Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
54 user(s) are online (49 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 0
Guests: 54

more...




Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users




« 1 (2) 3 »


Re: Vote No for 2 city questions
#50
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
3/21 23:34
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5375
Offline
Quote:

corybraiterman wrote:
just because you're an idiot who can neither do basic math nor apparently read a ballot does not mean that applies to the rest of us


Shame on your mother for not raising you with manners.

Posted on: 2016/10/26 2:20
 Top 


Re: Vote No for 2 city questions
#49
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/7/3 5:49
Last Login :
2022/4/28 22:07
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1384
Offline
just because you're an idiot who can neither do basic math nor apparently read a ballot does not mean that applies to the rest of us

Posted on: 2016/10/26 1:22
 Top 


Re: Vote No for 2 city questions
#48
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
3/21 23:34
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5375
Offline
Election fatigure is when there are 20 people running for mayor if you place that along with their running mates, federal, state, county and board elections including questions, that will be voter fatigure. Then you have to translate everything into Spanish.

Posted on: 2016/10/26 0:24
 Top 


Re: Vote No for 2 city questions
#47
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
2023/7/17 17:42
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Banned
Posts: 5775
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Stack is looking after the interest of his constituents in his district, I consider him a good man. After all, Union City is much cleaner than JC so he must be doing something right.


Stack is a power broker, and the fewer people who vote favor his breed who turn out their constituencies to keep power. The myriad elections here were always about keeping down the vote so unions and other organized special interests would dominate via "election fatigue".

The "election day jobs program" argument would be hysterical if it wasn't indicative of the "old school" way of spreading the perks for support.

Posted on: 2016/10/26 0:14
 Top 


Re: Vote No for 2 city questions
#46
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
3/21 23:34
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5375
Offline
Quote:

caj11 wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
In an open letter, State Senator, Brian Stack sent to his constituents, he said to vote No on question one, Keep Elections in May! Stack said moving it makes it confusing.


I would not be confused, nor do I consider Senator Stack someone I'd take my voting advice from. I make my own decisions and so should you.


Stack is looking after the interest of his constituents in his district, I consider him a good man. After all, Union City is much cleaner than JC so he must be doing something right.

Posted on: 2016/10/25 23:53
 Top 


Re: Vote No for 2 city questions
#45
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/10/1 1:03
Last Login :
6/5 23:38
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1280
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
In an open letter, State Senator, Brian Stack sent to his constituents, he said to vote No on question one, Keep Elections in May! Stack said moving it makes it confusing.


I would not be confused, nor do I consider Senator Stack someone I'd take my voting advice from. I make my own decisions and so should you.

Posted on: 2016/10/25 23:02
 Top 


Re: Vote No for 2 city questions
#44
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
3/21 23:34
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5375
Offline
In an open letter, State Senator, Brian Stack sent to his constituents, he said to vote No on question one, Keep Elections in May! Stack said moving it makes it confusing.

Posted on: 2016/10/25 22:16
 Top 


Re: Vote No for 2 city questions
#43
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2014/3/4 22:31
Last Login :
2019/8/30 19:03
From Downtown Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 820
Offline
Quote:

caj11 wrote:
Quote:

Leo168 wrote:
Also, sad as it is to say, there are many seniors who work the polls and count on the money from one day at an election to help them catch up on expenses. It is only $225 a for the day, but that money can make a big difference for some people. Especially seniors on a fixed income. Vote NO to move the election.


You have got to be kidding me. The elections are not meant to be a jobs program. Keeping the elections in May just so people will have another day to work the polls and earn $ 225 is definitely NOT a reason to have separate elections. This is not about a jobs program or charity and those who worked the polls that day will have to find something else to replace that $ 225. I'm guessing those temporary jobs only go to people who are in tight with county board of elections anyway and it's not something anybody can just sign up for, all the more reason to have fewer election days.

Call up Manpower, or Adecco, or Randstad, they'll be happy to place you in a job that only lasts a day.


And in fact, this is a great reason to vote yes on that item. That money is paid by the taxpayers and should not be squandered.

Posted on: 2016/10/25 19:09
 Top 


Re: Vote No for 2 city questions
#42
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/3/29 21:43
Last Login :
2023/9/5 18:27
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1980
Offline
Quote:

psyop wrote:
Why does nj.com keep posting her garbage?

http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2 ... o_on_ballot_question.html


I thank you so very much for that bit of comedy. Between the rambling, incoherent Trump support and Yvonne... that was pure magic.

Posted on: 2016/10/25 14:32
Dos A Cero
 Top 


Re: Vote No for 2 city questions
#41
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/8/27 22:16
Last Login :
2019/4/26 20:07
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 359
Offline
Same reason there is a comics section.

Posted on: 2016/10/24 17:16
 Top 


Re: Vote No for 2 city questions
#40
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/7/25 0:34
Last Login :
2021/9/21 23:51
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 401
Offline

Posted on: 2016/10/24 1:13
 Top 


Re: Vote No for 2 city questions
#39
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/1/11 21:47
Last Login :
2022/7/25 21:48
From Van Vorst Park area
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 175
Offline
Voting YES to both!

Posted on: 2016/10/21 16:39
 Top 


Re: Vote No for 2 city questions
#38
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/2/6 23:13
Last Login :
2021/7/30 1:08
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1225
Offline
in a presidential year, we can go to the polls for the general election in November (previously school board in the following April), municipal elections, municipal runoffs, primary elections then another general elections (for governor). that was 6, now 5 times with in a year to go to the polls.

in theory, the no arguments may have validity, but in reality more people and more minorities will vote. noting there are always exceptions and outlier elections.

so, well said.


Quote:

jc_dweller wrote:
Quote:

Leo168 wrote:
There is no benefit to the City or the constituents by moving it.


How about a reduced number of times that one must go to the polls? There are plenty of people who have to arrange their work schedules to fit that in. That's a MAJOR benefit. Additionally, moving it will result in increased participation because more people show up on a November election date. It's cheaper for the city to have a reduced number of election dates for those concerned with the city budget. Shall I go on?


Posted on: 2016/10/20 1:45
 Top 


Re: Vote No for 2 city questions
#37
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/10/1 1:03
Last Login :
6/5 23:38
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1280
Offline
Quote:

Leo168 wrote:
Also, sad as it is to say, there are many seniors who work the polls and count on the money from one day at an election to help them catch up on expenses. It is only $225 a for the day, but that money can make a big difference for some people. Especially seniors on a fixed income. Vote NO to move the election.


You have got to be kidding me. The elections are not meant to be a jobs program. Keeping the elections in May just so people will have another day to work the polls and earn $ 225 is definitely NOT a reason to have separate elections. This is not about a jobs program or charity and those who worked the polls that day will have to find something else to replace that $ 225. I'm guessing those temporary jobs only go to people who are in tight with county board of elections anyway and it's not something anybody can just sign up for, all the more reason to have fewer election days.

Call up Manpower, or Adecco, or Randstad, they'll be happy to place you in a job that only lasts a day.

Posted on: 2016/10/19 17:50
 Top 


Re: Vote No for 2 city questions
#36
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/3/19 18:28
Last Login :
2020/3/10 14:50
From hamilton park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 292
Offline
Quote:

Leo168 wrote:
Moving the election is a bad thing. The mayoral election in JC is non-partisan. Moving it would be confusing because the other elections have democrat and republican candidates. Also, sad as it is to say, there are many seniors who work the polls and count on the money from one day at an election to help them catch up on expenses. It is only $225 a for the day, but that money can make a big difference for some people. Especially seniors on a fixed income. Vote NO to move the election. There is no benefit to the City or the constituents by moving it.


what a clueless post from a "new user", hmmm, fewer days I have to vote and an increase in voters that will turn out b/c elections are consolidated! OH hell yeah I vote YES!!!

Posted on: 2016/10/19 16:41
utterly deplorable
 Top 


Re: Vote No for 2 city questions
#35
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2015/11/21 22:12
Last Login :
2023/10/3 18:37
From DTJC
Group:
Banned
Posts: 465
Offline
I really think her ulterior motive with the election date bs, in addition to whatever reasoning she uses it against Fulop, the depressed May turnout would better favor her preferred candidates.

More than likely, less younger and working professionals, mostly living in Downtown, will vote in a separate election. That favors the NIMBY/Yvonne/Neighborhood Association candidates.

Posted on: 2016/10/19 15:33
 Top 


Re: Vote No for 2 city questions
#34
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/9/18 3:58
Last Login :
2021/9/23 15:07
From Between Thought and Expression
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 907
Offline
Yvonne convinced me! I'm voting YES on both and will inform my friends and neighbors.

Posted on: 2016/10/19 15:05
 Top 


Re: Vote No for 2 city questions
#33
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/7/3 5:49
Last Login :
2022/4/28 22:07
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1384
Offline
Quote:

Leo168 wrote:
The mayoral election in JC is non-partisan.

bullshit
Quote:
There is no benefit to the City or the constituents by moving it.

bullshit. you get a lot more people to vote - the more voices heard the better.

on another note, let's just move the zeros over and spell out the math for the double-digit iq people in here:

$0.02 for each $100
0.20 for 1,000
2.00 for 10,000
20 for 100,000
200 for 1,000,000

seriously, go find a third grader and apologize to them because you can't do basic shit as well as them.

Posted on: 2016/10/19 14:44
 Top 


Re: Vote No for 2 city questions
#32
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/8/12 18:31
Last Login :
2020/4/26 22:05
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3932
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
I disagree with you bodhipooh because the open space says $0.02 per hundred, as I mentioned before, the county open space tax back in the early 2000s were $0.001 per hundreds. Please get a copy of what is printed on the ballot. I am using the exact words. However, I do respect that you gave me the math.


Wait, so you *still* refuse to admit that the proposed tax levy would amount to $200 for a home worth 1 million??

Posted on: 2016/10/19 10:19
 Top 


Re: Vote No for 2 city questions
#31
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/10/15 17:32
Last Login :
2017/5/17 13:40
From Heights
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 797
Offline
Quote:
Moving the elections appears to be a solution in search of a problem to solve. Many of our friend's ancestors were intimidated and beaten-up for the right to vote. If we have to take 10 minutes out of our schedule 2 or 3 times a year, it hardly seems an issue.

I - conditionally - disagree regarding the Open Space Tax, and am sorry the video clip didn't catch the interviewees commenting on how, specifically, the monies would be put to use. You and I live in the Heights - while Washington Park is lovely, Riverview and Leonard Gordon Parks really need some help.

If I'm satisfied the funds would go to enhance the few, much needed parks in our neighborhood are kept-up properly, I'll support this. I'm not sure it make sense to tie this to the issue of people who can't afford their taxes generally - I don't think the upkeep of public space should be compromised to accommodate people who feel entitled to live in places they can't afford.

Posted on: 2016/10/19 0:47
 Top 


Re: Vote No for 2 city questions
#30
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/2/9 20:40
Last Login :
2023/2/6 21:56
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 334
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
When the county did their open space, it was .001 not the proposed .02 per hundreds, those zeros mean a lot.


At the time it happened we reported the county increase as .01 per 100. That's what the county budget says it is too.

Posted on: 2016/10/19 0:35
 Top 


Re: Vote No for 2 city questions
#29
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2006/12/28 17:08
Last Login :
2022/2/8 3:24
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 981
Offline
Quote:

Leo168 wrote:
There is no benefit to the City or the constituents by moving it.


How about a reduced number of times that one must go to the polls? There are plenty of people who have to arrange their work schedules to fit that in. That's a MAJOR benefit. Additionally, moving it will result in increased participation because more people show up on a November election date. It's cheaper for the city to have a reduced number of election dates for those concerned with the city budget. Shall I go on?


Posted on: 2016/10/18 23:48
 Top 


Re: Vote No for 2 city questions
#28
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/1/11 18:21
Last Login :
2019/12/26 15:30
From GV Bayside Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5356
Offline
I'm voting YES!

Posted on: 2016/10/18 23:40
 Top 


Re: Vote No for 2 city questions
#27
Newbie
Newbie


Hide User information
Joined:
2016/10/14 2:00
Last Login :
2018/4/24 0:25
From Hudson County
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 6
Offline
Moving the election is a bad thing. The mayoral election in JC is non-partisan. Moving it would be confusing because the other elections have democrat and republican candidates. Also, sad as it is to say, there are many seniors who work the polls and count on the money from one day at an election to help them catch up on expenses. It is only $225 a for the day, but that money can make a big difference for some people. Especially seniors on a fixed income. Vote NO to move the election. There is no benefit to the City or the constituents by moving it.

Posted on: 2016/10/18 23:35
 Top 


Re: Vote No for 2 city questions
#26
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/6/10 16:06
Last Login :
2020/10/28 15:39
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 290
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Quote:

rescuelife wrote:
Yvonne (the former teacher!) also stated here not too long ago that Puerto Ricans were immigrants and refused to recognize that she was flat out wrong after being called out. Good luck getting her to acknowledge any fault on this one.

I imagine the only way she would change here is if Mayor Fulop comes out against it, then she will have to support it :) .


Show me the math that I am wrong, I never said Puerto Ricans were immigrants, why would I? When people hide behind phony names that can say anything including lies.


Yvonne calls Puerto Ricans "immigrants" in post #15

"But in the meantime more immigrants from Puerto Rico was arriving in Hoboken..."

You do flip-flop later in the thread, but I recall another time you also referred to Puerto Ricans as immigrants but don't have the time to dig for it. I will try to re-register here with my real name when I have a minute if that makes you feel better.

Posted on: 2016/10/18 22:25
 Top 


Re: Vote No for 2 city questions
#25
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
3/21 23:34
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5375
Offline
I disagree with you bodhipooh because the open space says $0.02 per hundred, as I mentioned before, the county open space tax back in the early 2000s were $0.001 per hundreds. Please get a copy of what is printed on the ballot. I am using the exact words. However, I do respect that you gave me the math.

Posted on: 2016/10/18 22:17
 Top 


Re: Vote No for 2 city questions
#24
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/8/12 18:31
Last Login :
2020/4/26 22:05
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3932
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Quote:

rescuelife wrote:
Yvonne (the former teacher!) also stated here not too long ago that Puerto Ricans were immigrants and refused to recognize that she was flat out wrong after being called out. Good luck getting her to acknowledge any fault on this one.

I imagine the only way she would change here is if Mayor Fulop comes out against it, then she will have to support it :) .


Show me the math that I am wrong, I never said Puerto Ricans were immigrants, why would I? When people hide behind phony names that can say anything including lies.


I already showed you in an earlier post how your math is wrong. You simply got it wrong. Go re-read my post that explains how you got it wrong.

A 2 cents per $100 (or, 20 cents per $1,000) tax levy does NOT equal $2,000 per million. You have it wrong by a factor of 10.

Posted on: 2016/10/18 22:11
 Top 


Re: Vote No for 2 city questions
#23
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/7/4 16:37
Last Login :
2021/11/4 21:55
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 586
Offline
I will vote yes for both. I live dantan.

Posted on: 2016/10/18 22:10
 Top 


Re: Vote No for 2 city questions
#22
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
3/21 23:34
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5375
Offline
Quote:

rescuelife wrote:
Yvonne (the former teacher!) also stated here not too long ago that Puerto Ricans were immigrants and refused to recognize that she was flat out wrong after being called out. Good luck getting her to acknowledge any fault on this one.

I imagine the only way she would change here is if Mayor Fulop comes out against it, then she will have to support it :) .


Show me the math that I am wrong, I never said Puerto Ricans were immigrants, why would I? When people hide behind phony names that can say anything including lies.

Posted on: 2016/10/18 22:02
 Top 


Re: Vote No for 2 city questions
#21
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/6/10 16:06
Last Login :
2020/10/28 15:39
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 290
Offline
Yvonne (the former teacher!) also stated here not too long ago that Puerto Ricans were immigrants and refused to recognize that she was flat out wrong after being called out. Good luck getting her to acknowledge any fault on this one.

I imagine the only way she would change here is if Mayor Fulop comes out against it, then she will have to support it :) .

Posted on: 2016/10/18 21:55
 Top 




« 1 (2) 3 »




[Advanced Search]





Login
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!



LicenseInformation | AboutUs | PrivacyPolicy | Faq | Contact


JERSEY CITY LIST - News & Reviews - Jersey City, NJ - Copyright 2004 - 2017