News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.4K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 39K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 4.7K     0 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rofo won't be the first!

http://theweek.com/article/index/271456/speedreads-dead-man-elected-in-washington-state

Dead man elected in Washington state

Criminal charges won't stop you from getting elected in America, and apparently neither will death: State Rep. Roger Freeman of the 30th District in Washington handily won his re-election on Tuesday — but he won't take office again because he died in October.

At the time of his death, about 15 percent of the district's voters had already mailed in their ballots. And by the time Election Day came around, many voters were not aware that Freeman had died, and apparently voted for the incumbent or along party lines anyway.

Freeman is not the first official to be elected posthumously. In 2010, Missouri voters accidentally elected a man who had likewise died in October, while in 1998 a woman won a runoff election in late August after dying in mid-July. And in 2013, an Oregon man was elected to his city council five months after his death, though in that case the victory was an intentional gesture of respect rather than the result of misinformation. - - Bonnie Kristian

America is a cesspool of stupidity. In case you didn't hear about the recent midterm election, here's what they voted for:

cartoon_249027_438899109461742_1420949922_n_0.jpg
 

Attachments

  • cartoon_249027_438899109461742_1420949922_n_0.jpg
    cartoon_249027_438899109461742_1420949922_n_0.jpg
    143 KB · Views: 3,765
You are right, I read it wrong. It is 40% for first chart, but still very bad for second chart!

The first chart isn't optimistic either, IMO. Just less pessimistic. Also, I'm not sure the second chart applies. Retro-peritonital would be the around the kidneys instead of in the abdomen, no? Too bad Rob is our only source of info these days. He's not so good with the accuracy.
 

Attachments

  • retroperitoneal.jpg
    retroperitoneal.jpg
    31.2 KB · Views: 1,844
America is a cesspool of stupidity. In case you didn't hear about the recent midterm election, here's what they voted for:

View attachment 36957

Actually, I've found my l'il corner of America to be on a par - or actually more educated/active, politically - than, say...Toronto ;D Partisan politics aside (comic is clever but similar ones can and have been done when the Dems win, of course. Indies like me inevitably chuckle - and shiver - at both), the biggest thing that makes the election of dead people or candidates who have withdrawn (the GOP candidate for State Senate in our District withdrew but came within 4% of winning, in this election) happen is the ability to vote a straight 'party ticket' with one tick-box. If they didn't die or withdraw prior to the deadline...they just got voted for, along with all the others running in your electoral district for your party of choice. Add in the truly uneducated voters who just know or like the name, and ones who vote for the dead guy as a protest, and yep, can happen.

Problem is...without the ability to vote a straight party-ticket, even fewer would bother to vote. Even longer wait-times and loooooong ballot forms to complete, inevitably have that result. And voter turn-out isn't great now. So, no one wants to take the slate-vote ability away.

A final thought regarding the election here, and voter turnout - it wasn't entirely the American people having spoken. Big factor was the American people who didn't bother. Overall voter turnout was lousy, but was at least 10% higher in every district tracked by various news agencies, that historically trended Republican (and went GOP again this time in almost every case) as well as some of the big Dem 'unseating' districts. Who can get the vote out, is key. Too many are willing to let other American people speak for them.

Same everywhere though, I think, by all reports. That and voters who let everyone else think for them, too. *sigh*
 
Thanks. This all still behind the abdomen, though. Have I got that part right?

Wikipedia puts it 'in the abdominal cavity', fwiw: "retroperitoneal space
The retroperitoneal space (retroperitoneum) is the anatomical space (sometimes a potential space) in the abdominal cavity behind (retro) the peritoneum. It has no specific delineating anatomical structures. Organs are retroperitoneal if they have peritoneum on their anterior side only."

( Looking into these tems, I feel as though I'm 'not in Kansas anymore, Toto..'. Thoroughly confused and amazed - haven't heard of any of these terms before, except the organs and circulatory systems involved here! Fascinating, in a very "oh, yikes!" kind of way. Especially for Rob, from the sound of it.)

ETA: meant to put in the link. Not sure Wikipedia is the ideal place to get this info, but sounds as though they're directly quoting sources: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retroperitoneal_space
 
Last edited:

This is really helpful - it helps illustrate the kind of 'obstacles' I imagine the surgeons are facing. From my reading on this type of cancer, retroperitoneal tumours are more likely to be non-resectable and are harder to get clean margins on because of the presence of so many key veins, arteries and of course, organs. Lots of people who have had "successful" surgery have had multiple organs cut up or removed entirely. Very scary stuff.

Given this, I have assumed the reason Ford started with chemo and not surgery is because it's a retroperitoneal tumour.
 
This is really helpful - it helps illustrate the kind of 'obstacles' I imagine the surgeons are facing. From my reading on this type of cancer, retroperitoneal tumours are more likely to be non-resectable and are harder to get clean margins on because of the presence of so many key veins, arteries and of course, organs. Lots of people who have had "successful" surgery have had multiple organs cut up or removed entirely. Very scary stuff.

Given this, I have assumed the reason Ford started with chemo and not surgery is because it's a retroperitoneal tumour.

Would make sense. If it was just in the big belly section, it could come out, but what do I know, I do health policy, not surgery.
 
I thought he didn't get a particularly great reception at the last Remembrance Day ceremony either - if you are someone who'd incite booing at a solemn event, you really should stay away.

AoD


yeah, I believe last year he got a stern lecturing from a WW2 vet about why he shouldn't be there.
 
yeah, I believe last year he got a stern lecturing from a WW2 vet about why he shouldn't be there.

I think he desperately want to align himself the event because that's his bread and butter of his image (stand up for democracy, bravery, don't back down, etc, etc). Except that his own failure is a huge drag on what the event is really about. Again, it's all about him - screw the real point of Remembrance Day, it's about what I want to say about it.

AoD
 
yeah, I believe last year he got a stern lecturing from a WW2 vet about why he shouldn't be there.

Yep, the vet who refused to shake his hand because he was 'a druggie'.

I really hope that now both Rob and Doug are out of the mayoral office and actually have more time to be out and about among the 'common folk' (ironic, considering Rob's self-image as 'the people's mayor' and all those 'constituent visits') we'll be seeing more and more citizens approaching them in public to tell them to their faces how full of crap they are.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top