Glen Youngkin...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At some point Youngkin will have to be more specific about his stance on various issues. In general he strikes me as a technocrat with a common-sense business-oriented approach, whereas Terry McAuliffe is just a slimy politician getting support from a lot of other equally calculating politicians who don’t actually like him, but think they may have a seat at the table if he’s elected.

100% incorrect.

Youngkin is a Republican Q Slime.

No, he does not belong in office period. He has no policies just like the rest of the GQP. Anyone see that health plan to replace "Obamacare" during a global pandemic. Or how about Mexico paying for that wall? It's not like the Trump contractors are not be indicted for embezzling taxpayer monies.

You go ahead and vote for more zero policy makers.

At some point you operatives are going to realize that a lot of traditional Ds want an alternative to sleazy, inauthentic pols like McAuliffe and that simply repeating that all Rs are inextricably linked to Q isn’t going to do the trick. Until then the defections in upcoming state and local elections will continue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Democratic party organizations in places like Loudoun and Fairfax are going to find out that many Biden Democrats aren't going to support candidates like McAuliffe (not to mention the local school boards) who have outdone themselves with their pandering and blatant embrace of identity-based politics.

How are “Biden Democrats” not McAuliffe voters? I could see them not voting for Foy, but McAuliffe? Seriously?

Yeah, I'm also a bit baffled about why "Biden Democrats" wouldn't support McAuliffe.

As for "identity-based politics," nobody holds a candle to the Republicans.

In terms of personality, Biden is genuine, and McAuliffe is a phony; in terms of politics, McAuliffe has been directly and shamelessly pandering the left wing of the Democrats whereas Biden, at least personally, continues to strike a more moderate tone.

Youngkin will get a lot of votes from people in the state who traditionally vote for Democratic candidates.

Wrong on all counts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
At some point you operatives are going to realize that a lot of traditional Ds want an alternative to sleazy, inauthentic pols like McAuliffe and that simply repeating that all Rs are inextricably linked to Q isn’t going to do the trick. Until then the defections in upcoming state and local elections will continue.

I'm wondering what you mean by "inauthentic"? Because at this point, everyone should be able to recognize that the McAulliffe we get is the authentic McAuliffe. He's been around in public life for many years. You may not like the authentic McAuliffe, but he's the authentic McAuliffe.

What's more, those "traditional Ds" (whoever they might be) have already elected McAuliffe once.

[Anonymous]

I think for me I will look at Virginia and consider whether it is better than it was 8 years ago. This is the end of a second consecutive D administration. There are some things that have changed that I am not happy about and I need to educate myself about them. I do not like the math changes in Virginia in part because I don't think anyone I know (mostly Democrats but some Independents) was asking for them. I feel like that should matter since we pay for schools. Local school board decisions are local but the Math decision was a state decision and I need to dig into how the Virginia DoE is influenced by the Governor. If a lot, I will not vote for D. If not a lot, then it won't be a factor. It feels very icky to me that this massive state-wide education revamp has been rolled out for discussion during a pandemic when parents have already been so distracted with remote learning etc. It feels to me like the DoE wanted to slip it in without anyone noticing and as a taxpayer and consumer of public education, that infuriates me. And again, no one was asking for this change. For me this is a major deal and if it was the result of Northam/McAuliffe governorships, I will not be able to support McAuliffe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Democratic party organizations in places like Loudoun and Fairfax are going to find out that many Biden Democrats aren't going to support candidates like McAuliffe (not to mention the local school boards) who have outdone themselves with their pandering and blatant embrace of identity-based politics.

How are “Biden Democrats” not McAuliffe voters? I could see them not voting for Foy, but McAuliffe? Seriously?

Yeah, I'm also a bit baffled about why "Biden Democrats" wouldn't support McAuliffe.

As for "identity-based politics," nobody holds a candle to the Republicans.

In terms of personality, Biden is genuine, and McAuliffe is a phony; in terms of politics, McAuliffe has been directly and shamelessly pandering the left wing of the Democrats whereas Biden, at least personally, continues to strike a more moderate tone.

Youngkin will get a lot of votes from people in the state who traditionally vote for Democratic candidates.

You must not talk to many people who are actually in the left wing.

Agreed. How did he shamelessly pander to the far left, exactly? By supporting gay marriage? By pushing Republican legislators to take up Medicaid expansion made available by the ACA? By supporting background checks to buy guns?

The fact is that he governed as a pragmatic moderate, much like Biden is currently. It's likely that the PP is one of those types that froths at the mouth at the mere mention of anyone remotely associated with the Clintons.

Only someone who is WAY at the end of the diving board can consider the policies implemented so far by the Biden administration as any version of moderate. If you polled the American people on each issue, you would find the Biden policies to be supported by a small subset on the left. Most people were aspirational when they voted for Biden as a moderate, but that isn't what is happening in reality.

You should stop watching Fox News and getting your analysis from AM talk radio. Good news - we can poll Americans on each issue, and pollsters have! Biden's policies are incredibly popular. You can quibble about whether or not childcare is infrastructure but the truth is that a majority of Americans, including independents, support the bill. Expanding access to affordable childcare is an overwhelmingly popular policy position. Making the child tax credit payable in installments instead of a lump sum during tax season is sensible policy informed by behavioral economics. Sheesh, even the American Rescue Plan was supported by 40% of Republicans. You're living in fantasy land if you think Biden is some stalwart of the far-left.

Get it over with and bleat about the border. That's the only ~ooooh, scary radical~ position you could even remotely plausibly pin on Biden, and it's in no worse shape than Trump left it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think for me I will look at Virginia and consider whether it is better than it was 8 years ago. This is the end of a second consecutive D administration. There are some things that have changed that I am not happy about and I need to educate myself about them. I do not like the math changes in Virginia in part because I don't think anyone I know (mostly Democrats but some Independents) was asking for them. I feel like that should matter since we pay for schools. Local school board decisions are local but the Math decision was a state decision and I need to dig into how the Virginia DoE is influenced by the Governor. If a lot, I will not vote for D. If not a lot, then it won't be a factor. It feels very icky to me that this massive state-wide education revamp has been rolled out for discussion during a pandemic when parents have already been so distracted with remote learning etc. It feels to me like the DoE wanted to slip it in without anyone noticing and as a taxpayer and consumer of public education, that infuriates me. And again, no one was asking for this change. For me this is a major deal and if it was the result of Northam/McAuliffe governorships, I will not be able to support McAuliffe.

so your complaint after 8 years is an unimplemented proposal that still leaves local districts with autonomy? I get that the trolls are trying to sound reasonable, but this is down right hilarious

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At some point Youngkin will have to be more specific about his stance on various issues. In general he strikes me as a technocrat with a common-sense business-oriented approach, whereas Terry McAuliffe is just a slimy politician getting support from a lot of other equally calculating politicians who don’t actually like him, but think they may have a seat at the table if he’s elected.

100% incorrect.

Youngkin is a Republican Q Slime.

No, he does not belong in office period. He has no policies just like the rest of the GQP. Anyone see that health plan to replace "Obamacare" during a global pandemic. Or how about Mexico paying for that wall? It's not like the Trump contractors are not be indicted for embezzling taxpayer monies.

You go ahead and vote for more zero policy makers.

At some point you operatives are going to realize that a lot of traditional Ds want an alternative to sleazy, inauthentic pols like McAuliffe and that simply repeating that all Rs are inextricably linked to Q isn’t going to do the trick. Until then the defections in upcoming state and local elections will continue.

😆🤪

[Anonymous]

wow, a random twitter handle predicted something that won't happen, have you forward this to WaPo (or probably the Washington Times in your case)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think for me I will look at Virginia and consider whether it is better than it was 8 years ago. This is the end of a second consecutive D administration. There are some things that have changed that I am not happy about and I need to educate myself about them. I do not like the math changes in Virginia in part because I don't think anyone I know (mostly Democrats but some Independents) was asking for them. I feel like that should matter since we pay for schools. Local school board decisions are local but the Math decision was a state decision and I need to dig into how the Virginia DoE is influenced by the Governor. If a lot, I will not vote for D. If not a lot, then it won't be a factor. It feels very icky to me that this massive state-wide education revamp has been rolled out for discussion during a pandemic when parents have already been so distracted with remote learning etc. It feels to me like the DoE wanted to slip it in without anyone noticing and as a taxpayer and consumer of public education, that infuriates me. And again, no one was asking for this change. For me this is a major deal and if it was the result of Northam/McAuliffe governorships, I will not be able to support McAuliffe.

so your complaint after 8 years is an unimplemented proposal that still leaves local districts with autonomy? I get that the trolls are trying to sound reasonable, but this is down right hilarious

It doesn't leave local school boards with autonomy. They may have some ability to modify it but only within the confines of the program. And AGAIN--who asked for this. Meanwhile most private schools have amped UP their math curriculum so this leaves an every bigger divide. Richer kids can and will hire tutors but some people (me) cannot do that and I want my kids to pursue their dreams that are science oriented and taking rigorous math is a very important part of the puzzle. Again, left moderate with tons of similar minded friends and I have not met a single one NOT ONE that wants this. So when you talk about local control consider we should NOT have to battle back proposals that no one actually wants. So tell me mighty know it all, who wanted it. Who? Answer that? It is like being served liver and onions for dinner. Sure, you can pick between liver or onions or liver and onions (local choice accorting to you) BUT who actually wants liver and onions. I am not a troll or trumpy. You just cannot actually handle any real debate about anything without resorting to ad hominem attacks.

[Anonymous]

who asked for this?

The VA General Assembly requires VDOE to update SOLs every 10 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think for me I will look at Virginia and consider whether it is better than it was 8 years ago. This is the end of a second consecutive D administration. There are some things that have changed that I am not happy about and I need to educate myself about them. I do not like the math changes in Virginia in part because I don't think anyone I know (mostly Democrats but some Independents) was asking for them. I feel like that should matter since we pay for schools. Local school board decisions are local but the Math decision was a state decision and I need to dig into how the Virginia DoE is influenced by the Governor. If a lot, I will not vote for D. If not a lot, then it won't be a factor. It feels very icky to me that this massive state-wide education revamp has been rolled out for discussion during a pandemic when parents have already been so distracted with remote learning etc. It feels to me like the DoE wanted to slip it in without anyone noticing and as a taxpayer and consumer of public education, that infuriates me. And again, no one was asking for this change. For me this is a major deal and if it was the result of Northam/McAuliffe governorships, I will not be able to support McAuliffe.

so your complaint after 8 years is an unimplemented proposal that still leaves local districts with autonomy? I get that the trolls are trying to sound reasonable, but this is down right hilarious

It doesn't leave local school boards with autonomy. They may have some ability to modify it but only within the confines of the program. And AGAIN--who asked for this. Meanwhile most private schools have amped UP their math curriculum so this leaves an every bigger divide. Richer kids can and will hire tutors but some people (me) cannot do that and I want my kids to pursue their dreams that are science oriented and taking rigorous math is a very important part of the puzzle. Again, left moderate with tons of similar minded friends and I have not met a single one NOT ONE that wants this. So when you talk about local control consider we should NOT have to battle back proposals that no one actually wants. So tell me mighty know it all, who wanted it. Who? Answer that? It is like being served liver and onions for dinner. Sure, you can pick between liver or onions or liver and onions (local choice accorting to you) BUT who actually wants liver and onions. I am not a troll or trumpy. You just cannot actually handle any real debate about anything without resorting to ad hominem attacks.

What is your actual concern?

You have some moral opposition to blending algebra and geometry concepts? You are offended by data science?

Your “outrage” sounds straight- up RWNJ.

[Anonymous]

I am concerned that it will result in less differentiation at the high school level. My concerns are widely shared.

[Anonymous]

And what does RWNJ mean?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am concerned that it will result in less differentiation at the high school level. My concerns are widely shared.

Why do you think that?

They hope to expand offerings...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:wow, a random twitter handle predicted something that won't happen, have you forward this to WaPo (or probably the Washington Times in your case)?

The entire point is that it won’t happen (hence picked up by “Bad Electoral Takes”) and that it sounds like half of this thread, which is full of people who don’t realize that all this shit is nationalized now and think Virginia’s gubernatorial election is going to hinge on tiny issues that the Governor doesn’t even control.