Danville & The Presidential Election of 2012 Around Town, posted by American, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Sep 12, 2012 at 2:37 pm
The Contra Costa Times had a recent article that noted that Danville has the highest percentage of registered Republicans of any city or town in the Bay Area, at 43.1% of all registered voters, followed by Atherton and Hillsborough. The Article also noted that last election, Obama actually received more votes than McCain in Danville.
I do not know anything about Atherton or Hillsborough(other than they are wealthy communities), but have resided in Danville for almost 15 years, so I feel have a pretty good pulse on what makes up your "normal Danvillian".
First, we tend to be highly educated, value family, community, public safety, and are actively(sometimes too much) involved in our children's activities, whether school, sports, or social events. Very few of us are divorced, and most families have a mom and a dad, who both are involved in raising the children. We are patriotic, love a good fourth of July parade, and fully support our military, and law enforcement, and their families. Most of us are actually doing better than our parents did financially, and we want our children to do even better than we have done. We are optimistic, and believe that if you work hard, play by the rules, you can achieve success. We suffer losses just like anyone else, but we do not blame others for them, and we celebrate when our neighbors succeed, and are not envious of them, or their success.
Finally, we are fiscally conservative and do not live beyond our means. We save for college when our children are born, we save for retirement when we are young, and we carry plenty of insurance, whether auto or life, in case a casaulty strikes. We do not expect the goverment to do much more than provide roads, military, police, courts, schools, etc., and we certainly do not expect the government to take care of us financially.
Looking at the above, I think I understand why Danville voted for Mr.Obama last election. We knew we needed a change, we knew the economy was in trouble, and we were concerned that Mr. McCain was in poor health and that Ms.Palin was not qualified to be Vice President(or truthfully anything else) Mr.Obama also said all the right things, did all the right things during the campaign, and we followed our gut more than our brains.
Four years later, in 2012, I am very confident that Danville will return to the Republican party and vote in favor of Mr. Romney. With his business background, his fiscal conservatism, his view on the government being too big, and his need to cut the deficits and make our country live within our means, is right on point with values we have in Danville. We have also seen Mr.Obama fail to keep most of his promises, and in four years there has truthfully been little to no economic recovery. When he talks about the "Evil 1%" he wants to blame for "not paying their fair share", he is talking about us Danvillians, and we all know, we pay our fair share and more. We take care of our families and our neighbors, we live within our means, and we play by the rules, and value success and hard work. Moreover, the fears we had about Ms.Palin, are seen in Mr. Biden almost every time he opens his mouth.
Danville is not the problem in our country, even though Mr.Obama likes to blame us "1%" people. In fact, if more cities and towns were like the people in Danville, America would be a much better place.
God bless Danville, and God bless America.(and f.y.i., do not mention God in the Democratic platform or Mr. Obama will be upset)
Posted by Vicki, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Sep 12, 2012 at 4:41 pm
I've lived in Danville for over half of my 62 years. I very much like many of your comments about our little town!
I was one of the conservatives who voted Obama, and I may vote for him again. If Romney comes back with some sort of meaningful plan to make sure access to health care is available to all, that my daughter will not go back to being denied coverage due to a pre-existing condition that she was born with, and that includes optional end of life counseling that is covered by Medicare (I work in health care and was appalled at how my own party picked apart that benefit and named it "putting granny out to pasture" - ridiculous!) - then I will reconsider. To be honest, I'm not a Romney fan OR an Obama fan. I'll undoubtedly be voting against someone rather than for someone.
Posted by American, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Sep 12, 2012 at 4:59 pm
Vicki: governor Romney has made it clear that he also favors getting rid of pre-existing condition exclusions, so your daughter would be covered under his plan as well. I agree with you that pre-existing conditions should be covered.
Posted by save the american dream, a resident of the Diablo neighborhood, on Sep 13, 2012 at 8:56 am
Thank you for your well-expressed thoughts, American. As a Diablo resident, I can assure you that many, if not most, of our residents agree with everything you have said.
Romney represents the American dream. He worked hard and made his success in business. Obama is a career politician. He decries the success of people like Romney and encourages class warfare, justifying confiscatory tax levels on the basis that the government should get all the credit for anyone's success. He encourages the victim mentality and that one's circumstance is never his or fault, eroding the notion of personal responsibility that has made our country great.
At this point in our nation, we are at a tipping point. Almost as many people are on the government as dole as are not. This election may very well show us which side we will be on for the rest of our history.
Posted by Citizen Paine, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Sep 13, 2012 at 11:34 am
Why American, you and your nominee are beginning to sound like Democrats with all this backsliding on the repeal of ObamaCare. You are aware, aren't you, that the (Only) reason pre-existing conditions can be required to be covered is that the mandate creates a pool of insureds large enough to finance it. With pre-existing conditions coverage alone, rates explode. In other words, you don't get dessert unless you eat your vegetables.
Posted by Vicki, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Sep 13, 2012 at 2:44 pm
American, I have heard that as well, but I'm not sure I believe it. I should have mentioned that I also believe in a woman's right to choose and in marriage equality. I doubt those are part of the Romney platform so I would imagine I'll vote for Obama again....we'll see!
Posted by Diane, a resident of the Alamo neighborhood, on Sep 14, 2012 at 7:59 am
Social issues (abortion, gay marriage, health care) are emotional and divisive.
They are close to home, and IMHO should be decided by the states, not the federal government.
When we focus on emotional issues we look at what is 'good' for a few of us, or for us personally, rather than what is important to the country as a whole.
Our country's fiscal health and security is (again, IMO) tantamount to all else. If it's not on a solid footing, NOTHING ELSE WILL MATTER.
It won't matter that my gay brother can't get 'married' if the dollar is devalued so much that a gallon of milk costs $247.00. It won't matter that pre-existing condition is not covered by insurance when even aspirin isn't available at the local store because the trucking industry can't survive on $1,200.00 per gallon gasoline.
It won't matter (fill in your own blank), because the nation will have collapsed under the weight of its current and future debt.
That's the bottom line.
Thank you for your letter, American. Beautifully written.
Posted by Dave, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Sep 14, 2012 at 5:35 pm
I challenge American to find a quote in which President Obama has ever referred to those in the top 1 percent of income as the "evil 1 %.". He hasn't blamed the 1 percent for anything. He merely said that they have done much better than everyone else in these tough economic times and can afford, better than others who are less fortunate, to pay a little more in taxes.
BTW, the federal income tax rate for upper bracket earners is hardly confiscatory, as one writer above suggested. In fact, at 35 percent on marginal income, the rate is lower now than anytime in the past 60 years, including under Reagan.
Posted by American, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Sep 14, 2012 at 6:50 pm
Dave: No disrespect, but your comment that those with more can afford pay even more than they already are, sure sounds a lot like Karl Marx and communism manifesto. Personally, I would like to think that America is still a capitalism country where there is a financial incentive to play by the rules, work hard, and get to keep the fruits of our labor that we earned.
Posted by Dave, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Sep 15, 2012 at 3:00 pm
No, American. It's classic Adam Smith, who (like I) believed that capitalism is the best economic system, but, that it only works well when accompanied by a progressive taxation system.
No comment on Reagan's tax rates, eh?
The rules are only what we (or lobbyists for monied interests) make them. In recent years, the tax rates for the wealthy have been changed lower and lower, which has contributed greatly to the deficit.
Posted by Vicki, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Sep 16, 2012 at 9:45 am
I believe tax rates should be equitable. If I pay over 20% in federal tax, Romney should pay more than 15%.
Diane - you lost me when you put the word married in quotations when discussing your gay brother and marriage to a life partner. That speaks volumes. My sister, who has been with the same (female) life partner for 22 years, cannot marry. My other sister has been married 5 times - all to men, some she barely knew. How is that reasonable? I also don't believe that marriage equality will influence or be influenced by the price of our dairy products....imho.
Posted by MsAmerican, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Sep 16, 2012 at 9:32 pm
I like that Reagan transformed Carter's 20% interest and unemployment into a robust economy, which is the best way to create revenue...EVerybody working!! Sadly, our transformation hasn't turned out so well...Current unemployment is higher than last year!
Vicki, Romney paid $6.2 million for the last 2 year's taxes, so you are doing very well, if you're close to paying $3 mil/year. Also, it would be good to have a little wider range in flexibilty, which you'll need in finding Mr close-to-Right. Or, if you're married, you probably were lucky to get a 94 or 96 percenter...100% perfection is hard to find.
Right now we have the very finest campaigner money can buy. Obama is truly a great campaigner, He really enjoys campaigning and the roar of the crowd. In fact he loves it so much, while terrorist killings were happening earlier this week, he flew off to Las Vegas to keep his campaign schedule (because he loves it). Having a choice, I would rather have a not so great campaigner, and a much better president...that's what I'm going for.
Posted by Vicki, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Sep 17, 2012 at 7:02 pm
Ms. American, methinks you are missing the idea behind equitable as a fair distribution. If Romney paid 6.2 million in taxes, I guarantee that is not as large a portion of his income that I (and yes, my husband) paid in taxes. If I pay a large percentage of my income in taxes, then so should he. It really is that simple.
Posted by MsAmerican, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Sep 24, 2012 at 6:33 pm
Funny how how standards and expectations evolve from election to election. Nobody wanted percentages or anything else when our 'richest' president, George Washington ran. He served is OK.
Or, when John Kennedy ran, who did not have a job or career, and from a youth lived off unearned interest income. Jack, Bobby, and Teddy were all as rich as Romney, yet, nobody cared, much less snooped and harrassed. Money has little to do with governing. Being a senior without a pension or income, I'm rather sensitive about interest income. That is my retirement.
The prison convict, DEM Ways & Means boss, Dan Rostenkowsi, wrote the tax laws that Romney would like to overhaul. There are far greater scandals in the current tax code. It has to be an overhaul, percentages are minor compared to a multitude of hidden and complex matters. If you poke in one place, it pops out someplace else.
Posted by MsAmerican, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Sep 24, 2012 at 6:58 pm
Now, to the really big issue. Why for 10 days were Obama, Hillary, and J Carney talking about an irrelevant video. They stonewalled and denied that the Sept 11 attack on our Embassy was a pre-planned 9-11 anniversary terrorist attack. It's not fair to the 4 who were murdered, our Ambassador and 3 others on the American team. Then, hours lated, Obama jetted off to Las Vegas to continue the campaigning he so loves.
Now, Obama refers to it as a "bump in the road". ! ! OMG, I doubt the Ambassador's family would describe it as a bump in the road. Obama is so determined to minimize and buy time....it's just ignore and stall until I can get REelected.
He slipped thru last time with no sticky reporter questions, nobody cared he had never done anything. He was a blank slate, for anybody to tell themselves whatever they wanted him to be. NO questions. NO name calling for the anointed one..,...just adulation. Still, it's no expectations, no demands, and NO SOLUTIONS !!!
in such denial, and is determined must continue to buy him time
Posted by Dave, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Sep 25, 2012 at 10:21 pm
The economy improved under Reagan because he used federal government spending to stimulate the economy (including doubling defense spending) -- so much so that he doubled the federal debt during his 2 terms.