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.
I've noticed that the leadership in Rochester has been Democrat for a while and I personally believe we need a change in modus operandi. I see a Conservative standpoint being balancing for Rochester and there needs to be some cutting back.
What do you think? Please share the reasoning behind your decisions.
The entire state of Florida is a little different than the small city of Rochester.
As far as I'm concerned, it can't get much worse. Right? I think whoever comes in needs to take over city schools at the very least.
Exactly, how could it get any worse?! When that question is asked, there is nothing to lose and it is logical to try another approach rather than continue to repeat the same mistakes. Rochester makes me think of the definition of insanity with it's government and voter logic.
Well, although I'm not a city resident and thus unable to vote in the mayoral elections; this is a fairly moot point; but I would vote for any candidate, regardless of party, who would be fiscally responsible, focus on getting crime down, the schools out of the pits, revitalize downtown with small, manageable products (instead ren-square-fastferry type projects), and work towards bridging the social stigma between the city and the suburbs (though that responsibility does fall more on the shoulders of the residents of both areas more than any civic leaders). Partisan politics is completely stupid and is bringing this entire country down.
As long as african-americans (and most other racial minorities) keep voting for democratic party candidates in numbers that would make Stalin blush, the notion that a major northern american city will one day be governed by republicans is a pipe dream. The modern republican party (party of Lincoln, anyone?) has little to no appeal to urban minorities, ceding this territory to the democrats across the north. The real question here IMHO is whether a conservative, moderate or "progressive" democrat is elected mayor or rochester.
As long as the city is forced to compete with Monroe County (instead of the two working cooperatively together) for economic opportunities, it will continue on a downward trend.
Not to nitpick, but Guliani and Bloomberg are both republicans and were both mayors for new york city, which has proportion of minorities than Rochester.
Granted, NYC is an exception, perhaps due to the unique influence of Wall Street and the near bankruptcy that occur red during the Koch era. I can't off-hand think of another example.
Any idea what the voter demographic of NYC was for their respective elections? There may be a ton of minorities in NYC, but:
A) How many of them voted?
B) Were they still outnumbered by rich white people?
C) Is a rich black more likely to vote for a Repub than a Dem?
D) Do they really stand a chance against the massive wealthy Jew population of NYC anyways? lol
Too late to look this stuff up myself and I gotta get to bed.
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.
