So … Kelly Ayotte’s campaign is based on not letting the Democrats “MASS up New Hampshire.” More specifically, Ayotte’s contention is that New Hampshire is just one election away from turning into Massachusetts because her potential Democrat opponents, Joyce Craig and Cindy Warmington, would turn New Hampshire into a “sanctuary state.”
For example:
But what else would be “MASSing up New Hampshire”? I would guess that subsidizing commuter rail to Boston would qualify as “MASSing up New Hampshire.” But my question is, why isn’t subsidizing solar … which essentially requires working and middle-class families to pay more for electricity so those better off financially can pay less, while virtue signaling … also “MASSing up New Hampshire”? I would much rather subsidize rail than solar, if the State is going to remain in the subsidizing business.
Another question. Why isn’t eviscerating local zoning laws in order to build apartment complexes “MASSing up New Hampshire”? Seriously, I really would like to know why the scared principle of “local control” means that local school districts can force students to wear masks, but that principle is somehow NOT violated by preventing the locals from favoring single-family housing.
One final (for now) question. Why isn’t complying with a court decision that, as a practical matter, orders the political branches to raise taxes by half a BILLION dollars “MASSing up New Hampshire”? I ask because, if the Sun-King Sununu Supreme Court upholds the trial court, I’m quite sure that eventually … that is, after claiming that “only a constitutional amendment” can save us … Ayotte will comply with the decision.