Skip to content
 
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.

(Twitter)   Cynthia Nixon blames her loss on high voter turnout   ( twitter.com) divider line
    More: Dumbass, Tweet location history, World Wide Web, third-party applications, precise location, location information, Tweets  
•       •       •

3398 clicks; posted to Politics » on 14 Sep 2018 at 3:55 AM (9 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



235 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2018-09-13 10:46:52 PM  
Original Tweet:

 
2018-09-13 10:50:44 PM  
i.vimeocdn.comView Full Size
 
2018-09-13 11:22:22 PM  
Heaven forfend people actually vote?
 
2018-09-14 01:55:37 AM  
Good for her for pulling Cuomo to the left. And goodbye and good riddance to six turncoat IDC Dems!
 
2018-09-14 03:34:04 AM  
Cuomo got twice the number of votes as Nixon in AOC's district.

"Progressives do better in high-turnout elections" just isn't true. Wasn't true in 2016; isn't true now. Bernie kicked ass in caucus states where a handful of activists spend hours going through byzantine rules of order; Clinton blew him out of the water in the big primary states where millions of voters got involved.

Almost by definition, the more participants you have, the more centrist the result. That's what the center is, after all: the average. Increase the sample size, increase the representativeness of the sample, watch the sample regress to the mean, watch the resylt

Progressives do better when they can play a vanguard role: getting into positions of power through low-turnout elections and backroom maneuvering, dominating the discourse through high-visibility protest and communication, and then steering the party leftwards by force.

It simply isn't the case that there's a sekrit progressive majority that just needs to be Inspired By The Right Candidate to awaken and crush the bourgeoisie beneath its righteous proletariat boot. The strength of progressivism is in the depth of its support, not the breadth.
 
2018-09-14 03:35:33 AM  
"watch the resylt" --> watch the result become more moderate.
 
2018-09-14 03:57:20 AM  
I mean it couldn't have been that she was a joke as a candidate?
 
2018-09-14 04:12:28 AM  
As a New Yorker the options were crappy. It was family political dynasty vs TV "Star".

For a lot of people it's the devil you know...

/I farking hated that show
 
2018-09-14 04:13:24 AM  
How dare those peasants vote?  They were supposed to be distracted by, well, everything!  Note to self: peasants can sometimes remember two things at once.
 
2018-09-14 04:13:25 AM  
If she doesn't like people voting, maybe she should be a Republican.
 
2018-09-14 04:13:56 AM  

insertsnarkyusername: I mean it couldn't have been that she was a joke as a candidate?


And another trump voter.
 
2018-09-14 04:15:20 AM  

insertsnarkyusername: I mean it couldn't have been that she was a joke as a candidate?


Nope. She was so serious and awesome and was the perfect candidate. It was the electorate. Not ready for a woman so powerful and amazing and ready to shake things up. Just look at Clinton.

That's the line she'll be giving at every upcoming social event she goes to for the next 20 years, where she'll feign frustration that she has to be the center of attention and regale the people about the time she was almost governor. Can you believe it? You invited someone to your Sunday social who was almost governor. She must be so amazing and wonderful. We should have her over more often. So lively and her tails from the campaign! The one where she almost became the one that would fix everything. Yes, Margot, I'll be out in a second. Do take muffy for her walk before all the darkies leave for work. It's almost 2am, you know. Hah hah hah.

That's the scene that will happen 500 times in NYC in the next 20 years.
 
2018-09-14 04:17:28 AM  
Did the big bad money bribe the voters into showing up to the polls? No? Well that's democracy in action, you big baby.
 
2018-09-14 04:25:54 AM  
Did she make an affirmative case to her superiority, because it seems like she was relying on the vague notion that Democratic primary voters actually had enough disdain for Cuomo to not vote for him.

And I never believed that NY Dem voters disliked him enough for that.
 
2018-09-14 04:26:16 AM  

DVOM: insertsnarkyusername: I mean it couldn't have been that she was a joke as a candidate?

And another trump voter.


Personally I'm for celebrities staying the hell out of politics.
 
2018-09-14 04:27:17 AM  

Cubansaltyballs: Nope. She was so serious and awesome and was the perfect candidate. It was the electorate. Not ready for a woman so powerful and amazing and ready to shake things up. Just look at Clinton.

That's the line she'll be giving at every upcoming social event she goes to for the next 20 years, where she'll feign frustration that she has to be the center of attention and regale the people about the time she was almost governor...


Male candidates: lose high profile election, be instantly rehabilitated as a respected pundit, spend next two decades on TV and in guest columns at major newspapers giving the sort of insight that can only come from not quite winning an election.

Female candidates: lose high profile election, be immediately mocked for audacity of thinking she could be taken seriously as a woman, subjected to millions of internet randos raging over their hate-fantasies of that candidate talking proudly about her experiences, at parties she goes to, in her personal life as a private citizen.
 
2018-09-14 05:18:33 AM  

insertsnarkyusername: DVOM: insertsnarkyusername: I mean it couldn't have been that she was a joke as a candidate?

And another trump voter.

Personally I'm for celebrities staying the hell out of politics.


It should be the exact opposite. Leave public office after your term expires and get an instant job offer in Hollywood.
 
2018-09-14 05:20:08 AM  
She didn't say the high turnout was bad. She didn't say people shouldn't vote. She typed up an off the cuff election analysis. She described the event.

If you project your emotions onto the statement that's your butthurt, not hers.
 
2018-09-14 05:24:55 AM  
It wasn't the Cinnamon Raisin Bagel with lox, capers, red onions, cream cheese, and tomatoes?

Or the appearance that she is an idiot?
 
2018-09-14 05:54:36 AM  
Turns out ratfarking works. I wish the Democratic party establishment would quit doing it to other Democrats, but hey, they're gonna do what they're gonna do.
 
2018-09-14 06:02:27 AM  

Major Malfunction: Turns out ratfarking works. I wish the Democratic party establishment would quit doing it to other Democrats, but hey, they're gonna do what they're gonna do.


You sound very concerned
 
2018-09-14 06:09:41 AM  

Gubbo: Major Malfunction: Turns out ratfarking works. I wish the Democratic party establishment would quit doing it to other Democrats, but hey, they're gonna do what they're gonna do.

You sound very concerned


Remember: if the insurgent candidate you liked better lost a primary to an established candidate with a proven track record of popular support among your party's voters and a name with universal recognition, the only possible reason is a devilish conspiracy of cackling, malevolent puppeteers using devious and unspecified magicks to hoodwink the majority of voters into supporting the same candidate they supported last time.

And of course, when faced with such a cabal of dark conspirators, the only rational solution is to throw a months-long tantrum in which you spend all your energy trying to tear down the Democrat to "teach the party a lesson" about supporting the candidate most people liked instead of supporting the candidate *you* liked.
 
2018-09-14 06:13:34 AM  

pkjun: Gubbo: Major Malfunction: Turns out ratfarking works. I wish the Democratic party establishment would quit doing it to other Democrats, but hey, they're gonna do what they're gonna do.

You sound very concerned

Remember: if the insurgent candidate you liked better lost a primary to an established candidate with a proven track record of popular support among your party's voters and a name with universal recognition, the only possible reason is a devilish conspiracy of cackling, malevolent puppeteers using devious and unspecified magicks to hoodwink the majority of voters into supporting the same candidate they supported last time.

And of course, when faced with such a cabal of dark conspirators, the only rational solution is to throw a months-long tantrum in which you spend all your energy trying to tear down the Democrat to "teach the party a lesson" about supporting the candidate most people liked instead of supporting the candidate *you* liked.


Who said anything about a cabal of dark conspirators? I'm talking about the mailer that got sent out 2-3 days before the primary ratfarking Nixon as an anti-semite. Remember? We had a thread about it and everything.

If Cuomo'd won clean I wouldn't have given a shiat - better politician wins votes, film @ 11, dog bites man, all that jazz. But he didn't, and that's irritating, because now there's going to be Democratic voters who feel shiatty about the situation because a decent human being got ratfarked, at a time when we really need all hands on farking deck.

But hey, throwing your rattle out of the pram and calling everyone who objects to ratfarking the same team "concern trolls" works too.
 
2018-09-14 06:19:27 AM  

pkjun: Gubbo: Major Malfunction: Turns out ratfarking works. I wish the Democratic party establishment would quit doing it to other Democrats, but hey, they're gonna do what they're gonna do.

You sound very concerned

Remember: if the insurgent candidate you liked better lost a primary to an established candidate with a proven track record of popular support among your party's voters and a name with universal recognition, the only possible reason is a devilish conspiracy of cackling, malevolent puppeteers using devious and unspecified magicks to hoodwink the majority of voters into supporting the same candidate they supported last time.

And of course, when faced with such a cabal of dark conspirators, the only rational solution is to throw a months-long tantrum in which you spend all your energy trying to tear down the Democrat to "teach the party a lesson" about supporting the candidate most people liked instead of supporting the candidate *you* liked.


Sounds reasonable to me.

You know what's funny, I mentioned something about not supporting people that you only 90% agree with. And was told that such a thing has never been said on this site.

Oh good times
 
2018-09-14 06:20:55 AM  

Major Malfunction: pkjun: Gubbo: Major Malfunction: Turns out ratfarking works. I wish the Democratic party establishment would quit doing it to other Democrats, but hey, they're gonna do what they're gonna do.

You sound very concerned

Remember: if the insurgent candidate you liked better lost a primary to an established candidate with a proven track record of popular support among your party's voters and a name with universal recognition, the only possible reason is a devilish conspiracy of cackling, malevolent puppeteers using devious and unspecified magicks to hoodwink the majority of voters into supporting the same candidate they supported last time.

And of course, when faced with such a cabal of dark conspirators, the only rational solution is to throw a months-long tantrum in which you spend all your energy trying to tear down the Democrat to "teach the party a lesson" about supporting the candidate most people liked instead of supporting the candidate *you* liked.

Who said anything about a cabal of dark conspirators? I'm talking about the mailer that got sent out 2-3 days before the primary ratfarking Nixon as an anti-semite. Remember? We had a thread about it and everything.

If Cuomo'd won clean I wouldn't have given a shiat - better politician wins votes, film @ 11, dog bites man, all that jazz. But he didn't, and that's irritating, because now there's going to be Democratic voters who feel shiatty about the situation because a decent human being got ratfarked, at a time when we really need all hands on farking deck.

But hey, throwing your rattle out of the pram and calling everyone who objects to ratfarking the same team "concern trolls" works too.


Not winning clean.

You're sounding a bit desperate now. And placing an awful lot of faith in one flyer.

But I'm sure you're right.....
 
2018-09-14 06:25:53 AM  

Major Malfunction: pkjun: Gubbo: Major Malfunction: Turns out ratfarking works. I wish the Democratic party establishment would quit doing it to other Democrats, but hey, they're gonna do what they're gonna do.

You sound very concerned

Remember: if the insurgent candidate you liked better lost a primary to an established candidate with a proven track record of popular support among your party's voters and a name with universal recognition, the only possible reason is a devilish conspiracy of cackling, malevolent puppeteers using devious and unspecified magicks to hoodwink the majority of voters into supporting the same candidate they supported last time.

And of course, when faced with such a cabal of dark conspirators, the only rational solution is to throw a months-long tantrum in which you spend all your energy trying to tear down the Democrat to "teach the party a lesson" about supporting the candidate most people liked instead of supporting the candidate *you* liked.

Who said anything about a cabal of dark conspirators? I'm talking about the mailer that got sent out 2-3 days before the primary ratfarking Nixon as an anti-semite. Remember? We had a thread about it and everything.

If Cuomo'd won clean I wouldn't have given a shiat - better politician wins votes, film @ 11, dog bites man, all that jazz. But he didn't, and that's irritating, because now there's going to be Democratic voters who feel shiatty about the situation because a decent human being got ratfarked, at a time when we really need all hands on farking deck.

But hey, throwing your rattle out of the pram and calling everyone who objects to ratfarking the same team "concern trolls" works too.


So you think Nixon lost by thirty points because 7,000 people received an inaccurate attack ad that Cuomo disavowed, apologized for, and sent out corrections for?

Given the tiny exposure of the mailer, the immediate and highly publicized apology/correction, and given the near-saturation anti-Cuomo coverage of the scandal, I think it would be hard to claim the mailer was a net "win" for Cuomo as far as shifting votes or perceptions goes. He did a dumb thing and paid a political price for it.

But it didn't really matter because he's a popular incumbent who was running against an insurgent with no particular political experience or qualifications beyond a willingness to adopt progressive positions, so he won with double her vote share.
 
2018-09-14 06:28:39 AM  
Gubbo:
Not winning clean.

You're sounding a bit desperate now. And placing an awful lot of faith in one flyer.

But I'm sure you're right.....


Oh, given the margins involved Cuomo absolutely didn't need the flyer. That's actually what pisses me off about it - he was polling well outside error IIRC, and as Nixon said in the comments quoted in TFA, he branded himself well and had a lot of outside money to work with.

So why bother ratfarking Nixon? We're one team, made up of 4-5 different factions with what essentially come down to disagreements about our priorities. As the old Chinese legend goes, one arrow can be broken easily; three, not so much. Ratfarking her like this ruins her credibility in going on the stump for Cuomo in the general, and seeing as she got significantly more than zero votes, why throw that away for free? It's farking dumb.

At a time when we need to be at our best, and most united, the state Democratic Party apparatus needs to not be farking dumb.
 
2018-09-14 06:37:04 AM  

Major Malfunction: Gubbo:
Not winning clean.

You're sounding a bit desperate now. And placing an awful lot of faith in one flyer.

But I'm sure you're right.....

Oh, given the margins involved Cuomo absolutely didn't need the flyer. That's actually what pisses me off about it - he was polling well outside error IIRC, and as Nixon said in the comments quoted in TFA, he branded himself well and had a lot of outside money to work with.

So why bother ratfarking Nixon? We're one team, made up of 4-5 different factions with what essentially come down to disagreements about our priorities. As the old Chinese legend goes, one arrow can be broken easily; three, not so much. Ratfarking her like this ruins her credibility in going on the stump for Cuomo in the general, and seeing as she got significantly more than zero votes, why throw that away for free? It's farking dumb.

At a time when we need to be at our best, and most united, the state Democratic Party apparatus needs to not be farking dumb.


Yeah. I don't believe your concern.
 
2018-09-14 06:40:09 AM  
Gubbo:

Yeah. I don't believe your concern.

Feelz < Realz
 
2018-09-14 06:44:26 AM  

Major Malfunction: Gubbo:
Not winning clean.

You're sounding a bit desperate now. And placing an awful lot of faith in one flyer.

But I'm sure you're right.....

Oh, given the margins involved Cuomo absolutely didn't need the flyer. That's actually what pisses me off about it - he was polling well outside error IIRC, and as Nixon said in the comments quoted in TFA, he branded himself well and had a lot of outside money to work with.

So why bother ratfarking Nixon? We're one team, made up of 4-5 different factions with what essentially come down to disagreements about our priorities. As the old Chinese legend goes, one arrow can be broken easily; three, not so much. Ratfarking her like this ruins her credibility in going on the stump for Cuomo in the general, and seeing as she got significantly more than zero votes, why throw that away for free? It's farking dumb.

At a time when we need to be at our best, and most united, the state Democratic Party apparatus needs to not be farking dumb.


Your deep concernis noted.
 
2018-09-14 06:51:14 AM  

CheatCommando: Major Malfunction: 

Your deep concernis noted.


But why male models?
 
2018-09-14 07:01:36 AM  
Could it be that New Yorkers were smart enough to not vote for somebody with no political experience?  At least Arnold had done something, however pointless, in the Bush 41 administration, and was married into the Kennedy family.
 
2018-09-14 07:02:52 AM  
The "my candidate losing is proof that the system is broken" is one of the more frustrating of recurring infantile arguments made on FarkPol.
 
2018-09-14 07:06:58 AM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: Good for her for pulling Cuomo to the left. And goodbye and good riddance to six turncoat IDC Dems!


One of the IDC Dems was replaced by a corporate lobbyist

https://www.cityandstateny.com/articl​e​s/politics/news-politics/robert-jackso​n-has-been-lobbying-big-styrofoam.html​
 
2018-09-14 07:08:42 AM  
Voter voter turnout is not a problem, now if she wants to talk about money in politics she at least has a leg to stand on.
 
2018-09-14 07:09:12 AM  

Mr.Tangent: Voter voter turnout is not a problem, now if she wants to talk about money in politics she at least has a leg to stand on.


High voter turnout...
 
2018-09-14 07:17:04 AM  
Maybe, just maybe people who voted in the primary we're motivated by seeing what a trainwreck it is putting a rookie celebrity into an important executive position.
I dont care what your policies are or how liberal/conservative you are if you lack any relevant experience for the job. Run for mayor of your town. Learn how to actually do the job. Then run for higher office.
It isn't glamorous, but it is the way it should be done.
 
2018-09-14 07:17:24 AM  
I was planning to vote for Cuomo, but on the ride over there I remembered that both sides are bad. Since there's no law saying you can't be President and Governor at the same time, I wrote in Trump instead. MAGA
 
2018-09-14 07:18:14 AM  
Samantha would've won it.
 
2018-09-14 07:18:32 AM  
She was really cute in Amadeus.
 
2018-09-14 07:27:52 AM  

pkjun: Gubbo: Major Malfunction: Turns out ratfarking works. I wish the Democratic party establishment would quit doing it to other Democrats, but hey, they're gonna do what they're gonna do.

You sound very concerned

Remember: if the insurgent candidate you liked better lost a primary to an established candidate with a proven track record of popular support among your party's voters and a name with universal recognition, the only possible reason is a devilish conspiracy of cackling, malevolent puppeteers using devious and unspecified magicks to hoodwink the majority of voters into supporting the same candidate they supported last time.

And of course, when faced with such a cabal of dark conspirators, the only rational solution is to throw a months-long tantrum in which you spend all your energy trying to tear down the Democrat to "teach the party a lesson" about supporting the candidate most people liked instead of supporting the candidate *you* liked.


Wow, bitter much?
 
2018-09-14 07:28:46 AM  

Chaide: Did the big bad money bribe the voters into showing up to the polls? No? Well that's democracy in action, you big baby.


Soros!  Where's my money George?
 
2018-09-14 07:30:24 AM  

please: Wow, bitter much?


It's reasonable to be frustrated with people who refuse to acknowledge realities they don't like.
 
2018-09-14 07:43:13 AM  

Eddie Adams from Torrance: I was planning to vote for Cuomo, but on the ride over there I remembered that both sides are bad. Since there's no law saying you can't be President and Governor at the same time, I wrote in Trump instead. MAGA


You're on to something here.

Ok there is a law that says you can't be President and a Senator at the same time, but surely that wouldn't apply to Trump

And who better to advance the trump agenda in the Senate than Trump himself.

/would encouraging the rubes to do that be some kind if election tampering?
 
2018-09-14 07:43:49 AM  

pkjun: "watch the resylt" --> watch the result become more moderate.


I think the confusion is that the "moderate" position for the electorate is noticeably to the left of the Democratic party platform.
 
2018-09-14 07:44:52 AM  

Major Malfunction: I'm talking about the mailer that got sent out 2-3 days before the primary ratfarking Nixon as an anti-semite. Remember? We had a thread about it and everything.


At no time in this campaign was Nixon close to upending Cuomo, poll showed him with a double digit lead throughout the campaign. It wasn't as if she was close to catching up with him except for a mailer sent out. And yes, she definitely sounds like she was hoping a low turnout would make up for his poll numbers.
 
2018-09-14 07:56:16 AM  
Bagelghazi doomed Nixon
 
2018-09-14 07:57:23 AM  
One day women will get a fair shake in America.
 
2018-09-14 08:02:03 AM  

t3knomanser: pkjun: "watch the resylt" --> watch the result become more moderate.

I think the confusion is that the "moderate" position for the electorate is noticeably to the left of the Democratic party platform.


On some issue polling, yes. If that were generally true, though, we'd see progressive candidates wiping the floor with moderates and Republicans all over the place. And we aren't.

Which means we need to question either the assumption that the electorate holds progressive positions or the assumption that the electorate's voting habits are meant to reflect their issue positions.

At some point we need to lose the model of the Dumb Voter who really really wants a socialist utopia but who, darn it all, keeps voting for conservatives anyway.
 
2018-09-14 08:03:09 AM  
Nixon should continue campaigning against Cuomo for the next month or so. Really give her supporters a voice.
 
Displayed 50 of 235 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  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