Chopticon64
Well-Known Member
I guarantee everyone one of those responders knew who Hogan was!
I rest my case
- Thread starter vraiblonde
- Start date
(shrug) He's going to lose. I thought he had a chance way back in the primaries, and my thought then was, an R is an R, because it doesn't matter what he does or thinks, a majority in the Senate by a party allows THEM to set the agenda, form the committee chairs -
And RUN THE SENATE. So, yeah, he wins, the party wins, even if he's a dope.
But once Alsobrooks got the nomination, she's been way ahead in the polls, and it's been a really long time since Maryland first elected a Republican Senator (qualified that - the last one was Mathias, but he was FIRST elected in '68 even though he lasted through to '87.)
And there have been a handful of surveys where voters are asked what they know about her, and most have no freaking clue at all.
Voting for the D.
Hijinx
Well-Known Member
Face it. Whites in Maryland do not have a Representative or a Senator.
Maryland is 59% White (31% black). It's not a case of "white people vote Republican, and black people vote Democrat". I've lived all over Maryland - and urban and suburban Maryland is leftie, white or black.
If race was the only determining factor - states like Georgia, Mississippi, South Carolina and Alabama - which are 32%, 38%,, 26% and 19% black, respectively - would very rarely vote in Republicans, but they almost every election, DO.
All of New England votes Democrat - and they are almost the whitest states in the nation. with Vermont, Maine and New Hampshire among the top five.
Suffice it to say, most white people in Maryland vote Democrat. Northern Virginia is about the whitest place in the country, and they always vote Democrat.
Sure they do - but only if they're a Democrat.
I tried to point that out to whatshisface in another thread and it fell on deaf ears. People believe what they want to believe despite any facts or common sense.
I've found people just have a hard time sorting out numbers - they hear 10 million was spent on election interference and they clutch their pearls - but they don't get that's one half of one percent of recent Presidential campaigns. They think we can take in all of the world's poor into this country - not realizing that the world ADDS ANOTHER United States every5-6 years and we ourselves represent a mere 5% of the planet, population wise.
We can NEVER take in all of the world's poor. If we only took in 1% a year - around 7 million - it would never end, and we wouldn't have any measurable affect on the world's poor. It cannot be done by admitting immigrants. It's mathematically impossible.
When I first began at the Census, I came across a number of maps for a Census year, and I was astonished at what it said - it was a graph showing the states and the PERCENT of counties by black population - and noticed that the deep South was very, very heavily black. Ok, I thought, that's a surprise, I thought they lived in the major cities. They DO. Most of the nation's black population are in and around major cities, even cities like NYC, which is just 20% black - but it's almost 2 million people. About the same as the black population in all of Maryland, and 50% more than the black population of Mississippi. They LIVE in the big cities by numbers, but by percentage, they live in the South.
Which by voting record - has been conservative. Either black voters sometimes vote Republican - or they're just not voting, because the South is very conservative.
We gave each of our sons a shotgun for their 12th birthday.
well this was 1978 ...
I was given a Spanish Mauser 1893 / 1916
I kept that rifle and 5 dummy rounds on a stripper clip in my bed room
I think this is a Rural vs Urban conflict
Rural = more conservative
Urban = Democrat / Progressive, Whitey owes me a bag for Slavery mentality
Mine was a Marlin 39A 22lr.
Many a day after school I'd go get it and pop some soda cans on the back hill behind the house.
...in big cities. Atlanta is the south. Birmingham is the south. Jackson is the south. Houston is the south.
Only outside the major metro areas. Which coincides with the US in general. Election maps show a red country with dots of deep blue where the big cities are.
As @GURPS said, it's a rural/suburban vs. urban thing, and race has pretty much nothing to do with it.
EDIT: nevermind, I just reread your post and am going to get another cup of coffee to wake up my brain.
Last edited:
And we covered a lot of this, and I think rural tends to heavily favor - - self reliance.
"What, without government, how would you handle - fires?" Uhhh - volunteers. Ditto EMTs.
"What about garbage collection?" We have a dump - and pickup trucks.
"Where do you get your WATER, then? Huh?" From the ground - it's called a well. And septic, for outflow.
And so on - rural life involves doing things for yourself. And it makes sense, actually. You can't have wells and septic tanks in the city - way too many people. You have to have water treatment plants. You can't have huge landfills, in cities (although some might argue, there's plenty of trash just sitting around, anyway). You cannot have volunteers keep up with the demands of a metropolitan fire department. I mean, jeez, how would a rural volunteer department handle a fire in 30 story high rise?
And if you live in a city - you probably depend on public transportation - so when urban dwellers move to rural areas, they muse - "where all the public transportation at?" - and it's simple. You can't support a bus system going everywhere even if EVERY SINGLE PERSON IN THE COUNTY used it regularly. For one, the citizens could never afford it, because the distances involved.
So, no surprise - rural and much suburban areas aren't in favor of paying heavily for services they can do better, themselves - or pay someone to do, privately (as I do, with trash collection). If you've always lived in a city, you don't realize how much you depend on city services but when it's a problem, you don't concern yourself with the fact you have to PAY for it through taxes.
Now it might mean, in rural areas - citizens have to PAY for things that city people don't concern themselves with. I've lived in rural areas - where we had to pony up the bucks for street lighting. Or paving short roads. But the self-reliance thing means - you might clean up parks or streets YOURSELF, rather than ask "what are my TAXES paying for?". You might help out a poor neighbor rather than ask the same. GOVERNMENT isn't the answer for you, so you're not in favor of MORE OF IT.
Make mine an Espresso, it's Friday!...in big cities. Atlanta is the south. Birmingham is the south. Jackson is the south. Houston is the south.
Only outside the major metro areas. Which coincides with the US in general. Election maps show a red country with dots of deep blue where the big cities are.
As @GURPS said, it's a rural/suburban vs. urban thing, and race has pretty much nothing to do with it.
EDIT: nevermind, I just reread your post and am going to get another cup of coffee to wake up my brain.
This goes along with an earlier post I made. For the amount of Taxes we pay in this State we shouldn't have to use the transfer station to haul our trash out, littering the roadways with the bags that fall out.
Hell, when I lived in FL we could cut down a whole tree and stack it along side the curb for pick up. Jacksonville actually had a chipper and truck to come get it.
Same with a junk fiberglass boat I had acquired. Cut it up with a chainsaw, set it by the curb and gone within the week.
If you want clean roadways, offer the service as part of your "Govt Services".
I don't know about other states. I know that in THIS county, even our "dump" is just a holding place to haul stuff to OTHER landfills. We don't actually have our own.
But cost is the key point. If you have half a million people living in an area one sixth the size of this county with five times the population (Baltimore) - you can afford to use the money to haul away everyone's trash. You cannot however, afford to offer the SAME service without charging them MORE MONEY when people live in 762 square miles and they're all far apart. It just costs a LOT MORE, And it doesn't help that they're always spending themselves in the red.
This is true in most states - the major cities get the bucks for the most services, but they also have the PEOPLE - and they vote.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Interesting point - when we had so many downed trees after the hurricane came through here about 13 years ago, same thing about the trees - crews came along and took the trees. I remember bragging to my Dad that a cedar tree on my property had fallen and would he like wood from it?
That night, the tree was gone - but the other trees on the street were still there. Someone stole my cedar. Arrgh.
OccamsRazor
Well-Known Member
This made me laugh. When it takes 7 different departments, 30 vehicles, and 80 volunteers to show up for a shed fire.. of course they couldn't handle a 30-story high rise fire!
Bare-ya-cuda
Well-Known Member
I
Inmates should be cleaning the roadside litter up
... sounds great.
Strange story, back in 1971 I was living in Hawaii sharing an apartment with my "Bud" that I was with for 4 years in the Marine Corps. He was starting to make a name for himself in local politics. At a round table discussion he talked about using inmates to clean the road side and beaches. Within a few days he was told to back down from that opinion as local unions wanted those jobs for their members only! He got the "HINT"!
Those big Solomon's union members can get your attention...
Chopticon64
Well-Known Member
How old are you?!?!?