Your thoughts on the election results?
I downloaded a sample ballot for my city. We had one contest for the Senate, and another for the House of Representatives, a couple of constitutional amendment proposals for the state constitution, and the rest of the options were for local offices.
Even though I knew the party affiliations of the candidates running for federal office, I still looked through their websites.
No party affiliation was listed for local candidates. But, there was a roundabout way to identify their leanings.
Candidates for mayor and city Council… If they appeared to buy into the “sea-level rise” canard, their names became toxic. Making it easier for people to start and operate a business via practical economic solutions? That got my vote.
Candidates for Board of Education… If they argued in favor of returning merit-based incentives like designating the valedictorian, allowing more leeway to give zeros for not submitting a homework, allowing for point penalizing for below standard work, etc., they got my vote.
One candidate’s comment regarding sea-level rise related problems… Clearing out canals. Now, if the sea levels are rising, and our city is looking at becoming a part of the sea floor, how exactly is clearing out canals, or more dredging operations, going to solve the problem?
Is that supposed to lower sea levels from the city?
Tragically, in this local area, as well as in local areas across the country, many low information voters go full NPC on important topics like this.
Sea-level “rise” isn’t the problem.
The ground has a limited ability to naturally process rain water. Once the ground’s saturation/absorb rate is reached, water starts ponding. Result? Water ponds above the ground, flooding occurs. This should be a bases for arguing for improving our drainage systems.
Then we have the issue involving high and low tide, but that’s an ongoing process.
The above photo is from Smithsonian Magazine.