Dems on the Rise in the 21st

Praise be to Maury Thomson for bringing forth these stats on voter enrollment in the 21st district of our fair state.

Democratic --

• April 1, 2016: 115,566
• Nov. 1, 2015: 111,864
• April 1, 2015: 113,425
• Year-to-year difference: + 2,141

Republican --

• April 1, 2016: 165,228
• Nov. 1, 2015: 163,491
• April 1, 2015: 166,243
• Year-to-year difference: - 1,051

A big huzzah to that!

Just for the purpose of completeness, I'll include the stats he put up for Warren County. Just wanted to point out that the Green Party seems to have its work cut out for them outside of Warren County. They gained 22 voters in the district and they were all in Warren County. Good luck with that, Matt! 

Matt's Epistle To Pissed Off Dems

I'm beginning to realize how much I'm going to miss out with Matt Funiciello not going to Congress in January. He's at least providing some entertainment as we count down to the winter solstice here in the not-so-frozen North. I hold out hope that once Elise Stefanik takes office, he will provide the promised critiques of her. In the meantime, he's, not surprisingly, finding some Dems who are not enamored of him. After saying reaction to him and his campaign have, in general, been positive:

(T)here has been some negative reaction (in general from hereditary Democratic Party voters) including people like Warren County Democratic Chair Lynne Boecher (whose remarks in The Chronicle about my run For congress were hardly favorable).

Once again, kudos to Lynne Boecher. 

I have also been called a "spoiler" and a "vanity candidate" by some people who would have gladly called themselves friends in the past. My Cafe Manager was told by a loyal customer that he will no longer be coming to our cafe because I am such a terrible human being that I dared to run for office.

OK, kudos to that guy, too. I bake my own bread anyway and have other cafes that I already go to. And as far as I know no one is organizing a boycott. Nor should they. I understand the sentiment of the customer. The reason given there sounds a little "strawmanish." I have to wonder if that was the actual reason or maybe his come closer to mine. It could have been the whole Dems and Reps are the same thing. That makes me either evil or naive for supporting Dems. Maybe the guy saw the "concession." That irritated me a little, too.

I was informed that DFA (Democracy for America) would no longer hold their monthly meetings at my cafe which they have been doing for well over a decade. 

That's right. Good on them, too. He spends more time during and after the campaign attacking the Dem Party and then is surprised when actual Democrats are upset with him? He expects a laurel and hearty handshake? I feel bad for his workers, though. If he wants to hurt his business, that's one thing.

So, this response is primarily for those among you who are angry at me for running or for trying to inject some grassroots democracy into the pathetic, manipulated process we have allowed our political system to become by surrendering our will to the two corporate war parties and their corporate sponsors.

That's just purely a straw man argument. That's so not the reason people are pissed.

Well, at least Aaron's money wasn't from Paul Ryan and Crossroads and the Koch's.

Um, damned with faint praise.

True. But it was his wife's money and it was made by investing in some pretty damaging and unconscious companies (Monsanto, McDonald's, tobacco and oil companies and several hedge funds to name but a few.)

I've done some web searches to find where AW's wife was invested. Can't find it. I do wish I could. Anyway. This seems to be a "degrees of separation" proof that Dems and Reps are equally evil. They're not. Reps are evil. Dems are inept. Woolf was running on the fruit of a poison tree because his wife was invested in Monsanto. Was it an individual stock or part of a mutual fund?

I'd love to hear from MF how you live a life without supporting corporations in some way, without moving to Walden Pond.

I'm going to paraphrase the fors and agins:

For peace, public banks and utilities, single payer health care. Against mono-crop farming. For healthy food and small family farms. Against torture and domestic spying. For clean renewable energy. Against fracking. For public transport, ballot access reform, term limits and public funding of elections. For a living wage.

There's probably nothing there that I disagree with. Do want to point out that I've ridden the bus, a lot. I spent over 4 years without a vehicle and have ridden it off and on for 8 to 10 years. I've never seen Matt on the bus. He drives a Ford pickup that I'm assuming is filled with gas that comes via a corporation. And totally beside the point, Henry Ford was a pretty big admirer of Adolph Hitler. So, I could see where some folks, particularly of the Jewish faith, would object to driving a Ford. I just don't like Fords. But, my Chevy comes from a corporation, too.

A majority of Democratic VOTERS (and many others) may share some or all of these values but the Democratic PARTY, itself, and its corporate sponsors... clearly do not.

I believe the chances of reforming the Democratic Party, while they may be slim, are much better than the chances of ever building a viable Green Party.  

Random Thoughts on the Election

I'll start with this from Salon. Otherwise, I may just come back and add to this post.

On MSNBC, Chris Hayes argued that Democratic candidates erred in running away from Obama. So did an indignant Al Sharpton and even Republican Joe Scarborough. Many liberal pundits had urged Democrats to stand by their man. Paul Krugman recently called Obama “one of the most consequential and, yes, successful presidents in American history.”

My feelings exactly. I sent a message to my candidate, Aaron Woolf, telling him not to run away from ACA after he told a reporter he wouldn't give a hypothetical answer to whether he'd have voted yes on it. I told him the answer I 'd have liked to see was, "I would have voted yes on it. If I'd been in the Congress way back, I'd have voted yes on Social Security and Medicare, too. And you know what, Republicans are still trying to get rid of all three."

This was in the news today:

(T)he country churned out 214,000 net new jobs last month.

That kept alive a nine-month streak over the 200,000 benchmark, and a record 56 months straight of growth in the US jobs market.

"With today's report, the unemployment rate is falling as fast as at any point in the last thirty years, and the economy is on pace for its best year of job growth since the late 1990s," said Jason Furman, Obama's top economic advisor.

The data suggested even more strength than that: the numbers for the previous two months were revised upward, and showed that the economy is smoothly absorbing more entrants and returnees into the jobs market.

And yes, the article did say that wage gains were not what they could be. But, as much as I think Matt Funiciello is an arrogant jerk bastard, it would be nice to see a Dem or two with the same spirit. It wouldn't surprise me if the Dems in the district actually do give him a veto on their candidate in 2016.Here's a little something for his supporters:


Obama’s failings are those of a generation of Democrats whose flaw is not how they campaign but how they govern. The only problem with their ‘message’ is that they often don’t mean it. They’re no more apt to change than the donors and consultants who hold their reigns are apt to let them. Since they’re too afraid to emancipate themselves others will have to do it for them, if necessary by primary.

Those possible ‘others’ are mighty disaffected. Do they still think the Democratic Party worth the time and effort that it takes to write a new agenda, build a new movement and challenge old leadership? I don’t know that they do. I only know that I’ve spent my life in that party and that nothing short of its utter transformation can save it now.

Also from Salon (yes, I use this blog to bookmark shit):

Amid this week’s disastrous Democratic drubbing, Connecticut emerged as one of the few bright spots for Democrats. Facing a formidable challenge from wealthy investor Tom Foley, whom he defeated by less than one percentage point in 2010, Democratic Gov. Dannel Malloy secured another term, fending off Foley 51 to 48 percent. For Democrats seeking a way forward after Tuesday’s rout, Malloy’s victory is instructive: when Democrats build a record of progressive achievements — and run campaigns based on that record — they can win.

Running against a multimillionaire opponent who paid only $673 in federal taxes in 2013, Malloy naturally lobbed plenty of populist rhetorical barbs at Foley. But Malloy also boasted something many Democrats who lost Tuesday night did not — an actual track record of economic populist accomplishments. Malloy could point to specific policies he’d signed into law — most notably, mandatory paid sick leave and the nation’s first-ever state-level minimum wage increase to $10.10 an hour — that benefited Connecticut families but would be jeopardized if Foley, who opposed those policies, won the governorship.

My italics, also something for Funiciello supporters, point the bullshit that there's no difference between Dems and Reps. Matt would be attacking Malloy for not getting them $15 an hour.


“The core economic issues – such as the minimum wage increase and paid sick days – really drew a contrast between Malloy and Foley, partly because they are issues that really resonate with everybody,” Farrell said. “Everybody has a sense that everybody who works should be paid a decent wage and people who get sick shouldn’t have to choose between their health and losing their job or losing their pay.”

But, Farrell noted, Malloy signed both paid sick leave and the minimum wage increase into law despite encountering opposition among more moderate Democrats in the state legislature, particularly on the former.

“When we passed paid sick days, when we passed the minimum wage increase, it wasn’t easy,” she said. “We had a lot of opposition from more moderate Democrats. In Connecticut, there are strong Democratic majorities in both chambers, but you get a lot of opposition from moderate, corporate Democrats. So if they had won the day on those issues, we’d probably be preparing for Gov. Foley right now, because Malloy would have been without these strong economic justice issues to run a campaign on.”

Yes, there are ball-less Dems in Connecticut. The moral here is to be more progressive. Change has to come to the Democratic Party, though. Unless you believe in magic.

Well, do ya? Then vote Green!

Election Hangover

Not literally, though that 16 hours at the polls was a bit draining. My candidate, Aaron Woolf, lost fairly badly. He received 32% of the vote to Elise Stefanik's 53%. Green Party candidate, Matt Funiciello received 11% of the vote and enough of my attention to merit this posting. Here's Kingmaker Extortionist Matt in his concession speech.

Yes, that's right, the candidate that got 32% was the spoiler for the guy that got 11%. And no, you did not get 12 to 16% Matt. He did not win against anyone, anywhere, including Warren County where he should have been strongest. He got 24% there and it went rapidly downhill in the other 11 counties. 

I don't know why he's not running for president. His winning that is about as realistic as the chances of his winning in this district.