| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Guest
|
 Posted: Wed, Apr 6 2011, 12:47 pm EDT Post subject: Wittman? |
 |
|
| Wayne Wittman is running for state assembly? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed, Apr 6 2011, 1:31 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Wittman? |
|
|
| Linda Greenstein would completely wallop Wayne Wittman |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed, Apr 6 2011, 2:03 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Wittman? |
|
|
| LOL - interesting comment, except for the fact that Wayne would not be running against her since she is in the Senate..... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed, Apr 6 2011, 8:06 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Wittman? |
|
|
| Guest wrote: | | Linda Greenstein would completely wallop Wayne Wittman |
Wrong office and we will surely be stuck with Greenstein in the State Senate for a long time. But there's no contest that at least Wittman would care about Cranbury instead of consistently abstaining or voting against our interests because her real constituency are the party bosses. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest 2
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat, Apr 9 2011, 5:45 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Wittman? |
|
|
| He IS running for State Senate (not assembly) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat, Apr 9 2011, 6:37 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Wittman? |
|
|
| Wow! I saw an article in I think the Trenton times that mentioned assembly, but that was the first I heard of anything. Now you are saying he is running for state senate? Could we get an official confirmation? Wayne are you out there? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat, Apr 9 2011, 6:51 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Wittman? |
|
|
| Guest wrote: | | Wow! I saw an article in I think the Trenton times that mentioned assembly, but that was the first I heard of anything. Now you are saying he is running for state senate? Could we get an official confirmation? Wayne are you out there? |
He was at the Cranbury Coffee House last night and said he totally enjoyed the music. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest 2
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat, Apr 9 2011, 8:23 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Wittman? |
|
|
Here is the link to his site -- it's State Senate
http://www.waynewittman.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat, Apr 9 2011, 9:39 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Wittman? |
|
|
| Great. I'm a Democrat but will vote for him over Greenstein who has never voted in our favor for Cranbury. But he has virtually no shot against her just the same. If voting patterns hold true she'll even get hundreds of votes from registered voters in Cranbury despite the fact that they are voting against their own interests because most peopel don't bother to educate themselves and just vote their party line. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat, Apr 9 2011, 11:34 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Wittman? |
|
|
| Guest wrote: | | Great. I'm a Democrat but will vote for him over Greenstein who has never voted in our favor for Cranbury. But he has virtually no shot against her just the same. If voting patterns hold true she'll even get hundreds of votes from registered voters in Cranbury despite the fact that they are voting against their own interests because most peopel don't bother to educate themselves and just vote their party line. |
Rather stupid and condescending remark. I live in Cranbury and I believe she does a good job representing me and my interests and beliefs. It's actually people like you with your myopic views that are the real problem. I'm sure you voted for Christie and also his crony Port Authority Baroni who just nixed the the new tunnel from NJ to NY |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat, Apr 9 2011, 11:44 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Wittman? |
|
|
| Let the flame war begin. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun, Apr 10 2011, 7:24 am EDT Post subject: Re: Wittman? |
|
|
| Guest wrote: | | Great. I'm a Democrat but will vote for him over Greenstein who has never voted in our favor for Cranbury. But he has virtually no shot against her just the same. If voting patterns hold true she'll even get hundreds of votes from registered voters in Cranbury despite the fact that they are voting against their own interests because most peopel don't bother to educate themselves and just vote their party line. |
You sound like a "don't tread on me" Democrat |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun, Apr 10 2011, 7:37 am EDT Post subject: Re: Wittman? |
|
|
| He is running for the assembly - must not have had a chance to update his website because the change happened very quickly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun, Apr 10 2011, 9:30 am EDT Post subject: Re: Wittman? |
|
|
| Guest wrote: | | Guest wrote: | | Great. I'm a Democrat but will vote for him over Greenstein who has never voted in our favor for Cranbury. But he has virtually no shot against her just the same. If voting patterns hold true she'll even get hundreds of votes from registered voters in Cranbury despite the fact that they are voting against their own interests because most peopel don't bother to educate themselves and just vote their party line. |
Rather stupid and condescending remark. I live in Cranbury and I believe she does a good job representing me and my interests and beliefs. It's actually people like you with your myopic views that are the real problem. I'm sure you voted for Christie and also his crony Port Authority Baroni who just nixed the the new tunnel from NJ to NY |
Please give specific examples where her voting record positively represented the interests of Cranbury Township. Go for it. I bet you can't come up with a single example in the last 5 years.
It is easy to cite the alternative. She voted in favor of two bills designed to give the State more power to try and force consolidation of small townships and school districts and she has consistently voted the party line, or done token, cowardly abstentions, in support of COAH rules whose only real purpose is to help developers and builders unions force townships to let them overbuild. All in the last few years. So, again, go for it. Name a bill that impacts Cranbury as these do where she voted in favor of Cranbury’s interests.
Better yet, name one bill where she voted against the majority party line. Abstentions don’t count.
If she never votes against the party line, how is she “representing your interests”? Even if you are a loyal party member she is representing the party’s interests which just coincidentally coincide with yours. What drives her vote is party loyalty, to preserve her party’s support for her re-elections, and not her constituents. Party hacks will tell you that her being loyal to party votes will give her more influence at the table to serve our interests but only very dense bulbs would accept that at face value without taking the ounce of brainpower necessary to ask, “ok, so when has that paid off for us?” If there are never examples where the extra influence her party votes against township interests bought us, how can it be true?
She’s hardly unique in this bald-faced self-interest but that’s no excuse. I don’t support any politicians that don’t show the character to represent their actual constituents interests even when it is not in lock-step with the party machines. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun, Apr 10 2011, 9:44 am EDT Post subject: Re: Wittman? |
|
|
| Guest wrote: | | Guest wrote: | | Great. I'm a Democrat but will vote for him over Greenstein who has never voted in our favor for Cranbury. But he has virtually no shot against her just the same. If voting patterns hold true she'll even get hundreds of votes from registered voters in Cranbury despite the fact that they are voting against their own interests because most people don't bother to educate themselves and just vote their party line. |
You sound like a "don't tread on me" Democrat |
If that were true why would I be a Democrat at all? What cost me the most money out of my pockets is the federal tax policies and all the other federal initiatives that take money from me to pay for others, like social security, Medicare and Medicaid and Freddie and Fannie Mae, etc. It would be in my self-interest to vote Republican nationally for all those reasons, and others.
But as the expression goes, “all politics is local.” At the State level I have no respect for the Democratic party. It is seething with corruption and the support of bad ideas and bad institutions. New Jersey is statistically the most over-developed state in the union. Why? Because the state politicians and even judges have spent decades going to extremes to support developer interests over the interests of citizens or the long term health of the state, let alone any principles. They hide behind noble ideas like supporting jobs and fair housing but these are cardboard facades to any unbiased eyes. BTW, the state Republican party is not much better. But they are a little. Just as the national Democratic party is highly flawed but certainly the lesser evil of the two. Christie has turned out to be a total fraud, a very skilled one, but a fraud nonetheless. He is the Bernie Madoff of politicians and he may go far just as Bernie did. But that doesn’t change the fact that he’s all talk and smoke and mirrors, claiming to champion spending reductions and lower taxes while really making policies that just transfer more local taxes to the state without reducing state expenses while putting arbitrary caps on local tax revenue despite taking more of the taxy levys for himself. The very definition of fraud.
What I am is an voter who becomes informed on issues and candidates and doesn’t blindly vote party lines. The statistical probability that someone who always votes the party line year after year on candidates is also sincerely voting for the person they would have supported if they truly researched the candidate is tiny. And yet tens of millions of voters do that in this country. It is disappointing that such people are the majority of voters, on both sides of the aisle. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun, Apr 10 2011, 9:57 am EDT Post subject: Re: Wittman? |
|
|
Decaf. Look the assembly pumps out hundreds of bills a year. Anyone can find a bill any legislater voted for or against in the interest of Cranbury. For instance, Greenstein sponsored a bill a couple of years ago that increased funding directly to Cranbury and the West Windsor Plainsboro School systems. She basically wrote that bill. You could argue that it was straight pork, but you seem to want things that directly impact Cranbury whether they are right or wrong. Yes her party fell in line behind that law. But she drove the bus.
Here is one she voted against. Six years ago Cardinale had a bill to force school children to recite a portion of the Declaration of Independence every morning? Why? So, that they could recite ".....endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights, that among them are life....." this was then to be explained to the children that our founding fathers put anti -abortion language in the Declaration.
Look I am not particularly a Greenstein fan, but be careful what you wish for. The biggest push to consolidate Cranbury was under Christie Whitman (unfortunate similarity in name).
I look forward to Wayne's run and want to hear what he has to say, but has Greenstein been a blight on Cranbury, no. My fear is that while you are aware of Democratic idiocies with respect to Cranbury you seem blinded to the republican assaults on the town. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
