Shoutout to this lady with her friendly reminderSubmitted by MartianCleric t3_zr1sd5 in rva
oldguy_on_the_wire t1_j13mhki wrote
Reply to comment by jaywan1991 in Shoutout to this lady with her friendly reminder by MartianCleric
I don't know about it being just my opinion bro.
From the evidence through the thread it seems from the down votes you gathered that it LOOKS a lot like it is the opinion of multiple (Like almost everyone that commented) people in this thread.
jaywan1991 t1_j13n28h wrote
And if you read, I was saying what I thought then within two comments got my ideas called simple and accused of playing into partisan politics when I was trying to just exchange ideas.
Which goes to show me that discussions have gone from exchange of ideas to attacking the character of the argument and individual. If we just want to pat each other on the back and call each other right so we feel good about ourselves fine but dang, I've gotten more out of conversations where I exchange ideas and sources from Facebook conversions which is sad that reddit is going this way.
oldguy_on_the_wire t1_j13q8up wrote
You stated:
> .... that the Republicans get to join in it again even though they lost. I don't get it (Emphasis mine).
To which a commenter explained:
> If someone dies in office, it should be the voice of the people that decides who replaces them. That's democracy.
> I think Republicans should have a chance just like Democrats should have a chance if a Republican dies in office. I don't like Republicans, but that's only fair. Everyone gets their shot in a democracy. ....
Right there in the very first reply to your complaint that you "don't get it" is the explanation. If a publicly elected official dies before they take office then a new election is held. Because it is a different election than the previous one every voter gets to express their opinion. It is not a difficult concept but you seem to have trouble accepting it.
Democrats did not win the election. Donald McEachin, a Democrat, won the election and died before he could take office. It is entirely plausible that some Republicans voted for him in the first election. It is also entirely plausible that any who did might decide in the run off that neither Democratic candidate is a suitable replacement for McEachin and want to vote for someone else in the new election.
You can't disenfranchise people like that, it is unfair. The rest of the thread goes downhill from there....
jaywan1991 t1_j13qkkl wrote
See other than your last paragraph, your whole reply was the conversation I was looking for. Then we would go back and forth and exchange ideas and I would realize I was wrong or I would realize maybe a few ideas of mine are misguided are something.
But no, that didn't happen. That's how new ideas are formed. You take different people with different view points and experiences and put them together to come up with solutions to satisfy everyone or that area ethically correct... or both.
oldguy_on_the_wire t1_j13r96u wrote
> See other than your last paragraph, your whole reply was the conversation I was looking for.
If this was the case then why did you not say so when the first commenter to your complaint noted it? You proceeded to go into lala land. And received appropriate replies.
As to my last paragraph, I do not understand your complaint. Would you care to elaborate? Do you disagree that it is unfair to disenfranchise people? Do you disagree that the thread went down hill for you after this comment of yours and the reply to it that you totally ignored?
jaywan1991 t1_j13smkw wrote
I didn't think I'd have to explain myself. I thought we were having a friendly conversation.
I agree, we should not have to disenfranchise folks but just not how it was said. You made it seem like that was my intention but it was not. My point I was trying to Make was that both parties held primaries allow voters to pick their people. They voted then they put one person from each of the 2 big parties and the independents on the ballot for people to vote for. The Democrat got over 60% of the vote, won then passed away. I was trying to say ok well since a majority voted for the Democrat candidate, shouldn't we just hold a Democrat election? We don't even do that when the president passes, it goes to the VP but if the VP passes too, it goes to the speaker of the house who the vast majority of Americans did not even vote for (since it's a Rep from a state chosen by other Reps). So why don't we do that when a representative passes? Why don't we have a deputy representative or something to take over in case the worst happens?
On the earlier earlier point about people voting for the people and not the party that's not entirely true. 2020 showed us that people didn't JUST vote for Biden because he was Biden. I saw a lot of reasons from "he's not Trump" to "he's not republican ".
Also, the current people running for the Democrat seats are all very similar with all similar views (other than the topic of the main post) that it just felt like I was voting for the same person but with different names.
oldguy_on_the_wire t1_j13u7mo wrote
> I was trying to say ok well since a majority voted for the Democrat candidate, shouldn't we just hold a Democrat election?
I understood what you were saying. What you don't seem to get here is that another commenter pointed out the same thing and you refused to accept that, continuing to dig your hole deeper.
> So why don't we do that when a representative passes? Why don't we have a deputy representative or something to take over in case the worst happens?
Why would we elect alternative representatives to takee over in the event of the death of an elected representative before they take office when it is VASTLY simpler and cheaper to hold a new election in those very rare circumstances?
> the current people running for the Democrat seats are all very similar with all similar views (other than the topic of the main post) that it just felt like I was voting for the same person but with different names.
I don't think that you have visited either candidates web sites or looked at their positions because if you had then you would not say this.
jaywan1991 t1_j13xzfs wrote
I was trying to explore it more and talk about it more. I was getting ready to concede because it was looking like I was going to be 100% wrong
You wouldn't be calling it easier if you saw the lines to park and get to the voting stations, vote and get out of there. It took me more than an hour to get that all done and that's not even taking into account my commute there and I went outside peak hours. Plus i was lucky and had a car, could you imagine those who had to take the bus, or request off work, or those who couldn't get off work and had to go during peak times and wait in those lines, or those with kids?
I read up on every candidate before I go vote. Most read very very similarly.
oldguy_on_the_wire t1_j140wdt wrote
> You wouldn't be calling it easier if you saw the lines to park and get to the voting stations, vote and get out of there.
Yes I would.
A normal election involves closing schools and government offices to serve as polling places. While it may make it easier for an individual to vote if all those spots are open, it makes it vastly harder on the general public. With schools closed parents now have to cover child care or miss work to watch the kids that can't go to school during the election.
> I read up on every candidate before I go vote. Most read very very similarly.
And yet you seemed to have missed the differences between McClellan and Morrissey on the topic of abortion for instance.....
jaywan1991 t1_j143ocn wrote
Which is why I think a deputy representative or vice representative would alleviate those issues. Or online voting but sadly that won't happen in my time on earth
I did say everyone but the person this main post was about. So I'm not counting Morrissey. He's the reason I went to vote, I wanted anyone but him to be the nominee.
oldguy_on_the_wire t1_j157558 wrote
> Which is why I think a deputy representative or vice representative would alleviate those issues.
It has that potential, but it is intensely more complex, thus more expensive and confusing. It also does not address the issue of if both the elected representative are incapacitated simultaneously, leaving us in the same position we are in currently.
As far as online voting.. nah, folks freak out too much over mail in ballots, online would cause them to clutch their pearls so hard they would choke themselves.
jaywan1991 t1_j157hx2 wrote
Maybe a succession thing like the president has. At least until an election can be planned at a minimum. I mean does district 4 even have a representative come January?
Yeah i know they'll freak out but a guy can dream. We were able to do the 2020 census over the internet so I hope one day we can do this the same. It's crazy this is still a pen and paper operation.
oldguy_on_the_wire t1_j15akhn wrote
> Maybe a succession thing like the president has.
How would you decide who is to succeed when necessary? The only process that makes sense to make that decision is the same one we previously discussed... elect multiple people in priority order.
> I mean does district 4 even have a representative come January?
It does not have representation beyond the two statewide senators until McEachin is replaced.
jaywan1991 t1_j15b0jy wrote
Maybe have their lead aid run the ship until elections Happen or people in charge of various departments in the state like we do with the presidency. I dunno, I'm not a policy maker
Yeah no representation for a month-ish kinda sucks. I wonder if we should be taxed for that time period on a state level because of the whole taxation without representation (that last sentence was a joke and should not be taken seriously).
oldguy_on_the_wire t1_j15eflo wrote
This still ignores the fundamental fact that the people elected a particular person. The didn't elect an aid. They didn't elect the representative's wife or child or parent.
A line of succession scheme can work well when there is a hierarchy to hang it on, as with the US Presidency, or with state governorships. A representative to Congress or to a state legislature is a single power point, not a hierarchy.
The most effective, fair way to replace a lost one is with a special election rapidly conducted.
I slightly misstated things earlier in this thread when I said the fourth district is unrepresented until the seat is filled. It is more accurate to note that if an important enough issue were to arise then it very probably would be picked up by other members of the Virginia delegation.
jaywan1991 t1_j15jcxx wrote
Eh you're probably right there. Still, I do think we need an interim rep until the election. Someone to bring our local concerns to the federal level.
I just hope what you say is true that an important enough issue will be picked up. Heck a nice rule would be any other Virginia rep can help you out until you have a rep again. I think most do out of kindness but still something on paper would be nice
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments