(1) Galloway knocks another one out of the ballpark: 'Behind Michael Thurmond’s run for the U.S. Senate' & (2) What will Thurbert say?

State Labor Commissioner Michael Thurmond

A 4-2-09 post entitled "Michael Thurmond comments on Thurbert Baker's decision to enter 2010 race for governor," provides:

From the AJC's Political Insider:

“The last thing that the Georgia Democratic party needs is at this point in time is an extensive, controversial and divisive primary season, especially in the governor’s race,” said state Labor Commissioner Michael Thurmond, who is also vice-chairman of the party.

With Michael Thurmond publicly commenting on a decision by Thurbert Baker to run for a different office, I am wondering if we should expect the Attorney General to reciprocate.

This could be interesting as I assume that the Attorney General would be among "the essential stage hands of the state Democratic party" referred to in Jim Galloway's article below.

Jim Galloway writes the following keeper in the AJC's Political Insider:

Michael Thurmond, known as one of the most cautious men in Georgia politics, spent the weekend on the phone with the essential stage hands of the state Democratic party, explaining the gamble he’s about to take.

three-term state labor commissioner has plans on Wednesday – moved from Tuesday, as first reported — to announce his U.S. Senate candidacy against Republican incumbent Johnny Isakson.

Consider that Thurmond is, like Attorney General Thurbert Baker or former Gov. Roy Barnes, an A-list Democrat – often mentioned as a candidate for higher office, but never taking the plunge.

Also consider that Isakson may be the strongest and most popular Republican in Georgia.

So the question becomes whether Thurmond, a former state lawmaker from Athens, has been hiding a passion for the roulette wheel.

The answer is yes – and no.

Thurmond is better than good on the stump, and has a friendly demeanor that goes down well with voters. But he’s enough of a politician to understand the risk.

There are always unknowns. Isakson, 65, has had some health issues this spring. Polling has shown some vulnerability. And while the tea party movement has added emotion to the Republican side of the ledger, it’s also added a certain brittleness.

But the known knowns, as Donald Rumsfeld might say, include this: Isakson has raised $6 million for his re-election bid. And a contest against him is an uphill slog by any measure.

So what, short of outright victory in November, is Thurmond up to?

Politics is very rarely a team sport – but we may be seeing the equivalent of a sacrifice fly to deep right field, for the sake of advancing or protecting the Democratic runners already on base.

Thurmond is a sign that Democrats in Georgia and in Washington, with reapportionment coming next year, are dead serious about November.

Point One: All four major Democratic candidates for governor are casting Republican ineptitude in the state Capitol as the issue that will carry them into the general election.

The GOP, on the other hand, will do its best to tie Democrats to Washington and President Barack Obama, who does not poll well here in Georgia. Not among white independents. The economy will be the topic.

Isakson would be a major vehicle for nationalizing the Georgia contest. If the GOP incumbent, at the top of the ballot, clears much beyond 60 percent, strategists figure then Democratic chances of winning the race for governor disappear.

Whether the candidate is Barnes, Baker, DuBose Porter or David Poythress.

And right now, the only Democrat in the Senate race is the unknown and unfunded R.J. Hadley.

By putting up an A-list candidate fluent in the language of jobs and the economy, who just happens to be African-American, Democrats will be taking a large step toward preventing an Isakson-driven avalanche.

And remember that no one anticipated the September ‘08 economic bust that forced a runoff between Saxby Chambliss and Jim Martin.

Point Two: Thurmond had been spoken of as a candidate for lieutenant governor. But Carol Porter, wife of the Democratic candidate for governor, jumped in first.

Arguably, Thurmond might have beaten Carol Porter, but at the cost of a divided Democratic electorate that still bears the scars of the Cathy Cox/Mark Taylor debacle.

Thurmond’s shift to the U.S. Senate race in essence hands Carol Porter the Democratic nomination for a post that has never gone to a woman. Carol Porter could be the highest-ranking woman in state government.

Which means the contest against Republican incumbent Casey Cagle is sure to generate interest through November.

Moreover, let’s suppose that DuBose Porter does not win the Democratic contest for governor. By assuring Carol Porter’s nomination for lieutenant governor, you guarantee that the House Democratic leader will remain engaged.

Point three: In the Democratic race for governor, Thurmond’s entrance as a U.S. Senate candidate is likely to benefit Barnes.

Baker, while he has differed with other African-Americans in the party over such volatile issues as Genarlow Wilson, has a legitimate claim on black voters. Barnes likewise has a claim on African-American voters, through his decision to change the ‘56 state flag.

But with Thurmond at the top of the state ballot, racial loyalty immediately becomes a lesser issue. And if Barnes is indeed the Democratic nominee, the chances of an African-American backlash are greatly lessened.

I’m sure there are other advantages/disadvantages. Feel free to add them below. But bottom line, if Thurmond joins the U.S. Senate race, then — win or lose — should any Democrat win a statewide contest in November, he’ll deserve a spot on the stage.