Discussion:
[OT] Jake Elizey's Win Means Nothing
(too old to reply)
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2021-07-29 17:40:15 UTC
Permalink
The news media has allowed itself to be confused by misleading
terminology.
The news media has actively participated on using misleading
terminolgy to confuse their product, which is to say, readers.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Kevrob
2021-07-29 19:39:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
The news media has allowed itself to be confused by misleading
terminology.
The news media has actively participated on using misleading
terminolgy to confuse their product, which is to say, readers.
--
In this case, it was reported as a first round or primary in a
special election (May 2, 2021) .....


https://apnews.com/article/texas-health-coronavirus-government-and-politics-17b5eff8e09e9ea8ad80e289261835d3

Followed by a second round run-off.

https://apnews.com/article/government-and-politics-health-texas-coronavirus-pandemic-house-elections-4cfb18cd70718446e37aed248aac82ff (July 28, 2021)

That's a pretty normal procedure for a special election.
(UKIsh: by-election)
--
Kevin R
Quadibloc
2021-07-29 21:40:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevrob
That's a pretty normal procedure for a special election.
(UKIsh: by-election)
True, but at least the headlines I saw said the candidate
Trump supported lost the primary, not the election.

They're called by-elections in Canada too, but since we don't
have our elections to a schedule like the Americans, there
is a difference between their special elections and our
by-elections.

I think the idea of an all-party primary is silly.

Since it's happening in Texas, one _could_ consider the
possibility that this is intended to hinder people from voting
who have to take a day off without pay to vote, and so would
only do that for the election and not the primary. I don't have
enough information, though, to eliminate the possibility of
perfectly legitimate reasons instead of voter suppression
in this particular case.

John Savard
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2021-07-29 22:28:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
I think the idea of an all-party primary is silly.
For once, I tend to agree.
Post by Quadibloc
Since it's happening in Texas, one _could_ consider the
possibility that this is intended to hinder people from voting
who have to take a day off without pay to vote, and so would
only do that for the election and not the primary. I don't have
enough information, though, to eliminate the possibility of
perfectly legitimate reasons instead of voter suppression
in this particular case.
The ostensible reason California went to open primaries was that (in
many jurisdictions) closed primaries meant there was, for all
practical purposes, only one candidate on the general election ballot
because Republicans have *zero* chance of winning a state wide
election (largely because California Republicans are batshit crazy,
and can't field a candidate that can refrain from eating the paste
without a nanny to watch him). Open primaries at least mean there's a
choice between two candidates, even if they're both Democrats.

As a side effect, it lets Democrats poison the primary to ensure that
the Republicans *never* field a candidate that isn't in a straight
jacket, but it's a very minor effect since the Republicans never will
anyway.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Kevrob
2021-07-29 22:49:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Kevrob
That's a pretty normal procedure for a special election.
(UKIsh: by-election)
True, but at least the headlines I saw said the candidate
Trump supported lost the primary, not the election.
They're called by-elections in Canada too, but since we don't
have our elections to a schedule like the Americans, there
is a difference between their special elections and our
by-elections.
I think the idea of an all-party primary is silly.
It was essentially run "Louisiana style."

BTW, Edwin Edwards died earlier this month.

https://www.nola.com/gambit/news/the_latest/article_20c63d1c-e326-11eb-bacf-2344ec9de2cf.html


A two-stage election that included party primaries could seriously
disadvantage independents (and candidates from other than
the two parties in the duopoly.) As it was, the first round
had 26 candidates. It might take some time to find the
Libertarian or Green candidate in that crowd.
Post by Quadibloc
Since it's happening in Texas, one _could_ consider the
possibility that this is intended to hinder people from voting
who have to take a day off without pay to vote, and so would
only do that for the election and not the primary.
I never had much trouble getting to a polling place
on my way to work, or on my way back, and in an off-year
election, as 2022 will be, I'd rarely have to wait much. I
_bicycled_ to my polling place in Nov 2008, and then continued
on my regular route. I may have warned my employer that
taking time to vote might result in my being a bit late. I
had no car and was 5 miles from the nearest bus stop.
I bet if I had called either of the two major campaigns they
would have set me up with a ride. I was a "young man" in my
50s, then.
Post by Quadibloc
I don't have enough information, though, to eliminate the possibility of
perfectly legitimate reasons instead of voter suppression
in this particular case.
We don't do "snap elections" in the state. The Constitution _mandates_
special elections for House seats. Unlike Senators, who can be appointed
by a governor to finish a term, Reps are always elected. We'll
have a few more of these in the upcoming months.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_United_States_House_of_Representatives_elections
--
Kevin R
Joe Bernstein
2021-07-31 02:57:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
I think the idea of an all-party primary is silly.
Since it's happening in Texas, one _could_ consider the
possibility that this is intended to hinder people from voting
who have to take a day off without pay to vote, and so would
only do that for the election and not the primary. I don't have
enough information, though, to eliminate the possibility of
perfectly legitimate reasons instead of voter suppression
in this particular case.
This speculation is silly. While the first state with a
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisiana_primary>
was, um, duh, and other states using it include Georgia and, yes,
Texas, it's essentially identical to
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonpartisan_blanket_primary>
which is used in Washington and California, famous Democratic
strongholds. Furthermore, the article claims that Portland, Oregon,
uses the Louisiana version.

This kind of primary may also be silly, but you've made here a really
bad argument against it. It seems obvious that the jurisdictions
that use it are all ones where one party is very dominant, and that
it's meant to reduce the ills associated with that [1], but less
obvious that it actually does reduce them.

Joe Bernstein

[1] Not something the legislatures of the states in question are
famous for wanting to do, mind. Hmmm.
--
Joe Bernstein <***@gmail.com>
<https://myseattleparksdiary.blogspot.com/>
<https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/homeless/living-outside-in-a-
pandemic-the-story-of-joe-bernstein>
<https://www.gofundme.com/f/help-joe-with-finding-housing-and-his-job-
search>
and that's what I did during the lockdowns!
Ninapenda Jibini
2021-07-31 04:39:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joe Bernstein
Post by Quadibloc
I think the idea of an all-party primary is silly.
Since it's happening in Texas, one _could_ consider the
possibility that this is intended to hinder people from voting
who have to take a day off without pay to vote, and so would
only do that for the election and not the primary. I don't have
enough information, though, to eliminate the possibility of
perfectly legitimate reasons instead of voter suppression
in this particular case.
This speculation is silly. While the first state with a
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisiana_primary>
was, um, duh, and other states using it include Georgia and,
yes, Texas, it's essentially identical to
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonpartisan_blanket_primary>
which is used in Washington and California, famous Democratic
strongholds. Furthermore, the article claims that Portland,
Oregon, uses the Louisiana version.
This kind of primary may also be silly, but you've made here a
really bad argument against it.
Has he ever made an argument against, or for, anything that wasn't
bad?
Post by Joe Bernstein
It seems obvious that the
jurisdictions that use it are all ones where one party is very
dominant, and that it's meant to reduce the ills associated with
that [1], but less obvious that it actually does reduce them.
In fact, it generally reinforces them.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration


"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Paul S Person
2021-07-30 15:49:37 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 09:55:18 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
Wow! A candidate endorsed by Donald Trump actually lost a Republican
primary in Texas! That means Trump's influence is on its way out, doesn't it?
But when I read articles about this...
Apparently in Texas, they have all-party primaries. The Democratic candidate
was eliminated during the "primary", and so there were two candidates in the...
runoff.
So the Democrats voting didn't have a Democrat to vote for. You think they were going to vote for the candidate endorsed by Donald Trump?
Texas may have called it a "primary", but since its winner is now going straight
to the vacant House seat, it was really a special election.
The news media has allowed itself to be confused by misleading
terminology.
Isn't that the one where the winner had the /same last name/ as the
former occupant? Could name recognition have played a role?
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
Quadibloc
2021-07-30 16:11:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul S Person
Isn't that the one where the winner had the /same last name/ as the
former occupant? Could name recognition have played a role?
The winner came by that name honestly, being related to the former
occupant.

John Savard
Dorothy J Heydt
2021-07-30 16:03:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul S Person
On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 09:55:18 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
Wow! A candidate endorsed by Donald Trump actually lost a Republican
primary in Texas! That means Trump's influence is on its way out, doesn't it?
But when I read articles about this...
Apparently in Texas, they have all-party primaries. The Democratic candidate
was eliminated during the "primary", and so there were two candidates
in the...
runoff.
So the Democrats voting didn't have a Democrat to vote for. You think
they were going to vote for the candidate endorsed by Donald Trump?
Texas may have called it a "primary", but since its winner is now going
straight
to the vacant House seat, it was really a special election.
The news media has allowed itself to be confused by misleading
terminology.
Isn't that the one where the winner had the /same last name/ as the
former occupant? Could name recognition have played a role?
Dunno. But there have been several cases where an official has
died in office and the governor appoints his widow to fill out
his term.
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
Www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/
Scott Lurndal
2021-07-30 16:26:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Paul S Person
On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 09:55:18 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
Wow! A candidate endorsed by Donald Trump actually lost a Republican
primary in Texas! That means Trump's influence is on its way out, doesn't it?
But when I read articles about this...
Apparently in Texas, they have all-party primaries. The Democratic candidate
was eliminated during the "primary", and so there were two candidates
in the...
runoff.
So the Democrats voting didn't have a Democrat to vote for. You think
they were going to vote for the candidate endorsed by Donald Trump?
Texas may have called it a "primary", but since its winner is now going
straight
to the vacant House seat, it was really a special election.
The news media has allowed itself to be confused by misleading
terminology.
Isn't that the one where the winner had the /same last name/ as the
former occupant? Could name recognition have played a role?
Dunno. But there have been several cases where an official has
died in office and the governor appoints his widow to fill out
his term.
And a few where the widow has run successfully for her husband's office.
Robert Woodward
2021-07-30 17:06:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul S Person
On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 09:55:18 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
Wow! A candidate endorsed by Donald Trump actually lost a Republican
primary in Texas! That means Trump's influence is on its way out, doesn't it?
But when I read articles about this...
Apparently in Texas, they have all-party primaries. The Democratic candidate
was eliminated during the "primary", and so there were two candidates in the...
runoff.
So the Democrats voting didn't have a Democrat to vote for. You think they
were going to vote for the candidate endorsed by Donald Trump?
Texas may have called it a "primary", but since its winner is now going straight
to the vacant House seat, it was really a special election.
The news media has allowed itself to be confused by misleading
terminology.
Isn't that the one where the winner had the /same last name/ as the
former occupant? Could name recognition have played a role?
IIRC, which I might not, Trump endorsed the widow of the previous
representative and she lost.
--
"We have advanced to new and surprising levels of bafflement."
Imperial Auditor Miles Vorkosigan describes progress in _Komarr_.
-------------------------------------------------------
Robert Woodward ***@drizzle.com
Dorothy J Heydt
2021-07-30 21:13:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by Paul S Person
On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 09:55:18 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
Wow! A candidate endorsed by Donald Trump actually lost a Republican
primary in Texas! That means Trump's influence is on its way out, doesn't it?
But when I read articles about this...
Apparently in Texas, they have all-party primaries. The Democratic candidate
was eliminated during the "primary", and so there were two candidates in the...
runoff.
So the Democrats voting didn't have a Democrat to vote for. You think they
were going to vote for the candidate endorsed by Donald Trump?
Texas may have called it a "primary", but since its winner is now going straight
to the vacant House seat, it was really a special election.
The news media has allowed itself to be confused by misleading
terminology.
Isn't that the one where the winner had the /same last name/ as the
former occupant? Could name recognition have played a role?
IIRC, which I might not, Trump endorsed the widow of the previous
representative and she lost.
A logical result! Whoda thunkit?
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
Www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/
Paul S Person
2021-07-31 16:50:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by Paul S Person
On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 09:55:18 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
Wow! A candidate endorsed by Donald Trump actually lost a Republican
primary in Texas! That means Trump's influence is on its way out, doesn't it?
But when I read articles about this...
Apparently in Texas, they have all-party primaries. The Democratic candidate
was eliminated during the "primary", and so there were two candidates in the...
runoff.
So the Democrats voting didn't have a Democrat to vote for. You think they
were going to vote for the candidate endorsed by Donald Trump?
Texas may have called it a "primary", but since its winner is now going straight
to the vacant House seat, it was really a special election.
The news media has allowed itself to be confused by misleading
terminology.
Isn't that the one where the winner had the /same last name/ as the
former occupant? Could name recognition have played a role?
IIRC, which I might not, Trump endorsed the widow of the previous
representative and she lost.
A logical result! Whoda thunkit?
Which some regard as a sign that Trump's endorsement isn't as good as
promised.

But others have pointed out that, with no Dem in the race, all those
Dem voters may have voted an anti-Trump ticket.

Who can say?
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
Robert Woodward
2021-07-31 18:19:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by Paul S Person
On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 09:55:18 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
Wow! A candidate endorsed by Donald Trump actually lost a Republican
primary in Texas! That means Trump's influence is on its way out,
doesn't
it?
But when I read articles about this...
Apparently in Texas, they have all-party primaries. The Democratic candidate
was eliminated during the "primary", and so there were two candidates in the...
runoff.
So the Democrats voting didn't have a Democrat to vote for. You think they
were going to vote for the candidate endorsed by Donald Trump?
Texas may have called it a "primary", but since its winner is now going straight
to the vacant House seat, it was really a special election.
The news media has allowed itself to be confused by misleading
terminology.
Isn't that the one where the winner had the /same last name/ as the
former occupant? Could name recognition have played a role?
IIRC, which I might not, Trump endorsed the widow of the previous
representative and she lost.
A logical result! Whoda thunkit?
Which some regard as a sign that Trump's endorsement isn't as good as
promised.
But others have pointed out that, with no Dem in the race, all those
Dem voters may have voted an anti-Trump ticket.
Who can say?
The real question is whether people who didn't vote for a Trump-endorsed
candidate in a primary (but did vote for a Republican who rejected
Trump) will vote for a Democrat in the general election rather than than
a Trump-endorsed Republican.
--
"We have advanced to new and surprising levels of bafflement."
Imperial Auditor Miles Vorkosigan describes progress in _Komarr_.
-------------------------------------------------------
Robert Woodward ***@drizzle.com
Paul S Person
2021-08-01 16:48:03 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 31 Jul 2021 11:19:20 -0700, Robert Woodward
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by Paul S Person
On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 09:55:18 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
Wow! A candidate endorsed by Donald Trump actually lost a Republican
primary in Texas! That means Trump's influence is on its way out,
doesn't
it?
But when I read articles about this...
Apparently in Texas, they have all-party primaries. The Democratic candidate
was eliminated during the "primary", and so there were two candidates in the...
runoff.
So the Democrats voting didn't have a Democrat to vote for. You think they
were going to vote for the candidate endorsed by Donald Trump?
Texas may have called it a "primary", but since its winner is now going
straight
to the vacant House seat, it was really a special election.
The news media has allowed itself to be confused by misleading
terminology.
Isn't that the one where the winner had the /same last name/ as the
former occupant? Could name recognition have played a role?
IIRC, which I might not, Trump endorsed the widow of the previous
representative and she lost.
A logical result! Whoda thunkit?
Which some regard as a sign that Trump's endorsement isn't as good as
promised.
But others have pointed out that, with no Dem in the race, all those
Dem voters may have voted an anti-Trump ticket.
Who can say?
The real question is whether people who didn't vote for a Trump-endorsed
candidate in a primary (but did vote for a Republican who rejected
Trump) will vote for a Democrat in the general election rather than than
a Trump-endorsed Republican.
In this case, the run-off /was/ the "general election", as it were.

The results, IOW, were final. The winner took the seat.

I realize it is strange to have this happen, but it can happen and has
happened here, although with two Dems since this area is heavily
Democratic.

An interesting statistic involving the current virus:
County Transmissivity Rate (per 100,000 IIRC)
King 54
Pierce 127
Spokane 270
(this is from memory and, of course, may be different today anyway as
the article appeared sometime last week)

Guess which county is lousy with Democrats, and so has or nearly has
(IIRC) 70% vaccinated.
Guess which county is overrun by Republicans, and so doesn't really
care.
Guess which county is more balanced, and doesn't know which way to
turn.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
Loading...