A McCain Outpost in Blue Park Slope
Hey, don’t assume that Park Slope will go blue on November 4th. Four brownstones on 11th Street are adorned with McCain signs (though residents had to travel to New Jersey to get them). Writes the NY Times, “The election district that includes 11th Street has 643 registered voters: 51 of them Republicans, 452 Democrats, 23…
Hey, don’t assume that Park Slope will go blue on November 4th. Four brownstones on 11th Street are adorned with McCain signs (though residents had to travel to New Jersey to get them). Writes the NY Times, “The election district that includes 11th Street has 643 registered voters: 51 of them Republicans, 452 Democrats, 23 in other parties and 117 who did not list a party. That breakdown is echoed by the overwhelmingly Democratic makeup of Assembly District 52, as well as that of Brooklyn, which voted 79 percent for Senator John Kerry in 2004.” The McCain supporters are old school Slopers, writes the Times: residents from long before the Manhattan exodus who say the block was full of Roman Catholics and firemen when they arrived. But donkeys and elephants alike seem to be getting along: old and new, Obama and McCain-lovers. As one Democratic neighbor said about his neighbor’s signs, “To me, that says the person’s possibly open to some dialogue.
An Outpost in the Blue Sea of Brooklyn [NY Times]
Photo by moralesdirect.
He won’t win a third term through the council He will win it through the election and the polls currently say that he will. Q.E.D.
I’m not obsessed with signs – I just think that people who put these political signs up are douches……
Just like I do not care (as I walk down your block or drive behind you) what your political views are….why do you care what I think of your signs?
“Snark…the polls show that despite people being against a third term, over 80% of them would vote for Bloomberg!!!!! This is some kind of nonsense!!!!”
It’s not nonsense. It’s about the democratic process. Bloomberg wanted to “win” a third term not through another popular election, but through the vote of a City Council stacked with his cronies. Talk about a predetermined outcome. Why should any politician – particularly one who has previously supported term limits quite explicitly – have the ability to subvert the process when voters have TWICE voted for term limits? If 80% of NYers will vote for Bloomberg, than there’s no problem – let’s have a vote. But a back-room deal to usurp the people’s express will stinks.
I’d like to know if my charities are worthwhile.
SnarkSlope – yeah I guess another referendum would be ‘better’ process – but since it would have to be a special election and very few would vote, I’m not sure that it would be that much more ‘legitimate’ anyway.
I do find it interesting that people supporting NYC term limits seem to feel that the peoples choice (vote) is so sacrosanct, when you consider that the vote in question is one designed to REPLACE voting (choice) with a legal processes…..
Go to hell fsrq. I probably pay more taxes than you, I do vote, give to charities and will serve on jury duty.
What is this obsession you have with the signs?? I can’t begin to imagine what happened to you as a child for you to harp on this the way you do.
Are you campaigning for the nobel prize in economics?
daveinbedstuy – who CARES who you support – I didnt ask and I dont care and why are you so intent on telling everyone????
Do you also have a “I Support the Troops” metallic ribbon on your car? or a “Give Peace a Chance” bumper sticker?
These ‘signs’ are totally empty gestures that DO NOTHING and simply are a cry for attention by the idiots who engage in them. Instead of wasting your time with signs – try voting, paying your taxes, sitting for jury duty and quietly give to a worthwhile charity.
Which fool really thinks McCain wont raise everyone’s taxes? Same with Obama. This election, perhaps more than any others, will see the tax promises of the winner be the first promise to meet its end at the hands of reality. We, as a country, are deep in the shit. No amount of trickle down or trickle up is going to get us out. We need money to pay for infrastructure improvements, money to fight wars, money to improve education, money to fund new energy policy, money to fix the financial mess, the list goes on and on.
Rich people moan about their proportinate burden, but take a closer look at the burden on the middle class and the poor: there is no room for much more of an increase in their taxes. We rely on them to drive the economy, but they need disposable income. The rich have far more room than anyone else. Indeed, many of them will not even notice the increase, as noted above. Reagan had to go back and increase taxes on the rich, Bush Sr, and Clinton too. It makes sense because it is the only true option, and even then the rich didnt suddenly become poor. They did well when the middle class got stronger.