Ny Senate Seat News

[Cancel7]

he obviously picked her cause it improves his chance when he is running for re-election against cuomo.

I don't like Cuomo. He has always been hanging around like he was waiting for the job that is coming to him as Mario's son. He reminds me of a manrat.

I guess I will have to put aside my pettiness, and watch him and what his positions are, and whether they are strongly held, to decide what to do. I really can't support Paterson after this, which is too bad.

 

[Chapdog]

I don't like Cuomo. He has always been hanging around like he was waiting for the job that is coming to him as Mario's son. He reminds me of a manrat.

I guess I will have to put aside my pettiness, and watch him and what his positions are, and whether they are strongly held, to decide what to do. I really can't support Paterson after this, which is too bad.

Read up on Kirsten. I know your pretty far left but id be shocked if you think shes conservative

http://www.ontheissues.org/NY/Kirsten_Gillibrand.htm

 

[Socrtease]

She supports the second amendment and is a democrat! I am impressed that Patterson chose not to go with the typical "take their guns, take their money" democrat.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

She supports the second amendment and is a democrat! I am impressed that Patterson chose not to go with the typical "take their guns, take their money" democrat.

I must admit, I am quite happy with this selection. Far better than I would have expected. To get a left of center dem, rather than a leftwing nutjob is quite the pleasant surprise.

 

[blackascoal]

Gillibrand is just fine for her particular district. A true liberal couldn't win in that district. But that's also why this is a shitty pick. Now there is an open seat the Republicans have a good chance of picking up.

While she is fine for upstate, a Senator doesn't represent the a particular portion of the state. A Senator represents the entire state. New York is a liberal state and should have a liberal Senator.

BINGO!!!!

Nailed it.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Gillibrand is just fine for her particular district. A true liberal couldn't win in that district. But that's also why this is a shitty pick. Now there is an open seat the Republicans have a good chance of picking up.

While she is fine for upstate, a Senator doesn't represent the a particular portion of the state. A Senator represents the entire state. New York is a liberal state and should have a liberal Senator.

Funny... Pataki took almost 50% of the vote when he won the governorship

in 98 and 2000 the Senate elections saw about 45% go to Republicans.

In 2004 and 2006 it was more like 30% to Republicans. Due to popularity of Schumer and Clinton combined with hatred of Bush and Republicans. Yet McCain still took 37% of the state.

Bottom line... as you said, a Senator represents the state as a whole. Yet if you go with two far left liberals, then how are they representing the state as a whole? Just because she is not as far to the left of center as you would like doesn't mean she cannot represent the state as a whole. Like it or not, there are still a good deal of voters in NY that vote Republican. Add to that the moderate to more conservative Dems and that represents a good chunk of the state.

 

[leaningright]

Funny... Pataki took almost 50% of the vote when he won the governorship

in 98 and 2000 the Senate elections saw about 45% go to Republicans.

In 2004 and 2006 it was more like 30% to Republicans. Due to popularity of Schumer and Clinton combined with hatred of Bush and Republicans. Yet McCain still took 37% of the state.

Bottom line... as you said, a Senator represents the state as a whole. Yet if you go with two far left liberals, then how are they representing the state as a whole? Just because she is not as far to the left of center as you would like doesn't mean she cannot represent the state as a whole. Like it or not, there are still a good deal of voters in NY that vote Republican. Add to that the moderate to more conservative Dems and that represents a good chunk of the state.

Too reasonable SF. Way to reasonable.

 

[Cancel7]

Funny... Pataki took almost 50% of the vote when he won the governorship

in 98 and 2000 the Senate elections saw about 45% go to Republicans.

In 2004 and 2006 it was more like 30% to Republicans. Due to popularity of Schumer and Clinton combined with hatred of Bush and Republicans. Yet McCain still took 37% of the state.

Bottom line... as you said, a Senator represents the state as a whole. Yet if you go with two far left liberals, then how are they representing the state as a whole? Just because she is not as far to the left of center as you would like doesn't mean she cannot represent the state as a whole. Like it or not, there are still a good deal of voters in NY that vote Republican. Add to that the moderate to more conservative Dems and that represents a good chunk of the state.

Pataki wouldn't take the governorship from Mario Cuomo today. You know, things are constantly in flux. and at that time, what the R's hit Cuomo with, very effectively, was his determined, and strong, stance against the death penalty. As you should know, even nationally, opinions have changed on that. YOu could no longer take someone out on that issue in this state.

And NY has moved more and more blue, just as some red states moved more and more red. I don't see you whining or bitching about a state that has two literal right wing nuts. the damned senate has been filled with right wing nuts.

Yet when it comes to the more liberal states, we are supposed to send centrists. SEriously, how do you not choke on this stuff?

It's just like some conservatives who were really strongly advocating the idea of changing the winner take all electoral system, but only for California. Of course, states like Texas would continue to be winner take all. We'd never see another democratic president.

Seriously, it's just a joke, and you're not credible with this position. You want a country filled with right wing lunatics, and centrists to "balance them".

No thanks.

 

[Bonestorm]

Too reasonable SF. Way to reasonable.

Well it's not reasonable from the standpoint of the entire Senate. I mean, NY has 11 million people and 2 senators. Meanwhile, every two bit backwater red state with a handful of people and twelve teeth among them gets 2 senators each. How is that reasonable? You have to balance the equation where you can.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Pataki wouldn't take the governorship from Mario Cuomo today. You know, things are constantly in flux. and at that time, what the R's hit Cuomo with, very effectively, was his determined, and strong, stance against the death penalty. As you should know, even nationally, opinions have changed on that. YOu could no longer take someone out on that issue in this state.

And NY has moved more and more blue, just as some red states moved more and more red. I don't see you whining or bitching about a state that has two literal right wing nuts. the damned senate has been filled with right wing nuts.

Yet when it comes to the more liberal states, we are supposed to send centrists. SEriously, how do you not choke on this stuff?

It's just like some conservatives who were really strongly advocating the idea of changing the winner take all electoral system, but only for California. Of course, states like Texas would continue to be winner take all. We'd never see another democratic president.

Seriously, it's just a joke, and you're not credible with this position. You want a country filled with right wing lunatics, and centrists to "balance them".

No thanks.

I am not the one bitching Darla... I am mocking you for doing so. I didn't say you are SUPPOSED to send moderates. I just said you are wrong to suggest she doesn't represent the state simply because she is more to the center than you are. I was pointing out that even in this environment McCain took 37% of your state. It is blue to be sure, but it may not be as far to the left as you seem to beleive.

That said, I don't know a lot about Bennett yet, Udall is way to the left of me, yet that doesn't stop me from sending complaints, suggestions etc.. to either of them. They still represent me even though we may disagree on a number of issues. Thus far, Udall has been pretty good at responding. Bennet was sworn in today, so we shall have to wait and see.

Bottom line, your DEMOCRAT governor made this selection. She has a 100% approval rating of the ACLU and high approval of the NRA... so it seems she would represent a wide swath of the constituents of NY. He did not HAVE to nominate someone like her, but he also did not need to appoint a NYC liberal. He made his choice. Deal with it.

 

[Cancel7]

The American Conservative Union's top ten most conservative Senators, include, BOTH Senators from the state of Oklahoma:

Coburn at number 3, and Infoe at number ONE.

Two right wing lunatics from one state, and when we factor in what DH just brought up which is another glaring problem, and compare populations, this is outrageous.

Are SF, Leaning, and Smarterthanwhoever, whining about that? Oh no.

But NY State one of the big stalwarth blue states, should send a conservative democrat to "balance" the right wing nuttery. How do we then end up? With a right of center national policy.

Liberals then have zero representation. Just like SF, Leaning and smarter. and the rest of them want it.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Well it's not reasonable from the standpoint of the entire Senate. I mean, NY has 11 million people and 2 senators. Meanwhile, every two bit backwater red state with a handful of people and twelve teeth among them gets 2 senators each. How is that reasonable? You have to balance the equation where you can.

The two senators are there to represent their STATE. They are not there to try to 'balance' things out for the country as a whole.

Nice to see you are so judgemental about the red states. I am guessing you haven't spent much time in Northern Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Western Ohio, Western PA, etc....

 

[Cancel7]

The two senators are there to represent their STATE. They are not there to try to 'balance' things out for the country as a whole.

Nice to see you are so judgemental about the red states. I am guessing you haven't spent much time in Northern Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Western Ohio, Western PA, etc....

Have you ever been to Oklahoma, responsible for handing us some of the biggest loons of all time? I have. His description definitely holds water.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

The American Conservative Union's top ten most conservative Senators, include, BOTH Senators from the state of Oklahoma:

Coburn at number 3, and Infoe at number ONE.

Two right wing lunatics from one state, and when we factor in what DH just brought up which is another glaring problem, and compare populations, this is outrageous.

Are SF, Leaning, and Smarterthanwhoever, whining about that? Oh no.

But NY State one of the big stalwarth blue states, should send a conservative democrat to "balance" the right wing nuttery. How do we then end up? With a right of center national policy.

Liberals then have zero representation. Just like SF, Leaning and smarter. and the rest of them want it.

Again Darla... the point you are missing... I did not state that NY HAD to nominate a moderate Dem. I did state that I was surprised that they did do so. I thought they would go with a more liberal Dem. My point is that you are wrong to suggest that she cannot represent your state simply because she is a moderate Dem. I was pointing out that there are many people in NY that are to the right of you.

I could care less if a state has two far left nutjobs or two far right nutjobs. You are simply creating this strawman to try to give legs to your argument.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Have you ever been to Oklahoma, responsible for handing us some of the biggest loons of all time? I have. His description definitely holds water.

yes, I have been to every state except Hawaii.

OK is a very very very conservative state that is big on the 'we are a part of the bible belt' kind of thinking.

His description does not hold water. You can find a wide range of individuals there just like you can in NYC or San Fran. To attempt to paint an entire state or group of states with the brush stroke he used is simply pathetic.

 

[Bonestorm]

The two senators are there to represent their STATE. They are not there to try to 'balance' things out for the country as a whole.

Nice to see you are so judgemental about the red states. I am guessing you haven't spent much time in Northern Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Western Ohio, Western PA, etc....

Well, the Senate is an undemocratic institution, particularly when you can get 41 redneck, hillbillies and hicks from the least populous states to block just about everything if they were so inclined. States like California and New York ought to have two staunch liberals.

And I don't see where I've been judgmental.

 

[Cancel7]

Again Darla... the point you are missing... I did not state that NY HAD to nominate a moderate Dem. I did state that I was surprised that they did do so. I thought they would go with a more liberal Dem. My point is that you are wrong to suggest that she cannot represent your state simply because she is a moderate Dem. I was pointing out that there are many people in NY that are to the right of you.

I could care less if a state has two far left nutjobs or two far right nutjobs. You are simply creating this strawman to try to give legs to your argument.

I didn't she cannot, I said she does not. A strawman? Do you know what one is? Basically your entire debate style could be termed the Strawman's Special. I on the other hand, have presented no strawmans.

She's too conservative for a NY Senate seat, because we have a population that can support a much more liberal Senator. Hopefully, in two years, we will correct this.

Of course, there is the possibility, that she will move to the left now that she is supposed to be representing the entire state, and not just one conservative district of it.

 

[Cancel7]

yes, I have been to every state except Hawaii.

OK is a very very very conservative state that is big on the 'we are a part of the bible belt' kind of thinking.

His description does not hold water. You can find a wide range of individuals there just like you can in NYC or San Fran. To attempt to paint an entire state or group of states with the brush stroke he used is simply pathetic.

Really, I don't know where you hung out, but when I was there, I felt like either Deliverance or An American Werewolf in London could break out at any moment, and if I hadn't been with my brother (who was the only reason I was there, I was helping him with some business), I probably would have taken the first plane out to get away from those scary assed freaks. However, since my brother, even though he is a right wing idiot (you'd like him), can kick just about anyone's ass, I stayed for three days, and they were the longest three days of my life. I never met more ugly people either! So, tell your story walkin!

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Well, the Senate is an undemocratic institution, particularly when you can get 41 redneck, hillbillies and hicks from the least populous states to block just about everything if they were so inclined. States like California and New York ought to have two staunch liberals.

And I don't see where I've been judgmental.

"every two bit backwater red state with a handful of people and twelve teeth among them gets 2 senators each"

"when you can get 41 redneck, hillbillies and hicks from the least populous states "

yeah... not judgemental at all.

 

[Cancel7]

How the hell did SF get to be a splendid one to behold? This proves a relationship with Damo. You are about as splendid to behold as a hemorrhoid on Rush Limbaugh's ass.

At least I came by reputation honestly!