![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
airiefairie.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpoliticsa-new-machine.livejournal.com - (no subject) +9 responsesluzribeiro.livejournal.com - (no subject)dexeron.livejournal.com - (no subject) +14 responsesmahnmut.livejournal.com - (no subject) +1 responsesandwichwarrior.livejournal.com - (no subject) +6 responsesluvdovz.livejournal.com - (no subject) +2 responseshtpcl.livejournal.com - (no subject)nairiporter.livejournal.com - (no subject)htpcl.livejournal.com - (no subject) +1 responseunderlankers.livejournal.com - (no subject)
(no subject)
Date: 31/10/12 18:32 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/10/12 19:52 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/10/12 19:58 (UTC)Then the priorities on what we spend on are all messed up, they want to privatize functions that by rights should be public (prisons, roads/traffic enforcement, etc.), and they desperately want more government involvement in areas like reproductive rights and the like. We finally have a working school funding system after decades of legal battles, and they want an amendment to tear it down. It's just a huge mess. I don't even agree wholeheartedly with Democrats, I just can't see myself voting for any other party when the other party is so blatantly irresponsible.
(no subject)
Date: 31/10/12 20:02 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/10/12 20:17 (UTC)2.) It's just the local culture. We're a very libertarian state, overall, and we've had an influx of libertarian individuals and ideology over the past decade or so since the Free State Project (http://freestateproject.org/) decided to shine a beacon to both legitimate libertarians and crazy tax-dodging conspiracy theorists and invite them to invade our too-permeable democratic structures. NH, a state of some 1.8 million people, has the third biggest legislature in the English-speaking world, behind the US Congress and the Indian parliament.
That makes it simultaneously the most and least representative state in the world. Most, because each representative has a very small constituency, and thus each constituent has a greater proportionate share of that representative's time and energy; lease, because each representative is basically powerless. A friend's mom was elected to our legislature, swapped her party affiliation to "Christian," and started campaigning for prayer in schools, banning abortion, and amending the Constitution to bar gay marriage. The thing is, basically no one noticed. We're the same state that introduced the infamous Magna Carta bill (http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/01/04/397520/new-hampshire-gop-bill-mandates-that-laws-find-their-origin-in-1215-english-magna-carta/), because this sort of shit is just what happens when you only need to convince 500 people to put your name down.
3.) Probably not. More and more people are coming around to an anti-Pledge stance, and starting to see the point of better investment (note that local purists blame this on infiltration by our liberal southern neighbor, Massachusetts). Maggie Hassan, the current Democratic candidate for governor, was once an anti-Pledge Senate Majority Leader -- though she's converted to Pledge orthodoxy for this race. I had a whole post in the works about this, and how the Pledge distorts our local Overton window. I should finish it and post it.
Anyway. Not irredeemable, but definitely difficult. People are short-sighted, and Republicans are promising lower taxes (with no clear means of paying for them). Democrats are not, because Democrats realize that if we're going to be a state full of old people (which is looking more and more likely, as the young leave the state in droves) then we need better infrastructure, good health care, etc. If we're going to keep young families here, we need to invest in schools and bring decent jobs - which means bringing good businesses here, which means investment in our broadband infrastructure, getting the North Country on its feet so that it's not dragging the rest of the state down budget-wise, getting good schools for those young families' children to attend, and generally expanding services.
At this point, though, none of that is likely to happen. I'm wagering we'll go red this time around, and the coattails will carry the Republicans to a greater majority in the House. They want to do austerity, basically, when we've put off some key investments for way too long to begin with. It's just going to shift the costs to towns, who will never pass tax increases because of our heavily decentralized "town meeting" style of governance.
It's... a mess.
(no subject)
Date: 31/10/12 21:23 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/10/12 20:36 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/10/12 20:37 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/10/12 21:22 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/10/12 21:26 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/10/12 18:33 (UTC)HE SHOULD LOOK SEXY, IS ALL I'M SAYIN'!
(no subject)
Date: 31/10/12 18:48 (UTC)Just sayin'.
(no subject)
Date: 31/10/12 18:52 (UTC)The answer is clear.
(no subject)
Date: 31/10/12 18:54 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/10/12 19:00 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/10/12 19:01 (UTC)Turning cities to marshes is the new deal in the 21st century.
(Stay safe, you guys)...
(no subject)
Date: 2/11/12 02:21 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2/11/12 02:50 (UTC)Yes, but...
You see...
Alright, it's true. Theodore Roosevelt would have done those things too.
(no subject)
Date: 31/10/12 18:59 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/10/12 21:01 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/10/12 22:18 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/10/12 21:23 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/10/12 22:19 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 1/11/12 03:21 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 1/11/12 08:23 (UTC)Um... midget porn?
(no subject)
Date: 2/11/12 02:22 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/10/12 18:57 (UTC)* I doubt anyone believes that the political establishment would just let anyone run for president, do they?
(no subject)
Date: 1/11/12 03:34 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/10/12 18:57 (UTC)The biggest thing to me is the "who they surround themselves with" issue, and what sort of behavior they reward in their subordinates. I've found that this a much more reliable indicator of future behavior than pretty speeches or even past behavior.
That said I do put a lot of wheight on the debates but I tend to put a far greater emphasis on the overall gamesmanship of a candidate than the typical "Rah-Rah Go team". I'm less interested in the specific issues than in how well the canditdate presents them. How quick are they on they on thier feet, and How prone to misteps? Can they smell rhetorical blood in the water?
I almost clicked, "Do they look presidential?" but to me the real question is more "Is this a guy I'd want negotiating with the Russians on my behalf?"
I can tolerate intellectual drivel from my politicians but I demand that it beHigh Quality drivel.
(no subject)
Date: 31/10/12 19:03 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 1/11/12 17:32 (UTC)For instance, say a candidate preaches "post-partisan" politics and surrounds himself with political pit-fighters and urban ward-bosses. If those political pit-fighters and urban ward-bosses have differing ideological backgrounds that would technically make the claim of being non-partisan correct, it still reveals something of the candidate's approach to the taking and holding of power.
Of course confusion can and does happen and in those cases you have no choice but to make a "best guess" while preparing for the worst and praying for the best.
(no subject)
Date: 31/10/12 19:05 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 1/11/12 17:21 (UTC)I actually would have voted for Clinton had she won the nomination in 08.
(no subject)
Date: 1/11/12 17:46 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 1/11/12 18:12 (UTC)Clinton may be a stone cold machiavellian bitch who may or may not have been "the power behind the throne" in the 90s, but god-damn if she aint one of the most skilled political pugilists of this generataion.
I may dislike her politics but I can respect her talent.
...And as I said above, if the question is "who would I want negotiating with the Russians on my behalf?" talent counts for a lot.
(no subject)
Date: 31/10/12 19:21 (UTC)And here's a fundamental(ist) question...
Which team are they rooting for?
(no subject)
Date: 31/10/12 19:54 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/10/12 19:55 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/10/12 19:40 (UTC)Brb, off to stockpile some more beans and matches in my underground bunker.
(no subject)
Date: 31/10/12 19:44 (UTC)It didn't come up.
I was disappointed. I am sure it would have totally swayed me, had I been an American voter - but I'm not.
(no subject)
Date: 31/10/12 22:41 (UTC)> Touch, pause, engage!
How very South African of you!
(no subject)
Date: 1/11/12 08:49 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2/11/12 02:23 (UTC)