Jump to content
270soft Forum
TheMiddlePolitical

How'd your state races/local races go (If your involved)

Recommended Posts

I was heavily involved in local politics with my first full election cycle (being 19). I founded the Fayette County Young Democrats,Worked for the PA Dems,and was on campaign staffs for Congress and state senate. Heres a list of local races I was involved in,and was friends with the Democratic candidate,or worked for them and with them. (All the first named candidates are the Dems,and are the people I mentioned) 

PA State 32:

Pam Gerard 34.2%

Pat Stefano (I) 65.8% 

Pat outspent Pam 22-1.

PA State 46:

James Craig (who is 27!) 41.1%

Camera Barlotta 58.9%

PA Rep 49

Steve Torpani 49.9%

Bud Cook 50.1% 

109 vote difference with 20,000 votes

PA Rep 51

Tim Mahoney (Was the state rep for this district,my district,from 2006-2016,lost in 2016 to the same person) 45%

Matt Dowling 55%

PA Rep 52

Ethan Keedy (Who is 24!) 38%

Ryan Warner 62%

PA Rep 54

Jon McCabe (Who is 21!) 40%

Bob Brooks 60%

PA Rep 57

Collin Warren (Who is 22!) 37%

Eric Nelson 63%

PA Cong. 14 

Bibiana Boerio 42%

Guy Reschenthaler  58%

 

Notice 4 people were between the ages of 21-27! Gives me hope for the future,as I am running for my city council seat in May. 

 

Also got front page for my areas newspaper (I'm the one in the blue shirt)

45369940_10212998424776845_4388184690666766336_n.thumb.jpg.93566f6e7ae5f9b631ce41787d9c1b04.jpg

(day before election day)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, TheMiddlePolitical said:

I was heavily involved in local politics with my first full election cycle (being 19). I founded the Fayette County Young Democrats,Worked for the PA Dems,and was on campaign staffs for Congress and state senate. Heres a list of local races I was involved in,and was friends with the Democratic candidate,or worked for them and with them. (All the first named candidates are the Dems,and are the people I mentioned) 

PA State 32:

Pam Gerard 34.2%

Pat Stefano (I) 65.8% 

Pat outspent Pam 22-1.

PA State 46:

James Craig (who is 27!) 41.1%

Camera Barlotta 58.9%

PA Rep 49

Steve Torpani 49.9%

Bud Cook 50.1% 

109 vote difference with 20,000 votes

PA Rep 51

Tim Mahoney (Was the state rep for this district,my district,from 2006-2016,lost in 2016 to the same person) 45%

Matt Dowling 55%

PA Rep 52

Ethan Keedy (Who is 24!) 38%

Ryan Warner 62%

PA Rep 54

Jon McCabe (Who is 21!) 40%

Bob Brooks 60%

PA Rep 57

Collin Warren (Who is 22!) 37%

Eric Nelson 63%

PA Cong. 14 

Bibiana Boerio 42%

Guy Reschenthaler  58%

 

Notice 4 people were between the ages of 21-27! Gives me hope for the future,as I am running for my city council seat in May. 

 

Also got front page for my areas newspaper (I'm the one in the blue shirt)

45369940_10212998424776845_4388184690666766336_n.thumb.jpg.93566f6e7ae5f9b631ce41787d9c1b04.jpg

(day before election day)

The problem for me getting involved directly in electoral races where I live is my trouble with associating with a political party enough to really do so. And where I live (in Alberta), there's actually a couple more viable political parties to choose from than in most parts of the U.S., and it's still a difficulty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Patine said:

The problem for me getting involved directly in electoral races where I live is my trouble with associating with a political party enough to really do so. And where I live (in Alberta), there's actually a couple more viable political parties to choose from than in most parts of the U.S., and it's still a difficulty.

I think I could associate with both political parties,I could be a Massachusetts (liberal) Republican,or a Moderate Democrat,like Connor Lamb. I took a quiz (the isidewith) here are my results,basically meaning I can get along with any party.

Capture.PNG.6a0d93911fe0acca00af91540d4fb269.PNG

 

Share this post


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

The problem for me getting involved directly in electoral races where I live is my trouble with associating with a political party enough to really do so. And where I live (in Alberta), there's actually a couple more viable political parties to choose from than in most parts of the U.S., and it's still a difficulty.

Here's my percentage of siding with 2020 candidates,I side just as much as I do with Biden as I do Trump,I go all over the spectrum. 

Capture.PNG

Share this post


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

I think I could associate with both political parties,I could be a Massachusetts (liberal) Republican,or a Moderate Democrat,like Connor Lamb. I took a quiz (the isidewith) and most associated with the Working Families Party,and was like 58% that,56% Democrat,52% Socialist,and 50% Republican,so I definitely have a mix,lol. 

Well, the political parties here in Alberta are all different than the parties in the United States - we don't have a Democratic Party or a Republican Party at all (though I'm not at all fond of those two parties in any case).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Patine said:

Well, the political parties here in Alberta are all different than the parties in the United States - we don't have a Democratic Party or a Republican Party at all (though I'm not at all fond of those two parties in any case).

 I understand Canada has parties such as UK,Like Conservative,Labour,and Social Democratic. (Which I believe I would vote Social Democratic) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TheMiddlePolitical said:

 I understand Canada has parties such as UK,Like Conservative,Labour,and Social Democratic. (Which I believe I would vote Social Democratic) 

Well, not exactly the same scheme. We have a Conservative Party, but not parties called "Labour," "Social Democratic," or "Liberal Democratic," though the New Democratic Party refers to itself as "social democratic" as a descriptive, but that's not it's name. There is also the Liberal Party of Canada, which had more staying power as a major party in it's own right than the historical British party. The Bloc Quebecois is the only Federal regional/separatist party that has gotten any real traction or success. There is, however, also a small and growing Green Party. So, not quite the same as the UK.

Share this post


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

Well, not exactly the same scheme. We have a Conservative Party, but not parties called "Labour," "Social Democratic," or "Liberal Democratic," though the New Democratic Party refers to itself as "social democratic" as a descriptive, but that's not it's name. There is also the Liberal Party of Canada, which had more staying power as a major party in it's own right than the historical British party. The Bloc Quebecois is the only Federal regional/separatist party that has gotten any real traction or success. There is, however, also a small and growing Green Party. So, not quite the same as the UK.

Interesting,surprisingly Canada isn't a country I've looked into there politics. I guess I should do so! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

State Senate: TEXAS-17

(R) Huffman 52%

(D) Lucido 47%

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

State House: TEXAS-25

(R) Dennis Bonnen 100%

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

US HOUSE: US-14

(R) Randy Weber: 59.3%

(D) Adrienne Bell: 39.2%

(L) Don Conley: 1.4%

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

US SENATE: TEXAS

(R) Ted Cruz: 50.9%

(D) Beto O'Rourke: 48.3%

(L) Neal Dikeman 0.8%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

KY-6 (I worked on Barr's campaign during the general election)

Barr (Incumbent R): 51

McGrath (D): 47.78

 

KY-2 (My district)

Brett Guthrie (Incumbent R): 66.71

Hank Linderman (D): 31.08

Thomas Loecken (I): 2.21

 

State Senate 22 (Didn't vote for either horrible candidate)

Tom Bufford (Incumbent R): 66.01

Carolyn DuPont (D): 33.99

 

State House 55

Kim King (Incumbent R): 65.69

Cathy Carter (D): 35.31

 

The Republicans gained 1 state senate seat while losing a net a 1 in the house (despite talks of a teacher revolt bringing a D wave to the local races)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jvikings1 said:

State Senate 22 (Didn't vote for either horrible candidate)

Tom Bufford (Incumbent R): 66.01

Carolyn DuPont (D): 33.99

Why were both candidates horrible? I'm assuming DuPont was horrible because she's a Democrat but what did you dislike about Bufford? I can't stand my State Senator, either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, jnewt said:

Why were both candidates horrible? I'm assuming DuPont was horrible because she's a Democrat but what did you dislike about Bufford? I can't stand my State Senator, either.

 

2 hours ago, jvikings1 said:

State Senate 22 (Didn't vote for either horrible candidate)

Tom Bufford (Incumbent R): 66.01

Carolyn DuPont (D): 33.99

I can fully understand if all the viable candidates are horrible. I voted for the Natural Law Party here in Canada in 1997, because of horrible or greatly uncharismatic candidates. Also, if I had been able to vote in the U.S. in 2016 (the worst U.S. Presidential election in terms of BOTH major candidates being God-awful, horrid, corrupt, lying monsters since 1852), I would have voted for Rocky DeLaFuante, the least of all evil and the most tenable of all poisons. Even though I knew the Natural Law Party would not win a singe seat, or even get their deposit back in a single seat in Canada in 1997, and DeLaFuante didn't stand a hope in the Hell because the whole electoral is thoroughly rigged against him as much as in Russia or Zimbabwe, a protest vote still sends a message, without just abdicating one's right to vote in despair and resignation of monstrous, corrupt, and apathetic candidates freely winning elections.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Patine said:

I can fully understand if all the viable candidates are horrible. 

Oh I can definitely understand both candidates being horrible in many, if not most, elections in the U.S. But he specifically mentioned this one and not any of the other races he talked about. I'm just curious why this one stood out to him.

Share this post


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

Oh I can definitely understand both candidates being horrible in many, if not most, elections in the U.S. But he specifically mentioned this one and not any of the other races he talked about. I'm just curious why this one stood out to him.

I was just saying I can empathize with the feeling. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem he even had a token Third Party/Independent candidate to make a protest vote on here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, jnewt said:

Oh I can definitely understand both candidates being horrible in many, if not most, elections in the U.S. But he specifically mentioned this one and not any of the other races he talked about. I'm just curious why this one stood out to him.

In fact, if, hypothetically, I were living and voting in his State Senate District, and I agreed, myself, with his analysis of both candidates, I might just make a Write-in Vote for @jvikings1:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Patine said:

I was just saying I can empathize with the feeling. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem he even had a token Third Party/Independent candidate to make a protest vote on here.

Yes, most likely he didn't. My state Senator didn't even have a Democratic challenger, let alone a Third Party/Independent one. I had to use the write-in.

Share this post


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

Yes, most likely he didn't. My state Senator didn't even have a Democratic challenger, let alone a Third Party/Independent one. I had to use the write-in.

In Canadian politics, the three biggest political parties (the Conservatives, Liberals, and New Democrats) have a tradition called the "sacrificial lamb candidates." That is, even in constituencies that are HEAVILY polling for another party, and the statistical chance of winning it is close to nil, the party will still field a candidate and a campaign office. The three biggest parties almost always have "full slates" of candidates each Federal election, and many Provincial elections.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/10/2018 at 1:03 PM, QuickHead555 said:

State Senate: TEXAS-17

(R) Huffman 52%

(D) Lucido 47%

We have the same state senator. My House Rep lost though by 45 or so votes and flipped Democrat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎11‎/‎11‎/‎2018 at 7:55 PM, jnewt said:

Why were both candidates horrible? I'm assuming DuPont was horrible because she's a Democrat but what did you dislike about Bufford? I can't stand my State Senator, either.

DuPont was too liberal on economic issues (wanted to repeal Right to Work, return to Prevailing Wage, increase spending) while not being liberal enough on certain social issues (hesitant on marijuana, casino gambling, sports gambling).  Buford refuses to look at pension reform because he's fully with the teacher's unions and is generally more in favor of more government spending.  Plus, he's not any better on those social issues either.  Also, he's been in there for like forever and has some integrity questions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jvikings1 said:

DuPont was too liberal on economic issues (wanted to repeal Right to Work, return to Prevailing Wage, increase spending) while not being liberal enough on certain social issues (hesitant on marijuana, casino gambling, sports gambling).  Buford refuses to look at pension reform because he's fully with the teacher's unions and is generally more in favor of more government spending.  Plus, he's not any better on those social issues either.  Also, he's been in there for like forever and has some integrity questions.

Neither of them sound that bad, after all. The "Right to Work," which should properly be called "the Mandatory Obligation to be Squashed by Exploitative Employers with no Legal Recourse and be Moved Back to Industrial Revolution Labour Standards" should be repealed by any government NOT run by uncaring, cold-hearted, plutocratic, corrupt, sociopathic corporate Muppets...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jvikings1 said:

DuPont was too liberal on economic issues (wanted to repeal Right to Work, return to Prevailing Wage, increase spending) while not being liberal enough on certain social issues (hesitant on marijuana, casino gambling, sports gambling).  Buford refuses to look at pension reform because he's fully with the teacher's unions and is generally more in favor of more government spending.  Plus, he's not any better on those social issues either.  Also, he's been in there for like forever and has some integrity questions.

Shame that a state with a history that includes the Harlan County war would turn their back on Unions. I always wondered why so called "libertarians" would be against collective bargaining, and unionism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My state, South Carolina:

Governor

Henry McMaster(R)- 54%

James Smith (D)- 46%

 

In a year friendly to Democrats, and a year where the incumbent governor-McMaster- went into a runoff, Smith managed to lose counties that are traditionally Democratic(such as Florence, and Darlington Counties). I mentioned back in June that Smith had the entire Democratic behind him because of his strong resume- a war vet that is in that State Senate. However, Smith ran a terrible campaign and failed to attack McMaster for supporting the president- despite the tariffs are hurting both Greenville(Spartanburg) and Charleston Counties. He failed to attack McMaster on issues regarding funding for teachers(since so many within the state are fleeing to Georgia or beyond), or funding to improve the rural roads that are due for much needed updating. 

SC 1st Congressional District:

Joe Cunningham (D)- 50.7% [Democratic Gain]
Katie Arrington(R)- 49.3%

Back in June, Congressman lost his primary to Katie Arrington-whom ran against him from the right/support for Trump. Since then the election rested low on the radar for many political pundits on a district that could flip. Joe Cunningham ran a tight campaign, where he immediately said he would not vote for Nancy Pelosi and began courting moderate suburban voters in Charleston County. A relevant ad that ran nonstop in the lead up to the election. All of those towns are no more than 20 minutes from the peninsula(the heart of Charleston). Another ad he constantly aired was this one where he highlighted the contrast between him and Arrington when it came to offshore drilling. 

Attorney General:

Alan Wilson (R) - 55%

Constance Anstapoulo (D)- 46%

 

State House District 124:

Shannon Erickson(R)- Uncontested race.

Amendment 1:

Appointment of State Superintendent of Education by the Governor of South Carolina.

No- 60%

Yes- 40%

This is a weird piece of legislation that I'm trying to figure out which group in the state was in favor for it. I mean weird, because if you understand how corrupt South Carolina politics can be, you will see why it might be a bad idea to allow the governor to appoint someone to a position that oversees every public university and public school across the state. 


 

County Measure:

Should the county levy a 1cent tax to pay for county wide infrastructure  improvements?

58%- Yes

42%- No.


What is interesting about this result is that the north-south split in the results. South of the Broad(River, which includes Sun City, Bluffton, and Hilton Head Island) all voted overwhelmingly yes; while North of the Broad(Beaufort, Port Royal, and the outlying communities) voted no or barely yes. The reason for this I believe is that majority of the funds raised from the tax will be used to expand 278(the main north-south road in the southern half of the county,and the only way into Hilton Head Island). 

Other odds and ends: 

The County School Board will be made up of almost entirely fresh faces due to a scandal of the former Superintendent giving his wife a $90K do-nothing job and the old school board were ok with it initially. Time will tell if these newly elected individuals will improve the region. 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NY US Senate: you know how that went, obvious gillibrand win
NY US House: that too
NY Governor: that too
NY State Senate: republican in my very red district, aka not NYC (lol) but blue in total across the state.
really dont know the rest cuz i didnt vote cuz every candidate sucked (except for governor i voted libertarian Larry Sharpe)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/9/2018 at 6:41 PM, TheMiddlePolitical said:

I think I could associate with both political parties,I could be a Massachusetts (liberal) Republican,or a Moderate Democrat,like Connor Lamb. I took a quiz (the isidewith) here are my results,basically meaning I can get along with any party.

Capture.PNG.6a0d93911fe0acca00af91540d4fb269.PNG

 

Cant get a screenshot (gyazo down again) but its 60% Libertarian, 58% GOP, 52% Constitution, 49% Women's  Equality, 45% Working Families, 39% Democrat, 20% Socialist.

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

×