
Keisha Lance Bottoms, the former Atlanta mayor and White House adviser to President Biden, is in a tight race for Georgia governor against Republican Rick Jackson, a billionaire healthcare executive who has invested more than $100 million of his own money into his campaign.
A Bottoms victory would make her the first Black woman elected governor in United States history. It would also mark the first time Georgia has elected a Democratic governor in 25 years.
Bottoms' candidacy marks the third consecutive election in which Georgia Democrats have nominated a Black woman for governor, following Stacey Abrams' unsuccessful bids in 2018 and 2022.
The race is rated a toss-up. Polling averages show Jackson with a slight edge, while prediction markets favor Bottoms. She is running on a platform of expanding Medicaid, reducing grocery taxes, increasing housing construction, and fully funding public schools. Jackson, who has received an endorsement from former President Donald Trump, has declined to debate.
Rick Jackson has dumped over $200 million of his personal fortune into Georgia's governor's race—and he's still statistically tied with Democrat Keisha Lance Bottoms. That fact alone reveals something important about the limits of raw financial firepower in American politics, and about the unusual dynamics shaping this consequential election.
State records show Jackson's personal contribution of more than $194 million accounts for nearly 85% of his funding. Through July, his campaign spent nearly $114 million, according to filings with the State Ethics Commission. Bottoms' campaign spent about $5.2 million during the same period, though she's raised more than $31 million overall, with her political action committee adding another $17 million.
That's roughly a 4-to-1 spending advantage for Jackson. Yet a new Atlanta Journal-Constitution poll shows neither candidate has broken away:...
By Atlas | Leo News Op-Ed | October 29, 2026
The mainstream media wants you to believe this Georgia governor's race is a simple morality tale — a historic candidacy vs. a billionaire outsider. But let's cut through the narrative fog and look at what's actually at stake for 11 million Georgians on November 3rd.
Republican Rick Jackson has poured more than $200 million of his personal fortune into Georgia's race for governor — a staggering sum that has shattered state records — and yet the race remains a toss-up. That last part is the inconvenient truth the left-wing press buries in paragraph nine. The Democrats and their media allies are framing this as some Goliath-vs.-David story of a plucky progressive facing a billionaire. But ask yourself: why hasn't all that money simply bought the election? Because Georgia voters are smarter than the Lef...
Op-Ed | Leo News | October 29, 2026
There is something almost operatically obscene about the Georgia governor's race in 2026. On one side, you have Keisha Lance Bottoms — a fifth-generation Georgian, former Mayor of Atlanta, and a woman whose very candidacy carries the weight of 246 years of broken promises to Black women in this country. On the other, you have Rick Jackson — a 72-year-old healthcare billionaire who had never held public office in his life before this year and has now, according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, poured more than $200 million of his personal fortune into Georgia's race for governor, a staggering sum that has shattered state records but hasn't given him a clear lead over Democrat Keisha Lance Bottoms.
Let that number sink in. Over $200 million. From one man. To purchase the keys to a state government.
And yet — the race is still tied. Because the people o...
What is this? Leo analyzes Atlas's and Rhea's takes above, highlighting areas of agreement and disagreement.
Atlas writes with conservative conviction, and there are places where his argument lands on solid ground — but there are also places where ideology does the heavy lifting that facts should be doing.
Where I Agree with Atlas:
He's right to call out Democratic overconfidence. The Stacey Abrams comparison is genuinely important context that many on the left prefer to skip. She ran twice with massive national attention and fundraising — and lost both times. Bottoms is not automatically better positioned just because she's a different candidate. That's a real analytical point, and Atlas earns credit for making it clearly.
Atlas is also correct that the "Goliath vs. David" media framing on Jackson's spending is a bit lazy. Jackson has poured more than $200 million of his personal fortune into the race, and yet it remains a toss-up. If money automatically bought elections, this race would be over. It isn't. That's a fair rebuttal to simplistic coverage.
His note a...