Baltimore native I live in Bristol Virginia Sinclair owns my local TV station WCYB. They force the local to run "news reports" from various "correspondents" during the local newscast that often "compliment" the day's news from the local announcers.

Leaves little time for real local news when they're always turning to CRT or alien hordes coming over the border.

Might be a little physically crowded depending on how busy it is, but it is low key otherwise.

Nor have I. I live in IL now, and this is what we’ve been working toward. If Baltimore is intent on going in the opposite direction while political leaders to nothing to save residents, so be it.

Trying to counter the argument that every election cycle is an unbiased way to hold elected officials accountable. We have data that confirms the opposite.

Those who get elected one time hold an almost insurmountable advantage over any challenger. So simply saying we have elections isn't addressing the scope of the problem of incumbency advantage. Hell, it isn't even acknowledging a problem might exist.

And I'm saying you're catastrophizing as a rhetorical slight of hand.

I don't think handing the keys to the city to Comcast or Coca-Cola would serve us any better ngl

They're not winning once, they're winning every election. You want to circumvent democracy and force people out after an arbitrary amount of time rather than let the voters decide.

> Virginia's governor is termlimited to one 4 year term.

VA's also a state where their Republican governor wasn't chosen via an open primary, which allowed him to run as a moderate and govern like he's doing.

Even for all that's wrong with Hogan, we're so much better off with the system we have.

I’m referring to you saying “give it a shot for a decade” and that not everyone will be as unaffected by what might go on in that decade as you seem to believe you will

Of course! I’m just genuinely curious to see why so many are opposed to this.

I think that might be acceptable. But then again we would lose some expertise in a job that is insanely difficult to learn and relies heavily on institutional and procedural knowledge.

I would be in favor of fairly expansive term limits to help mitigate the concerns but still encourage a little bit of turnover there. Something like 18 years for House and 18 years for Senate. Between the two, you would have the ability to have a 36 year career on the Hill which is more time than many people spend in one job.

That gives plenty of time for continuity and knowledge building but prevents any one person from setting up shop their entire life and preventing anyone from the next generation from having a chance due to the incumbency advantage.

[deleted]

DEMOCRATS ON TERM LIMITS:

Barack Obama: “We want to see new voices and new ideas emerge. I think that is why term limits are a really useful thing.”

Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot: “Chicago is the largest city in the country without mayoral term limits,” she notes, which “has led to entrenched leaders, a lack of new ideas and creative thinking and city government that works for the few, not the many.”

U.S. Rep. Beto O’Rourke, TX: “The longer you are in office, the less connected you are to the people you represent, the less accountable, the less responsive. The people in this country understand that and get that and I think it helps to account for our historic low level of popularity.”

New York Governor, Kathy Hochul: “I want people to believe in their government again. With these bold reforms, we will ensure New Yorkers know their leaders work for them and are focused on serving the people of this state,” Gov. Hochul said.

U.S. Sen. John Hickenlooper, Colorado: “I would not be in politics were it not for term limits. It makes sense at all levels of government.”

Andrew Yang, Candidate for NYC Mayor and former Presidential Candidate: “With term limits, members of Congress would get what they went to DC to accomplish done and then go home. It would make room for new leaders with new experiences and fresh ideas. It would make time in Congress about reaching a goal, not reaching retirement after a long career with a good salary at the expense of the public. And it would give legislators a period of time when they didn’t need to constantly fundraise, as their final term wouldn’t hold the option for reelection.”

State Rep. Geraldine Thompson, FL: “I support term limits for elected officials because I believe that too often politicians become entrenched, more concerned about their reelection than the business of the people. Our members of Congress spend too much time fundraising and not enough time governing because their number one concern is their reelection. Term limits ensure that rather than focusing on the next election, our members of Congress will be focused on what they c

Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell: “I believe we should change the charter and every elected official in Philadelphia — controller, district attorney, mayor, and City Council members — should be limited to two terms,” Rendell said. “We would have a more effective and efficient government if we did that.”

There’s no such thing as neutral coverage.

Okay

I don't think an adult having an ID is onerous requirement whatsoever. You already need one to open a bank account, sign up for food stamps, apply for welfare, apply for unemployment, rent a house/apartment, apply for a job, get married, picking up certain prescriptions from the pharmacy, and a whole laundry list of other things.

I think there can be arguments that it’s more likely that one happens than the other, so it’s a net benefit to society to make it easy to vote by not having onerous ID requirements. The poorest of individuals are most likely to suffer from not having money for a state ID, which is a not super useful $20 to spend to vote.

There are plenty of sources in this thread and many others on this topic highlighting why people are against this specific measure. It's weird that you're acting like they're not here.

>it genuinely seems like the only opposition over this stems from the fact that Sinclair supports it

I was initially for the measure and sort of jumped on the fence about it because of Sinclair's support. I commented on it in this sub and a person pretending to be a progressive tried to convince me that it's a good idea. That was enough for me. If the alt-right media is pushing for it and they're using those sorts of tactics to get their way, then I'm fully out.

Open to suggestions on improving the competency of our local elected officials. Because elections don't seem to be doing it.

Right?

The same Odette Ramos that voted with Nick Mosby to reduce the pension period for council members? The city council demonstrated exactly why we need term limits last night with their vote.

To her point, we would only be forced to replace the entire city council, mayors office, and city council president if every one of those positions wins re-election and serves their full two terms. And there will certainly be long serving advisors and bureaucrats in City Hall to help with the transition and advise new officials, so much of that institutional memory will be retained.

[deleted]

I’m just letting people know they don’t need their sample ballot or voter ID card.

Yes, it's not perfect. You will force some competent people to either move up or move on. But the baby that goes out with the bathwater shouldn't get to live there in perpetuity just because they won election once.