The Free Dictionary  
mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest Forum Search | Active Topics | Members

Virginia/New Jersey elections Options
Andrew Schultz
Posted: Tuesday, November 07, 2017 10:23:19 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/7/2015
Posts: 398
Neurons: 804,579
Location: Chicago, Illinois, United States
First thanks to thar for the post on Iceland. It pushed me to write this post.

I don't know how much people have been paying attention, but usually states elect governors and representatives in even years.

Virginia and New Jersey do so in odd years. Specifically, governors are elected in year 4x+1. Like this year! Like tonight, November 7th! So here's a quick rushed overview.

Virginia is known as a "purple state." Red = Republicans, Blue = Democrats. It was Republican for a long time, but in 2008, it voted for Obama. Virginia wasn't the biggest gain for Democrats, but it was one of two southern states (Florida being the other) that flipped. Virginia stayed Democratic, but Florida went for Trump in 2016. Florida is a heterogeneous, idiosyncratic state, and people have said "north Florida is like the south US, and south Florida is like the north US."

Virginia has been trending Democratic partially due to a surge in population the DC (District of Columbia) exurbs, and New Jersey has been Democratic for a while, largely since it is geographically a small state with a lot of cities, and in some ways, it's a suburb of New York City. I think it's not an understatement to say that failing to regain the Governorship in both states would've signaled a disaster for the Democrats.

But state legislatures are important, too. They are sort of laboratories for national laws, and John Oliver has a take on them, and their problems: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIMgfBZrrZ8. The thing is, local elections matter. They're how a lot of people get their starts.

For Virginia, the state legislature was 66-34 Republicans and is at this time 53-47 to the Republicans. Democrats have had a real problem electing lower level state officials & while some Democrats think Virginia is badly gerrymandered in Republicans' favor, that excuse only goes so far. It's hard to draw fair borders when the population is concentrated. But Dems were hoping for about 8 pickups and got 13 or so. That's big. It's the equivalent of a 60 seat flip in the national House of Representatives, which is what the Republicans got in 2010.

Democrats already had a statehouse advantage in New Jersey and picked up a few seats, but that isn't as big news as a party cutting into a huge statehouse deficit.

As a Democrat I'm pretty happy about this, but I also recognize that a lot of the vote may be the standard reacting to the party currently in power. After all, in 2009 with Obama as president, Virginia and New Jersey both elected Republican governors.

This is kind of big because if Bob Menendez, one of the Democratic senators from New Jersey, is indicted on fraud charges (and it doesn't look good for him IMHO,) he will probably resign from the Senate. After January 20(?), 2018, Phil Murphy, the governor-elect and a Democrat, will appoint the replacement, likely a Democrat. But if Menendez is indicted before, Chris Christie (current governor, Republican) will likely appoint a Republican, as he did when Frank Lautenberg died in office.

The Republican (like Lautenberg's replacement) probably would not stay in office long, since there would be a special election. But 53-47 would be much tougher to overcome than 52-48. For instance, McCain, Murkowski and Collins could not have rejected the one Seante health care bill if there had been one more Republican senator.

So yes, the Democrats are playing a bit of a waiting game, here.

Corruption is a very real problem when one party gets too many seats, and as a Democrat, I can't pretend it's not there. New Jersey and Illinois have, well, certain problems. Even when people aren't doing illegal things, like Rod Blagojevich (went to jail for trying to shake Obama down for a cabinet position,) they're bending the rules or strongarming, like Mike Madigan (Illinois House Speaker). That's on the Democratic side. Republicans have had problems too, with George Ryan's cash for drivers' licenses scandal.

Of course, voting in elections is only a small part of enacting change. And while more Americans need to vote, it needs to be more than "my side, your side." We all need to focus on issues important to us between elections, so when the needle moves back and forth from left to right, it isn't just a push and pull, but actually progress being made with new ideas.

I particularly enjoy the idiom section of this fine website.
TheParser
Posted: Wednesday, November 08, 2017 5:58:21 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/21/2012
Posts: 4,674
Neurons: 22,062
Andrew Schultz wrote:


As a Democrat I'm pretty happy about this, but I also recognize that a lot of the vote may be the standard reacting to the party currently in power.

We all need to focus on issues important to us between elections.




As about the only moderate in this forum, I congratulate the Democrats on their two big victories last night.

Moderates and most Republicans are good sports. I have just seen a bit of the concession speech of the Republican candidate. It was, of course, gracious.

Yes, it would be nice if all politicians could act like adults.

They need to work together on such issues as taxation, health care, immigration, crime, etc.


They need to stop demonizing the other side.

I hope that you will continue to post your thoughtful comments. Your temperate language has more effect on members and guests than all the insulting and hysterical language that is so common in this forum.


*****

I have just seen a bit of President Trump and the First Lady's visit to the famous Forbidden City in Beijing. Very impressive. I hope that President Trump gets a chance to tour Buckingham Palace in London and to dine with Her Majesty.
tunaafi
Posted: Wednesday, November 08, 2017 8:01:23 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/3/2014
Posts: 4,453
Neurons: 53,498
Location: Karlín, Praha, Czech Republic
TheParser wrote:
As about the only moderate in this forum, I ...


Brick wall
Andrew Schultz
Posted: Thursday, November 09, 2017 1:23:24 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/7/2015
Posts: 398
Neurons: 804,579
Location: Chicago, Illinois, United States
tunaafi wrote:
TheParser wrote:
As about the only moderate in this forum, I ...


Brick wall


In fairness, TheParser is most definitely more reasonable than some people who post from outside the US.

And I don't mean people posting from England, Canada or Australia. Or the Czech Republic :).

Seriously though, Parser--I have been annoyed by others on the left who tell me I'm not left wing enough or who make it some performance art or who say if you don't agree with them 100% you are just a fake and not really interested in social justice etc. I can see how this is annoying to others, and I think it's probably cost those of us on the left elections, and I try to avoid acting like them. People on the right are, IMHO, better salesmen. And I don't mean that as a backhand compliment. Salesmanship is a different thing to learn, and like all social skills, it can be used for bad or good.

I particularly enjoy the idiom section of this fine website.
TheParser
Posted: Thursday, November 09, 2017 3:48:23 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/21/2012
Posts: 4,674
Neurons: 22,062
Andrew Schultz wrote:
I have been annoyed by others on the left who tell me I'm not left wing enough or who make it some performance art or who say if you don't agree with them 100% you are just a fake and not really interested in social justice etc.



Thank you for your comments.

I am not kidding when I say that I have just read the most reasonable words that I have ever read from a liberal since I joined these forums several years ago.

In fact, your civil tone has convinced me to be as polite as you: I will no longer put quotation marks around the word "liberal" and I will no longer use the word "individual" instead of "person" or "member."

*****

I have copied the one sentence from your post that sums up the situation in these forums. I never thought that a liberal member would make that admission in open forum. I especially loved the phrase "performance art."


*****

You state that you are NOT referring to people from those four countries.

Of course, I must take you at your word.

*****






Personally, I have always found the member from [censored) to be civil and reasonable.

And I have found that, generally speaking, the member from [censored] tries to stay on topic and generally has avoided personal abuse.

Regarding a certain male person and a certain female person from the two other countries, I do not trust myself to comment. (Veteran members and guests will understand.)

*****

If more liberals (in these forums and in the real world) would adopt your tone of civility, they would no doubt be able to persuade some conservatives and moderates to reconsider their views on certain topics. And no doubt more members would join in the "Politics" discussions.






Have a great new week!











Hope123
Posted: Thursday, November 09, 2017 4:02:25 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 7,127
Neurons: 41,209
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
I deleted a post after that time limit expired but when I could still edit as it was too long and rambling. It was mainly a definition of moderate - whether it was used here to mean politically moderate or impartial in all areas, including politics.

I do agree with Parser that civil discourse without divisiveness, rancor, blaming, judging other posters, and generalizations/stereotypes about different political groups would make the forum a much pleasanter place to read and discuss issues that are important to us. I am looking forward to no more posts about certain members, judging them good as compared to others - as well as bad - censored or not, liberals, conservatives, moderates, or the lack of discussion on the Politics section. If a compliment is to be given, it is polite and nice to include all who contributed, and not just a chosen few.

World food shortage that threatens five hundred million children could be alleviated at the cost of one day's warfare.
tunaafi
Posted: Thursday, November 09, 2017 4:59:04 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/3/2014
Posts: 4,453
Neurons: 53,498
Location: Karlín, Praha, Czech Republic
TheParser wrote:
Personally, I have always found the member from [censored) to be civil and reasonable.

And I have found that, generally speaking, the member from [censored] tries to stay on topic and generally has avoided personal abuse.


Which gives members no idea who you are talking about. If you don't want to name names (and I don't see why not - given that you are being complimentary) then just lump them together and say 'some members'. This "[censored]" thing is just silly.


Quote:
Regarding a certain male person and a certain female person from the two other countries, I do not trust myself to comment. (Veteran members and guests will understand.)

This is just infantile.

You do not trust yourself to comment because you lack the balls to attempt to justify to some of the foul comments you have made about your 'enemies' (your term).You never directly name us, because you appear to think this absolves you of responsibility for your remarks. You claim (when it suits you) not to read our posts, which absolves you, in your mind, of any need to justify any of the racist, sexist, chauvinistic, insultingly personal, comments you have made.

In addition to being a bigot (I have provided evidence for this on a number of occasions), and a liar (I have provided evidence for this on a number of occasions), you are a spineless, gutless coward.

Members may have observed that, since my return from a short break, I have used some intemperate words about TheParser. This is deliberate. I am hoping to provoke some reaction from the 'moderators' of this forum. Their (and that of their sponsoring organisation, Farlex) failure to date to deal with some of the inflammatory posts of 'TheBastard' (and, I must admit, some of my responses) suggests to me that Farlex is content to provide a platform for racism, sexism, chauvinism, bigotry and lies.

Are you happy with that, Farlex? To be known as the provider of a platform for bigotry?
TheParser
Posted: Friday, November 10, 2017 5:02:11 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/21/2012
Posts: 4,674
Neurons: 22,062
Andrew Schultz wrote:
Salesmanship is a different thing to learn, and like all social skills, it can be used for bad or good.



Yes.

If the Democrats can find a candidate who is witty, humorous, and positive, then, I feel, they have a very good chance of winning back the White House in 2020.

If people like you as a human being, then your politics come second.
Drag0nspeaker
Posted: Monday, November 13, 2017 8:57:42 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/12/2011
Posts: 27,115
Neurons: 149,215
Location: Livingston, Scotland, United Kingdom
TheParser wrote:
If people like you as a human being, then your politics come second.

WOW!
So that's what's wrong with the USA!

What about policies, issues, doing something about society?
Politicians are not there to be liked or to make money for industry, but to improve the lot of the general public.


Wyrd bið ful aræd - bull!
TheParser
Posted: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 5:08:26 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/21/2012
Posts: 4,674
Neurons: 22,062
Drag0nspeaker wrote:

Politicians are not there to be liked or to make money for industry, but to improve the lot of the general public.



You are absolutely right!

I vote only for a candidate whom(m) I like, for I assume that a good human being will pursue good policies.




Have a great day!
TheParser
Posted: Wednesday, November 15, 2017 5:17:41 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/21/2012
Posts: 4,674
Neurons: 22,062
tunaafi wrote:
TheParser wrote:
Personally, I have always found the member from [censored) to be civil and reasonable.

And I have found that, generally speaking, the member from [censored] tries to stay on topic and generally has avoided personal abuse.


Which gives members no idea who you are talking about. If you don't want to name names (and I don't see why not - given that you are being complimentary) then just lump them together and say 'some members'. This "[censored]" thing is just silly.


Quote:
Regarding a certain male person and a certain female person from the two other countries, I do not trust myself to comment. (Veteran members and guests will understand.)

This is just infantile.

You do not trust yourself to comment because you lack the balls to attempt to justify to some of the foul comments you have made about your 'enemies' (your term).You never directly name us, because you appear to think this absolves you of responsibility for your remarks. You claim (when it suits you) not to read our posts, which absolves you, in your mind, of any need to justify any of the racist, sexist, chauvinistic, insultingly personal, comments you have made.

In addition to being a bigot (I have provided evidence for this on a number of occasions), and a liar (I have provided evidence for this on a number of occasions), you are a spineless, gutless coward.

Members may have observed that, since my return from a short break, I have used some intemperate words about TheParser. This is deliberate. I am hoping to provoke some reaction from the 'moderators' of this forum. Their (and that of their sponsoring organisation, Farlex) failure to date to deal with some of the inflammatory posts of 'TheBastard' (and, I must admit, some of my responses) suggests to me that Farlex is content to provide a platform for racism, sexism, chauvinism, bigotry and lies.

Are you happy with that, Farlex? To be known as the provider of a platform for bigotry?
March Hare
Posted: Wednesday, November 15, 2017 6:01:32 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/4/2014
Posts: 246
Neurons: 1,243,078
Location: Zedelgem, Flanders, Belgium
tunaafi wrote:
TheParser wrote:
Personally, I have always found the member from [censored) to be civil and reasonable.

And I have found that, generally speaking, the member from [censored] tries to stay on topic and generally has avoided personal abuse.


Which gives members no idea who you are talking about. If you don't want to name names (and I don't see why not - given that you are being complimentary) then just lump them together and say 'some members'. This "[censored]" thing is just silly.


Quote:
Regarding a certain male person and a certain female person from the two other countries, I do not trust myself to comment. (Veteran members and guests will understand.)

This is just infantile.

You do not trust yourself to comment because you lack the balls to attempt to justify to some of the foul comments you have made about your 'enemies' (your term).You never directly name us, because you appear to think this absolves you of responsibility for your remarks. You claim (when it suits you) not to read our posts, which absolves you, in your mind, of any need to justify any of the racist, sexist, chauvinistic, insultingly personal, comments you have made.

In addition to being a bigot (I have provided evidence for this on a number of occasions), and a liar (I have provided evidence for this on a number of occasions), you are a spineless, gutless coward.

Members may have observed that, since my return from a short break, I have used some intemperate words about TheParser. This is deliberate. I am hoping to provoke some reaction from the 'moderators' of this forum. Their (and that of their sponsoring organisation, Farlex) failure to date to deal with some of the inflammatory posts of 'TheBastard' (and, I must admit, some of my responses) suggests to me that Farlex is content to provide a platform for racism, sexism, chauvinism, bigotry and lies.

Are you happy with that, Farlex? To be known as the provider of a platform for bigotry?


Bold move, Tuna. I suppose if TheParser can happily ignore the forum terms and guidelines, there is no reason whatsoever why you should adhere to them. If he can post "content that is [...] abusive, defamatory, harassing, hateful, [...], or contains racially, ethnically, or otherwise objectionable content" - to quote the terms & guidelines - and get away with it, as he has for ages, I suppose there is no reason why any of us should stick to the rules. Except perhaps common decency. But in this case, for the greater purpose of getting the attention of the moderators (if any?) for a problem that has been festering on this forum for ages, I can only approve.
Romany
Posted: Wednesday, November 15, 2017 1:01:33 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/14/2009
Posts: 13,116
Neurons: 40,018
Location: Brighton, England, United Kingdom


Hey! Get someone to post an image of a nude Greek sculpture - and bells and buzzers will go off all over the internet.That'll attract moderators of every stripeWhistle
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS
Forum Terms and Guidelines. Copyright © 2008-2017 Farlex, Inc. All rights reserved.