Jump to content
270soft Forum

Recommended Posts

I don't think Molinaro really stands a chance against either Nixon or Cuomo, unless Nixon decides to run on the WFP line and play spoiler (which would be bad) or if Cuomo did the same thing on the WEP line (which would be bad and... so stupid.) But I think Nixon would win because Williams would help her get more votes in the city and she would carry Syracuse, Buffalo, Albany, Rochester, etc-- particularly if she would be able to beat Cuomo in the primary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NM Senate - Only to see the effect Johnson has on the race. Still firmly believe Heinrich will win.

FL Senate - Scott is definitely giving Nelson a run for his money

AZ-1 - I think Wendy Rodgers and Tom O'Halleran are both solid candidates. I voted for O'Halleran in 2016, as I was vehemently opposed to Paul Babeu. However, this district is generally republican, and I believe the only reason O'Halleran won was because of the widespread opposition to Babeu. This is my District, and in a state that is becoming MUCH more purple, this race may or may not set the tone for 2020, alone with our senate race.

HONORABLE MENTIONS

AZ Senate - McSally will most likely win, but still a competitve race. I think Sinema was a terrible candidate for the Democrats, and drafting someone like Raul Grijalva or Ann Kirkpatrick would've been better. I know Kirkpatrick faced McCain in 2016, but its a different ballgame to challenge the incumbent VS running a campaign in an open race. 

MI Senate - Most polls have John James trailing Stabenow by at least 20%, but with the Kavanaugh vote happening before the election, and Michigan narrowly going for Trump, this race still entertains me.

AZ Governor - I dislike Ducey. As an educator he's turned his back on public education, and honestly just dislikeable. I however have appreciated him bringing AZ back from the brink after the economy being destroyed. I will vote for him over Garcia, because at the end of the day, I'm not a one-issue voter, and sadly Republicans are a let down when it comes to education. Still, it will be an interesting election to see how voters respond to Garcia.

Finally, CO Governor race. Another purple state that continues to surprise at the state level. It will be interesting to see how Polis and Stapleton square off. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, ThePotatoWalrus said:

@Patine, would you support Gary Johnson for Senate? 

Fiscal conservatives, especially those who use that brand as one of their principal labels as a politician, tend to like to cut the programs that I often go on about should receive MORE comprehensive funding in a rich nation - and programs which my personal job in RL deals with, to the bone. I find such politicians are usually guilty of wanting to abdicate many of the services and duties of a government is meant to provide by nature of being a government, or just "privatize" them (putting life and death things like healthcare, or sociopathically putting things like prisons, fully and completely in the hands of the plutocrats for their maximal profit) just to "save costs" - which makes ones wonder just what the Hell they're saving up for or what other priorities they really have...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Patine said:

Fiscal conservatives, especially those who use that brand as one of their principal labels as a politician, tend to like to cut the programs that I often go on about should receive MORE comprehensive funding in a rich nation - and programs which my personal job in RL deals with, to the bone. I find such politicians are usually guilty of wanting to abdicate many of the services and duties of a government is meant to provide by nature of being a government, or just "privatize" them (putting life and death things like healthcare, or sociopathically putting things like prisons, fully and completely in the hands of the plutocrats for their maximal profit) just to "save costs" - which makes ones wonder just what the Hell they're saving up for or what other priorities they really have...

So you only support left wing third parties despite wanting to do away with the binary system?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ThePotatoWalrus said:

So you only support left wing third parties despite wanting to do away with the binary system?

Other than that though you make good points that I partially agree with. Im just saying you should support all non extreme third parties if you ever want to realistically do away with the binary system 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, ThePotatoWalrus said:

So you only support left wing third parties despite wanting to do away with the binary system?

I'd say they probably support third parties having support or being able to attain support fairly. That doesn't mean they (or anyone) agrees with their principles. The fact is simple: people will vote what they support, in the end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ThePotatoWalrus said:

So you only support left wing third parties despite wanting to do away with the binary system?

Actually, you're generalizing here. I don't support ALL modern tropes taken by modern liberal or social-democratic politicians in the modern context you would use those terms today. I DON'T agree with affirmative action or other quota-based hiring practices being imposed on everyone, or PC/SJW terminology to the point it's gotten so ridiculous you can barely say anything without someone declaring they're "triggered" and then them becoming the aggrieved victim, even if there's so sense to it, while I certainly don't believe in a Christian theocracy or theonymy or Christian (or any other) religious specific law being legislated into law, and I don't believe in Christian (or any other) religious indoctrination through schooling and other programs where a child is obliged to attend and is enrolled in long before they're capable of making such decisions because of "parental rights" and "parents know best" (because, frankly, parents often don't know best - among mammals, humans are statistically the second-worst parents on the globe, on average, next to giraffes), but I believe NO ONE should enter into any binding commitment to a religious community until they're of the age of majority and comprehension and understand and fully consent, from the start, to EVERYTHING their getting involved in - that being said, I don't believe religious communities (especially Christians, who ARE greatly targeted here) should have avoid to celebrating their religious festivals or practices except in solemn privacy, unless they're infringing on others' rights in a tangible way (again, not the emotional, subjective, by declaration alone, or often for ulterior motives "triggering" above), also, just declaring certain statuses for ulterior motives or benefit (like, having dealt professionally with psychologists and therapists who have dealt with the issue, there is a process of transformation, medication, adjustment, and long, several-year-long procedure to transsexuality - it's NOT a matter of "I feel like the opposite sex today, and I can't be questioned on the matter, so I'll shower in the other locker room, coach," or benefits from "religions" that are obviously not religions, but scams or social control schemes, gaining the benefiting of religions *cough* Scientology *cough*), I don't believe in slap-on-the-wrist justice or "rehabilitation" - while I don't believe in capital punishment, except maybe in the most heinous cases, but only if the evidence was absolutely irrefutable, and I believe the label of "terrorist," in the criminal justice should be abolished, as it's just a highly politicized and arbitrary label with insufficient limits on it's use and a tool of tyranny waiting to be picked and used by a future dictator-wannabe, and I don't believe that police should have the impunity to shoot-to-kill on flimsy rationale and consistently get away with it, and I DEFINITELY think prisons should NEVER be privatized, under ANY circumstances, I do believe in hard punishment for serious crimes and much lighter ones for lighter offenses, and if a judge gives significantly different sentences for similar crimes for defendants of widely different social classes, that judge should suspended, and then closely investigated for potential, and quite seriously so, permanent debarring, I believe cannabis and prostitution should be legalized, taxed, and regulated, though I'm a big vice fiend, myself, I do believe immigration (both in Canada, the U.S., and the U.K. and EU, for that matter), needs control, but shouldn't be ended completely, or based completely on country of origin and other profiling, and on what the immigrant has to other in terms of skills and education, with only their nuclear family being "chained in," I don't believe it is ethical (or legal, by international human trafficking laws, for that matter), to ship the children of illegal immigrants to a country where they have never set foot and may not even have citizenship in, but they can't be instant citizenship either - they should be allowed to earn it somehow, I don't believe that private universities and colleges should have forced and mandatory quotas of students they MUST take, most of whom would be happier and more harmonious in a public post-secondary institution anyways, I believe and government services given to the population should have definite, measurable ratio, no matter what services are being given in a particular jurisdiction. These are a few of my socio-economic points of view differ from the typical modern "social liberal and social democratic" views of today. This doesn't even touch on my military, foreign affairs, trade, and government reform (neigh, massive overhaul) ideals, but there's a rebuttal for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Patine said:

Actually, you're generalizing here. I don't support ALL modern tropes taken by modern liberal or social-democratic politicians in the modern context you would use those terms today. I DON'T agree with affirmative action or other quota-based hiring practices being imposed on everyone, or PC/SJW terminology to the point it's gotten so ridiculous you can barely say anything without someone declaring they're "triggered" and then them becoming the aggrieved victim, even if there's so sense to it, while I certainly don't believe in a Christian theocracy or theonymy or Christian (or any other) religious specific law being legislated into law, and I don't believe in Christian (or any other) religious indoctrination through schooling and other programs where a child is obliged to attend and is enrolled in long before they're capable of making such decisions because of "parental rights" and "parents know best" (because, frankly, parents often don't know best - among mammals, humans are statistically the second-worst parents on the globe, on average, next to giraffes), but I believe NO ONE should enter into any binding commitment to a religious community until they're of the age of majority and comprehension and understand and fully consent, from the start, to EVERYTHING their getting involved in - that being said, I don't believe religious communities (especially Christians, who ARE greatly targeted here) should have avoid to celebrating their religious festivals or practices except in solemn privacy, unless they're infringing on others' rights in a tangible way (again, not the emotional, subjective, by declaration alone, or often for ulterior motives "triggering" above), also, just declaring certain statuses for ulterior motives or benefit (like, having dealt professionally with psychologists and therapists who have dealt with the issue, there is a process of transformation, medication, adjustment, and long, several-year-long procedure to transsexuality - it's NOT a matter of "I feel like the opposite sex today, and I can't be questioned on the matter, so I'll shower in the other locker room, coach," or benefits from "religions" that are obviously not religions, but scams or social control schemes, gaining the benefiting of religions *cough* Scientology *cough*), I don't believe in slap-on-the-wrist justice or "rehabilitation" - while I don't believe in capital punishment, except maybe in the most heinous cases, but only if the evidence was absolutely irrefutable, and I believe the label of "terrorist," in the criminal justice should be abolished, as it's just a highly politicized and arbitrary label with insufficient limits on it's use and a tool of tyranny waiting to be picked and used by a future dictator-wannabe, and I don't believe that police should have the impunity to shoot-to-kill on flimsy rationale and consistently get away with it, and I DEFINITELY think prisons should NEVER be privatized, under ANY circumstances, I do believe in hard punishment for serious crimes and much lighter ones for lighter offenses, and if a judge gives significantly different sentences for similar crimes for defendants of widely different social classes, that judge should suspended, and then closely investigated for potential, and quite seriously so, permanent debarring, I believe cannabis and prostitution should be legalized, taxed, and regulated, though I'm a big vice fiend, myself, I do believe immigration (both in Canada, the U.S., and the U.K. and EU, for that matter), needs control, but shouldn't be ended completely, or based completely on country of origin and other profiling, and on what the immigrant has to other in terms of skills and education, with only their nuclear family being "chained in," I don't believe it is ethical (or legal, by international human trafficking laws, for that matter), to ship the children of illegal immigrants to a country where they have never set foot and may not even have citizenship in, but they can't be instant citizenship either - they should be allowed to earn it somehow, I don't believe that private universities and colleges should have forced and mandatory quotas of students they MUST take, most of whom would be happier and more harmonious in a public post-secondary institution anyways, I believe and government services given to the population should have definite, measurable ratio, no matter what services are being given in a particular jurisdiction. These are a few of my socio-economic points of view differ from the typical modern "social liberal and social democratic" views of today. This doesn't even touch on my military, foreign affairs, trade, and government reform (neigh, massive overhaul) ideals, but there's a rebuttal for you.

Damn I agree with like over 90% of this lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/11/2018 at 8:13 PM, President Trenton Adams said:

NM Senate - Only to see the effect Johnson has on the race. Still firmly believe Heinrich will win.

FL Senate - Scott is definitely giving Nelson a run for his money

AZ-1 - I think Wendy Rodgers and Tom O'Halleran are both solid candidates. I voted for O'Halleran in 2016, as I was vehemently opposed to Paul Babeu. However, this district is generally republican, and I believe the only reason O'Halleran won was because of the widespread opposition to Babeu. This is my District, and in a state that is becoming MUCH more purple, this race may or may not set the tone for 2020, alone with our senate race.

HONORABLE MENTIONS

AZ Senate - McSally will most likely win, but still a competitve race. I think Sinema was a terrible candidate for the Democrats, and drafting someone like Raul Grijalva or Ann Kirkpatrick would've been better. I know Kirkpatrick faced McCain in 2016, but its a different ballgame to challenge the incumbent VS running a campaign in an open race. 

MI Senate - Most polls have John James trailing Stabenow by at least 20%, but with the Kavanaugh vote happening before the election, and Michigan narrowly going for Trump, this race still entertains me.

AZ Governor - I dislike Ducey. As an educator he's turned his back on public education, and honestly just dislikeable. I however have appreciated him bringing AZ back from the brink after the economy being destroyed. I will vote for him over Garcia, because at the end of the day, I'm not a one-issue voter, and sadly Republicans are a let down when it comes to education. Still, it will be an interesting election to see how voters respond to Garcia.

Finally, CO Governor race. Another purple state that continues to surprise at the state level. It will be interesting to see how Polis and Stapleton square off. 

Why in your opinion is Sinema a terrible candidate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎9‎/‎11‎/‎2018 at 5:17 PM, lizphairphreak said:

I don't think Molinaro really stands a chance against either Nixon or Cuomo, unless Nixon decides to run on the WFP line and play spoiler (which would be bad) or if Cuomo did the same thing on the WEP line (which would be bad and... so stupid.) But I think Nixon would win because Williams would help her get more votes in the city and she would carry Syracuse, Buffalo, Albany, Rochester, etc-- particularly if she would be able to beat Cuomo in the primary.

I personally dont care in the fact that, as long as Nixon beats Cuomo, I don't care if Nixon or Molinaro are the faces of the state, just not Cuomo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×