Amendment 4: Approve or Oppose?

[ChriswUfGator]

What do you mean it's not the money? Please...we just elected a crook governor because he outspent on advertising.

[tufsu1]

What do you mean it's not the money? Please...we just elected a crook governor because he outspent on advertising.

well let's see....Scott outspent Sink 5-1....and even with Rs winning across the board in FL (in a state that hasn't elected a D governor in 16+ years), he barely beat her.

and oh yeah, Meg Whitman and Carly Firoina got beat in CA even though they way outspent their opponents.

[ChriswUfGator]

What do you mean it's not the money? Please...we just elected a crook governor because he outspent on advertising.

well let's see....Scott outspent Sink 5-1....and even with Rs winning across the board in FL (in a state that hasn't elected a D governor in 16+ years), he barely beat her.

and oh yeah, Meg Whitman and Carly Firoina got beat in CA even though they way outspent their opponents.

So then you're saying without that advertising spending he still would have beat Sink?

That's the contrapositive to your argument that's logically required to be valid in order for your argument to be true, so let's address it...

[CS Foltz]

Gee..........good thing he used his money right? Either way, produce or get out! I look forward to just how 700K jobs are going to be generated in this economy!

[tufsu1]

I would submit to you that his spending helped him beat McCollum in the primary....but if he had spent just as much $ as Sink in the general election, yes I think he would have still won.

in fact, nationally Democrats raised and spent more than Republicans (not inluding the 527 $) and still got trounced.

[tufsu1]

actually Stephen the data on fundraising is clear....feel free to look it up.

and while this may sound like a cop out, since the 527s "can't endorse a candidate or party", you can't associate their money with a given party.

[CS Foltz]

Unless that money has been accounted for via filing, who knows where it came from? Supreme Court ruled that Corperations can finanace anyone with any amount! There are no limits and Corperations with deep pockets can do pretty much what they will..............unlike the tax paying public! For all any one knows, Mr Scotts former Company, HCA, actually gave him that money................or does anyone know for sure?

[north miami]

Follow the money for sure.

Hometown leaders will be providing insight on the details.Stay tuned.
Although # 4 has come and gone,the systemic issues remain and there is elevated interest.

[CS Foltz]

Follow the money for sure.

Hometown leaders will be providing insight on the details.Stay tuned.
Although # 4 has come and gone,the systemic issues remain and there is elevated interest.

north miami..........you said it! Amendment 4 was shot down, but the systemic problems do remain.....elected officials that do not represent their constituants but pander to those special interests just for the campaign contributions! Something is wrong here and right now, I don't see anyway to correct other than removing elected officials that do not do their elected jobs!

[north miami]

Follow the money for sure.

Hometown leaders will be providing insight on the details.Stay tuned.
Although # 4 has come and gone,the systemic issues remain and there is elevated interest.

north miami..........you said it! Amendment 4 was shot down, but the systemic problems do remain.....elected officials that do not represent their constituants but pander to those special interests just for the campaign contributions! Something is wrong here and right now, I don't see anyway to correct other than removing elected officials that do not do their elected jobs!

If not by now,then when??

The definitive response and grasp by the development industry to # 4 was simply a reflection of that influence on a local government joined at the hip with ardent development.Rearranging the faces on an elected local review commission to no avail.

The leaders of the Hometown #4 proposal command great experience and are aware of a statewide historical narrative.The Hometown concept was arrived at through a deliberative process that examined all of the elements.The HT leaders realized long ago that simply relying on elected officials and campaign election cycles would often fail.
Collectively the great angnst generated by unsound and unpopular land use decisions statewide has done little to remove the bad apples.

It's really very simple-for example here in late 2010 a tufsu for instance has a better chance at local office seat than most of the rest of MJ posters.
I personally refrained from seeking political office in Clay county due to the known futility of such a venture.

A correct panel of politicians you envision could probably only come about due to a public more attuned to a conservative vision for growth management."Growth management" has created a sense of complacency.In the mean time,most of the public is compliant with the typical political profile in office,until something Gigantica hits their own back yard.Defense of the back yard is honorable- and the fact there are so many back yards is a tribute to 'growth',and hence the great enmity from development and the classic "NIMBY" phrase usually employed in a negative manner when in fact the issues at stake are in fact the individuals citizens' back yard,literally at times.But the most important person is the one who has not moved here yet-no wonder those in elective roles are faceless too.

[CS Foltz]

You do have valid points points and then some! Maybe educating the electorate might have a bearing, but that would be difficult. If any voter does not due  basic  research, then they are not getting enough information to make an informed decision and information allows anyone to make that educated choice! I voted YES for Amendment 4 because of what I see taking place.........the excuse of business not coming because of 4 passing,is not substanciated by what I saw or read! Uncontroled and unbridled developement continues and we have no one to blame but ourselves for  not taking control of our future. If the persons supposedly watching out for the public don't do their elected jobs, then the public has no choice but to do the job for them!