Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The case for Youngkin here seems to be long on rage, short on facts. I understand why that’s compelling for some people, but it doesn’t bode well for good governance.

+1

Irrational and/or misinformed.

You misunderstand. I'm not making a case for Youngkin. I'm making a case for why the Democrats got Youngkin elected in part because of their horrible policies on schools. I don't want Youngkin. I want a Democratic party that can stand up for its basic beliefs even if strong special interests within the party oppose them.

Right. Ds have to change tactics because some people tend to vote based on emotion or misinformation.

Oh, please. The ridiculous claim that Youngkin won because "people tend to vote based on emotion or misinformation" simply makes you look even more condescending than usual. Youngkin won because voters had all the FACTUAL information necessary to make an informed decision. Do you realize how you look when you make these idiotic claims?
DP

Exactly. There are very, very few other policy areas where voters can very easily see the facts for themselves -- did you actually think they would not notice that private schools were open, Catholic schools were open, schools in other states were open? It boggles the mind that we somehow were not supposed to notice this, or not care.

Private schools could stay open because they have bigger facilities per student, smaller class sizes, the ability to enforce pretty much whatever rules they want in this regard, and the ability to kick out anyone who refused to comply. Public schools don’t have those luxuries and that’s not something Youngkin can/will change.

Yeah, tell us why there were many, many other schools across the nation and in Europe were open. Did every single last one of them just have more resources? And if the issue was space, why not just open hybrid in Fall 2020?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The case for Youngkin here seems to be long on rage, short on facts. I understand why that’s compelling for some people, but it doesn’t bode well for good governance.

+1

Irrational and/or misinformed.

You misunderstand. I'm not making a case for Youngkin. I'm making a case for why the Democrats got Youngkin elected in part because of their horrible policies on schools. I don't want Youngkin. I want a Democratic party that can stand up for its basic beliefs even if strong special interests within the party oppose them.

Right. Ds have to change tactics because some people tend to vote based on emotion or misinformation.

Oh, please. The ridiculous claim that Youngkin won because "people tend to vote based on emotion or misinformation" simply makes you look even more condescending than usual. Youngkin won because voters had all the FACTUAL information necessary to make an informed decision. Do you realize how you look when you make these idiotic claims?
DP

Exactly. There are very, very few other policy areas where voters can very easily see the facts for themselves -- did you actually think they would not notice that private schools were open, Catholic schools were open, schools in other states were open? It boggles the mind that we somehow were not supposed to notice this, or not care.

Private schools could stay open because they have bigger facilities per student, smaller class sizes, the ability to enforce pretty much whatever rules they want in this regard, and the ability to kick out anyone who refused to comply. Public schools don’t have those luxuries and that’s not something Youngkin can/will change.

Yeah, tell us why there were many, many other schools across the nation and in Europe were open. Did every single last one of them just have more resources? And if the issue was space, why not just open hybrid in Fall 2020?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If McAuliffe had won, we'd simply be staring down four more years of exactly the same nonsense: watering down of curriculum, focusing on "anti-bias" training to the exclusion of actually focusing on ACADEMICS, and high taxes. The voters have spoken.

I welcome Governor Youngkin and hopefully the return of common sense.

Youngkin wasn’t running for school board, which is where most of those decisions get made.

Proving the point about “short on facts”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The case for Youngkin here seems to be long on rage, short on facts. I understand why that’s compelling for some people, but it doesn’t bode well for good governance.

+1

Irrational and/or misinformed.

You misunderstand. I'm not making a case for Youngkin. I'm making a case for why the Democrats got Youngkin elected in part because of their horrible policies on schools. I don't want Youngkin. I want a Democratic party that can stand up for its basic beliefs even if strong special interests within the party oppose them.

Right. Ds have to change tactics because some people tend to vote based on emotion or misinformation.

Oh, please. The ridiculous claim that Youngkin won because "people tend to vote based on emotion or misinformation" simply makes you look even more condescending than usual. Youngkin won because voters had all the FACTUAL information necessary to make an informed decision. Do you realize how you look when you make these idiotic claims?
DP

Exactly. There are very, very few other policy areas where voters can very easily see the facts for themselves -- did you actually think they would not notice that private schools were open, Catholic schools were open, schools in other states were open? It boggles the mind that we somehow were not supposed to notice this, or not care.

Private schools could stay open because they have bigger facilities per student, smaller class sizes, the ability to enforce pretty much whatever rules they want in this regard, and the ability to kick out anyone who refused to comply. Public schools don’t have those luxuries and that’s not something Youngkin can/will change.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The case for Youngkin here seems to be long on rage, short on facts. I understand why that’s compelling for some people, but it doesn’t bode well for good governance.

+1

Irrational and/or misinformed.

You misunderstand. I'm not making a case for Youngkin. I'm making a case for why the Democrats got Youngkin elected in part because of their horrible policies on schools. I don't want Youngkin. I want a Democratic party that can stand up for its basic beliefs even if strong special interests within the party oppose them.

Right. Ds have to change tactics because some people tend to vote based on emotion or misinformation.

Oh, please. The ridiculous claim that Youngkin won because "people tend to vote based on emotion or misinformation" simply makes you look even more condescending than usual. Youngkin won because voters had all the FACTUAL information necessary to make an informed decision. Do you realize how you look when you make these idiotic claims?
DP

Exactly. There are very, very few other policy areas where voters can very easily see the facts for themselves -- did you actually think they would not notice that private schools were open, Catholic schools were open, schools in other states were open? It boggles the mind that we somehow were not supposed to notice this, or not care.

Private schools could stay open because they have bigger facilities per student, smaller class sizes, the ability to enforce pretty much whatever rules they want in this regard, and the ability to kick out anyone who refused to comply. Public schools don’t have those luxuries and that’s not something Youngkin can/will change.

Anonymous wrote:If McAuliffe had won, we'd simply be staring down four more years of exactly the same nonsense: watering down of curriculum, focusing on "anti-bias" training to the exclusion of actually focusing on ACADEMICS, and high taxes. The voters have spoken.

I welcome Governor Youngkin and hopefully the return of common sense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The case for Youngkin here seems to be long on rage, short on facts. I understand why that’s compelling for some people, but it doesn’t bode well for good governance.

+1

Irrational and/or misinformed.

You misunderstand. I'm not making a case for Youngkin. I'm making a case for why the Democrats got Youngkin elected in part because of their horrible policies on schools. I don't want Youngkin. I want a Democratic party that can stand up for its basic beliefs even if strong special interests within the party oppose them.

Right. Ds have to change tactics because some people tend to vote based on emotion or misinformation.

Oh, please. The ridiculous claim that Youngkin won because "people tend to vote based on emotion or misinformation" simply makes you look even more condescending than usual. Youngkin won because voters had all the FACTUAL information necessary to make an informed decision. Do you realize how you look when you make these idiotic claims?
DP

Exactly. There are very, very few other policy areas where voters can very easily see the facts for themselves -- did you actually think they would not notice that private schools were open, Catholic schools were open, schools in other states were open? It boggles the mind that we somehow were not supposed to notice this, or not care.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Come on now, you aren't seeing alllllllll of the sexism inherent in deriding women who were 1) disproportionately hurt in terms of employment and well-being by school closures, 2) pushing for faster school reopening because they felt their children were being hurt by the closures?

So you voted for the candidate and party who is for defunding public schools (go charters, let’s ramp up that graft like you have in DC), and opposed universal day care and parental leave? What a shell game.

Actually, Youngkin is for fully funding public schools, including revamping and investing in special education. Funding charter schools doesn't equal defunding public schools. But keep on lying! It's worked so well for you so far.
DP

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The case for Youngkin here seems to be long on rage, short on facts. I understand why that’s compelling for some people, but it doesn’t bode well for good governance.

+1

Irrational and/or misinformed.

You misunderstand. I'm not making a case for Youngkin. I'm making a case for why the Democrats got Youngkin elected in part because of their horrible policies on schools. I don't want Youngkin. I want a Democratic party that can stand up for its basic beliefs even if strong special interests within the party oppose them.

Right. Ds have to change tactics because some people tend to vote based on emotion or misinformation.

Oh, please. The ridiculous claim that Youngkin won because "people tend to vote based on emotion or misinformation" simply makes you look even more condescending than usual. Youngkin won because voters had all the FACTUAL information necessary to make an informed decision. Do you realize how you look when you make these idiotic claims?
DP

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so sick of the whining over "they closed the schools!!!" The schools were re-opened long before election day. The worst that could be said was that the Democrats were too cautious in responding to a 100-year pandemic that was killing thousands of people. And because of that you stick us with Youngkin?

You're a bunch of Karens.

WTF? And, true to type. Call those you disagree with "Karens." Never change, Democrats.

It seems like there are only three rhetorical moves available to respond to "school voters":

1. You are racist for wanting schools to open.
2. Schools actually HAD to stay closed - THERE WAS NO WAY TO OPEN THEM!!
3. You are actually just racist and pretending to care about school closures.

I will add:

4. The only reason you wanted schools to open is because you hate your kids.
5. Schools WERE open. Not the school buildings themselves, but your kids got an education!
6. You need to learn resiliency. You shouldn't talk or complain about this because it is an important life lesson. Everyone else, though, is allowed to push their elective representatives for things they need.

I think you’re conflating all of the ways you were “victimized”.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so sick of the whining over "they closed the schools!!!" The schools were re-opened long before election day. The worst that could be said was that the Democrats were too cautious in responding to a 100-year pandemic that was killing thousands of people. And because of that you stick us with Youngkin?

You're a bunch of Karens.

WTF? And, true to type. Call those you disagree with "Karens." Never change, Democrats.

It seems like there are only three rhetorical moves available to respond to "school voters":

1. You are racist for wanting schools to open.
2. Schools actually HAD to stay closed - THERE WAS NO WAY TO OPEN THEM!!
3. You are actually just racist and pretending to care about school closures.

I will add:

4. The only reason you wanted schools to open is because you hate your kids.
5. Schools WERE open. Not the school buildings themselves, but your kids got an education!
6. You need to learn resiliency. You shouldn't talk or complain about this because it is an important life lesson. Everyone else, though, is allowed to push their elective representatives for things they need.

I think you’re conflating all of the ways you were “victimized”.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The case for Youngkin here seems to be long on rage, short on facts. I understand why that’s compelling for some people, but it doesn’t bode well for good governance.

+1

Irrational and/or misinformed.

You misunderstand. I'm not making a case for Youngkin. I'm making a case for why the Democrats got Youngkin elected in part because of their horrible policies on schools. I don't want Youngkin. I want a Democratic party that can stand up for its basic beliefs even if strong special interests within the party oppose them.

Right. Ds have to change tactics because some people tend to vote based on emotion or misinformation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The case for Youngkin here seems to be long on rage, short on facts. I understand why that’s compelling for some people, but it doesn’t bode well for good governance.

+1

Irrational and/or misinformed.

You misunderstand. I'm not making a case for Youngkin. I'm making a case for why the Democrats got Youngkin elected in part because of their horrible policies on schools. I don't want Youngkin. I want a Democratic party that can stand up for its basic beliefs even if strong special interests within the party oppose them.

Right. Ds have to change tactics because some people tend to vote based on emotion or misinformation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some nuances I'm not seeing reflected here - as the working parent of a young child, I definitely was told that by wanting in-person school, I "just wanted free daycare"...but usually that sentiment was expressed by people of conservative political persuasions who probably thought women should be SAHMs anyway ("if you can't/don't want to take care of your own kids you shouldn't have had them!"). From teachers/teacher advocacy groups, I mostly heard a lot of "not [reopening] until it's safe", which seemed to be unclear at best and a constantly moving goalpost at worst. I was incensed by teachers who took full advantage of priority vaccination and then still refused to return to in-person teaching.

All that said...the majority of APS and FCPS parents chose remote learning in the fall of 2020 (not sure about other counties). You can split hairs and say it's because the proposed in-person offerings weren't workable (staggered starts, alternate days), but looking back 15 months ago, we didn't know what we do now, and most people erred on the side of keeping kids home.

The "OpenFCPS" crowd was an uneasy alliance of Covid deniers, parents who wanted/needed their kids out of the house, and people with serious concerns about their children's educational needs being met (or not)...while they were loud, they were never able to formulate a cogent "Plan B" that included CDC-compliant risk mitigation measures.

I can understand being mad at local school boards, at teachers, at teachers unions. Some of the stuff that was done (remote school from within school facilities, for a fee?!) was the antithesis of equity. And the fact that working parents got the rawest deal of the pandemic has been broadly documented. All fair points.

But to go from there to...voting in the party that opposes paid family and medical leave, dispenses with public health mitigation measures like masks and vaccinations, and siphons off public school money to private schools and corporate-helmed charters (while simultaneously decreasing overall incoming tax revenue) seems to me to be textbook cutting off one's nose to spite one's face. I won't go so far as to say flipping one's vote to Youngkin was racist, but I absolutely believe that the people who did so en masse (college-educated white women) acted in an effort to preserve their own privilege in shaping public schools to best serve their own interests. Just because Youngkin was smart enough to largely keep his mouth shut during the campaign doesn't mean he's not the policy equivalent of Trump et al.

So your point is, that it’s a white college-educated woman’s responsibility to shut up, pay taxes, and not expect a thing for them?

Wait...what?! That's quite a leap. If high-quality, safe, continuously open public schools are your goal, don't you think it's a bit short-sighted to think you'll get that from the party that consistently denigrates public health measures and either directly or indirectly defunds public education? Seems rather like expecting Rs to do something about gun control because Democrats moved too slowly on the issue for your taste...

given that Democrats literally closed schools for 1.5 years, you don’t have much credibility. That’s the whole problem.

DP. Virginia schools closed in March 2020. They were ordered to reopen in March 2021. That’s one year, not 1.5. I understand some people were dissatisfied with 3 months of hybrid at that point (as was I), but school was not closed at that point.

Fcps special ed kids wwre kept out of school through the summer of 2021

This is not believable. Citation?