No-one's talking about the governor races?

So, a bit of good news for weary Democrats; after a series of demoralising special election losses earlier in the year, they've routed the Republicans in yesterday's governorship races.

In Virginia, Democrat Ralph Northam beat Republican Ed Gillespie by eight percentage points, which was reassuring to a lot of Democrats who were worried that Gillespie might have leveraged his way into the blue state by exploiting culture war issues in television ads.[1] Gillespie was an establishment Republican party operative who sought to emulate Trump's race-baiting and casual hypocrisy to energize the Republican voter base; his failure is reassuring for both moderate Republicans and Democrats who were worried about Trump-style tactics taking over politics. (Trump, naturally, blamed Gillespie for not being Trumpy enough.)

Virginia was where everyone was paying attention, but the Democrats also won the governorship of New Jersey, formerly held by the disgraced Chris Christie. The New Jersey state legislature is solidly Democratic, creating an opportunity for the Democrats to enact policies at a state level unhindered.

More important, though, is the more basic shit: state legislative seats. The results aren't all in yet, but Democrats unexpectedly snared fourteen seats in Virginia; they need just three more to flip the chamber, and they already control supermajorities in the legislature in New Jersey. Notably, one of those seats was won by Danica Roem, who is now the first openly transgender state legislator in the US. Edit: They also picked up two seats in Georgia, funnily enough.

So, what's this mean? Is this a sign of coming change, or just existing demographic trends flexing their muscle? Is this a referendum endorsing establishment Democrats like Northam, or one denouncing gutter-level campaigns like the one Gillespie ran? Is the Trump brand toxic? Is America...not doomed?

Local races rarely get much coverage, the special elections held soon after November were a sort of exception as a lot of the media was desperately fishing for some sort of narrative, either an immediate indictment of Trump's election by flipping deep red districts, or a vindication of Trump's victory by showing it wasn't some sort of fluke and Red voters were still behind the party.

That said, not too surprising, the in power party always tends to suffer after sweeping national elections, the GOP has advantage in a lot of areas due to gerrymandering but given Trump's historically low approval ratings I imagine we will see a lot of swinging as the the Democrats and moderates against the GOP will be more energized. People entirely misunderstanding how statistics work and suddenly assuming that polling data is worthless won't change reality.

Considering the Republican party managed to disassociate the disaster that was Bush within two years and re-energize their base, I imagine as long as Hillary doesn't suddenly announce a 2020 run, the Democrats will likely pick up the senate and a number of state positions between now and 2020, with a slim chance of retaking the House. With both Obama and Hillary kind of out of the picture, fundraising might also focus more on the state level. If they are lucky they will get people energized like the Tea party was in 2008-2009, and avoid the unfortunate pitfall of the tea party where they become obsessed with ideological purity over actually getting things done.

The current shit Republicans are trying to pull in my state by trying to recall Democratic state legislature officials for no actual reason beyond being sore losers, I am certainly feeling motivated to make sure I am voting more consistently.

Also, congrats to Roem, her opponent was a real piece of shit pushing bathroom bills and trying to act like a wannabe Trump.

SO much salt I'm seeing over the net over Danica Roem winning.

So many triggered conservatives screeching about "Moral decay!1!11", "Misgendered smears!1!11!", "We must preach the lord's work from the pulpits to counter this!1!1". Seriously, they all need to grow up and learn that the world isn't this tiny little orderly box that conforms to their narrowminded norms.

Why they all take someone identifying as a different gender to be such a terrifying thing, I will never understand. Trans people are people just like anyone else. Whatever happened to basic human decency to one another?

Anyway, here's hoping Danica makes for a great state legislator and is good enough to stay in power for a long time to come, not just because I hope she does good things for her state, but also just to rub salt in the wounds of those assholes.

aegix drakan:
Whatever happened to basic human decency to one another?

At what time was that really a thing?

But yeah, good luck to her, and hopefully she stays in the role for a long time. Not so much to stick it to the bigots per se, but to prove that being trans doesn't disqualify someone for such a role. Of course, anyone that needs this to be proven for them won't likely accept this as proof, but still.

aegix drakan:
SO much salt I'm seeing over the net over Danica Roem winning.

So many triggered conservatives screeching about "Moral decay!1!11", "Misgendered smears!1!11!", "We must preach the lord's work from the pulpits to counter this!1!1". Seriously, they all need to grow up and learn that the world isn't this tiny little orderly box that conforms to their narrowminded norms.

Why they all take someone identifying as a different gender to be such a terrifying thing, I will never understand. Trans people are people just like anyone else. Whatever happened to basic human decency to one another?

Anyway, here's hoping Danica makes for a great state legislator and is good enough to stay in power for a long time to come, not just because I hope she does good things for her state, but also just to rub salt in the wounds of those assholes.

Nah, I enjoy the reminders of why I am unapologetic in my attitude. Very vindicating.

aegix drakan:
SO much salt I'm seeing over the net over Danica Roem winning.

So many triggered conservatives screeching about "Moral decay!1!11", "Misgendered smears!1!11!", "We must preach the lord's work from the pulpits to counter this!1!1". Seriously, they all need to grow up and learn that the world isn't this tiny little orderly box that conforms to their narrowminded norms.

Why they all take someone identifying as a different gender to be such a terrifying thing, I will never understand. Trans people are people just like anyone else. Whatever happened to basic human decency to one another?

Anyway, here's hoping Danica makes for a great state legislator and is good enough to stay in power for a long time to come, not just because I hope she does good things for her state, but also just to rub salt in the wounds of those assholes.

Ironically she's showing more class than all of them put together.

https://twitter.com/BlyTarbell/status/928126868817174533

For the record, the man she's talking about wanted a bathroom bill.

aegix drakan:
SO much salt I'm seeing over the net over Danica Roem winning.

So many triggered conservatives screeching about "Moral decay!1!11", "Misgendered smears!1!11!", "We must preach the lord's work from the pulpits to counter this!1!1". Seriously, they all need to grow up and learn that the world isn't this tiny little orderly box that conforms to their narrowminded norms.

Why they all take someone identifying as a different gender to be such a terrifying thing, I will never understand. Trans people are people just like anyone else. Whatever happened to basic human decency to one another?

Anyway, here's hoping Danica makes for a great state legislator and is good enough to stay in power for a long time to come, not just because I hope she does good things for her state, but also just to rub salt in the wounds of those assholes.

Transgendered people seem to have become the new punching bag of conservatives now that homophobia is less popular and they want to use Yanopoulos for everything he is worth for purposes of political agitation and tokenism, and since he shares their stances on transexuals, that seems to be their new compromise

CyanCat47:

Transgendered people seem to have become the new punching bag of conservatives now that homophobia is less popular and they want to use Yanopoulos for everything he is worth for purposes of political agitation and tokenism, and since he shares their stances on transexuals, that seems to be their new compromise

I've honestly never understood why, though. I mean, outside of the indoctrinated religious sheep who go "Pastor said is bad, must trust pastor, must hate the Other!" whose reasons are obvious.

Because aside from those people, or people who are in the closet (likely because they're overly religious and see it as bad), I cannot understand why people hate on LGBT people.

I mean, seriously, as long as no one is getting hurt and no one's consent is being violated, why the hell are they so triggered that someone else has a different sexual preference or a different gender identity than th eone they were born with. The worst case scenario for anyone is that it gets mildly awkward if someone of the sex you don't prefer flirts with you, or you misgender someone and go "oh shit, my bad, sorry".

It's just...There are so many more problems and issue to deal with in the world already, to say nothing of all the fun things you can do. So why some people fixate on hating the LGBT I will never understand. I don't judge people on their preference for underwear why the hell should I judge who or how someone wants to get down and dirty, if no lasting harm is being one and everyone's ok with it?

Maybe I'm just getting set in my ways as I approach my (eeeep) 30s. But "Don't hate people who aren't openly harming people" seems kind of like a "DUH!" position to me, you know? And it weirds me out that it's not the duh position for some people.

aegix drakan:

CyanCat47:

Transgendered people seem to have become the new punching bag of conservatives now that homophobia is less popular and they want to use Yanopoulos for everything he is worth for purposes of political agitation and tokenism, and since he shares their stances on transexuals, that seems to be their new compromise

I've honestly never understood why, though. I mean, outside of the indoctrinated religious sheep who go "Pastor said is bad, must trust pastor, must hate the Other!" whose reasons are obvious.

Because aside from those people, or people who are in the closet (likely because they're overly religious and see it as bad), I cannot understand why people hate on LGBT people.

I mean, seriously, as long as no one is getting hurt and no one's consent is being violated, why the hell are they so triggered that someone else has a different sexual preference or a different gender identity than th eone they were born with. The worst case scenario for anyone is that it gets mildly awkward if someone of the sex you don't prefer flirts with you, or you misgender someone and go "oh shit, my bad, sorry".

It's just...There are so many more problems and issue to deal with in the world already, to say nothing of all the fun things you can do. So why some people fixate on hating the LGBT I will never understand. I don't judge people on their preference for underwear why the hell should I judge who or how someone wants to get down and dirty, if no lasting harm is being one and everyone's ok with it?

Maybe I'm just getting set in my ways as I approach my (eeeep) 30s. But "Don't hate people who aren't openly harming people" seems kind of like a "DUH!" position to me, you know? And it weirds me out that it's not the duh position for some people.

The hatred is based on a few reasons. First, there's the good old Johnson quote of "I'll tell you what's at the bottom of it," he said. "If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you." just (somewhat) moved on from the now unacceptable open racism.

Secondly, it comes down to a manifestation of fear. The fear of loss of privilege, the fear of "other," and the fear of the possibility that they themselves might not be "normal" due to recognition of all these traits.

Finally, there's the standard pushback on being given consequences and having to take responsibility for their actions. Now that LGBT persons are able to live more openly and bigoted speech and actions are being looked down on, these people's ability to act on their biases (see the first point) is being met with resistance. This last point is where claims of "PC Police," "free speech," and "censorship" come from; they're angry they're beginning to be treated the same way that openly racist people are.

edit: This kind of ties in with the first point as well, but there's the group of people who are unhappy with their lives and rely upon hating others to make themselves feel better.

I don't know much about Virginia, but it was already democratic state, however, New Jersey just hired a Former Goldman Sachs executive and major Democratic donor Phil Murphy.

If any company were to embody evil, it would be Goldman Sachs. This was NOT a win for progressives. Goldman Sachs now controls another state's executive.

EternallyBored:
The current shit Republicans are trying to pull in my state by trying to recall Democratic state legislature officials for no actual reason beyond being sore losers, I am certainly feeling motivated to make sure I am voting more consistently.

Jeegus chfist, already?
Which state is this happening in?

OT: I'm glad to see the Dems have managed to start flipping seats, now I'm just hoping they can actually fix some problems within the party and put forth a good candidate. If Hillary pulls a surprise 2020 campaign and gets the nomination again, I'll probably just stay home on election day.

Gergar12:
If any company were to embody evil, it would be Goldman Sachs. This was NOT a win for progressives. Goldman Sachs now controls another state's executive.

Because if you don't get 100% of everything you wanted, then you obviously got absolutely nothing.

OT: Fox News sure as shit doesn't want to talk about this. Hannity promised to cover the election last night and only spent 6 seconds mentioning it during the hand-off to sentient foreskin Tucker Carlson who also didn't want to talk about it.

BeetleManiac:

Gergar12:
If any company were to embody evil, it would be Goldman Sachs. This was NOT a win for progressives. Goldman Sachs now controls another state's executive.

Because if you don't get 100% of everything you wanted, then you obviously got absolutely nothing.

OT: Fox News sure as shit doesn't want to talk about this. Hannity promised to cover the election last night and only spent 6 seconds mentioning it during the hand-off to sentient foreskin Tucker Carlson who also didn't want to talk about it.

The last thing we need in state governments in another Goldman Sachs shill.

The thing about the US is that we don't have as established of a welfare state as the Brtish Commonwealth, or Western Europe.

If we get more third-way corrupt democrats, you can kiss goodbye to many things such as getting universal healthcare that many posters here take for granted passed.

BeetleManiac:

OT: Fox News sure as shit doesn't want to talk about this. Hannity promised to cover the election last night and only spent 6 seconds mentioning it during the hand-off to sentient foreskin Tucker Carlson who also didn't want to talk about it.

Not surprising. A trans woman beat a man that introduced the bathroom bill.

The boyfriend of a reporter who died of gun violence beat an NRA backed candidate

and a Civil Rights Lawyer who has sued the local police department and wants to hold bad cops responsible for their actions is now Philadelphia's District Attorney and top prosecutor

I hope trumpster soured the entire republican party

Dr. Thrax:

EternallyBored:
The current shit Republicans are trying to pull in my state by trying to recall Democratic state legislature officials for no actual reason beyond being sore losers, I am certainly feeling motivated to make sure I am voting more consistently.

Jeegus chfist, already?
Which state is this happening in?

OT: I'm glad to see the Dems have managed to start flipping seats, now I'm just hoping they can actually fix some problems within the party and put forth a good candidate. If Hillary pulls a surprise 2020 campaign and gets the nomination again, I'll probably just stay home on election day.

I?m in Nevada where you can file a recall against a state legislator if you can get 25% of the people who voted in the last election to sign a recall petition, which our state Republican Party is trying to do to 3 of our legislators because of their, and I?m quoting our Republican minority leader here, ?anti-business and pro-felon agenda?. So basically because the elections were close the Republican Party is trying to flip things back into their control by triggering a recall for no actual reason beyond not liking the outcome.

They even failed to inform our Republican governor of this brilliant plan, at least he came out and criticized the move as likely opening up a partisan shit storm that would have both parties attempting to recall any close elections in the future. The Democratic Party has filed a motion to block the recall petitions through the federal courts. As someone that still supported some of our local Republican politicians even in 2016, I find this might be what finally destroys the last of any support I had for them, even if I like governor Sandoval and am glad he is criticizing this nonsense, if this recall bullshit actually goes anywhere I don?t know if I will be able to bring myself to vote for any of them again.

Also if I am forced to vote for either a Republican or someone who worked at Goldman Sachs. I would rather not vote.

When Phil Murphy was ambassador to Germany he had NO qualifications whatsoever.

No degree in international relations, poltical-science, or economics.

While he was at Goldman Sachs, they lied about Greece, and help corrupt Greek officals cover up their government's debt.

http://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-17108367/how-goldman-sachs-helped-mask-greece-s-debt

Sold sub-prime mortgages, and defrauded investers

http://fortune.com/2016/04/11/goldman-sachs-doj-settlement/

And used tax havens

Gergar12:
If we get more third-way corrupt democrats, you can kiss goodbye to many things such as universal healthcare that many posters here take for granted.

Unless I'm just misreading you here...
The United States does not have universal healthcare, that's what some of us are still actively fighting for.

Dr. Thrax:

Gergar12:
If we get more third-way corrupt democrats, you can kiss goodbye to many things such as universal healthcare that many posters here take for granted.

Unless I'm just misreading you here...
The United States does not have universal healthcare, that's what some of us are still actively fighting for.

I mean we will not have it in the future if we elect more corrupt third-way shills from Goldman Sachs.

Gergar12:

Dr. Thrax:

Gergar12:
If we get more third-way corrupt democrats, you can kiss goodbye to many things such as universal healthcare that many posters here take for granted.

Unless I'm just misreading you here...
The United States does not have universal healthcare, that's what some of us are still actively fighting for.

I mean we will not have it in the future if we elect more corrupt third-way shills from Goldman Sachs.

Goldman Sachs is a company not a brainwashing cult, I know they are kind of a boogie man in politics, but someone being involved with a giant multinational corporation does not make them automatically corrupt, nor does it make them automatically against something like universal healthcare, I know people that have worked and currently work for financial institutions like Merrill Lynch, Goldman Sachs, etc. they are not bad people and their political beliefs are not all lockstep laissez faire capitalism. On the flip side, it doesn't mean this guy is automatically good so for something like universal healthcare his constituents need to be writing and lobbying him.

As for blue dog democrats, The Republican Party is only a couple controlled states away from being able to call a constitutional convention, and given the last 8 yearsof rabblerousing against the ACA I can make a pretty damn good guess that putting prohibition against universal healthcare into the constitution itself would be proposed, likely along with banning abortion and prohibiting marijuana nationwide.

Gergar12:
-snip-

Northam isn't my favorite person either. But let's not act as if this is a Pyrrhic victory, hm? He ran on a platform a lot of Virginians like (e.g. $15/hour minimum wage) and as long as his constituents make it clear they're watching, they can hopefully get a net positive out of this.

BeetleManiac:

Gergar12:
-snip-

Northam isn't my favorite person either. But let's not act as if this is a Pyrrhic victory, hm? He ran on a platform a lot of Virginians like (e.g. $15/hour minimum wage) and as long as his constituents make it clear they're watching, they can hopefully get a net positive out of this.

He's talking about Phil Murphy, who had a twenty-three year career at Goldman Sachs before retiring in 2006. He won the New Jersey race. Northam is a former Army surgeon and pediatrician.

Both are solid examples of establishment Democrats, so there's some truth in the statement that this is disappointing news for progressives. At least, disappointing to those progressives who would rather everybody lose than see someone they don't like win. But overall, this is what it boils down to: the parties chose candidates in the primaries, and after that point all Democrats, progressive or establishment, ought to be pleased that their party won. Phil Murphy is not so bad; he's come out in support of a $15 state minimum wage and paid sick leave, as well as the establishment of a state investment bank to provide loans for businesses and college students - an act that, interestingly, would also bar Goldman Sachs from participating in state finances. And he's released his tax returns. Like, he could be more progressive, but he could also be Steve Mnuchin, so he's not a disaster.

It's pretty foolish to consider this a defeat in any sense of the word. Or, as Sean Hannity seems to think, a lost cause from the start. It is entertaining to see Fox News being salty and pretending not to care about it.

"Oh, those are just Democrat states voting Democrat. What's that? Chris Christie? Who's he?"

bastardofmelbourne:
He's talking about Phil Murphy, who had a twenty-three year career at Goldman Sachs before retiring in 2006. He won the New Jersey race. Northam is a former Army surgeon and pediatrician.

I stand corrected. As you have pointed out though, my sentiments have reason to stand anyway.

It's pretty foolish to consider this a defeat in any sense of the word. Or, as Sean Hannity seems to think, a lost cause from the start. It is entertaining to see Fox News being salty and pretending not to care about it.

"Oh, those are just Democrat states voting Democrat. What's that? Chris Christie? Who's he?"

Ordinarily I would think that relishing their defeat so much would be uncouth. Then I remember what these motherfuckers stand for: fucking everybody's mothers.

bastardofmelbourne:
So, a bit of good news for weary Democrats; after a series of demoralising special election losses earlier in the year, they've routed the Republicans in yesterday's governorship races.

Odd how socialists like Lee Carter slip under the radar, innit?

Seanchaidh:

bastardofmelbourne:
So, a bit of good news for weary Democrats; after a series of demoralising special election losses earlier in the year, they've routed the Republicans in yesterday's governorship races.

Odd how socialists like Lee Carter slip under the radar, innit?

Not really. There's a solid theory floating around that part of the reason we have so many non-voters in the US because there simply wasn't anybody on the left speaking to them.

Seanchaidh:

bastardofmelbourne:
So, a bit of good news for weary Democrats; after a series of demoralising special election losses earlier in the year, they've routed the Republicans in yesterday's governorship races.

Odd how socialists like Lee Carter slip under the radar, innit?

All I can say for context is that the Democratic Party is running out of money. Or, rather, ran out of money some time in 2014, sold out to Hillary Clinton, and now is still mostly broke.

But Carter won, didn't he? I think that's a good sign. The GOP incumbent's communist scaremongering failed completely because his opponent went "well, they're gonna call me a socialist no matter what I say I stand for, so I may as well be a dang socialist." And it worked! Maybe that'll show the state and national establishment that democratic socialism is a safer bet in the 2010s than it was in the 90s.

altnameJag:

Seanchaidh:

bastardofmelbourne:
So, a bit of good news for weary Democrats; after a series of demoralising special election losses earlier in the year, they've routed the Republicans in yesterday's governorship races.

Odd how socialists like Lee Carter slip under the radar, innit?

Not really. There's a solid theory floating around that part of the reason we have so many non-voters in the US because there simply wasn't anybody on the left speaking to them.

I mean that it's really strange how it's very easy to miss the story, not that it's odd he won.

Seanchaidh:

altnameJag:

Seanchaidh:

Odd how socialists like Lee Carter slip under the radar, innit?

Not really. There's a solid theory floating around that part of the reason we have so many non-voters in the US because there simply wasn't anybody on the left speaking to them.

I mean that it's really strange how it's very easy to miss the story, not that it's odd he won.

Ahh, yes, that makes more sense.

Well, the media likes to pretend to be good centrist neo-liberals. Maybe it's like the UK's press and Corbyn.

Saelune:

aegix drakan:
SO much salt I'm seeing over the net over Danica Roem winning.

So many triggered conservatives screeching about "Moral decay!1!11", "Misgendered smears!1!11!", "We must preach the lord's work from the pulpits to counter this!1!1". Seriously, they all need to grow up and learn that the world isn't this tiny little orderly box that conforms to their narrowminded norms.

Why they all take someone identifying as a different gender to be such a terrifying thing, I will never understand. Trans people are people just like anyone else. Whatever happened to basic human decency to one another?

Anyway, here's hoping Danica makes for a great state legislator and is good enough to stay in power for a long time to come, not just because I hope she does good things for her state, but also just to rub salt in the wounds of those assholes.

Nah, I enjoy the reminders of why I am unapologetic in my attitude. Very vindicating.

Meh, she ran on "I want to fix the roads" while her opponent ran on "I want to be bathroom police." Somehow I'm not too surprised at who won. Bathroom police only sell well to certain far right folks, while basically everyone is fond of good roads. Kind of like how "I want to bring jobs and prosperity back to this area", even if an overt lie, sells better than not showing up because you assume they'll vote for you anyways.

EternallyBored:

Gergar12:

Dr. Thrax:

Unless I'm just misreading you here...
The United States does not have universal healthcare, that's what some of us are still actively fighting for.

I mean we will not have it in the future if we elect more corrupt third-way shills from Goldman Sachs.

Goldman Sachs is a company not a brainwashing cult, I know they are kind of a boogie man in politics, but someone being involved with a giant multinational corporation does not make them automatically corrupt, nor does it make them automatically against something like universal healthcare, I know people that have worked and currently work for financial institutions like Merrill Lynch, Goldman Sachs, etc. they are not bad people and their political beliefs are not all lockstep laissez faire capitalism. On the flip side, it doesn?t mean this guy is automatically good so for something like universal healthcare his constituents need to be writing and lobbying him.

As for blue dog democrats, The Republican Party is only a couple controlled states away from being able to call a constitutional convention, and given the last 8 yearsof rabblerousing against the ACA I can make a pretty damn good guess that putting prohibition against universal healthcare into the constitution itself would be proposed, likely along with banning abortion and prohibiting marijuana nationwide.

They don't have 2/3s of the Senate needed to call a constitutional convention, they have nowhere near it.

I think this forum doesn't see the difference between a social democrat/progressive, or a democratic socialist vs a neoliberal, third-way social democrat, or even an American liberal as significant.

They may LOOK the same, but they don't ACT the same in many ways. There are little differences in how they act which impact MILLIONS of people perhaps HUNDREDS of millions of people.

What do I mean?

Let's look at one member of Obama administration who is not a progressive, but is either a neoliberal or a liberal, but her actions are morally wrong regardless if she is either.

Under the Bayh Dole Act, the government is allowed to make give licenses to companies to manufacture what is currently a product under a single patent monopoly if they aren't distributing the product reasonably, and practically. This is known as March in Rights.

Guess what the EpiPen produced by Mylan costs. is this product with a less than ten dollars per unit cost, 20 dollars, 30 dollars, 100 dollars. It's 500 dollars because, and you guessed it, it's a single patent monopoly.

And so you as a reasonable person may think that is too expensive, and warrants regulation and Mylan is not keeping their end of the bargain to reasonably distribute it.

Not if you are Obama appointee Sylvia Mathews Burwell, and the 22nd United States Secretary of Health and Human Services.

The government has never during after the passage of the Bayh-Dole Act used it to regulate prices. Because there have been NO progressives in office during those years or even liberals with morals.

And again this is monopoly not the government setting in rent controls to landlords. You're supposed to REGULATE monopolies unless if they are location-based monopolies like a log cabin in X national park.

Had that been Bernie Sanders who was POTUS, he would have used March in Rights.

Now let's look at Hillary Clinton. To an outside observer, she votes 93% of the time with Bernie Sanders. So what is the problem???

One of that 7 % was the Iraq War, where ATLEAST 50 thousand civilians have died.

What I am trying to say that you won't get from the BBC, CNN, and maybe Al Jazeera will talk about, is that there are subtle differences between those two. And those differences can range to have a slightly different education policy to costing lives, and increase healthcare costs for the sick.

That is why I won't vote for people like Phil Murphy. They may LOOK progressive, and sane. But behind the scenes, they are doing everything from not enough cost sharing in Obamacare, underfunding the stimulus in a recession, privatizing schools, not regulating as much as they should, not going after Wall Street for sub-prime mortgages, supporting the TPP, and even trying to CUT social security, and Medicaid like a Republican would.

I don't want a democratic party that JUST supports climate change policy, abortions, gay rights, and everything else behind the scenes they align with the Republicans. If that's the case, I am staying home.

Gergar12:
They don't have 2/3s of the Senate needed to call a constitutional convention, they have nowhere near it.

That's nice. The Republican party has absolutely no need of Congress when they can do an end-run through the states.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_Convention_(United_States):
A Convention to propose amendments to the United States Constitution, also called an Article V Convention, or Amendments Convention, called for by two-thirds (currently 34) of the state legislatures, is one of two processes authorized by Article Five of the United States Constitution whereby the Constitution, the nation's frame of government, may be altered.

[...]

To become part of the Constitution, an amendment must be ratified by either?as determined by Congress?the legislatures of three-fourths (presently 38) of the states or State ratifying conventions in three-fourths of the states.

Also, once this convention is convened, Pandora's box has been opened regarding what may be altered. Goodbye "freedom of religion" and hello "freedom to be a Christian"[1].

-------------------------

Your whole spiel about refusing to vote is, to be frank, nothing more than inflating your own ego. "If I only get 1/2 of the progress I want by voting for a Democrat or regress by voting for a Republican, I'm going to not vote!" is childish. With the way the US electoral system works, you aren't making a grand stand against the system; you're simply giving away your choice to someone else. Politicians don't give a solitary damn about people who don't vote; the people who do vote and which representatives they choose matter.

I'm not saying you have to vote for a (D) or an (R). Vote 3rd party, vote a write-in, just fucking vote. Choosing to stay home isn't taking a moral stance. It's refusing to take one to make yourself feel better. If Democrats and Republicans went from currently winning elections 48% against 44% to winning elections 25% against 21% if everyone voted, they would take notice. However, people with opinions like yours are too busy feeling self-righteous for "sticking it to the man" to make that difference.

[1] only "real" Christians may apply

Avnger:
I'm not saying you have to vote for a (D) or an (R). Vote 3rd party, vote a write-in, just fucking vote. Choosing to stay home isn't taking a moral stance. It's refusing to take one to make yourself feel better. If Democrats and Republicans went from currently winning elections 48% against 44% to winning elections 25% against 21% if everyone voted, they would take notice.

As someone whom no one could mistake for a Third Way trash apologist without some extreme mental gymnastics, I approve this message. Don't stay home. Give them noise, if nothing else. Those winning percentages need to start coming down from the 50s and 40s and into the 30s and 20s where they really belong because that means that a whole lot of people can infer that there are a lot of people who are similarly dissatisfied who can unite behind a better alternative next time.

Natural resource dictatorships will tend to keep their populations disconnected from each other, and unable to communicate with each other in any way that allows the mass of people to become confident that they share rebellious thoughts with a very large number of other people. These dictators will purposely decline to make effective road connections between villages, will purposely allow such roads if they do exist to be dangerous and not worth the effort of traversing without an expensively armed escort (or will undertake such banditry themselves), and will suffer the evils of having a basketcase economy in order to keep their populations ignorant of how widespread revolutionary sentiment might be. (They make their money by allowing foreign capitalists to extract a natural resource, so the infrastructure necessary to allow a flourishing domestic economy is unnecessarily destabilizing.)

Whatever one thinks about how the United States establishment news media acts, and I would tend to agree with those who think that they function with an intention of keeping the population ignorant of widespread discontent with capitalism, it is best to force them to lie if they want to maintain that illusion. Make them have to make a choice between reporting "won with 37%" or only counting the ballots of Democrats and Republicans in the denominator and so falsifying their reporting. To the extent that we can, we should make them either help the progressive argument or have to be dishonest to prevent doing so (which helps to discredit them). Indeed, the difference between not voting and voting for Mickey Mouse is larger in terms of moral acceptability than the difference between voting for Clinton or Trump.

Yeah I think that's reading too much, first was a democrat winning in a democrat state, whopedo. Was the margin of victory higher than last election?

NJ is also mostly democrat, it did have a rep governor, but Christie was so hated at this point (block bridge and beach for personal benefit) that even if Clinton had won or Trump turned out to be an amazing president the seat would have flipped regardless.

Call me when a deep red state flip, which has yet to really happen.

As far as the convention, like Avnger said republican are actually ridiculously close to calling one trough states and if that happen anything can happen. It's never occurred before and there's no legal precedent, it's not even clear if there would need to be a general population referendum (probably not). This could mean pretty much anything.

aegix drakan:
SO much salt I'm seeing over the net over Danica Roem winning.

So many triggered conservatives screeching about "Moral decay!1!11", "Misgendered smears!1!11!", "We must preach the lord's work from the pulpits to counter this!1!1". Seriously, they all need to grow up and learn that the world isn't this tiny little orderly box that conforms to their narrowminded norms.

Why they all take someone identifying as a different gender to be such a terrifying thing, I will never understand. Trans people are people just like anyone else. Whatever happened to basic human decency to one another?

Anyway, here's hoping Danica makes for a great state legislator and is good enough to stay in power for a long time to come, not just because I hope she does good things for her state, but also just to rub salt in the wounds of those assholes.

Because we're everyone's favourite punching bag. Basically when it stops being fashionable dog whistling for a politician, that's when they get all the uglier for it because it's a convenient way to pretend you stand for something when in truth all that correlates to is hurting innocent people and blocking the tide of basic scientific knowledge that trans people exist.

Religion is a convenient shield for simply feeling less scared or less impacted by one's scientific illiteracy, hence convenient dog whistle antics. You give these people an inch, they'll take a mile and then pretend it's somehow 'extremist' that a person like Roem is asking for basic inclusivity in political, social and market participation.

Still, classy burn by Roem.

That was the best way to handle what will be a fairly ugly, continued reprisal by conservatives based solely on her being trans and that somehow that correlates to her ethical capacity for leadership.

Avnger:

Gergar12:
They don't have 2/3s of the Senate needed to call a constitutional convention, they have nowhere near it.

That's nice. The Republican party has absolutely no need of Congress when they can do an end-run through the states.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_Convention_(United_States):
A Convention to propose amendments to the United States Constitution, also called an Article V Convention, or Amendments Convention, called for by two-thirds (currently 34) of the state legislatures, is one of two processes authorized by Article Five of the United States Constitution whereby the Constitution, the nation's frame of government, may be altered.

[...]

To become part of the Constitution, an amendment must be ratified by either?as determined by Congress?the legislatures of three-fourths (presently 38) of the states or State ratifying conventions in three-fourths of the states.

Also, once this convention is convened, Pandora's box has been opened regarding what may be altered. Goodbye "freedom of religion" and hello "freedom to be a Christian"[1].

-------------------------

Your whole spiel about refusing to vote is, to be frank, nothing more than inflating your own ego. "If I only get 1/2 of the progress I want by voting for a Democrat or regress by voting for a Republican, I'm going to not vote!" is childish. With the way the US electoral system works, you aren't making a grand stand against the system; you're simply giving away your choice to someone else. Politicians don't give a solitary damn about people who don't vote; the people who do vote and which representatives they choose matter.

I'm not saying you have to vote for a (D) or an (R). Vote 3rd party, vote a write-in, just fucking vote. Choosing to stay home isn't taking a moral stance. It's refusing to take one to make yourself feel better. If Democrats and Republicans went from currently winning elections 48% against 44% to winning elections 25% against 21% if everyone voted, they would take notice. However, people with opinions like yours are too busy feeling self-righteous for "sticking it to the man" to make that difference.

If Joe Manchin is on the 2020 ticket, I am staying home, the governor and senate race(Lucky for me it's a progressive incumbent, a coal-supporting one, but a progressive nonetheless) in my state is in 2018. A Democrat will never win in my district for the house of representatives, and the city council is all corrupt democrats.

I may vote for issues, but I almost every issue I have voted for in the state-lv has lost. The lower drug prices and the one for weed were so lop-sided.

[1] only "real" Christians may apply

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here