Anonymous wrote:Hahaha, you don’t think billionaires and elites weren’t behind McAuliffe and the Democrat party?? You do know the governor doesn't determine the voting boundaries, right?

Anonymous wrote:Hahaha, you don’t think billionaires and elites weren’t behind McAuliffe and the Democrat party?? You do know the governor doesn't determine the voting boundaries, right?

In 2016, when millions of Americans voted for Donald Trump, many believed his claims that personal wealth would free him from wealthy donors and allow him to “drain the swamp.” But then Trump appointed several billionaires and multimillionaires to high-level positions and pursued billionaire-friendly policies, such as cutting corporate income taxes. Why the change from his fiery campaign rhetoric and promises to the working class? This should not be surprising, argue Benjamin I. Page, Jason Seawright, and Matthew J. Lacombe: As the gap between the wealthiest and the rest of us has widened, the few who hold one billion dollars or more in net worth have begun to play a more and more active part in politics—with serious consequences for democracy in the United States.

Page, Seawright, and Lacombe argue that while political contributions offer a window onto billionaires’ influence, especially on economic policy, they do not present a full picture of policy preferences and political actions. That is because on some of the most important issues, including taxation, immigration, and Social Security, billionaires have chosen to engage in “stealth politics.” They try hard to influence public policy, making large contributions to political parties and policy-focused causes, leading policy-advocacy organizations, holding political fundraisers, and bundling others’ contributions—all while rarely talking about public policy to the media. This means that their influence is not only unequal but also largely unaccountable to and unchallengeable by the American people.

Unfortunately, this picture is misleading. Our new, systematic study of the 100 wealthiest Americans indicates that Buffett, Gates, Bloomberg et al are not at all typical. Most of the wealthiest US billionaires – who are much less visible and less reported on – more closely resemble Charles Koch. They are extremely conservative on economic issues. Obsessed with cutting taxes, especially estate taxes – which apply only to the wealthiest Americans. Opposed to government regulation of the environment or big banks. Unenthusiastic about government programs to help with jobs, incomes, healthcare, or retirement pensions – programs supported by large majorities of Americans. Tempted to cut deficits and shrink government by cutting or privatizing guaranteed social security benefits.

Anonymous wrote:Hahaha, you don’t think billionaires and elites weren’t behind McAuliffe and the Democrat party?? You do know the governor doesn't determine the voting boundaries, right?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: . . .

And of course, many abortions will take place in states where it is not legal and they will be more dangerous. We have been there before and unbelievably, we seem to heading backwards to the good old days of the "back alley" abortion. Horrible.

Oh please.

This is the mid-Atlantic, not the Deep South or the Dakotas.

Youngkin is not going to ban abortion.

- signed, a pro choice parent of a daughter growing up in Virginia

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had a conversation with my neighbor today, who made the strong case that whatever Youngkin himself believes, he's just the tip of the spear of an authoritarian movement that wants to destroy democracy.
The take is: Youngkin may have backed away from Trump, but it's the billionaires and elites that run the GOP that are setting up the plan to steal the 2024 election, not Trump. It's the party that's designing gerrymanders to assure white Christian authoritarian minority rule. And the guy made the case that Youngkin embraced all that -- Youngkin took the money from Koch and Heritage billionaires and the GOP corporate interests and the gun companies and fossil fuel companies.

I am not sure if Youngkin himself is an authoritarian. To me he seems more like a dim, born-advantaged private equity guy who might not fully know what the GOP stands for today.
I don't fully see voting for Youngkin as embracing authoritarianism and helping to further climate disaster that will impact our kids future.

My kids will have the chance to get an abortion in VA or MD or another blue state.
Is Youngkin really a step to taking that away?

Yeah, $400M just fell into his pockets because he’s tall and White, right? Because that’s how you imagine the world works - no particular skill or brains required.

He’ll be making Virginia a better place to live, work, and get an education, all while the usual crowd chatters away.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is a centrist and will restore sanity - particularly in school policy.

If you have not been following the state-wide VMPI debate, you should.

And Terry would have implemented the plan to follow in NYC footsteps in eliminating all accelerated / AAP programs in VA.

This person is most definitely NOT a centrist. He's right-wing. Not extreme right, but solidly to the right. Just acknowledge this, PP. It's OK to like right-wing politicians. It's not OK to lie.

DP. Whether he's a centrist or "solidly to the right" does not concern me at all. The PP is correct. He will appoint people with common sense to the VDOE - something that has been sorely lacking for some time. All the money and time that has been wasted on an "equity lens" and "anti-bias" needs to be funneled into academics. Normal, rational people of ALL political stripes - sorry, "stakeholders - have had it with the far-left's crazy policies.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had a conversation with my neighbor today, who made the strong case that whatever Youngkin himself believes, he's just the tip of the spear of an authoritarian movement that wants to destroy democracy.
The take is: Youngkin may have backed away from Trump, but it's the billionaires and elites that run the GOP that are setting up the plan to steal the 2024 election, not Trump. It's the party that's designing gerrymanders to assure white Christian authoritarian minority rule. And the guy made the case that Youngkin embraced all that -- Youngkin took the money from Koch and Heritage billionaires and the GOP corporate interests and the gun companies and fossil fuel companies.

I am not sure if Youngkin himself is an authoritarian. To me he seems more like a dim, born-advantaged private equity guy who might not fully know what the GOP stands for today.
I don't fully see voting for Youngkin as embracing authoritarianism and helping to further climate disaster that will impact our kids future.

My kids will have the chance to get an abortion in VA or MD or another blue state.
Is Youngkin really a step to taking that away?

Yeah, $400M just fell into his pockets because he’s tall and White, right? Because that’s how you imagine the world works - no particular skill or brains required.

He’ll be making Virginia a better place to live, work, and get an education, all while the usual crowd chatters away.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: . . .

And of course, many abortions will take place in states where it is not legal and they will be more dangerous. We have been there before and unbelievably, we seem to heading backwards to the good old days of the "back alley" abortion. Horrible.

Oh please.

This is the mid-Atlantic, not the Deep South or the Dakotas.

Youngkin is not going to ban abortion.

- signed, a pro choice parent of a daughter growing up in Virginia

+100

Anonymous wrote:I had a conversation with my neighbor today, who made the strong case that whatever Youngkin himself believes, he's just the tip of the spear of an authoritarian movement that wants to destroy democracy.
The take is: Youngkin may have backed away from Trump, but it's the billionaires and elites that run the GOP that are setting up the plan to steal the 2024 election, not Trump. It's the party that's designing gerrymanders to assure white Christian authoritarian minority rule. And the guy made the case that Youngkin embraced all that -- Youngkin took the money from Koch and Heritage billionaires and the GOP corporate interests and the gun companies and fossil fuel companies.

I am not sure if Youngkin himself is an authoritarian. To me he seems more like a dim, born-advantaged private equity guy who might not fully know what the GOP stands for today.
I don't fully see voting for Youngkin as embracing authoritarianism and helping to further climate disaster that will impact our kids future.

My kids will have the chance to get an abortion in VA or MD or another blue state.
Is Youngkin really a step to taking that away?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think extremists on both sides, but particularly the right, are going to tear this country apart. Weird, because most people here are actually moderates..

I have her go hopes for tanked choice voting. Liked how it tuned out in nyc. Hoping it spreads. Power to the moderates!!

Anonymous wrote:I think extremists on both sides, but particularly the right, are going to tear this country apart. Weird, because most people here are actually moderates..

Anonymous wrote:I think extremists on both sides, but particularly the right, are going to tear this country apart. Weird, because most people here are actually moderates..

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is a centrist and will restore sanity - particularly in school policy.

If you have not been following the state-wide VMPI debate, you should.

And Terry would have implemented the plan to follow in NYC footsteps in eliminating all accelerated / AAP programs in VA.

This person is most definitely NOT a centrist. He's right-wing. Not extreme right, but solidly to the right. Just acknowledge this, PP. It's OK to like right-wing politicians. It's not OK to lie.