| Author |
Message |
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
 Wed Nov 09, 2005 8:10 am Democrats Do Well In Elections |
|
| Quote: |
Dems Win Virginia, N.J. Governors Seats
Wednesday, November 09, 2005
Democrats cleaned up big in off-year elections from New Jersey to California, sinking the candidate who embraced President Bush in the final days of the Virginia governor's campaign. They also turned back GOP Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's efforts to limit the power of California's Democratic leaders.
Democratic Sen. Jon Corzine easily won the New Jersey governor's seat after an expensive, mudslinging campaign, trouncing Republican Doug Forrester by 10 percentage points. Polls in the last week had forecast a much closer race.
Democratic Lt. Gov. Tim Kaine won a solid victory in GOP-leaning Virginia, beating Republican Jerry Kilgore by more than 5 percentage points. Democrats crowed that Bush's election-eve rally for the former state attorney general only spurred more Kaine supporters to the polls.
In California, Schwarzenegger failed in his push to rein in the Democrat-controlled Assembly. Three of his ballot measures flopped: Capping spending, removing legislators' redistricting powers, and making teachers work five years instead of two to pass probation. Another measure he supported was too close to call.
Elsewhere, Texas voters overwhelmingly approved a constitutional ban on gay marriage, Maine voted to preserve the state's new gay-rights law, and GOP Mayor Michael Bloomberg easily clinched a second term in heavily Democratic New York.
Democrats said the results were the first steps toward bigger victories next year � when control of Congress and 36 governors seats are at stake � and for the 2008 presidential race.
"I believe national Republican politics ... really had an effect in Virginia and California," said Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean. Voters "don't like the abuse of power, they don't like the culture of corruption. They want the nation to go in a different way."
Republicans warned against reading too much into two governorships that started the day in Democratic hands and ended that way. Virginia Gov. Mark Warner was barred by law from seeking a second term, and New Jersey acting Gov. Richard J. Codey opted not to run.
"It's not some type of trend," said GOP Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas, noting that both seats were won by Democrats in 2001 when Bush's popularity was high. Still, he acknowledged the defeats � and said they could help rally the GOP base next year. "I don't think anybody will be complacent now."
Both governors' races were marked by record-breaking spending and vicious personal attacks.
In Virginia, Kilgore's campaign ran an ad claiming Kaine, a death penalty opponent, would have refused to execute Adolf Hitler, while Forrester quoted Corzine's ex-wife as saying he had let down his family and he would let down New Jersey.
In his concession speech, Forrester urged Corzine to bring the state together. Corzine acknowledged that the campaign had been painful.
"Sometimes, innocent bystanders are hurt in politics. ... Some seen, some unseen. And I hope we can push beyond this," he said, appearing with his three grown children.
Warner � who had campaigned hard for Kaine � declared: "Tonight, Virginians from one end of our commonwealth to the other said no to negative campaigning." Kaine's victory was likely to boost Warner's profile as a possible 2008 presidential candidate.
Corzine and Forrester, both multimillionaires, spent upward of $70 million to succeed Codey, who assumed the office last year when Democratic incumbent Jim McGreevey resigned over a homosexual affair.
A voter survey in New Jersey found women favored Corzine by more than 20 points while men narrowly preferred Forrester. Two-thirds of Hispanics and nearly all blacks favored the U.S. senator, while whites and wealthier people split their votes between the candidates. Self-described independents favored Corzine narrowly over Forrester.
Most voters said President Bush was not a factor in their choices Tuesday, according to the survey conducted Tuesday by the AP and its polling partner, Ipsos. The survey was based on interviews with 1,280 adults throughout New Jersey who said they voted in the governor's election.
Survey results were weighted to age, race, sex, education, region and 2004 vote. The margin of sampling error was plus or minus 2.5 percentage points.
Corzine, as governor, will have the power to choose a successor to fill his unexpired Senate term. The seat will be up for election in a year, but whoever Corzine appoints will likely have a big advantage in that election.
In California, where Schwarzenegger faces re-election next year, the four ballot measures he pushed were seen as a referendum on his leadership. Three failed and a fourth � requiring public-employee unions to get members' permission before their dues could be used for political purposes � was too close to call.
In other races:
�Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick was in a tight race with challenger Freman Hendrix, a deputy mayor under Kilpatrick's predecessor.
�San Diego surf-shop owner Donna Frye, a maverick Democratic councilwoman who nearly won the mayor's race in a write-in bid last year, lost to Republican Jerry Sanders, a former police chief backed by the city's business establishment.
SEARCH
Click here for FOX News RSS Feeds
Advertise on FOX News Channel, FOXNews.com and FOX News Radio
Jobs at FOX News Channel.
Internships at FOX News Channel (Accepting Fall Applications Now).
Terms of use. Privacy Statement. For FOXNews.com comments write to
[email protected]; For FOX News Channel comments write to
[email protected]
� Associated Press. All rights reserved.
Copyright � 2005 ComStock, Inc.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Copyright 2005 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved.
All market data delayed 20 minutes.
|
|
|
|
CJ Cregg
Commodore
Joined: 05 Oct 2002
Posts: 1254
|
| Wed Nov 09, 2005 8:59 am |
|
I'm very pleased. Too bad Ohio rejected the electoral reform ballot. They obviously like corruption in politics
|
|
|
TrekkieMage
Office Junkie
Joined: 17 Oct 2004
Posts: 5335
Location: Hiding
|
| Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:53 pm |
|
Personally I think Kilgore shot himself in the foot.
I'm in Virginia, so I've seen most of the ads. Kilgore's campaign was sending out mail insulting Kaine that was thinly disguised as being from Potts campaign (a third canidate, Republican, but not officially endorsed)
The whole campaign was just sick.
|
|
|
CJ Cregg
Commodore
Joined: 05 Oct 2002
Posts: 1254
|
| Wed Nov 09, 2005 5:04 pm |
|
I agree with you there. I think both sides seem to be getting more and more dirty every election. I also read some voting problems from some areas as well. I never understand why the US has to have loads of various fancy voting machines. All you need it a pen and a ballot. Then put a cross next to who you are voting for. Simple and it works. Just look at UK
|
|
|
LightningBoy
Commodore
Joined: 09 Mar 2003
Posts: 1446
Location: Minnesota, U.S.A.
|
| Wed Nov 09, 2005 5:10 pm |
|
I'm happy with Democrats winning elections on the Odd Numbered Years.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Wed Nov 09, 2005 6:17 pm |
|
| CJ Cregg wrote: | | I'm very pleased. Too bad Ohio rejected the electoral reform ballot. They obviously like corruption in politics |
Actually, it was corruption in the other way. It wasn't fair reform; it was reform designed to help the democrats. Unless there's a fair reform, keep it this way.
And it's too bad that the Republicans lost the governor races, but it's not a big deal. 28 are still Republican, as before.
I'm most upset that in our elections last week Referendum C passed.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
CJ Cregg
Commodore
Joined: 05 Oct 2002
Posts: 1254
|
| Wed Nov 09, 2005 6:20 pm |
|
How was it? Prove that they were not fair
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Wed Nov 09, 2005 6:31 pm |
|
Trying to redistrict things and all that in a way that would benefit the democrats. It's not equal, and so the change shouldn't happen (unless there was an equal measure).
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
CJ Cregg
Commodore
Joined: 05 Oct 2002
Posts: 1254
|
| Wed Nov 09, 2005 6:33 pm |
|
Its bi-partisan. READ THE ACTUAL AMENDMENT.
and i bet you supported the CA one didnt you. Why? it would give republicans more seats 
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Wed Nov 09, 2005 6:36 pm |
|
I preferred it over the past one, and thought that it would be fair, so in a way, yes. But it wasn't as fair as I would have liked, so technically no.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
CJ Cregg
Commodore
Joined: 05 Oct 2002
Posts: 1254
|
| Wed Nov 09, 2005 6:39 pm |
|
And the current system of 98% re-election rates is?
These kinds of reforms are ALWAYS going to benefit one party. That's the whole point. Balance them, give them equal chance.
BTW you are a flip-flopper. You supported these 2 things a few weeks ago. Now you don't
|
|
|
CJ Cregg
Commodore
Joined: 05 Oct 2002
Posts: 1254
|
| Wed Nov 09, 2005 6:48 pm |
|
You still haven't shown me HOW the amendments are biased towards a single party
-------signature-------
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Wed Nov 09, 2005 6:50 pm |
|
I never said that. Oh, the California one? The Ohio one I was mistaken on. I thought it would fair things out and that it had already too much control to the Democrats originally, and so I thought it was good. Now, I don't see it that way. And I said just there technically no but at the same time yes. I think it would have faired things out more, and would have given Republicans more seats, but technically I'm opposed to it, because it wasn't fair.
And by the way? I'm not a politician. It's alright for people to change their minds on things. 
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
CJ Cregg
Commodore
Joined: 05 Oct 2002
Posts: 1254
|
| Wed Nov 09, 2005 6:52 pm |
|
You keep saying its not Fair, How, show me, back up your point
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Wed Nov 09, 2005 7:04 pm |
|
It takes away too much power from Republicans and does the opposite, giving too much to the Democrats. It's not evenly spread out, so I'm glad that it didn't pass. I say put forth a new initiative for next year's ballot that really truly is fair. (And I really do mean that. As much as I want Republicans to control every state, I want things to be evenly spread out, which this doesn't do.)
Look, these elections are passed, and they're not like the Presidential elections. They're not nearly as big of a deal. It's easy to move on, and it's done with. I've not complained about C passing, which is detrimental, here in CO, since the election last week. I'm not happy about it, but it's over and done with. I agree with the Arapahoe County Republican Party when they said yesterday that it's time for Republicans to settle their differences with each other over this, forget about it, and move on to more important issues. It's not worth fretting about these off-year elections so much. You don't see me upset over the governorships, do you? Am I unhappy, yes. But is it a big deal? No; Republicans still have 28 states like before, and even if we lost one, it would have been only one.
So I say forget about it and move on. This election is over with, and so I'm moving on, like I have with Referendum C. I'm done discussing the elections, at least for now.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
CJ Cregg
Commodore
Joined: 05 Oct 2002
Posts: 1254
|
| Wed Nov 09, 2005 7:14 pm |
|
How is it giving more power to the Democrats? Its taking power away from both parties and putting the power into an independent commission.
Why don't you actually read the amendments before making accusations
|
|
|
CJ Cregg
Commodore
Joined: 05 Oct 2002
Posts: 1254
|
| Wed Nov 09, 2005 7:16 pm |
|
| Quote: | To amend Article XI of the Constitution of the State of Ohio.
To provide for the creation of a state redistricting commission
with responsibility for creating legislative districts, this
amendment would:
Replace the current provisions of Article XI of the Ohio
Constitution, including the two existing separate processes for
creating legislative districts and for electing representatives to
Congress and representatives and senators to the Ohio General
Assembly with a new state commission.
Provide that the new commission would be composed of
five members, two of whom would be chosen by sitting
judges, and the remaining members appointed by the first two
or chosen by lot. The terms of the members of the commission
shall be until the later of the adoption of the redistricting plans
required to be adopted under the Article or the conclusion of
all litigation in any court regarding such plans or the commission�s
responsibilities, actions or operations
Provide that a primary criterion to be utilized by the new
commission in creating legislative districts would be to ensure
that the districts are competitive, according to a mathematical
formula contained in the Amendment.
Provide that the commission must adopt a qualifying plan
with the highest �competitiveness number,� as defined in the
proposed Amendment. The Amendment defines the �competitiveness
number� of a plan by a mathematical formula, that is
the product of the number of balanced districts multiplied by
two, plus the total number of other remaining competitive districts,
minus the total number of unbalanced uncompetitive
districts multiplied by two. The competitiveness number for a
general assembly plan is the sum of the competitiveness number
for the house of representatives districts and the competitiveness
number for the senate districts. Provide that the
�measure of competition� of a legislative district be based on
a calculation using the two average partisan indexes for the
district, which are calculated on the basis of the percentage of
votes received by each of the two partisan candidates who
received the two highest vote totals statewide in each of the
three closest general elections during the four previous evennumbered
years prior to adopting a redistricting plan, keeping
the index for one of the partisan affiliations always as the minuend
and the index for the other partisan affiliation always as
the subtrahend from district to district throughout a redistricting
plan.
Provide that the commission may consider whether to
alter a plan to preserve communities of interest based on
geography, economics, or race, so long as the reconfiguration
does not result in a competitiveness number that is more than
two points lower for a congressional plan and four points
lower for a general assembly plan.
Provide that the commission may design and adopt a
redistricting plan if the plan meets the same criteria and has a
competitive number equal to or greater than each submitted
qualifying plan
Provide a method for the commission to assign state districts
for senators whose term do not expire at the end of the
first even-numbered year following adoption of the plan.
Provide that legislative district boundaries shall change in
2007 and, thereafter, every year ending in one following a federal
decennial census.
Provide that the supreme court of Ohio has exclusive
original jurisdiction involving redistricting plans adopted
under the amendment, but limits such jurisdiction to ordering
the commission to perform duties required under the amendment
and prohibit the court from revising or adopting a plan.
Provide for open meetings, public hearings, and certain
public record requirements regarding the activities of the commission.
Provide that the general assembly must appropriate sufficient
funds for the commission to perform its duties. The
commission may expend funds as it, in its discretion, deems
necessary
A majority yes vote is necessary for passage. |
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Wed Nov 09, 2005 7:23 pm |
|
I've read it. The commission, I can guarantee you, would be overly democratic and end up being unfair. That's why it was voted down. Can I prove it? No, but I know that that is what would be the case. That's what it tends to be, regardless of the state, including Ohio. As I said, the election's over, and I'm done. It's not a serious election like next year or '04. It's not worth debating now. Get over it. I have C, which is worse than that. TABOR, the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights, is now screwed. Taxes are going up, for no logical reason. There are other ways to solve education problems, and CU doesn't need more state funds, nor should it get it. But I'm not complaining about that. Done, I am.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Hitchhiker
Rear Admiral
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 3514
Location: Ontario, Canada
|
| Wed Nov 09, 2005 7:29 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | The commission, I can guarantee you, would be overly democratic and end up being unfair. |
Overly democratic?
How much more democratic can one get, pray tell, short of becoming a direct democracy?
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Wed Nov 09, 2005 7:32 pm |
|
I mean democratic in terms of democrats, not the governing system.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
LightningBoy
Commodore
Joined: 09 Mar 2003
Posts: 1446
Location: Minnesota, U.S.A.
|
| Wed Nov 09, 2005 11:23 pm |
|
Democratic (Captial "D")
|
|
|
Hitchhiker
Rear Admiral
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 3514
Location: Ontario, Canada
|
| Thu Nov 10, 2005 8:28 am |
|
Ah. And people wonder why we go to war . . . typos are the root of all evil. (It is of course well known that careless talk costs lives, but the full scale of the problem is not always appreciated. )
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Star Trek �, in all its various forms, are trademarks & copyrights of Paramount Pictures
This site has no official connection with Star Trek or Paramount Pictures
Site content/Site design elements owned by Morphy and is meant to only be an archive/Tribute to STV.com
|
Search
FAQ
Log in
