pull down to refresh
10 sats \ 4 replies \ @Bell_curve OP 7 Jun \ parent \ on: Will you vote for Biden? news
District Attorney is also an important local election
Soros funded district attorney are making life in cities worse and unsafe.
I agree about local elections and their impact on your life , mundane or otherwise
The one federal law that has made a large impact, a deleterious impact, has been Obama care. Health care is more expensive and unaffordable than ever. Obama made healthcare worse in every possible way. The system was already broken and Barry exacerbated it.
Other examples similar to Obama care: social security, Medicare, Medicaid, public housing especially section 8, aid to families with dependent children or AFDC , federal gun control act 1968
But I digress. Local elections matter more than federal.
What about state government? More or less important than local?
State elections are more important than federal for your day to day life and affairs.
Obama care.
For sure it was ruinous. Yes, I agree having good Congressmen is very important. However, in the case of total commie revolution, it will be local people who prevent their edicts from being enforced.
That really is my only point: Local elections are your seatbelt + airbags. Federal are your Nav system.... State elections is somewhere in-between.
Case in point regarding State elections is that Abbott (TX Gov) was for the lockdowns originally. Our local Sheriff, who produced that letter, was writing that letter to Abbott as much as he was his people. (In it he coyly referenced there was no "state law" enforcing lockdowns, only "a governors statement"). Abbott quickly pivoted when he saw how deeply unpopular his policies were - and that they were not being enforced anyway.
reply
This discussion about local government made me think of the electoral college ironically.
Every state except Maine and Nebraska are winner take all.
I wish every state divided electors like Maine and Nebraska.
I hate the idea of a few swing states determining the presidential election.
There are at least 40 competitive districts vs 5 competitive states
Someone wins a state by a few hundred votes and he gets all the electors. Doesn’t seem fair or right
reply
Speaking of which, what is the argument for winner-take-all? Perhaps they are worried about too many contested presidential elections?
Winner-take-all effectively transforms the country into being more of a direct democracy....side question is what where founding fathers thoughts on that?
reply
I actually can’t remember the argument for winner take all.
Founding Father hated direct democracy like Athens during the age of Pericles. Hence the electoral college.
Regarding contested elections if no one gets 270 or a majority in the electoral college then the House representatives determine the winner.
According to John Yoo, the founding fathers expected the house representatives to settle most elections as they perceived getting a majority in the electoral college would be difficult in 1789 or the 1800s.
Civil war and reconstruction were a turning point for everything including elections
I still think Maine and Nebraska have the right model. Right now candidates only have to focus on 9 states or less. I’m in California. I think the last time a Republican visited California was 1988 or 1992. The last presidential campaign ad I saw on television was in 1988. The infamous Willie Horton. Maybe I saw one in 1992.
reply