JustUsBoys.com gay porn forum

logo

remove these banner ads by becoming a JUB Supporter.

Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Michigan Democrats' chairman's days may be numbered

      
   
  1. #1
    JUB Addict CoolBlue71's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    State of Michigan
    Posts
    1,899

    Code of Conduct

    Michigan Democrats' chairman's days may be numbered

    I consider the below article good news. Michigan is my home state, and the Democratic Party is too stuck in the past. They need new blood. I for one do not want senior U.S. Senator Carl Levin, first elected in 1978, re-nominated in 2014. And I did not vote to re-elect junior U.S. Senator Debbie Stabenow, first elected in 2000, last November. (I voted Green. Levin and Stabenow having voted to extend the Patriot Act, last year, has turned me away from them.) The Michigan Democratic Party needs to be revived to become a more proactively progressive party. Being less than that contributed to the ballot failures from last November. If such changes, starting with getting rid of Mark Brewer, were to become a reality perhaps the No. 8 state (about to be supplanted by Georgia) might someday produce a Democratic president of the United States. (Nearly all of the last 100 years' worth of U.S. presidents hailed from a Top 10 or Top 20 state. Why shouldn't Michigan get in on the action? That is, if they were to field the right type of candidate.)



    Michigan Democrats' chairman's days may be numbered

    By Livingston Daily
    Feb. 7, 2013 | http://www.livingstondaily.com/artic...s-may-numbered

    It sure looks as though Mark Brewer's days as the chairman of the state's Democratic Party are numbered.

    The actual decision won't be made until the party meets Feb. 23. But it can't be a good sign when the state's Democratic congressional delegation — including Sens. Carl Levin and Debbie Stabenow — come out in writing in support of an alternative candidate who hasn't officially entered the race.

  2. #2
    JUB Addict T-Rexx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    4,398

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Michigan Democrats' chairman's days may be numbered

    Frankly, I've been wondering what's wrong with Michigan lately.

    The Michigan Republican Party has been acting like a crazy southern state Republican Party. We keep hearing about transvaginal ultrasounds, electoral college vote rigging, and union-busting by the state government.

    But, given Michigan's demographics, I can't believe that people in the state actually support these things. And yet, everyone there seems to support the Tea Party crazies.

  3. #3
    It ain't easy being King MisterMajestic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    10,461

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Michigan Democrats' chairman's days may be numbered

    I'm starting to worry about Michigan....We're always hearing on MSNBC how Michigan Republicans in Office are taking Names & Whipping Ass....I havent looked up any information recently but I think The Michigan House, Senate & Governorship is all freaking Republican...

    Yet the State usually votes for Democratic Presidential Nominees..What gives Michigonians? What is wrong with y'all that you THINK it's FINE to let the Republicans Fuck you over on the Local & State Level but you side with Dems on the National Level? Does that make an ounce of sense?

    What has happened to Michigan?
    Last edited by MisterMajestic; February 16th, 2013 at 11:48 PM.

  4. #4
    RazorzEdge88
    Guest

    Re: Michigan Democrats' chairman's days may be numbered

    WTF? I had no idea about Levin voting for the Patriot Act. He's usually pretty good on civil liberties.

    Do you think Gretchen Whitmer might get nominated for the 2014 governor's race btw, given this change of direction?

  5. #5
    JUB Addict CoolBlue71's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    State of Michigan
    Posts
    1,899

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Michigan Democrats' chairman's days may be numbered

    Quote Originally Posted by MisterMajestic View Post
    I'm starting to worry about Michigan....We're always hearing on MSNBC how Michigan Republicans in Office are taking Names & Whipping Ass....I havent looked up any information recently but I think The Michigan House, Senate & Governorship is all freaking Republican...
    Via the 2010 midterms election, the governor, lieutenant governor, attorney general, and secretary of state are from the Republican column. In the 1990s and 2000s, the first two (which come together; some states allow splitting for individuals rather than a joint ticket) came from one party while the last two were from the opposition party. And, yes, the state House and Senate are majority-controlled by Team Red.

    Also: There is a problem with the Democrats in Michigan.

    In 2004, the Bush Administration was able to get on the election ballot a proposal to ban LGBT people from possibly being able to get married. It was merely a part of the Bush re-election strategy. Ken Mehlman, at the time the chairman of the Republican National Committe who has since revealed himself a longtime closeted homosexual, gave aid to the 43rd president's campaign efforts. (Even though this is about Michigan, that went in on a lot of states.) This was for a state constitution defining marriage between one man and one woman.

    In the Democratic primaries, there was a rush to get John Kerry on the path to the nomination. Kerry didn't show up to campaign in Detroit and, from what I remember, the only party-nod-seeking candidate who did show was Al Sharpton. Kerry, nevertheless, did carry the state primary. It was essential, in the minds of a lot of Michigan Democrats, to unseat President George W. Bush. But when the general election came around, and with Kerry having carried Mich. with 51.23% to Bush's 47.81%, and by a margin of D+3.42 (as he lost nationally by R+2.46), the state saw 59% of the vote cast against LGBT.

    That wasn't excusively by Michigan Republicans. Michigan Democrats made it possible. That was an estimated 20-point crossover loss. More than enough of the Kerry voters (at least 10 percent of them) made that happen.

    They are not liberal Democrats. They are slow. Especially not with the specific ones who showed up in 2010 and crossed party lines with figuring that Rick Snyder was an appealing enough Republican for election to the governorship. Mich. is a state where the type of Republicans who can win statewide are those remnants of what seems today's version of Rockefeller Republicans.

    So, it turns out that the majority of Michigan voters prefer to vote for Democratic presidential candidates. That they prefer Democratic senators (not since the 1994 Republican Revolution has Team Red won a Senate seat from the state: Spencer Abraham, who was unseated in 2000 and went to become Bush Jr.'s first secretary of energy). And I consider this a problem with the national and statewide Democratic party. And part of that is because they have Old Guard Democratic figures identified as Team Blue in Michigan.

    Yet the State usually votes for Democratic Presidential Nominees..What gives Michigonians?
    ^ See above!

    Also: Consider that there was a 2012 ballot proposal in support of a more progressive, renewable energy policy (to be implemented by the mid-2020s). And that there was another ballot proposal to include in the state constitution collective bargaining rights. Voters turned down both. Barack Obama's re-election included carriage of Michigan with 54.09%, to Mitt Romney's 44.61%, and by a margin of D+9.48. (He won re-election nationally by D+3.84.) The energy policy didn't reach 40% of voters' support while the other issue was just over that losing bar. (See: http://www.mlive.com/politics/index...._michigan.html.) After the collective bargaining rights failed, and that's the [Democratic] voters' being chiefly responsible, it was no surprise the governor and his yes-men in the state houses pushed through right to work. (I do suspect that Snyder is on the payroll of the Koch brothers.)

    The Democratic Party carrying Michigan in presidential elections isn't sufficient when they are failing to be proactive in Michigan politics. It's a state where the voters are slow to catch on. (See http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/...rvey_majo.html.) They are failing to formulate language with Democratic voters. When a lot of the Michigan electorate, with a preference for Team Blue in presidential and Senate elections, are routinely casting ballots that vote down proposals where more money would have to be invested (like on renewable energy) -- meaning a reinvestment in Michigan (and its citizenry) -- you have to look at what both the national and state party is doing. Why they are failing.

    I think the people at the helm need to be gone. It's not enough to carry the state in presidential elections. (Since 1992, when Bill Clinton unseated George Bush and won the state in a Democratic pickup, it has been enjoying a blue tilt of a good 5 or 6 points in most cases.) Actual legislation, the progressive kind needed for the state on this or that issue, will continue to be either too slow to progress or, ultimately, end up failing to go through because the party isn't getting their base on board. That's a problem, especially since Mich. is still a Top-10 state (population), and it effects the picture not just statewide but nationally for Team Blue.

    What is wrong with y'all that you THINK it's FINE to let the Republicans Fuck you over on the Local & State Level but you side with Dems on the National Level? Does that make an ounce of sense?

    What has happened to Michigan?
    Added to this: The majority of states schedule and hold their gubernatorial elections in the same year as midterms. And a fair comparison with even-numbered years is to compare those who participate in leap year presidential elections and those who participate in midterm elections. One specifically refers to the House elections, for Congress, because that's the best measure. A good 26 to 30 percent of the voting electorate refrains from participating in midterms despite being present to vote for the House in presidential cycles.

    Michigan was ripe for a Republican gubernatorial pickup in 2010. Since 1978, nearly all the governor races were won by candidates from the party opposite a sitting president. Only exception was 1990. But 1978, 1982, 1986, 1994, 1998, 2002, 2006, and 2010 resulted in winners from the president's opposition party.

    Pennsylvania is another state that fits the mold. They've been on this path since 1938. All midterms, except 1982, resulted in gubernatorial elections going to the party opposite a sitting president.

    Other states on this type of pattern: Wyoming (since 1958, except one occurrence), for one. Add to that: Tennessee, Oklahoma, New Mexico, and Arizona. All have been on a roll. And they don't all vote one color in presidential years. It's an example how and why it is a sitting president usually loses same-party seats in Congress ... and in governorships.

  6. #6
    JUB Addict CoolBlue71's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    State of Michigan
    Posts
    1,899

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Michigan Democrats' chairman's days may be numbered

    Quote Originally Posted by RazorzEdge88 View Post
    WTF? I had no idea about Levin voting for the Patriot Act. He's usually pretty good on civil liberties.
    Carl Levin last won re-election, in 2008, with about 65 percent of the vote. That was in 2008, when Barack Obama carried Michigan with 57.33%, to John McCain's 40.89%, and by a margin of D+16.44. Levin is an example of the question, "Can or will the party incumbent senator outpace the president in their party's given base state?" The answer: "Hell, yes!" Levin, first elected in 1978, is the type who wins counties which vote Republican in presidential elections. (Example of that from 2012: Florida U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson. He ran a good 12 points in his home state better than a likewise re-elected President Obama. The president carried Fla. by D+0.88. Nelson was re-elected by about 13 points.)

    I think Levin is too establishment now. He didn't vote for going to war in Iraq. Yet he is on board with the Patriot Act. I'm as ready for a change more than with what has happened with Massachusetts now that John Kerry is out of the Senate and is serving as the 48th Secretary of State. That officially bumped up Elizabeth Warren, who last November unseated then-incumbent Republican Scott Brown, from the state's junior to senior senator. Kerry's replacement, Wiliam "Mo" Cowan (formerly in Gov. Deval Patrick's administration), is now the junior U.S. senator from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. I would love, love, love for Carl Levin, born in 1934, to announce that he will not seek re-election in 2014. But I wonder if this only means Establishment Michigan Democrats would push for the nod some run-of-the-mill replacement? (Another reason I want the state party's Old Guard out in favor of ushering in some new voices.)

    Do you think Gretchen Whitmer might get nominated for the 2014 governor's race btw, given this change of direction?
    Local news affiliated stations reported, just recently, that she had an interest in running but has since changed her mind. Family issues. I think that's another way of saying she figures Michigan will re-elect in 2014 Gov. Rick Snyder.
    Last edited by CoolBlue71; February 17th, 2013 at 10:21 AM.

  7. #7
    JockBoy87
    Guest

    Re: Michigan Democrats' chairman's days may be numbered

    Your state, and all states for that matter, need a system where "voting Green" is not a gift part and parcel to the Republican Party.

  8. #8
    JUB Addict CoolBlue71's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    State of Michigan
    Posts
    1,899

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Michigan Democrats' chairman's days may be numbered

    Quote Originally Posted by JockBoy87 View Post
    Your state, and all states for that matter, need a system where "voting Green" is not a gift part and parcel to the Republican Party.
    When it comes to "blue states"—the ones National Journal's Ron Brownstein described leading up to Election 2012 as "the blue firewall" of states that haven't once colored red since either 1984 or 1988 (worth around 90 percent of the required-for-election 270 electoral votes)—no one should rank Michigan as one of the more progressive states. Vermont, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, New York, and Maryland are in the top tier. Illinois and Minnesota would be in the middle of three groups. And Michigan fits in with Oregon, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania with the sleepy low-tiered listees.

    The gubernatorial elections need to be held in leap years. The House and Senate—nationally and statewide—need term limits. When it comes a system of "voting green," what would help is with a better built Democratic party in Michigan where the Old Guard retires and the new voices are more on top of in and touch with the changing times.

    I have respect in particular for Rep. John Conyers, but he and fellow congressmen John Dingle, both in their 80s, cannot and will not live forever. Between the two, Conyers is more progressive while Dingle is an iconic establishment figure from World War II. Conyers, born in 1929, was first elected in 1964. Dingle, born in 1926, was first elected in 1954. When they're both finally done (be it whether or not they die in office), what are the Michigan Democrats going to do -- run the same congressional candidates, the ones who didn't return for the 113th Congress because the state lost congressional seats, to new ones as eventual replacements for Conyers and Dingle? Where are the new voices? No wonder Mich. is never on the radar for Democratic presidential candidates!
    Last edited by CoolBlue71; February 17th, 2013 at 11:27 AM.

  9. #9
    JockBoy87
    Guest

    Re: Michigan Democrats' chairman's days may be numbered

    We do not have absolute majority or run off or power sharing elections in the United States. If you want a change in the Democratic Party and advance the cause of liberal issues, you don't then go cut off your nose to spite your face, and vote for a third party to help out the GOP. You become more active and advocate for more viable candidates at lower levels.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | About JustUsBoys.com | Site Map | RSS | Webmasters | Advertise | Link to JUB | Report A Bug on this Page

Visit our sister sites: Broke Straight Boys | CollegeDudes.com | CollegeBoyPhysicals.com | RocketTube
All models appearing on JustUsBoys.com were over 18 at the time of photography. The records for sexually explicit images required by U.S. 2257 are kept by the
individual producers of the images. The location of the records is available by clicking the Custodian of Records link at the bottom of each gallery page.
© 2012 JustUsBoys.com. The JustUsBoys.com name and logo are registered trademarks. Labeled with ICRA and RTA. Member of ASACP and The Free Speech Coalition.