Who do we like for Governor?

[GRDadof3]

With all due respect, Swiping at Devos because he has too much money, runs a business, is actually religious, and other assorted childish comments have not shown Granholm supporters to be very mature in their reasons to vote FOR her.

We have a state with one of the highest unemployment rates in the nation, and more people everyday losing their jobs, and the state is losing people. This is a serious issue for a lot of us. My mother's job is already gone and my dad is lucky enough to be near retirement so he may be ok there.

I just have to take issue with this statement "more people everyday losing their jobs" in Michigan. It's just not true. In fact, since 2003, 100,000 jobs have been added to Michigan's economy, and incomes have also been rising. Have we completely recovered from the loss of over 285,000 manufacturing jobs in the State in the past five years? Of course not. But you can clearly see from this trend line from 2003 to 2006 that your statement is incorrect:

And if you live in Grand Rapids, the job market outlook is even BETTER.

(Sorry about your Mom's job BTW). But even in the best economies, jobs are shed.

Michigan's economy the worst? Just ask the thousands of construction, real estate and mortgage people in South Florida, Phoenix and Southern California right now who are out on the streets due to their recent plunge in real estate markets.

I certainly like the fact that Devos has a lot of business contacts and uber respect in the Global Economy, but there are other issues facing the governor's office. Will Devos treat the State like L Brooks Patterson (Oakland County Commissioner), or more like Vern Ehlers. I'd rather see a Vern Ehler's touch.

[tamias6]

Let's see. Who should I vote for? The devil? Or should I cast my vote for the deep blue sea? Gramholm's performances is avereage but lackluster. In short politics as usual. However Dick Devos is of the Republican party, a Political party I have little trust in at this time thanks to a certain moron in the whitehouse. So I'm going to have to say " Mr. Devos, stick with the VanAndels and Meijers and continue to fund/build big developments in GR."

[mgreven]

Go DeVos...there's my two cents.

Even though people think he's so "high and mighty" because he has money, I find him very down to earth. He's really good friends with some family members and rarely misses a wedding, funeral or open house in our family. He's from a rich family, but one that values hard work and generousity. He just seems like he just wants the best for our state and will do a good job and be a classy politician. Plus, he's from GR...I'm very excited for him to be our next governor! I find it funny how many people here don't like DeVos simply because they don't like GWB. That's some strange reasoning in my mind...they're different people in different jobs at different times. The only thing is that they are part of the same party.

Anyway, there's my vote!

[Veloise]

... Will Devos treat the State like L Brooks Patterson (Oakland County Commissioner...

Patterson ("I love sprawl!") is the county executive. JTIS.

[soooo glad I no longer live there!]

[GR_Urbanist]

DeVos is not the Devil. That

[michaelskis]

However Dick Devos is of the Republican party, a Political party I have little trust in at this time thanks to a certain moron in the whitehouse.

That is like saying that you

[craig d]

That is like saying that you

[Rizzo]

Rizzo, ya gonna vote absentee, or return from Scumbag to cast your ballot?

(bring your illicit ten-centers..."gee, my GF bought them, I don't keep track")

I will be going back to GR City via the Pere Mark for my vote. I plan on bringing one can and writing "Illinois, I pronounce it with an S."

[michaelskis]

Exactly, that's why he/she is shopping at Family Fare now.

I think that you completely missed my point.

Her saying that she did not like DeVos because both he and Bush are republicans, is much like her saying that she is not going to by any food... from any place, only because she does not like Meijer.

[francishsu]

I think that you completely missed my point.

Her saying that she did not like DeVos because both he and Bush are republicans, is much like her saying that she is not going to by any food... from any place, only because she does not like Meijer.

Or perhaps it's like her saying that she won't buy Amway products because she does not like the president of Alticor?

[GRGridGirl]

At the end of the work day, Granholm has picked up four votes whereas Dick has picked up one.

"Who do we like for Governor II?

Jennifer Granholm [ 25 ] [59.52%]

Dick DeVos [ 17 ] [40.48%]

Other [ 0 ] [0.00%]"

Interesting to hear how this will be the FIRST year that many pro-Life supporters will vote for Granholm, instead of the pro-Life candidate.

[mgreven]

Interesting to hear how this will be the FIRST year that many pro-Life supporters will vote for Granholm, instead of the pro-Life candidate.

Not to start a debate, but why?

[suydam]

With all due respect, Swiping at Devos because he has too much money, runs a business, is actually religious, and other assorted childish comments have not shown Granholm supporters to be very mature in their reasons to vote FOR her.

Highlighting reasons NOT to vote for DeVos are as valid as DeVos' TV commercials that talk about reasons NOT to vote for Granholm. My favorite is the one starring people on the street in downtown Holland (I know, you're thinking "Where did they find Republicans in Holland?!" ).

In addition, I don't read previous posts as swiping at DeVos because he runs a business. My own personal comment was more of pointing out that success at running business is not an indicator of success at running our state government.

As for swiping at him for being rich, that's completely disingenuous, I agree. We're all working to make money. Just because the guy makes more (or was born with more in his case) doesn't make him good OR bad...just rich. Which isn't a qualification (or a shortcoming).

[Siler]

And another thing. The Democrat's base is made up of these "uneducated factory workers" that are:

A) Losing jobs and unable to find work or work or a wage close to what they have known.

B) Too old to go back to school to get one of these nice new office jobs.

This reminds me of that new TV ad that stereotypes union workers. Generalizations and stereotyping may be fun and good for the joke books, but they don't reflect reaity. For the record, I am a Dem and neither a) lacking a job and unable to find work, nor b) too old to go back to school. To be honest, I can't think of a single one of my Dem friends who fits this worn-out stereotype.

I'm waiting for Jen and Dick to step out from behind the shield of the PR firms and go toe-to-toe on a little live debate. I have to admit, I've been impressed by how Granholm has been able to lead a legislature that is not of her ilk without gridlock. She can work with folks with whom she disagrees. Can Mr. DeVos?

Beyond patisanship, who's really working in your self-interest? And why do you think so?

[snoogit]

I'm waiting for Dick Devos to come out and call himself a Republican

He still hasn't come out and outright said it (although you'd have to be under a rock not to know it) Why is he hiding this seemingly innocent fact?

Top three Jennifer Granholm is better:

#1: She has shown she is more willing to be patient, and has worked with a congress that has done everything but throw the kitchen sink at her to discredit, and derail her initiatives, it took a strong public outcry to get the state congress to move on the issues.

Short Answer: I put more of the blame on the state congress.

#2: Jennifer Granholm has only been given ONE term to fix the mess that John Engler and the GOP controlled congress left behind. A mess that included short-term fixes, and patchwork lawmaking to hold up what was already a failing economy 10 years prior.

Short Answer: We gave Engler 12 years to screw things up, can we possibly think Jennifer Granholm can fix it in four?

#3: Jennifer Granholm knows how to handle the government. She has government experience. If I were hiring someone to be a chef, I wouldn't hire a carpenter. I look at Dick Devos like I would look at a Carpenter applying to be a chef, theres no experience there! Business experience does not equal public policy experience, all the history has shown that the way you run a business, and the way you run the state are two different experiences. Neither one are as compatable as the business-owners would like you to believe.

Short Answer: I trust someone who has been in government, and knows how it works.

Top three why Dick Devos would be bad for Michigan:

#1: Devos does not have a good history in business. If I were a businessman I would make sure that the business I was leaving would be one of the best run organizations in the world after I left. Devos left Alticor/Amway after one of its least profitable, and worst periods in its history. When Dick Devos was at Amway, 1,300 jobs were lost. Why would I want someone who nearly took their company into the ground running my state? While we can never fully understand why Amway started tanking when Dick took over, (due to being a private entity) What we can see from the outside never looked all that great.

Short Answer: Devos nearly killed Amway, cutting 1,300 jobs while there.

#2: If there was a term, lets take it from the 2004 presidential campaign to describe Devos, I would have to say it would be "flip-flop" Devos's opinion, and his ideas seem to change right along with the public. "Its cool to bash President Bush? I'll bash him too!" "I criticize Jennifer Granholm for running negative ads? (which I never saw) a few weeks later: I'll run my own nagative ads!, but they will look like "person on the street" (Even if its only Holland)"

Short Answer: Devos is a "flip-flop"

#3: I mentioned it at the beginning of my post, but I'll elaborate: Devos can't level with the people. If a canidate is so afraid to even announce his party in his politcal ads, what does that say about someone's leadership skills? This one tactic alone give me an impression that he would never be truthful enough with the public to ever gain the people's trust. It will come to the debates, where I hope he is asked questions about his stance on school vouchers, and his performance while at Amway (dreadful) If he can actually show he can level with the people, he wont win me over, but he would at least dispell some of my concerns if he does indeed end up winning the election.

Short Answer: I just don't feel like I could trust Devos to do whats right for Michigan.

[snoogit]

And another thing. The Democrat's base is made up of these "uneducated factory workers" that are:

A) Losing jobs and unable to find work or work or a wage close to what they have known.

B) Too old to go back to school to get one of these nice new office jobs.

If all you can do is name-call, and stereotype, then please don't join in on this discussion.

[zenstyle]

^Snoogit, thanks for articulating my thought balloons so beautifully.

My personal addendum: DeVos' stand on womens' reproductive rights. Michigan is firmly a pro-choice state, and I would hate to see him screw that up in the guise of his "beliefs."

[RustTown]

Snoogit, I agree with almost all of your assessment except maybe part of your reason in opposition to DeVos in #1. You seem to backtrack. First you say that business experience means very little in running a state, which I completely agree with. Then, you make issue of him running badly Amway, as if it matters. It either matters or it doesn't. And, how much weight do you want to put on the changing market for the decline of direct marketing? I'd put alot more on the change of the market.

All that said, I do agree with almost everything you said, especially your points 1 and 2 for Granholm. IMO, she's the only governor in the past 20-30 years that has made any real effort to actually try (and succeed despite the pain) to seriously diversify the economy and wean us off manufacturing to the degree on which we need to be weened off.

I'm amazed by what's she been able to accomplish despite what's happening in Washington, which has a much larger effect on things here in Michigan than people give it credit for, and the State legislature, which has been incredibly hostile to this governor. In the end, for me, my blame on the state of Michigan's economy lies much more heavily on the NAFTA and letting the genie out of the bottle on the issue of Globalisation.

[civitas]

I'll be voting for Granholm. Dick Devos himself I can stomach, it's his wife I don't care for. If he gets in, she'll obvioulsy have some power and that does not sit well with me.

I think everyone, even if they would not be voting fro DeVos, can be thankful for all his family has done for Grand Rapids. Still...I don't necessarily believe that being successful in the private sector means one will be successful in the public sector.

Your point may be literally true, but given a choice, would you rather have a governor who has been unsuccessful?

[civitas]

I just have to take issue with this statement "more people everyday losing their jobs" in Michigan. It's just not true. In fact, since 2003, 100,000 jobs have been added to Michigan's economy, and incomes have also been rising. Have we completely recovered from the loss of over 285,000 manufacturing jobs in the State in the past five years? Of course not. But you can clearly see from this trend line from 2003 to 2006 that your statement is incorrect:

And if you live in Grand Rapids, the job market outlook is even BETTER.

(Sorry about your Mom's job BTW). But even in the best economies, jobs are shed.

Michigan's economy the worst? Just ask the thousands of construction, real estate and mortgage people in South Florida, Phoenix and Southern California right now who are out on the streets due to their recent plunge in real estate markets.

I certainly like the fact that Devos has a lot of business contacts and uber respect in the Global Economy, but there are other issues facing the governor's office. Will Devos treat the State like L Brooks Patterson (Oakland County Commissioner), or more like Vern Ehlers. I'd rather see a Vern Ehler's touch.

"Mississippi again posted the highest unemployment rate (8.0 percent) in July. Alaska and Michigan had the next highest rates, 7.0 percent each. The states recording the lowest jobless rates were Louisiana, 2.9 percent, and Hawaii and Wyoming, 3.0 percent each." Link

"Michigan's seasonally adjusted unemployment rate was 7 percent in July, above the national average of 4.8 percent." Link

[civitas]

Or perhaps it's like her saying that she won't buy Amway products because she does not like the president of Alticor?

[GRDadof3]

"Mississippi again posted the highest unemployment rate (8.0 percent) in July. Alaska and Michigan had the next highest rates, 7.0 percent each. The states recording the lowest jobless rates were Louisiana, 2.9 percent, and Hawaii and Wyoming, 3.0 percent each." Link

"Michigan's seasonally adjusted unemployment rate was 7 percent in July, above the national average of 4.8 percent." Link

I get the Sunday Press thanks. Are you agreeing with my assessment or disagreeing with my assessment?

[civitas]

I get the Sunday Press thanks. Are you agreeing with my assessment or disagreeing with my assessment?

Mark Twain said about lies...there are 3 kinds - lies, damned lies and statistics.

Statistics give me a headache.

I guess that employment could go up while the unemployment percentage also goes up if the total labor force increased more than employment went up. ???

Yup, now I have a headache.

[GRDadof3]

Mark Twain said about lies...there are 3 kinds - lies, damned lies and statistics.

Statistics give me a headache.

I guess that employment could go up while the unemployment percentage also goes up if the total labor force increased more than employment went up. ???

Yup, now I have a headache.

I actually failed stats in college the first time. But you're right, actually, the unemployment rate can go up if the total labor force increased and the employment number stayed the same. I just think a one-month snapshot is too small of a sample size. Stats can be a good thing, if taken in moderation.

[civitas]

I actually failed stats in college the first time. But you're right, actually, the unemployment rate can go up if the total labor force increased and the employment number stayed the same. I just think a one-month snapshot is too small of a sample size. Stats can be a good thing, if taken in moderation.

But why would the labor force go up that much in a state that has no jobs (high unemployment)?

I'll bet Governor DeVos will figure it out.