Florida Republicans Demand Ron DeSantis End 2024 Run To Focus on His Job...

Nomad

Nomad

Every trumper is a N4T.
This is soooo funny!!!!

I bet Little Mussolini is sputtering with rage!!! :laugh:

Gov. Ron DeSantis has been urged by a group of Florida Republicans to end his 2024 primary campaign so he can concentrate on his role as governor.

The Florida Republican Assembly, a grassroots political organization, issued a declaration calling for DeSantis to return to the role he was reelected to in November 2022 and to "complete his four-year term" as Florida governor.

The declaration, confirmed by the group on social media, suggested that DeSantis' presidential campaign has "caused a distraction" and that the interests of Florida's residents have been "placed secondary" to his White House bid.

The group also said that DeSantis' 2024 campaign is not generating any positive poll results, nor has it gained any "significant momentum" since it officially launched in May.

For months, DeSantis was seen as the ideal replacement for former President Donald Trump to lead the Republican Party into the next election, with several people, including some within the GOP, blaming the influence of the former president on the party's poor 2022 midterm performance.

However, DeSantis continues to trail Trump by massive margins in the polls, with his floundering campaign dogged by a series of controversies, concerns about his ability to charm voters, and a lack of funds heading into the primaries.

"Gov. Ron DeSantis has been using his position as governor to campaign for the office of the president of the United States, taking him away from his official duties and responsibilities to the citizens of Florida, frequently at taxpayer expense," the declaration said.

"Furthermore, the Florida Republican Assembly requests that Gov. DeSantis rededicate himself to the needs of Florida residents and prioritize their interests over his personal political ambitions," the group said.

https://www.newsweek.com/florida-republicans-ron-desantis-end-2024-governor-1838895
Click to expand...

Although I agree with them about DeShameless quitting the race, I do not agree with the part about him coming back to Florida and continuing his term.

He should drop out of the 2024 race, resign from his current position, pack up his shit and go somewhere else.

Mississippi, Alabama, Texas.... some shithole more suited to his kind.
 
Nomad said:
This is soooo funny!!!!

I bet Little Mussolini is sputtering with rage!!! :laugh:



Although I agree with them about DeShameless quitting the race, I do not agree with the part about him coming back to Florida and continuing his term.

He should drop out of the 2024 race, resign from his current position, pack up his shit and go somewhere else.

Mississippi, Alabama, Texas.... some shithole more suited to his kind.
Click to expand...
Strange that California and New York are losing population and representation and Texas and Florida are gaining population and representation. And you think they are shitholes. moron. :rofl2:
 
ExpressLane said:
Strange that California and New York are losing population and representation and Texas and Florida are gaining population and representation. And you think they are shitholes. moron. :rofl2:
Click to expand...

Texas and Florida have warm climates and lots of room to build relatively inexpensive housing.

Has nothing to do with politics.

Texas, Alabama and Mississippi are shitholes.

Moron.
 
Nomad said:
Texas and Florida have warm climates and lots of room to build relatively inexpensive housing.

Has nothing to do with politics.

Texas, Alabama and Mississippi are shitholes.

Moron.
Click to expand...

Actually, it has very much to do with politics. Having land is necessary yes, but land doesn't matter if you're not allowed to build on it. California is Exhibit A. We have plenty of room to build, but the cities, countries and state make it so difficult to do so supply can never keep up with demand. That's a choice we make. Texas has lots of land but they have nowhere near the restrictive policies California does. Now even Texas prices are rising (as more coastal people move there) but the state is far more liberal in allowing new development.
 
cawacko said:
Actually, it has very much to do with politics. Having land is necessary yes, but land doesn't matter if you're not allowed to build on it. California is Exhibit A. We have plenty of room to build, but the cities, countries and state make it so difficult to do so supply can never keep up with demand. That's a choice we make. Texas has lots of land but they have nowhere near the restrictive policies California does. Now even Texas prices are rising (as more coastal people move there) but the state is far more liberal in allowing new development.
Click to expand...

I don't think much of that is pure party politics.

Much of it is due to practical concerns like infrastructure, schools, public safety and availability of resources like water in California. Why would any government in their right minds allow unfettered development in a desert state that has to take it's water from neighboring states who themselves are beginning to feel the pinch?

Yes, politicians are the ones who control that stuff, but Distressed Lame was suggesting that it's a purely Democrats vs Republicans thing.

And BTW, it's no stroll on the beach getting things built here in Florida either.

With the exception of water, which we have an abundance of, the other issues I listed are of equal concern here.
 
Nomad said:
I don't think much of that is pure party politics.

Much of it is due to practical concerns like infrastructure, schools, public safety and availability of resources like water in California. Why would any government in their right minds allow unfettered development in a desert state that has to take it's water from neighboring states who themselves are beginning to feel the pinch?

Yes, politicians are the ones who control that stuff, but Distressed Lame was suggesting that it's a purely Democrats vs Republicans thing.

And BTW, it's no stroll on the beach getting things built here in Florida either.

With the exception of water, which we have an abundance of, the other issues I listed are of equal concern here.
Click to expand...

NIMBYism may be one of the few remaining bi-partisan things this country has, but in California we have it on steroids. My family moved to California in 1981 and there was already a strong anti-growth sentiment in the state. Over 40 years of those policies and there's a reason housing here is so unaffordable. NIMBYism is the ultimate 'Fvck You I've Got Mine". People hide behind not wanting to change "neighborhood character" and traffic etc but it's basically saying 'I like my neighborhood/area/City as it is and don't want it to change at all'. This attitude hurts all of us as it makes moving harder and our economy less dynamic.

Why would gov't allow more development? In California we've become a state with the most wealth and highest poverty rate and it is only become harder and harder for the middle class to live here. That's not a model you want for long term prosperity. Then people complain about climate change. Well one way to deal with climate change is to allow higher density in areas around public transportation. But people who say climate change is an existential crisis still fight against that. What happens instead? People build further out which means longer commutes, more pollution etc.

It's so bad that the YIMBY movement was created here, which is a progressive group that supports new housing.

I can't claim to follow Florida real estate all that closely and outside looking at a couple of small investments never really done much work there. So I can't speak to the reception new development gets in the state.
 
cawacko said:
NIMBYism may be one of the few remaining bi-partisan things this country has, but in California we have it on steroids. My family moved to California in 1981 and there was already a strong anti-growth sentiment in the state. Over 40 years of those policies and there's a reason housing here is so unaffordable. NIMBYism is the ultimate 'Fvck You I've Got Mine". People hide behind not wanting to change "neighborhood character" and traffic etc but it's basically saying 'I like my neighborhood/area/City as it is and don't want it to change at all'. This attitude hurts all of us as it makes moving harder and our economy less dynamic.

Why would gov't allow more development? In California we've become a state with the most wealth and highest poverty rate and it is only become harder and harder for the middle class to live here. That's not a model you want for long term prosperity. Then people complain about climate change. Well one way to deal with climate change is to allow higher density in areas around public transportation. But people who say climate change is an existential crisis still fight against that. What happens instead? People build further out which means longer commutes, more pollution etc.

It's so bad that the YIMBY movement was created here, which is a progressive group that supports new housing.

I can't claim to follow Florida real estate all that closely and outside looking at a couple of small investments never really done much work there. So I can't speak to the reception new development gets in the state.
Click to expand...

Well, there's a lot of validity to the desire to keep rampant development at bay. Increased traffic as you said, increased noise, increased commercial development, increased crime, increased pollution and an overall decrease in the quality of life. Having been there first, I think the long-time residents absolutely have good reason and the right to voice their objections.

Here in Florida, we have a much more sensitive environment than California, that consists of delicate wetlands or what outsiders like to call swamps, which are home to countless native species. Bulldozing large swaths of it for new neighborhoods is bad enough, but when they bulldoze strips of land between these areas to build the new roads and highways these new neighborhoods require, it not only destroys the land that got bulldozed and paved over, but the vehicular traffic that passes over them by the multiple thousands per day, leaves a fine soot from their exhaust pipes on the pavement. When it rains, that acidic chemical soup gets washed into the surrounding natural wetlands, slowly poisoning the native plant and animal life, negatively affecting things like reproductive rates and causing tumors, birth defects etc.

There are communities around here that are still very rural and from the air look like a green, carpet of grass and trees, dotted with lakes. Greedy developers are constantly pressuring county officials to let them bulldoze big chunks of it in the name of economic growth (aka profits for them).

Just seems so short-sighted and small-minded to me, to allow the destruction of all that natural beauty rather than force developers to build upwards rather than outwards and confine it to already highly developed areas.

But they don't.

They want to sell people boring, cookie-cutter single family homes squeezed up next to each other so closely, the owners can hear their neighbors fart. And with postage stamp lawns so small their kids can't even play on them anyway.

I understand people need housing. But if they can't find a traditional house, they should make the decision to either live in a high rise in the city or go live somewhere else altogether.

The long time residents and natives shouldn't have to see their quiet, peaceful hometowns and rural lifestyles destroyed just to accommodate some late comers who couldn't care less about what got bulldozed to accommodate them.

https://news.yahoo.com/video-lake-county-residents-push-231925263.html

That's the way I see it.
 
Nomad said:
This is soooo funny!!!!

I bet Little Mussolini is sputtering with rage!!! :laugh:



Although I agree with them about DeShameless quitting the race, I do not agree with the part about him coming back to Florida and continuing his term.

He should drop out of the 2024 race, resign from his current position, pack up his shit and go somewhere else.

Mississippi, Alabama, Texas.... some shithole more suited to his kind.
Click to expand...
He left the state looking like the walls of the White House when trump is served spaghetti.

This is a state legislature that is simply going through withdrawal after a full year of rubber stamping every one of Puddin' Hands' racist, homophobic, misogynistic desires.

They need their little Nazi back.
 
ExpressLane said:
I have been to the mountains in New Mexico to hunt elk. Its fucking beautiful moron.
Click to expand...

Who wants to live in the fucking mountains, moron?

The same ones who want to live in the desert.

Nobody.

You can run your mouth about your macho animal murdering fantasies or whatever other nonsense you want to, but nobody wants to live in New Mexico.

If it's so fucking great, why don't you move there?
 
Nomad said:
Who wants to live in the fucking mountains, moron?

The same ones who want to live in the desert.

Nobody.

You can run your mouth about your macho animal murdering fantasies or whatever other nonsense you want to, but nobody wants to live in New Mexico.

If it's so fucking great, why don't you move there?
Click to expand...
So you are a vegan :laugh:
 
Nomad said:
They're the only ones who do.

Everyone else hates the obnoxious little toad.
Click to expand...
Now you know that is not true.

He's done a good job as Governor, made all the right calls during Covid. Actually stood up for the citizens against government tyranny.

Who would you rather have as Governor? A degenerate like Gillum?
 
Nomad said:
Texas and Florida have warm climates and lots of room to build relatively inexpensive housing.

Has nothing to do with politics.

Texas, Alabama and Mississippi are shitholes.

Moron.
Click to expand...
California and NY are unaffordable. Why do think that is? California has better climate than Florida..
 
Nomad said:
Well, there's a lot of validity to the desire to keep rampant development at bay. Increased traffic as you said, increased noise, increased commercial development, increased crime, increased pollution and an overall decrease in the quality of life. Having been there first, I think the long-time residents absolutely have good reason and the right to voice their objections.

Here in Florida, we have a much more sensitive environment than California, that consists of delicate wetlands or what outsiders like to call swamps, which are home to countless native species. Bulldozing large swaths of it for new neighborhoods is bad enough, but when they bulldoze strips of land between these areas to build the new roads and highways these new neighborhoods require, it not only destroys the land that got bulldozed and paved over, but the vehicular traffic that passes over them by the multiple thousands per day, leaves a fine soot from their exhaust pipes on the pavement. When it rains, that acidic chemical soup gets washed into the surrounding natural wetlands, slowly poisoning the native plant and animal life, negatively affecting things like reproductive rates and causing tumors, birth defects etc.

There are communities around here that are still very rural and from the air look like a green, carpet of grass and trees, dotted with lakes. Greedy developers are constantly pressuring county officials to let them bulldoze big chunks of it in the name of economic growth (aka profits for them).

Just seems so short-sighted and small-minded to me, to allow the destruction of all that natural beauty rather than force developers to build upwards rather than outwards and confine it to already highly developed areas.

But they don't.

They want to sell people boring, cookie-cutter single family homes squeezed up next to each other so closely, the owners can hear their neighbors fart. And with postage stamp lawns so small their kids can't even play on them anyway.

I understand people need housing. But if they can't find a traditional house, they should make the decision to either live in a high rise in the city or go live somewhere else altogether.

The long time residents and natives shouldn't have to see their quiet, peaceful hometowns and rural lifestyles destroyed just to accommodate some late comers who couldn't care less about what got bulldozed to accommodate them.

https://news.yahoo.com/video-lake-county-residents-push-231925263.html

That's the way I see it.
Click to expand...

To be clear, I'm in no way suggesting literally all land should be opened up for development. That wouldn't be good nor is that necessary. And not all new development needs to be, nor should it be, single family homes. But unless we have plans to stop immigration and lower the birth rate we need new housing to keep up with the demand.

I pointed out the environmental issues but it's also an issue for those who claim to care about the middle class, working class and racial equity. Preventing new housing is often great for the property values of those who already own their home but it only makes it more difficult for those trying to get into the market. For the country as a whole, that's not a positive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top