Krewson wins the Democratic primary (St. Louis, Republic: low income, homes, schools)

[chicagobear]

Bill McClellan used to write that St. Louis really did have a two party system, the Black Democrats and the White Democrats

[RisingAurvandil]

The most racist response is coming from Jones supporters. It's disgusting that they openly called for other black candidates to step down because of their race.

If Krewson's supporters had done that, it would be a scandal. It would probably be on national news.

[MOforthewin]

Really doesn't matter. Either way St. Louis would have a liberal, democrap mayor and not much would change anyway regardless of skin color. Krewson is as far left as they come and doesn't understand basics of state law. She submitted a highly illegal, unconstitutional gun bill that could not be enforced. As usual liberal one track mind instead of focusing on the actual real issues the city has.

It doesn't matter if the mayor was black or a white. Far left liberal. Slay is white and the city is broke and full of all sorts of problems. He wasn't able to fix them.

Hillary is white and she would have done the same policies Obama did and was even more left on some.

[RisingAurvandil]

Originally Posted by MOforthewin

Really doesn't matter. Either way St. Louis would have a liberal, democrap mayor and not much would change anyway regardless of skin color. Krewson is as far left as they come and doesn't understand basics of state law. She submitted a highly illegal, unconstitutional gun bill that could not be enforced. As usual liberal one track mind instead of focusing on the actual real issues the city has.

It doesn't matter if the mayor was black or a white. Far left liberal. Slay is white and the city is broke and full of all sorts of problems. He wasn't able to fix them.

Hillary is white and she would have done the same policies Obama did and was even more left on some.

You are indeed mistaken, and clearly lack a historical perspective. The issues facing cities are not related to political association. If that was the case, all of St. Louis would be poor. All of New York would be poor. All of Dallas would be poor.

But they're not. In fact, they have incredible economic diversity that doesn't correlate with politics.

I suppose Outstate Missouri is so poor and drug-ridden because it votes Republican? By your logic, it is.

[FrankMiller]

Originally Posted by RisingAurvandil

I suppose Outstate Missouri is so poor and drug-ridden because it votes Republican? By your logic, it is.

Considering the cost in jobs, human suffering and medical treatment options as a direct result of refusing to expand Medicaid for basically free, there's a strong case to be made here. Not quite analogous to "the city is overrun with gun violence because the mayor doesn't love guns enough".

[MOforthewin]

Originally Posted by RisingAurvandil

You are indeed mistaken, and clearly lack a historical perspective. The issues facing cities are not related to political association. If that was the case, all of St. Louis would be poor. All of New York would be poor. All of Dallas would be poor.

But they're not. In fact, they have incredible economic diversity that doesn't correlate with politics.

I suppose Outstate Missouri is so poor and drug-ridden because it votes Republican? By your logic, it is.

I wouldn't say they're great with economics. The rams pulled out, companies leave downtown St. Louis as well and I can eventually see the Blues moving to somewhere like St. Louis county or northern Jefferson, St. Charles County eventually due to the amusement tax and always having to fight to get upgrades to Scottrade. Not now, but in about 10-15 years I can see the Blues trying to get an arena built in St. Louis county because it will be over 30 years old and time to be replaced and certainly don't want to keep paying that amusement tax.

If the Blues pull out of downtown that will further hurt the hotels and union station businesses.

You can't really compare cities like Stl do Dallas and New York which are much much bigger and have a lot more industries. NYC is the HQ for almost everything, and Dallas is much bigger and has a lot of oil and tech industry in the region something St. Louis does not and never will!

Also not all of outstate Missouri is a bunch of poor people living in shacks. You would be surprised in southern Missouri some of those places some of the people are pretty wealthy in places such as West Plains, Bull Shoals, Table Rock but don't flaunt it or buy expensive cars. And while there are drug problems they don't have the rate of violent crimes and murders that St. Louis city has such as knock out games and car jackings on a regular basis.

[RisingAurvandil]

Originally Posted by MOforthewin

I wouldn't say they're great with economics. The rams pulled out, companies leave downtown St. Louis as well and I can eventually see the Blues moving to somewhere like St. Louis county or northern Jefferson, St. Charles County eventually due to the amusement tax and always having to fight to get upgrades to Scottrade. Not now, but in about 10-15 years I can see the Blues trying to get an arena built in St. Louis county because it will be over 30 years old and time to be replaced and certainly don't want to keep paying that amusement tax.

If the Blues pull out of downtown that will further hurt the hotels and union station businesses.

You can't really compare cities like Stl do Dallas and New York which are much much bigger and have a lot more industries. NYC is the HQ for almost everything, and Dallas is much bigger and has a lot of oil and tech industry in the region something St. Louis does not and never will!

Also not all of outstate Missouri is a bunch of poor people living in shacks. You would be surprised in southern Missouri some of those places some of the people are pretty wealthy in places such as West Plains, Bull Shoals, Table Rock but don't flaunt it or buy expensive cars. And while there are drug problems they don't have the rate of violent crimes and murders that St. Louis city has such as knock out games and car jackings on a regular basis.

And now you're on the defensive. You're using far more words to peddle a response that doesn't even mention political affiliation. That speaks volumes about your inability to substantiate your claim that political affiliation is restraining St. Louis.

Sir, no deflections. Stay on-topic.

[MOforthewin]

Originally Posted by RisingAurvandil

And now you're on the defensive. You're using far more words to peddle a response that doesn't even mention political affiliation. That speaks volumes about your inability to substantiate your claim that political affiliation is restraining St. Louis.

Sir, no deflections. Stay on-topic.

Until St. Louis gets Republican control, the situation won't be much better. White liberals, black liberals, it doesn't matter who runs St. Louis. It isn't race. As long as the dems control the city it will bleed money. How can you not figure that out?

Just look at liberal controlled California. Basically St. Louis at a state level. Totally broke and trying to pass more liberal illogical policies.

[mjtinmemphis]

Originally Posted by MOforthewin

Until St. Louis gets Republican control, the situation won't be much better. White liberals, black liberals, it doesn't matter who runs St. Louis. It isn't race. As long as the dems control the city it will bleed money. How can you not figure that out?

Just look at liberal controlled California. Basically St. Louis at a state level. Totally broke and trying to pass more liberal illogical policies.

Just look at the Conservative controlled Mississippi, Arkansas and just look at Missouri. California is much better off then us as a state.

[FrankMiller]

Originally Posted by MOforthewin

Until St. Louis gets Republican control, the situation won't be much better. White liberals, black liberals, it doesn't matter who runs St. Louis. It isn't race. As long as the dems control the city it will bleed money. How can you not figure that out?

Just look at liberal controlled California. Basically St. Louis at a state level. Totally broke and trying to pass more liberal illogical policies.

Please tell me how holding up California as an example of financial ruin compared to Red States isn't absurd.

Not that either party deserves all the blame; California is financially hamstrung by an inability of the legislature to raise taxes, and any kind of divided government basically finishes it off. Missouri has a similar problem with the Hancock amendment; it's basically been designed to grind itself into the ground financially. Of course, in MO it's easy to blame Republicans for that fact.