Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 23 of 23

Thread: Diverse media reports on Lancaster Supervisor race

  1. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    6,129
    [QUOTE=Breezy;1900637]

    Actually, I thought she was a shoe-in all along.

    The only reason I stayed out of it was that it was driving you and your 'spot on' buddy wild every time it came up and I remained silent. LOL, just taking a play out of your pal Trump's playbook - distraction!
    What nonsense!

    While you bring up rats, Lee, it would be interesting to know who Sojka voted for on Election Day!
    Ask Sojka. I could care less who he voted for.

    Didn't he rat out the GOP with this race from the beginning?
    How?

  2. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    6,129
    Quote Originally Posted by gorja View Post
    Lee, please don't get mad at me for asking.

    The **** Mohr pulled in the primary was wrong.

    The logic that I don't understand is if someone receives more votes than the other candidates in the primary,
    why is it called stealing? Is the logic that only Republicans can win a Conservative primary?
    Why I come to that conclusion is when Fudoli won the Conservative primary using the write-in campaign,
    he was also not the endorsed Conservative at the time. No one referred to it as stealing. It was just the people's choice.
    At least, that's the way my mind works. Maybe, I'm a just a little quirky.
    The first time I heard the phrase 'stealing the line' was when Fudoli used the write-in tactic to win line he was not endorsed for by the Conservative Party, and to my knowledge did not actively campaign for.

    Prior to his win, the Democrats controlled the Conservative line for years. I could not understand why liberals were controlling a line with conservative values. Changes took place in the party hierarchy and conservative values were reinstated. Some of the old guard oppose the ideological change and challenge the party endorsed candidates, not only with a bonafide candidate but with interlopers supporting the challenging candidate to take away votes from the party-endorsed candidate.

    As stated in other posts, I favor fusion politics and voting. As a ‘blank’ I can find a minor party line to vote for a candidate I believe qualified for office.

    I abhor voting on either Democrat or Republican election ballot lines.

    I believe when the respective party committees endorse a candidate there should be no challenges. The committees interview, vet and endorse the candidates they believed follow party ideology and values. This year, some candidates did not apply for an interview, got the needed petitions and never actively campaigned – stalkers. Some managed to challenge the endorsed candidate and through chicanery won. These candidates represented a party line whose values often differ from the party ideology and also take away a line for someone like me to vote on – taking away my freedom of expression.

    As a blank who can’t vote in a primary, I knew little of the process, but enough to know that this year’s primary was far more disgustingly immoral / dishonest than the norm. As such, Breezy and his cohorts were in pig heaven. They loved every minute of the intrigue.

    Despite the primary BS, I was still able to find my candidates of choice on minor party lines. Three of the five local candidates won, and one is pending.

  3. #18
    Member gorja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lancaster, NY
    Posts
    11,815
    Originally posted by Lee Chowaniec:
    I believe when the respective party committees endorse a candidate there should be no challenges
    I respectfully disagree. I was happy to see Terranova challenge the Democratic endorsed candidate.

    I do like a primary if it is run appropriately with no shenanigans. SOmetimes the people on the committee
    may not have made the choice the majority of the party would like.

    Have a GREAT day,
    Georgia Schlager

  4. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    6,129
    Quote Originally Posted by gorja View Post
    I respectfully disagree. I was happy to see Terranova challenge the Democratic endorsed candidate.

    I do like a primary if it is run appropriately with no shenanigans. SOmetimes the people on the committee
    may not have made the choice the majority of the party would like.
    As I was, because no candidate can win without major party backing. How unfortunate that Terranova received the endorsement from the Republican Party, the Conservative Party and Independence Party but found it necessary to challenge the endorsed candidate from her own Democratic Party. Losing the Republic line, after being cross endorsed by that party was devastating. She needed the endorsement of a major party.

    Did the losing endorsed Democratic candidate graciously bow out? Nope her name remained on a minor party line and she did no campaigning. In turn, did the Republican Party give any support to the challenger winner who got the endorsement line? Nope! Why should they; the Dems didn’t do anything for Coleman.

    Mr. Mohr made it happen that Desiderio received mailer support from the State Independence Party. The same party where the local party had endorsed Terranova. Mohr mentoring Desiderio, becoming her campaign manager and rivaling the same Lancaster Republican Party he lost influence over for vindictive reasons.

    Your earlier post where you stated, “The logic that I don't understand is if someone receives more votes than the other candidates in the primary, why is it called stealing? Is the logic that only Republicans can win a Conservative primary?” is misleading considering that for a number of years before the Conservative Party Chair position took place four years ago the Chair who had been in place for many years held no interviewing process, no committee meetings to reach consensus on a candidate but arbitrarily endorsed his candidates which just happened to be democrats. Four years a chair change was made when the party decided to go back to its conservative core values. Did Ruffino, Desiderio or Mazur interview with the Conservative Party?

    I like the fusion system, but I don’t like the current fusion system at all. Unlike you, I believe that when any political party’s committee interviews, vets and meets to vote to choose the best qualified candidate that has the party’s core values in mind, the process is over.

    Yes, we will disagree here. You have the advantage as you are an affiliated voter and have skin in the game. I’m just an outsider giving you my opinion. However, I do know that if I was an individual working my ass off to get petitions for the endorsed party candidate and my candidate’s name doesn’t wind up on the ballot, I would be pretty pissed – especially knowing the crap that took place this year.

    Terranova (the incumbent) started out with endorsements from three political parties and wound up having to challenge the endorsed candidate from her own party to have two lines on the election ballot. Think that’s fair? I don’t.

  5. #20
    Member gorja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lancaster, NY
    Posts
    11,815
    Originally posted by Lee CHowaniec:
    Terranova (the incumbent) started out with endorsements from three political parties and wound up having to challenge the endorsed candidate from her own party to have two lines on the election ballot. Think that’s fair? I don’t.
    No, I don't either but probably view it differently than you do. The Republican voters chose Desiderio in the primary.
    More of the Sojka side of the party should have voted.
    Terranova won the primary over the endorsed Democratic candidate.
    In my view, the unfairness occurred when Ralph Mohr didn't recognize Terranova's Independence party petition to primary.

    Have a GREAT day,
    Georgia Schlager

  6. #21
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    215
    All:

    Having gone through the process 4 years ago, I can attest to having the option to watch the absentee votes being counted. They go around the table with reps from both major parties checking ballots and agreeing on who it was cast for. I think I lasted 90 minutes watching this process.... it is not overly exciting but it is without a doubt fair.

    The other voter number I haven't heard of yet is for the people who voted in the wrong location. They are allowed to vote but their ballot isn't counted until it can be confirmed that they were registered. In my election this was another 40-50 votes, as I recall. In an election this close, though, it might come down to those as well.

    Matt

  7. #22
    Member gorja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lancaster, NY
    Posts
    11,815
    Quote Originally Posted by MaddMatt View Post
    All:

    Having gone through the process 4 years ago, I can attest to having the option to watch the absentee votes being counted. They go around the table with reps from both major parties checking ballots and agreeing on who it was cast for. I think I lasted 90 minutes watching this process.... it is not overly exciting but it is without a doubt fair.

    The other voter number I haven't heard of yet is for the people who voted in the wrong location. They are allowed to vote but their ballot isn't counted until it can be confirmed that they were registered. In my election this was another 40-50 votes, as I recall. In an election this close, though, it might come down to those as well.

    Matt
    Thanks for the info, Matt. We, who did vote early were allowed to vote in any location in Erie County. That's why they had to print individual ballots.

    I didn't realize that in prior elections that you could vote in a wrong location. So, if your name was NOT in the book with your signature, they'd let the person vote?

    I moved here on October 13, 2000 and couldn't vote in the 2000 Presidential election.

    Have a GREAT day,
    Georgia Schlager

  8. #23
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    215
    Quote Originally Posted by gorja View Post

    I didn't realize that in prior elections that you could vote in a wrong location. So, if your name was NOT in the book with your signature, they'd let the person vote?
    Yes but the vote would be set aside to be checked for legitimacy. The proper name for these votes escapes me at the moment but there are usually a few at every voting location. With 34 (?) voting locations and a close election that could add up to quite a few votes!

    Matt

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Lancaster Supervisor salary
    By Lee Chowaniec in forum Village of Lancaster and Town of Lancaster Politics
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: November 23rd, 2017, 11:18 PM
  2. Supervisor race gets heated
    By gorja in forum Village of Lancaster and Town of Lancaster Politics
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: October 31st, 2015, 08:23 PM
  3. Dems Supervisor's Race
    By Smiley in forum Amherst, Clarence and Williamsville
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: September 16th, 2009, 11:10 PM
  4. Lancaster'$ Supervisor mispoke again !!!!!!
    By 4248 in forum Village of Lancaster and Town of Lancaster Politics
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: August 31st, 2009, 10:26 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •