Wisconsin Supreme Courts Flips Liberally

[basballguy]

(04-06-2023, 10:34 AM)pally Wrote: only 2 of the poorest states are also on the lowest cost of living states

only 1 rich state repeats on the highest cost of living top 10....Alaska...a red state

Too often people focus on the cost of living in cities, due to housing costs, and fail to consider how much more inexpensive it is to live in suburban or rural areas of these large states.  For example, California gets dinged on city housing costs, taxes, and gas but is counter balanced by lower the cost of healthcare, food, rural housing, and consumer goods.

What data are you looking at?  I literally just matched 8/10 on cost of living for poor.  

https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/states-with-lowest-cost-of-living

[Mike M (the other one)]

(04-06-2023, 10:32 AM)Nately120 Wrote: I think the issue is that the Wisconsin GOP cranked it up to a level that couldn't be ignored as business as usual.  They flew too close to the sun on this one. 

Depends on who you ask i suppose, I view it as a:
If you don't put in the time, don't expect a dime. <-----ooh I think i just made that up.


Instead of admitting one side got out hustled for votes, easier to blame gerrymandering especially if you lose in a place where you were already counting your chickens.

[*Nately120*]

(04-06-2023, 11:11 AM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Depends on who you ask i suppose, I view it as a:
If you don't put in the time, don't expect a dime. <-----ooh I think i just made that up.


Instead of admitting one side got out hustled for votes, easier to blame gerrymandering especially if you lose in a place where you were already counting your chickens.

Im saying i agree a certain amount of gerrymandering is accepted, but WI took it to levels that forced the normally timid democrats to action. 

Gerrymandering is like masturbating, everyone does it. But WI gerrymandering was like masturbating in public. They went so overboard they forced something to be done about it. 

Just my 3 cents. Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go do a whole lotta totally nothing.  

[Belsnickel]

(04-06-2023, 11:11 AM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Depends on who you ask i suppose, I view it as a:
If you don't put in the time, don't expect a dime. <-----ooh I think i just made that up.


Instead of admitting one side got out hustled for votes, easier to blame gerrymandering especially if you lose in a place where you were already counting your chickens.

The problem is that we know that the game plan of the GOP for the past few decades has been to strategically take control of state legislatures and then use that to gerrymander their states to stay in power. It's not a secret that this was their plan and it was an effective one. It's why they can have a damn near supermajority in a legislative body without being able to win a statewide election.

Call me crazy, but I tend to favor a representative democracy where the people choose their representatives rather than the representatives choosing their constituents.

[GMDino]

(04-06-2023, 11:11 AM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Depends on who you ask i suppose, I view it as a:
If you don't put in the time, don't expect a dime. <-----ooh I think i just made that up.


Instead of admitting one side got out hustled for votes, easier to blame gerrymandering especially if you lose in a place where you were already counting your chickens.

(04-06-2023, 11:15 AM)Nately120 Wrote: Im saying i agree a certain amount of gerrymandering is accepted, but WI took it to levels that forced the normally timid democrats to action. 

Gerrymandering is like masturbating, everyone does it. But WI gerrymandering was like masturbating in public. They went so overboard they forced something to be done about it. 

Just my 3 cents. Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go do a whole lotta totally nothing.  

(04-06-2023, 11:35 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: The problem is that we know that the game plan of the GOP for the past few decades has been to strategically take control of state legislatures and then use that to gerrymander their states to stay in power. It's not a secret that this was their plan and it was an effective one. It's why they can have a damn near supermajority in a legislative body without being able to win a statewide election.

Call me crazy, but I tend to favor a representative democracy where the people choose their representatives rather than the representatives choosing their constituents.

Ali Alexander telegraphs the GOP plan for 2024, which is to win not via the popular vote but through vote challenges and corrupt courts stacked with right-wing judges:

“We just lost the Wisconsin Supreme Court. I do not see a path to 270 in 2024.” pic.twitter.com/rfb19frtOF

— Leah McElrath (@leahmcelrath) April 5, 2023

 

[Mike M (the other one)]

(04-06-2023, 11:15 AM)Nately120 Wrote: Im saying i agree a certain amount of gerrymandering is accepted, but WI took it to levels that forced the normally timid democrats to action. 

Gerrymandering is like masturbating, everyone does it. But WI gerrymandering was like masturbating in public. They went so overboard they forced something to be done about it. 

Just my 3 cents. Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go do a whole lotta totally nothing.  

and for all their efforts, they lost control of the WI SC right? 
Doesn't seem like it ended up being "an advantage". 

It's like the Browns win the SB every year during the Free Agency period, but at the end of the year, they fail to make the play-offs.

It's a pretty simple fundamental, those in power seek ways to retain their power regardless of political affiliation, age, color, gender or any other bias.

[*Nately120*]

(04-06-2023, 12:06 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: and for all their efforts, they lost control of the WI SC right? 
Doesn't seem like it ended up being "an advantage". 

It's like the Browns win the SB every year during the Free Agency period, but at the end of the year, they fail to make the play-offs.

It's a pretty simple fundamental, those in power seek ways to retain their power regardless of political affiliation, age, color, gender or any other bias.

She won by 11 points and yet the Wisconsin GOP has the power and latitude to immediately impeach her before she even puts on a black robe thingy. 

[Mike M (the other one)]

(04-06-2023, 12:11 PM)Nately120 Wrote: She won by 11 points and yet the Wisconsin GOP has the power and latitude to immediately impeach her before she even puts on a black robe thingy. 

Well if:


“The Assembly may impeach an elected official by a majority vote based on specific reasons: corrupt conduct in office or for the commission of a crime or misdemeanor,” according to a Wisconsin Legislative Council memo.


Then she shouldn't have been a candidate in the first place

[*Nately120*]

(04-06-2023, 12:16 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Well if:


“The Assembly may impeach an elected official by a majority vote based on specific reasons: corrupt conduct in office or for the commission of a crime or misdemeanor,” according to a Wisconsin Legislative Council memo.


Then she shouldn't have been a candidate in the first place

Ah logic and rules.  That otter stop em cold. 

[Mike M (the other one)]

(04-06-2023, 12:25 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Ah logic and rules.  That otter stop em cold. 

Oh they might give a half-ass effort at it, but then who doesn't these days?

Isn't the idea to keep corrupt officials out of positions of power? 

[XenoMorph]

(04-05-2023, 09:11 PM)pally Wrote: 9 of the 10 poorest states are dominated by conservative policies.  7 of the 10 richest states are liberal.   

and how are those 7/10 richest states on crime?

[GMDino]

(04-06-2023, 12:06 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: and for all their efforts, they lost control of the WI SC right? 
Doesn't seem like it ended up being "an advantage". 

It's like the Browns win the SB every year during the Free Agency period, but at the end of the year, they fail to make the play-offs.

It's a pretty simple fundamental, those in power seek ways to retain their power regardless of political affiliation, age, color, gender or any other bias.

I could be wrong but I think gerrymandering has less affect on state-wide elections.

That's why republicans have had control of the PA House and Senate almost exclusively for decades but we usually have a Democrat Governor.

[*Nately120*]

(04-06-2023, 12:37 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Oh they might give a half-ass effort at it, but then who doesn't these days?

Isn't the idea to keep corrupt officials out of positions of power? 

My point is that they have the undue power and leeway to be able to cry unjust after losing by 11 points.  That sort of loss and whiney excuse making response to said loss with a candidate who is now 0-2 should lead to a loss of influence and party reevaluation.  But they have enough power to dig in their heels and throw a fit in response. 

Is the Democrat that was just elected corrupt?  I assume they can sell the notion to their supporters simply because she's a Democrat, if nothing else.  Its just odd that it is so admirable to get your ass kicked and then cry foul and maintain losing positions.  

I assume if they had an punt of power equal to their voter base they'd have to act in a more reasonable manner.  Perhaps im way off base here.  

[KillerGoose]

(04-06-2023, 12:43 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: and how are those 7/10 richest states on crime?

Pretty low. The seven would be New York, Massachusetts, Washington, California, Connecticut, Delaware and Maryland. There are two of these states in the top 20 for overall crime rates - California and Washington. Six of the poorest show up in that top 20. On average, red states tend to have higher crime than blue states.

I am not saying that I definitively believe the two are correlated, but it is what the data tells you. Out of the top 20 states with highest crime rates, 13 voted red in the 2020 election. Out of the top 40, 24 are red.

[*Nately120*]

(04-06-2023, 01:11 PM)KillerGoose Wrote: Pretty low. The seven would be New York, Massachusetts, Washington, California, Connecticut, Delaware and Maryland. There are two of these states in the top 20 for overall crime rates - California and Washington. Six of the poorest show up in that top 20. On average, red states tend to have higher crime than blue states.

I am not saying that I definitively believe the two are correlated, but it is what the data tells you. Out of the top 20 states with highest crime rates, 13 voted red in the 2020 election. Out of the top 40, 24 are red.

Poverty and warm climates seem to correlate with crime more than D vs R, but that's just a glance from me. 

[KillerGoose]

(04-06-2023, 01:17 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Poverty and warm climates seem to correlate with crime more than D vs R, but that's just a glance from me. 

Yeah, stuff like this is really complicated. Politics do tie into it at some level, I imagine. It is going to be some amalgamation of education, poverty levels, access to healthcare & assistance etc. 

[Mike M (the other one)]

(04-06-2023, 01:09 PM)Nately120 Wrote: My point is that they have the undue power and leeway to be able to cry unjust after losing by 11 points.  That sort of loss and whiney excuse making response to said loss with a candidate who is now 0-2 should lead to a loss of influence and party reevaluation.  But they have enough power to dig in their heels and throw a fit in response. 

Is the Democrat that was just elected corrupt?  I assume they can sell the notion to their supporters simply because she's a Democrat, if nothing else.  Its just odd that it is so admirable to get your ass kicked and then cry foul and maintain losing positions.  

I assume if they had an punt of power equal to their voter base they'd have to act in a more reasonable manner.  Perhaps im way off base here.  

Ok, i see you point, but i don't care if you lose by 1 or 100 Mil votes. Someone's going to win and someone's gonna lose and the losers will whine. Nature of Politics.

I doubt the Dem is corrupt (Dems aren't that stupid... at least I hope not). Big difference between hearsay and proving it in court which would be the required method to remove her from office. So I'm not worried too much about it, just a bunch of nonsense.

[*Nately120*]

(04-06-2023, 02:04 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Ok, i see you point, but i don't care if you lose by 1 or 100 Mil votes. Someone's going to win and someone's gonna lose and the losers will whine. Nature of Politics.

I doubt the Dem is corrupt (Dems aren't that stupid... at least I hope not). Big difference between hearsay and proving it in court which would be the required method to remove her from office. So I'm not worried too much about it, just a bunch of nonsense.

When you lose voters and you double down on your policies and strategy rather than  making adjustments it makes me think you aren't looking for legitimate avenues to victory. 

This was evident when Paul Ryan and the GOP were reevaluating strategy following the 2012 loss, but Trump took over the party and all the introspection and retooling to better meet the majority of voters sort of went out the window and paved the way for googling if a prisoner can be president.  

[*Synric*]

(04-06-2023, 01:11 PM)KillerGoose Wrote: Pretty low. The seven would be New York, Massachusetts, Washington, California, Connecticut, Delaware and Maryland. There are two of these states in the top 20 for overall crime rates - California and Washington. Six of the poorest show up in that top 20. On average, red states tend to have higher crime than blue states.

I am not saying that I definitively believe the two are correlated, but it is what the data tells you. Out of the top 20 states with highest crime rates, 13 voted red in the 2020 election. Out of the top 40, 24 are red.

But does voting for one candidate make a state Liberal or Conservative or even Blue or Red? West Virginia votes overwhelmingly Blue (state and federal) besides the last two presidential elections where its been Trump. 

[KillerGoose]

(04-06-2023, 02:42 PM)Synric Wrote: But does voting for one candidate make a state Liberal or Conservative or even Blue or Red? West Virginia votes overwhelmingly Blue (state and federal) besides the last two presidential elections where its been Trump. 

It's a fair question to ask and a difficult one to answer. Governorship is probably better and more pertinent. West Virginia is an interesting case, though. For instance, WV has a Republican governor, but he was a Democrat originally. He switched. They have voted Republican federally for eight years. They have a conservative Supreme Court majority. Both representatives in the House are Republican. In the West Virginia State Senate, 31 of 34 members are Republican. So, Republican presidential vote, governor, Supreme Court, Representatives and state senate. That looks like a political switch to me.