![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
chhotiiEvan Falchuk. (Surprised?)
Really, any way you go is equally respectable, as they are are all equally disrespectable. Any choice is bad. Coakley is an evil nitwit, Baker is an evil Republican. Falchuk is... what is supposed to be wrong about the decision to vote for Falchuk?... Oh right, I'm "throwing away" my opportunity to either decrease the chances of Baker winning or decrease the chances of Coakley winning (depending on which prospect horrifies you more.) Well, I could just stay home, which would be more convenient, and maybe I would do that if it weren't for the ballot questions. But since I'll be at the polling place anyway, I'll take the opportunity to say "f. no" and "f. you" to the only viable choices we are being offered.
And give a nod to people whose policy statements include stuff like this:
" Burning natural gas generates less greenhouse gases than other fossil fuels, but Massachusetts is overly reliant on it as a source of energy. Our energy policy will be to aggressively invest in renewable energy infrastructure to meet our goal of 25% power generation from renewable sources by 2020. We should work to generate as much of our new energy needs as possible from renewable sources so that our energy supplies are resilient, diverse, predictable and environmentally responsible.
We must work aggressively to combat climate change
I have challenged all of the candidates in the race for governor to agree to introduce legislation within their first 100 days in office, should they be elected governor, calling for them to take specific action to overturn Citizens United via Constitutional Convention, and in the process end all spending from Super PACs... I also challenged each candidate to go on the record for voters specifically where they stand on Super PACs - do they support their existence, or do they think their influence should be removed from our political system? To date, no candidate has responded to either sensible challenge. Voters deserve a lot more than this.
I oppose the proposed Kinder Morgan Pipeline, and believe it is a bad deal for the people of the Commonwealth. The estimated $1.2 billion required just to build the pipeline would be much better spent on infrastructure for distributed, renewable solutions such as wind and solar, smart grid technology and other ways to make Massachusetts more modern and efficient....
Women in Massachusetts must have access to the full range of reproductive health services, whether primary care, birth control, reproductive health care or cancer screenings. We are pro-choice, and support women's right to choose.
We are against the death penalty. Our justice system is imperfect and it is impossible to reverse a mistake made when the death penalty has erroneously been carried out. "
(snippits quoted from the campaign website here.)
Not enabling comments, because, not interested in the tedious "but you have to vote against Baker!!!" debate. I'll just say, I don't think that Karen Polito would actually get very far in her attempt to roll back LGBT rights, regardless of whatever Baker wins/Baker leaves scenario plays out. I think that public opinion on such issues has trended too far the other way. Not going to argue, though, if she makes you feel uncomfortable enough to vote for Coakley. As I said, all choices equally bad/good here...
Really, any way you go is equally respectable, as they are are all equally disrespectable. Any choice is bad. Coakley is an evil nitwit, Baker is an evil Republican. Falchuk is... what is supposed to be wrong about the decision to vote for Falchuk?... Oh right, I'm "throwing away" my opportunity to either decrease the chances of Baker winning or decrease the chances of Coakley winning (depending on which prospect horrifies you more.) Well, I could just stay home, which would be more convenient, and maybe I would do that if it weren't for the ballot questions. But since I'll be at the polling place anyway, I'll take the opportunity to say "f. no" and "f. you" to the only viable choices we are being offered.
And give a nod to people whose policy statements include stuff like this:
" Burning natural gas generates less greenhouse gases than other fossil fuels, but Massachusetts is overly reliant on it as a source of energy. Our energy policy will be to aggressively invest in renewable energy infrastructure to meet our goal of 25% power generation from renewable sources by 2020. We should work to generate as much of our new energy needs as possible from renewable sources so that our energy supplies are resilient, diverse, predictable and environmentally responsible.
We must work aggressively to combat climate change
I have challenged all of the candidates in the race for governor to agree to introduce legislation within their first 100 days in office, should they be elected governor, calling for them to take specific action to overturn Citizens United via Constitutional Convention, and in the process end all spending from Super PACs... I also challenged each candidate to go on the record for voters specifically where they stand on Super PACs - do they support their existence, or do they think their influence should be removed from our political system? To date, no candidate has responded to either sensible challenge. Voters deserve a lot more than this.
I oppose the proposed Kinder Morgan Pipeline, and believe it is a bad deal for the people of the Commonwealth. The estimated $1.2 billion required just to build the pipeline would be much better spent on infrastructure for distributed, renewable solutions such as wind and solar, smart grid technology and other ways to make Massachusetts more modern and efficient....
Women in Massachusetts must have access to the full range of reproductive health services, whether primary care, birth control, reproductive health care or cancer screenings. We are pro-choice, and support women's right to choose.
We are against the death penalty. Our justice system is imperfect and it is impossible to reverse a mistake made when the death penalty has erroneously been carried out. "
(snippits quoted from the campaign website here.)
Not enabling comments, because, not interested in the tedious "but you have to vote against Baker!!!" debate. I'll just say, I don't think that Karen Polito would actually get very far in her attempt to roll back LGBT rights, regardless of whatever Baker wins/Baker leaves scenario plays out. I think that public opinion on such issues has trended too far the other way. Not going to argue, though, if she makes you feel uncomfortable enough to vote for Coakley. As I said, all choices equally bad/good here...
