Home » The split tickets and the votes for governor

Comments

The split tickets and the votes for governor — 25 Comments

  1. Both Massachusetts and California have elected GOP governors while legislatures were Democrat dominated. Romney was just one example. In California, which I know better, George Deukmajian and Pete Wilson were elected and re-elected as a check on the crazier of the Democrat legislatures. Jerry Brown, of long term fame as “Governor Moonbeam,” has recently been the semi-conservative check on the nuts in Sacramento. Now, he will be gone and there is no sign of conservative reflexes in Gavin Newsom, the incoming Governor. Newsom is a creature of the Getty family and other billionaires of San Francisco. He is, apparently, thinking of a try at a presidential nomination, just as Brown was before a term as Mayor of Oakland beat some sense into his head.

    Meanwhile, I expect California to descend into a sort of Medieval state with castles and all. Even Orange County seems to be going left, with the end of the last GOP Congresswoman, Mimi Walters. It appears that “late votes” put the Dim over the top. Irvine is a wealthy suburb near the UC, Irvine campus.

  2. Both Massachusetts and California have elected GOP governors…

    I have friends and relatives in Boston. I never got a satisfying explanation for Romney’s election as governor. Massachusetts was the only state which went for McGovern in 1972.

    Just one of those things, I guess.

    Ella Fitzgerald, “Just one of those things”
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHyc0RSxxsg

  3. Bill Weld was also a GOP Governor of Mass.

    Neither was particularly conservative. Even Democrats may want an adult in the room at times.

  4. McSally ran a very negative ad campaign here in AZ, and Simena ran as a “moderate”, even tho she was a radical leftist when she was a Green Party candidate in the past. And McSally needs a better speech presentation.

  5. Im a bit bored, so lets cut to the chase of WHY they vote socialism..

    and maybe a bit of insight in to what you guys are perceiving, but have no way to contextualize and arrange to understand…

    Without Virgil, Dante was just another lost soul wandering hell with no way out!!!

    Socialism was huge before Leninism was even a thing, and that Marxism was and is still popular is not due only to Soviet patronage.

    Socialism works by hacking the Social Calculus Module that humans have in our brains. Remember, humans care deeply about status. Status is what drives human behavior. Everybody works to achieve more status, and to avoid losing status. Socialism of course sells egalitarianism. It tells people with low status that they can get some more. The Industrial Revolution had forced millions of peasants into the cities, and they all felt they had lost status in the process. Economists will tell you that the standard of living of industrial workers (according to some measures) had actually improved. And that may be so, but the workers didn’t think so, and they were pissed.

    You see, there is a defined process going on and why bother to know it?
    watching politicians do thiis and that and because you dont konw what will happen, and they do, you cant imagine or actually get ahead of them…

    Your just learning, they are learned.

    So these socialists come by and tell them they have this plan to make them gain status, big time.

    That was huge. Yes, sure, Christianity had also started promising the meek that they were morally higher than rich people; they’d all go to heaven unlike those bad rich guys.

    But that didn’t translate into actual, real-world status. Socialism was promising actual goods. And so it became huge. It’s still huge. It’s pretty much catnip for humans. It’s instant check-mate.

    Socialism works not only because it promises higher status to a lot of people. Socialism is catnip because it promises status to people who, deep down, know they shouldn’t have it.

    first it sets up a belief system…
    then:
    it promises women what? Status, power to be vindictive
    (if mans fault is lust womens is vindictiveness)
    What did Venezuela Chavez promise the poor? status..
    Why does a poor inner city youth kill for a dis?

    but more to the point, like islam whose jihad promises truly evil a place at the heavenly table and reward.. (Status here and in heaven they dont deserve), the left promises every malcontented group, fringe sect, and more…
    [edited for length by n]

  6. from Biological Leninism:

    That’s the nature of the Cathedral…..

    If you live in a free society, and your status is determined by your natural performance; then it follows that to build a cohesive Leninist ruling class you need to recruit those who have natural low-status.

    In any society, men have higher performance than women. They are stronger, they work harder, they have a higher variance, which means a fatter right tail in all traits (more geniuses); and they have the incentive to perform what the natural mating market provides. That’s the patriarchy for you.

    in many ways nonsense is a more effective organizing tool than the truth. Anyone can believe in the truth. To believe in nonsense is an unforgettable demonstration of loyalty. It serves as a political uniform. And if you have a uniform, you have an army.

    The deer that was a horse was supposed to teach you…
    Or as the Chinese put it, point deer, make horse.

    You can’t run a tight, cohesive ruling class with white men!!

    A much easier way to run an obedient, loyal party is to recruit everyone else. Women. Blacks. Gays. Muslims. Transexuals. Pedophiles.

    Those people may be very high performers individually, but in a natural society ruled by its core of high performers, i.e. a white patriarchy, they wouldn’t have very high status. So if you promise them high status for being loyal to you; you bet they’re gonna join your team. They have much to gain, little to lose.
    [edited for length by n]

  7. “Everybody goes to bed on Tuesday night thinking that I’ve been declared the winner, and then suddenly on Wednesday morning they start hearing that there were 8,000 ballots that came up out of nowhere,” Rep. Yvette Herrell (R-N.M.)

  8. I didn’t know Charlie Baker. He was a wunder-CEO of a non-profit Harvard Pilgrim Health Care. They went from massive losses under the previous CEO, to a complete positive turn-around under Baker. He held 2 state offices under gov. Bill Weld.

    I watched a couple clips of Baker. Not a scintillating or super charismatic speaker by any stretch, but he speaks slowly and careful, has a bit of gravitas, and you can hear and understand what he is saying. His gov. debate opponent’s speaking style was a little nasal and whiny by comparison.

    I’d rate him highly on substance, especially if you are a thoughtful left-winger, and slightly good on style.

  9. Kai Akker on November 14, 2018 at 4:05 pm at 4:05 pm said:
    Im a bit bored
    Go read a book. Play the piano. Drop the condescending lectures. TIA

    nice edit, have a career in newspapers? when you write for one block for 12 years, then you can be bored, your new here, arent you..

    anyway. you get your wish…
    i am now over here.. wont post here anymore..
    https://www.the-niceguy.com/forum/

  10. Re: Bill Weld

    He ran against John Silber, a “conservative” intellectual who fought Political Correctness and the Left in general.

    He was also a flamethrower, spoke of the cuff, and wrote his own speeches which were often laced with insults. I’m tempted to say he was Trumpian, but he was wildly articulate. If Donald Trump and Allan Bloom had a baby…

    Anyway, on policy imo he was clearly to the left of Weld. But culturally he coded right. Iirc he was Reagan considered him for the Sec of Education post…but eventually gave it to one of Silber’s former students.

  11. Thanks Manju,

    Sorry to be thick, the “flamethrower” para refers to Silber or Weld? I assume that last para refers to Silber. I’ve heard Weld speak a bit, but don’t really know his mindset well either.

  12. Flamethrower refers to Silber, TommyJay. He was a ferociously articulate and salty-tongued debater. You could probably find his debates with Noam Chomsky online somewhere.

    As for Weld, he was/is the opposite: amicable and funny. That probably served him well at the end of the day, as Silber’s temper became too much for many Dems to bear.

    Weld remains very witty, in an old-wasp sort of way. I leave you with this:

    Weld has a sense of humor about his background; when Massachusetts Senate president Billy Bulger publicly teased him about his all-American heritage and wealth, pointing out that his ancestors had come over on the Mayflower, Weld rose on the dais with a correction: “Actually, they weren’t on the Mayflower. They sent the servants over first to get the cottage ready.”

  13. Manju:

    I don’t always love what you write, but I did love the idea that if Trump and Allan Bloom had a baby, it would be John Silber.

    I remember Silber well. He certainly put The Fear into much of BU.

    I had forgotten his political career, though. I had certainly forgotten that he was the Democrat! I had long thought of him as conservative, at least vis a vis the university. And speaking of long—I knew he was a BU administrator, but I had no idea how long. I just looked it up, and it was a long, long time:

    From 1971 to 1996, he was President of Boston University (BU) and, from 1996 to 2002, Chancellor. From 2002 to 2003, he again served as President (Ad Interim); and, from 2003 until his death [in 2012], he held the title of President Emeritus.

  14. If someone is just the kind of person people like, and his or her opponent is more off-putting on the personal level, people will vote for the former over the latter.

    Trump… Hillary?

    Obama… McCain?

  15. Being “socially liberal and fiscally conservative” seems to be the ticket for Republicans in Democrat states. That brings up the question of whether there are “socially conservative and fiscally liberal” candidates as well, and I think there are. What is really telling to me, though, is Neo’s comment: “Perhaps people generally want their governors to be somewhat fiscally conservative and yet want the feds to give them lots of perks and “free” stuff. ”

    I am reminded of a news clip I saw after Obamacare went into effect, where a supporter of the law got his bill for increased premiums and complained, “I want people to have insurance, but I never thought I would have to pay for it.”

    The Reason article Neo linked yesterday had convincing reasons for McSally’s loss. AG adds a couple more, including a riff on Romney vs Trump.
    One thing about her loss among the college educated got me wondering : the GOP touted her military career as an advantage, but I wonder if it wasn’t more of a liability to the academe-indoctrinated voters?

    https://amgreatness.com/2018/11/13/arizona-illustrates-the-rino-revenge/

  16. I kind of wonder if this election is a dry run for Democrat massive vote fraud in 2020. It seems that Wisconsin and Arizona both had “early voting” misadventures. Now we have Florida and Georgia, with of course, the race issue.

  17. The best article I read on Sinema v McSally was from Jon Gabriel at Ricochet. He also happens to live in Arizona. He also had a thread on it at exjon@twitter.

  18. MikeK: every election is a dry run for the next election; they take whatever works and that they get away with — which is just about everything, everytime — and add that to the playlist.

    If Democrats really wanted to convince Republicans that they were not perpetrating election fraud, this continual finding of new ballots, and breaking their own state’s law, is not the way to do it.

  19. Decisions at the national level are abstract and decisions at the local level are more concrete. Local politicians can redistrict your school and have a huge effect on you. National politics might vaguely effect education policy at the federal level…

    That said, “fiscally conservative” at the state and local level doesn’t seem to amount too much. You rarely see a roll back in spending, just a slowdown in increase. All the big problems are with unfunded pensions and other liabilities, and I haven’t seen “fiscally conservative” blue state Republicans take them on in a meaningful way.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>