Your feedback is a great tool for connecting with voters. We want to hear from you. Your advice is welcome.  

To contact the campaign, leave your comments here.

Showing 4 reactions

  • commented 2018-04-16 22:14:22 -0400
    Lisa,

    I am glad that you are running for the US Senate.

    Here is what I think should be a focus of your campaign — you are a third option. The incumbent, Bob Menendez, has done a good job, but unfortunately he is tainted by scandal. The second option is a Republican who likely would rubber stamp whatever Donald Trump demands. It is critical that the Senate seat remain in Democrat hands, in order to oppose a president who is very dangerous and mentally unstable — not fit for his position — plus most of all endangers a high perentage of world population with his nuclear war desires. During 2016, I spoke out very much against Donald Trump, so now I can say, “I Told You.” If Bob Menendez runs in November, history very well might repeat itself with a scandal tainted Democrat, Hillary Clinton, losing causing election of who most certainly should not be elected. Come now people — questionable handling of email versus threatening nuclear war — there is no comparison. The thing about scandals is that the only way to know the truth is to have been there when it took place. I was not there. We essentially don’t know, because we were not there. You may have an opinion, but opinion is not knowing for sure. Opinion is likely conjecture. Opinion is often based on what you have read, but can you really trust anything you read today? A common opinion is that he/she is guilty; otherwise it would not be in the news. The Bob Menendez court case resulted in a hung jury, meaning that we more so don’t know. Unfortunately, voters assume the worst when a candidate is scandal tainted. In the case of Watergate, we became sure when President Nixon resigned.

    I also support your desire for Medicare For All. Today, Democrats are often saying that health care should be a right. Sadly, health care is instead a priviledge only for those who can pay for it — most people pay for it with insurance. Ideally insurance is based on that the majority stay healthy so that insurance company can pay the bills of those with medical problems. But America’s exalted free enterprise system has resulted in discrimination among insurance companies, because insurance can be cheaper if they eliminate people with health problems. You can’t blame the healthy for being frugal and chosing a cheaper insurance. It usually is just rotten luck when people have health problems that cause severe financial problems and sometimes even bankruptcy. United States is the only industrialized nation that doesn’t guarantee health care for everybody. The first American president that advocated guaranteeing health care for everybody was Franklin D Roosevelt. At first, he intended to include that with the Social Security legislation in 1935. But he concluded that it would be too much to include health care with Social Security. Then World War II came along requiring all of President Roosevelt’s efforts. During the last months of Roosevelt’s life, he again had universal health care ambition. Sadly, President Roosevelt died. His successor Harry Truman continued the goal. President Truman (the haberdasher) had less clout than President Roosevelt. Republicans began to deride it as Socialized Medicine. At that time, I was in middle school where we debated in speech class. A classmate was a doctor’s son, who delivered a very effective speech against Socialized Medicine. Canada has had universal health care (usually called Socialized Medicine) since before the Dionne quintuplets were born in 1934. For decades stories have been circulating about Canadians rationing health care, long waits for treatments, and Canadians coming into United States for their medical procedures. Republican propaganda is a probable source of those stories about Canada. I also have heard that Canadians love their health care system. During the 1960’s, people older than 65 especially had difficulty obtaining health insurance. So President Lyndon Johnson was instrumental in getting Medicare and Medicaid passed in 1965. That solved the problem only for senior citizens. Two developments next stiffled any movement toward universal heath care. Watergate came along in 1972 and caused people to distrust the government. In 1980, presidential candidate Ronald Reagan campaigned saying that the government is not the solution. Reagan promised to get the government off your back. During the 1990’s, President Clinton had his wife Hillary promote passing universal health care, but the legislation didn’t pass. In the next millenium, Obamacare came along as a partial solution. Today the Trump led Republicans are partially successful in dismantling Obamacare. After the 2018 mid-term elections, we hope for universal health care to finally come along with Medicare For All. But President Mike Pence (if Trump is impeached and removed) will probably veto the legislation. We will need to get sufficient congressional support to override the veto.

    I wish you victory in the primary.

    Lester Hemphill
  • commented 2018-04-02 08:59:24 -0400
    Tanya81272@yahoo.com
  • commented 2018-03-05 18:05:40 -0500
    I would spend that huge sum of money to build affordable housing. To get the homeless lots of help. Feed the hungry. Set up a program to refurbish used vehicles and donate them to people in need.
  • commented 2017-11-15 14:52:47 -0500
    I am seeking to expand my political voice in these hectic times. I am retired now but was a process engineer in my career which allows me to see the process in what is occurring and analyze what, why and how to improve the process or situation. I like Lisa’s email very much and agree with the few high profile changes mentioned: publicly funded campaigns ( removing money from politics), term limits, free education, etc. The solutions are staring us in the face but we are being divided by the few powerful who just make out like bandits. Our message can be one of unity if we focus on our commonalities which are vast.


    At the end of the day, the challenge is how to communicate and mobilize the priorities and needs the vast majority have in common vs. battling over variables too far down the chain where it feels more tribal.


    I believe it can be done and I have ideas and strategies to share.