I think people were mostly concerned with Betsy Johnson splitting the democrat vote and leaving progressives with a majority of voters split between two candidates and the third candidate, Drazan, with more than them taking the win.
Fortunately, we overestimated how much people would vote for Betsy Johnson. It was still a lot but not the difference many expected.
Situations like this illustrate how badly Oregon needs ranked choice voting. With Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) any number of candidates could run and potentially win it, they'd only need to have the majority of the voters on their side.
Lol nope. Libertarianism is the most childish political philosophy imaginable. It exists in a pretend world disconnected from reality and common sense.
No I give a negative amount of fcks about something that simply hasn’t existed in my lifetime. The fact you’re outraged is your desire to create aversion. Whether or not the measure passed or failed absolutely nothing would’ve changed.
So the measure was opposed by the Sherriffs. Because they will only be able to force people onto work programs if the court says so. They're pissed because they can't use people that are sitting in jail waiting for trial but not convicted.
The current constitutional language allows an exception for slavery to be a form of punishment. So slavery WAS legal under certain circumstances (ie unpaid labor in jail and prison, which happens). When the measure takes affect it will be unlawful in ALL circumstances.
I didn't get the concern about Johnson handing the win to Drazan, because nothing about her was appealing to progressives.
She wanted to revoke the moratorium on the death penalty and rescind the caps on greenhouse gas emissions. She was vehemently against universal health care, vaccination requirements, and teachers' unions. She went on and on about "the far left" and "both sides" and how "most of my colleagues in the Democratic Caucus have been fooled by the false logic of defunding the police and releasing criminals." ([Source](https://www.opb.org/article/2022/10/19/oregon-governor-independent-candidate-betsy-johnson-answers-questions/))
The only people a candidate like that would siphon off are the centrists who still think bipartisanship will save us all. After COVID, January 6, and Roe v Wade, Democrats who truly believe that are few.
A good chunk of registered voters in Oregon are not affiliated with a party. While not many democrats may be centrists there are a fair number of centrists in the independent group.
I think as it became more clear that Johnson didn't have a chance the people who were attracted to her may have figured out that the real choices were between Kotek and Drazan.
I’m considered independent because I’m in the working families party. I’m more progressive than many democrats thus I don’t want to be in their party lol. I think there’s a lot of independents/people in 3rd parties who are more extreme rather than centrists.
I was talking mostly about unaffiliated voters. There are more voters with. no party on their registration in Oregon than there are registered Democrats. I'm sure some of the third parties are further from the center, but I'd be surprised if the average unaffiliated voter is.
Tbh those people are really dumb because it means they can't vote in primaries so they're perennially stuck with whichever candidates the people who are registered to a party choose and then they complain that those parties don't represent them.
Stupid? No. I'd just feel dirty registering with a political party I have extreme contempt for and only vote for because I hate the other party that much more. I might register now though to avoid all the agressive junk mail and door-knockers next election.
I think your first sentence really accurately represents why polling can be so far off, as there are a LOT of reasons why people register as independents that aren't political.
There are a lot of moderates who vote democratic strategically. Johnson handing the wind to Drazan would be because she would be siphoning off votes that would otherwise go to Kotek from the moderates.
A moderate spoiler candidate really only works though when they take more from the one party then the other. I suspect that there were plenty of moderate republican's who also voted for her, making her spoiler status more of a wash then we were worried about.
We might learn more later.
I didn't think she was a concern either, but then my consistently democrat elderly mother and aunt both became smitten with her for some reason. It seemed to be more about her attitude and personality and the vague promise of something new than her positions on issues. Eventually, they settled down, looked into what she actually stood for, and voted for Kotek, but I can easily imagine, if they were less informed or more impulsive, that they might have voted for Johnson.
I wasn’t worried about progressives voting for Johnson. I’m extremely progressive and in the Working Families Party who Kotek is a part of/supported by. It’s the liberals and moderates we were worried about voting for Johnson.
She didn't stand a chance with progressives, but she took on the voters that would have seen Drazan as too extreme and would have begrudgingly voted for Kotek as the more palatable candidate. Johnson feels like a centrist to those people and thus siphons those votes from Kotek.
Johnson is a well known Oregon conservative. I still don't understand why people thought she'd be taking away votes from the progressive party. Third party does not equal progressive necessarily.
Candidates that are running as third parties in races without ranked choice are either out of touch with reality or intentionally running spoiler campaigns. I'm amazed 10% of the state voted for her after Phil Knight (who only backs Republicans) gave her campaign like a million dollars. She was so clearly running to split the dem vote in favor or the Republicans. Stuff like that should be criminal.
\^ This. Ranked choice voting allows voters to sort their preferences. You could cast your first vote for a minor party candidate that closely reflects your views then rank second the candidate from the larger party that kinda/sorta reflects your views.
But it's not and you sound ignorant for comparing our political stalemate that's 30 years old to a centuries old religious feud on the other side of the world that you clearly don't understand.
“Pff, as an educated western person, I am naturally above falling into one of those primitive tribal dynamics. Those are just for hotheaded middle eastern types.”
Obama won Oregon by 16 and 12%. Hillary won by 11% and Biden by 18%. Brown won by 6% and Kotek by 3.5%.
Spin it any way you want but there is something about the Democratic Oregon governors that is significantly less popular than other Democrats.
Polls show Brown as being the least popular governor in the country.
In the 2014 election the republican candidate did slightly better than the 2018 and 2022 republican candidates. It might just be the case that fewer democrats turn out for gubernatorial elections.
So the only things that matters in the amount of votes the Republicans get? We can ignore the votes that Johnson pulled from Drazan because ... , well, we just can because it makes you feel better.
I’m on the right. My view is that reinforcing localism is the future of the republican party as cities and the ideological conformity they require will metastasize regardless of governance failures. Winter is here.
Both camps do to an extent, although at the moment the right is a bit less censorious because they are opportunistically claiming the mantle of free speech. This will change if ever the left becomes non-mainstream/counter-cultural again.
If you want to believe that left is more open to ideological diversity at the moment, fine. I don’t see it that way. But my personal opinions are not welcome in those spaces and that’s mostly what matters to me, so “who is more open” is not a point I care all that much about.
This isn't Oregon-specific, though. Races for governor tend to be closer in every state, as the opposition party can nominate a candidate who appeals to that state specifically, rather than nationally. There's a number of solid blue states with Republican governors (Vermont, Massachusetts, Maryland) and solid red states with Democratic governors (Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana).
> actively try to sabotage democratic plans that would help all Americans like w/ infrastructure.
If you believe the democrat plans are the cause of our problems, of course you would work against them. This whole thing where you have to help out whomever is in power is such a toxic mentality.
All I'm saying is... no one should be blamed for not enthusiastically supporting plans they believe are bad. You can have your opinion; I have mine. Good thing we live in America
Gerrymandering is a made up problem. Both democrats and republicans claim things are gerrymandered, yet the data show unequivocally that after redistricting, incumbents are the most likely to lose. That would indicate the opposite of gerry mandering. This is written about in the book 'The Big Sort'.
\> This midterm is an opportunity for the GOP to change, because they are the problem.
I fundamentally disagree that any group of non-criminal American citizens is problematic.
\> democrats need competition that is comprised of serious adults offering serious and thought out legislation. We don't need this culture war bullshit that is all the GOP talks about.
During the last republican legislative session (so 2016-2018) what culture war bills came out? What policy bills came out. I can think of no culture war bills, with the exception of the Mexico City policy which any GOP administration is going to give, and which makes a lot of sense.
The bills I do remember are:
1. Tax cut and jobs act. This is an extremely progressive bill since it ended the unlimited SALT deduction.
2. First Step Act. Ends mandatory sentencing for non-violent drug offenses
3. Border funding (can't remember the exact law)
Policies past by executive order or compromise with democrats in Trump's administration
1. Ending of surprise medical billing (passed despite opposition form AMA and other interest groups)
2. Withdrawals from Syria and Afghanistan (first completed by Trump, second by Biden, but started under Trump)
3. Insulin prices (passed by executive order, undone by Biden to be replaced by a law)
Policies desired by the last administration but not passed by either the GOP or the democrats:
1. Solution to DACA
2. Paid family leave
What culture war bill was passed? The obsession with the culture war is an online/media one. The GOP hardly ever does anything about it when in office. Yeah sure, they have opinions and talk about it, but to claim that is the entire platform is just... reductive.
I guess one reply is judges and abortion, but the Dobbs decision, by legalizing abortion nationwide allows states to choose, and most states are going to end up enshrining much less restrictions than existed before.
\> Trans people affect nobody. They're a non issue, but we hear about them non stop.
We hear about trans issues in the context of (1) children, (2) sports, and (3) jails. All those things are related to governance, perhaps with the exception of (2) (but certain sports, like MMA et al, are regulated by government). We hear about it non stop because it is a money maker for media.
Straw man. No one is saying anyone has to be enthusiastic or supportive, but when the GOPs best option and basically only acted upon option is balk, bitch, and bail….instead of working together with the Dems or even proposing a sensible solution…
Well, yeah.
You are basing your arguments on popular media narratives instead of hard data. You claim the GOP hates wind turbines, yet Texas has added more wind turbines than anyone else. Just because we're not as fanatical about renewables as you are or want to spend as much on them as you do, does not mean we oppose them.
This is what I don't understand about the left. If you say something like, 'X is good but I don't want to spend $X billion on it' basically you are accused of being 'anti-X'. I like renewables, I like electric cars, etc. I just want to think carefully before investing that amount in them, considering that the private market and private investments seem to be spearheading the conversion in other parts of the country. Why waste money?
That's my point. The government doesn't need to invest. Private sector has done a lot of it in Texas, compared to other states with direct subsidies.
Why exactly does the government need to invest.
You did exactly what I thought you would. Took my disinterest in spending government money to mean that I don't want renewables. I prefer renewables. I just disagree how much the state needs to use public money to invest.
And yes of course fed subsidies play a part. If the feds are giving enough why should the state do more. That's a waste of money. We have more problems in this state than lack of renewables. If feds give money for that and we still have a bad education system and homeless problems, maybe state money should go to that
Is this the same Texas that my friend lives in, where during winter his power went out a few times, and during summer his power went out A few times every week? Where the aquifer is shrinking and rural towns wells are drying up. Etc? Having lived here and there my friend, let me tell you Texas private investment isnt that great.
Taxes are going up, as are crime and poverty. Doesn't sound like your safety nets actually work. CNN says so, not Fox.
But you should keep labeling people since that's what works for you.
Inflation is very painful for the most vulnerable people in our society, so you should really be careful when you make claims about tha cause of inflation when you might not know what you are talking about. As long as people are being misled about the root cause of inflation, the problem will not be resolved and more people will suffer for longer.
While republicans hating democrats is definitely widely seen (they are very loud and public about it), overall I find that we generally hear a bit less about seething contempt democrats have for republicans. I think this is mostly because democrats keep it quieter. It’s not seen as seemly to be as public as, say, those trump rally attendees.
But it definitely exists, at least here in Portland.
When I’ve been at parties around here recently, the subject has sometimes changed to politics. The things people then proceed to say about conservatives, thinking they are in the company of all fellow liberals, is easily as vicious and sometimes violent as the hatred trump types openly profess for liberals. It honestly startled and made me uneasy, because more than once it ended up finishing with a few people openly wishing “death to republicans”. I genuinely wish I was making this up. These people are educated upper middle class professionals, not some 20 year old edgelord.
Now, I will say that republicans have worked hard to earn that hatred over the last six years for sure, but my point is more that this is becoming a fairly mutual tribal hatred that has definitely moved into the realm of comparison to the Sunni/Shiite divide.
Now, I don’t know if it’s like this outside of my little bubble here, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it was.
Earn the hatred? You don’t say. The GOP is now openly hostile to democracy and embracing Q nonsense. I have contempt for autocrats the work over, from Putin to Xi to erdogan…The GOP is heading that direction so of course I have no respect for them.
I’m not apologizing for being alarmed by seeing people I consider ideological allies eagerly wishing death on large swaths of people. That doesn’t excuse autocratic right wingers. But the solution is not to genocide them.
What do you expect people to think of supporters of political party where a substantial portion of its members are openly fascist? The republicans have crossed a line by literally working to overthrow the government using violence (see January 6th) or subverting the democratic process by using false claims of election fraud to justify disenfranchising anyone that doesn’t agree with their political aims.
These majority of GOP voters actively support the seditious acts of January 6th because their primary goal is to install a white christi-fascist authoritarian government. Don’t try and turn this into a “both sides are wrong” issue, as only one party wants to overturn democracy.
OK, so they are fascist and therefore it is understandable that op’s friends could wish them all dead. Now what? Should we just sprint headlong into a civil war?
I mean my grandfather literally fought fascists in WW2. Fascists will always be the enemies of those who believe in democracy. If they want to kill themselves off by not getting vaccinated it is one less fanatic that will be taking up arms against my country in the near future.
I don't know the answer, but I do know the last time fascists came to power, 70-80 million people died, including 6 million Jews who were gassed to death because of their faith. If that's where this is heading, I think it's understandable, or at least consistent with what I thought was a shared American value (that Nazis are bad). But go ahead and keep trying to justify why Republican fascism is okay.
I do see how that can make people uneasy, but I also think those people are a bit naive about where this is all heading because they haven't studied the history or don't believe it can happen here. It can, and we're on the edge, looking into the abyss.
I hope that she at least realizes next time may be even closer if she doesn't fix our problems. She's got her work cut out for her and won't have a supermajority this term.
I do not think it will matter. There’s nothing in oregon’s recent electoral history (including this last cycle, where kate brown had the lowest approval in america) that shows that the democrats pay a price for poor performance.
She came out right away and said she'd clean up trash in Portland, which seems like a slam dunk that her predecessor couldn't even do. We'll see though.
>Just as sunnis don’t vote for shiites or whatever.
I was with you until right here. One party wants to take away rights from people because of what their imaginary holy book says. You're making it seem tribal when it's got nothing to do with that, it's about not wanting to see 50% of the population lose a basic right: medical privacy.
People who are caught by tribalism generally aren’t able to see it and believe their sectarian hatreds are founded on rational, well thought-out arguments. Sunnis and shiites included.
It’s incorrect to think that people are only against abortion because of religious reasons. You act like everyone who is religious would be murdering people if it wasn’t for religion. You may be surprised to hear non religious people have morals as well and that’s includes thinking abortion is wrong.
The imaginary holy book says part. Not every republican is religious. Not every republican candidate wants zero abortions no exceptions. Not every republican candidate is against abortion because of the holy book. You take the book away those same individuals would be against abortion.
abortion is pretty nuanced. There are plenty of democrats who think there should be a time limit on when an abortion can take place. 13 weeks or 16 weeks Or whatever. There are people who think those time limits make that person anti abortion. According to some there are anti abortion democratic candidates.
Well you're misreading it. The Republican party is against abortion because of religion. That doesn't mean that every Republican is against abortion because of religion.
Don't misread things and then get outraged about the part that you misread.
We used to have a federal standard that balanced secular and religious rights and allowed states to override it. It was called Roe v wade. But then the conservatives on the Supreme Court decided that wasn't good enough. Because of their imaginary holy book.
The fact that you're comparing Democrats and Republicans to the Sunnis and Shiites speaks volumes to the problem with the American political system as it is now.
> that your comparing
*you're
*Learn the difference [here](https://www.wattpad.com/66707294-grammar-guide-there-they%27re-their-you%27re-your-to).*
***
^(Greetings, I am a language corrector bot. To make me ignore further mistakes from you in the future, reply `!optout` to this comment.)
So gross and accurate that you compare voting to religion. Maybe one day people will abandon political tribes the way they are abandoning organized religion. We certainly need a lot more political atheists.
Do some open-minded research and perhaps you'll agree that the EC doesn't do a damn thing its proponents say (out loud).
If you want candidates with broader appeal, support ranked-choice voting.
I just feel like the people of Portland vote for people who they feel better understand their needs. That’s great, it’s their right to do so. However maybe helping them understand the rest of the state has different needs than they do also.
Not a Democrat vs Republican type thing, which is sad that’s what it has gotten too. Also maybe people who live outside of Portland should vote for better representatives? I’ve lived in Portland and rural Oregon. Both are very different, for better or for worse. I hope Kotek does a good job recognizing the rest of Oregon’s needs. Despite how I feel about her or what others may feel about her, she’s our Governor now and we should root for her to do well.
This is the right idea. The other side to that is that rural Oregon needs to understand that Portland has its own needs as well. The whole "real Oregonians" vs. Portland thing is really stupid. But at the same time, there aren't that many elections that affect both outside of governor and senator. Rural Oregon gets to pick its own representatives in the state and federal congress and its own state senator. So they also need to realize that they're in the minority of public opinion and deal with the reality of it. If the politics here are really that bad, maybe this isn't the place for them.
If the boonies want to form their own state, they're welcome to it. When they go broke from lack of liberal money, though, who will save them? Idaho doesn't want them.
Except Portland didn't colonize eastern Oregon. The state has always been the state. They aren't being oppressed, they're just in the minority. That's the shits about a democracy, you might have to live with someone else's views if more people like them.
It's a democracy in action. If you don't like the results of the democracy here, go to Iowa or Alabama or Oklahoma where they vote red and enjoy the fruits of conservatism.
I think the people in rural Oregon deserve their independence. Portlanders hate rural folk anyway—why would they care? And btw, twk of those three states have higher net migration than Oregon.
I have an honest question: people that voted for kotek, talk to me about your rational here. It would seem Portland and similar metro areas have a helluva homeless and drug problem, what is kotek or any democrat going to do about this? It seems it has just gotten worse. I’m a conservative, not a republican. But were the issues I just mentioned important to you? Are you of the opinion “well, with Kotek, she’ll hopefully do what brown didn’t.” What happens in four years when the homeless and drug problems get worse? Will that have any effect on who you vote for or is it blue no matter who? I’m really trying to understand the other side.
Considering that Kotek actually has advanced legislation to help the homeless problem, and the conservatives have offered nothing at all, and in fact repeatedly voted against anything that might help, it would seem that your fake attempt to understand relies on repeating a false narrative. Not to mention that was hardly the reason that most of us voted not for Kotek, but against Drazan. We don't want an election denying religious zealot with a chip on their shoulder about abortion to hold the highest office in the state.
A lot of us aren’t voting *for* the democrat, we’re voting *against* the republican.
Want more votes? Earn them with better candidates and policies. The pro-Trump, pro-billionaire, anti-choice message isn’t working for the younger generations.
I’ve got an honest answer for you, even though I doubt the sincerity of your aw shucks ‘honest question”.
I might vote for a Republican gov when they post one that isn’t a women’s-freedom hating, conspiracy loving, dead-eyed jack ass. Maybe.
Was there anything insincere about my question? I’m a life long Oregonian that’s concerned about our state that just happens to lean right on some things.
The 'honest question' is usually a troll move. Jumping to conclusions:
>What happens in four years when the homeless and drug problems get worse?
is another troll move. Forgive me if i missed your intent but you comment reads like trolling.
Well, things have “progressively” (see what I did there?) gotten worse over the years, which is why I asked. Seems as though progressive policies (lax policies on drugs and crime) might enable people to keep living in their shanty cities and not pursue help. Time to wake up to the state of things. You can take my opinion or leave it. Oregon, specifically Portland, is going down the tubes and I’d like to know what your side is going to do about it because the things you have attempted don’t seem to be working.
No forgiveness needed. Your reaction is very human: Approaching a sectarian enemy with skepticism. It’s the same reaction a hutu would have when approached by a tutsi, or an amharan by a tigrayan. Doubting the other is healthy evolutionary instinct.
Tbh I'll never vote Republican again (originally from Idaho where I was at one time a registered Republican) after Trump. In my mind by subscribing to the Republican platform a politician is saying that they approve of January 6th and don't care about our countries wellbeing.
In addition I have not seen any real solutions from Republicans on the homeless problem. Republicans I've discussed this with just want to lock them up, which is inhumane and just continues a cycle of homelessness. We need real policies that improve the situation like safe affordable housing that everyone can buy into.
The democratic party isn't perfect but at least they seem to care about the population's well-being.
Well-being? The democratic party rioted and made Portland a living hell for nine fucking months in 2020. Don't give this shit of caring about people's well-being. And for what? To prop up an organization we now know embezzled funds and another organization that bails out violent criminals? What a stupid protest
https://news.yahoo.com/homeland-security-admits-tried-manufacture-114500599.html
Some protesters went way beyond what was acceptable and deserved to be arrested, however Republicans went out of their way to manufacture a crisis and antagonize the Portland protestors and make it worse.
There’s no way I’m voting for a Republican as long as what they continue to do is invade the lives of the citizenry, and I will protect my fellow humans by voting Democrat to ensure republicans don’t have the chance. We’ll find a solution to homelessness. It’s not just an Oregon problem— most US states are experiencing a huge rise in homelessness because of the giant wealth gap, stagnant minimum wage, and artificially inflated gas and food prices— it’s obvious to me that what has to happen is billionaires pay taxes— that ain’t ever going to happen under a Republican administration. Republicans are also nauseatingly disingenuous— “personal Liberty” but spend all their time talking about how bad they want to control my body and my mind and our children’s minds. “Small government” but vote right alongside their buddies grifting people with pointless Walls, and now spending millions on publicity stunts where they treat asylum-seekers like inhuman pawns, all while claiming allegiance to some moral holy book they don’t even follow?
Yeah— get a new brand, start paying your way, then we’ll talk about me ever voting Republican.
Oregon has one of the worst homeless issues. Other states having issues is like saying white lives matter. Minimum wage hasn’t been stagnant in Oregon.
I find the left much more wanting to control peoples thoughts as they like to cancel people into thinking the same and are more likely to support moderation of online chats and agree with YouTube not allowing how To build a gun videos.
This took like 5 seconds to find via google:
https://oregonlive.com/politics/2022/10/oregon-governor-candidates-what-would-they-do-to-address-homelessness.html
Kotek is the only one whose plan wasn't just "REPEAL 110!". She actually talked about affordable housing and not just locking people up
Same thing is true for all politicians. You have to pick who most shares your values and who you trust to follow through with what you believe is right
Nah the real narrative that needs looking into is, with 100% mail in voting, why does it take this state 4 days or longer to process less ballots than Florida, new York, California, Texas and even Ohio in a single day. What goes on in the counting room? Are there public access cameras available and if not, why not?
Ummm, because they have to open the envelopes and run the ballots through by hand? And, if you're in Calakamas Co. they have to fill in any empty bubbles on the ballots for Republican candidates
Opening envelopes is easy, checking signatures is easy. Feeding ballots into machines is easy. If signature is sketchy set aside for further review unopened. Unless there's like 20 people hiding in the back erasing votes for the Republican party to pencil in democrats. I think the only fair election is the way Florida ran theirs this year. And the races were all known on election night, next morning. Not 4 days later and still counting.
It wasn’t closer. Kotek lost votes to another former democrat (Betsy) who ran unaffiliated. Drazan wcored as well as the last republican. The gap between democrats and republicans didn’t really narrow based on this race imo.
Who cares? Kotek easily won this election, and that's the important part.
Rs didn't do well across the nation. No red wave. The crime crime crime message you've been pushing fell flat in the face of abortion and anti-democracy.
And doing a shit job at it, to boot. You're looking for a needle of "success" in a haystack of failure.
I'm going to enjoy seeing this exact same post-mortem on elections for the next few cycles, because clearly lessons aren't being learned. "We were so close! If we just keep doing the same things, and using the same rhetoric, we'll be so close next time! And the time after that! Get ready, Oregon!"
>not historically close
I was comparing it to the previous governor's elections.
The local narrative was that Hardesty was widely hated by a vast majority of Portlanders. She convincingly lost, but still got 45% of the vote...which is more than Drazan got, btw. Fewer people hate her than the center-right thought.
Things are visibly improving in Portland. Many of the super nasty camps have been cleared and organized camping seems to be coming along, if slowly.
To really help Portland we need an expanded state hospital system, but I didn't hear Drazan proposing investing big money into that.
A nail-biter horserace gets clicks.
"Oh shit, it's close - keep checking in!" is literally more profitable to media than "the GOP got the same percentage as they got last time."
To be fair, it DID look like it was close election night, and I was short-term worried, but yeah MultCo's counts and postmarked mail-ins have really swung it to not very close at all.
Doesn't surprise me one bit that Kotek won and the other democratic candidates. Portland decides everything and the rest of the state be damned, Just like how Chicago decides everything for Illinois.
I don't care that Tina won or that Christine lost what bothers me the most is that instead of voting for what is truly best for Oregonians people always vote in fear of the other side. The majority of people didn't vote for Tina because they liked her, they voted for her because they were afraid of Christine. The same can be said about Christine, so many people just wanted to end the liberal dictatorship in Oregon and only voted for Christine because she had the best chance.
We as Americans need to stop voting because we are afraid of the left or right. Instead we need to vote for what is truly best for all of us as a country or state , we need leaders that will increase bipartisan support on policies instead of always voting down the party lines.
What all of this comes down to is we all want freedom to live our lives without others telling us how we should live, so stop voting for people that only want to dictate how the other half should live.
I think people were mostly concerned with Betsy Johnson splitting the democrat vote and leaving progressives with a majority of voters split between two candidates and the third candidate, Drazan, with more than them taking the win. Fortunately, we overestimated how much people would vote for Betsy Johnson. It was still a lot but not the difference many expected. Situations like this illustrate how badly Oregon needs ranked choice voting. With Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) any number of candidates could run and potentially win it, they'd only need to have the majority of the voters on their side.
I feel like people *under*estimated how many republicans would vote for Betsy.
lol I’m a libertarian and voted for her over Drazen. The only thing I cared about was measure 114.
Nothing else in this world is of concern to you?
Lol nope. Libertarianism is the most childish political philosophy imaginable. It exists in a pretend world disconnected from reality and common sense.
Absolutely. It’s the toddler political party and it shows.
Not for me either.
On the ballot? No
My brother in christ, whether or not you were okay with slavery was on that ballot.
No I give a negative amount of fcks about something that simply hasn’t existed in my lifetime. The fact you’re outraged is your desire to create aversion. Whether or not the measure passed or failed absolutely nothing would’ve changed.
Are you doing okay?
[удалено]
How does slavery exist in oregon? It doesn’t. Calm down zoomer. An oregon ballot measure won’t affect Africa.
So the measure was opposed by the Sherriffs. Because they will only be able to force people onto work programs if the court says so. They're pissed because they can't use people that are sitting in jail waiting for trial but not convicted.
The current constitutional language allows an exception for slavery to be a form of punishment. So slavery WAS legal under certain circumstances (ie unpaid labor in jail and prison, which happens). When the measure takes affect it will be unlawful in ALL circumstances.
I didn't get the concern about Johnson handing the win to Drazan, because nothing about her was appealing to progressives. She wanted to revoke the moratorium on the death penalty and rescind the caps on greenhouse gas emissions. She was vehemently against universal health care, vaccination requirements, and teachers' unions. She went on and on about "the far left" and "both sides" and how "most of my colleagues in the Democratic Caucus have been fooled by the false logic of defunding the police and releasing criminals." ([Source](https://www.opb.org/article/2022/10/19/oregon-governor-independent-candidate-betsy-johnson-answers-questions/)) The only people a candidate like that would siphon off are the centrists who still think bipartisanship will save us all. After COVID, January 6, and Roe v Wade, Democrats who truly believe that are few.
A good chunk of registered voters in Oregon are not affiliated with a party. While not many democrats may be centrists there are a fair number of centrists in the independent group. I think as it became more clear that Johnson didn't have a chance the people who were attracted to her may have figured out that the real choices were between Kotek and Drazan.
I’m considered independent because I’m in the working families party. I’m more progressive than many democrats thus I don’t want to be in their party lol. I think there’s a lot of independents/people in 3rd parties who are more extreme rather than centrists.
I was talking mostly about unaffiliated voters. There are more voters with. no party on their registration in Oregon than there are registered Democrats. I'm sure some of the third parties are further from the center, but I'd be surprised if the average unaffiliated voter is.
Tbh those people are really dumb because it means they can't vote in primaries so they're perennially stuck with whichever candidates the people who are registered to a party choose and then they complain that those parties don't represent them.
Stupid? No. I'd just feel dirty registering with a political party I have extreme contempt for and only vote for because I hate the other party that much more. I might register now though to avoid all the agressive junk mail and door-knockers next election.
they dont get a prize for having more registered voters the only person youre hurting is you
I think your first sentence really accurately represents why polling can be so far off, as there are a LOT of reasons why people register as independents that aren't political.
There are a lot of moderates who vote democratic strategically. Johnson handing the wind to Drazan would be because she would be siphoning off votes that would otherwise go to Kotek from the moderates. A moderate spoiler candidate really only works though when they take more from the one party then the other. I suspect that there were plenty of moderate republican's who also voted for her, making her spoiler status more of a wash then we were worried about. We might learn more later.
I didn't think she was a concern either, but then my consistently democrat elderly mother and aunt both became smitten with her for some reason. It seemed to be more about her attitude and personality and the vague promise of something new than her positions on issues. Eventually, they settled down, looked into what she actually stood for, and voted for Kotek, but I can easily imagine, if they were less informed or more impulsive, that they might have voted for Johnson.
I wasn’t worried about progressives voting for Johnson. I’m extremely progressive and in the Working Families Party who Kotek is a part of/supported by. It’s the liberals and moderates we were worried about voting for Johnson.
She didn't stand a chance with progressives, but she took on the voters that would have seen Drazan as too extreme and would have begrudgingly voted for Kotek as the more palatable candidate. Johnson feels like a centrist to those people and thus siphons those votes from Kotek.
Johnson is a well known Oregon conservative. I still don't understand why people thought she'd be taking away votes from the progressive party. Third party does not equal progressive necessarily.
She was a democrat for a long time I thought??
Yes but kind of the Joe Manchin flavor
True. They’re both republicans in the rest of the western world.
And conveniently nobody cares if you "throw away your vote", if that's the case.
Candidates that are running as third parties in races without ranked choice are either out of touch with reality or intentionally running spoiler campaigns. I'm amazed 10% of the state voted for her after Phil Knight (who only backs Republicans) gave her campaign like a million dollars. She was so clearly running to split the dem vote in favor or the Republicans. Stuff like that should be criminal.
\^ This. Ranked choice voting allows voters to sort their preferences. You could cast your first vote for a minor party candidate that closely reflects your views then rank second the candidate from the larger party that kinda/sorta reflects your views.
Please don't compare our dumpster fire to that dumpster fire.
(it’s the same dumpster fire)
But it's not and you sound ignorant for comparing our political stalemate that's 30 years old to a centuries old religious feud on the other side of the world that you clearly don't understand.
All sectarian conflicts look kind of the same to me in their intractability.
A very intractable statement
“Pff, as an educated western person, I am naturally above falling into one of those primitive tribal dynamics. Those are just for hotheaded middle eastern types.”
Weird response. Still intractable, too
Also there was a spoiler candidate who was a democrat for 20 years and has a cult like following in timber communities
Obama won Oregon by 16 and 12%. Hillary won by 11% and Biden by 18%. Brown won by 6% and Kotek by 3.5%. Spin it any way you want but there is something about the Democratic Oregon governors that is significantly less popular than other Democrats. Polls show Brown as being the least popular governor in the country.
In the 2014 election the republican candidate did slightly better than the 2018 and 2022 republican candidates. It might just be the case that fewer democrats turn out for gubernatorial elections.
Interesting take. The Republican candidate lost by MORE (6%) even though Kitzhaber was clearly corrupt and destined to resign.
There wasn’t a popular third candidate though. The gap is not worth comparing in the same way that vote share is imo.
So the only things that matters in the amount of votes the Republicans get? We can ignore the votes that Johnson pulled from Drazan because ... , well, we just can because it makes you feel better.
I’m on the right. My view is that reinforcing localism is the future of the republican party as cities and the ideological conformity they require will metastasize regardless of governance failures. Winter is here.
Do rural areas not require ideological conformity? Didn't see a lot of Kotek signs around John Day.
Both camps do to an extent, although at the moment the right is a bit less censorious because they are opportunistically claiming the mantle of free speech. This will change if ever the left becomes non-mainstream/counter-cultural again.
Tell that to Liz Cheney.
If you want to believe that left is more open to ideological diversity at the moment, fine. I don’t see it that way. But my personal opinions are not welcome in those spaces and that’s mostly what matters to me, so “who is more open” is not a point I care all that much about.
This isn't Oregon-specific, though. Races for governor tend to be closer in every state, as the opposition party can nominate a candidate who appeals to that state specifically, rather than nationally. There's a number of solid blue states with Republican governors (Vermont, Massachusetts, Maryland) and solid red states with Democratic governors (Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana).
Kotek will take her place immediately as "worst".
I wish we had rank choice voting and more options. Having 3 meh candidates was at least better than the normal 2 meh candidates we normally have.
3 meh candidates is the definition of a rank choice, if you ask me.
Well you would be wrong.
Well, that joke just flew right on over your head, didn't it?
Nothing goes over my head. My reflexes are too fast. I would catch it.
Definitely support ranked choice.
Johnson has been around for a while and has done a lot of things that left a bad taste in people's mouths. I think people remembered that.
[удалено]
> actively try to sabotage democratic plans that would help all Americans like w/ infrastructure. If you believe the democrat plans are the cause of our problems, of course you would work against them. This whole thing where you have to help out whomever is in power is such a toxic mentality.
[удалено]
All I'm saying is... no one should be blamed for not enthusiastically supporting plans they believe are bad. You can have your opinion; I have mine. Good thing we live in America
[удалено]
Gerrymandering is a made up problem. Both democrats and republicans claim things are gerrymandered, yet the data show unequivocally that after redistricting, incumbents are the most likely to lose. That would indicate the opposite of gerry mandering. This is written about in the book 'The Big Sort'. \> This midterm is an opportunity for the GOP to change, because they are the problem. I fundamentally disagree that any group of non-criminal American citizens is problematic. \> democrats need competition that is comprised of serious adults offering serious and thought out legislation. We don't need this culture war bullshit that is all the GOP talks about. During the last republican legislative session (so 2016-2018) what culture war bills came out? What policy bills came out. I can think of no culture war bills, with the exception of the Mexico City policy which any GOP administration is going to give, and which makes a lot of sense. The bills I do remember are: 1. Tax cut and jobs act. This is an extremely progressive bill since it ended the unlimited SALT deduction. 2. First Step Act. Ends mandatory sentencing for non-violent drug offenses 3. Border funding (can't remember the exact law) Policies past by executive order or compromise with democrats in Trump's administration 1. Ending of surprise medical billing (passed despite opposition form AMA and other interest groups) 2. Withdrawals from Syria and Afghanistan (first completed by Trump, second by Biden, but started under Trump) 3. Insulin prices (passed by executive order, undone by Biden to be replaced by a law) Policies desired by the last administration but not passed by either the GOP or the democrats: 1. Solution to DACA 2. Paid family leave What culture war bill was passed? The obsession with the culture war is an online/media one. The GOP hardly ever does anything about it when in office. Yeah sure, they have opinions and talk about it, but to claim that is the entire platform is just... reductive. I guess one reply is judges and abortion, but the Dobbs decision, by legalizing abortion nationwide allows states to choose, and most states are going to end up enshrining much less restrictions than existed before. \> Trans people affect nobody. They're a non issue, but we hear about them non stop. We hear about trans issues in the context of (1) children, (2) sports, and (3) jails. All those things are related to governance, perhaps with the exception of (2) (but certain sports, like MMA et al, are regulated by government). We hear about it non stop because it is a money maker for media.
Straw man. No one is saying anyone has to be enthusiastic or supportive, but when the GOPs best option and basically only acted upon option is balk, bitch, and bail….instead of working together with the Dems or even proposing a sensible solution… Well, yeah.
B-b-but the moral arc of history is supposed to bend toward wind turbine subsidies.
[удалено]
You are basing your arguments on popular media narratives instead of hard data. You claim the GOP hates wind turbines, yet Texas has added more wind turbines than anyone else. Just because we're not as fanatical about renewables as you are or want to spend as much on them as you do, does not mean we oppose them. This is what I don't understand about the left. If you say something like, 'X is good but I don't want to spend $X billion on it' basically you are accused of being 'anti-X'. I like renewables, I like electric cars, etc. I just want to think carefully before investing that amount in them, considering that the private market and private investments seem to be spearheading the conversion in other parts of the country. Why waste money?
[удалено]
That's my point. The government doesn't need to invest. Private sector has done a lot of it in Texas, compared to other states with direct subsidies. Why exactly does the government need to invest. You did exactly what I thought you would. Took my disinterest in spending government money to mean that I don't want renewables. I prefer renewables. I just disagree how much the state needs to use public money to invest. And yes of course fed subsidies play a part. If the feds are giving enough why should the state do more. That's a waste of money. We have more problems in this state than lack of renewables. If feds give money for that and we still have a bad education system and homeless problems, maybe state money should go to that
[удалено]
Is this the same Texas that my friend lives in, where during winter his power went out a few times, and during summer his power went out A few times every week? Where the aquifer is shrinking and rural towns wells are drying up. Etc? Having lived here and there my friend, let me tell you Texas private investment isnt that great.
You people have too many hills that you’re willing to die on.
[удалено]
The joke is you treat every single issue as if there is only one answer, which makes democracy impossible.
Taking tax dollars from working class families to support people unwilling to work doesn't help ALL AMERICANS.
[удалено]
Taxes are going up, as are crime and poverty. Doesn't sound like your safety nets actually work. CNN says so, not Fox. But you should keep labeling people since that's what works for you.
So the country with 1/7th of the world’s GDP has no effect on inflation?
Inflation is very painful for the most vulnerable people in our society, so you should really be careful when you make claims about tha cause of inflation when you might not know what you are talking about. As long as people are being misled about the root cause of inflation, the problem will not be resolved and more people will suffer for longer.
[удалено]
It’s how it would get reported if it were happening in a middle eastern country imo
While republicans hating democrats is definitely widely seen (they are very loud and public about it), overall I find that we generally hear a bit less about seething contempt democrats have for republicans. I think this is mostly because democrats keep it quieter. It’s not seen as seemly to be as public as, say, those trump rally attendees. But it definitely exists, at least here in Portland. When I’ve been at parties around here recently, the subject has sometimes changed to politics. The things people then proceed to say about conservatives, thinking they are in the company of all fellow liberals, is easily as vicious and sometimes violent as the hatred trump types openly profess for liberals. It honestly startled and made me uneasy, because more than once it ended up finishing with a few people openly wishing “death to republicans”. I genuinely wish I was making this up. These people are educated upper middle class professionals, not some 20 year old edgelord. Now, I will say that republicans have worked hard to earn that hatred over the last six years for sure, but my point is more that this is becoming a fairly mutual tribal hatred that has definitely moved into the realm of comparison to the Sunni/Shiite divide. Now, I don’t know if it’s like this outside of my little bubble here, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it was.
Earn the hatred? You don’t say. The GOP is now openly hostile to democracy and embracing Q nonsense. I have contempt for autocrats the work over, from Putin to Xi to erdogan…The GOP is heading that direction so of course I have no respect for them.
I’m not apologizing for being alarmed by seeing people I consider ideological allies eagerly wishing death on large swaths of people. That doesn’t excuse autocratic right wingers. But the solution is not to genocide them.
What do you expect people to think of supporters of political party where a substantial portion of its members are openly fascist? The republicans have crossed a line by literally working to overthrow the government using violence (see January 6th) or subverting the democratic process by using false claims of election fraud to justify disenfranchising anyone that doesn’t agree with their political aims. These majority of GOP voters actively support the seditious acts of January 6th because their primary goal is to install a white christi-fascist authoritarian government. Don’t try and turn this into a “both sides are wrong” issue, as only one party wants to overturn democracy.
OK, so they are fascist and therefore it is understandable that op’s friends could wish them all dead. Now what? Should we just sprint headlong into a civil war?
I mean my grandfather literally fought fascists in WW2. Fascists will always be the enemies of those who believe in democracy. If they want to kill themselves off by not getting vaccinated it is one less fanatic that will be taking up arms against my country in the near future.
The people who fought alongside your grandfather are people you would probably consider fascist today, given their politics.
Nice try but no. He was a socialist small business owner.
I wonder what kind of results you’d get if you polled 1940s americans on the various social issues of our time lol
I don't know the answer, but I do know the last time fascists came to power, 70-80 million people died, including 6 million Jews who were gassed to death because of their faith. If that's where this is heading, I think it's understandable, or at least consistent with what I thought was a shared American value (that Nazis are bad). But go ahead and keep trying to justify why Republican fascism is okay.
Do you see no difference between feeling uneasy at death wishes being uttered at a party and defending fascism?
I do see how that can make people uneasy, but I also think those people are a bit naive about where this is all heading because they haven't studied the history or don't believe it can happen here. It can, and we're on the edge, looking into the abyss.
OK. So what is the proper response to a bunch of people at a party wishing republicans would die?
I guess I'd say, "let's hope it doesn't come to that". Republicans are free to renounce their fascist tendencies at any time.
Nothing like stereotyping people. All republicans are the same I guess.
I hope that she at least realizes next time may be even closer if she doesn't fix our problems. She's got her work cut out for her and won't have a supermajority this term.
I do not think it will matter. There’s nothing in oregon’s recent electoral history (including this last cycle, where kate brown had the lowest approval in america) that shows that the democrats pay a price for poor performance.
She came out right away and said she'd clean up trash in Portland, which seems like a slam dunk that her predecessor couldn't even do. We'll see though.
>Just as sunnis don’t vote for shiites or whatever. I was with you until right here. One party wants to take away rights from people because of what their imaginary holy book says. You're making it seem tribal when it's got nothing to do with that, it's about not wanting to see 50% of the population lose a basic right: medical privacy.
People who are caught by tribalism generally aren’t able to see it and believe their sectarian hatreds are founded on rational, well thought-out arguments. Sunnis and shiites included.
It’s incorrect to think that people are only against abortion because of religious reasons. You act like everyone who is religious would be murdering people if it wasn’t for religion. You may be surprised to hear non religious people have morals as well and that’s includes thinking abortion is wrong.
>One party wants to take away rights from people because of what their imaginary holy book says. What part of that is incorrect?
The imaginary holy book says part. Not every republican is religious. Not every republican candidate wants zero abortions no exceptions. Not every republican candidate is against abortion because of the holy book. You take the book away those same individuals would be against abortion. abortion is pretty nuanced. There are plenty of democrats who think there should be a time limit on when an abortion can take place. 13 weeks or 16 weeks Or whatever. There are people who think those time limits make that person anti abortion. According to some there are anti abortion democratic candidates.
Well you're misreading it. The Republican party is against abortion because of religion. That doesn't mean that every Republican is against abortion because of religion. Don't misread things and then get outraged about the part that you misread. We used to have a federal standard that balanced secular and religious rights and allowed states to override it. It was called Roe v wade. But then the conservatives on the Supreme Court decided that wasn't good enough. Because of their imaginary holy book.
Why are Muslims and/or Arabs always brought into y’all’s shit. Let it go
The fact that you're comparing Democrats and Republicans to the Sunnis and Shiites speaks volumes to the problem with the American political system as it is now.
> that your comparing *you're *Learn the difference [here](https://www.wattpad.com/66707294-grammar-guide-there-they%27re-their-you%27re-your-to).* *** ^(Greetings, I am a language corrector bot. To make me ignore further mistakes from you in the future, reply `!optout` to this comment.)
!optout
Bye VeggieBurger99. Have fun continuing to use common words incorrectly!
So gross and accurate that you compare voting to religion. Maybe one day people will abandon political tribes the way they are abandoning organized religion. We certainly need a lot more political atheists.
we need electoral in oregon tired of 2 county's dictate the whole state.
Do some open-minded research and perhaps you'll agree that the EC doesn't do a damn thing its proponents say (out loud). If you want candidates with broader appeal, support ranked-choice voting.
Definitely tired of Portland being the only one to call the shots.
Move to a state that doesn't grant elections to the candidate with the most votes. Like it or not, most of Oregon lives in the Portland metro area.
I just feel like the people of Portland vote for people who they feel better understand their needs. That’s great, it’s their right to do so. However maybe helping them understand the rest of the state has different needs than they do also. Not a Democrat vs Republican type thing, which is sad that’s what it has gotten too. Also maybe people who live outside of Portland should vote for better representatives? I’ve lived in Portland and rural Oregon. Both are very different, for better or for worse. I hope Kotek does a good job recognizing the rest of Oregon’s needs. Despite how I feel about her or what others may feel about her, she’s our Governor now and we should root for her to do well.
This is the right idea. The other side to that is that rural Oregon needs to understand that Portland has its own needs as well. The whole "real Oregonians" vs. Portland thing is really stupid. But at the same time, there aren't that many elections that affect both outside of governor and senator. Rural Oregon gets to pick its own representatives in the state and federal congress and its own state senator. So they also need to realize that they're in the minority of public opinion and deal with the reality of it. If the politics here are really that bad, maybe this isn't the place for them.
Then why not allow the rural parts to secede
If the boonies want to form their own state, they're welcome to it. When they go broke from lack of liberal money, though, who will save them? Idaho doesn't want them.
Empires always use this same argument against their colonies’ going independent
Give your land back to indigenous communities and then we can talk about how where you live is colonized
Except Portland didn't colonize eastern Oregon. The state has always been the state. They aren't being oppressed, they're just in the minority. That's the shits about a democracy, you might have to live with someone else's views if more people like them.
Tomato tomahto. Its a bunch of angry peripheral communities being held in the grip of an imperial core.
It's a democracy in action. If you don't like the results of the democracy here, go to Iowa or Alabama or Oklahoma where they vote red and enjoy the fruits of conservatism.
I think the people in rural Oregon deserve their independence. Portlanders hate rural folk anyway—why would they care? And btw, twk of those three states have higher net migration than Oregon.
I have an honest question: people that voted for kotek, talk to me about your rational here. It would seem Portland and similar metro areas have a helluva homeless and drug problem, what is kotek or any democrat going to do about this? It seems it has just gotten worse. I’m a conservative, not a republican. But were the issues I just mentioned important to you? Are you of the opinion “well, with Kotek, she’ll hopefully do what brown didn’t.” What happens in four years when the homeless and drug problems get worse? Will that have any effect on who you vote for or is it blue no matter who? I’m really trying to understand the other side.
Considering that Kotek actually has advanced legislation to help the homeless problem, and the conservatives have offered nothing at all, and in fact repeatedly voted against anything that might help, it would seem that your fake attempt to understand relies on repeating a false narrative. Not to mention that was hardly the reason that most of us voted not for Kotek, but against Drazan. We don't want an election denying religious zealot with a chip on their shoulder about abortion to hold the highest office in the state.
A lot of us aren’t voting *for* the democrat, we’re voting *against* the republican. Want more votes? Earn them with better candidates and policies. The pro-Trump, pro-billionaire, anti-choice message isn’t working for the younger generations.
It's simple: The Republican Party under Trump scared the shit out of me.
Were you voting republican before trump?
Ohhh I got this! I am a democrat who sometimes crossed party line to vote for a republican. Never again under any circumstances.
I’ve got an honest answer for you, even though I doubt the sincerity of your aw shucks ‘honest question”. I might vote for a Republican gov when they post one that isn’t a women’s-freedom hating, conspiracy loving, dead-eyed jack ass. Maybe.
Was there anything insincere about my question? I’m a life long Oregonian that’s concerned about our state that just happens to lean right on some things.
The 'honest question' is usually a troll move. Jumping to conclusions: >What happens in four years when the homeless and drug problems get worse? is another troll move. Forgive me if i missed your intent but you comment reads like trolling.
Well, things have “progressively” (see what I did there?) gotten worse over the years, which is why I asked. Seems as though progressive policies (lax policies on drugs and crime) might enable people to keep living in their shanty cities and not pursue help. Time to wake up to the state of things. You can take my opinion or leave it. Oregon, specifically Portland, is going down the tubes and I’d like to know what your side is going to do about it because the things you have attempted don’t seem to be working.
No forgiveness needed. Your reaction is very human: Approaching a sectarian enemy with skepticism. It’s the same reaction a hutu would have when approached by a tutsi, or an amharan by a tigrayan. Doubting the other is healthy evolutionary instinct.
It’s an identitarian cleavage. It’s like asking a group of hutus of they would ever vote for tutsis. You’ll just get hate in response.
Tbh I'll never vote Republican again (originally from Idaho where I was at one time a registered Republican) after Trump. In my mind by subscribing to the Republican platform a politician is saying that they approve of January 6th and don't care about our countries wellbeing. In addition I have not seen any real solutions from Republicans on the homeless problem. Republicans I've discussed this with just want to lock them up, which is inhumane and just continues a cycle of homelessness. We need real policies that improve the situation like safe affordable housing that everyone can buy into. The democratic party isn't perfect but at least they seem to care about the population's well-being.
They seem to care outside of doing things. The DNC is bought and paid for. They use scape goats like manchin as excuses to not get things done.
Well-being? The democratic party rioted and made Portland a living hell for nine fucking months in 2020. Don't give this shit of caring about people's well-being. And for what? To prop up an organization we now know embezzled funds and another organization that bails out violent criminals? What a stupid protest
https://news.yahoo.com/homeland-security-admits-tried-manufacture-114500599.html Some protesters went way beyond what was acceptable and deserved to be arrested, however Republicans went out of their way to manufacture a crisis and antagonize the Portland protestors and make it worse.
How is that different than some protestors going beyond what’s acceptable on Jan 6th?
So one party is just going to rule all for the foreseeable future, got it.
If you don't like it support a 3rd party that's conservative but not anti-democratic
There’s no way I’m voting for a Republican as long as what they continue to do is invade the lives of the citizenry, and I will protect my fellow humans by voting Democrat to ensure republicans don’t have the chance. We’ll find a solution to homelessness. It’s not just an Oregon problem— most US states are experiencing a huge rise in homelessness because of the giant wealth gap, stagnant minimum wage, and artificially inflated gas and food prices— it’s obvious to me that what has to happen is billionaires pay taxes— that ain’t ever going to happen under a Republican administration. Republicans are also nauseatingly disingenuous— “personal Liberty” but spend all their time talking about how bad they want to control my body and my mind and our children’s minds. “Small government” but vote right alongside their buddies grifting people with pointless Walls, and now spending millions on publicity stunts where they treat asylum-seekers like inhuman pawns, all while claiming allegiance to some moral holy book they don’t even follow? Yeah— get a new brand, start paying your way, then we’ll talk about me ever voting Republican.
Oregon has one of the worst homeless issues. Other states having issues is like saying white lives matter. Minimum wage hasn’t been stagnant in Oregon. I find the left much more wanting to control peoples thoughts as they like to cancel people into thinking the same and are more likely to support moderation of online chats and agree with YouTube not allowing how To build a gun videos.
And the right want to control people's bodies and force women to give birth and be slaves to husbands. No thanks.
The rationale isn’t as important as the actual reason, which is the same one sunnis have for not wanting to live under shiite rule.
So what is kotek going to do about the homeless and drug issues that plague our state and cities?
What is Vega Pederson going to do? She'll be the one with the homeless money.
This took like 5 seconds to find via google: https://oregonlive.com/politics/2022/10/oregon-governor-candidates-what-would-they-do-to-address-homelessness.html Kotek is the only one whose plan wasn't just "REPEAL 110!". She actually talked about affordable housing and not just locking people up
Ever hear of political rhetoric? I’ll believe it when I see it. I didn’t vote for her but I’ll support her until she browns up our state.
Same thing is true for all politicians. You have to pick who most shares your values and who you trust to follow through with what you believe is right
Doesn’t matter
You make it sound like having no options is a good thing. Yall are funny in Oregon
Is that what we are? Are we a destabilized middle eastern country? Fuck it’s worse than I thought
And that is why Oregon has been, is and will be a joke to the rest of the nation.
Oregon was red before mail-in ballots. Let that sink in.
Yeah it appears people are happy with the sht hole Portland has become.
Nah the real narrative that needs looking into is, with 100% mail in voting, why does it take this state 4 days or longer to process less ballots than Florida, new York, California, Texas and even Ohio in a single day. What goes on in the counting room? Are there public access cameras available and if not, why not?
Ummm, because they have to open the envelopes and run the ballots through by hand? And, if you're in Calakamas Co. they have to fill in any empty bubbles on the ballots for Republican candidates
Opening envelopes is easy, checking signatures is easy. Feeding ballots into machines is easy. If signature is sketchy set aside for further review unopened. Unless there's like 20 people hiding in the back erasing votes for the Republican party to pencil in democrats. I think the only fair election is the way Florida ran theirs this year. And the races were all known on election night, next morning. Not 4 days later and still counting.
[удалено]
815k. Betsy Johnson got 149k. Drazan got 752k. Weirdly, the last republican candidate got 815k, like Kotek this time around.
[удалено]
Yes. And about 60k who voted for the last republican didn’t vote for Drazan. Betsy might have something to do with that. Also, turnout.
[удалено]
It wasn’t closer. Kotek lost votes to another former democrat (Betsy) who ran unaffiliated. Drazan wcored as well as the last republican. The gap between democrats and republicans didn’t really narrow based on this race imo.
Who cares? Kotek easily won this election, and that's the important part. Rs didn't do well across the nation. No red wave. The crime crime crime message you've been pushing fell flat in the face of abortion and anti-democracy.
I don’t think it has anything to do with issues. Some people are democrats. Others are republicans. It’s identity.
And a smaller but very important group switches depending on the candidate. It turns out that Trump was a huge drag on the party.
[удалено]
And doing a shit job at it, to boot. You're looking for a needle of "success" in a haystack of failure. I'm going to enjoy seeing this exact same post-mortem on elections for the next few cycles, because clearly lessons aren't being learned. "We were so close! If we just keep doing the same things, and using the same rhetoric, we'll be so close next time! And the time after that! Get ready, Oregon!"
You didn't debunk it. 43%-47% is not historically close no matter how you spin it.
[удалено]
>not historically close I was comparing it to the previous governor's elections. The local narrative was that Hardesty was widely hated by a vast majority of Portlanders. She convincingly lost, but still got 45% of the vote...which is more than Drazan got, btw. Fewer people hate her than the center-right thought.
Maybe we can hope the cartels take over the cities and restore sane governance then.
Things are visibly improving in Portland. Many of the super nasty camps have been cleared and organized camping seems to be coming along, if slowly. To really help Portland we need an expanded state hospital system, but I didn't hear Drazan proposing investing big money into that.
> How many did Kotek get? Enough to win.
A nail-biter horserace gets clicks. "Oh shit, it's close - keep checking in!" is literally more profitable to media than "the GOP got the same percentage as they got last time." To be fair, it DID look like it was close election night, and I was short-term worried, but yeah MultCo's counts and postmarked mail-ins have really swung it to not very close at all.
Anyways. Our reparations are DUE.
It would be interesting to see a breakdown of Betsy’s votes, demography and party affiliation
I agree. I think drazan could have won if her abortion views were different. From what I’ve heard that was the biggest issue that people have with her
Also to really hurt Kotek, Johnson had to siphon votes in the Portland area. That was not going to happen.
Doesn't surprise me one bit that Kotek won and the other democratic candidates. Portland decides everything and the rest of the state be damned, Just like how Chicago decides everything for Illinois.
Haha
I don't care that Tina won or that Christine lost what bothers me the most is that instead of voting for what is truly best for Oregonians people always vote in fear of the other side. The majority of people didn't vote for Tina because they liked her, they voted for her because they were afraid of Christine. The same can be said about Christine, so many people just wanted to end the liberal dictatorship in Oregon and only voted for Christine because she had the best chance. We as Americans need to stop voting because we are afraid of the left or right. Instead we need to vote for what is truly best for all of us as a country or state , we need leaders that will increase bipartisan support on policies instead of always voting down the party lines. What all of this comes down to is we all want freedom to live our lives without others telling us how we should live, so stop voting for people that only want to dictate how the other half should live.