Why we have no choice but to vote for Onorato.

[grouchyoldcoot]

Here in Pittsburgh, we all associate Onorato with the Poured Beverage Tax. Pretty much everyone who likes beer or bars dislikes that tax, and I think it's pretty stupid- sin taxes are generally just a way of targeting the weak. So on general principle it wouldn't break my heart to see Onorato lose the Governor's race

Comments

[hildakrista]

Wow, that completely decided my vote. Thanks.

[cellio]

I too prefer that governments be divided (it ought to force them to work toward consensus more, though it doesn't always), and even moreso when redistricting is on the table. But weighed against the likelihood that he will continue Rendell's reckless economic policies, I'm not sure that's the deciding factor. Redistricting would be bad, but the state is already in pretty bad shape economically and I don't see anything to suggest that he will improve that. I don't think we can afford him.

[grouchyoldcoot]

Well, I think the divided government argument is relevant here as well. Onorato would have his spending tendencies heavily restricted by the Republican legislature. Corbett may be more fiscally responsible, but experience suggests that any party which holds the Executive and Legislative branches is likely to increase spending.

[herooftheage]

Indeed, I think you have summed up the raison d'etre of the Tea Party movement pretty well there - I suspect they're mostly the fiscal conservative part of the Republican party, appalled by the expansion of government W. presented them with. Plus, of course, the evangelicals, who go wherever it is they go - I've never had a good handle on their behavior.

[grouchyoldcoot]

Hm. I'll find that more plausible when they start voting Democratic in solid-Republican states.

[allthingsnoisy]

My biggest pet peeve against Onorato is his support of Marcellus Shale drilling. I know people personally affected by the environmental consequences and the atrocities being covered up in the name of energy (more like lining someone else's pockets) have settled my vote.

[grouchyoldcoot]

Yeah, well, check Corbett's stand on that one. I don't think you've got any candidates available who have the right stand on Marcellus shale.

[allthingsnoisy]

Oh, I have, and you are correct. Still, Onorato just rubs me the wrong way. For once, can I get a PA governor that I like? I don't think I've liked one in three decades.

[grouchyoldcoot]

I don't say this to minimize the environmental consequences, mind you- the fracking liquid is pretty horrifying.

[bhudson]

Redistricting in the US is such a complete disaster.

[ariannawyn]

In discussions with my kids about this election, I simplified the PA gubernatorial race as between a chucklehead who agrees with me on some issues but will probably do stupid stuff vs. a smart guy whose policies I mostly detest. I will probably hold my nose and vote for Onorato, at least partly for the redistricting issue, but it's a lose-lose proposition no matter who wins.

Just in general, the whole gerrymandering thing should be done away with, but you'll never see politicians do it unless the people force them to it. Referendum, anyone?

Harking back to a previous post of yours on election advertising, I was dismayed to see numerous Toomey ads on the banner at Salon.com. If Toomey and his allies can afford to advertise on a very liberal site like Salon, where they have little or no hope of actually winning the votes of any of its readers, then they must be awash in money.

[koredono]

Re: redistricting: There is at least one state (probably California, but don't quote me on that, I heard it on NPR a couple of weeks ago) where there is a referendum on the ballot which would require any redistricting be done such that neighborhood / community integrity be maintained, which would get rid of the worst of the gerrymandering, I'd think.

[grouchyoldcoot]

Unfortunately it's more subtle than that- you can gerrymander the heck out of a state while using nice compact boundaries. You just have to concentrate the votes from one party in a small subset of regions, so that the remaining voters in that party make up only a minority in the other regions. The goal is to get lots of regions which are 55% party A and 45% party B, and a few regions which are 99% party B. Then party B feels like it's got its regions, but party A controls the House. Only the qants notice that party B is the majority of the population but party A has a permanent majority in government.

And that's what will happen to us, since apparently Corbett has won.