2018 Midterm voting

[TrapperFrank]

I was not going to vote this year, but my wife shamed me into it. We live in Georgia and our choice for governor was between size 22, ugly as home made sin, radical Socialist Stacey Abrams (D) and no talent ass clown Brian Kemp(R). So I held my nose and voted for him along with every other R on the ticket. And as an added bonus, I voted no on every ballot measure and proposed constitutional amendment on the ballot also.

[rsdengler]

I always steal the political signs near the Stop Signs, they are great for target practice......

It's bad enough that I see old 2016 Bernie and Clinton stickers plastered on the back of Prius's and Bikenstock Sandal wearing Subaru's all the time.

I'm just waiting until next week to vote; maybe I can steal some more signs while I am up there....HA

[Badger52]

Originally Posted by SouthernDZ

My conservative dog likes to pee on BETO signs.....

Woof! Good dog.

[mojaveman]

I work a pretty busy schedule and usually don't have time to make it to the polling stations in Kalifornia that are usually staffed with twenty-something year old idiots. No joke.


Voted by mail.

[Badger52]

This didn't deserve to get put in the Comedy Zone. It seems appropriate for the races that see ever dwindling (end of election day) leads for the Republicans. Ever wonder how those votes "trickle in"? Answer: They don't trickle in.

[tom kelly]

Originally Posted by Badger52

This didn't deserve to get put in the Comedy Zone. It seems appropriate for the races that see ever dwindling (end of election day) leads for the Republicans. Ever wonder how those votes "trickle in"? Answer: They don't trickle in.

IF THE U S A IS NOT INVOLVED IN SOME KIND OF INSURRECTION IN THE NEXT 5 YEARS....I WILL BE AMAZED. THERE IS NO HOPE FOR UNITY WITH THE DIVERSE POLITICAL VIEWS AND BELIEFS IN THIS COUNTRY...THE MILITARY MAY NOT BE ON YOUR SIDE...THE COURTS MAY NOT BE ON YOUR SIDE... THE POLITICIANS WON'T BE ON YOUR SIDE... THE POLICE MAY NOT BE ON YOUR SIDE... THE POLARIZATION OF GOVERNMENT IS TO DEEPLY DIVIDED FOR A COMPRISE TO ALLOW THIS COUNTRY TO BE GOVERNED ACCORDING TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. SOCIALISM, FASCISM, OR COMMUNISM WILL NOT PREVAIL; THOSE SYSTEMS OF RULE ARE TOTALITARIAN AND OPPOSED TO FREEDOM.

[Badger52]

Originally Posted by tom kelly

IF THE U S A IS NOT INVOLVED IN SOME KIND OF INSURRECTION IN THE NEXT 5 YEARS....I WILL BE AMAZED. THERE IS NO HOPE FOR UNITY WITH THE DIVERSE POLITICAL VIEWS AND BELIEFS IN THIS COUNTRY...THE MILITARY MAY NOT BE ON YOUR SIDE...THE COURTS MAY NOT BE ON YOUR SIDE... THE POLITICIANS WON'T BE ON YOUR SIDE... THE POLICE MAY NOT BE ON YOUR SIDE... THE POLARIZATION OF GOVERNMENT IS TO DEEPLY DIVIDED FOR A COMPRISE TO ALLOW THIS COUNTRY TO BE GOVERNED ACCORDING TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. SOCIALISM, FASCISM, OR COMMUNISM WILL NOT PREVAIL; THOSE SYSTEMS OF RULE ARE TOTALITARIAN AND OPPOSED TO FREEDOM.

A reprsentative at one time was envisioned representing about 30,000 citizens; now it's closer to a couple million per. Flyover space in a district is not represented when the congresskritter's district is drawn to touch a few points on a map (cities, hives, university campuses, whatever) to grab that "Guv-take-care-of-me" liberal demographic into the booth. IMO the USA is currently too big under the existing reapportionment scheme (circa 1929) to adequately represent its citizens. Balkanization, or insurrection as you point out, is one possible end. Some states tried for several years to politely identify their differences about why they would leave, just as the colonies had done to King George; it was the civil thing to do. Both entreaties fell on deaf ears & justices pretty much still adhere to "the victor gets to write the history." So much for peaceful secession. Sporty times ahead.

[Ret10Echo]

Originally Posted by Badger52

when the congresskritter's district is drawn to touch a few points on a map (cities, hives, university campuses, whatever) to grab that "Guv-take-care-of-me" liberal demographic into the booth.

Case in point:

From 2 days ago

Federal judges say Maryland's 6th congressional district is unconstitutional; map must be redrawn for 2020

In 2011 the slick Dims at the state house drew the lines for the 6th District in such a way as to neutralize Republican votes. This has been done in many districts because the huge majorities in just a few Maryland counties.

The link to the map is here

District 2408 is the specific one from the lawsuit. It pulls Montgomery County, a liberal stronghold... follows a slender line up Interstate 270 in order to neuter Frederick County.

But if you look at the map you'll see where a similar tact has been taken over the years.

[Airbornelawyer]

Originally Posted by Badger52

A reprsentative at one time was envisioned representing about 30,000 citizens; now it's closer to a couple million per. Flyover space in a district is not represented when the congresskritter's district is drawn to touch a few points on a map (cities, hives, university campuses, whatever) to grab that "Guv-take-care-of-me" liberal demographic into the booth. IMO the USA is currently too big under the existing reapportionment scheme (circa 1929) to adequately represent its citizens. Balkanization, or insurrection as you point out, is one possible end. Some states tried for several years to politely identify their differences about why they would leave, just as the colonies had done to King George; it was the civil thing to do. Both entreaties fell on deaf ears & justices pretty much still adhere to "the victor gets to write the history." So much for peaceful secession. Sporty times ahead.

It is actually closer to 750,000, though your point is still valid.

For comparison to other large federal republics:

• India: 2,458,000 per member of the Lok Sabha
• Brazil: 409,000 per member of the Câmara dos Deputados
• Nigeria: 537,000 per member of the House of Representatives
• Mexico: 240,000 per member of the Cámara de Diputados
• Germany: 117,000-138,000 per member of the Bundestag (the size of the Bundestag changes due to the dual nature of voting (for a party and for individual districts), and is currently 709, but the minimum is 598).

Here are the numbers for some unitary republics. You'd expect a lower ratio, since the lack of regional governments with any real power means more decisions are made by the national assemblies.

• United Kingdom: 102,000 per member of the House of Commons
• France: 117,000 per member of the Assemblée Nationale
• Indonesia: 473,000 per member of the People's Representative Council

The problem is twofold. Individual representatives are unable to adequately serve their constituents because of the size of the districts. This problem wouldn't be as bad as it is if we still respected federalism, allowing local governments to deal with local problems, but we've made a federal case out of everything. So even if we increased the size of Congress, they would still be spending most of their time on issues which probably shouldn't be handled in Washington rather than on constituent service.

Regarding gerrymandering, Republicans and Democrats have both been complicit in this. Democrats wanted urban enclaves, especially those with large minority populations, as reliably Democrat-voting districts. Republican politicians supported this, because concentrating likely Democrat voters into these districts made the suburban and rural districts more reliably GOP. And then, as various suburban areas join the "'Guv-take-care-of-me' liberal demographic", the GOP is hoist by its own petard. See for example Montgomery County, Maryland, which Ret10Echo mentioned above, and Fairfax County, Virginia, two counties whose economies are pretty much dependent on the Federal government gravy train.

[Badger52]

Originally Posted by Airbornelawyer

This problem wouldn't be as bad as it is if we still respected federalism, allowing local governments to deal with local problems, but we've made a federal case out of everything. So even if we increased the size of Congress, they would still be spending most of their time on issues which probably shouldn't be handled in Washington rather than on constituent service.

That's a very good point. Thanks for the numbers also.

Do you see any way ahead (if any) or model that is sustainable in terms of having the Fed retracts its claws which are clearly into areas that are (or should be imo) none of its business? It seems the judiciary has continued to give a free hand to allow the central gov't to be a stakeholder in every little thing. As example it appears that people are allowed to bring suit on local governments over any little thing and can have standing in a court even if they don't live there.

[Ret10Echo]

Originally Posted by Badger52

Do you see any way ahead (if any) or model that is sustainable in terms of having the Fed retracts its claws which are clearly into areas that are (or should be imo) none of its business?

I believe that at least a portion (if not a majority) of that reduction of federal influence on "conditions relating wholly to matters under state control" would begin with a move away from dependency on the federal dole for states to survive. The percentage of state revenue from federal aid ranges from a low of around 19% to a high of 42% with a (non-scientific) median of around 30%. So when the state is basically a crack-addict, shunning their dealer has a very low likelihood of success.


Tax Foundation

[Old Dog New Trick]

Heading to a recount in Florida for Senate race between the winner Gov. Scott and Botox Man Sen. Nelson.

I’m just afraid that Florida, Georgia and Arizona are going to to pull a Washington State recount Dino Rossi style. Win the first count and then recount new undiscovered ballots until you get the results you want a Democrat in office.

[Badger52]

Originally Posted by Ret10Echo

I believe that at least a portion (if not a majority) of that reduction of federal influence on "conditions relating wholly to matters under state control" would begin with a move away from dependency on the federal dole for states to survive. The percentage of state revenue from federal aid ranges from a low of around 19% to a high of 42% with a (non-scientific) median of around 30%. So when the state is basically a crack-addict, shunning their dealer has a very low likelihood of success.


Tax Foundation

Concur. The brand-new D governor here based a great deal of his campaign on the notion that predecessor Walker had made the state teachers' union members pay something for their medical insurance vs. previous gov't freebie. He also had prohibited the university system from enacting tuition hikes for in-state students when it was found the U had a slush fund sitting in the 100's of millions. And he never did play in Obama's "exchanges" (since shown to be a right decision). The D's campaign became "Walker stripped education of $800M" and "Walker wants to deny your loved ones coverage for pre-existing conditions."

There has still got to be a better way to apportion representation that doesn't pander to population density over self-sufficiency. I don't know what that is, but your weaning from the teat worked for awhile here but there are some real true-believers out there who have more zeal than critical thinking skills.

[CW3SF]

Lawyers for Dems object to non-citizens’ votes being denied. WTF? Are they really that stupid? Never mind, I already know the answer to that (yes they are).

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/law...e-being-denied

[cbtengr]

Badger I feel your pain! Wisconsinites will miss Scott Walker after the new guy gets down to picking their pockets clean. The dem hopeful in Iowa ran on a similar platform, but thankfully the Republicans held onto the house and senate and gov's seat.