Jump to content

10albersa

Huntington Tower 330'
  • Content Count

    404
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

64 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. In fairness, Nov 1st was the time that Bloomberg was seriously threatening running for office, then announced mid-November. It wouldn't be out of the ordinary to see him mentioned more often. I'm kind of surprised he wasn't mentioned ahead of Warren.
  2. Classic. Nevermind that 4 of the most dangerous intersections in the state are on this road, there's a chance it might possibly cost us one customer a month!
  3. I've wondered this about every big or 'hot' city. At what point are big cities going to be 80%+ rich white people? Some despise that there are people fighting gentrification, but that is the end result if we let the market decide. And despite what some may think, a less diverse population is an absolutely horrible thing for a city.
  4. Bernie does alienate the middle-ground suburbs though, an area that has been huge in making gains in the US House despite gerrymandering.
  5. There's two ways the Democrats can proceed. 1. Do what the USA Today article is suggesting and try and gain back our ancestral brethren, a shrinking portion of the population with disproportionate amounts of voting power. 2. Expand our growing demographics within the base. (Run-up urban margins) For the most part, I see these as mutually exclusive, there are some candidates with overlap (Bernie and Sherrod seem to be able to gather enthusiastic support from both factions). Investing in strategy #1 will guarantee a victory in the 2020 presidential, but severely limits the ceiling as the growing populations of young people and minorities don't care about status quo messages. Potentially hurts future engagement in the party within these growing factions. Investing in strategy #2 means a tougher path to victory, but if city margins are big enough in PA and MI, we win anyway. This strategy will help bring out the vote in states where there are also important down-ballot races outside of the midwest (MI has a senate race, but all other important senate races are not in the midwest). Can help solidify the enthusiasm that finally is starting to show within the younger generations for a long time.
  6. I hope so, I much prefer her to Sanders, but he seems to be winning the battle between the two. I wish he would have just backed her instead of ran. At this point, I've determined the only attribute I care about in the remaining field is who will bring the most voters out in the most important states in 2020. Those states are GA, IA, ME, AZ, CO, NC, and MI. None of what we've debated here is even possible if voters are apathetic and Republicans retain control of the senate. So what ticket wins the WH (fairly easy task), and 4 of the above senate seats? GA: Biden/Abrams... she's the only way Democrats have a chance at winning the open seat IA: Bernie, Warren or Pete... This one is probably lost unless democrats win Iowa outright in the presidential, Ernst is a strong incumbent. Just run up the score in the cities. ME: Warren... seems like this should be achievable no matter who is on the ticket, but I imagine Warren would do best in the state AZ: Bernie or Warren... Mark Kelly should be able to bring this home without help from the top, but you have to bring our the vote in Phoenix. CO: Should be a slam dunk NC: Biden/Abrams: Tillis is vulnerable, but Democrats aren't running a strong candidate either. This will go how the state goes in 2020. MI: Biden/Bernie: I'm a little worried about this race given the strength of the Republican running. Could get poached if we aren't careful. Even with Biden as president, I have full faith that if we have the senate and house, they can lead on policy and all he has to do is sign the damn thing.
  7. If Klobuchar is really moving up, then the primary is simply just a doing a 'flavor of the month' and we will end up with Biden (and maybe Sanders still in it) after Super Tuesday.
  8. They should direct their anger at the hotel that is going in near the Madison and Edwards intersection. There's going to be 100+ more flushing toilets going into their already over-capacity wastewater system, there will be hundreds of cars worth of traffic daily with this hotel, and all the tourists are going to ruin the trail that runs right behind it. They're probably tearing down a few trees too, that's literally illegal! Oh, wait... a hotel won't add to the housing stock so they can keep their houses at artificially high values. Now I get it
  9. The worst part is that if they did this project without telling anyone, car drivers wouldn't even notice that anything changed. It's a win for buses and nobody loses (except I guess taxpayers) and they can't even be bothered to do it.
  10. If city leaders had an attitude like this, OTR would look more like The Banks right now than an actual urban neighborhood.
  11. 538 went over this in an discussion this morning. Biden sucked up a lot of the air for minority candidates because of his popularity in the black community. That leaves Harris and Booker in a tough position. Another point in that discussion was that the 'bridge' Democrats between Sanders and Biden don't offer anything that would actually siphon off votes from either camp in an election like this. She was my #1 candidate way back at the beginning because she was strong in the hearings I saw her in over the last few years (Kavanaugh being the biggest of those) and because she was a Democratic middle-ground. Whatever magic she has as a prosecutor asking pointed questions didn't translate to much in the way of charisma. Her attempts to be "likeable" hurt to watch.
  12. And I think laying out a plan would go a long way in generating more support for the levy in 2020. Saying we might do some cool ideas doesn't leave anyone feeling like they have a stake in this (besides people who depend on timely buses now).
  13. Exactly, it is much more sustainable for businesses if they have residents. For example: I live in Wyoming, I go to the 3 restaurants and coffee shop within walking distance on a more than weekly basis. I go downtown once every month or so, and rarely patronize the same restaurant twice. With visitors, it can be very tough to get a consistent customer base and you are subject to the trends and reviews of internet strangers. Things can vary wildly. I imagine that office workers also behave similarly to residents in that they find places nearby that they will regularly hit up for lunch.
  14. Let's make sure we get voices in there, I'm worried the anti-streetcar people could mobilize if that meeting reaches enough ears. If there is a choice between decent service and removing ticketing, fare-free is still the more important need at this juncture. What good is decent service if you miss your train due to ridiculous ticketing machines?
  15. I will never complain about a development in downtown not having enough on-site parking. If the goal is to create the best urban neighborhood it can be, then parking needs to be an afterthought in these developments, not the driving force. Take the bus, bike, live in OTR, there are options if you want to work there and not deal with the hassle of parking. No need to cater to people that will live outside the city limits. We need to push people to use these options if we ever want to reverse the damage that cars have done to our city, that starts with making parking as scarce as we can.
×
×
  • Create New...