Erin Palmer

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry to say, ethics lawyers aren’t the brightest in the bunch.

Non-lawyers who think ethics lawyers are human rights lawyers are certainly below that level.

She teaches human rights law at AU and has represented clients on human rights cases, so I think we are splitting hairs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry to say, ethics lawyers aren’t the brightest in the bunch.

Non-lawyers who think ethics lawyers are human rights lawyers are certainly below that level.

She teaches human rights law at AU and has represented clients on human rights cases, so I think we are splitting hairs.

She doesn’t teach human rights law at AU. She’s a supervising attorney for a law clinic on a part-time basis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ok, I was all set to vote for Palmer for Chair but I'm working on my ballot this week and doing lots of reading and have started getting cold feet. I'm frustrated with Mendo and agree the Council needs fresh faces and I like the idea of new leadership. I think my political align pretty well with Palmer and I like her personally -- she has a great attitude and seems easy to work with and I could see that translating to a good leadership style.

But I'm suddenly getting nervous. Council Chair has a lot of power. It's a big job with a ton of logistics. Palmer has a great resume and I'm a huge fan of her advocacy. But she's never been in a role with this many moving parts, this level of logistics. I am stressed about it. ANC can be a challenging job but it's very small compared to Chair. Her day job has always been as more of a team player.

She also has proposals for changing the way the Council works. I don't disagree with her proposals (re-forming the education subcommittee and hiring on more staff to draft and review legislation) but that kind of change can be hard and she has no track record with it -- no track record with building teams (other than her campaign team, which is smaller than typical because she decided to do public funding) or building a program from the ground up. I have done those things and it is really challenging work.

It's hard to imagine voting for Mendo (though I've done it in the past so it's not THAT hard) but I'm just starting to wonder if Palmer's enthusiasm and style can overcome these deficits in experience. Can some of Palmers supporters make the argument in favor? I want to vote for her but I need to get past this reservation.

(please don't accuse me of being a Mendo plant -- I genuinely want to vote for Palmer and want to hear the best argument in her favor on the issue of experience and leadership ability, I have been angry with Mendo since the Council overturned Prop. 77)

Sometimes the best argument is that change is necessary. A few years ago we could not contemplate a council without Jim Graham or Jack Evans, but it was time for a change. Mendo is of that era. Seemed pretty clueless on COVID, and is no longer an effective leader of the council on a whole host of issues, including tolerating antisemitism, building coalitions with others. etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry to say, ethics lawyers aren’t the brightest in the bunch.

Non-lawyers who think ethics lawyers are human rights lawyers are certainly below that level.

She teaches human rights law at AU and has represented clients on human rights cases, so I think we are splitting hairs.

She doesn’t teach human rights law at AU. She’s a supervising attorney for a law clinic on a part-time basis.

FFS. Students in legal clinics take a class to be part of a clinic. She is teacher of that class. https://www.wcl.american.edu/community/faculty/profile/palmer/bio

[Anonymous]

Seems like the Mendo shills are scared of her. And rightly so!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Voted for Janeese Lewis George because she wasn't Brandon Todd and it's been GREAT! No regrets at all.

I love Janeese! She's responsive, speaks with constituents on the street, and most importantly, fights against traffic violence and out of control drivers in Ward 4.

She wants to reopen Beach Drive to vehicular traffic and also thinks violent criminals should go unpunished. Think before you post.

Reopening upper Beach drive is important for Ward 4.

Improvements to 16th and 14th make it even more important to reopen Beach Drive to provide people in Ward 4 alternatives.

Could you elaborate? I'm in Ward 4, and have seen very little impact from the Beach Drive closure. I'm curious what you mean about changes to 14th & 16th.

East-West Highway in MD runs along the top of the DC diamond. There are three roads that connect. Connecticut, Beach and 16th. Georgia does too but it's more complicated. Congestion on Connecticut and 16th push those drivers into the neighborhoods of Ward 4. Re-opening Beach releases that pressure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Voted for Janeese Lewis George because she wasn't Brandon Todd and it's been GREAT! No regrets at all.

I love Janeese! She's responsive, speaks with constituents on the street, and most importantly, fights against traffic violence and out of control drivers in Ward 4.

She wants to reopen Beach Drive to vehicular traffic and also thinks violent criminals should go unpunished. Think before you post.

Reopening upper Beach drive is important for Ward 4.

Improvements to 16th and 14th make it even more important to reopen Beach Drive to provide people in Ward 4 alternatives.

Could you elaborate? I'm in Ward 4, and have seen very little impact from the Beach Drive closure. I'm curious what you mean about changes to 14th & 16th.

East-West Highway in MD runs along the top of the DC diamond. There are three roads that connect. Connecticut, Beach and 16th. Georgia does too but it's more complicated. Congestion on Connecticut and 16th push those drivers into the neighborhoods of Ward 4. Re-opening Beach releases that pressure.

This is simply not true. There is actual data on this and it doesn’t show what you’re claiming at all. I absolutely believe that people in ward 4 are experiencing more awful driving now than they did pre-closure but apparently a lot of them don’t stop to think for 30 seconds that since the pandemic and the closure happened at the same time, and the increase in crappy driving has been citywide, maybe they got the causality wrong

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ok, I was all set to vote for Palmer for Chair but I'm working on my ballot this week and doing lots of reading and have started getting cold feet. I'm frustrated with Mendo and agree the Council needs fresh faces and I like the idea of new leadership. I think my political align pretty well with Palmer and I like her personally -- she has a great attitude and seems easy to work with and I could see that translating to a good leadership style.

But I'm suddenly getting nervous. Council Chair has a lot of power. It's a big job with a ton of logistics. Palmer has a great resume and I'm a huge fan of her advocacy. But she's never been in a role with this many moving parts, this level of logistics. I am stressed about it. ANC can be a challenging job but it's very small compared to Chair. Her day job has always been as more of a team player.

She also has proposals for changing the way the Council works. I don't disagree with her proposals (re-forming the education subcommittee and hiring on more staff to draft and review legislation) but that kind of change can be hard and she has no track record with it -- no track record with building teams (other than her campaign team, which is smaller than typical because she decided to do public funding) or building a program from the ground up. I have done those things and it is really challenging work.

It's hard to imagine voting for Mendo (though I've done it in the past so it's not THAT hard) but I'm just starting to wonder if Palmer's enthusiasm and style can overcome these deficits in experience. Can some of Palmers supporters make the argument in favor? I want to vote for her but I need to get past this reservation.

(please don't accuse me of being a Mendo plant -- I genuinely want to vote for Palmer and want to hear the best argument in her favor on the issue of experience and leadership ability, I have been angry with Mendo since the Council overturned Prop. 77)

Being an effective advocate, as she has been as ANC, requires strong organization and leadership skills. If she has gotten results for her ANC, and it sounds like she has, it’s because she knows how to organize, engage, and be persuasive. In addition, she will have a staff as Council chair, and if she’s smart she’ll hire some experienced hands.

It’s true that this will be a leap for her, but that’s not an argument to keep someone in office who seems completely uninterested in representing and advocating for the people who elected him—in some cases actively working against their expressed interest (e.g. leading the effort to overturn the results of Initiative 77).

He also refuses to engage on development of the RFK site, which is highly time-sensitive given the likely end of Democratic congressional rule after the midterms (more here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/05/31/commanders-stadium-dc-norton-bowser-mendelson/); I’m no Bowser fan, but it seems clear that he’s the hold-up, and that’s absolutely disqualifying given the stakes.

He needs to go, and I’m confident that Erin Palmer is up to the job.

[Anonymous]

I just realized that Erin Palmer is endorsed by GGWash. LOL.

Well that explains all the sock puppet posts in support.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Voted for Janeese Lewis George because she wasn't Brandon Todd and it's been GREAT! No regrets at all.

I love Janeese! She's responsive, speaks with constituents on the street, and most importantly, fights against traffic violence and out of control drivers in Ward 4.

She wants to reopen Beach Drive to vehicular traffic and also thinks violent criminals should go unpunished. Think before you post.

Reopening upper Beach drive is important for Ward 4.

Improvements to 16th and 14th make it even more important to reopen Beach Drive to provide people in Ward 4 alternatives.

Could you elaborate? I'm in Ward 4, and have seen very little impact from the Beach Drive closure. I'm curious what you mean about changes to 14th & 16th.

East-West Highway in MD runs along the top of the DC diamond. There are three roads that connect. Connecticut, Beach and 16th. Georgia does too but it's more complicated. Congestion on Connecticut and 16th push those drivers into the neighborhoods of Ward 4. Re-opening Beach releases that pressure.

This is simply not true. There is actual data on this and it doesn’t show what you’re claiming at all. I absolutely believe that people in ward 4 are experiencing more awful driving now than they did pre-closure but apparently a lot of them don’t stop to think for 30 seconds that since the pandemic and the closure happened at the same time, and the increase in crappy driving has been citywide, maybe they got the causality wrong

“Actual data”. Followed by “I believe”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry to say, ethics lawyers aren’t the brightest in the bunch.

Non-lawyers who think ethics lawyers are human rights lawyers are certainly below that level.

She teaches human rights law at AU and has represented clients on human rights cases, so I think we are splitting hairs.

She doesn’t teach human rights law at AU. She’s a supervising attorney for a law clinic on a part-time basis.

FFS. Students in legal clinics take a class to be part of a clinic. She is teacher of that class. https://www.wcl.american.edu/community/faculty/profile/palmer/bio

She is not a “teacher” in any practical sense. She’s effectively is a supervisor of legal interns.

If you don’t know how law school works or what a legal clinic is, you should really just stand down because you are misrepresenting her experience is important ways that I’m sure she would be careful not to do herself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry to say, ethics lawyers aren’t the brightest in the bunch.

Non-lawyers who think ethics lawyers are human rights lawyers are certainly below that level.

She teaches human rights law at AU and has represented clients on human rights cases, so I think we are splitting hairs.

She doesn’t teach human rights law at AU. She’s a supervising attorney for a law clinic on a part-time basis.

FFS. Students in legal clinics take a class to be part of a clinic. She is teacher of that class. https://www.wcl.american.edu/community/faculty/profile/palmer/bio

She is not a “teacher” in any practical sense. She’s effectively is a supervisor of legal interns.

If you don’t know how law school works or what a legal clinic is, you should really just stand down because you are misrepresenting her experience is important ways that I’m sure she would be careful not to do herself.

Lawyer who has been in a legal clinic. She’s a human rights law professor. Professors are teachers. You sound kinda sexist - not a great look for you, Mendo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok, I was all set to vote for Palmer for Chair but I'm working on my ballot this week and doing lots of reading and have started getting cold feet. I'm frustrated with Mendo and agree the Council needs fresh faces and I like the idea of new leadership. I think my political align pretty well with Palmer and I like her personally -- she has a great attitude and seems easy to work with and I could see that translating to a good leadership style.

But I'm suddenly getting nervous. Council Chair has a lot of power. It's a big job with a ton of logistics. Palmer has a great resume and I'm a huge fan of her advocacy. But she's never been in a role with this many moving parts, this level of logistics. I am stressed about it. ANC can be a challenging job but it's very small compared to Chair. Her day job has always been as more of a team player.

She also has proposals for changing the way the Council works. I don't disagree with her proposals (re-forming the education subcommittee and hiring on more staff to draft and review legislation) but that kind of change can be hard and she has no track record with it -- no track record with building teams (other than her campaign team, which is smaller than typical because she decided to do public funding) or building a program from the ground up. I have done those things and it is really challenging work.

It's hard to imagine voting for Mendo (though I've done it in the past so it's not THAT hard) but I'm just starting to wonder if Palmer's enthusiasm and style can overcome these deficits in experience. Can some of Palmers supporters make the argument in favor? I want to vote for her but I need to get past this reservation.

(please don't accuse me of being a Mendo plant -- I genuinely want to vote for Palmer and want to hear the best argument in her favor on the issue of experience and leadership ability, I have been angry with Mendo since the Council overturned Prop. 77)

Being an effective advocate, as she has been as ANC, requires strong organization and leadership skills. If she has gotten results for her ANC, and it sounds like she has, it’s because she knows how to organize, engage, and be persuasive. In addition, she will have a staff as Council chair, and if she’s smart she’ll hire some experienced hands.

It’s true that this will be a leap for her, but that’s not an argument to keep someone in office who seems completely uninterested in representing and advocating for the people who elected him—in some cases actively working against their expressed interest (e.g. leading the effort to overturn the results of Initiative 77).

He also refuses to engage on development of the RFK site, which is highly time-sensitive given the likely end of Democratic congressional rule after the midterms (more here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/05/31/commanders-stadium-dc-norton-bowser-mendelson/); I’m no Bowser fan, but it seems clear that he’s the hold-up, and that’s absolutely disqualifying given the stakes.

He needs to go, and I’m confident that Erin Palmer is up to the job.

ANC is basically high school student government. She’s going to be absolutely steam rollered by DC interest groups and will as a result focus on only the most inane virtue signaling stuff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry to say, ethics lawyers aren’t the brightest in the bunch.

Non-lawyers who think ethics lawyers are human rights lawyers are certainly below that level.

She teaches human rights law at AU and has represented clients on human rights cases, so I think we are splitting hairs.

She doesn’t teach human rights law at AU. She’s a supervising attorney for a law clinic on a part-time basis.

FFS. Students in legal clinics take a class to be part of a clinic. She is teacher of that class. https://www.wcl.american.edu/community/faculty/profile/palmer/bio

She is not a “teacher” in any practical sense. She’s effectively is a supervisor of legal interns.

If you don’t know how law school works or what a legal clinic is, you should really just stand down because you are misrepresenting her experience is important ways that I’m sure she would be careful not to do herself.

Lawyer who has been in a legal clinic. She’s a human rights law professor. Professors are teachers. You sound kinda sexist - not a great look for you, Mendo.

DP. She has a decent career for a bright, mid-tier lawyer. She’s done zero real legal work requiring any sort of grit and difficulty, or dealing with complex political forces. She’s very average as a lawyer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry to say, ethics lawyers aren’t the brightest in the bunch.

Non-lawyers who think ethics lawyers are human rights lawyers are certainly below that level.

She teaches human rights law at AU and has represented clients on human rights cases, so I think we are splitting hairs.

She doesn’t teach human rights law at AU. She’s a supervising attorney for a law clinic on a part-time basis.

FFS. Students in legal clinics take a class to be part of a clinic. She is teacher of that class. https://www.wcl.american.edu/community/faculty/profile/palmer/bio

She is not a “teacher” in any practical sense. She’s effectively is a supervisor of legal interns.

If you don’t know how law school works or what a legal clinic is, you should really just stand down because you are misrepresenting her experience is important ways that I’m sure she would be careful not to do herself.

Lawyer who has been in a legal clinic. She’s a human rights law professor. Professors are teachers. You sound kinda sexist - not a great look for you, Mendo.

This is hilarious. She’s not a “professor”. AU doesn’t refer to her as a professor. Clinics are practicums for experiential education, so it doesn’t even make any sense. She supports and advises participants, which is consistent with her stated role as a “supervising attorney” which is the actual job title that AU gave her.

It isn’t even accurate to say that she is part of the AU WCL clinical faculty, because AU doesn’t even consider her a faculty member.
https://www.wcl.american.edu/academics/experientialedu/clinical/faculty/

Why you feel the need to overstate her credentials, I have no idea. But it’s not sexist to point that out and it’s actually pretty sad to claim that it is. I think you are doing her campaign a grave disservice.