Tomorrow is election day. The Milton Coalition Voter page has been updated. Specifically, under the News Stories, Podcast, Interviews, Questionnaires section, many new links have been added to assist voters in making their decision in the HD-47 race. Following is a link to the Milton Coalition Voter Page:
If you are a local political junkie, like me, I highly recommend the State Navigate (SN) website. SN mimics at the state level the highly regarded Cook Political Report, which analyzes and predicts national elections.
The State Navigate website has rated the HD-47 race as competitive; most races in Georgia are not competitive. Only 16 out of 180 house seats are currently rated as competitive. Still Miller is highly favored, with an 84% chance of winning. (Trump’s approval rating in HD-47 is 41.5%–slightly higher than his 39.3% nationwide approval rating.) However, Miller’s victory is not the lock it was expected to be, considering Miller’s huge advantages: a slew of political endorsements (including outgoing representative Jan Jones); many hundreds of thousands of dollars of PAC money; and a flood of large contributions from local politicians and special interests. Despite all these advantages, Miller has consistently underperformed. To be blunt, as someone who has closely watched his campaign, I believe he was run a poor campaign, with many missteps . . . surprising considering his long history as a political operative in various campaigns. After perusing State Navigator’s HD-47 predictions, I now understand why the state Republican party PAC is dumping so much money into the race. And I now understand why Miller’s surrogates have launched a very ugly smear campaign, often focused on the petty and personal . . . very much below-the-belt campaign tactics. Suffice to say, Miller’s Opie Taylor campaign image has been destroyed by his recent scorched earth campaign. My belief is the personal attacks will be ineffective at best and will backfire at worst . . . such tactics don’t play well in HD-47, where voters are much more educated, engaged and discerning. However, I suppose Miller perceived that victory might be slipping away from him and low-ball tactics were his only recourse. After all, winning is everything, right? That’s just politics, right? All’s fair in love and war and politics, right?
In previous elections, HD-47 was not competitive. Democrat challengers typically garnered only 37 – 38% of the vote. Additionally, as the blue zone has crept northward, HD-47 was re-districted in 2020 (by taking in part of very red Cherokee County) to keep the district in Republican hands.
Primary Forces Making HD-47 Competitive
Three forces are making the HD-47 race competitive:
First, Jan Jones is not on the ballot. Jones typically outperformed national and statewide Republican candidates in the district by 5 percentage points—a result of incumbency and a huge campaign war chest. So rather than starting with 37% of the vote, DeFranco probably starts with 42% of the vote.
Second, DeFranco is a much stronger candidate than previous Democrats that ran for the HD-47 seat. She is smart, engaging, hard-working, and media-savvy. However, her career in media has meant she also carries a lot of baggage in the form of stupid, sometimes offensive, social media utterances. Nevertheless, I think her candidate strength still nets out positive, perhaps adding another 2% to her vote totals.
Third, it is unfortunate, but state elections have become nationalized. This is especially true of the current election. And this trend should be helpful to DeFranco. Every state poll indicates that Democrats will gain seats in the Georgia House and possibly the State Senate. SN gives Democrats a 29% chance of actually winning a majority of seats in the Georgia House. Certainly, the Republican headwinds blowing from Washington DC will substantially hurt Republican candidates in statewide races . . . how much remains to be seen.
Split ticket voters will decide this election. Typically, Republican split ticket voters outnumber (by 3 to 1) Democrat split ticket voters. And the proportion of such voters is higher in District 47. Remember it was white, educated, suburban voters that put Biden in the White House in 2020 . . . a very high proportion of such voters live in HD-47 and a large majority of these voters were women. Add to all of this the Ossoff effect. It is a near certainty that Ossoff will win because of Republican split-ticket voters; he currently maintains a relatively high 20% approval rating among Republicans. Common sense suggests these voters, having voted for Ossoff, will be more inclined to vote down-ballot for other Democrats. All these factors militate in favor of DeFranco. So perhaps Republican headwinds will yield another 4% for DeFranco.
Three Areas Where DeFranco Has Underperformed . . . Possibly to Her Detriment
Of course, it is difficult to assess the above factors, particularly the second and third factors. I predict DeFranco will garner 48% of the vote . . . well within the (large) margin of error. We’ll see. As a strategist by trade, there are a three areas where DeFranco has fallen short and would explain her defeat–if it comes to pass.
First, despite her media savvy, De Franco’s messaging has been scattered and sometimes poor quality. Some of her posts have been on-the-mark and brilliant. But quite a few posts have been weird, wacky, and sometimes whiny. And I was baffled as to the relevance/purpose of some posts.
Second, DeFranco needed to run as a moderate to attract the split ticket voters that will decide the election. Jack Miller understands the criticality of these voters and his messaging (until he veered sharply negative) seemed aimed at these voters. His model-citizen, calm demeanor is reassuring; his messaging—although mostly vanilla—was designed not to offend . . . again, until he decided personal attacks were needed to win. DeFranco has touched on some themes (accountability and transparency) and issues (Flock cameras) that appeal to voters across the political spectrum, particularly split-ticket voters. She needed to do much more of this. And she needed to moderate her progressive stances on certain issues (healthcare, education, abortion). When you are running and serving a strongly red-leaning district, you need to acknowledge that and position yourself accordingly . . . that is, not too far to the left. Too often De Franco has been preaching to her base, who regardless (of her messaging) are going to show up and vote for her because of the Governor and US Senate races. (Frankly, as a political conservative, I must admit DeFranco’s strong progressivism makes me queasy and she’s done little to allay that queasiness.)
Third, DeFranco has not sufficiently exploited Miller’s vulnerabilities . . . and he has many, which is why he avoided a debate and limits appearances to carefully choreographed events with friendly audiences. DeFranco seemed not to fully appreciate Miller’s vulnerabilities, so her messaging about Miller was sometimes muddled and not especially compelling. She should have chased him especially hard on 1) the $300,000+ campaign on his behalf by the gambling industry, 2) the huge conflicts of interest associated with his employment by the mayor of Milton, and 3) the incredible volume of IOUs Miller has issued to PACs, special interests, and various politicians. To be blunt, DeFranco needed to better and more fully expose the lack of integrity permeating Miller’s campaign and the associated high potential for future corruption.
Anyway, that is more than I wanted to say about the election. I will not endorse a candidate or even imply how I’m voting: Miller, DeFranco, or just skip the HD-47 race on the ballot.
Early voting begins October 13th. I have updated the Milton Coalition Voting Guide, which is a one-stop shop for 1) information on the candidates and 2) general election information (dates, locations, etc.). I have added several recent news stories covering the candidates as well as links to a few websites that provide detailed information on the HD-47 races, including district maps, previous election results, and financial disclosure summaries. Following is a link to the Voter Guide. I will post additional news stories as they become available.
I was disheartened to learn that Republican candidate Jack Miller withdrew from a scheduled debate hosted by Appen Media. According to Ms. DeFranco, his campaign notified Appen of his withdrawal just 10 minutes before the debate was to commence. The debate proceeded without Mr. Miller, with Ms. DeFranco responding to the moderator’s questions. A link to the debate is provided at the Milton Coalition Voter Guide.
Mr. Miller also avoided debating his primary run-off opponent Brian Cochran, with his campaign stating he was “unavailable” for a debate. Voters deserve better from Mr. Miller. Why is Jack so afraid to debate his challengers? If Jack cannot show up for a candidate debate, should we assume he also won’t show up for citizens when we need him? Doesn’t Jack understand the importance to voters of demonstrating transparency and accountability? I suppose Mr. Miller knows he has much to answer for. He would rather not answer uncomfortable questions about his being tipped off about Jan Jones retirement . . . about PAC money pouring into his campaign . . . about his countenancing dark money campaigns (over $300,000 in expenditures) conducted on his behalf . . . about several sketchy endorsements he touted . . . about his flip-flopping and evasiveness on legalized gambling . . . about funding from special interests . . . about copious political IOUs he has issued . . . and about conflicts of interests inherent in his employment by Milton Mayor Jamison.
Yes, Mr. Miller has much to answer for. Right now, Miller is confining his campaign appearances to carefully orchestrated events with friendly audiences. I hope some attendees will pointedly ask Miller about these issues he seems intent on avoiding . . . and please make sure the video cameras are running. Voters, ensure that Jack earns your votes by telling us exactly where he stands on the issues that I have outlined above.
Advocating for Candidate Transparency and Accountability,
Tim
Note: I am not inclined to endorse either candidate at this time. However, I believe that voters deserve a full and fair vetting of both candidates. That requires open, honest, and substantive dialogue with citizens. And right now, Jack is avoiding such conversations with voters. We need spirited and rich discussion and debate, not pep rallies and look good/feel social media posts. Elections should not be popularity contests; we are not electing a Prom King/Queen, but rather electing a representative that understands and appreciates the serious and difficult task of governance.
The Milton Coalition Blog is providing a one-stop shop for candidate and election information for the 2026 Georgia House District 47 race. This website includes:
Links to candidates’ campaign websites and social media outlets.
A link to the easy-to-use and informative Georgia Ethics Commission website that synthesizes and summarizes candidate and PAC financial disclosures required by state and federal law.
Candidate letters to voters submitted to the Milton Coalition Blog.
Useful Election information, including key dates/deadlines, polling locations, useful hyperlinks, etc.
The Milton Coalition Blog is the ONLY online site in District 47 that provides a full and continuously updated compilation of candidate and election informationfor easy voter access . . . one-stop shopping for candidate and election information. Following is a link to the Milton Coalition 2026 District 47 Candidate and Election Guide web page:
A few weeks ago, D-47 Democrat candidate Lindsay DeFranco reached out to me regarding a factual error at the blog, which I (promptly) corrected. In her email, Ms. DeFranco graciously offered to meet with me. I accepted her invitation and we met for approximately two hours.
I previously had similar extended discussions with both Republican run-off candidates Brian Cochran and Jack Miller. I would surmise that I am the only D-47 voter that has had the honor and privilege of such lengthy discussions with all three D-47 candidates. And of course, because of my 10+ years covering local politics, these discussions were both substantive and comprehensive. Thank you to all 3 candidates for indulging me. I would welcome future opportunities to meet.
Currently, the Milton Coalition Blog is the only independent media outlet covering the D-47 campaign. Readers might wonder why the MC Blog is covering the D-47 race. My primary motivation is to influence both Mr. Miller and Ms. DeFranco to be better candidates and ultimately better legislators.Voters deserve substantive debate about policy issues that citizens care about. I want to especially prod the candidates to focus on elements of good governance that transcend party politics . . . things on which we all agree, such as greater transparency and improved accountability. Citizens deserve more than platitudes and vague promises . . . we deserve substance and specifics. Finally, character counts! Citizens deserve representatives who will run and will serve with integrity, courage, competence, and compassion. The MC Blog will not be shy about calling out candidates that travel the low road in this election.
I provided the same letter-writing guidelines to Ms. DeFranco that I provided to the Republican run-off candidates when they submitted letters. My only stipulation was that letters not exceed 500 words. I am publishing Ms. DeFranco’s letter without commentary. I am providing Ms. DeFranco’s letter exactly as written and providing a pdf of the letter.
In October, I will again invite Ms. DeFranco and Mr. Miller to submit letters providing their closing arguments to voters.
Please forward this post to family, friends, neighbors, and colleagues who live in District 47. Please share the blog URL on social media. More informed voters yield better election outcomes.
Thanks to Ms. DeFranco for her letter and thanks to readers for being informed citizens and voters,
Tim
Lindsay DeFranco’s Letterto Voters
I’m Lindsay DeFranco, and I’m running to represent House District 47.
I grew up in Alpharetta. I went to Barnwell Elementary, Haynes Bridge Middle, and Centennial High. Like a lot of people, I left, built a career, and came back to raise my family in the place I call home. My husband and I have two kids in Fulton County Public Schools. Time away teaches you what a community is worth, and how fast it can slip away.
Fifteen years ago, my husband and I co-founded an independent media company, now home to one of the most successful online news shows ever made, based on an unheard of concept at the time. The work was always about dismantling the gatekeepers who decided what ordinary people were allowed to know. I intend to do the same with politics here.
I also co-founded a media literacy nonprofit, because the news business taught me how much depends on people understanding what’s being done in their name. I’ve spent my entire life being held publicly accountable, my work and judgment out in the open. That doesn’t stop here. You may not agree with me, but you will always know where I stand. My door will always be open to you.
For years I’ve been showing up: testifying at the Capitol on bills most people never hear about until it’s too late, sitting in on State Election Board meetings, going to city council meetings and town halls. If you’re not in the room, you miss the details that matter, and the details are usually the whole story.
The government should work as hard as you do. We pay plenty. Our schools are still underfunded, our infrastructure is still struggling, and our money goes everywhere except back into this community. Why do commutes keep growing? Why do you get transferred four times when you finally reach someone at a state agency? And of the programs that do get funded, is anyone checking whether they help?
Meanwhile, the state hands $2.5 billion in tax breaks to data centers owned by the richest companies on Earth while sitting on a $14 billion surplus. That isn’t fiscal responsibility. A budget is a list of priorities, and right now you are not on it. Property taxes climb because the state underfunds our communities and lets the bills land locally. That’s a decision made at the Capitol, and the answer isn’t paying more. It’s demanding your dollars come home.
They promise the same things every year and fix nothing, because the problem is the product. Solve it, and they’d have nothing left to run on. When we invest early, in healthcare, safety, schools, and strong neighborhoods, we spend less and get more. That’s what I mean by lower costs and higher standards.
This seat is open for the first time in 24 years. I’m not asking you to change your party or your identity. I’m asking you to expect more from the people spending your money.
July 12, 2026: I am posting a correction to this blog post. See below note in red.
Election Day for the District-47 Georgia House Seat Republican Run-off is June 16th. Please vote.
The previous Milton Coalition Blog post endorsed Brian Cochran. That post emphasized Brian’s stellar qualifications to represent D-47, only implicitly referencing his opponent Jack Miller’s missteps. This blog post will be more explicit in explaining Miller’s blunders, which strongly point to Cochran as the more pragmatic choice for Republican voters, both in terms of electability and legislative effectiveness (should he be elected).
I have known both Jack and Brian for many years. Both Jack and Brian are fine young men. However, Jack has stumbled and lost his way, although he has belatedly taken some actions to rectify his errors. Unfortunately, through his missteps, Jack has weakened his standing with voters, reducing his odds (once quite high) of winning the general election and diminishing his future legislative influence should he prevail in the elections.
When the campaign began, I was all-in for Jack. However, as Jack’s campaign progressed, I (and other voters) became increasingly troubled by several issues. While some issues were deeply concerning, individually, they were not deal-breakers: an unfair head start; copious, dubious, and entangling politician endorsements; a dull and uninspiring campaign; questionable tactics; and an injection (from PAC advertisements) of divisive national politics. Notwithstanding these other issues, one issue predominated and is disqualifying for Jack in the run-off election: Gambling Dark Money campaigns conducted on Jack’s behalf that he accepted and from which he has immensely benefited. I estimate the Gambling Dark Money expenditures to be $300,000+. Sadly, Jack’s public responses to these expenditures have been too little, too late. Gambling Dark Money is Jack’s Achilles Heel and could dog him all the way to November. The Gambling Dark Money fiasco is Exhibit A in the case for Brian Cochran being the more pragmatic choice for Republican voters. The Democrat opponent, Lindsay DeFranco, will relentlessly wield Dark Money as a cudgel against Jack. In fact, Ms. DeFranco recently sent her first mailer to voters, with a sole focus on Gambling Dark Money.
(Corrected July 12, 2026. See above introductory note in red. I have concluded that Ms. DeFranco was not behind the referenced mailer, which was anonymous.)
The Dark Money campaigns also hurt Jack by nonsensicallytying him to divisive national politics. Prudently, neither Jack nor Brian has referred to national politics in their election communications. Both occupied a right-of-center lane in the campaign. In contrast, the PAC campaigns for Jack maladroitly injected national politics into the run-off, pulling Jack’s campaign messaging unnecessarily Rightward. This is certain to hurt Jack, if he is the Republican nominee; pivoting closer to the campaign centerline (needed to win the general election) will be difficult. The explicit linkages to national politics are yet another weapon Ms. DeFranco can employ. She can now portray Jack as too extreme for D-47 . . . creating unease among Independents and more moderate Republicans needed to win the election. Conversely, Brian Cochran is unsoiled; he has wisely avoided being dirtied by national political rancor.
Lastly, Jack poorly executed his endorsement strategy. To his credit, Jack has taken down his website’s endorsement page. However, much damage has been done (and can only be partially repaired). There were several issues with Jack’s endorsement strategy. First, many persuadable voters recoil at entrenched politicians telling them how to vote. Many such voters now view Jack as just another political insider and establishment politician. Second, staring out from Jack’s bingo card of endorsements were several sketchy endorsers that Ms. DeFranco can now link to Jack. And in fact, Ms DeFranco is already citing questionable endorsements in her online posts. Third, and most-importantly, Jack’s endorsements mean he returned a lot of valuable IOUs (he had earned while working on various election campaigns) to their originators. Jack is no longer a political creditor, but rather is now a political debtor . . . deeply in debt to a bevy of politicians as well as to immensely powerful gambling corporations. And unfortunately, Jack’s accumulation of so much political debt and his entanglement with so many career politicians (plus his association with Gambling Dark Money) could limit his effectiveness in the House–should he be elected. Brian has none of this baggage. Brian’s lack of obligations makes him more electable and potentially more effective as legislator (than Jack). Brian Cochran is beholden to no one.
Jack’s self-inflicted wounds have certainly diminished his political standing, perhaps fatally. Pragmatism suggests that Brian Cochran is the more electable candidate and (potentially) more effective legislator. However, putting aside his lack of political baggage (that make him the more pragmatic candidate), Brian Cochran is a strong candidate in his own right. Brian has a demonstrated track record of fighting for our civil liberties. Brian is a man of courage, integrity, and competence. His expertise in technology is critically needed at the state house, especially in sensibly regulating AI. Brian is unequivocal in this opposition to gambling, including referenda that would pass the legislative buck to citizens. Against all odds and despite rivers of PAC money being spent for the benefit of his opponent, Brian vaulted into the run-off. Brian self-managed and (mostly) self-financed an impressive, enthusiastic, and authentic grassroots campaign. However, Brian needs your help to cross the finish line. Please join your fellow citizens in voting for Brian Cochran . . . the pragmatic choice and the best choice for District 47.
Following are some links to Brian’s campaign websites:
I am also including a letter from Brian to voters in which he makes his closing argument for your vote.
This is likely my last long-form blog post before election day. However, I will continue to publish shorter posts at the Bits and Pieces blog page; such posts do not generate emails to blog subscribers, who will need to directly access the Bits and Pieces page for the latest analysis of the D-47 election. Following is a link: Bits and Pieces
I am enthusiastically endorsing Brian Cochran in the Republican run-off for the Georgia House District 47 seat. This is only my fifty endorsement in 10+ years of community advocacy; I set a high bar for endorsements.
In my previous post, I described the single issue that has been definingthe District 47 run-off: Gambling Dark Money intended to subvert the integrity of our local elections. I will not say more (at this time) about this issue. Belatedly, this issue is now being properly addressed. That is good for everyone: citizens and the candidates. (See Note 1.)
This post’s focus is on Brian Cochran. Over the past few weeks, I have had the pleasure of re-acquainting myself with Brian, who was my neighbor many years ago. Brian is an impressive young man. A Georgia Tech graduate, he currently works as robotics engineer. He has deep AI expertise and his campaign pitch for prudently regulating AI is resonating with voters. Brian is self-managing and (mostly) self-financing his own campaign. He has enthusiastic, young, unpaid volunteers pounding the pavement for him. No campaign consultant intermediaries; no wealthy donors; no PAC-purchased canvassers. He is running an amazing DIY campaign. There is an appealing authenticity and infectious fervor infusing Brian’s campaign. You can feel the enthusiasm. Brian is the Train-That-Could chugging uphill against the political establishment.
Alveda King (far left) with Brian Cochran (far right)
What I most like about Brian Cochran is his focus on liberty and his courage and tenacity in fighting for our rights. While a student, Brian filed a free-speech lawsuit against Georgia Tech . . . and against all odds, he won. GIT settled the case for $50,000, but more importantly GIT agreed to fundamentally change its rules for student organizations. No longer would GIT distribute money based on whether the university agreed or disagreed with an organization’s political, religious, or ideological views. Henceforth, GIT would maintain viewpoint-neutrality in distributing funds. Although his lawsuit focused on the First Amendment right to free speech, Brian also scored victories for freedom of religion, freedom to protest, and freedom of assembly . . . three other First Amendment Rights. Impressive! (See Note 2.)
Through his actions, Brian demonstrated admirable bravery. Brian is a fighter and a man of integrity. He is comfortable being an outsider and a scrappy underdog. Americans love an underdog. Brian has the courage of his convictions. That is critically important. Through his lawsuit, Brian had to navigate state government and often experienced indifference, obstruction, and sometimes even hostility. He wants to change that. He has an understanding—that can only be gained through experience in the trenches—of the ever-present threats (e.g., Gambling Dark Money) to our republican democracy and our basic civil liberties. Brian understands the most important role of government, as articulated in the Declaration of Independence, is to “secure” our “inalienable rights.” We need a champion for our rights like Brian Cochran in the Georgia Assembly.
Brian has not received any support from gambling PACs nor are any PACs conducting campaigns on his behalf. Brian has made his position on gambling clear: he will actively oppose expansion of gambling in Georgia, including past-the-buck referenda being proposed by cowardly elected representatives that want to shirk their legislative responsibilities. Brian is beholden to no one, except the citizens of District 47. I am confident Brian will represent citizens with competence, compassion, and integrity.
As always, thanks to my readers, voters, and sentient citizens. Thanks to both candidates, Jack and Brian, for running to represent the worthy citizens of District 47; both are fine young men.
Advocating For Citizens,
Tim
Note 1: There is an opportunity to reset the election once the run-off has passed. So far, the Dark Money issue has eclipsed all other issues in this election. However, the Gambling issue’s importance in the general election can be dramatically diminished; both Miller and Cochran are taking appropriate steps to do so. Both have categorically stated their opposition to gambling expansion, including through referenda. The Gambling PAC issue needs to be put behind us; there are other important issues that need vetting.
Note 2: Since 2018, most of my consulting work has been in higher education. Based on my higher education experience and expertise, I can tell you that Mr. Cochran’s victory against GIT and the state of Georgia is astonishing. To take on the professoriate (and its acolytes) and win is quite a feat of daring and courage. Cochran outsmarted the self-annointed intelligentsia.
Using Dark Money, Gambling Corporations are mounting a Pearl-Harbor-style assault on our democracy . . . the likes of which we’ve never seen in Georgia. And if successful, we will see a proliferation of similar onslaughts in future elections. The consent of the governed will be effectively blotted out by the purveyors of Dark Money. Now is the time for ordinary citizens to oppose Special Interests that are using deception and manipulation to finagle their agents into the state legislature. Don’t let gambling PACs choose your representatives!
So why the Pearl Harbor analogy? Isn’t that over-the-top? Not in the least. This Gambling Industry PAC-Attack is a huge assault and it is a surprise assault. $10M+ (and growing) is being injected into 30+ selected state legislative races . . . that’s $300,000+ per race. And based on what I’ve seen (e.g., 18 PAC-financed mailers . . . so far), District 47 is seeing this level of spending. The state PAC behind this dark money attack (Republican-tilted American Conservative Fund Action Georgia) is the largest Georgia PAC in both contributions and expenditures. And when combined with the smaller Democrat-tilted American Future PAC (which traces its funding back to the same Win For America Super-PAC and the same gambling corporations as its conservative counterpart), the dark money pot tops $10M. This is nearly twice the second biggest Georgia PAC, the Georgia Democratic Party, at $5.6M. Why is this a sneak attack? First, gambling is never mentioned in any campaign promotional media for candidates. And gambling is never mentioned at the PACs’ websites. Second, you must wade through three layers of PACs before you identify the malefactors: three gambling corporations lurking at the 4th layer. Third, these PACs were all established within the past 8 months. (American Future, the Democrat gambling PAC, wasn’t registered in Georgia until April 17th.) The recency element is important because there are time lags that watchdogs (like me) must deal with. The intent of these PACs is to attack with minimal advance notice (just like a military attack) to maximize the element of surprise . . . perhaps people won’t notice or act until it’s too late.
Fortunately, some watchdogs were paying attention. Sentient reporters began sounding the alarm in early February. Over a period of several weeks, the gambling corporations’ master plan was gradually revealed and exposed: $41+M in gambling dark money to be spent on state legislative races in selected states where gambling is illegal, including Georgia, Alabama, and Texas. By mid-April (before early voting started on April 27th), several excellent articles had been published by national media that shone a bright light on the Gambling Dark Money invasion. And since then, articles have abounded that expose the Gambling Industry’s plot to hijack elections. Unfortunately, in some cases, the media reports read like obituaries or post-mortems, reflecting Gambling Dark Money’s deathblows in numerous state legislative races. In Georgia, only two of the Gambling PACs’ candidates failed to win outright or else advance to the run-off. That, citizens, shows the overriding influence of this Dark Money. Hopefully, District 47 voters will more discerning . . . at least, now that they are aware of the situation and the clear-and-present dangers.
So don’t let any politician tell you that he didn’t know what was going on. Nobody is that clueless. “American Conservative Fund” (or “American Future” in Democratic races) appears on all promotional materials for the Gambling PACs’ anointed candidates. To ascertain the truth, one need only insert “American Conservative Fund” (or its variants) into one’s favorite search engine . . . or use easily searchable online state and federal campaign filing repositories . . . or both.
I could lay out the whole ugly Dark Money story for you here, but I won’t because other watchdogs have already done my work for me. Following are 37 articles plus several other useful/interesting links. I have organized the articles by geographical groupings and chronologically within a grouping. For each article, I provide the title, the publishing date, and a website link. (Unfortunately, a few articles require a subscription.) The titles of articles that I think are especially compelling are in bold, red font. The first grouping are national press articles. These provide a broader perspective from experts and experienced watchdogs; these are the best reading. The articles from Georgia provide the basics, but I would suggest instead reading the reporting from Alabama, which is deeper and more insightful. Finally, I have provided a few articles from other states.
Citizens, make no mistake. The infection of the District 47 election with $300,000+ in Gambling Dark Money is THE dispositive issue in the run-off (and general election). (See Note 1.) It is a huge point of differentiation and eclipses all other candidate distinctions in the run-off.
Advocating Against Dark Money in District 47,
Tim
National Press:
These represent the most expert reporting. I suggest reading the bolded national articles first.
The first article is not about Gambling Dark Money but provides important situational context. At the end of the Georgia articles are some links to websites that provide insightful data/statistics on the Gambling PACs.
The best state reporting on gambling Dark Money is issuing from Alabama. Reporters there figured out early what was happening and have been quite astute in their coverage.
Note1: The gambling PACs have allocated $10+M to 30+ races in Georgia, so $300,000+ per race. So far, I’ve received no less than 18 mailers for Jack Miler from PACs. Another PAC, AFC Victory Fund, is also conducting a campaign for Jack Miller. So the figure of $300,000 is likely conservative. One organization that tracks PAC spending using AI has estimated about $180,000 has been spent by the American Conservative Fund on Miller. However, there are lags in the processing and reporting of data, so this is a low estimate but gives a sense of the trajectory of spending.
On May 29th, I announced that the Milton Coalition Blog would cover the Georgia House District 47 Republican Run-off Election. This announcement came in the wake of a 3-way primary election where Brian Cochran and Jack Miller advanced to the run-off. (Thanks to Phoebe Eckhart, the third-place finisher, for stepping up and running.) This outcome was surprising to District 47 political watchers, who expected Miller to handily rout his competitors. I decided I would dig deeper . . .
I requested to meet with both the run-off candidates, and both readily and graciously accepted my invitation. Last week, I had extended and enlightening conversations with both candidates. I also began researching the back story of the race. I was surprised that the Milton Herald has essentially opted out of covering the election, except for articles on Miller and Cochran’s announcements of their candidacies. That was late February and since then more than 3 months have passed with NO coverage from the Milton Herald. I cast a wider net and found almost nil coverage from other legacy media outlets . . . or for that matter, from anyone. This was troubling to me. The implications for a healthy democratic republic are obvious. Democracy dies in darkness. Special Interests fill the information vacuum.
Other than candidate and PAC-issued communications, there was no place for voters to go. This has also been an issue in Milton municipal elections, which is why for the past three elections, I’ve provided a neutral page that consolidates election information sources in one on-line location. Although it is late in the primary election season, I decided the Milton Coalition Blog would fill the information void and provide analysis of, and reporting on, the District 47 race.
To that end, I offered to publish the letters of both candidates. Following are the run-off candidates’ letters without commentary. My only stipulations were that the letters not exceed 500 words and that both candidates send their letters to me NLT June 4th at noon. I am providing the letters exactly as written and providing the pdfs of the letters provided by each candidate (for download). I flipped a coin to determine which letter would be published first.
Please forward this post to family, friends, neighbors, and colleagues that live in District 47. Please share the blog URL on social media. More informed voters yield better election outcomes.
Thanks to the candidates for their letters and thanks to readers for being informed citizens and voters,
Tim
Brian Cochran’s Letter to Voters
I grew up in rural Milton and am a Georgia Tech alum. I want to protect our community’s rich heritage even as our city grows. I am a robotics engineer, not a politician. This is my strength; my engineer mindset allows me to see practical solutions where others are stuck on political opportunism.
There are three key areas that I will focus on in my first year as your representative: First, protecting life. 3000 children are killed by abortion every month in Georgia. We will protect life from conception to natural death. The number one job of the government is to protect life. This is a cause I am already championing.
Second, I will provide cost of living relief through tax cuts. Too many politicians promise tax relief but lower one tax only to raise another. I will cut wasteful government spending which will allow us to cut taxes across the board. For example, our government’s computer infrastructure is aging and costly; by modernizing our infrastructure, we will cut costs and put money back in your pocket.
Third, AI is coming into our lives. New technology can be powerful, but it can also be dangerous. As a robotics engineer working on self-driving vehicles, I am the only candidate qualified to balance AI innovation with clear safety and accountability standards. AI is being used by doctors to identify new treatments. However, it is also being used for online scams targeting seniors and children, which must be stopped. The new technology needs a good steward to ensure our community benefits and is not being taken advantage of. I have that expertise.
Working at a Georgia startup, I am used to wearing many hats and solving hard problems with new technology. I know how to do more with less, a lesson our politicians need.
My campaign is built on my proven conservative track record. I have long fought for our basic rights to life and liberty. In 2020, I won my First Amendment lawsuit against the State of Georgia to protect our right to Free Speech. My lawsuit taught me to stay vigilant and unyielding.
I am a proven conservative with a plan of action. I have two pieces of draft legislation ready to go on Day One. I am ready to hit the ground running.
I will bring Biblical values to the Gold Dome. I have taken ZERO dollars from Special Interest lobbyists or PACs. I can’t be bought. I work for you.
This letter, every direct mailer, and every advertisement is written and designed by me, not political consultants. When you vote for me, you know exactly who you are voting for: Brian Cochran.
My name is Jack Miller, and I am running to be your next State Representative for House District 47.
My wife and I both grew up in this community. I got involved with politics at a young age; I was passionate about the issues, wanted to vote, and, since I was not old enough, decided the next best thing was to get involved and work for Republican campaigns.
That decision set me on a path of service to conservative causes. After my wife and I graduated from the University of Georgia, we returned home to build our careers, start our family, and invest in the community that raised us. In recent years, I created the North Fulton Young Republicans to connect young professionals and families with local issues and demonstrate how conservative policies and local control help places like Milton thrive.
I am running because I believe too many people have lost faith in the American Dream. Young people, especially, are told their voices do not matter and that their future is bleak. Government alone cannot solve that problem, but strong leadership can create the conditions for opportunity. That means lowering the state income tax, freezing and rolling back property taxes, and reducing unnecessary regulations that quietly drive up costs for Georgians.
As a financial planner, I help families manage their finances, plan for the future, and navigate the impact of taxes and government policy every day. That experience gives me a practical understanding of how taxes, regulations, and government spending affect household budgets across our district.
Through my work with the Milton First Responders Foundation, Rotary, and the Milton Historical Society, I have listened to my neighbors and understand their concerns firsthand. I have served this community for many years, and I will never stop working for the place I call home.
If elected, my responsibility will be simple: to represent the people of House District 47 and no one else. I will not answer to special interests, lobbyists, or political leadership. I will answer to my neighbors who sent me to the Capitol.
My opponent is a good man, and we agree on many issues. As President Reagan said, “The person who agrees with you 80 percent of the time is a friend and an ally — not a 20 percent traitor.” While we are competitors today, I respect him and consider him an ally in the conservative cause.
I would be honored to earn your vote. I view public office as a temporary calling, not a career. I am not running to build a lifetime in politics. I am running to serve for a short period of time, fight for this community, and then pass the torch to the next leader. Most importantly, I hope you judge me not only by the legislation I help pass, but by the bad legislation I help stop. Protecting Georgians from unnecessary government expansion is just as important as advancing good policy.
In my last post, I promised an analysis of the District 47 race. Here it is . . .
The recent District 47 Republican primary was a political shocker. Jack Miller, the heavyweight favorite and local political Wunderkind, was expected to effortlessly flatten his two (supposedly) flyweight competitors: Brian Cochran and Phoebe Eckhart. However, voters delivered a different outcome with a loud thud. Mr. Miller fell short of the 50% threshold by 39 votes and was forced into a run-off with Brian Cochran, a political newcomer. Through their ballots, voters protested gambling SuperPACs dumping upwards of $300,000 (or more) of dark money into the race and injecting divisive national politics into an otherwise civil campaign. Voters also disregarded an avalanche of endorsements from local political glitterati. Rather than a coronation, voters opted for further vetting of the candidates. That’s good for everyone, even Mr. Miller.
Left: Brian Cochran; right: Jack Miller
Before I go further, it is important to understand that both candidates—Jack Miller and Brian Cochran—are qualified to represent District 47. I knew both candidates before they announced their candidacies (See Note 1). Last week, I had extended and enlightening conversations with both candidates. Both have good character and are strong in their faith. They agree on most major issues and are (mostly) taking the right positions on these issues. It is refreshing to see two sharp young men—both still in their 20s—enter the political arena. It should engender hope in citizens for the future of our country. We need more Jack Millers and Brian Cochrans, rather than the failure-to-launch young people we too often encounter these days. It is rare for a political race to offer two qualified choices. More often, the choice is between two terrible candidates: hold your nose . . . pick the least bad candidate, and . . . hope for the best. Rinse and repeat.
The District 47 run-off not only offers two qualified candidates, but better still . . . some sharp contrastsexist between the Miller and Cochran that should make vetting easier for many voters. Only one candidate will win. Hopefully, the runner-up will remain engaged in politics and seek and win another elected position.
Unfortunately, Jack Miller has a problem . . . and it is a big problem . . . a problem that will likely dominate the debate and discussion until election day. There is a perception (and perhaps it reflects reality . . . voters must decide) that Miller is being bought with dark money (from gambling PACs) and with political endorsements. The dark money has created another problem for Miller . . . divisive national politics have unnecessarily infected the campaign, alienating many voters.
When the campaign began, I was all-in for Jack Miller. He called me soon after his announcement. I offered financial support, advice, and my endorsement. His initial mailers were professional and on message. However, as the campaign progressed, like many voters, I began to have concerns that evolved into deep reservations and eventually convinced me (and many others, it seems) to vote for Mr. Cochran. Mr. Miller’s campaign became lackluster, almost as if outsourced to a campaign consultant. (Mr. Miller is employing a consultant; Mr. Cochran is not.) Miller’s campaign seemed to be coasting on autopilot . . . perhaps based on an assumption of electoral inevitability . . . a reasonable assumption as Mr. Miller has many advantages over Mr. Cochran. However, advantages are often double-edged swords—harmful if wrongly wielded, which some were. Two factors—the corrosive influence of gambling PACs (and their dark money) in the race and a deeply flawed endorsement strategy—tipped the scales for meand many other voters. I was conflicted but ended up voting for Mr. Cochran in the primary. (However, I am an undecided voter going into the run-off . . . I am waiting to see how things play out.)
So let’s dive deeper into Mr. Miller’s loss at the polls. (See Note 2.) Let’s analyze the two primary factors in Mr. Miller’s defeat: 1) the negative impact of gambling PACs and their dark money in the race and 2) a poorly executed political endorsement strategy.
The first and much more important factor in Miller’s defeat was the flow of copious amounts of dark money into the race—most of it tied to gambling PACs. This will not play well with most local Republican voters (regardless of whether they support expansion of gambling or not). I received no fewer than 16 mailers paid for mostly by gambling PACS (See Note 3 for an explanation of dark money, PACs/SuperPACs and how this all works). At $6,000 to $9,000 per mailer, we’re talking $96,000 to $144,000 just for mailers. However, the PACs are also conducting a coordinated media campaign, including ads on Fox News. So it is fair to estimate that upwards of $300,000 (or maybe more) of dark money has been allocated to promote Mr. Miller; no dark money is being spent on Mr. Cochran. Even now, this dark money is continuing to flow in support of Mr. Miller. The main PAC supporting Miller is spending $10M ($7.8M going to Republicans and $2.2M to Democrats) statewide on 34 races . . . if you do the math, that’s nearly $300,000 per race. (Source: AJC. See Note 4 for links to articles from AJC and other news sources about the gambling industry’s intrusion into state legislative races.)
The expenditure of so much dark money is bad enough, but another big problem emerged for Mr. Miller because of this media campaign. The PACs’ messaging and presentation were often poor and off-target, especially the clear and repeated references to divisive national politics. Until the dark money appeared, neither candidate had mentioned Trump . . . and neither has ever done so in their communications. And based on my conversations with both candidates, their positions on Trump are similar and both stated they are opposed to injecting national politics into the District 47 race. District 47 is certainly a Red district but it is a nuanced sort of Red . . . the persuadable voters that decide elections in Milton (and in contiguous areas) do NOT like appeals to raw partisanship . . . so these dark money communications could be damaging Miller . . . understandably so.
Photo from PAC-financed mailer
So what does this all say and mean for Jack Miller’s candidacy? Miller asserts that he has no control over these PAC expenditures. Technically, that is true. Candidates are forbidden to COORDINATE with PACs, BUT . . . and this is important . . . candidates can COMMUNICATE with PACs. A candidate can certainly send a letter to a PAC to demand the PAC cease its efforts. The problem for Miller is that he went along with the actions of the gambling political machine; he did not protest (and still has not). While he had concerns (particularly around the messaging and presentation), my opinion is that his campaign believed the dark-money promotion would help him (or perhaps not hurt him enough that he would lose the election). They were wrong. Where I fault Miller is his not investigating the PACs’ ties and agendas and subsequently not disavowing them. Miller says he was not aware of the dark money ties to gambling interests. Perhaps that is true, but he should have known . . . that’s the crux of the matter. These PACs have been extensively exposed in the press, so it is not hard to figure out who they are and what they are promoting. (See Note 4 for links to articles detailing the activities of the primary SuperPAC and primary PAC supporting Miller.). And remember that Miller is a seasoned political operative with an extensive political network and a paid campaign consultant, so voters are likely not to accept an excuse of inexperience or ignorance from Miller.
The second but lesser factor in Miller’s loss was a poorly executed endorsement strategy. Most of the North Fulton political establishment has endorsed Miller. The gist of Miller’s endorsement strategy seems to be: the more politicians who endorse me, the better. However, with endorsements (as with most things), eventually you reach a point of diminishing returns and later a point of negative returns. Some endorsements are better than others. Others provide no benefit, so just muddle your message. And still other endorsements are just harmful . . . and there were a few of those in Miller’s endorsement portfolio. Rather than carpet-bomb voters with a dog’s breakfast of endorsements, Miller should have communicated a thoughtful and curated selection of more impactful endorsements. (See Note 5 for my advice to Miller on endorsements.)
I received one mailer from Miller that had 24 endorsements! And every endorser was a politician–several held in low regard by citizens. Not a single business leader or other type of community leader was included. For many voters, this is a huge turn-off. Voters recoil at the local political elite telling them how to vote. And the sophisticated, persuadable voters that decide elections realize that such endorsements come with lots of strings. They create obligations for Mr. Miller. Miller has issued bushels of IOUs that could limit his effectiveness. He is now beholden to these endorsers. Again, the perception (and perhaps it reflects reality . . . voters must decide) is that politicians have bought Miller with their endorsements. Don’t misunderstand. Strong and healthy relationships with current and former elected officials are beneficial. These relationships are valuable and take time to develop. Certainly, Miller can and should play the experience card and assert he can hit the ground running; Cochran cannot say this. However, the issue is NOT the political relationships; the issue IS the endorsements and associated obligations. Yes, Miller can hit the ground running, but will he trip over all the IOUs he has issued?
So did the gambling PACs and endorsements hurt Miller? It is difficult to say. Miller certainly believes the gambling PACs hurt him. To prove his point, Miller points out that he won the early vote and lost the election day vote. He logically concludes that the increasing surge of dark money mailers, ads, etc. pushed voters (including me) toward Mr. Cochran. And to make matters worse . . . in my opinion, the message that Mr. Miller was being bought was reinforced by all the endorsements he sought and was granted from the local political establishment—several from disgraced/discredited politicians.
A big positive for Miller is that he came very close to winning 50% (+1 vote) in the first primary. However, the third-place finisher Phoebe Eckhart has endorsed Cochran. Cochran clearly has the momentum coming into the run-off. And Miller is on the defensive. Additionally, my sense is that fewer voters will vote in the run-off; this is typical. This could also hurt Miller, as Cochran’s voters seem more enthused so more likely to show up in proportionally higher numbers. (See Note 6 for a recent example of a Milton city council runoff where the second-place finisher handily beat the first-place finisher.)
Despite all this, I believe Miller is still the favorite to win and Cochran is still the underdog. I believe the race will be close. I give Miller a 65-75% chance of winning. However, it will depend on how Miller addresses the two factors that caused his defeat. I suspect his consultant and his political advisors will tell Miller to ignore the gambling issue . . . don’t give it any Oxygen . . . change the subject. I know some of Miller’s political advisors well and I can tell you they don’t know boo about winning elections and even less about integrity. I believe Miller will flip the odds in Cochran’s favor if he doesn’t acknowledge the gambling issue, state unequivocally his opposition to expanding gambling in Georgia, and disavow the PACs that are supporting him. This action is not only the right thing to do, but it will also maximize Miller’s chances of victory. However, time is running out . . . or maybe has run out. If Miller delays much longer in not addressing this issue, any 11th hour disavowal will be justly viewed as disingenuous. You can’t eat the steak but then refuse to pay the bill because the steak wasn’t to your liking (to quote Judge Judy).
Regarding his poorly executed endorsement strategy, there is not much that can now be done. What’s done is done. You cannot really “return” endorsements, although Miller might quietly take down controversial endorsements from his website. What Miller can do is de-emphasize endorsements in his communications and reassure voters that he is his own man and not beholden to any politician or Special Interest.
Miller needs to respect the intelligence and integrity of his North Fulton voters. They are tough but fair. Honesty and sincerity—that’s the Jack Miller I know—are the best way to finish out the Republican primary. Same goes for Mr. Cochran.
In another post, I will compare the candidates. There are several areas where there are significant contrasts that should make candidate vetting easier.
Voters, this is a hugely important election. I urge readers to share this post with fellow voters through social media or forwarding a link to the blog via e-mail.
Advocating For Election Fairness and Integrity,
Tim
Note 1: I have known Jack Miller since 2017, when we both were involved in Laura Bentley’s campaign for Milton City Council; we’ve maintained a friendly acquaintance since then. Although only 25, Jack is an experienced political operative who has worked in many political campaigns and is well-regarded. I’ve known Brian Cochran’s family for 25 years. (We were neighbors in the same subdivision. My wife and Brian’s mother were in a small Bible study group that spanned 3 years and the entire Bible.) However, I didn’t initially realize the Brian Cochran running for office was the same Brian Cochran we knew from the neighborhood where we lived 1993-2013. He’s grown into a fine young man with a great future ahead of him.
Note 2: I intentionally use the word “loss” to refer to Mr. Miller’s failure to garner more than 50% of the vote because his two challengers were both explicitly running against Mr. Miller and collectively did achieve more than 50% of the vote. Moreover, third-place finisher Eckhart has endorsed Mr. Cochran in the run-off.
Note 3: What I mean by “dark money” in the context of this blog post is money where the ultimate sources are anonymous or else difficult to trace. In some cases, the agenda of the PACs distributing such money is not mentioned in its promotional media. That is the case with most of the dark money supporting Jack Miller. The primary PAC conducting a media campaign on behalf of Miller is American Conservative Fund (ACF), which is primarily funded by Win For America, a gambling SuperPAC that doesn’t even have a public website. ACF does have a rudimentary website but nowhere is gambling mentioned. ( Link to ACF website: https://americanconservativefund.com/ ). None of their mailers (and other promotional media) for Miller mention gambling. So you can see that the efforts of these PACs and Super-PACs are non-transparent, deceptive, and manipulative. Win For America is reaching Democrat voters through a separate PAC, American Future, which also has only a rudimentary website that makes no mention of gambling. (Link to AF website: https://americanfuturepac.org/ ) So you can see that the goal here is to cynically use conservative and progressive talking points to manipulate Republican and Democrat voters to vote for candidates that the gambling interests believe will promote legalization/expansion of gambling. Ultimately, the gambling interests care nothing about conservative or liberal causes; they only care about buying politicians that will promote increased gambling.
Note 4: Following are links to articles explaining the intrusion of gambling PACs into state legislative races in GA, AL, and NC (and elsewhere). I am also including a link to the Moms Against Gambling website. MAG is putting up a valiant, but unfortunately under-funded, uphill fight against the gambling political machine. (Note: A subscription may be required to read the AJC articles.)
Note 5: I did suggest to Mr. Miller that he get all 7 Milton City Council members behind his candidacy. I believed such an endorsement would carry weight in the general election in the fall.
Note 6: Following are two screen shots of election results from the 2021 Milton municipal elections. The race went to a run-off. The leader in the general election, Jami Tucker, came close to winning; she came up 160 votes short. However, Tucker badly lost the run-off, dropping from 45.66% to 37.22%. Her challenger, Andrea Verhoff, surged more than 31 percentage points to win the run-off with a whopping 62.78% of the vote.
I have decided to analyze and report on the Georgia House District 47 Republican run-off election. District 47 covers all of Milton and Mountain Park and some areas of Roswell, Alpharetta, and Cherokee County.
Brian Cochran and Phoebe Eckhart–the two candidates that challenged the heavily favored Jack Miller–forced a run-off that no one anticipated. The issue for voters was $200,000+ of Special Interest dark money (mostly from gambling concerns) that financed a massive media campaign that injected national politics into the race. Voters reacted negatively and punished Mr. Miller. I will provide much more in-depth analysis in my next post.
District 47 Republican candidates (l to r): Brian Cochran and Jack Miller
Sadly, the Milton Herald has opted not to cover the District 47 race. The Herald only covered Jan Jones retirement announcement and announcements from Cochran and Miller that they were running but has been otherwise silent.
This lack of media coverage is one reason I have decided to blog on the District 47 race. Also, I want to provide voters a framework for understanding the current dynamics of the race so that they can tune out political noise and make an informed decision based on the character, background, and positions of the candidates. Finally, I live in District 47, so I have a personal interest in the outcome.
Currently, I do not plan to endorse either candidate and I am an undecided voter.
I have asked each candidate to provide their closing arguments to voters, which I will publish next week.
In the meantime, as I’ve done with municipal elections, I am providing useful links that voters can use to research the candidates:
Jack Miller:
Note: I have removed Jack Miller’s websites because I have observed a huge spike in followers, particularly at Facebook. This spike is consistent with the purchase of followers, likes, shares, etc. There is a whole industry built around creating fake grassroots support for candidates. I consider this a deceptive and manipulative tactic (not unlike the Gambling Dark Money campaign for Miller) either by Miller or organizations supporting him that confers unfair advantage with voters that are performing due diligence and consulting campaign websites.
In closing, I request that blog subscribers and blog visitors inform fellow citizens about the blog’s coverage of the run-off. Please forward the blog email and share the blog URL on social media. The District 47 seat is critical to protecting and furthering the interests of the greater Milton area.
