|
WNYC segment on Congressman Crowley's machine in Queens and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's primary challenge.
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2017 18:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 16:54 |
|
|
GalacticAcid posted:WNYC segment on Congressman Crowley's machine in Queens and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's primary challenge. here's hoping more machines get busted. the Brooklyn Dems have nothing on Crowley's machine
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 01:55
|
|
|
get that OUT of my face posted:I went to a New Kings Democrats meeting that discussed the constitutional convention. They're all for it, and as someone who isn't, I decided to hear them out. I left halfway through mostly because the disgusting heat of the church we were in, but their argument more or less hinged upon one thing: the State Senate is the biggest obstacle to progress, so this is a better way of making lasting change. Not only is this a fatalistic argument, the vast majority of convention delegates will be elected by... State Senate districts. Three delegates per district with 15 at-large candidates. So they're relying on the hosed up State Senate to save New York from the State Senate. "Con Con" could not be a more appropriate shorthand for this charade. I have a friend in DSA who is all for it, and apparently Jabari Brisport is supporting it too. Baffling and frustrating. Edited to add -- I know this post is a couple days old but I just got in a slight argument about this convention and recalled it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2017 00:49
|
|
|
For the record, here's a Facebook link to a video where Jabari endorses the Yes vote. Apologies for linking to FB but that's the only positive statement I could track down.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2017 01:31
|
|
|
union called me everyday this week to vote no. never called for years before.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2017 01:51
|
|
|
the one union argument against the convention that isn't true is the hysteria about pensions. it doesn't matter what constitutional changes happen, state pensions are still an ironclad agreement labor stands to lose a whole lot more, of course
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2017 03:32
|
|
|
get that OUT of my face posted:the one union argument against the convention that isn't true is the hysteria about pensions. it doesn't matter what constitutional changes happen, state pensions are still an ironclad agreement The way they’re structured in the NY Constitution is a big part of why they haven’t become the sort of unfounded football that has completely destroyed New Jersey. It’s a reasonable fear.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2017 03:43
|
|
|
CaptainPsyko posted:The way they’re structured in the NY Constitution is a big part of why they haven’t become the sort of unfounded football that has completely destroyed New Jersey. It’s a reasonable fear. other statistics from that poll i linked: democrats oppose the convention 2-to-1, republicans and independents oppose it 3-to-1, a slight plurality oppose it in NYC, and Long Island and upstate massively oppose it. here's hoping people actually remember to flip the ballot over
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2017 04:05
|
|
|
The status quo reigns supreme. Things cant get better, so it makes no sense to risk anything. I disagree of course, but I feel like that is the position being argued.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2017 06:27
|
|
|
ate poo poo on live tv posted:The status quo reigns supreme. Things cant get better, so it makes no sense to risk anything. There are three ballot measures on the back of the ballot this year. Two of them are constitutional amendments arrived at using the regular process. One of those would allow judges to remove pensions from public officials indicted on corruption charges. Seems better than the status quo to me, and no convention was needed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2017 06:29
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:There are three ballot measures on the back of the ballot this year. Two of them are constitutional amendments arrived at using the regular process. One of those would allow judges to remove pensions from public officials indicted on corruption charges. Seems better than the status quo to me, and no convention was needed. I feel like removing pensions, even if "deserved," is ultimately a conservative aka, bad, position. e: One of the most important aspects of a pension, is that they should be absolute. If you can take them away, you undermine a lot of their benefit and their support. Throw people in prison for doing bad things, but any earned pensions should be protected. ate shit on live tv has issued a correction as of 06:37 on Nov 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2017 06:31
|
|
|
get that OUT of my face posted:i'm not too well versed on this whole thing but what i got from NKD was that current pension agreements are safe and ironclad. future ones stand to lose a lot. feel free to correct me if i'm wrong Currently the State Constitution bars the state from downgrading a worker's pension once that worker has been enrolled in the pension program. They can (and do) create worse pension tiers for newer employees. There are still a handful of Tier I folks working--their pension is half their pay in their highest paid year, and they do not have any payroll contribution to the pension fund. The bulk of people I'm aware of right now are Tier 4. They need 25 years of service and need to be 55 years old to retire. They have a flat contribution rate (I think 2%?) and their pension is based on the average of their 3 best consecutive years. They also cannot have more than a 10% increase in pay year over year for pension purposes. People like me are Tier VI. Most of Tier VI has to be 62 years old to retire and has to work 30 years. Some places like MTA and the Court Police are still 25/55. We pay a variable portion of our salary--up to 7% into the pension. This rate is determined by the previous year's salary, and stupidly is not a marginal rate. So you can actually do the thing that people who don't understand income taxes worry about, where you'll have less take home if you make very slightly more than a threshold value than if you make very slightly less. Moving all workers onto Tier VI would absolutely be on the table at a Convention.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2017 12:31
|
|
|
ate poo poo on live tv posted:The status quo reigns supreme. Things cant get better, so it makes no sense to risk anything. well you're really dumb then. it doesn't follow from "the status-quo is bad" that "we should take any risk to improve the status quo". Everything in life is a cost benefit analysis. you weigh the risks against the expected rewards. when you consider the risks of a constitutional convention (loving over unions, education, God only knows what else) it turns out that they are much, much more likely outcomes than the thing progressives who support the convention want to do. most progressives want to unfuck Albany by changing he senate, but most delegates will be elected from senate districts and the at-large delegates may well be in violation of federal law. Reasonable people look at the situation and conclude that the risks are too great to justify the slim chance of fixing the senate.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2017 14:03
|
|
|
grah posted:Currently the State Constitution bars the state from downgrading a worker's pension once that worker has been enrolled in the pension program. They can (and do) create worse pension tiers for newer employees. There are still a handful of Tier I folks working--their pension is half their pay in their highest paid year, and they do not have any payroll contribution to the pension fund. The bulk of people I'm aware of right now are Tier 4. They need 25 years of service and need to be 55 years old to retire. They have a flat contribution rate (I think 2%?) and their pension is based on the average of their 3 best consecutive years. They also cannot have more than a 10% increase in pay year over year for pension purposes. People like me are Tier VI. Most of Tier VI has to be 62 years old to retire and has to work 30 years. Some places like MTA and the Court Police are still 25/55. We pay a variable portion of our salary--up to 7% into the pension. This rate is determined by the previous year's salary, and stupidly is not a marginal rate. So you can actually do the thing that people who don't understand income taxes worry about, where you'll have less take home if you make very slightly more than a threshold value than if you make very slightly less. you can still retire at 55 with pension, you take a big penalty to do it tho. or at least i can as a tier v
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2017 14:49
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:
lol violation of federal law, get the gently caress out of here. Ogmius815 posted:well you're really dumb then. it doesn't follow from "the status-quo is bad" that "we should take any risk to improve the status quo". ate shit on live tv has issued a correction as of 18:11 on Nov 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2017 18:08
|
|
|
the Working Families Party wrote a good roundup of why we should vote "no" on the convention
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2017 18:22
|
|
|
ate poo poo on live tv posted:I feel like removing pensions, even if "deserved," is ultimately a conservative aka, bad, position. Here is the ballotpedia explanation of the measure: "Proposal 2 would allow judges, following a court hearing, to reduce or revoke the public pension of a public officer convicted of a felony related to his or her official duties. Judges would consider the severity of the crime in determining whether to reduce or revoke the officer's public pension. They would also consider whether pension forfeiture would create undue hardship for the convicted officer’s spouse, children, and other dependents. The measure would define public officers as elected officials, governor-appointed officials, municipal administrators and managers, heads of government departments, boards, and commissions, state and local chief fiscal officers and treasurers, judges and justices of the unified court system, and employees of the state designated as policymakers. Proposal 2 would apply to any crimes committed on or after January 1, 2018." Why is it "conservative" to want people who have abused their high public office to not keep getting public money after they have been convicted of this abuse? But let's accept that this is a bad move. A ConCon will potentially create many worse ones, the delegates choosing them elected on midterms, and the yeas and naes counted on a off-year.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2017 19:32
|
|
|
ate poo poo on live tv posted:lol violation of federal law, get the gently caress out of here. no for real. I don't think we can elect the at-large delegates as is.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2017 19:47
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:But let's accept that this is a bad move. A ConCon will potentially create many better ones, the delegates choosing them elected on midterms, and the yeas and naes counted on a off-year.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2017 19:49
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:no for real. I don't think we can elect the at-large delegates as is. As long as the voting system is fair, i.e. everyone gets a vote and they aren't excluded by unconstitutional means, the actual positions being voted on don't matter. If everyone in the state can vote for the 15 at-large delegates, there is no problem there. What exactly would be a violation of federal law about at large delegates and why wasn't it a problem in 1967?
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2017 19:53
|
|
|
The vast majority of the delegates are going to be selected from district currently gerrymandered towards Republicans. At least with business as usual we have the Democratically-gerrymandered Assembly to counter-balance that. Redistricting only comes up in 2020, after which there is at least a hope that a non-partisan commission would lead to better results from 2021 and on.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2017 21:30
|
|
|
ate poo poo on live tv posted:The status quo reigns supreme. Things cant get better, so it makes no sense to risk anything. I fail to see how “have a concon and win a whole nother election in the existing senate districts” isnsomehow a more effective route to achieve change than “flip the loving Senate” The resources available to do these things are not infinite, nor is the public’s attention. The latter seems like a much more powerful way to get some change and also easier. The desire to blow poo poo up regardless of what the outcome of the explosion is is what gave us Donald loving trump.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2017 23:23
|
|
|
As far as the at-large delegates being illegal that might be bullshit. Someone who I know knows about election law told me that but I can't find anything else that supports it. I didn't look that hard though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2017 05:33
|
|
|
jimmy van bramer wants me to re-elect him. I know relatively little about him, other than seeing him at a restaurant and he takes credit for shutting down that nazi super in sunnyside. how should I feel about not really having a choice?
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2017 16:14
|
|
|
JAY ZERO SUM GAME posted:jimmy van bramer wants me to re-elect him. I know relatively little about him, other than seeing him at a restaurant and he takes credit for shutting down that nazi super in sunnyside. He's okay on most issues if a little happy to throw himself in front of any camera he sees (he's gunning hard for the Council Speaker seat once MMV is done), but he's ranged from doing nothing about LIC's overdevelopment to outright encouraging and enabling it, so that's pretty poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2017 16:37
|
|
|
i haven't seen a single yes sticker anywhere on long island, i'd be shocked if it passed also the daily news refused to endorse de blasio http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/verdict-de-blasio-article-1.3609893
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2017 16:58
|
|
|
Vertical Lime posted:i haven't seen a single yes sticker anywhere on long island, i'd be shocked if it passed "Dear Tenant Bill de Blasio" 
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2017 17:15
|
|
|
so the daily news is endorsing nobody for mayor?
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2017 17:23
|
|
|
get that OUT of my face posted:so the daily news is endorsing nobody for mayor? Nobody can resolve the basic class contradictions of the modern megalopolis, so it checks out.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2017 17:37
|
|
|
Vertical Lime posted:i haven't seen a single yes sticker anywhere on long island, i'd be shocked if it passed They want more Charter schools lol
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2017 17:39
|
|
|
everybody in the local media thinks de blasio should roll over and play dead whenever cuomo tells him to and thinks it's the worst thing when he doesn't. i've got plenty of complaints about the mayor but this is assuredly not one of them. when that happens it's like he's the only sane person in the room
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
better than cuomo is not a good compliment cuomo is the worst
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2017 22:04
|
|
|
Real hurthling! posted:better than cuomo is not a good compliment a low bar to hop over...
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 00:28
|
|
|
Real hurthling! posted:better than cuomo is not a good compliment gently caress negotiating in good faith, i'll take any kind of negotiation from albany at this point
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 07:23
|
|
|
Times endorsed BdB. Daily News endorsed nobody. Post endorsed Malliotakis. That sounds about right. Anyway, Bill has 75% support from black voters, who have fewer representatives in the chattering class, which is how he's cruising to re election despite nobody you know liking him all that much.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 15:54
|
|
Tater Love 
|
Did the "Cy Vance is corrupt, write in Marc Fliedner for Manhattan DA" thing get discussed in this thread at all? http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/10/scandal-plagued-cy-vance-suddenly-has-a-write-in-challenger.html I got weirdvibes from Fliedner in the Brooklyn DA race but this still seems like an okay idea. There's other stuff to be pissed at Cy Vance about https://twitter.com/davidminpdx/status/921204674488778752 and there's no Republican who could win if the vote's split, so... do this? There's a part of me that worries Fliedner could be a kook that we shouldn't be encouraging, but I think responsible people more involved in politics than I am have met him and said he seems like a good guy. onefish has issued a correction as of 21:12 on Nov 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 21:07
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/JimmyVielkind/status/927645533954506754 yeah it's not passing
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 22:32
|
|
|
Jabari Brisport has been running a very strong campaign, it seems to me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 23:59
|
|
|
the Daily News, ever the wild card, has endorsed voting "yes" for the constitutional conventiononefish posted:There's a part of me that worries Fliedner could be a kook that we shouldn't be encouraging, but I think responsible people more involved in politics than I am have met him and said he seems like a good guy. GalacticAcid posted:Jabari Brisport has been running a very strong campaign, it seems to me. by the way: if anyone lives in District 40, vote for Brian Cunningham. Mathieu Eugene is one of the biggest do-nothings in City Council and is probably less popular in his own district than Cumbo is in hers get that OUT of my face has issued a correction as of 01:16 on Nov 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2017 01:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 16:54 |
|
|
Has Working Families endorsed any non-Democrats?
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2017 02:30
|
|