So I decided we had enough threads bickering with the forums "conservatives". We have enough threads discussing presidential politics.

Please no conservative trolling in this thread.

There are elections in 2019. Louisiana, Mississippi, Virginia, Kentucky, New Jersey

We need to start discussing state level elections if we want to protect our country from those with authoritarian tendencies. All politics are local. Anyone plan on getting involved with these elections? I'll be donating money, especially as a fed that is still getting paid. I get extremely irritated when federal civilians and the military get used as political pawns in these shutdowns. It gets old. That shouldn't be a partisan issue, but right now it is. Workers shouldn't go unpaid because politicians refuse to do their jobs.

PS. I just donated $100 to the DLCC because they serve a key role in state legislative candidate recruitment.

What’s the NJ election?

2122M wrote:

What’s the NJ election?

The entire lower chamber is up for re-election in NJ! https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Jer ... l_Assembly

Dems already hold the majority here but it's important to hold onto it. 2016 is a strong lesson in that everyone needs to vote, every election.

Jouhou wrote:

The entire lower chamber is up for re-election in NJ! https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Jer ... l_Assembly

Dems already hold the majority here but it's important to hold onto it. 2016 is a strong lesson in that everyone needs to vote, every election.

Hopefully the people will turn out because IIRC NJ leads the country in people leaving because of high cost of living.

It's too early for us to have specific candidate discussions, except for Kentucky and Mississippi where candidates have come forward for the Governors Races. I do want to emphasize to anyone who cares about our politics but haven't yet gotten very engaged with the early phases of the election cycle this candidate recruitment period for legislative races is important. Both major parties struggle to get a candidate running for every seat, and it can be even more of a struggle to find high quality candidates.

These are the people who will make up the future "bench". Don't underestimate their importance. Doing so results in lame candidates for high profile federal races later on. This has been one of the democrats weak points, the party is just now starting to get off its ass on this issue.

NIKV69 wrote:

Jouhou wrote:

The entire lower chamber is up for re-election in NJ! https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Jer ... l_Assembly

Dems already hold the majority here but it's important to hold onto it. 2016 is a strong lesson in that everyone needs to vote, every election.

Hopefully the people will turn out because IIRC NJ leads the country in people leaving because of high cost of living.

You are incorrect. NJ shows population growth in 2017 (including adding me). And as someone in the middle of the home buying process, I can promise you, its a sellers market. People are moving here in droves.

You are disagreeing with the United Van Lines study on migration patterns. Rich northern Jersey counties might be doing well, but the migration out of the NE continues—too expensive, too much taxation.

https://www.unitedvanlines.com/contact-united/news/movers-study-2018

GF

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

You are disagreeing with the United Van Lines study on migration patterns. Rich northern Jersey counties might be doing well, but the migration out of the NE continues—too expensive, too much taxation.

https://www.unitedvanlines.com/contact-united/news/movers-study-2018

GF

While people are leaving NJ, more people are leaving NY to go to NJ.

Also, I’m not sure this is the right thread for you.

New Jersey’s population growth is expected to lag well behind average for the foreseeable future.

https://www.nj.gov/labor/lpa/content/nj ... oj2030.pdf

VTKillarney wrote:

New Jersey’s population growth is expected to lag well behind average for the foreseeable future.

https://www.nj.gov/labor/lpa/content/nj ... oj2030.pdf

I bet you’ll find most of the densely populated small states will see less growth by percentage than the large less densely populate states. THats almost just a matter of physics. There’s not a lot of room to put more people.

But it was clear that the OP didn’t want you conservative trolls to derail the conversation (talking to you GF and VTK). And NJ population growth rate is probably considered off topic. THe legislature has been blue for a long time with only the governor being GOP for a while, but no longer. That leads me the believe the population of NJ is, in general, happy with democratic policies. I, for one, can get a little sticker shock when looking at property taxes around here, but at the same time, I believe you get what you pay for, and I’d much rather pay higher taxes so my kids can go to better schools, have nicer public parks to play in etc.... than move to a low tax state and pay the price of a poor education for my kids.

New Jersey has plenty of room for growth. The demand is the problem. I’m really looking forward to the NJ elections in 2019. As was said earlier in this thread, “We need to start discussing state level elections if we want to protect our country from those with authoritarian tendencies.”

Anyone have some insight on Mississippi?

2122M wrote:

You are incorrect. NJ shows population growth in 2017 (including adding me). And as someone in the middle of the home buying process, I can promise you, its a sellers market. People are moving here in droves.

Care to source that? Everything I find seems to think their growth is anemic and at the bottom half of the country.

https://www.njfuture.org/2017/12/20/201 ... -estimate/

2122M wrote:

Also, I’m not sure this is the right thread for you.

Wow. This thread turned into Communist North Korea real fast. We can't voice our opinion?

Jouhou wrote:

AOC is only getting a spotlight because of the conservative media.

Somebody hasn’t read HuffPo lately.

They are averaging at least one AOC article a day.

VTKillarney wrote:

Jouhou wrote:

AOC is only getting a spotlight because of the conservative media.

Somebody hasn’t read HuffPo lately.

They are averaging at least one AOC article a day.

No one who is serious about politics reads Huffington post. You go there to have your biases affirmed. It's cut from the same thread as Breitbart. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Breitbart

After helping in the early stages of The Huffington Post[2] and the Drudge Report,[3] Breitbart created Breitbart, a news and right-wing opinion website

Jouhou wrote:

No one who is serious about politics reads Huffington post. You go there to have your biases affirmed. It's cut from the same thread as Breitbart.

Good to know. I really enjoy the comments there, though.

Guys, let’s get back to the topic. I’m still hoping to hear from the ground in Mississippi. Anyone?

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/l ... story.html

Anyways, a good opinion piece that sums up my feelings on Trump trolls. This is what we're dealing with in this country

The OP has made a reasonable request to keep trolling comments out of this thread. No one is forcing anyone to participate in this thread, so it's not unreasonable to expect users to follow forum rules. It isn't just an OP's request, it's the rules, so please respect that.

For reference:

1d(4) - “Trolling” posts are subject to removal at the discretion of the Moderators. Intentional trolling of users or topics may result in warning or suspension.

✈️ atcsundevil

I see AOC as a much-needed jolt in the arm for the Democratic Party. Whether or not she proceeds up the food chain is rather immaterial at this point.

She’s been tweeting about Progressive policies, taunting those who laughably try to “put her in her place,” and FFS she even quoted a line from The Watchmen!

She’s good for the youth vote and I hope she has quite a bit of impact on that. Plus, she seems to relish her role as a bogeyman for the right. They’re damn scared of her.

https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5c39 ... d4fd6e/amp

johnboy wrote:

I see AOC as a much-needed jolt in the arm for the Democratic Party. Whether or not she proceeds up the food chain is rather immaterial at this point.

She’s been tweeting about Progressive policies, taunting those who laughably try to “put her in her place,” and FFS she even quoted a line from The Watchmen!

She’s good for the youth vote and I hope she has quite a bit of impact on that. Plus, she seems to relish her role as a bogeyman for the right. They’re damn scared of her.

https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5c39 ... d4fd6e/amp

Any new blood is needed in the party though, and yes the right wing obsession with her is fascinating. But it really would make sense for the rest of us to allow her to find her feet in her new role before we comment on her performance. Otherwise it does seem just as silly for us to be discussing her as it is for the right to be obsessing over her and clutching their pearls. There's a lot of other new members of Congress with unique personalities for us to get to know.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kendra_Horn this one was one of the biggest upsets of the 2018 election.

NIKV69 wrote:

Hopefully the people will turn out because IIRC NJ leads the country in people leaving because of high cost of living.

Conservatives need to get their stories straight. If it's not NJ, it's CA or NY or IL or MA or RI...make up your minds already.

For the record, per the latest census estimates, NJ still has a healthy population growth, enough to let it keep its House delegation intact. WV and AL, on the other hand, are not so fortunate.

VTKillarney wrote:

Anyone have some insight on Mississippi?

During the Senate election, all eyes were on the northwest part of the state where Ole Miss and part of the Memphis suburbs are located. If Espy had been able to turn out many college educated and suburban voters in the area, he would have broken through a ceiling in the state for Democrats. I'd say keep an eye out for that part of the state. That may determine if the GOP edge in the legislature is reduced.

As for the governor's race, Jim Hood (the state AG) is well known and has had no problem cruising to reelection in every election. Polls show a tight race so I woudn't be surprised if he ekes out a win. Granted, if he does, it'll be because he'll be like Bel Edwards in LA: a moderate-conservative Democrat who is a good fit for a Southern state and is to the right of the national party.

einsteinboricua wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

Hopefully the people will turn out because IIRC NJ leads the country in people leaving because of high cost of living.

Conservatives need to get their stories straight. If it's not NJ, it's CA or NY or IL or MA or RI...make up your minds already.

For the record, per the latest census estimates, NJ still has a healthy population growth, enough to let it keep its House delegation intact. WV and AL, on the other hand, are not so fortunate.

VTKillarney wrote:

Anyone have some insight on Mississippi?

During the Senate election, all eyes were on the northwest part of the state where Ole Miss and part of the Memphis suburbs are located. If Espy had been able to turn out many college educated and suburban voters in the area, he would have broken through a ceiling in the state for Democrats. I'd say keep an eye out for that part of the state. That may determine if the GOP edge in the legislature is reduced.

As for the governor's race, Jim Hood (the state AG) is well known and has had no problem cruising to reelection in every election. Polls show a tight race so I woudn't be surprised if he ekes out a win. Granted, if he does, it'll be because he'll be like Bel Edwards in LA: a moderate-conservative Democrat who is a good fit for a Southern state and is to the right of the national party.

Jim Hood can't win without dems taking the majority of legislative districts unfortunately. The state has some... laws.

Jouhou wrote:

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-heffernan-shutdown-as-trump-doomsday-act-20190112-story.html

Anyways, a good opinion piece that sums up my feelings on Trump trolls. This is what we're dealing with in this country

“Better nuclear winter than more letters in LGBTQ”

It doesn’t get more terrifying that this type of mindset. Many on the right are perfectly willing to destroy everything if it means sticking it to liberals. One comment said Trump supporters have never matured past that six year old child who threatens to run away when they’re mad. I think that’s a perfect comparison.

CitizenJustin wrote:

Jouhou wrote:

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-heffernan-shutdown-as-trump-doomsday-act-20190112-story.html

Anyways, a good opinion piece that sums up my feelings on Trump trolls. This is what we're dealing with in this country

“Better nuclear winter than more letters in LGBTQ”

It doesn’t get more terrifying that this type of mindset. Many on the right are perfectly willing to destroy everything if it means sticking it to liberals. One comment said Trump supporters have never matured past that six year old child who threatens to run away when they’re mad. I think that’s a perfect comparison.

Indeed. What was the quote? Russian officials were shocked to learn that US conservatives hated liberals far more than the prospect of cozying up to the Commies?

CitizenJustin wrote:

“Better nuclear winter than more letters in LGBTQ”

It doesn’t get more terrifying that this type of mindset. Many on the right are perfectly willing to destroy everything if it means sticking it to liberals.

Truth be told, I don't agree with the mentality either. However, regarding the "more letters in LGBTQ", I have gotten to the point where I facepalm at more letters being added to the acronym. Many folks apparently feel insulted that their identity or orientation are not described in the acronym and that it's not all inclusive.

At my company, they changed the employee association name to be more inclusive because they felt the original name left out many people.

At what point do we draw the line to stop making so many accommodations?

einsteinboricua wrote:

CitizenJustin wrote:

“Better nuclear winter than more letters in LGBTQ”

It doesn’t get more terrifying that this type of mindset. Many on the right are perfectly willing to destroy everything if it means sticking it to liberals.

Truth be told, I don't agree with the mentality either. However, regarding the "more letters in LGBTQ", I have gotten to the point where I facepalm at more letters being added to the acronym. Many folks apparently feel insulted that their identity or orientation are not described in the acronym and that it's not all inclusive.

At my company, they changed the employee association name to be more inclusive because they felt the original name left out many people.

At what point do we draw the line to stop making so many accommodations?

I generally leave out the Q. I'm not sure why a word used as a pejorative is in there anyways.

Jouhou wrote:

einsteinboricua wrote:

CitizenJustin wrote:

“Better nuclear winter than more letters in LGBTQ”

It doesn’t get more terrifying that this type of mindset. Many on the right are perfectly willing to destroy everything if it means sticking it to liberals.

Truth be told, I don't agree with the mentality either. However, regarding the "more letters in LGBTQ", I have gotten to the point where I facepalm at more letters being added to the acronym. Many folks apparently feel insulted that their identity or orientation are not described in the acronym and that it's not all inclusive.

At my company, they changed the employee association name to be more inclusive because they felt the original name left out many people.

At what point do we draw the line to stop making so many accommodations?

I generally leave out the Q. I'm not sure why a word used as a pejorative is in there anyways.

Well Q can also stand for questioning, so it's not necessarily a pejorative. That said, I too have lost count of how many letters are currently in the acronym. It's difficult to keep track of and cumbersome. But I'm not sure what the solution is. Personally, I have no problem with adopting queer as an umbrella term, but not everyone feels the same way as I do.

OA412 wrote:

Jouhou wrote:

einsteinboricua wrote:

Truth be told, I don't agree with the mentality either. However, regarding the "more letters in LGBTQ", I have gotten to the point where I facepalm at more letters being added to the acronym. Many folks apparently feel insulted that their identity or orientation are not described in the acronym and that it's not all inclusive.

At my company, they changed the employee association name to be more inclusive because they felt the original name left out many people.

At what point do we draw the line to stop making so many accommodations?

I generally leave out the Q. I'm not sure why a word used as a pejorative is in there anyways.

Well Q can also stand for questioning, so it's not necessarily a pejorative. That said, I too have lost count of how many letters are currently in the acronym. It's difficult to keep track of and cumbersome. But I'm not sure what the solution is. Personally, I have no problem with adopting queer as an umbrella term, but not everyone feels the same way as I do.

[Bolded mine]

The SOLUTION is to STOP labeling people like they are UPS packages.It's denigrating.
Every person is pretty much unique. No need to slap a LGBTQXYZABC... label onto them. If someone tells me I'm LGBTQ, I say "sorry, I'm not". I am simply Dieuwer (with a preference for "G").

Dieuwer wrote:

The SOLUTION is to STOP labeling people like they are UPS packages.It's denigrating.
Every person is pretty much unique. No need to slap a LGBTQXYZABC... label onto them. If someone tells me I'm LGBTQ, I say "sorry, I'm not". I am simply Dieuwer (with a preference for "G").

I agree with stop labeling people, but when people want to group themselves in order to "belong". It's not necessarily a bad thing but it's wrong when everyone demands a spot. Where does a non-binary fit in? Or a sapiosexual? An asexual person? Heck, even the gay pride flag is criticized for not being all inclusive (despite the fact that the colors have nothing to do with orientation).

On another topic (with all respect to the otherwise-amorous out there), there is obviously lots of talk about lowering the costs of college. I hear lots of talk about "free" college, but is anyone pushing to make all student loans interest free? Wouldn't that be a great first step?

einsteinboricua wrote:

For the record, per the latest census estimates, NJ still has a healthy population growth, enough to let it keep its House delegation intact. WV and AL, on the other hand, are not so fortunate.

I can speak for WV, and you are correct. We were a Democrat stronghold for decades, but that is shifting. I would argue that we still are in terms of registered voters.

Independent = 309,832
Republican = 392,804
Democrat = 524,964

There was a time when you stood zero chance of ever winning an election here unless you were a Democrat. The numbers show Democrats still hold the majority in terms of registered voters. In terms of elected officials, it's a much different story.

Governor = Republican
Senator = Republican
Senator = Democrat

US House District 1 = Republican
US House District 2 = Republican
US House District 3 = Republican

Secretary of State = Republican
State Auditor = Republican
State Treasurer = Democrat
Attorney General = Republican
Commissioner of Agriculture = Republican

State Senate = Republican Majority
State House of Delegates = Republican Majority

My personal observations as a proud Mountaineer is that our state DNC needs to get their head in the game for the 2020 elections. They need to remind West Virginians that the state DNC is pro-union, pro-wages, pro-jobs, and pro-education. They need to remind West Virginians that Democrats have a plan for our state which would be in stark contrast to the fear-mongering from the other side.

I can tell you that many Democrats in the Mountain State including myself feel that the national DNC hasn't done enough here. Almost to the point that we feel as if we don't matter.

Do West Virginians have traditionally conservative values? Absolutely, and they always have. I would argue that having conservative values does not imply that you have to vote conservative. Sadly, many who might otherwise be (and should be) our allies like to paint us as being redneck, one-toothed inbred hillbillies who date our cousins and or sisters.

I would remind those folks that we Mountaineers from the hills of West Virginia consider the term Redneck to mean the following:

The term "redneck" was used in reference to American coal miner union members who wore red bandanas for solidarity. The sense of "a union man" dates at least to the 1910s and was especially popular during the 1920s and 1930s in the coal-producing regions of West Virginia, Kentucky, and Pennsylvania.

I've been visiting this site for many, many years and have read the insults slung at country folks like me. My advice to you, stop throwing mud and stand with us. You might actually learn that we have a whole lot more in common than you think.

CitizenJustin wrote:

“Better nuclear winter than more letters in LGBTQ”

I will never understand the irrational fear that many people have regarding the LGBTQ community. I will always remember the look on the face of a car salesman when he found out my niece was a lesbian. When he found out she was also married, I thought he was about to have a stroke.

The real kicker was when I informed him that both my niece and her beautiful wife were members of the US Armed Forces. Not only that but officers. It is quite sad that in the 21st century, there are people on this planet that would not give a second thought to treating my niece as a second-class citizen if they could legally get away with it. That fact that she defends this country makes it even worse.

I asked her what she thought about folks like the car salesman. She smiled and said, "My duty is to defend this country and its citizens. That includes the stupid ones too." Good answer.

The thread seems the proper forum to discuss one of the issues that's dominating political headlines today: Republican House Representative Steve King

For some background, in an interview with the New York Times published on January 10th Rep. King is quotes as saying "White nationalist, white supremacist, Western civilization - how did that language become offensive?" and later, "You could look over there and think the Democratic Party is no country for white men."

This comments, in conjunction with Rep. King's history of racist comments, have drawn harsh bipartisan condemnation from House Reps and Senators alike:

Mitch McConnell:

"I have no tolerance for such positions and those who espouse these views are not supporters of American ideals and freedoms,” McConnell said in a statement to The Hill.

“Rep. King’s statements are unwelcome and unworthy of his elected position," McConnell added. "If he doesn’t understand why ‘white supremacy’ is offensive, he should find another line of work.”

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy just finished a one on one meeting with King after saying yesterday:

I'm having a serious conversation with Congressman Steve King about his future and role in this Republican Party," McCarthy told CBS's "Face the Nation." "I will not stand back as a leader of this party, believing in this nation that all are created equal, that that stands or continues to stand and have any role with us."

Finally today, Democratic lawmakers have proposed formally censuring Rep. King

I'm not sure why it's only now that the GOP is speaking out so strongly against Rep. King given his lengthy history of such statements, but is it possible that the pressure is finally building to a point where him stepping down might be an outcome?

I assume King is not family of "King". Otherwise it would be a total slap in the face...

Dieuwer wrote:

I assume King is not family of "King". Otherwise it would be a total slap in the face...

Update: Mitt Romney is calling on Steve King to resign - even though Romney endorsed King in 2012

“Steve King’s comments are reprehensible. They have no place in polite society, certainly no place in the Republican Party, and they should have no place in the United States Congress. He ought to resign and move on.”

PIMountaineer wrote:

I can speak for WV, and you are correct. We were a Democrat stronghold for decades, but that is shifting.

A coworker is from WV and he recommended I read Hillbilly Elegy to understand Appalachia in general. I was telling him that I'm amazed at how quick WV went from Democrat to Republican. I understand why Southern states changed allegiance (see Southern Strategy), but through it all, WV stuck with Democrats at the state level until 2014 (its 5 EC votes were gone since 2000 and its 3 seats were becoming redder with each election).

I was asking him why is it that WV would vote for a person that wants to get rid of the program they benefit from (the ACA) or promises coal will come back, despite it being the free market determining that Appalachian Coal is not economical to extract or even believes that government assistance is a mark of socialism.

He mentioned how, because Appalachian coal and factories were from out of state, they organized under the party that encouraged union membership (Democrats). It's why for the greater part of the 20th century WV was one of the staunchest Democrat states in the union, but that when Democrats became more environmentally conscious, WV took it as a slap in the face. Here is the party they supported for generations and it's currently advocating for regulations that can cost them their job.

I argued that it's plain in the news that the GOP is not advocating for them; that their support for the GOP is really cutting their noses to spite their faces. He told me that West Virginians are "special", that they don't really know or care of what's happening outside of their state, and that education levels in the state are so poor that it explains why they're easily manipulated. He told me he grew up in Morgantown and that he is perceived as a city boy, despite Morgantown being a town of about 31,000 residents, that many other towns have even lower populations.

I honestly would like to go into a cafe and have a Q&A with an ordinary West Virginian and ask them point blank what was it that drove them from Democrats to Republicans.

You should just visit Eastern Oregon/Washington. Will be immediately clear why they vote GOP.

Dieuwer wrote:

You should just visit Eastern Oregon/Washington. Will be immediately clear why they vote GOP.

Can you elaborate on that? I know the Pacific NW cities are some of the more liberal in the country, so I’m curious as to what it is specifically about those rural regions that causes them to support the GOP?

2122M wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

Jouhou wrote:

The entire lower chamber is up for re-election in NJ! https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Jer ... l_Assembly

Dems already hold the majority here but it's important to hold onto it. 2016 is a strong lesson in that everyone needs to vote, every election.

Hopefully the people will turn out because IIRC NJ leads the country in people leaving because of high cost of living.

You are incorrect. NJ shows population growth in 2017 (including adding me). And as someone in the middle of the home buying process, I can promise you, its a sellers market. People are moving here in droves.

Reading that people were leaving New Jersey in droves almost made me laugh myself out of my chair. I live in Jersey City. For the past five years, possibly seven (but I think that's pushing it) I wouldn't even have been able to COUNT the number of high rise apartment towers that have gone up/or are in the process of going up in this city. I know there have been at least 15 above 15 stories. President Dipshit's name is on two, and the Kushner's have at least three, but I would be willing to bet more like six. And they are suing the city for whatever is going on that is blocking them (Kushner's) from building twin 60 story towers next to the PATH station. Across the street, using the facade of the old Jersey Journal building, a 25 story building is planned. A good 2500-3500 units within "spitting distance" of one another. Three towers going up just east of the PATH station, 54, 60, and 70 floors. Finally, the tallest building in New Jersey has just been newly crowned a few months ago. Surpassing 30 Hudson, the Goldman Sachs building, was 99 Hudson, at 899 feet, 79 stories. And that's some of the high rises. I have no idea how many residences under 10 floors have gone up in the same time frame. A couple of dozen.

As I understand, the reason for all this growth is because years ago, people were priced out of Manhattan so they moved to Brooklyn. Now people are being priced out of Brooklyn and they're heading for New Jersey. The PATH train system has a big impact on where the buildings are going as well. From Newark, the furthest point on PATH west, is five stops to the World Trade Center. Pretty darned convenient for metropolitan New York, if you ask me.

(Some) people leaving New Jersey in droves? Possibly. But it was only a matter of time before they would leave anyway. Otherwise, I don't see Jersey's population doing anything but rising. Up to 79 floors, in fact.

2122M wrote:

Dieuwer wrote:

You should just visit Eastern Oregon/Washington. Will be immediately clear why they vote GOP.

Can you elaborate on that? I know the Pacific NW cities are some of the more liberal in the country, so I’m curious as to what it is specifically about those rural regions that causes them to support the GOP?

In one word? Jesus.

Dieuwer wrote:

2122M wrote:

Dieuwer wrote:

You should just visit Eastern Oregon/Washington. Will be immediately clear why they vote GOP.

Can you elaborate on that? I know the Pacific NW cities are some of the more liberal in the country, so I’m curious as to what it is specifically about those rural regions that causes them to support the GOP?

In one word? Jesus.

That is so incredible to me. I know the Bible lends itself to selective interpretation, but you have to do some serious selective reading to use the Bible to justify supporting Donald Trump.

2122M wrote:

Dieuwer wrote:

2122M wrote:

Can you elaborate on that? I know the Pacific NW cities are some of the more liberal in the country, so I’m curious as to what it is specifically about those rural regions that causes them to support the GOP?

In one word? Jesus.

That is so incredible to me. I know the Bible lends itself to selective interpretation, but you have to do some serious selective reading to use the Bible to justify supporting Donald Trump.

Go read judges 19. Makes Donald look saintly.

einsteinboricua wrote:

I honestly would like to go into a cafe and have a Q&A with an ordinary West Virginian and ask them point blank what was it that drove them from Democrats to Republicans.

Good post this one. I wanted to focus on this particular section as I think your comment here is quite important to the topic at hand. At least I think so. So, what drove the Mountaineers to go red? I think I can sum that up in one word, a word that you have already mentioned. COAL.

Coal is king in just about every aspect of daily life in the Mountain State. Mining companies and their subsidiaries employee a whole lot of West Virginians. The science teacher at the local high school has a job because of it, as does the school bus driver, the salesman at the Ford dealership, the server at Outback, and even the neurosurgeon at the trauma center are employed because of coal.

Any slight hint of something potentially interfering with Coal Country will not be greeted warmly.

The Democratic party has been and is still Pro-Jobs and Pro-Union, and so is West Virginia. However, as you correctly pointed out, the DNC evolved. Democrats at the national level became environmentally aware. Coal Companies evolved too, and not in a good way. They went from digging into the mountain to get to the coal to just removing the mountain altogether.

Do you realize how environmentally disastrous mountaintop removal mining is? Rhetorical question, I know. Of course, you are aware. The damage done to the local ecosystem is shocking.

West Virginia is a state that went solidly for Clinton in 92 and 96. Gore lost by roughly 41,000 votes in 2000. Kerry by approximately 97,000 in 2004, Obama did better in 2008, losing by 93,000. 2012 and 2016 were not pretty at all. With the election of Republican Shelley Moore Capito to the US Senate in 2014, the blue wall in the US Senate for WV was brought to a close. You will have to go all the way back to the 1950s until you see another Republican US Senator for WV.

So, the question still stands . . . How do we reverse the trend?

I have ideas, but I don't know how well they would work. Fortunately, you are starting to see a trend in West Virginia concerning environmental awareness. The locals are beginning to push back against the coal companies and their methods of extracting coal. If you have never visited the Mountain State, I invite you to do so. It is one of the most beautiful in the nation. The natural wonders here are in great abundance. I was raised in Central WV east of Charleston, the state capital. Coal might be king, but the New River Gorge National River is the Mountain State's queen. Not far away is the Greenbrier Valley, home to the Greenbrier Resort. One of the finest in the nation in my opinion.

I think our natural wonders are the key to WV's future. The DNC would be wise to jump on this. You can't just simply close the mines. That too would be a disaster. So, you focus on promoting our natural wonders through tourism. Such as white water rafting the rapids of the Gauley and New River. Hiking, biking, fishing, hunting, skiing, etc.

Doing this is only going to get you so far. I propose creating a national wildlife reserve and making it home to rare and endangered species. Now you tackle education. Education levels and quality will vary depending on your location within the state. If you are graduating students with marketable skills, you provide potential new green employers with a local talent pool from which to recruit. Create incentives for green industry, energy, and corporations to set up shop in WV.

None of this will happen overnight, but I think its a start for my home state. I am sure there are many out there that will look at WV and say, we do not need their five electoral votes. They would not be entirely wrong in thinking so. I do believe this is a bad decision in the long term. You never know when you will see a general election where five electoral votes could mean everything. Not just to West Virginia, but the nation.

I would agree, anyone coming from Morgantown would be considered a city boy for sure. I would also agree that we are in many ways indeed unique, almost isolated from events and issues that affect other areas of the nation.

WV Democrats could also benefit from some young blood. We could use our very own AOC. I would argue that her ideas and general platform probably would not sell well. In fact, it would bomb. However, her energy, enthusiasm, and overall moxy is just what we need. We need that type of person promoting what's truly important to Mountaineers. The fearmongering coming from the other side just isn't cutting it, folks.

...or maybe West Virginia will become irrelevant in national elections (because population going to zero, due to mass Black Lung Cancer cases).

Dieuwer wrote:

...or maybe West Virginia will become irrelevant in national elections (because population going to zero, due to mass Black Lung Cancer cases).

That is likely the alternative that the DNC will prefer. Why bother trying to recover 4 ECVs (come 2024) when Arizona's 12 and Georgia's 16 look more promising?

einsteinboricua wrote:

Dieuwer wrote:

...or maybe West Virginia will become irrelevant in national elections (because population going to zero, due to mass Black Lung Cancer cases).

That is likely the alternative that the DNC will prefer. Why bother trying to recover 4 ECVs (come 2024) when Arizona's 12 and Georgia's 16 look more promising?

Actually, I really don't understand why GA is not a blue state. Georgia Tech and Atlanta strike me as liberal (although not as much as MA or CA). Also, I would think that non-white voters would lean Dem out of their own interest.

Dieuwer wrote:

Actually, I really don't understand why GA is not a blue state.

Because it's in the south and has always been in the south where confederate flags abound. This is where Sherman did his ineffective march to the sea. He burnt the place down because Georgia was ground zero for starting the Civil war and most Georgians wanted to continue the war in irregular fashion. In their mind, Yankees were/are their oppressor. One university town doesn't change a whole state.

salttee wrote:

Dieuwer wrote:

Actually, I really don't understand why GA is not a blue state.

Because it's in the south and has always been in the south where confederate flags abound. This is where Sherman did his ineffective march to the sea. He burnt the place down because Georgia was ground zero for starting the Civil war and most Georgians wanted to continue the war in irregular fashion. In their mind, Yankees were/are their oppressor. One university town doesn't change a whole state.

What you are saying doesn't make any sense to me...

It's an American history thing. The Civil war was a big deal and it still isn't healed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman%2 ... to_the_Sea

2122M wrote:

Dieuwer wrote:

You should just visit Eastern Oregon/Washington. Will be immediately clear why they vote GOP.

Can you elaborate on that? I know the Pacific NW cities are some of the more liberal in the country, so I’m curious as to what it is specifically about those rural regions that causes them to support the GOP?

People are few and far between. They think every cent of their taxes go to Portland, Eugene, and Bend. There is little investment east of the Cascades because there is not much there; not many people, not much usable land, no major companies, etc. Southern Oregon is still stuck, in some ways, in the 1950s. Many older people will not deal with "outsiders" in many places. Ashland is much more open minded but Medford and Grants Pass are just odd. They are getting there, but at a much slower pace.

Washington is a different animal. With larger areas like Spokane and Pasco/Richland/Kennewick (Tri-Cities) being center to center left. There are parts of eastern Washington that face similar issues eastern Oregon does. They think all tax dollars go to Seattle. There is a lot Spokane and Tri-Cities have to offer. Both areas are growing and have great opportunities, if you have the right education. But, many places simply do not have the population to support a tech boom or justifying large investments.