Arpaio should be removed from MCSO immediately.

[Ponderosa]

Originally Posted by kell490

If Arpaio has such a bad rep why does he keep winning and by a large margin? One thing that has concerned me is the man is 82 years old is he capable of being Sheriff much longer?

He has no primary opponent. Anyone who gets through the Republican primary can pretty much be assured of being elected in Arizona in an off year election, especially. Look at Diane Douglas. Apathy rules the electoral process in Arizona.

[kell490]

I found this about the Judges Wife

The sheriff admitted that his former attorney had hired the private investigator to look into a tipster's allegation that Snow's wife had told someone at a restaurant that Snow wanted to prevent Arpaio from being reelected.

Which is a legitimate concern Judges should be impartial but you know they aren't all the time.

He has no primary opponent. Anyone who gets through the Republican primary can pretty much be assured of being elected in Arizona in an off year election, especially. Look at Diane Douglas.

That's what they said last time he ran with all his problems he would not be elected the Dems measured their win by how much they lost by LOL.

[pbenjamin]

Originally Posted by kell490

If Arpaio has such a bad rep why does he keep winning and by a large margin? One thing that has concerned me is the man is 82 years old is he capable of being Sheriff much longer?

In the last election he got 50.66% of the vote, hardly a landslide. There is a reasonably large percentage of the electorate who just vote for whoever has a R next to their name.

[pbenjamin]

Originally Posted by Ponderosa

He has no primary opponent. Anyone who gets through the Republican primary can pretty much be assured of being elected in Arizona in an off year election, especially. Look at Diane Douglas. Apathy rules the electoral process in Arizona.

Actually the Sheriff is elected in Presidential election years.

[Potential_Landlord]

Originally Posted by Juram

LOL, no. You can find guys like him in every single state, not in jail, corrupt as hell, out and about, smiling for the camera's, gladhanding and kissing babies.

Go look at the DA out of Milwaukee who basically decided to wage a one man war on the governor and any of his political allies, issuing countless bogus subpoena's all because his wife was brought to tears as a result of the governor's policies.

Arizona is no more dysfunctional than anywhere else. Every single state and major city has its own dirty laundry, corrupt politicians and people acting always in their own personal interest and not fulfilling the duties of their office, they come from all ideological backgrounds, all colors, sizes and genders.

What makes AZ stand out is the non-competitiveness of the elections, always favoring the one party. That always breeds corruption and bullying. It's the same in California from the opposite direction. As long as there are so many political offices non-competitive you will get the problems we have like Sheriff Joe. The hypocrite thing is that the party in power here always states they are for competition, right-to-work and free markets but they do everything to rig the political game in their favor. They couldn't be more socialist about this.

[Juram]

Originally Posted by Potential_Landlord

What makes AZ stand out is the non-competitiveness of the elections, always favoring the one party.

I wouldn't say that makes this state stand out anymore than any number of other places with largely one party rule. You have places around the country where a Republican hasn't been elected in decades, but you are right, this sort of setup generally leads to corruption and a lot of "wink wink, pay for play" style arrangements. Its never a good thing to have one party amass so much power that they don't really have to be accountable to anyone. Its largely why Illinois is in such major trouble, as well as places like Detroit....etc.

[thinkalot]

Originally Posted by pbenjamin

In the last election he got 50.66% of the vote, hardly a landslide. There is a reasonably large percentage of the electorate who just vote for whoever has a R next to their name.

I left an area where most people voted for anyone with a D next to their name. That happens all over the country.

[johnp292]

Originally Posted by jdahunt

I find the following comment very interesting because you don't really mean even it though you post it.....if you did I would love to see your posts condemning others doing the same thing.....yet you remain silent.

It seems the current administration has forgotten the following sayings "the law applies to everyone"..."if you don't like the law then work to change it".

And yes the Sheriff position is a political job......in every aspect...just because the duties are different don't mean its not political.

Joe is and will continue to be a hero to millions because he enforces the laws on the books, doing what clearly a huge majority of local voters want done.

We should not love our politicians...on either side....but can you really throw stones at Joe while at the same time idolize a man who clearly has a record of abusing women...really?

I like how the Arpaio Apologists trot out the contention that "a huge majority of local voters" support him. That is simply not true. He won the last election by a narrow margin, and if you look at the trend his margin has steadily decreased after each term. 50.66% of the voters, while enough to win, is hardly a huge majority.

[The_Cadillac_Lawyer]

Dude is 82 years old!!

Nothing against seniors, I'll be one someday (hopefully), however when my grandpa was 82 his mental capacity had visibly diminished. Why is that old folks cannot seem to let go of power?

[Java Jolt]

Originally Posted by johnp292

I like how the Arpaio Apologists trot out the contention that "a huge majority of local voters" support him. That is simply not true. He won the last election by a narrow margin, and if you look at the trend his margin has steadily decreased after each term. 50.66% of the voters, while enough to win, is hardly a huge majority.

I like how the Arpaio lovers try to twist the topic around and start their own tirade about Obama, Holder, and other politicians involved in scandals.

For the last time, this topic isn't about the other politicians, it's about Joe Arpaio.

Can the Arpaio lovers justify the reasons why a secret investigation was done on a judge's wife?

Can the Arpaio lovers justify the reasons why Arpaio sent his posse to Hawaii to investigate Obama's birth certificate?

Can the Arpaio lovers justify the reasons why he asked the feds to pay $39,000,000.00 to cover his legal costs?

Can the Arpaio lovers justify the reasons why MCSO allowed numerous sex crimes to go unresolved?