Politics

Come here to talk about topics that are not related to development, or even Kansas City.
User avatar
beautyfromashes
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 4709
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:04 am

Re: Politics

Post by beautyfromashes » Thu Nov 08, 2018 7:41 pm

brewcrew1000 wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 7:34 pm
beautyfromashes wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 6:35 pm
I think Beto more than has the personality but not the depth. He’s probably more of a 2024, 2028 candidate. Just not enough experience or substance. He’ll definitely be a future Dem nominee. The Dems did something very smart in some races this term; they had women with military backgrounds. All of them won. That’s an ideal candidate.
Trump didn't have any experience and he won. People don't want career politicians anymore.
Yes, but Beto is not just a politician, he is an inexperienced one. I do agree that career politicians are losing favor. A Dem version of Trump, like Mark Cuban, could be a viable candidate.

User avatar
FangKC
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 14004
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: Politics

Post by FangKC » Fri Nov 09, 2018 1:21 am

In many parts of the USA, eligible voters who didn't vote in 2016 outnumbered those that voted for either Clinton or Trump. In Jackson County, Missouri, had "Nobody" been on the ballot with Clinton and Trump, "Nobody" would have won.

Mapping Where Americans Don't Vote

https://www.citylab.com/life/2018/11/vo ... ap/574939/

Counties where none-of-the-above would have won in 2016.

https://urbanobservatory.maps.arcgis.co ... 3762d82e82

States where none-of-the-above would have won the electoral college in 2016.

https://urbanobservatory.maps.arcgis.co ... 3762d82e82

Jackson County, Missouri

Image

Johnson County, Kansas

Image

User avatar
FangKC
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 14004
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: Politics

Post by FangKC » Fri Nov 09, 2018 1:47 am

phuqueue wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 7:04 pm
beautyfromashes wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 5:26 pm
phuqueue wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 3:44 pm
...aggregate national opinion on a broad range of issues is closer to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez than to Claire McCaskill, Paul Ryan, Mark Meadows, or Donald Trump.
I think you’ve been going to too many communist reading groups or antifa protests. It’s time to get out into the real world. Claire McCaskill is probably right where America as a whole is on policy.
Do you have any actual facts to cite, or is this just your own intuition?

70% of Americans (including 52% of Republicans) support Medicare for All: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/28/most-am ... ition.html
Medicaid expands by ballot initiative in Idaho, Nebraska, Utah: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/07/heal ... allot.html
52% of Americans thought taxes should be raised on corporations, and 21% thought they were about right, before Republicans lowered them last year: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/20 ... d-incomes/ (that poll also shows only 24% wanted to reduce taxes on high-income earners)
62% support tuition-free college: https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/college ... on-n620856 (this one is kinda old, I don't see a newer one)
61% support stricter gun laws (only 8% support laxer laws): https://news.gallup.com/poll/1645/guns.aspx
81% support cutting greenhouse gases, 67% support federal carbon tax, 78% support tax on fossil fuel imports: https://news.stanford.edu/2018/07/16/po ... ns-strong/
67% want immigration to increase or hold current levels, only 29% want a decrease: https://news.gallup.com/poll/1660/immigration.aspx
58% believe abortion should be legal in all or most cases: http://www.pewforum.org/fact-sheet/publ ... -abortion/
63% oppose raising the age for Social Security, 64% support raising SS taxes on all workers, 67% support raising SS taxes on wealthy workers, 57% oppose reducing future benefits for current young workers: https://news.gallup.com/poll/1693/social-security.aspx (these are also old numbers, don't see a more recent poll)
And I previously noted that when RTW was presented to MO voters a few months ago, they obliterated it.

This is just a random sampling of issues that popped into my head. Like I acknowledged before, there are some, like abolish ICE, that the general population isn't there on. But by and large, majorities support "left" policies, even if they wouldn't identify as leftwing, even if they recoil at "socialism."
As my post above indicates, in many counties the majority of eligible voters didn't turn out in a presidential election. Vast polling support for the above issues is meaningless when so many people don't vote. While these issues are popular, apparently they aren't important enough to be bothered with taking action--for most people who want them. The lack of carry-through problem. Intention vs. action.

The interesting part in this is that the voters that oppose the things listed above, vote. They always vote. They never miss an election. Ever.
Last edited by FangKC on Fri Nov 09, 2018 4:05 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
FangKC
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 14004
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: Politics

Post by FangKC » Fri Nov 09, 2018 1:55 am

beautyfromashes wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 7:41 pm
brewcrew1000 wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 7:34 pm
beautyfromashes wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 6:35 pm
I think Beto more than has the personality but not the depth. He’s probably more of a 2024, 2028 candidate. Just not enough experience or substance. He’ll definitely be a future Dem nominee. The Dems did something very smart in some races this term; they had women with military backgrounds. All of them won. That’s an ideal candidate.
Trump didn't have any experience and he won. People don't want career politicians anymore.
Yes, but Beto is not just a politician, he is an inexperienced one. I do agree that career politicians are losing favor. A Dem version of Trump, like Mark Cuban, could be a viable candidate.
I predict that after Trump, Americans might prefer traditional politicians again. I don't know who that will be. No one does at this point.

User avatar
WSPanic
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 3665
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: Politics

Post by WSPanic » Fri Nov 09, 2018 9:14 am

I agree that it seems to soon for Beto. But I'm also tired of hearing the Warren/Biden/Sanders/HRC talk. I'm a lifelong Democrat and appreciate the years of time and effort those people have dedicated to public service, but I'm ready for some new voices. Maybe Harris - maybe someone people aren't even considering right now. Nothing would surprise me at this point.

flyingember
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 7622
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: Politics

Post by flyingember » Fri Nov 09, 2018 9:27 am

I would like to see a JFK-esque election in 2020. A Democratic primary where someone was born in the 1980s. At the very least this would help bring energy into the mix.

Someone born in 1980-82 would be 37-39 in 2020.

It's very possible that only having candidates the age of their grandparents is a turn off for young voters.

phuqueue
Penntower
Penntower
Posts: 2393
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 10:33 pm

Re: Politics

Post by phuqueue » Fri Nov 09, 2018 9:36 am

beautyfromashes wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 7:16 pm
Good Lord! And you trust polls too.

“Should everyone in America get a house, and car and puppy from the government while working 10 hours a week?”

“Yes, yes they should!”

“Poll says 95% of Americans want to double taxes to pay for....” smh
You could have just said "yes I'm talking out of my ass" and saved us all some time

phuqueue
Penntower
Penntower
Posts: 2393
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 10:33 pm

Re: Politics

Post by phuqueue » Fri Nov 09, 2018 10:16 am

FangKC wrote:
Fri Nov 09, 2018 1:47 am
phuqueue wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 7:04 pm
beautyfromashes wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 5:26 pm

I think you’ve been going to too many communist reading groups or antifa protests. It’s time to get out into the real world. Claire McCaskill is probably right where America as a whole is on policy.
Do you have any actual facts to cite, or is this just your own intuition?

70% of Americans (including 52% of Republicans) support Medicare for All: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/28/most-am ... ition.html
Medicaid expands by ballot initiative in Idaho, Nebraska, Utah: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/07/heal ... allot.html
52% of Americans thought taxes should be raised on corporations, and 21% thought they were about right, before Republicans lowered them last year: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/20 ... d-incomes/ (that poll also shows only 24% wanted to reduce taxes on high-income earners)
62% support tuition-free college: https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/college ... on-n620856 (this one is kinda old, I don't see a newer one)
61% support stricter gun laws (only 8% support laxer laws): https://news.gallup.com/poll/1645/guns.aspx
81% support cutting greenhouse gases, 67% support federal carbon tax, 78% support tax on fossil fuel imports: https://news.stanford.edu/2018/07/16/po ... ns-strong/
67% want immigration to increase or hold current levels, only 29% want a decrease: https://news.gallup.com/poll/1660/immigration.aspx
58% believe abortion should be legal in all or most cases: http://www.pewforum.org/fact-sheet/publ ... -abortion/
63% oppose raising the age for Social Security, 64% support raising SS taxes on all workers, 67% support raising SS taxes on wealthy workers, 57% oppose reducing future benefits for current young workers: https://news.gallup.com/poll/1693/social-security.aspx (these are also old numbers, don't see a more recent poll)
And I previously noted that when RTW was presented to MO voters a few months ago, they obliterated it.

This is just a random sampling of issues that popped into my head. Like I acknowledged before, there are some, like abolish ICE, that the general population isn't there on. But by and large, majorities support "left" policies, even if they wouldn't identify as leftwing, even if they recoil at "socialism."
As my post above indicates, in many counties the majority of eligible voters didn't turn out in a presidential election. Vast polling support for the above issues is meaningless when so many people don't vote. While these issues are popular, apparently they aren't important enough to be bothered with taking action--for most people who want them. The lack of carry-through problem. Intention vs. action.

The interesting part in this is that the voters that oppose the things listed above, vote. They always vote. They never miss an election. Ever.
I think this is only part of it. People who don't vote are not one monolithic bloc -- some people don't vote because they're not interested in general, some don't vote because they can't (either practical hurdles, like not being able to get off work, or, increasingly, intentional hurdles, ie voter suppression), some don't vote because they don't like their options, etc. There's a lot of chatter about how the Green candidate in AZ SEN was pulling more votes than Sinema was losing by (last I heard, Sinema was now narrowly up, so possibly a moot point if she hangs on), and I read that generally if you pulled the Green candidate from the race, 60% of the Green voters simply wouldn't vote at all, while the rest break about 2 to 1 for the Dem (caveat: not sure what the source of this data was). I think liberals who blame Green candidates for Dem losses (and I have, myself, blamed Green candidates for Dem losses in the past) assume the whole Green vote would shift to the Dem if there were no Green on the ballot, but the reality, according to that data, is that the Dem can expect more like only about 27% of those voters, and a strong majority of the would-be Greens join the other non-voters.

Point being that by actually running on these issues, Dems could potentially energize some of these non-voters. Like it's easy to say support for these things doesn't matter if people don't vote, but Dems haven't actually been campaigning on most of this stuff themselves. Medicare for All has been basically a fringe position within the Democratic Party until Bernie's surprising run two years ago, and it has still not been embraced by the whole party. Same with tuition-free college, which actually still hasn't yet caught on even to the same extent as Medicare for All. Dems have, until basically this year, been terrified of running on gun control, and plenty still won't (Joe Manchin is still cutting ads where he shoots legislation he doesn't like) or with caveats (Kander's ad a few years ago, where he has to preface by showing off his gun bona fides). Abortion is only really starting to become a live issue for Dems now that they feel it's under threat (might be closing the barn after the horse already got out on that one). And so on.

Running a candidate who actually wants the same things as the general public seems like it should be an obvious strategy that could pull in apathetic voters, but neither party has actually tried it lately. You'll still have problems with people who will put party ID ahead of self-interest (which is why such a candidate will need to run on one of the major parties' ticket -- leftists who dream about supplanting the Dems are living in a fantasy world -- and why plenty of Republicans will still vote against a Dem who's better for them, or vice versa), and of course majority support for something also doesn't mean unanimous support for something (eg there are probably some hardcore right wing guys out there who are also not voting because they don't like their options, and this progressive candidate isn't going to bring them in), but actually responding to what a majority of voters say they want seems like a good start. Unfortunately you'd lose all that sweet Wall Street and health insurer and fossil fuel money (oh yeah, 81% favor a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United https://www.documentcloud.org/documents ... eport.html).

User avatar
grovester
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 3895
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 7:30 pm
Location: KC Metro

Re: Politics

Post by grovester » Fri Nov 09, 2018 10:32 am

Bingo on your last sentence.

earthling
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 5148
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 2:27 pm

Re: Politics

Post by earthling » Fri Nov 09, 2018 12:34 pm

JoCo defense lawyer expects booming business from new Missouri marijuana law
https://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/ ... -work.html

Will also be interesting to see if we end up with a lot of legal small pot growers on MO side of the area.
“You’re going to have people who go through all the proper channels, have a condition, get a prescription from a legit doctor, buy or grow some marijuana and then venture into Kansas to go see a Sporting Kansas City game or to go shopping, then forget they have it on them,” Davies said. “When it becomes as common to have on you in Missouri as Tylenol, you're going to forget about it. Then you come into Kansas, interact with law enforcement, they search and find marijuana on you, and you're charged with a crime. It could potentially be prison time, even for small amounts.”

Compared with other states, Kansas has strict marijuana laws. The first offense is a misdemeanor Class B, a second is a misdemeanor Class A, and a third becomes a felony. So depending on a person's criminal history, forgetting about marijuana in a pocket or car could result in some serious legal hot water on the other side of the state line.

earthling
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 5148
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 2:27 pm

Re: Politics

Post by earthling » Sun Nov 11, 2018 12:05 pm

NY Times opinion piece on KS going blue...
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/10/opin ... ernor.html

earthling
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 5148
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 2:27 pm

Re: Politics

Post by earthling » Wed Dec 19, 2018 9:24 pm

KS lawmakers switching from GOP to DEM...
https://www.newsweek.com/two-more-kansa ... ty-1265961

User avatar
FangKC
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 14004
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: Politics

Post by FangKC » Sun Dec 23, 2018 8:17 pm

Missouri governor wants repeal of new redistricting law
When then-Missouri state Sen. Mike Parson didn’t agree with a voter-approved law imposing tough regulations on dog breeders, he led a legislative effort to repeal the measure and replace it with a tamer version.

Now eight years later as governor, Parson believes a similar repeal-and-replace effort is necessary for a new voter-approved constitutional amendment revising the way Missouri’s legislative districts are drawn. Beyond that, Parson said in an interview with The Associated Press, it may also be time to raise the bar for initiative petitions to appear on the ballot.

The Republican governor acknowledges that neither of those things may sound good to voters.

“Fundamentally, you think when the people vote you shouldn’t be changing that vote,” Parson told the AP. “But the reality of it is that is somewhat what your job is sometimes, if you know something’s unconstitutional, if you know some of it’s not right.”
...
https://apnews.com/7702bd1c62244505a065 ... S4IKbuLxhI

User avatar
FangKC
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 14004
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: Politics

Post by FangKC » Sun Dec 23, 2018 9:30 pm

No surprise here. Kansas government found to be decimated.

New Kansas governor’s budget repairs may fire GOP opposition

https://apnews.com/5e57951d3ff64890ad0d43222d9a2517

aknowledgeableperson
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 12256
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 10:31 pm

Re: Politics

Post by aknowledgeableperson » Sun Dec 30, 2018 12:38 am

One recent poll has a majority of the US wanting to impeach or remove Trump from office. For those of you who desire to impeach or remove Trump remember who would replace him. Mike Pence. Pence might bring some order into the White House but politically there wouldn't be much difference.

User avatar
FangKC
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 14004
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: Politics

Post by FangKC » Sun Dec 30, 2018 7:24 am

Pence doesn't tweet and make the stock market plummet.

User avatar
grovester
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 3895
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 7:30 pm
Location: KC Metro

Re: Politics

Post by grovester » Sun Dec 30, 2018 9:01 am

There will be an impeachment when the republicans want an impeachment.

I'm happy having Trump neutered.

phuqueue
Penntower
Penntower
Posts: 2393
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 10:33 pm

Re: Politics

Post by phuqueue » Sun Dec 30, 2018 6:47 pm

FangKC wrote:
Sun Dec 23, 2018 8:17 pm
Missouri governor wants repeal of new redistricting law
When then-Missouri state Sen. Mike Parson didn’t agree with a voter-approved law imposing tough regulations on dog breeders, he led a legislative effort to repeal the measure and replace it with a tamer version.

Now eight years later as governor, Parson believes a similar repeal-and-replace effort is necessary for a new voter-approved constitutional amendment revising the way Missouri’s legislative districts are drawn. Beyond that, Parson said in an interview with The Associated Press, it may also be time to raise the bar for initiative petitions to appear on the ballot.

The Republican governor acknowledges that neither of those things may sound good to voters.

“Fundamentally, you think when the people vote you shouldn’t be changing that vote,” Parson told the AP. “But the reality of it is that is somewhat what your job is sometimes, if you know something’s unconstitutional, if you know some of it’s not right.”
...
https://apnews.com/7702bd1c62244505a065 ... S4IKbuLxhI
Not often that I have occasion to quote David Frum of all people, but "if conservatives become convinced that they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will reject democracy."

User avatar
TheLastGentleman
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1004
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2017 9:27 pm

Re: Politics

Post by TheLastGentleman » Fri Jan 11, 2019 12:39 am

The government is the largest employer in KC, so I guess much of the city is essentially jobless right now. Any ideas what impact this is having on the local economy?

User avatar
FangKC
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 14004
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: Politics

Post by FangKC » Fri Jan 11, 2019 12:28 pm

Missouri has 55,448 federal workers. Kansas has 25,007 federal workers. Many federal workers for both states are located near the Kansas City Metro. The federal prison and military base at Leavenworth would account for many massed around the KC Metro. I can't figure out though if Leavenworth employment base is being counted in some of the figures reported in the local media -- thus some discrepancies between what the Federal Reserve reports, and the figure used in the KC Star article from 2015. The Star might be including Whiteman AFB employment since it refers to the KC area, and not specifically the KC Metro. Federal workers in Lawrence KS might also be included in the KC Star article. I have no way of knowing.

The largest federal footprint would also include agencies like the US Postal Service, the IRS, the GSA, the FBI, the EPA, the FDA, the USDA, the federal Justice Department and the federal courthouses in both KCMO, and KCKS, the Corps of Engineers, and the National Nuclear Security Administration Kansas City National Security Campus,

The Federal Reserve reports that as of October, 2018, there were around 26,700 federal workers in the Kansas CIty Metro (MSA).

BTW, the Federal Reserve Bank employees are not included in the figures, since they are a private agency, not federal.

The vast majority of all federal employees -- about 79 percent -- work outside the D.C. region. The other thing to remember is that while many federal workers will likely receive back-pay, many workers who are contractors will not ever receive back-pay. Through privatization, the number of federal jobs has gone down since 1990. Locally it looks like about 6,000 less workers. I assume many of those functions are being done by contractors.

This is from a 2015 KC Star article:
...
A lot of workers are affected. Klumb believes Kansas City’s downtown may have the highest concentration of federal workers per capita of any U.S. city outside of Washington.

About 10,000 federal employees work within or adjacent to the downtown freeway loop. That’s one-fourth of the federal government’s overall employment of about 38,000 in the Kansas City area, which makes Uncle Sam the largest employer in the metro area and the largest downtown.
...
Federal agencies occupy all or parts of 19 downtown buildings, including the sprawling Internal Revenue Service center on Pershing Road and the massive Richard Bolling Federal Building on East 12th Street.

That building tally excludes the Federal Reserve tower south of the Liberty Memorial. Federal Reserve Banks are not federal departments or agencies.

The 1.2 million-square-foot, 18-story Bolling building, which stretches over two blocks downtown, has been Uncle Sam’s signature work site for five decades. It recently had a four-phase, 15-year, $285 million remodeling to upgrade internal systems and begin brightening its 1960s-era decor.
...
North of the Bolling building is the Charles Evans Whittaker U.S. Courthouse on East Ninth Street, another large, secure federal structure downtown. It’s home to federal district, appellate and bankruptcy courts, related attorneys’ offices and legal programs, and a few other agencies.

The IRS service center and the Federal Bureau of Investigation also have high-security buildings of their own just outside the downtown freeway loop.

Read more here: https://www.kansascity.com/news/busines ... rylink=cpy
...
http://www.governing.com/gov-data/feder ... state.html

https://alfred.stlouisfed.org/series?se ... ign=alfred

https://www.kansascity.com/news/busines ... 54798.html

Post Reply