2026 midterms · Candidate
Democrat · Candidate · U.S. Senate, Georgia · Incumbent
The lowest of 20 Democratic Senate incumbents (their average is 3.8%; Ossoff ranks 20th of 20, where 1st is the highest rate), from 6,786 statements.
An AI model reads everything Ossoff publishes in office (posts, press releases, newsletters, floor speeches) and marks whether each attacks a person’s character, integrity or loyalty; the rate is the share marked.
What Ossoff says
0.4% of Ossoff’s statements contain a personal attack, the lowest of 20 Democratic Senate incumbents. Their average is 3.8%.
An AI model reads everything Ossoff publishes in office and marks five kinds of statement; the rate is the share of statements with each label. The thin grey bar is the average of the 20 Democratic Senate incumbents with 50 or more statements, and the rank places Ossoff among them (1st is the highest rate). A rate describes what was said, not whether it was right.
How often does Ossoff make each kind of statement?
Share of statements: Ossoff (thick bar) against the Democratic Senate incumbents average (thin grey bar)
Show the data
| Row | Ossoff | Average |
|---|---|---|
| Personal attacks | 0.4% | 3.8% |
| Policy criticism | 14% | 21% |
| Policy discussion | 79% | 69% |
| Bipartisanship | 24% | 9.8% |
| Credit claiming | 42% | 19% |
statements classified
From everything they publish in office: posts, press releases, newsletters and floor speeches.
Awards
- Accomplishments LeaderTop 3% in credit claiming among all ranked candidates, the lab’s rule.
- Bipartisanship LeaderTop 3% in bipartisan language among all ranked candidates, the lab’s rule.
- Policy Discussion LeaderTop 3% in policy discussion among all ranked candidates, the lab’s rule.
This compares Ossoff with other candidates. Ossoff’s official profile compares Ossoff with fellow office-holders and has every statement, vote and bill.
The five kinds of statement
Personal attacks. Overtly questions a named person’s character, integrity or loyalty, or calls them names. Criticising a record or a policy does not count.
Policy criticism. Objects to a specific policy, law or court ruling with fact-based arguments, without personal attacks or emotional appeals.
Policy discussion. Discusses a specific public policy or policy area (health care, taxes, defense, …).
Bipartisanship. Emphasises working across the aisle, compromise or common ground between the parties.
Credit claiming. Claims credit for passing legislation, securing funding or grants, or other accomplishments in office.
Money
Ossoff reports $115.9M raised and $15.1M cash on hand. By money raised, 1st of the three candidates on this race’s list with FEC figures.
Totals the campaign reports to the Federal Election Commission for the 2026 cycle, as filed.
Raised
Spent
Cash on hand
Where has Ossoff’s money come from?
Receipts by source, as reported to the FEC
Show the data
| Part | Value |
|---|---|
| Individuals | $102.2M |
| PACs | $1.1M |
| Party committees | $11.0K |
| Own money | $0 |
| Candidate loans | $0 |
Notes
Online
Engagement is what X reports for each collected post, averaged; it measures reach, not support.
No engagement figures are on file for this account.
The race
Georgia Senate: Ossoff advanced from the primary. Primary May 19, 2026, runoff Jun 16, 2026. General election Nov 3, 2026.
Rated toss-up. Cook Political Report ratings, entered by the lab (last updated by the lab on Jun 24, 2026); a forecaster’s judgement about the general election, not the lab’s.
Who else is on the list?
Candidates recorded as advancing from the primary
- Michael Collins JrRChallenger · advanced
- Derek DooleyRChallenger · advanced
The race page compares every candidate’s statements and money · every race in Georgia
Methods and sources
The headline. Each candidate’s headline is chosen by one rule for everyone. The peer group is the ranked candidates (50 or more statements) of the same party, for the same office and measured on the same record, widened to both parties when it has fewer than 10. Each kind of statement is scored by how far the candidate sits from the middle of the group (|percentile − 0.5|, ties counting half); the farthest leads if it is outside the middle half (above 0.25), scores within 0.03 tie and fall to a fixed order, and a high rate backed by fewer than 10 labelled statements cannot lead. Otherwise the headline is a plain count.
The statements. As an incumbent member of Congress, this candidate is measured on everything the lab collects from them in office: posts on X, press releases, newsletters and floor speeches. An AI model marks each statement for five kinds of statement; rates are shown from 10 statements and ranked from 50.
The race. Candidates come from FEC filings (House and Senate), the lab’s list of sitting members of Congress, and the lab’s list of candidates for governor. The lab records each primary’s result once it is official. House districts follow FEC filings; a sitting member is placed in the race for the seat they hold now.
Identifiers. FEC candidate id S8GA00180 (FEC record). Bioguide id O000174. First FEC filing Sep 10, 2019.
Money and reach. Campaign money is as reported to the FEC. Followers, likes and views are what X reports for the posts the lab collected.