Perdue defeats Kingston in Ga. GOP Senate runoff
ATLANTA — Businessman David Perdue defeated longtime Rep. Jack Kingston in the Republican runoff for Georgia's Senate nomination, setting up a nationally significant general election matchup against Democrat Michelle Nunn.
Tuesday night's primary runoff win validates the former corporate CEO's campaign as an outsider. The former CEO of Reebok, Dollar General and the failed textile firm Pillowtex, Perdue offered his private sector record and tremendous wealth as proof that he can help solve the nation's ills in a Congress largely devoid of experienced business titans. He spent more than $3 million of his own money blasting Kingston — and other primary rivals before that — as a career politician, including one ad depicting his rivals as crying babies.
“If we want to change Washington, then we've got to change the people we send to Washington,” he would say as he met voters.
With 99 percent of precincts reporting, Perdue led Kingston by about 8,000 votes — enough for 50.9 percent of the vote. Perdue also led Kingston in the initial May primary, but both fell well shy of the majority necessary to win without a runoff.
National Democrats view Nunn, the 47-year-old daughter of former Sen. Sam Nunn, as one of their best opportunities to pick up a GOP-held seat. She's raised more than $9 million and reported $2.3 million left to spend this month. Perdue reported less than $800,000, but his personal wealth ensures that his campaign doesn't have to worry about money.
Perdue's win could require a strategic shift for the new Republican nominee and his Democratic opponent, since they now can't simply run against the sitting Congress.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.