Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Reno Gazette-Journal)   How bad are Nevada's Democratic candidates for Governor? "None of these candidates" won the primary   (rgj.com ) divider line
    More: Amusing  
•       •       •

1785 clicks; posted to Politics » on 12 Jun 2014 at 6:32 PM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



31 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-06-12 03:17:58 PM  
Don't blame me, I bubbled in C
 
2014-06-12 03:32:42 PM  
Probably because he way outspent the other candidates.

madcrazyhatter.files.wordpress.com
 
2014-06-12 03:44:55 PM  

Sybarite: Probably because he way outspent the other candidates.


Snert. Well done.
 
2014-06-12 04:38:02 PM  
I accidentally voted for Pat Buchanan
 
2014-06-12 05:34:20 PM  
How about Oscar Goodman?

latimesblogs.latimes.com
 
2014-06-12 06:38:19 PM  
Waaaah, "Brewster's Millions" reference already made.
 
2014-06-12 06:39:47 PM  
They're gonna be annexed by the NCR anyway so no1curr
 
2014-06-12 06:41:52 PM  
Under Nevada law, the second-place finisher will step up to run against incumbent Brian Sandoval, who won his primary going away.

How is he going to be governor if he's going away?
 
2014-06-12 07:04:46 PM  
Ray Hagarrhagar?  Whagarbl?
 
2014-06-12 07:24:00 PM  

Sybarite: Probably because he way outspent the other candidates.

[madcrazyhatter.files.wordpress.com image 565x433]


I'm Not Sure

encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com
 
2014-06-12 07:24:54 PM  

vegaswench: Sybarite: Probably because he way outspent the other candidates.

Snert. Well done.


I'm really disappointed it took two posts!
 
2014-06-12 07:59:03 PM  

fusillade762: Under Nevada law, the second-place finisher will step up to run against incumbent Brian Sandoval, who won his primary going away.

How is he going to be governor if he's going away?


It's good to see that voting "none of the above" really makes a difference.
 
2014-06-12 09:14:24 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: I accidentally voted for Pat Buchanan


Well, the ballot was confusing.
 
2014-06-12 10:17:25 PM  
And right here is about where you ought to realize exactly how much your clever little 'I don't like any of these guys' vote actually factors into things. All this was in practice was a codified method of literally throwing your vote away. It didn't knock anyone off the ballot. It didn't disqualify anyone that lost to 'none of these candidates'. They just skipped right on over the stunt votes and gave the race to the top actual standing candidate.

Fun fact. When you cast a vote for Mickey Mouse or Donald Duck or Lizard People or whoever, they record that shiat. They don't record it for purposes of going 'OMG look at all these voters dissatisfied with the political process!', though. No. They record them because they have to record that you cast a vote, and they do tally them up. If the vote is cast for a name not certified as running, it officially goes down as a vote for nobody, and does not factor into the results. All you're doing is making the election officials' night that much longer and stupid.
 
2014-06-12 11:01:09 PM  
They couldn't get any decent candidates because they'd get murdered by the incumbent. Sandoval has a 65% approval rating. Mark my words, the GOP will come begging for this guy. He's eminently likeable, has a very high approval rating, governs well and, oh, he's Hispanic.

Profile
 
2014-06-12 11:25:53 PM  
Did anybody make a Brewster's Millions joke yet?

Aww, with a pic and everything.

i1.ytimg.com
 
2014-06-12 11:45:47 PM  

img858.imageshack.us

 
2014-06-12 11:57:55 PM  
They need that choice nationwide.
 
2014-06-12 11:58:32 PM  
Oh and it is the perfect choice for anarchists.
 
2014-06-13 12:21:34 AM  

qorkfiend: fusillade762: Under Nevada law, the second-place finisher will step up to run against incumbent Brian Sandoval, who won his primary going away.

How is he going to be governor if he's going away?

It's good to see that voting "none of the above" really makes a difference.


The Republicans blamed it for Reid's 1998 win. And sued to have it declared unconstitutional in 2012 because they thought it would draw more Republican than Democratic votes.
 
2014-06-13 12:25:12 AM  

Gosling: And right here is about where you ought to realize exactly how much your clever little 'I don't like any of these guys' vote actually factors into things. All this was in practice was a codified method of literally throwing your vote away. It didn't knock anyone off the ballot. It didn't disqualify anyone that lost to 'none of these candidates'. They just skipped right on over the stunt votes and gave the race to the top actual standing candidate.

Fun fact. When you cast a vote for Mickey Mouse or Donald Duck or Lizard People or whoever, they record that shiat. They don't record it for purposes of going 'OMG look at all these voters dissatisfied with the political process!', though. No. They record them because they have to record that you cast a vote, and they do tally them up. If the vote is cast for a name not certified as running, it officially goes down as a vote for nobody, and does not factor into the results. All you're doing is making the election officials' night that much longer and stupid.


You realize there is a "None of these candidates" option on the ballot along with the various candidatesm these aren't spoiled ballots, it is a deliberately included option.

In addition, I would bet that most of the people that voted for "None of these candidates" voted for actual candidates in other races.
 
2014-06-13 12:28:13 AM  

TheHighlandHowler: How about Oscar Goodman?


How about Oscar Acosta?
 
2014-06-13 12:50:29 AM  
I think the fact that Sandoval has basically not completely angered everyone and he is a considerable step up from Jim Gibbons is the reason why the Democratic Party basically decided to mail it in this time.

And there was NO advertising for the Democrats. None.

Heck, my mom, a French Blue Democrat, said she'll vote for Sandoval, and I basically had to grab a few drinks.
 
2014-06-13 01:44:29 AM  

Mi-5: I think the fact that Sandoval has basically not completely angered everyone and he is a considerable step up from Jim Gibbons is the reason why the Democratic Party basically decided to mail it in this time.

And there was NO advertising for the Democrats. None.

Heck, my mom, a French Blue Democrat, said she'll vote for Sandoval, and I basically had to grab a few drinks.


I'll probably vote for him to, and I'm a pretty libby liberal. He's been a moderate Republican and he's not obsessed with the national Republican social platform (our state Republicans took gay marriage out of their platform, for example), which makes him much more palatable. Of course, social issues in Nevada tend to revolve around "how can we make money off this?" and "will this hurt or help the gaming/tourist industry?". I was pissed when he was first elected and made deep cuts to schools - but he also promised he would return the funds when the state started to recover, and he kept that promise (unlike his worthless predecessor). He's also been listening to teachers about Common Core and teacher evaluations/testing, and has put a hold on some of those processes.

There are things I vehemently disagree with him about, but he's a pro-pot, pro-education, pro-business fairly moderate Republican who did a pretty good job during a recession that REALLY hurt Las Vegas and the state. Our construction industry nose-dived and housing was out of control. He's done a good job with some state incentives for businesses and balancing the budget. He's also done a good job of keeping the tea party fringe of Nevada Republicans in check and he was smart enough not to support that Cliven Bundy idiot (mostly because he knows perfectly well that Nevada cannot afford to maintain the millions of acres of federal land if it were turned over to the state).

So yea, I'll vote for him - the Democrats didn't put up anyone worth considering. I didn't even vote in the primaries after reviewing all of the candidates. They knew they were going to lose, and didn't even bother (which is pathetic, if you ask me).
 
2014-06-13 01:45:36 AM  
Voting "none of the above" does do one thing: It prevents the second-place winner who becomes governor from pretending he has some kind of "mandate" from the majority to do what he wants. He goes in to office knowing without a shadow of a doubt that he is everyone's second choice--that if someone else had been on the ballot, he would not be sitting where he is. He is governor by default only.

Which is why it would be nice to see that option for President. Yeah, Mr. X, you're President...but you don't have the "mandate of the people" behind you...so don't start eating crackers like you own the place.
 
2014-06-13 04:38:35 AM  

Gosling: And right here is about where you ought to realize exactly how much your clever little 'I don't like any of these guys' vote actually factors into things. All this was in practice was a codified method of literally throwing your vote away. It didn't knock anyone off the ballot. It didn't disqualify anyone that lost to 'none of these candidates'. They just skipped right on over the stunt votes and gave the race to the top actual standing candidate.

Fun fact. When you cast a vote for Mickey Mouse or Donald Duck or Lizard People or whoever, they record that shiat. They don't record it for purposes of going 'OMG look at all these voters dissatisfied with the political process!', though. No. They record them because they have to record that you cast a vote, and they do tally them up. If the vote is cast for a name not certified as running, it officially goes down as a vote for nobody, and does not factor into the results. All you're doing is making the election officials' night that much longer and stupid.


Someone doesn't understand how mandates work...
 
2014-06-13 07:15:21 AM  
Eh. To be honest, I'm somewhat happy with Sandoval right now. If he actually ran on the national stage, there's no way Republicans would take him, as he's pro gay and transgender rights, so it's amusing to see folks talk of Presidency.
 
2014-06-13 08:48:26 AM  

Gosling: And right here is about where you ought to realize exactly how much your clever little 'I don't like any of these guys' vote actually factors into things. All this was in practice was a codified method of literally throwing your vote away. It didn't knock anyone off the ballot. It didn't disqualify anyone that lost to 'none of these candidates'. They just skipped right on over the stunt votes and gave the race to the top actual standing candidate.

Fun fact. When you cast a vote for Mickey Mouse or Donald Duck or Lizard People or whoever, they record that shiat. They don't record it for purposes of going 'OMG look at all these voters dissatisfied with the political process!', though. No. They record them because they have to record that you cast a vote, and they do tally them up. If the vote is cast for a name not certified as running, it officially goes down as a vote for nobody, and does not factor into the results. All you're doing is making the election officials' night that much longer and stupid.


That's more of a problem with the voting system than with the voters.
 
2014-06-13 11:44:34 AM  

Gyrfalcon: Voting "none of the above" does do one thing: It prevents the second-place winner who becomes governor from pretending he has some kind of "mandate" from the majority to do what he wants. He goes in to office knowing without a shadow of a doubt that he is everyone's second choice--that if someone else had been on the ballot, he would not be sitting where he is. He is governor by default only.

Which is why it would be nice to see that option for President. Yeah, Mr. X, you're President...but you don't have the "mandate of the people" behind you...so don't start eating crackers like you own the place.

It'd be even better if it did what its name means. If NotA or NotC wins, then rather than #2 squeaking in, the election should be re-held with the stipulation that no one who was on the ballot for that office may be on the ballot this time (voters could still write any of them in if they so choose). After all, the electorate made it clear that they do not want any of those candidates.

rev. dave: They need that choice nationwide.

With the above alteration, yes indeedy. And at all other levels in all States, too.
 
2014-06-13 04:05:46 PM  

Kimothy: There are things I vehemently disagree with him about, but he's a pro-pot, pro-education, pro-business fairly moderate Republican who did a pretty good job during a recession that REALLY hurt Las Vegas and the state. Our construction industry nose-dived and housing was out of control. He's done a good job with some state incentives for businesses and balancing the budget. He's also done a good job of keeping the tea party fringe of Nevada Republicans in check and he was smart enough not to support that Cliven Bundy idiot (mostly because he knows perfectly well that Nevada cannot afford to maintain the millions of acres of federal land if it were turned over to the state).


All of these.  Or to put it another way, he's an old school Republican who votes with his conscience, rather than a neo-con who walks lockstep with the rest of the party.  I may not agree with what his conscience says on some matters, but he's done the state far more good than harm.  And he's no Jim Gibbons.

Oh, for you non-Nevada, Jim Gibbons was the worst Governor our state has ever seen, and is near the top of the list "worst Governor in the history of the US".  Besides getting caught on camera saying he wasn't with his alleged mistress as she got in his limo behind him, he also has the highest number of vetos and veto overrides in state history: 41 vetos and 25 overrides.  Not even our Tea Party state assemblypeople liked him.  He managed the state horribly, appointed unusually incompetent people to various state agencies even factoring in nepotism, and even tried to eliminate the state's tourism commission, which is a truly moronic move in a state basically kept afloat by tourism.  Even his Lieutenant Governor disagreed with him on most of this crap, publicly and to his face,  but he still didn't listen.

In short, Jim Gibbons did for this state what Fat Man and Little Boy did for the Japanese.
 
2014-06-14 01:05:38 AM  

The Numbers: Someone doesn't understand how mandates work...


These days, 'I get to plant my butt in the office chair' is basically equated with 'I have a mandate'. So I'm not really sure what the functional difference is anymore regarding margin of victory. They basically see it as, you either get the job or you don't.
 
Displayed 31 of 31 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report