Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The problem, Towanda, with that poll is that was conducted by a polling firm aligned with Republicans. You probably have to take at least 5 points off the poll for Martinez if you want to look at the results more objectively.
I KNEW someone would jump on the fact that the polling was done by a polling firm aligned with the GOP. Are you saying they don't conduct honest polling....or that they skew the results and are not objective?
Martinez has been leading in EVERY poll that has been done. Denish has rarely been even close within the margin of error. Maybe she should do some polling and then declare herself the leader?
It's very difficult to elect a conservative when you have a greater amount of people who rely upon government for WIC, EBT, or medicaid, and that mentality is trenchant in one's life.
But those are people who do not vote.
I think those above reasons might make it MORE likely to elect a conservative.
Republicans are energized this year. I am still betting on Susana's chances to win big.
The problem, Towanda, with that poll is that was conducted by a polling firm aligned with Republicans. You probably have to take at least 5 points off the poll for Martinez if you want to look at the results more objectively.
Believe me, I don't want to see Denish as governor any more than you do, but I am also a realist. Just about any one I know who lives in Las Cruces has a family member that is reliant upon some sort of financial assistance. It's very difficult to elect a conservative when you have a greater amount of people who rely upon government for WIC, EBT, or medicaid, and that mentality is trenchant in one's life.
As opposed to the influential few who rely upon getting fat off of bloated government defense contracts who will continue to support any Republican candidate.
As opposed to the influential few who rely upon getting fat off of bloated government defense contracts who will continue to support any Republican candidate.
As opposed to the influential few who rely upon getting fat off of bloated government defense contracts who will continue to support any Republican candidate.
In New Mexico, the ratio of permanent underclass welfare recipients to influential few who rely upon getting fat off of bloated defense contracts is in the order of about 100:1. In fact, I'd say that ratio would probably hold nationally.
Additionally, defense and military spending are earmarked as rightful spending in the Constitution. Handouts, health & human services, etc, are not.
Consider this......those who get the bloated government contracts hire others to get the job done.
I've never seen a welfare recipient provide a job for anybody else--not legally, anyway.
The inference here is that providing for others should be a priority over national defense. That's a perfidious remark, in my opinion. Never, ever, did the founding fathers intend for these conditions to be as prevalent as they are currently constituted, and that's a damned shame.
In New Mexico, the ratio of permanent underclass welfare recipients to influential few who rely upon getting fat off of bloated defense contracts is in the order of about 100:1. In fact, I'd say that ratio would probably hold nationally.
Additionally, defense and military spending are earmarked as rightful spending in the Constitution. Handouts, health & human services, etc, are not.
The voter ratio may be 100:1, but I'd be willing to bet the $ ratio is not. My point is that both parties make sure their constituents get their turn at the public trough. Republicans spend like drunken sailors, just like Democrats do, but Republicans cut taxes without cutting spending. Someone eventually has to pay.
Defense spending? Really? What national interests are we defending bombing Afghanistan into the Stone Age? The war in Iraq? WMD . . . didn't see them. Has war been declared? I missed that one. Rightful spending under the Constitution? Every bit as debatable as spending on social programs.
The inference here is that providing for others should be a priority over national defense. That's a perfidious remark, in my opinion. Never, ever, did the founding fathers intend for these conditions to be as prevalent as they are currently constituted, and that's a damned shame.
If any of you ever had to be in a position where you had to live off WIC or any other social program you'd think differently. I've grown up in New Mexico, and many of my friends grew up on welfare. It's not all rosy and easy like you guys seem to paint it. One friend in particular, their dad died when we were in middle school, and their mother worked 2 jobs to try and stay afloat. People on these programs ARE NOT moochers like you guys are painting them to be. It's really easy to say you're anti-welfare when you have a comfortable job and aren't at risk of getting into that hole. Well, shame on you. I for one got inoculated at La Casa. Without things like medicaid and La Casa TONS of children and adults would not even have the most basic medical care. Take a walk in someone else's shoes for a day. Go work a Peanut Plant for 10 hours then go clean several churches late at night, whilst making sure three kids at home have something to eat. Then, see what happens when you take away those programs. The ratio of people that take advantage of the system are 100:1 ,if that. So, 100 families truly benefitting and living to 1 person who takes advantage and you guys want to undo an entire system? That's just insane. It's this type of rhetoric that's driving my family from the GOP into the Independent category, and why i'm a Democrat. I for one would like to see this state be a nice place for everybody, not just the fat cats and the people who retire here from god knows where. People move here and complain about our poverty and the number of people on welfare, yet, they vote to remove welfare and just hammer more people into poverty? It's just cruel and wrong and it just doesn't work. No Tejana Susana, Viva Diane!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
