 1: one thing that really stands out for me whenever I
Speaker 1: think about the kind of justice that Justice Courtshiches is
Speaker 1: one of these arguments from his first sitting, where as
Speaker 1: you mentioned, he interrupted the Chief Justice to correct him
Speaker 1: about which highway runs through Montana, and then later on
Speaker 1: in the argument he had to interrupt again to say
Speaker 1: that he had actually been wrong and the Chief Justice
Speaker 1: had been right. That sticks out to me just because
Speaker 1: that's the kind of justice that Justice courses. Has been
Speaker 1: on the bench since, very self assured, willing to interject
Speaker 1: whenever he has a question. And again we didn't get
Speaker 1: to get kind of personality from Justice Sparrett, just because
Speaker 1: of the way that these arguments are taking place. What's
Speaker 1: your impression of her questions generally, Well, she seems to
Speaker 1: be very direct. She's not really showing her cars on
Speaker 1: how she's going to rule in these cases. She is
Speaker 1: showing her cards in the sense that she wants to
Speaker 1: make it clear why she's asking a particular question of
Speaker 1: the advocate. She really wants to make sure that the
Speaker 1: advocate answers her question and has an opportunity to kind
Speaker 1: of address the things that she's been thinking about. At
Speaker 1: least that's the way it seems as an observer. She
Speaker 1: was a law professor for about fifteen years. But does
Speaker 1: she question like a law professor? For example, do we
Speaker 1: hear a lot of hypotheticals? We do not. And so
Speaker 1: one of the other justices on the Court who was
Speaker 1: a law professor is Justice Brier, and he is known
Speaker 1: for his varied, long and involved hypotheticals. But that she's
Speaker 1: not something we've seen from Justice Sparrett so far, and
Speaker 1: not something that we saw from her while she was
Speaker 1: sitting on the Seventh Circuits for a couple of years
Speaker 1: as well. You said she doesn't really tip her hand,
Speaker 1: and I wonder if that's calm men to most new
Speaker 1: justices on the Court. I remember thinking that Justice Kavanaugh
Speaker 1: didn't tip his hand very much during his first term
Speaker 1: on the bench. That's right. So Justice Kavanaugh was more
Speaker 1: along the lines of what we traditionally see from a
Speaker 1: new justice, somebody who kind of hunk back, laid low,
Speaker 1: didn't really to his hands, and we've seen that's really
Speaker 1: how he's been on the bench since then. But you know,
Speaker 1: there's a saying among the justices that it takes five
Speaker 1: years to really settling into being a Spreme Court justice.
Speaker 1: So Justice Kavanaugh is still pretty new. I hadn't heard
Speaker 1: that before. Is there a reason why they settled on five?
Speaker 1: I think five is just a nice round number. I
Speaker 1: think the point is just that it takes some time
Speaker 1: to really get into the rhythm of the court and
Speaker 1: get into the rhythm of hearing cases and writing opinions
Speaker 1: and considering what cases to come before you. It's a
Speaker 1: lot of work for a new justice. Now, there was
Speaker 1: one instance where Barrett may have tipped her hand in
Speaker 1: a case pitting religious freedom against gay rights. Barrett's signaled
Speaker 1: that she might be willing to overturn employ Division versus Smith,
Speaker 1: a thirty year old precedent written by Justice Scalia. What
Speaker 1: would you replace messwith? Would you just want to return
Speaker 1: to Sherbert versus Verner? Yes, she did, And so one
Speaker 1: of the questions that the petitioners specifically asked in this
Speaker 1: case is for the Court to overrule what's really been
Speaker 1: a very unpopular Supreme Court decision, and she seemed open
Speaker 1: to doing that. And of course that's important, not just
Speaker 1: because of the impact it would have on religious freedom,
Speaker 1: but also because of the implications for other precedents that
Speaker 1: she might be open to overruling things like ro versus
Speaker 1: Wade and things on a permanent action and similar more
Speaker 1: controversial issues. I've been talking to Kimberly Strawbridge Robinson Bloomberg Law,
Speaker 1: Supreme Court reporter. President elect Joe Biden has pledged to
Speaker 1: nominate a woman of color to the Supreme Court should
Speaker 1: the opportunity arise, but he's not said anything about his
Speaker 1: choice for Solicitor General, the country's top advocate of the
Speaker 1: Supreme Court, often called the tenth Justice. The office of
Speaker 1: the Solicitor General role argues by far the most High
Speaker 1: Court cases each term and has traditionally been a springboard
Speaker 1: for female and male litigators to build Supreme Court practices.
Speaker 1: But the Supreme Court bar is still largely made up
Speaker 1: of white males, so many female appellate litigators and progressive
Speaker 1: advocates are saying Biden should make diversity a priority in
Speaker 1: picking his solicitor general. And she was a woman for
Speaker 1: the post. I was actually surprised to learn from your
Speaker 1: piece that only one woman was ever confirmed to be
Speaker 1: Solicitor General, and she's sitting on the court right now.
Speaker 1: That's right, there's just Elena Kagan was the first woman
Speaker 1: confirmed to the post Barbara Underwood, who is now the
Speaker 1: Solicitor General of New York Head Circuit and acting role um.
Speaker 1: But an interesting note about Justice Kagan is that her
Speaker 1: first appellate argument came as the Solicitor General arguing on
Speaker 1: behalf of the federal government in citizens. So it was
Speaker 1: a good debut. I guess Biden hasn't, as far as
Speaker 1: I know of an any hints about who we might
Speaker 1: appointed to be solicitor general. So is there like a
Speaker 1: concerted effort to have him appoint a woman as listener general. Well,
Speaker 1: I think one of the things that's driving, uh, this
Speaker 1: push to a point a woman is that what really
Speaker 1: sees that the number of female advocates versus male advocates
Speaker 1: is really abysmal. Uh. It ranges between twelve and twenty
Speaker 1: one percent in recent terms, and it's been very low,
Speaker 1: uh recently under the Trump administration. And part of the
Speaker 1: RAM is the office of the Solicitor General. They argue
Speaker 1: by far more cases than anyone else in the Sucreme Court,
Speaker 1: and so having a woman in that top spot, and
Speaker 1: having more women in that office in general, would raise
Speaker 1: those numbers quite a bit and could go a long
Speaker 1: way to getting some parody among advocates. Is anyone actually
Speaker 1: making a plea to Biden to a point a woman
Speaker 1: a solicitor general. I think they think that it's in
Speaker 1: line with some of the goals that he's talked about.
Speaker 1: So we we see not only that he's looking for
Speaker 1: diversity in the Supreme Court, but in his transition team
Speaker 1: in general. As you look on their web page, and
Speaker 1: they talked a lot about how their transition team are
Speaker 1: really diverse, made up not only of you know, male
Speaker 1: and females, but of different ethnicities, races, uh, And so
Speaker 1: I think they're they're thinking that this is along what
Speaker 1: he's going to be thinking of anyway. So tell us
Speaker 1: about some of the women who are being sort of
Speaker 1: talked up for solicitor General. Well, I think most of
Speaker 1: the people we're seeing are people who have actually had
Speaker 1: some experience in the office serving as assistance to the
Speaker 1: solicitor General. There were a number of women who right
Speaker 1: at the beginning of the Trump administration left and took
Speaker 1: a lot of good experience with them into private practice
Speaker 1: and have been building their resumes there ever since. And uh,
Speaker 1: you know, I think court watchers think that it's probably
Speaker 1: going to be somebody with experience from the Solicitor General's
Speaker 1: Office just because the office has uh don't think the
Speaker 1: little differently under the Trump administration. And so the hope
Speaker 1: is that we'll be able to get back to some
Speaker 1: of the norms under that office under the Biden administration.
Speaker 1: What kind of norms are we talking about that were
Speaker 1: strayed from? I think most notably um this idea of
Speaker 1: trying to jump over the federal courts of appeals and
Speaker 1: get right into the Supreme Court. Not only has the
Speaker 1: Trump administration brought many of those requests more than any
Speaker 1: other administration, but the Supreme Court has been granting a
Speaker 1: lot of those requests. And so we saw even Justice
Speaker 1: so to Mayor right up blistering opinion to her colleagues
Speaker 1: and chiding them for allowing the Solicitor General's Office to
Speaker 1: jump over the federal courts and not allowing the system
Speaker 1: to work the way that it's intended to work. Is
Speaker 1: there one candidate or two candidates whose names sort of
Speaker 1: pop up a lot there are. I would say there
Speaker 1: are about ten kingdodates whose name uh pop up. All
Speaker 1: would be really great. I think some of the front runners,
Speaker 1: or at least one front runner in my mind, is
Speaker 1: a partner at Mayor Brown Nicole's the Harsky she asked
Speaker 1: me on her law firm. Bio mentions that she's argue
Speaker 1: the most cases of any woman in the last decade,
Speaker 1: and she was in the Solicitor General's office for quite
Speaker 1: a long time, uh, and so she has the experience.
Speaker 1: I think that people are looking uh for the newest
Speaker 1: SG to bring to the office. Does the Attorney General
Speaker 1: have a lot of say usually in who the solicitor
Speaker 1: general is? Yes, and so we'll probably see the Biden
Speaker 1: administration UM try to pick their attorney general and their
Speaker 1: deputy Attorney general before moving on to the solicitor general
Speaker 1: pick um. Right now in the office was being headed
Speaker 1: by an acting Solicitor General UM. But I would expect
Speaker 1: that to change, and first you know, staff attorney in
Speaker 1: the office to take over acting while the Biden administration
Speaker 1: exist too for the top federal government lawyer in the
Speaker 1: Supreme Court. Another factor is that there have been very
Speaker 1: few solicitor generals of color over the years, there really
Speaker 1: has only been a handful. Most notably is uh Lader
Speaker 1: Justice third Good Marshal who was Solicitor General before he
Speaker 1: sat on the bench. Um. But definitely, you know, there
Speaker 1: are a number of candidates who are both female and
Speaker 1: who are attorneys of color who would fit the bill.
Speaker 1: So uh, you know, we could see Joe Biden kind
Speaker 1: of killed two birds with one stone. I want to
Speaker 1: turn for a moment to just as Alido. Justice Alito
Speaker 1: spoke to the Federalist Society and his remarks got a
Speaker 1: lot of attention, much of it negative attention. Can you
Speaker 1: tell us a little bit about what he said that
Speaker 1: drew attention? Well, I think for me, the thing that
Speaker 1: really when I was watching the remarks that really stuck
Speaker 1: out to me both as he was talking about the
Speaker 1: COVID restrictions and he said that they had brought upon
Speaker 1: the most limitations on our civil rights than we've ever
Speaker 1: seen before. And he went into specifics. He talked about religion,
Speaker 1: he talked about free speech, he talked about gun rights.
Speaker 1: All of these things he said were under attacks under
Speaker 1: the under the COVID crisis. And we just to point
Speaker 1: out that he is and along with Clarence Thomas, is
Speaker 1: one of the most consistent conservative votes on the Court.
Speaker 1: He certainly is so. He's an appointee of George bush
Speaker 1: Um and has consistently been on the conservative side of issues.
Speaker 1: We've actually seen him a calling for certain cases to
Speaker 1: be brought in front of the Court so the court
Speaker 1: can overturn longstanding precedent. So it's not as if we
Speaker 1: didn't already know that Justice Alito was conservative. Um, So
Speaker 1: it was something to see when he was talking so
Speaker 1: forcefully about issues that seemed likely to before the court.
Speaker 1: UH sometimes do thanks for being on the Bloomberg Laws show, Kimberly,
Speaker 1: that's Bloomberg Law. Supreme Court reporter Kimberly Strawbridge Robinson. The
Speaker 1: stakes and the Georgia Senate runoffs in January, it couldn't
Speaker 1: be much higher. Control of the U. S. Senate. Republican
Speaker 1: senators David Purdue and Kelly Loffler are facing off against
Speaker 1: Democratic challengers John Ossoff and Raphael Warnuck. With Republicans holding
Speaker 1: a fifty to forty eight seat advantage following the general election,
Speaker 1: the GOP could have as many as fifty two seats
Speaker 1: in the next Congress. While Democrats are trying for an
Speaker 1: even split, which would give Vice President elect Kamala Harris
Speaker 1: the tie breaking vote. So what are the strategies of
Speaker 1: the candidates and their parties? Joining me as Kyle Triggs,
Speaker 1: Dad Politics editor a Bloomberg Government Kyle. They say turnout
Speaker 1: is the key in these runoffs. What are each party's
Speaker 1: prospects of getting their voters out well the birds in
Speaker 1: male voting, I think the benefit Democrats, who historically have
Speaker 1: done terribly in runoffs in Georgia. I'm not sure they've
Speaker 1: ever won one for a federal rate, but the fact
Speaker 1: that they can get their voters to either registered to
Speaker 1: vote and then to vote early or vote by mail
Speaker 1: before January five, I think in the big advantage for them,
Speaker 1: Whereas in the past getting all their voters to turn
Speaker 1: out on a specific day has proved not successful. UM.
Speaker 1: So the Republicans go into this with the advantage because
Speaker 1: their voters are more likely to turn out at odd
Speaker 1: times elections. The Democrats because of the pandemic and everything
Speaker 1: that's done on this year, UM and all the male
Speaker 1: voting that we saw in the November three elections. UM,
Speaker 1: it looks like this is a toss up brakes because
Speaker 1: of that. Has there been any analysis don about why
Speaker 1: Republicans have won these runoffs in Georgia, why their voters
Speaker 1: seem more willing to come out. I'm not sure that
Speaker 1: there has. I mean, obviously, the Democratic Coalition relies on
Speaker 1: voters who don't turn out as often as Republican voters do.
Speaker 1: And it's sort of as simple as that, UM and
Speaker 1: run off to putting place sort of to help the
Speaker 1: majority party. And so that's kind of the basis of it.
Speaker 1: The GOP, you have Perdue and Loffler aligned with President Trump,
Speaker 1: including aligned on obviously on his claims that the election
Speaker 1: is rigged. Well, it helped them or hurt them that
Speaker 1: by the time this runoff takes place, Biden will most
Speaker 1: likely be declared the winner by the Electoral College. So
Speaker 1: how does that affect the GOP voters. Well, I think
Speaker 1: the fact that more Republicans haven't come out to congratulate
Speaker 1: President elect Joe Biden or even recognize that he is
Speaker 1: the president elect. I think it's directly related to their
Speaker 1: turnout hope in Georgia. UM, they want Trump based to
Speaker 1: be angry and to think they got robbed and to
Speaker 1: take it out at the ballot box, frankly. And so
Speaker 1: that is why you're seeing them a line with Trump
Speaker 1: having said that they also have to gin up turn
Speaker 1: out now. UM, And so you know you'll see Leffler
Speaker 1: saying Republican parties relying on us to not only hold
Speaker 1: the Senate, but to save the country. You know, they're
Speaker 1: putting it in really big terms. But you know, given
Speaker 1: the way the math is, Republicans have fifty seats in
Speaker 1: the Senate right now, Democrats have and so that sort
Speaker 1: of sets up a quandary for Republicans who want to
Speaker 1: be able to express to their base, you know, the
Speaker 1: urgency of this vote. They want to say Democrats would
Speaker 1: take control of the Senate by winning both seats. But
Speaker 1: when you say that, you have to con see that
Speaker 1: President Trump has lost. And so they're struggling that. You know,
Speaker 1: they're on this weird line right now of saying President
Speaker 1: Trump hasn't lost yet and yet sort of having to
Speaker 1: concede that he has lost that they can um signify
Speaker 1: to their voters what the stakes are. Then if Democrats limbos,
Speaker 1: they will control the Senate, Chuck Schumer will control what
Speaker 1: bills come to the floor, UM, and the Republicans were
Speaker 1: the Democratic you know, radical agenda will take over. President
Speaker 1: Trump is notoriously unpredictable. What could or might President Trump
Speaker 1: do about Georgia? I mean, might he go down there
Speaker 1: and might he tweet about it? Or is he just
Speaker 1: not interested in it at this point? Yeah, it seems
Speaker 1: his interests are very much elsewhere, um, centered more on himself.
Speaker 1: Having said that Mike Pants is heading there. There is
Speaker 1: a huge Republican fundraising operation being run by Karl Rove
Speaker 1: which is separate from Trump. UM. But I'm not sure
Speaker 1: if we will see Trump his I think the White
Speaker 1: House said, you know it's you know, it fits in
Speaker 1: his schedule, he might go down there. That tells me
Speaker 1: he's probably not going to go down there. But we
Speaker 1: do know how much he enjoys rallies, and if there's
Speaker 1: an opportunity to get down there um and have supporters,
Speaker 1: you know, be behind him and and perhaps get a
Speaker 1: couple of wins before he leaves office, you know, maybe
Speaker 1: we will see him down there. Two things you mentioned
Speaker 1: bring up questions for me. First, bringing outsiders Senator Marco
Speaker 1: Rubio was down there and a save our Majority rally.
Speaker 1: Do Georgians really care that much about outsiders coming in
Speaker 1: and telling them what to do. UM. Not. You know,
Speaker 1: I think just generally speaking, uh, you know, having surrogates
Speaker 1: like that come to the trail probably doesn't do a lot.
Speaker 1: But you know, I think Marco Rubio was there for
Speaker 1: a specific reason, UM, specifically to highlight Republican rhetoric that
Speaker 1: you know, Democrats support a socialist agenda. UM. And we
Speaker 1: saw that really take hold in Miami Dade County and
Speaker 1: Marco Rubio's home state of Florida, were um. Trump arly
Speaker 1: overperformed comp to what he did in while Biden got
Speaker 1: basically the same amount of vot Hillary Clinton, and it
Speaker 1: led to Democrats losing two House peeps down there. And
Speaker 1: so we're going to see Republicans using that line a
Speaker 1: lot in this election, UM, and then for the next
Speaker 1: two years as well. No matter what happens in George.
Speaker 1: There was a lot of outside money poured into some
Speaker 1: Senate races, for example in South Carolina where Lindsay Graham.
Speaker 1: Eventually one are we likely to see a lot of
Speaker 1: outside money being poured in here to by campaign ads
Speaker 1: and the like. Oh yeah, I believe we've already seen
Speaker 1: more than a hundred and twenty million dollars in TV
Speaker 1: time be booked. The Democratic candidates have both reportedly brought
Speaker 1: in about forty million dollars since the election. Um, you know,
Speaker 1: the Democrats around the country, Uh, as soon as they
Speaker 1: saw Joe Biden um was winning or about you know,
Speaker 1: about to win, or what's the race was called. Uh,
Speaker 1: it looks like their attention immediately turned to George just
Speaker 1: to try to bring along the Senate with him and
Speaker 1: help him get his agenda across. So money is pouring in,
Speaker 1: you know, in states like South Carolina where Lindsay Graham
Speaker 1: obviously was reelected. Um, I think he was reelected by
Speaker 1: ten points. And um, you know, his opponent was the
Speaker 1: first candidate ever to raise more than a million dollars.
Speaker 1: So in deep red states we saw fundraising not really
Speaker 1: helps Democrats that much. Mitch McConnell's challenger raised you know,
Speaker 1: something like ninety million dollars and she lost by double
Speaker 1: digits as well. Um, but Georgia is a battleground state now,
Speaker 1: and so the money and the message that the money
Speaker 1: is going to be paying for um, could really make
Speaker 1: a difference. Here. Are we likely to see negative campaigning
Speaker 1: attack ads? Perhaps? Yeah, there's plenty of attack ads flying
Speaker 1: right now there. So you know the there's two different races.
Speaker 1: Of course. Raphael Warnock is challenging Kelly Lessler, who's the
Speaker 1: appointed senator UM, and they're running for to fill the
Speaker 1: final two years UM of Johnny isaac Le term he
Speaker 1: resigned at the beginning of the year. UM. So there's
Speaker 1: ads being run against Rossael Warrener, who's UM a longtime
Speaker 1: senior pastorate at the User of Baptist Church in Atlanta,
Speaker 1: which was Martin Luther King Jr's congregation. UM. But they're
Speaker 1: the ads are criticizing him for speaking up to the
Speaker 1: support of Jeremiah Wright, who was President Obama's controversial pastor
Speaker 1: in Chicago. UM, and then for even for working at
Speaker 1: a church twenty five years ago UM in New York.
Speaker 1: I believe UM that had invited to del Castro to
Speaker 1: speak UM. So they're they're attacking him for you know,
Speaker 1: things like that. UM. And then John off Left, the
Speaker 1: other Democrat who's challenging David Perdue, the Republican first term senator.
Speaker 1: I think they put him his picture of next to Bernie's,
Speaker 1: Nancy Pelosi's AOCS and Chuck Schumer's you know, with the
Speaker 1: big block letters, radical agenda, So you know those types
Speaker 1: of ads, and then it's it's going both ways as well. Um.
Speaker 1: Democrats are really hitting David Perdue and Kelly Lee Leffler
Speaker 1: um for the stock sales they made shortly after the
Speaker 1: Senate coronavirus briefing in January. So you're seeing that in
Speaker 1: both races. So looking at Kelly Loffler and I'm wondering,
Speaker 1: does she benefit from being sort of tied here to
Speaker 1: Purdue or we're going to see more of the I
Speaker 1: think one of the ads was like rich, out of
Speaker 1: touch white folks. Both of them seem like the same
Speaker 1: kind of candidate in certain ways. Does she benefit or
Speaker 1: is it a detriment to her to be tied to Purdue. Well,
Speaker 1: that's a good question. You know, as a as a woman,
Speaker 1: you would think she might have a better chance of
Speaker 1: appealing to some suburban Republican women who maybe had been
Speaker 1: turned off by Trump but would like to support a
Speaker 1: Republican down balance. Um, So you know, it's possible that
Speaker 1: being tied to Purdue, you know, may hurt that advantage
Speaker 1: that she otherwise would have had. But you know, Purdue
Speaker 1: has been around longer, people know him more. Um, so
Speaker 1: I think it actually is an advantage to her to
Speaker 1: be tied to him. And yeah, this sort of goes
Speaker 1: to a larger point that you know, one party is
Speaker 1: probably gonna win both of these races, and so as
Speaker 1: David perdu goes, so goes Kelly Leffler and and same
Speaker 1: for the Democrats. So we'll see. But yes, I think
Speaker 1: Warnock criticized them as a way to show that he's
Speaker 1: sort of, you know, the regular guy who's gone through
Speaker 1: the same struggles as they have, versus these two former
Speaker 1: CEOs who are very wealthy. And you know, it's it's
Speaker 1: interesting that he sort of goes after both of them
Speaker 1: in one ad, not just Kelly Lefler who's running again
Speaker 1: worn off and off off campaign together before the general.
Speaker 1: Are they likely to do that and what's their advantage
Speaker 1: or disadvantage to being tied together? Yeah, they are likely
Speaker 1: to do that. I think they've already appeared together in
Speaker 1: the runoff at least once. But you know the other
Speaker 1: thing is that they can spread out now across the
Speaker 1: state and so, um, being tied to each other is
Speaker 1: helpful because you have it's almost like, you know, you
Speaker 1: have another you who can go out there and talk
Speaker 1: to voters. You can be in two places at once, UM,
Speaker 1: and so I think that's the real advantage. Raphael Warnock
Speaker 1: is obviously he's black, and so he could probably he
Speaker 1: I think Democrats are hoping can appeal to the state's
Speaker 1: large black electorate UM and really motivate them to turn out,
Speaker 1: and so that would obviously be a benefit to off
Speaker 1: off UM. I think that's sort of the those are
Speaker 1: probably the main point that are you know, that's why
Speaker 1: it's actually a good thing for them. What is the
Speaker 1: path that the Democrats see to victory in the runoff elections?
Speaker 1: What areas are they targeting? So there are two huge
Speaker 1: suburban counties outside Atlanta that have shifted from Republican to
Speaker 1: Democratic over the last four eight years, and those are
Speaker 1: Cobb and Gwynette County. They are just northeast and northwest
Speaker 1: of Atlanta, and Gwynette County is heavily immigrant. It features
Speaker 1: a lot of you know, New Georgians, people have recently
Speaker 1: moved to the state, either from out of state or
Speaker 1: from other countries. And then you have Atlanta, zonn and
Speaker 1: Fulton County. That's the place where I think Biden one
Speaker 1: by you know, two hundred and fifty thousand votes. So
Speaker 1: they really need to get their margins up in those
Speaker 1: two swing counties that have gone blue, and then you know,
Speaker 1: make sure their turnout is huge in Atlanta, UM. And
Speaker 1: then you also have Chasam County, which is down in
Speaker 1: the southeast of the state and that's where Savannah is UM.
Speaker 1: That's another huge Democratic population. And then you can go
Speaker 1: over to the west where Columbus Georgia is and that's
Speaker 1: not as big of a population, but it's still heavily Democratic.
Speaker 1: And so they really need to run up their margins
Speaker 1: there because in all the rural areas everywhere else and
Speaker 1: they're gonna be losing. And the problem to Republicans is
Speaker 1: all those other rural counties are pretty low in population.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's really all about Atlanta, but there are
Speaker 1: other gets of Democratic voters that could make the difference
Speaker 1: in a very close elections. And everything we're seeing right
Speaker 1: now is these are going to be two very close elections.
Speaker 1: Trump and Biden aren't obviously not going to be on
Speaker 1: the ballot, so they're not going to be draws. Does
Speaker 1: that affect the Republicans or the Democrats more. I guess
Speaker 1: you would just take a guess. No, you know, I
Speaker 1: think we don't just have to guess, because we can
Speaker 1: look at when when it's happened before. Republicans did terribly
Speaker 1: around the country. The Trump voters did not turn out,
Speaker 1: and so that is the big fear among Republicans right now.
Speaker 1: But Trump not on the ballot. Well, his strongest supporters
Speaker 1: who love him more than they love the Republican Party,
Speaker 1: well they turn out or not, and that is a
Speaker 1: big question mark that could be really bad for the GOP.
Speaker 1: Thanks Kyle. That's Kyle Trigg, stat Politics Editor, Bloomberg Government.
Speaker 1: I'm June Grosso. Thanks so much for listening, and please
Speaker 1: tune into The Bloomberg Law Show every weeknight at ten
Speaker 1: pm Eastern on Bloomberg Radio. Get the Pending Attended the
Speaker 1: Pending Pending, the ADDI