Why do liberal mayors want to ruin their own cities? (unemployment rate, generation)

[lovecrowds]

Lincoln, Nebraska traditionally had it all. Stable neighborhoods, no homicides yet for a city of 280,000 people, historically had low unemployment rates and one of the easiest to live in cities in America.

Sadly, Democratic Mayor Chris Beutler who was educated at an Ivy-League college in the Northeast is trying to have as many refugees and social service agencies as possible in one city.

Its sad that because of the mayors liberalism that the city now has a 48 percent free and reduced school lunch rate for elementary school students

In the cities Lutheran social services refugee neighborhoods like Everett there is a 92 percent free and reduced lunch rate. Everett is a neighborhood of single-family neighborhoods so the refugees are obviously living off the dime of the American taxpayer and social service agencies that get lots of federal money to make neighborhoods like the 3rd world.

https://docushare.lps.org/docushare/...%20Section.pdf

Sadly, the liberal Democratic mayor of Lincoln wants welfare agencies that just cause people from all over the Midwest to come to Lincoln for the massive amounts of non-profit agencies.

http://dhhs.ne.gov/children_family_s...ts/Lincoln.pdf

The catalog of social service agencies in Lincoln just goes on and on. Rather then a catalog of jobs, they have a catalog of handouts from the city of Lincoln, state of Nebraska and federal handouts that were in this year's budget from Barack Obama.

Sadly, the liberal mayors of Des Moines and Minneapolis also want to ruin good cities with their liberal agendas.

Minneapolis which was known for Mary Tyler Moore and non-pretentious affluence, now has epidemics and radicalization amongst it's refugee communities.

Des Moines is in a similar situation, so many refugees and poor have moved to the city because of Democratic mayors that the school system has 65 student per ELL teacher

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/sto...ers/100715798/

[skeddy]

who got the most votes in the last mayoral election in Lincoln?

[NCN]

It is all about getting votes over being concerned what is best for the people.

[Casper in Dallas]

Originally Posted by NCN

It is all about getting votes over being concerned what is best for the people.

If most of the citizens support the politician then he is doing what they want, don't like feeding hungry children a lunch then run your city that way.

[Natural510]

Another false narrative with dubious intentions not based in reality. So what if schools need more money to educate these children in Des Moines and Lincoln? They're the future generation who will be working and paying taxes in the central Midwest, which continues to experience population stagnation and brain-drain to the coasts and South. But of course, they're not Caucasian so maybe that's the problem for Steve King and the OP.

[bxlover]

Don't we have other threads with exactly the same topic ? Can the moderator merge it.

[skepticratic]

Mayors are not gods. City council and local activism play just as much, if not more so, of a role in what happens in a city. If the people of Des Moines or Lincoln or wherever voted for a Democrat as their mayor, then that's who they wanted. It's not some evil mayor who seized control and is subjecting a city to his rule; he's a democratically elected public servant, doing what he feels is right. If the people of these cities decide he no longer is, they can elect somebody else.

This is basic civics. You of course make it about red vs blue, because you do not understand basic civics.