zlacker

[parent] [thread] 4 comments
1. Michae+(OP)[view] [source] 2025-02-17 01:55:11
Clearly the local electorate has decided such desires and aspirations are not worthwhile enough to change their voting behaviour…

So the question is how do you plan to change that?

Trying to convince random HN readers seems pointless if that’s your goal.

replies(1): >>aprilt+k3
2. aprilt+k3[view] [source] 2025-02-17 02:22:27
>>Michae+(OP)
This isn't true btw. In San Francisco the constant homeless and drug and crime issues have led to voting changes.
replies(1): >>Michae+M9
◧◩
3. Michae+M9[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 03:16:22
>>aprilt+k3
Since when did changes in one electoral cycle automatically equate to changes in long term voting behaviour?

e.g. Swing states are a well known concept, so it’s unclear how you could confuse that.

It has to be credibly sustained and durable for a few cycles, at the very least.

replies(1): >>aprilt+Dy
◧◩◪
4. aprilt+Dy[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 07:37:01
>>Michae+M9
It has been durable for a few cycles. There was the Boudin recall and now the recent election
replies(1): >>Michae+9x1
◧◩◪◨
5. Michae+9x1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 15:32:20
>>aprilt+Dy
Can you provide sources for the relevant electoral districts…?

At the very least, whatever has been imagined hasn’t translated into a ground reality expected by the parent. So I doubt it’s true.

[go to top]