In a public statement, Duncan explained that his decision to switch parties was influenced by personal convictions and a desire to align his political actions with his values. While he did not outline every reason for the change, he emphasized principles, community engagement, and serving constituents as key factors in his decision.

Political analysts suggest that this move reflects both Duncan’s evolving personal philosophy and broader trends in American politics, where individual politicians sometimes reassess their affiliations. Georgia’s competitive political environment also adds context, as party changes by prominent figures can influence elections and public perception.

The response to Duncan’s switch has been mixed. Supporters see it as a demonstration of acting according to personal principles, while critics question how it might affect his influence in state politics. Media coverage highlights that his move could impact party strategy, voter dynamics, and discussions around leadership in Georgia. For voters and political observers, Duncan’s decision underscores that party affiliation can be fluid, and politicians may make changes in response to shifting beliefs or political landscapes. As he continues his career under a new party banner, many are watching to see how this shift will shape both local and national political discussions.