Virginia Governor Election

Discussion in 'Elections & Campaigns' started by Diamond, May 13, 2017.

  1. Diamond

    Diamond Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    1,850
    Likes Received:
    376
    Trophy Points:
    83
    June 13th is the up coming primaries for Virginia Governor. This I what I have discovered over the past 24 hours.

    Democrats have two candidates running to be nominated on June 13th and Republicans have three Candidates. The two Democrats are Ralph Northam and Tom Perriello. The three Republican candidates are Ed Gillespie, Corey Stewart, and Frank Wagner. I'll give you the quick break down on the Democrats first because it's a lot easier to define their differences. First it is important to note that all of the candidates I listed above are listed in the order of their current popularity in the polls.

    Ralph Northam is supported mainly by Hillary supporters (he sounds a lot like her) and he's a fascist.
    Tom Perriello has been endorsed by both Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren (he sounds a lot like Bernie) and has Socialist values.



    The Republican candidates all seem professional, but understanding their difference is harder to identify, so you have to look a lot harder to figure out who stands for what.

    Ed Gillespie currently holds a large lead in the polls, but he has a record of flip-flopping like Mitt Romney.
    Corey Stewart (who was a Trump supporter and even served in the Trump campaign) is a lot like Trump himself, focused mostly on deporting illegal immigrants.

    Frank Wagner has more experience than both Stewart or Gillespie, and similarly shares Stewart's opinion on illegal immigrant, but focuses more on transportation, internet access, and tackling problems facing coal-miners in SW VA.



    In summary, I would say that overall the Democrats have plans that would be of more personal interests to issues that impact me, but I am not at all in favor of voting for Northam because I'd feel like I'm supporting Hillary. So I'll most likely vote for Perriello in the primaries. However, if Northam secures the nomination then I might vote for the Republican nominee (preferably Wagner) but that also would come down to who that nominee is, and the way its currently looking it is most likely going to be Gillespie (which would be like voting for Mitt Romney). So take some time to look at the two links I provided of the debates and give me your feedback.
     
    Ole Ole likes this.
  2. Deckel

    Deckel Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2014
    Messages:
    17,608
    Likes Received:
    2,043
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Perriello's campaign is mostly funded by out of state donors, Soros in particular. If he wins the nomination, he is likely to lose the general election. Even if he were to win, he would get nothing done because his pie in the sky proposals will never be funded. I think his argument that the right to work law has to be abolished because it deters economic growth is one of the most bizarre positions he could have taken on the matter. One thing is for sure, Perriello will not win the district he represented in his one term in Congress which should be an indicator of how he operates as a politician--totally in it for himself. Northam is the better choice for the DNC because he is more likely to be able to get new laws passed even when the GOP controls at least one house of the General Assembly.

    Gillespie is all but guaranteed the GOP nod, so there is no point even discussing that at this point.
     
    MMC likes this.
  3. Diamond

    Diamond Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    1,850
    Likes Received:
    376
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I don't vote based on supporting who I think is most likely to win as if I'm playing the lottery. I vote based on candidates that promote things and idea that I can support despite their chances of pulling it off. Northam is definitely a no-go for me. Perriello is potentially a little naive and over optimistic, but I like where his head is at even though I have to agree with you that he probably cannot beat and of the Republican candidates. I'm still fine with supporting Perriello in the primaries.

    On the Republican side, I cannot and will not vote for Gillespie if Democrats nominate Northam and the RNC nominates Gillespie. If that's what happens then I just won't vote in November. But If the DNC goes with Northam and either Stewart or Wagner is the Republican nominee, I'll most likely vote Republican in November. My only real split here is between Stewart and Wagner, but since I won't be voting for either of them in June I'll just have to see where everything stands after June 13th. Now, like I said, I don't care if I vote for who is most likely to win, I only care about voting for (out of the options available) someone I can support. But yesterday I didn't even know anything about any of these people. So if you know about some dirt on any of them that I should be aware of, I'd be glad to learn about it.
     
  4. Deckel

    Deckel Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2014
    Messages:
    17,608
    Likes Received:
    2,043
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Apparently not really since you have already positioned yourself as a Perriello loyalist. You might want to read up on his recent politically convenient divestment when he got called out for investing in a company that built the power plant he publicly opposed and may be involved in building the border fence which he also publicly opposed. He doesn't invest his own money in accordance with his own public positions. I am not sure what makes you think he will do any better with yours.
     
  5. Diamond

    Diamond Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    1,850
    Likes Received:
    376
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I'm not 100% behind Perriello. I know I'm still ignorant of anything outside those debates videos I posted. I was just basing my choice off what I witnessed in those debates. I did dig up some stuff on him suffesting that he has a conservative and strong religion based history. And I noted that Gillespie made a comment about him really being a Librarian. But he's younger than I am, an I felt my way around a bit before settling in on what I could and couldn't support.

    Wagner, who I'm also considering, I found out was born in the UK. Now he seems to have been around and gained a lot of experience, but I'm not 100% on where his loyalties lay. So let me ask you, out of the five who do you think would be the best choice (not the most likely to win) and why?
     
  6. Deckel

    Deckel Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2014
    Messages:
    17,608
    Likes Received:
    2,043
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Of the ones you have cited, I suppose Wagner as he is the least offensive republican and I really cannot vote for a DNC candidate due to the bad taste still in my mouth over the rigging of the primaries for Hillary when I spent a lot of time and money supporting Bernie. I am really more interested in seeing Cliff Hyra flesh out the details his criminal justice reform plank (and gather enough signatures to be on the ballot) before I decide on any of them. Virginia's criminal justice system is far too Old Testament and needs some serious reworking. There is also probably some room for support in the GOP for that which increases the likelihood change would come.
     
  7. Diamond

    Diamond Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    1,850
    Likes Received:
    376
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I'm pretty much in the same place your at and for the same exact reasons. Other ex-Bernie supporters I know have also been saying the same. And since we don't register in Virginia by party affiliation all registered voters can vote, cross-vote (including Independants) in the primaries. Criminal justice reform is also an important matter for me. I was very happy Terry McAuliffe restored the rights of more than 130,000 disenfranchised residents, he faced tough opposition to pull that off and it would be disturbing to have his replacement just reset it. Recidivism rates are high because ex-cons previously had little opportunity to fully rejoin society. I was one of the people who was directly impacted by that change, allowing me to vote for the first time in the 2016 General. I know the criminal justice system in Virginia, from the courts, to jails, to the prison, to the probation and parole. That is a broken and dysfunctional system, at just over $30,000 a bed per year taxpayers are spending more to send citizens in there to be disenfranchised than college tuition rates (which themselves have multiplied by 700% over the last five years). I hear people say that we cannot afford universal healthcare or "free"/public college, but they have no problem with Virginia building more and more prisons (private at that) with stock-options that do absolutely nothing to better the State.

    Frank Wagner on the issues is silent on the issues that matter the most to me (but so are the rest of them).
     
    Deckel likes this.
  8. Deckel

    Deckel Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2014
    Messages:
    17,608
    Likes Received:
    2,043
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I did not and do not support the blanket restoration he tried. It was way overreaching. That kind of thing requires legislative approval since those rights were taken by statute. The next governor, however, cannot undo the restoration orders granted by the Governor. There is no parole in Virginia unless you are in prison and were sentenced before whatever year parole was abolished--96 maybe. Many states did away with it because of a court case in which it was ruled basically that if you have parole, it has to be some big expensive affair so many places abolished it altogether. Virginia college tuition is a mess because of inconsistent funding based on whose alums are in the General Assembly, but generally 4 year school tuition is okay. Community colleges seems to be where people are getting soaked.
     
  9. Diamond

    Diamond Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    1,850
    Likes Received:
    376
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I've heard the "blanket" argument before, but first of all no Governor possibly has the time to consider restoration of rights of over 100,000 ex-con one at a time, because of some blanket statute that was put on the books to allow for blanket-disenfranchisement in the first place. Second the original statute (although it was State) violated Federal law, and States cannot impose laws that violate Federal law. States only have the latitude to create local laws that the Feds do not address. That's why I always found it a bit confusing that States manage Federal elections. If States only managed local elections then this wouldn't be so confusing, but that issue has never been mentioned by anyone. Virginia's prior disenfranchisement policy was unique not only by standards of the rest of the US, but also by other States that have disenfranchisement laws. Other States with disenfranchisement laws automatically restore rights after an individual completes their sentence, but in Virginia ex-cons had to be clean for seven years and then they could only apply (with no guarantee) to have their rights restored. Governors have a lot of things to manage, their is no designated department (other than the Governor's office itself) to review those 100,000+ cases, so unless an individual knew someone that knew someone close to the sitting Governor (to put in a recommendation) all cases were automatically denied. And lets look at the restoration of rights that we're talking about, gun rights were not included, so we're mainly only talking about voting-rights. What could possibly be a good reason for taking away voting-rights just because someone committed a crime? Hell in Washington DC, the Mayor was convicted of possession of crack cocaïne and still allowed to run for office again after serving his sentence, but in Virginia he wouldn't even have been able to vote.
     
    Last edited: May 13, 2017
  10. Deckel

    Deckel Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2014
    Messages:
    17,608
    Likes Received:
    2,043
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I have no idea what old law you are referring to. Virginia's regimen is not unique. Other states require the person actually apply to have their rights restored. In Virginia, the pre-Mcauliff time line was 3 years, not seven, and you didn't have to know anybody to have it done. You had to fill out the form, mail it in, and as long as you qualified, they handed them out like candy. I know several felons who have had their voting rights restored, primarily to get their gun rights back which is a separate process, but ironically, several I know did it to vote against Hillary.
     
  11. Diamond

    Diamond Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    1,850
    Likes Received:
    376
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I never filed but I do know many that have, they qualified, and they were denied (probably without any review). This is what I know about disenfranchisement laws in the US.
     
  12. Deckel

    Deckel Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2014
    Messages:
    17,608
    Likes Received:
    2,043
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Then I assume that they did not qualify or filled out the paperwork wrong because I have never heard of a single person who applied who got turned down and some of the folks I know who got restored are sketchy people with no pull whatsoever.
     
  13. Diamond

    Diamond Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    1,850
    Likes Received:
    376
    Trophy Points:
    83
    No they qualified, sentence completed, time elapsed, fines & restitution paid; yet still denied. That's why I never bothered to file myself. All of that aside, we're still only talking about voting rights, not gun rights. So what's the concern about?
     
  14. Deckel

    Deckel Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2014
    Messages:
    17,608
    Likes Received:
    2,043
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What concern? I was simply pointing out that TM blanket pardon was inherently an overreach that was intended to nulliy legislation without legislative approval. That was never going to fly, particularly in a state with the weakest governor in the country.

    Tom P. wanting to end Lee-Jackson Day is probably the day he lost the election as well. It will rile up the right, and probably lose him support on the left of all the people who work for the state government who enjoy their 4 day weekend, and only appeal to folks who live out of state or don't have jobs. He runs around saying he lost his job because of Obamacare, but he really only had it in the first place because he rode in on Obama's coattails. 2017 will not draw out huge number of democratic voters the way 2008 did.
     
  15. Diamond

    Diamond Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    1,850
    Likes Received:
    376
    Trophy Points:
    83
    How is "blanket pardons" any different than "blanket condemnations"?
     

Share This Page