Reddy

Fictitious?

Is this at me? It doesn't matter if they're good if they're not popular. Candidates who support those policies have to win elections if they're ever going to get implemented, and in the meantime, do we just let people get screwed? Or do we pass less-than-perfect legislation that at least improves things? I'd rather do something than nothing every time. In the real world we need both of these movements. People to get elected and get things done and people to keep pushing the agenda forward. But that latter movement needs to not keep the former from winning against our common enemy, and THAT'S where my issue lies.

"Cuomo pushed through a same-sex marriage law long before marriage equality was a given everywhere, or even in New York. After the shootings in Sandy Hook, Cuomo strengthened New York’s already strict gun control laws. Last year’s budget included a $15 minimum wage, which is being phased in over a five-year period, as well as paid family leave. This year’s budget, which was the vehicle for the tuition plan, also reinstituted a tax on the income of millionaires, raised the age at which juvenile offenders can be tried as adults, created a $10 million legal defense fund for immigrants and provided a tax break for workers who pay union dues." http://www.governing.com/topics/politics/gov-cuomo-new-york-governor-progressives.html I'm honestly not a huge Cuomo fan. I was very critical of him prior to this race. But Nixon's candidacy led me to defend him over and over even though I didn't really want to. I'm happy he won when she was the alternative. That doesn't mean I think he's flawless - far from it. He's pretty damn corrupt and manipulative, but for the most part that ends up improving peoples' lives in this case. If far-left policy were so good (I think it - mostly - is) and so easy to implement (there's the kicker), why the hell don't those candidates win more elections?

Because I don't think passing laws that actually improve peoples' lives is a failure. I think trying to pass laws that fail because they're not popular - even if they'd improve peoples' lives as well - is a bad use of our time. This is a country in which things only improve peoples' lives if they get DONE, and I don't see that wing of the party getting anything done.

It was about representation in a low-turnout race, not about policy. People want leaders who look like them and come from the places they come from. And this... since we're quoting lefty-fan Dave Weigel today

New York has the worst voting laws in the country. Also, turnout tripled from 14, and Nixon is complaining that "high turnout" helped Cuomo even though he's presided over really strict voter laws. Huh? Maybe people just didn't like you! #NovelConcepts

Unless you're a Bernie Bro

Trump, yes. Obama? He was a US Senator in case you're forgetting.

Cuomo wins, IDC loses. Pretty solid night in NY! Of note: (it wasn't about policy)

David Wright was and is everything that's good and right about baseball. So sad.

Listen, I hate that part. I hate the IDC. I really do. But between these two options I just can't get myself behind Nixon. I just can't do that. She should've run for lower office first. If there were a viable alternative to Cuomo I'd support them.

I mean I would be if I lived there. I didn't want Trump and I don't want Nixon for similar reasons. Experience actually matters, and while Cuomo is FAR from perfect, he's still got one of the most progressive records of any Governor in America. Who cares if he has to be forced to do it by screaming constituents? It gets done. I worry that literally nothing would get done under a Nixon governorship.

Right, that's the kicker. If there are already 51 R votes, why would they vote in a way that would hurt their chances? If Collins or Murk (shockingly) flip, then that changes things.

This is a situation where I think they need to hold the line. Normally I'm on the other side of that issue - not this time.

Yard signs may matter a LITTLE BIT in very rural races where name recognition is low. Otherwise, they don't move the needle. This is backed by statistical evidence. In my race I'd love to yard sign the hell out of my small towns that aren't in our media markets, but otherwise it just doesn't matter.

You probably also think spending all your energy talking about the "stop Bezos Act" during Kavanaugh's confirmation is also the correct choice.

jesus christ. she's the fucking progressive haha how SPECIFIC is your litmus test?

It's definitely odd, but with a sample size of 250 LV and +-6.7 or whatever it is, you can get some wacky results. On the ground, though, there really are a lot of undecided voters out there.

Signs don't vote

Ths spartacus stuff is getting me all flustered. I'm obsessed.

Awesome win by Ayanna Pressley last night. Turns out representation matters in 2018. Which is awesome. Side note - this wasn't progressive vs. establishment/corporate Dem. Capuano was one of the most liberal/progressive members of the House. Apparently, people want representatives who look like them and share their life experience! What a concept.

That's a whole different problem - they need to stop voting for Republicans if they want someone to help them.

this is false.

Jerksticks isn't a suburban housewife, and actually the majority of Republican women support all the things and people I mentioned - including abortion. So you can sit down. I know you've got an anti-me hard-on at the moment, but criticizing "identity politics" as somehow ineffective is ridiculous. They're only ineffective when people like you CALL them identity politics.