Who to vote for in May primaries?

M

mtj458

Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2009
Messages
297
I haven't looked into local politics very much but since the primaries are coming up in May, I was wondering which candidates (for any office) people here are supporting. I'm thinking I probably won't vote for most offices based on the candidates I've heard about.
 
I'm supporting Sam Rorer for Governor, Daryl Metcalfe for Lt. Governor, Peg Luksik for U.S. Senate, Bill Russell for District 12 House Rep.
Another words I'm voting for all the candidates the machine is not supporting.
I know all of them personally and look at their records for yourself.

With these people we can get Pennsylvania off the political machines control.

Sam Rohrer for Governor www.samrohrer.org
Daryl Metcalfe for Lt. Governor www.darylmetcalfe.com
Peg luksik for Senate www.pegluksik.com
Bill Russell for Congress District 12 www.RussellBrigarde.com



An OC Activist and 1 of the 3%
Ed Stephan
 
Sam Rohrer looks interesting. How much of a social conservative is he? I was put off by some of the other candidates you mentioned because they seem to be less libertarian leaning regarding social issues and even immigration.
 
Sam Rohrer. He's a great candidate, very constitution-minded. I'm also supporting Toomey for Senate.
 
Ok, so far Rohrer and Luksik look like two obvious choices. But it looks like a tough choice between Diamond and Metcalfe for Lt. Gov: Metcalfe's website is all fluff with barely any mention of the issues (and his mention of any issues is quite generic), but he does have what looks like a great voting record. Diamond dosen't have a record to run on, but he has elimination of property taxes and 10th amendment assertation listed on his website as prominant parts of his platform (sounds a lot like Medina). Can anyone shed further light on either of these two candidates? Does one have a better chance of actually winning the primary than the other? Those that are saying Metcalfe, why did you choose him (besides his record)?

Also, is there anywhere that I can learn who the candidates are for the state legislature and what they are about? Any sites for that, and local offices?

The Dude, toomey is your typical cookiecutter neocon. Why on earth would you choose him over Peg Luksik?
 
I will be voting for Lou Barletta, I don't know as much about him as i would like. But he will take down Kanjorski this time around in november. Rohrer and Luksik are ideal, but sadly are going to lose unless there is a miracle
 
jtm845 said:
Sam Rohrer looks interesting. How much of a social conservative is he? I was put off by some of the other candidates you mentioned because they seem to be less libertarian leaning regarding social issues and even immigration.
Click to expand...

That has really annoyed me lately. There are so many great genuine small government Republicans waiting in the wings, but I absolutely refuse to vote for somebody who is outright looking to ban gay marriage. It is simply immoral to give tax breaks to straight people that are not available to gay people. When government regulated marriage is no more, then fine. Define marriage as you please. Otherwise, back off and let them get the same treatment as straight couples. Pat Luksik especially irritates me in this way...

Anyway, I'll be voting for Rohrer and Luksik. Might do Madeira for US Rep (D. 10), but need to read more into his record. I did notice on the sample ballots that my local meetup organizer Toni Rome is running for County Committeeperson. Guess I'll vote for him too. lol. BTW, Toni, if you're on here, let me know.
 
SimpleName, I also have a difficult time voting for someone who wants to ban gay marriage. I don't like Peg Luksik's social conservative leanings, but she appears a far better choice than toomey. Check out Diamond's stance on the marriage issue. No one has bothered to weigh in on my question of Diamond vs Metcalfe, and I'm still not decided yet. One thing I've been thinking is that would Diamond for Lt. Gov. be a wasted vote that would be better spent on Metcalfe? Being incumbent, Diamond will probably win re-election in his district. Would it thus be better to let him do that, and take a shot on Metcalfe for the higher office? Both look like worthy candidates, judging from Diamond's platform on his website and Metcalfe's record. Seems like it would be a shame to vote for one at the expense of the other.

Again, does anyone know of a site where I can learn who the candidates are for state legislature (and local offices) and what they are about? I imagine I can call the local board of elections, ask for a list, and google away, but it seems like that info should have already been compiled in one place online already.
 
Thanks! Looks like your google search was better than mine, lol. Actually, that's a great site, and was the first place I looked. But when I tried using the search feature, it came up with nothing. Your link took me right to where I needed to be. However, in my district everyone running (for the state legislature) in the primaries is a democrat, looks like I don't have any primary choices. No wonder I couldn't find anything!

Anyone have an opinion on the whole Diamond vs Metcalfe issue?
 
Same here. Everyone is democrat. Although i have to look further into one of them running for state senate more, he might be a fiscally conservative dem maybe i can steer my family to vote for him since im registered R currently. Anyone know anything about Volpe?
 
SimpleName said:
It is simply immoral to give tax breaks to straight people that are not available to gay people. When government regulated marriage is no more, then fine. Define marriage as you please. Otherwise, back off and let them get the same treatment as straight couples.
Click to expand...

The simple solution to this is to stop giving tax breaks to married couples, weather straight or gay. That's the point of contention for most. Going out on a limb, I'm going to assume that most gay couples wouldn't give a crap if the government recognized their marriage or not if there were no benefits to be had if you "married."

The tax breaks and other benefits that straight married couples have makes sense to be "married" but if the government removes the tax breaks and other benefits, it'd surly be an easier way to deal w/ the situation w/ constituents versus being either for or against gay marriage.
 
Sam Roher - Governor
Daryl Metcalfe- Lt. Governor
Peg Luksik- US Senate
Lou Barletta- Congressman 11th District
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

PAF
The Problem With Voting for Candidates With Biblical Values
Replies
8
Views
2K
CCTelander
C
LatinsforPaul
Who will Ron Paul Vote for?
Replies
2
Views
386
acptulsa
acptulsa
Snowball
Update. I cannot vote for Trump.
6 7 8
Replies
154
Views
58K
Dr.3D
Dr.3D
Swordsmyth
You Know That Hamas-Supporting Student Trump Is Deporting? He Has British Security Clearance
2
Replies
22
Views
225
Toomer Deplorable
T
Anti Federalist
Congress has the power to block Trump from taking office, but lawmakers must act now
Replies
8
Views
4K
Occam's Banana
Occam's Banana
Back
Top