MOBILE USERS: m.isthmus.com
Connect with Isthmus:         Newsletters 
Thursday, January 29, 2015 |  Madison, WI: 31.0° F  Overcast
Collapse Photo Bar

Allen-Muñoz: Who'll survive...

Please limit discussion in this area to local and state politics.

Who gets the honor of losing the general?

Peter Muñoz
16
57%
Ray Allen
12
43%
 
Total votes : 28

Postby Genie » Tue Jan 30, 2007 4:11 pm

jjoyce wrote:
Genie wrote:or don't you ever go out into the real world? :roll:


Ummm.... good one?


As real site mods like to say- OFF TOPIC!!
Genie
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 620
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2006 11:55 pm
Location: Spaceship Earth

Postby madisonpragmatic » Tue Jan 30, 2007 5:57 pm

On topic, I think Ray Allen will beat Munoz. Besides the fact he seems more engaged in the race, I don't think Madisonians will make it a progressive-progressive race. Even Madisoians like to narrow it down to left vs right. Part of this is by design and part of this is due to the fact that the left tends to have their vote split.
-A pragmatic Madisonian
Last edited by madisonpragmatic on Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
madisonpragmatic
Senior Member
 
Posts: 57
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 12:42 pm

Postby Marvell » Tue Jan 30, 2007 7:23 pm

madisonpragmatic wrote:On topic, I think Ray Allen will beat Munoz. Besides the fact he seems more engaged in the race, I don't think Nadisonians will make it a progressive-progressive race. Even Nadisoians like to narrow it down to left vs right. Part of this is by design and part of this is due to the fact that the left tends to have their vote split.
-A pragmatic Madisonian


Go Nadisonians!
Marvell
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6995
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 11:28 pm
Location: At one with time and space

Postby Daisy » Tue Jan 30, 2007 7:43 pm

Hey Genie? Who do you reckon's more likely to go vote - people who regularly get some info off the web, be it at work or at home, or those on whom a website would be wasted because they never come near one of the durn things?

I've got no empirical data on this one (nor the time/inclination to do the research), but I'm gonna go ahead and guess that those with regular access to the web are a significantly higher turnout demo than those without.

And that is not to say that the latter, presumably less fortunate group should be ignored, but that if you can communicate with the more likely voters in such a cheap, fast, efficient way, then....I dunno, you may want think about gettin' that goin.
Genie wrote:I'm sure he will get it going but he's was delayed getting into the race by a death in the family. And I guess that has slowed everything down for him. Death has a way of doing that.
I'd seriously reconsider the hamhanded attempt to use a family tragedy from last year as an excuse for not having a website. I could build him one in a day or two, for Chrissakes!

This isn't even so much about a campaign site per se, despite the aforementioned, cost-effective utility it adds to a campaign. It's more about what the lack of one says about the candidate - how serious of an effort their campaign is, whether they're clued in to their surroundings (see Jason's point re: Madison being a wired town), whether they're ready for prime time and WITH it, basically.
Daisy
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6044
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2001 10:51 am
Location: New York, NY

Postby Genie » Tue Jan 30, 2007 11:21 pm

Daisy wrote:Hey Genie? Who do you reckon's more likely to go vote - people who regularly get some info off the web, be it at work or at home, or those on whom a website would be wasted because they never come near one of the durn things?

I've got no empirical data on this one (nor the time/inclination to do the research), but I'm gonna go ahead and guess that those with regular access to the web are a significantly higher turnout demo than those without.


That's kind of a snobbish lookout on poor people. There are many people who can't afford a computer. There are even more who may have a computer but can't afford to upgrade them every year or however often you're supposed to do that. That's the problem with computers you know - you have to keep upgrading them. This is a problem that the schools are having. Anyway, to say that those without web access are less likely to vote is absolutely ridiculous. Since they're more likely to be out and about instead of glued to their computer screen I would put my bet on them going to the polls.

Of course, if all the information about the elections is only on the web, then you may be right. But that would be very discriminating if that were to happen. I think it's a problem with people who spend a lot of time on computers have. They think everyone else is also on computers.

If only those on TDP were to vote, that would be only 3452 people (assuming no one else is booted.)

This isn't even so much about a campaign site per se, despite the aforementioned, cost-effective utility it adds to a campaign. It's more about what the lack of one says about the candidate - how serious of an effort their campaign is, whether they're clued in to their surroundings (see Jason's point re: Madison being a wired town), whether they're ready for prime time and WITH it, basically.


My husband offered to do his website but he said he had people to do it. So I don't know what's going on. But he also doesn't have money like the others do, if that makes a difference.
Genie
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 620
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2006 11:55 pm
Location: Spaceship Earth

Postby Stu Levitan » Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:29 am

Genie wrote:Anyway, to say that those without web access are less likely to vote is absolutely ridiculous. Since they're more likely to be out and about instead of glued to their computer screen I would put my bet on them going to the polls.


I'll take that bet.
Stu Levitan
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3316
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2003 8:40 pm
Location: Studio B of the historic Abernathy Building

Postby Genie » Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:52 pm

Stu Levitan wrote:
Genie wrote:Anyway, to say that those without web access are less likely to vote is absolutely ridiculous. Since they're more likely to be out and about instead of glued to their computer screen I would put my bet on them going to the polls.


I'll take that bet.


How would you determine the results? Would you have an exit poll and ask who was a computer user? Or would you do an on-line poll.
Genie
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 620
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2006 11:55 pm
Location: Spaceship Earth

Postby madisonpragmatic » Wed Jan 31, 2007 3:23 pm

On topic, I think Ray Allen will beat Munoz. Besides the fact he seems more engaged in the race, I don't think Madisonians will make it a progressive-progressive race. Even Madisoians like to narrow it down to left vs right. Part of this is by design and part of this is due to the fact that the left tends to have their vote split.
-A pragmatic Madisonian
madisonpragmatic
Senior Member
 
Posts: 57
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 12:42 pm

Postby massimo » Wed Jan 31, 2007 3:37 pm

Genie wrote:There are many people who can't afford a computer. There are even more who may have a computer but can't afford to upgrade them every year or however often you're supposed to do that. That's the problem with computers you know - you have to keep upgrading them.

Right now, I'm typing on a laptop that I bought in 1999. Yeah, it's sort of old, but I do a lot of writing and browsing on it still. I certainly don't need to upgrade every year.

Two years ago, I bought a computer at SWAP for $25. That machine is about 8 years old now, but it functions beautifully. I'd call $25 pretty affordable.

My Compaq presario is about 11 years old now. It works well as a file server. It didn't burst into flames after one year.
---
Face it, a serious candidate should have a website. There are really no excuses.
massimo
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1721
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2005 5:52 pm
Location: Madison

Postby madisonpragmatic » Wed Jan 31, 2007 3:57 pm

massimo wrote:
Genie wrote:There are many people who can't afford a computer. There are even more who may have a computer but can't afford to upgrade them every year or however often you're supposed to do that. That's the problem with computers you know - you have to keep upgrading them.

Right now, I'm typing on a laptop that I bought in 1999. Yeah, it's sort of old, but I do a lot of writing and browsing on it still. I certainly don't need to upgrade every year.

Two years ago, I bought a computer at SWAP for $25. That machine is about 8 years old now, but it functions beautifully. I'd call $25 pretty affordable.

My Compaq presario is about 11 years old now. It works well as a file server. It didn't burst into flames after one year.
---
Face it, a serious candidate should have a website. There are really no excuses.

And for instance, I'd like to know more about Nunoz but can't because he doesn't have a web site. Is that fair that it might impact my vote? Maybe not, but in this day and age, it's a reality. For those who don't have access to the internet, it doesn't matter Munoz doesn't have a web site, but it will hurt him w/ those who do. Furthher, those who have access includes those whi use dial up and somebody else's computer (a friend's or the library's). Take downtown resaidents, Rosemarry Lee and Bob Hollaway. They don't have computers yet they check e-mail regularly and you'd never guess they didn't have a computer.
-A pragmatic Madisonian
madisonpragmatic
Senior Member
 
Posts: 57
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 12:42 pm

Postby Ben Manski » Wed Jan 31, 2007 4:00 pm

Looks pretty clear from his website . . .

http://munozformadison.com/issues.html

That he is a Chamber candidate. Too bad. Would have been good for the mayor to have some competition. Instead, you've got two candidates fighting over 15-20% of the vote. And the other 80% of us won't have a real debate.
Ben Manski
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 276
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 7:34 pm
Location: Madison, Wisconsin

Postby madisonpragmatic » Wed Jan 31, 2007 4:11 pm

Ben Manski wrote:Looks pretty clear from his website . . .

http://munozformadison.com/issues.html

That he is a Chamber candidate. Too bad. Would have been good for the mayor to have some competition. Instead, you've got two candidates fighting over 15-20% of the vote. And the other 80% of us won't have a real debate.

hey, he has a website now! Although, I'll note that his answers seem pretty simplistic.
-A pragmatic Madisonian
Last edited by madisonpragmatic on Wed Jan 31, 2007 5:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
madisonpragmatic
Senior Member
 
Posts: 57
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 12:42 pm

Postby gargantua » Wed Jan 31, 2007 4:14 pm

Ben Manski wrote:Looks pretty clear from his website . . .

http://munozformadison.com/issues.html

That he is a Chamber candidate. Too bad. Would have been good for the mayor to have some competition. Instead, you've got two candidates fighting over 15-20% of the vote. And the other 80% of us won't have a real debate.


I'd like to suggest to you that the majority of the other "80% of us" won't have a "real" debate because they don't feel the need for one at this point in time. Most voters like it here, and by and large are pretty satisfied with the status quo. So they will go out and vote for the status quo until such time as they are dissatisfied with it. The people on the far right or left who can not field a candidate who could win a city-wide election are the ones yearning for a debate. There is currently a consensus in this town. Rail about it to your heart's content, but the fact remains, and you'll see it on election day.
gargantua
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 4482
Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2002 1:30 pm
Location: Madison

Postby Ben Manski » Wed Jan 31, 2007 6:13 pm

gargantua wrote:
Ben Manski wrote:Looks pretty clear from his website . . .

http://munozformadison.com/issues.html

That he is a Chamber candidate. Too bad. Would have been good for the mayor to have some competition. Instead, you've got two candidates fighting over 15-20% of the vote. And the other 80% of us won't have a real debate.


I'd like to suggest to you that the majority of the other "80% of us" won't have a "real" debate because they don't feel the need for one at this point in time. Most voters like it here, and by and large are pretty satisfied with the status quo. So they will go out and vote for the status quo until such time as they are dissatisfied with it. The people on the far right or left who can not field a candidate who could win a city-wide election are the ones yearning for a debate. There is currently a consensus in this town. Rail about it to your heart's content, but the fact remains, and you'll see it on election day.


I agree with you that the base of the radical left represents a fifth of the electorate in Madison - in other words - not more than 1/4 of the 80% I was referring to. The other 60% are center-left. Those are generalizations, but I think a look at various recent elections will bear them out.

None of that changes the fact that this election involves 80% of the electorate being written off by two of the candidates in the race. Makes me wish that there was a debate for the rest of us. And there could have been, would have been, had there been another center-left or left candidate in the race.

As to that question of consensus. Over years, the radical left in the US has advocated a number of things which most citizens, at the time, either hadn't heard of, or had not yet embraced. Like abolition of slavery. Suffrage. The idea that women were full people. Social security. Free speech rights in public spaces. The Department of Defense (ok, that was a flop). Fighting fascism. Action to curb global warming. Equal rights for gays. Minimum wage. Affirmative action. An end to the war in Vietnam. And most recently, opposition to the invasion of Iraq.
Ben Manski
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 276
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 7:34 pm
Location: Madison, Wisconsin

Postby lukpac » Thu Feb 01, 2007 10:14 am

Ben Manski wrote:Looks pretty clear from his website . . .

http://munozformadison.com/issues.html

That he is a Chamber candidate. Too bad. Would have been good for the mayor to have some competition. Instead, you've got two candidates fighting over 15-20% of the vote. And the other 80% of us won't have a real debate.


Why is everything in the form of a question?

Oh jeeze:

http://munozformadison.com/about.html

"To read more, please click here to be directed to the Wisconsin State Journal website."
lukpac
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3362
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 1:51 pm
Location: Madison

PreviousNext

Return to Local Politics & Government

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

moviesmusiceats
Select a Movie
Select a Theater


commentsViewedForum
  ISTHMUS FLICKR
Created with flickr badge.

Promotions Contact us Privacy Policy Jobs Newsletters RSS
Collapse Photo Bar