Home / General / The Kristof Foolishness

The Kristof Foolishness

Comments
/
/
/
2146 Views

Nic Kristof’s desire to be governor of Oregon has one platform–worrying about white rural people. He wants to be J.D. Vance but he’s too stupid to understand the grift. Now, Kristof has been a New Yorker for approximately ever. Most of his connection to Oregon has been wine tourism. So the state ruled him ineligible to run for governor since he doesn’t live there and even cast his 2020 vote in New York. He’s outraged and is appealing it. What’s great about this appeal is the argument is based around Oregon’s history of exclusion back in 1859 when it became a state and didn’t allow Black people to live there.

The two former Democratic secretaries of state also echoed Kristof’s contention that an overly strict view of a candidate’s proof of eligibility could disenfranchise voters and violate their constitutional rights. They say that Kristof’s emotional ties to the state are, indeed, a valid factor in the residency question.

“Those voters who think that residency is important and requires connections to the state that the candidate might lack can express that view by voting for someone else,” Atkins and Bradbury wrote.

It is important, they noted, that collectively the people get the governor the majority of them wants. Oregon has been a state that at times “restricted access to the polls and to elected office, especially for people of color, sometimes through durational residency requirements. They are mindful of that shameful history.”

Angela Addae, an assistant professor at the University of Oregon School of Law, and David Fidanque, former executive director of the Oregon ACLU, and the Leaven Community Land and Housing Coalition also wrote to the court arguing for inclusivity. While the brief doesn’t address the merits of what the court decides or support Kristof’s candidacy, parts of it echoes Kristof’s arguments.

In the absence of a constitutional definition of resident or residency, they wrote, the court should construe the term “in the broadest possible sense consistent with modern principles of democratic participation and inclusivity, rather than with the xenophobia and racism that motivated the durational residency requirement 162 years ago.”

You have got to be kidding me. Nic Kristof is as oppressed as Black people in 1860! Maybe we need to fight a civil war to free him from his slavery. I hope his consultants are making as much easy cash from this mark as Somaly Mam did.

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • Linkedin
  • Pinterest
It is main inner container footer text