New York Times: Stacey Abrams is a crazy extremist who appeals only to the “fringes” of the electorate:
More starkly than in most midterm campaigns, the contest between Mr. Kemp, the two-term Republican secretary of state, and Ms. Abrams, a former Democratic leader in the State Legislature, has come to mirror the disorienting polarization of the Trump era and expose the consequences of a primary system that increasingly rewards those who appeal to the fringes.
What are these “fringe” positions?
Each side frames the election of the other in doomsday terms. Mr. Kemp, the Democrats fear, will take Georgia the way of North Carolina and Indiana, which were tarnished by recent legislative battles over issues like gay rights and the use of public restrooms by transgender people. Republicans warn that Ms. Abrams, who hopes to expand Medicaid health coverage for the poor and disabled, will raise taxes they have cut, reverse the state’s job growth, deplete its rainy-day surplus and threaten its superior bond ratings.
To start with the only concrete policy proposal Abrams affirmatively supports mentioned here, the Medicaid expansion is a very popular policy nationally and is also very popular in Georgia. It’s opposition to Medicaid expansion that’s a fringe position. (And at least 90% of it would be picked up by the feds, a fact omitted from this account of course.) States like North Carolina and Indiana were “tarnished” because Republicans lost their shit over the actions of municipalities. Raising taxes that have recently been cut is hardly a “fringe” position. And the rest of this is just pure Republican spin presented if it were fact.
The portrayal of Abrams as some kind of fringe candidate is, in the most charitable interpretation, just grossly incompetent reporting.