As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options

[2018 State and Local Elections in the US] Dems Pickup MI, WI, IL, KS, NV, NM, ME

1171820222347

Posts

  • Options
    CelestialBadgerCelestialBadger Registered User regular
    It’s pretty dumb that you get to vote for the school board but not the Supreme Court.

  • Options
    grumblethorngrumblethorn Registered User regular
    ChaosHat wrote: »
    What are the odds the right to hunt and fish ends up including the right to hunt people for sport in like 40 years in our dystopian hellscape future?

    Zero. this is silly hyperbole.

  • Options
    RedTideRedTide Registered User regular
    ChaosHat wrote: »
    What are the odds the right to hunt and fish ends up including the right to hunt people for sport in like 40 years in our dystopian hellscape future?

    Zero. this is silly hyperbole.

    Yeah, all you have to do is stop legally defining some humans as people.

    RedTide#1907 on Battle.net
    Come Overwatch with meeeee
  • Options
    FencingsaxFencingsax It is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understanding GNU Terry PratchettRegistered User regular
    It’s pretty dumb that you get to vote for the school board but not the Supreme Court.

    Voting for judges is a terrible idea

  • Options
    shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Fencingsax wrote: »
    It’s pretty dumb that you get to vote for the school board but not the Supreme Court.

    Voting for judges is a terrible idea

    So is voting for who runs your school.

  • Options
    CelestialBadgerCelestialBadger Registered User regular
    edited October 2018
    Fencingsax wrote: »
    It’s pretty dumb that you get to vote for the school board but not the Supreme Court.

    Voting for judges is a terrible idea

    I get to vote for local judges who have purely local influence, but the Supreme Court is appointed. How does that make sense? Most of the judges on the polls don’t so much as have a website, so I don’t know whether they are bleeding hearts, hangin’ judges or incompetent.

    CelestialBadger on
  • Options
    So It GoesSo It Goes We keep moving...Registered User regular
    Not on topic

  • Options
    monikermoniker Registered User regular
    Your local Bar Association should have a list of qualified/not qualified to help with judicial elections. (Which are terrible, and should be abolished to follow the Federal Judiciary approach.) Basically just vote what the Bar says.

  • Options
    JragghenJragghen Registered User regular
    And continuing to dig into local candidates, this time for city council.

    This year is a bit crazy. There's been very little turnover in the past, but 2 incumbents aren't running for re-election, so there's only one incumbent running with 3 spots open and 12 people running.

    There's actually attack ads from outside PACs for our city council (mostly construction developers because there's some major work in that direction). No love lost from me towards the one they're attacking - he's a former cop who was dismissed for excessive force (which who even knows what that took these days) but HOLY CRAP its been kinda hilarious on the city Facebook pages and such.

    Anyway, all of these are non-partisan positions (most people don't lost parties, etc) but knowing the town I kinda have to deal with it being all conservatives that I'm picking from. And then I see the guy who ran for state assembly as a republican previously, but who is calling for municipal broadband explicitly because of the FCC net neutrality bullshit, and... Yeah, that's a pet project I can cross lines over :p

  • Options
    LabelLabel Registered User regular
    I spent two and a bit hours doing data entry for my state Governor's race. I'm a little burnt out of door knocking for the moment.

    It's apparently a close race, which is frightening. I do not want to find out how much damage two conservatives in the secretary of state and governor's office can do to an otherwise progressive state.

  • Options
    SorceSorce Not ThereRegistered User regular
    Man, I get that the 'Soil and Water Conservation Representative District [x]' is a ridiculously downballot race, but the fact that I can't find anything about it other than going to the actual candidate's websites for what they have to say seems a bit too much.

    Relatedly, my absentee ballot is in the mail now, since I managed to get that straight.

    sig.gif
  • Options
    AthenorAthenor Battle Hardened Optimist The Skies of HiigaraRegistered User regular
    I've been texted twice in the last week by folks from the local democratic party asking if I needed any info on how to vote or candidate races.

    Finally let them know that I've already voted and to keep up the good fight. Good on them!

    He/Him | "A boat is always safest in the harbor, but that’s not why we build boats." | "If you run, you gain one. If you move forward, you gain two." - Suletta Mercury, G-Witch
  • Options
    JragghenJragghen Registered User regular
    In "beneficial down-ticket" news, every poll which is not KFI-NBC (whoever that is) has had CA governor as D+17 or more, which is definitely into the "suppress turnout" ranges, which could definitely impact a NUMBER of congressional districts (a lot of the LA suburb region have slightly marginal R districts that are in play). Lieutenant Governor and Senate are both two Dem candidates. So they're basically relying in propositions to drive Republican turnout in the state.

    Which has gotten me digging into proposition polling, and this shit is all over the place.

    Prop 1: One poll, SUSA - Support winning 62-21
    Prop 2, 4, 5, 12: No polls (infuriatingly for 5. Ugh).
    Prop 3: One poll, PPP - Support winning 58-25, but from July
    Prop 6:
    • USC - LA Times - 41 support/42 oppose (poll ran for a month from mid sept to mid oct)
    • SUSA - 58 support/29 oppose (mid october, looked at the question and it ONLY talks about the taxes, while the prop itself is described as "stop the road work from this revenue" so that's slightly misleading)
    • PPP - 39 support/52 oppose (mid sept, looked at THIS question and it ONLY reads the title of the proposition - which is ‘Eliminates Certain Road Repair and Transportation Funding. Requires Certain Fuel Taxes and Vehicle Fees be Approved by the Electorate. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.’ )
    Prop 7: One poll, SUSA - Support winning 58-21
    Prop 8: One poll, SUSA - Support winning 47-34
    Prop 10: USC-LA times had 41-37 support, PPP and SUSA had 36-48 oppose and 35-46 oppose, respectively.
    Prop 11: One poll, SUSA - support winning 54-26

    So 1, 3, 7, and 11 (sadly) seem like done deals (and probably 2 and 4, even without polling). 12 I'd expect to pass given 2 did in 2008. 5 I have no fucking idea and I wish someone would poll it.

    Prop 6, 8, and 10 are getting ALL the advertising it seems (with 6 having "oppose" get a TON more funding, 8 getting oppose getting an OBSCENE amount of money, and 10 with oppose getting a decent fundraising gap). 11 support also has a substantial amount of money, so not seeing that one budge, sadly.



    6 is going to be the interesting one, and if it fails, then having the prop named that was a coup. If asked about repealing the gas tax, people are way in support. If asked to eliminate road repair and transportation funding in order to reduce the gas tax, they seem opposed.

  • Options
    JragghenJragghen Registered User regular
    Also I've seen some ads for prop 10 and it's the most misleading shit ever, with homeowners talking about how it'll lower the value of all homeowners homes and make it harder for people to buy houses. It's about rent control, you pieces of shit.

  • Options
    AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    Jragghen wrote: »
    Also I've seen some ads for prop 10 and it's the most misleading shit ever, with homeowners talking about how it'll lower the value of all homeowners homes and make it harder for people to buy houses. It's about rent control, you pieces of shit.

    It would apply rent control to single family occupancy houses, so it's not as misleading as you think.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • Options
    MayabirdMayabird Pecking at the keyboardRegistered User regular
    On my drive to work most days, there is an old guy who stands by the street. I've seen him in that spot even on rainy days, covering himself with an umbrella. He has a big sign with two American flags attached to it. The sign reads:
    "Vote Out Corruption.
    VOTE BLUE!"

    I make sure to honk and wave when I see him.

  • Options
    EinzelEinzel Registered User regular
    5 judge seats in Durham NC, 4 were unopposed D and one had a R opposition. Interestingly that race was the only one I recognized a name from.

  • Options
    CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited October 2018
    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/22/us/politics/abrams-flag-burning-georgia.html
    ATLANTA — At a protest on the steps of the Georgia Capitol in 1992, Stacey Abrams, now the Democratic candidate for governor, joined in the burning of the state flag, which at the time incorporated the Confederate battle flag design and was viewed by many as a lingering symbol of white supremacy.

    Ms. Abrams’s role in the protest, which took place around the end of her freshman year at Spelman College in Atlanta, has begun to emerge on social media on the eve of her first debate Tuesday with her Republican opponent, Secretary of State Brian Kemp. Mr. Kemp and his allies have sought to portray her as “too extreme for Georgia.”
    Ms. Abrams’s campaign, in a statement Monday, said her actions in 1992 were part of a “permitted, peaceful protest against the Confederate emblem in the flag” and part of a movement that was ultimately successful in changing the flag.
    1. What the heck, NYT?
    2. Burning a flag that is a white supremacist symbol with the state seal on it isn't extremist.

    The GA state flag is still based on the first national Confederate flag.

    Couscous on
  • Options
    ViskodViskod Registered User regular
    The sides. They are both the same.

  • Options
    durandal4532durandal4532 Registered User regular
    Stacey Abrams seems like she legitimately cares about her state and the people who live in it.

    Take a moment to donate what you can to Critical Resistance and Black Lives Matter.
  • Options
    SyphonBlueSyphonBlue The studying beaver That beaver sure loves studying!Registered User regular
    Stacey Abrams seems like she legitimately cares about her state and the people who live in it.

    yeah but she burned a flag

    so you see she's exactly the same as the guy who is literally stealing an election

    LxX6eco.jpg
    PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
  • Options
    PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    I just like how that's a direct call for racism. Like that is flat out Homer Stokes "She burned a certain flag of a certain social group that I represent that's not too extreme for Georgia..."

    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • Options
    MorganVMorganV Registered User regular
    Preacher wrote: »
    I just like how that's a direct call for racism. Like that is flat out Homer Stokes "She burned a certain flag of a certain social group that I represent that's not too extreme for Georgia..."

    You need to cram "tradition" and "heritage" into that statement for true craven authenticity.

  • Options
    daveNYCdaveNYC Why universe hate Waspinator? Registered User regular
    From the NYT article:
    Ms. Abrams’s role in the protest, which took place around the end of her freshman year at Spelman College in Atlanta, has begun to emerge on social media on the eve of her first debate Tuesday with her Republican opponent, Secretary of State Brian Kemp. Mr. Kemp and his allies have sought to portray her as “too extreme for Georgia.”

    She's 44 now. This took place in 1992. What the everliving fuck.

    Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
  • Options
    RMS OceanicRMS Oceanic Registered User regular
    daveNYC wrote: »
    From the NYT article:
    Ms. Abrams’s role in the protest, which took place around the end of her freshman year at Spelman College in Atlanta, has begun to emerge on social media on the eve of her first debate Tuesday with her Republican opponent, Secretary of State Brian Kemp. Mr. Kemp and his allies have sought to portray her as “too extreme for Georgia.”

    She's 44 now. This took place in 1992. What the everliving fuck.

    It's a precursor of that Onion Article about 2040 candidates being disqualified by stuff they did on Facebook.

  • Options
    SyphonBlueSyphonBlue The studying beaver That beaver sure loves studying!Registered User regular
    daveNYC wrote: »
    From the NYT article:
    Ms. Abrams’s role in the protest, which took place around the end of her freshman year at Spelman College in Atlanta, has begun to emerge on social media on the eve of her first debate Tuesday with her Republican opponent, Secretary of State Brian Kemp. Mr. Kemp and his allies have sought to portray her as “too extreme for Georgia.”

    She's 44 now. This took place in 1992. What the everliving fuck.

    It was also an instrumental part of forcing Georgia to finally change the fucking flag and get rid of that racist bullshit

    In short: Fuck the fucking New York Times

    LxX6eco.jpg
    PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
  • Options
    SyphonBlueSyphonBlue The studying beaver That beaver sure loves studying!Registered User regular
    And Abrams is not backing down from it. In a statement to the FTFNYT
    “During Stacey Abrams’ college years, Georgia was at a crossroads, struggling with how to overcome racially divisive issues, including symbols of the Confederacy, the sharpest of which was the inclusion of the Confederate emblem in the Georgia state flag,” her campaign said in a statement to the Times. “This conversation was sweeping across Georgia as numerous organizations, prominent leaders, and students engaged in the ultimately successful effort to change the flag.”

    LxX6eco.jpg
    PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
  • Options
    enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    The New York Times is a white supremacist organization.

    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • Options
    zepherinzepherin Russian warship, go fuck yourself Registered User regular
    So in local election weirdness. The PE Teacher/Football coach of the town I grew up in, he became a member of city council when he retired from coaching and teaching, he won by a landslide, like 70% of the vote, the incumbent mayor asked him to run so that they would outnumber the art contingent of the city. after that mayor retired the coach ran for mayor and again landslide.

    My dad was friends with him, and he retired from mayor. The new mayor who was just elected is my dads ex girlfriend. Local politics are weird.

  • Options
    ViskodViskod Registered User regular
    daveNYC wrote: »
    From the NYT article:
    Ms. Abrams’s role in the protest, which took place around the end of her freshman year at Spelman College in Atlanta, has begun to emerge on social media on the eve of her first debate Tuesday with her Republican opponent, Secretary of State Brian Kemp. Mr. Kemp and his allies have sought to portray her as “too extreme for Georgia.”

    She's 44 now. This took place in 1992. What the everliving fuck.

    Less than a month ago Republicans thought it was ridiculous to talk about things people might have done when they were 18 or 19 years old when considering them for a political position later in life.

  • Options
    ShivahnShivahn Unaware of her barrel shifter privilege Western coastal temptressRegistered User, Moderator mod
    Viskod wrote: »
    daveNYC wrote: »
    From the NYT article:
    Ms. Abrams’s role in the protest, which took place around the end of her freshman year at Spelman College in Atlanta, has begun to emerge on social media on the eve of her first debate Tuesday with her Republican opponent, Secretary of State Brian Kemp. Mr. Kemp and his allies have sought to portray her as “too extreme for Georgia.”

    She's 44 now. This took place in 1992. What the everliving fuck.

    Less than a month ago Republicans thought it was ridiculous to talk about things people might have done when they were 18 or 19 years old when considering them for a political position later in life.

    To be fair, that was only attempted rape. Burning a flag, even a state flag, is a step too far.

    ...I... I guess.

  • Options
    enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Viskod wrote: »
    daveNYC wrote: »
    From the NYT article:
    Ms. Abrams’s role in the protest, which took place around the end of her freshman year at Spelman College in Atlanta, has begun to emerge on social media on the eve of her first debate Tuesday with her Republican opponent, Secretary of State Brian Kemp. Mr. Kemp and his allies have sought to portray her as “too extreme for Georgia.”

    She's 44 now. This took place in 1992. What the everliving fuck.

    Less than a month ago Republicans thought it was ridiculous to talk about things people might have done when they were 18 or 19 years old when considering them for a political position later in life.

    Yeah, but he deserved dude process.

    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • Options
    CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited October 2018
    The GA GOP gubernatorial nominee is the current GA Secretary of State and in charge of election security.

    https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/brian-kemp-leaked-audio-georgia-voting-745711/
    An attendee of the “Georgia Professionals for Kemp” event says they recorded 21 minutes and 12 seconds of the evening, held last Friday at the Blind Pig Parlour Bar near Atlanta’s Buckhead neighborhood. As proof of their attendance, the source shared with Rolling Stone a receipt of their donation, which granted access to the gathering.

    Not long after Kemp began his remarks, the candidate expressed worry about early voting and “the literally tens of millions of dollars that they [the Abrams camp] are putting behind the get-out-the-vote effort to their base.”

    Kemp then asserted that much of that Abrams effort is focused on absentee ballot requests. “They have just an unprecedented number of that,” he said, “which is something that continues to concern us, especially if everybody uses and exercises their right to vote — which they absolutely can — and mail those ballots in, we gotta have heavy turnout to offset that.”
    Kemp is basically admitting there he has reason to find reasons to reject those absentee ballots.

    Couscous on
  • Options
    tbloxhamtbloxham Registered User regular
    Jragghen wrote: »
    In "beneficial down-ticket" news, every poll which is not KFI-NBC (whoever that is) has had CA governor as D+17 or more, which is definitely into the "suppress turnout" ranges, which could definitely impact a NUMBER of congressional districts (a lot of the LA suburb region have slightly marginal R districts that are in play). Lieutenant Governor and Senate are both two Dem candidates. So they're basically relying in propositions to drive Republican turnout in the state.

    Which has gotten me digging into proposition polling, and this shit is all over the place.

    Prop 1: One poll, SUSA - Support winning 62-21
    Prop 2, 4, 5, 12: No polls (infuriatingly for 5. Ugh).
    Prop 3: One poll, PPP - Support winning 58-25, but from July
    Prop 6:
    • USC - LA Times - 41 support/42 oppose (poll ran for a month from mid sept to mid oct)
    • SUSA - 58 support/29 oppose (mid october, looked at the question and it ONLY talks about the taxes, while the prop itself is described as "stop the road work from this revenue" so that's slightly misleading)
    • PPP - 39 support/52 oppose (mid sept, looked at THIS question and it ONLY reads the title of the proposition - which is ‘Eliminates Certain Road Repair and Transportation Funding. Requires Certain Fuel Taxes and Vehicle Fees be Approved by the Electorate. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.’ )
    Prop 7: One poll, SUSA - Support winning 58-21
    Prop 8: One poll, SUSA - Support winning 47-34
    Prop 10: USC-LA times had 41-37 support, PPP and SUSA had 36-48 oppose and 35-46 oppose, respectively.
    Prop 11: One poll, SUSA - support winning 54-26

    So 1, 3, 7, and 11 (sadly) seem like done deals (and probably 2 and 4, even without polling). 12 I'd expect to pass given 2 did in 2008. 5 I have no fucking idea and I wish someone would poll it.

    Prop 6, 8, and 10 are getting ALL the advertising it seems (with 6 having "oppose" get a TON more funding, 8 getting oppose getting an OBSCENE amount of money, and 10 with oppose getting a decent fundraising gap). 11 support also has a substantial amount of money, so not seeing that one budge, sadly.



    6 is going to be the interesting one, and if it fails, then having the prop named that was a coup. If asked about repealing the gas tax, people are way in support. If asked to eliminate road repair and transportation funding in order to reduce the gas tax, they seem opposed.

    Prop 5 will be just another disaster piled on top of the disaster which already is Prop 13. We DESPERATELY need to get rid of Prop 13. Our state is doing so well, but Prop 13 just holds all our schools in the damn dark ages. It's an outrage. Prop 13 is yet another generational transfer tax to transfer yet more wealth from the young to the old. Boomers are a disgrace.

    "That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
  • Options
    tbloxhamtbloxham Registered User regular
    Jragghen wrote: »
    Also I've seen some ads for prop 10 and it's the most misleading shit ever, with homeowners talking about how it'll lower the value of all homeowners homes and make it harder for people to buy houses. It's about rent control, you pieces of shit.

    It would apply rent control to single family occupancy houses, so it's not as misleading as you think.

    Yeah, I am not a fan of 10, California's problem with housing is a problem of supply due to lack of building and zoning problems. Its not lack of supply due to owners holding property which already exists for rent rather than selling it.

    Rent control with a fixed housing stock will remove property from the rental market, and developers will be even less likely to build rentable properties. I guess that perhaps if both single family AND apartment units are governed by rent control then maybe developers might build more apartment units (less price advantage for single family homes) but it seems unlikely. Rent Control primarily benefits people who are already IN housing. Landlords earn slightly less, but the 'move in price' for units actually goes up because Landlords have a massive incentive to wring every dollar they can out of the initial price. Places like San Francisco already have rules against predatory rent increases, so there's not much extra protection from them.

    I much prefer the other propositions related to housing, which raise money to build apartments for people. That actually helps. Of course, if 5 passes then all this is irrelevent anyway.

    "That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
  • Options
    monikermoniker Registered User regular
    daveNYC wrote: »
    From the NYT article:
    Ms. Abrams’s role in the protest, which took place around the end of her freshman year at Spelman College in Atlanta, has begun to emerge on social media on the eve of her first debate Tuesday with her Republican opponent, Secretary of State Brian Kemp. Mr. Kemp and his allies have sought to portray her as “too extreme for Georgia.”

    She's 44 now. This took place in 1992. What the everliving fuck.

    But did she like beer? Did she have too many beers when that flag was just laying there looking like that?

  • Options
    KasynKasyn I'm not saying I don't like our chances. She called me the master.Registered User regular
    edited October 2018
    I really feel for the research team working the Abrams campaign for that one. Misspelled name in the news clip never feels good to get fucked over by, but it's far from an impossible catch.

    Also possible it was caught, not like knowing about it in advance prevents it from getting out.

    Kasyn on
  • Options
    JaysonFourJaysonFour Classy Monster Kitteh Registered User regular
    edited October 2018
    Sigh.

    Got a new mailer from the state Republican party on why we shouldn't vote for Whitmer for MI governor. Literally the only thing they can find to dump on her with is bringing up the damned Nassar case and the scandal that put her in as interim prosecutor. There's something about damaged evidence, adding in mentions of rape kits for extra "ewww" factor, and then saying the reason all this happened and the reason the scandal was swept under the rug was that she was too busy campaigning for governor, as well as how she "hesitated to prosecute the Nassar case" (mostly because she was thinking that was the responsibility of the attorney general to do so because it crossed county lines- oh, wasn't that YOUR job, Bill? Hmm?)

    This from the guy who screwed over Flint royally for years when their water system went to hell. Kind of telling he isn't attacking her on her positions on the issues.

    JaysonFour on
    steam_sig.png
    I can has cheezburger, yes?
  • Options
    FoefallerFoefaller Registered User regular
    edited October 2018
    Polaritie wrote: »
    Polaritie wrote: »
    I have to say, it seems odd that the result of a dead person winning the election is an appointment.

    Not sure what a good solution would be. That seems like a case where rules as written would say second place wins because votes for a dead guy are votes for an inelligible person, but that's also problematic.

    Would your opinion change if the dude died the day after the election? Our election laws are cobbled together and started when a guy on a horse was the acme of communications technology. We should probably rewrite them but oh boy do I not trust the current government to do that.

    That just makes it even messier.

    Ideally you'd just have a do-over with a new candidate, but...

    I don't really have a good solution here, I don't know if there is a good solution.

    There really isn't. Best one currently would be for the governor to declare who they will appoint in place of Hof should he still win. Missouri's Gov did that when the previous governor who was running for Senate died in a plane crash (resulting in the first time in Missouri (and maybe US?) history that an incumbent senator lost to a dead man)

    Foefaller on
    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    TaramoorTaramoor Storyteller Registered User regular


    "Glitch" leaves Democrat off ballot in Arkansas.

This discussion has been closed.