What the "Others" Want

[Cow Poke]

Analysis: After this election, Texas judicial races might never be the same

As I suspected...

[carpedm9587]

As I understand it, the "straight-party" ticket issue is about "down-ticket" elections, particularly judges.

Where more and more Democrats were voting "straight party", particularly in Harris and Travis Counties, it is less likely that people will be casting an informed vote for their local judges.

The Democrats used to hate straight-party voting - now they're going to hate not having it. Yes, it's political, but I don't think it has anything to do with attempting to lengthen the lines at polling places.

OK - so two things. First - you added something to my posts I did not put there: intent. My statement was that the primary effect would be longer lines or a need for more voting booths. I was speaking to effect - not intent.

Second - I did not factor in the "downstream races," which you correctly point out. It is entirely possible that my prediction about outcomes will prove to be false, because some percentage of people will vote in the main races and leave the rest of the ballot blank (the so-called "undervote").

I have no idea what the "intent" of the bill writers and bill supporters is, so I did not comment on it. I have no idea if this is going to impact Dems more than Reps, so I did not comment on it. I'm not sure it makes any difference. And, frankly, I am actually in support of this initiative. I think "straight-party" voting is dumb, and about as useless as voting without knowing the issues, or knowing how our government works. I actually agree with Norrin that we need more educated and thoughtful voters. I just disagree that it should be a gating condition into the polling place.

[Cow Poke]

OK - so two things. First - you added something to my posts I did not put there: intent.

No, I didn't actually add intent to your post - I was just bringing up current news that will have an impact on straight-party voting.

My statement was that the primary effect would be longer lines or a need for more voting booths. I was speaking to effect - not intent.

Cool.

Second - I did not factor in the "downstream races," which you correctly point out. It is entirely possible that my prediction about outcomes will prove to be false, because some percentage of people will vote in the main races and leave the rest of the ballot blank (the so-called "undervote").

EGGzackly.

I have no idea what the "intent" of the bill writers and bill supporters is, so I did not comment on it. I have no idea if this is going to impact Dems more than Reps, so I did not comment on it. I'm not sure it makes any difference. And, frankly, I am actually in support of this initiative. I think "straight-party" voting is dumb, and about as useless as voting without knowing the issues, or knowing how our government works. I actually agree with Norrin that we need more educated and thoughtful voters. I just disagree that it should be a gating condition into the polling place.

You're doing that thing I asked for, aren't you? You're just trying to start a fight!

[carpedm9587]

No, I didn't actually add intent to your post - I was just bringing up current news that will have an impact on straight-party voting.

This is the post that left me with the impression you were adding intent. If that is not what you were responding to, then I have no idea what drove you to write it.

Cool.

EGGzackly.

You're doing that thing I asked for, aren't you? You're just trying to start a fight!

Since I was agreeing with you - I'm not sure how this is a "fight."

Unless, of course you want to fight about tests for voters?

[Cow Poke]

This is the post that left me with the impression you were adding intent. If that is not what you were responding to, then I have no idea what drove you to write it.

Ya know, Carpe -- sometimes people just have thoughts that are not necessarily an argument or direct response to a particular something you said. You, sir, are NOT the center of the universe.

Since I was agreeing with you - I'm not sure how this is a "fight."

Unless, of course you want to fight about tests for voters?

I have reservations about people voting in ignorance, but I don't know of a fair test to prevent that.

I DO think people voting to spend my money on other people ought to have skin in the game, but, again - I don't know how to fairly screen that without somebody screaming "poll tax"!

[Cow Poke]

Unless, of course you want to fight about tests for voters?

One of my biggest objections is this "get out the vote" thing which is always a "we hope to get people who will vote the way WE want them" --- it's not about "we care for the voter" - it's about "we want their vote!"

[Sparko]

This is kinda depressing...

New Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez comes from a poorer background unlike the usual millionaires in congress, and so:



And a Fox News panel proceeded to laugh at her for being poor. And also repeated several times the long-discredited and mocked claim that when she'd done a photo-shoot and been provided by the photographer with expensive clothes to wear during her shoot that those clothes were somehow "hers" or owned by her.



For those here who have been (rightfully and reasonably) complaining that there's too many ultra-rich people in congress and not enough representation from working class people, it's depressing to see person from a working class background being mocked by multimillionaires on TV for being poor.

A reminder that 40% of Americans couldn't cover a $400 emergency expense without going into debt and 61% of Americans couldn't cover a $1000 emergency expense without going into debt.

The mocking is over her audacity to run on the platform claiming to fix everything with socialism and free stuff and when asked about how she expects to pay for it, she said she didn't know, "just pay for it!" - and now we see more of this foolishness of her not being able to move to DC because she can't figure out her personal financing? Thousands of people move to DC every year, without high paying jobs. She had at least 2 years to figure it out and save/borrow money. They are not mocking her because she is "poor" but because she is clueless. If she can't figure out how to move to DC, how is she supposed to fix everything she promised? Moving to a new city isn't rocket science. I moved to a new city when I was young and didn't even have a job waiting like she does. I had no help other than a friend who moved with me who also had no job. We figured it out. We actually lived on a campground for 3 months in a bus until we got jobs to afford an apartment. All while going to school (that is why we moved)

Millions of young adults and teens do this routinely every year across the US.

[carpedm9587]

Ya know, Carpe -- sometimes people just have thoughts that are not necessarily an argument or direct response to a particular something you said. You, sir, are NOT the center of the universe.

By definition, I'm the center of mine, and you're the center of yours.

I have reservations about people voting in ignorance, but I don't know of a fair test to prevent that.

I do. A single question:

Are you either Republican or Democrat? (YES) (NO)

Anyone who answers "yes" cannot vote.

I DO think people voting to spend my money on other people ought to have skin in the game, but, again - I don't know how to fairly screen that without somebody screaming "poll tax"!

Can you say "flat tax?"

[Cow Poke]

Can you say "flat tax?"

I can, but there are so many variables -- start a thread and let's hash this out. We can't solve all the world's problems in just this one thread.

[Starlight]

Thousands of people move to DC every year, without high paying jobs. She had at least 2 years to figure it out and save/borrow money. They are not mocking her because she is "poor" but because she is clueless. If she can't figure out how to move to DC, how is she supposed to fix everything she promised? Moving to a new city isn't rocket science. I moved to a new city when I was young and didn't even have a job waiting like she does. I had no help other than a friend who moved with me who also had no job. We figured it out. We actually lived on a campground for 3 months in a bus until we got jobs to afford an apartment. All while going to school (that is why we moved)

Millions of young adults and teens do this routinely every year across the US.

You don't seem to understand the situation Mr Clueless Non-Rocket-Scientist. She's not moving cities. As a congressperson she needs to maintain two residences - her existing one in her district in NY, and a new one in DC. She will be alternating between the two once she is in her congressional position. The challenge is not moving cities, it is funding simultaneously two homes in two of the most expensive cities in the US, a month prior to beginning to receive her congressional salary, which does not begin until the new year.

Plenty of people move cities. Relatively few have to afford 2 houses for their job prior to receiving income from said job. Here in NZ it is relatively common for a new job to offer a person some up front money for relocation if they have to move cities, but it turns out that being a congressperson in the US doesn't provide any up-front financial assistance for the rental of a DC home.

If you do want to have more "average people" running for political office and less millionaires and billionaires in political office, that is something to think about.

[Starlight]

I think your answer is a lot better than Carps. Thanks. And looking at the state legislature, while it is overwhelmingly democratic, there are still a number of republicans there too. I think northern california is still more conservative.

Further to this discussion:

Dems gain veto-proof supermajority in California legislature:

Democrats now have a two-thirds advantage in the 40-person Senate and in the 80-person Assembly.

The massive supermajority gives the party the ability to raise taxes, suspend legislative rules and override vetoes without Republican votes.

Apparently the intricacies of the rules in California require 2/3rd sign-off on budget legislation, and previously the Republicans were blocking Dems from raising taxes, and thus blocking all of the Dems' tax & spend policies like Medicare for All, or addressing homeless etc. Now that the Dems have enough votes to fund their policies without Republican sign-off, we could see some more progressive policies in Cali soon (of course, presumably not all the Dems are progressives and there's sure to be some centrists among them, so they may fall far short of Bernie Sanders-esque policies).

[JimL]

You are entitled to remain totally ignorant on this issue.

Yes, I am entitled, which is why I said I doubt, not that I know. As it turns out, judges in Texas are partisan and are elected as such. Who'd a thunk it.

[Cow Poke]

Yes, I am entitled, which is why I said I doubt, not that I know. As it turns out, judges in Texas are partisan and are elected as such. Who'd a thunk it.

Next time, it might be a good idea to check the facts BEFORE exposing your ignorance.

[JimL]

Next time, it might be a good idea to check the facts BEFORE exposing your ignorance.

Oh, you mean like you did?

[Cow Poke]

Oh, you mean like you did?

Correct.

As I understand it, the "straight-party" ticket issue is about "down-ticket" elections, particularly judges...