| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
more signs
Guest
|
 Posted: Mon, Jun 4 2012, 6:17 am EDT Post subject: Re: signs |
 |
|
| THe signs are up because of the primary - I don't think anyone with the signs in their yards intend to keep them up through November. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Signs 2
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon, Jun 4 2012, 6:58 am EDT Post subject: Re: signs |
|
|
However, the primaries on both sides are uncontested and there has never been campaigning for primary votes.
I actually disliked the signs last year and am friends with some of the Republican chairs who like me complained about their use last year before the election. Now this year they use them for a primary and I assume the general as well. I was hoping the Republicans would not use signs based on their complaints and Dave and Jay being long time residents would not use them either because that is not Cranbury. I think now both sides will use them which to me is a shame. I had hoped the signs would be an isolated one time thing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pathetic
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon, Jun 4 2012, 7:07 am EDT Post subject: Re: signs |
|
|
| more signs wrote: | | THe signs are up because of the primary - I don't think anyone with the signs in their yards intend to keep them up through November. |
I guess Tommy and Cindy must be worried about losing the primary to a write in candidate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
guest17
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon, Jun 4 2012, 7:48 am EDT Post subject: Re: signs |
|
|
| Move on wrote: | | guest17 wrote: | | Bad sign wrote: | | guest17 wrote: | | spin wrote: | | No matter how you try to spin it, putting up signs nearly 6 months before the election is tacky and reflects poorly on the candidates who have chosen this tactic. To me, it shows that this year's republican candidates are hopelessly out of touch with Cranbury. |
Be that as it may, it worked well for the Democratic candidate last year... |
Nothing but finger pointing from the camp of the upstart republican candidates. No accountability. That is not a good "sign"...  |
Except I'm not a Republican. I just think it's silly to try and say the signs were okay for a Democrat and now to claim they are wrong for Republicans, or to suggest the signs are out of touch with voters when the signs proved very effective last year when it was for the other party. And there were similar posts complaining about them last year too, just do a search to see. But based on the election results it seems those complaining about the signs were the ones out of touch with voters. |
Honestly, do you think the signs make any difference one way or another. This is just one side thumbing there nose at the other. Who cares? Move on. |
We completely agree. I don't care about the signs one way or the other. Didn't care last year either. And even if I did care I would defend the right of the home owners to post them. I personally am not convinced they make a difference or that most people care. I was merely responding to someone who wanted to turn it into a partisan issue claiming they reflected poorly on one party but not on the other when they do the same thing. It's just silly. Pilitics should be about the issues, not the people or the parties. Some people just can't seem to grasp that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
write In
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon, Jun 4 2012, 8:00 am EDT Post subject: Re: signs |
|
|
| Pathetic wrote: | | more signs wrote: | | THe signs are up because of the primary - I don't think anyone with the signs in their yards intend to keep them up through November. |
I guess Tommy and Cindy must be worried about losing the primary to a write in candidate. |
I hear there is a movement among moderate republicans to write in Jay Taylor as a Republican candidate.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
reality check
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon, Jun 4 2012, 5:14 pm EDT Post subject: Re: signs |
|
|
| Tom shouldnt be spending money on campaign signs anyway, he should be saving money so he can move out of mommy and daddys house! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Moderate
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon, Jun 4 2012, 7:07 pm EDT Post subject: Re: signs |
|
|
| write In wrote: | | Pathetic wrote: | | more signs wrote: | | THe signs are up because of the primary - I don't think anyone with the signs in their yards intend to keep them up through November. |
I guess Tommy and Cindy must be worried about losing the primary to a write in candidate. |
I hear there is a movement among moderate republicans to write in Jay Taylor as a Republican candidate.
|
I was just as unhappy to see taylor have a tough time with some of the local republicans as anyone however as a moderate republican in town I am upset he switched party. The truth is The only person talking about a jay Taylor write in is jay Taylor. No republican movement. He is now being shown as the calculating politician he really is. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
???
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon, Jun 4 2012, 7:24 pm EDT Post subject: Re: signs |
|
|
| Moderate wrote: | | write In wrote: | | Pathetic wrote: | | more signs wrote: | | THe signs are up because of the primary - I don't think anyone with the signs in their yards intend to keep them up through November. |
I guess Tommy and Cindy must be worried about losing the primary to a write in candidate. |
I hear there is a movement among moderate republicans to write in Jay Taylor as a Republican candidate.
|
I was just as unhappy to see taylor have a tough time with some of the local republicans as anyone however as a moderate republican in town I am upset he switched party. The truth is The only person talking about a jay Taylor write in is jay Taylor. No republican movement. He is now being shown as the calculating politician he really is. |
So you would have rather him not run again? The Republican Committee had made it clear they would actively oppose his candidacy in the primary. I heard members say this directly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Get a Mirror
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon, Jun 4 2012, 8:42 pm EDT Post subject: Re: signs |
|
|
| Moderate wrote: | | write In wrote: | | Pathetic wrote: | | more signs wrote: | | THe signs are up because of the primary - I don't think anyone with the signs in their yards intend to keep them up through November. |
I guess Tommy and Cindy must be worried about losing the primary to a write in candidate. |
I hear there is a movement among moderate republicans to write in Jay Taylor as a Republican candidate.
|
I was just as unhappy to see taylor have a tough time with some of the local republicans as anyone however as a moderate republican in town I am upset he switched party. The truth is The only person talking about a jay Taylor write in is jay Taylor. No republican movement. He is now being shown as the calculating politician he really is. |
What kind of conniving hypocrite do you have to be to attack Jay's character and anonymously lodge false accusations against him in the same post?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Close
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon, Jun 4 2012, 9:09 pm EDT Post subject: Re: signs |
|
|
| ??? wrote: | | Moderate wrote: | | write In wrote: | | Pathetic wrote: | | more signs wrote: | | THe signs are up because of the primary - I don't think anyone with the signs in their yards intend to keep them up through November. |
I guess Tommy and Cindy must be worried about losing the primary to a write in candidate. |
I hear there is a movement among moderate republicans to write in Jay Taylor as a Republican candidate.
|
I was just as unhappy to see taylor have a tough time with some of the local republicans as anyone however as a moderate republican in town I am upset he switched party. The truth is The only person talking about a jay Taylor write in is jay Taylor. No republican movement. He is now being shown as the calculating politician he really is. |
So you would have rather him not run again? The Republican Committee had made it clear they would actively oppose his candidacy in the primary. I heard members say this directly. |
I was told by several who are close to this the only person saying they were not going to support Taylor was Taylor. He made the whole thing up. The republicans then had to search around for candidates. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Brainiac
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon, Jun 4 2012, 9:44 pm EDT Post subject: Re: signs |
|
|
| Close wrote: | | ??? wrote: | | Moderate wrote: | | write In wrote: | | Pathetic wrote: | | more signs wrote: | | THe signs are up because of the primary - I don't think anyone with the signs in their yards intend to keep them up through November. |
I guess Tommy and Cindy must be worried about losing the primary to a write in candidate. |
I hear there is a movement among moderate republicans to write in Jay Taylor as a Republican candidate.
|
I was just as unhappy to see taylor have a tough time with some of the local republicans as anyone however as a moderate republican in town I am upset he switched party. The truth is The only person talking about a jay Taylor write in is jay Taylor. No republican movement. He is now being shown as the calculating politician he really is. |
So you would have rather him not run again? The Republican Committee had made it clear they would actively oppose his candidacy in the primary. I heard members say this directly. |
I was told by several who are close to this the only person saying they were not going to support Taylor was Taylor. He made the whole thing up. The republicans then had to search around for candidates. |
And that line of BS passed muster with you? Use your head! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Longtimer
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue, Jun 5 2012, 6:30 am EDT Post subject: Re: signs |
|
|
| The Cranbury Republican leadership is bent on outsourcing everything. The police and public works being at the top of their list. They will push this agenda at all costs. They will vilify anyone who doesn't fall into lock step with their plan. They are not interested in anyone who deviates from this agenda and will attack them viciously with propaganda. A factual debate with them is virtually impossible. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
what??
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue, Jun 5 2012, 7:12 am EDT Post subject: Re: signs |
|
|
| Quote: | The Cranbury Republican leadership is bent on outsourcing everything. The police and public works being at the top of their list. They will push this agenda at all costs. They will vilify anyone who doesn't fall into lock step with their plan. They are not interested in anyone who deviates from this agenda and will attack them viciously with propaganda. A factual debate with them is virtually impossible.
|
Geez - talk about propaganda! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rep vs Dem
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue, Jun 5 2012, 7:33 am EDT Post subject: Re: signs |
|
|
Most residents are not involved in politics locally or even nationally whether Ds or Rs. I think on the local level most vote for the person with a few exceptions. However, some party leadership are a contrast as they fully involve themselves in party belief and follow it to their core. To them what the party stands for defines who they are as individuals and expect the same is true for others. They also follow blindly. Just an example-That is why some R's oppose some ideas proposed by Corzine like consolidation, yet embrace it when proposed by Christie.
I do agree that the Rs want to consolidate police and outsource PW. That has been said publicly. However, police consolidation was also discussed under a D leadership a few years ago. We know Dave and Jay are opposed as they have openly stated it and have taken that course as officials. Dan is not on PW as he has stated that on the record, but has not favored police consolidation. Where Tom and Cynthia stand who knows. You won't know their true views until they face the decision as a TC member. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BS
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue, Jun 5 2012, 7:40 am EDT Post subject: Re: signs |
|
|
| Close wrote: | | ??? wrote: | | Moderate wrote: | | write In wrote: | | Pathetic wrote: | | more signs wrote: | | THe signs are up because of the primary - I don't think anyone with the signs in their yards intend to keep them up through November. |
I guess Tommy and Cindy must be worried about losing the primary to a write in candidate. |
I hear there is a movement among moderate republicans to write in Jay Taylor as a Republican candidate.
|
I was just as unhappy to see taylor have a tough time with some of the local republicans as anyone however as a moderate republican in town I am upset he switched party. The truth is The only person talking about a jay Taylor write in is jay Taylor. No republican movement. He is now being shown as the calculating politician he really is. |
So you would have rather him not run again? The Republican Committee had made it clear they would actively oppose his candidacy in the primary. I heard members say this directly. |
I was told by several who are close to this the only person saying they were not going to support Taylor was Taylor. He made the whole thing up. The republicans then had to search around for candidates. |
This post is utter BS, either by the poster or the people "close to this." I stood next to two of these people as they completely bashed him and openly declared they were going to replace him at the next election, that he was never welcome in their establishment again, etc. He wasn't even there, as he was not welcome anymore. I never heard Taylor say they were going to replace him, only people in the inner circle. Talk about trying to revise history. Don't expect anyone to take such nonsense seriously. Many, many people in town heard the same things I did first hand from these people. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Real Deal
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue, Jun 5 2012, 1:16 pm EDT Post subject: Re: signs |
|
|
To clarify, Jay chose not to run as a Republican. Jay also HAD A CHOICE to run as Independent where he didn't require any endorsements other than a minimum # of petition signatures. The fact of the matter is Jay choose to run as a Democrat because he wanted to take advantage of the benefits of running on a party line. In reality Jay would have not had enough support to win in the Nov election without party line support therefore JAY CHOSE to become a Democrat. Make no mistake Jay had a choice and he made that choice for his own personal benefit not because he suddenly realized he was actually a Democrat. The decision to switch parties was solely Jay's choice not the Republicans therefore, you need to hold Jay accountable for his decision not the Republicans.
Think about it, the strategy on the part of the Democrats to court Jay to switch was as follows.......Jay was in a weak position, having Jay run as a Democrat the Democrats hope he will split a portion of the Republican vote therefore all but assuring Cook's re-election. I honestly don't think most Democrats like Jay anymore than the Republicans did, it's all part of an overall strategy to ensure Cook's re-election and continued majority on TC. If by chance Jay wins that would just be an added bonus for the Democrats, there is essentially no risk here. Although I don't necessarily support Jay's decision to switch to the Democratic party (he should have run as an Independent), I do believe he is just a pawn in the game and he probably doesn't even realize it.
Lastly, unless you are the GOP chair or Jay Taylor himself you couldn't possibly know "first hand". If you want to post your opinion on what happened that is one thing, but to imply something as fact because you know "first hand" lacks all credibility. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
