APS - Who is running for School Board?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh wow! Someone on AEM just threw it down on the whole "poor Symone" narrative. It's kind of classic, actually. It really takes down the whole argument, quoting an Office of Special Counsel opinion from 2009 pretty much describing this situation and how it's not permissible. How can Symone's campaign really claim that this is a newfound and more conservative interpretation of the Hatch Act? As if THIS administration takes a more conservative view of any ethics law!

I really appreciated this too. I like Symone- and may be happy to vote for her as an independent- but her seeking the democratic endorsement was plainly illegal.
The blame lies at the foot of the ACDC- for insisting on controlling what should be a non-partisan election, not on Terron or anyone who wants laws to be followed.

AMEN. ACDC had a perfect opportunity this year to just do away with the caucus. None of these candidates really had a fair shot at campaigning once quarantine hit. ACDC should have just let them all ride it out to the November election so they had the summer to meet with voters. Instead we're picking based on who has the best website and who is the best public speaker in a debate format. ACDC needs to get rid of this stupid caucus once and for all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh wow! Someone on AEM just threw it down on the whole "poor Symone" narrative. It's kind of classic, actually. It really takes down the whole argument, quoting an Office of Special Counsel opinion from 2009 pretty much describing this situation and how it's not permissible. How can Symone's campaign really claim that this is a newfound and more conservative interpretation of the Hatch Act? As if THIS administration takes a more conservative view of any ethics law!

I really appreciated this too. I like Symone- and may be happy to vote for her as an independent- but her seeking the democratic endorsement was plainly illegal.
The blame lies at the foot of the ACDC- for insisting on controlling what should be a non-partisan election, not on Terron or anyone who wants laws to be followed.

AMEN. ACDC had a perfect opportunity this year to just do away with the caucus. None of these candidates really had a fair shot at campaigning once quarantine hit. ACDC should have just let them all ride it out to the November election so they had the summer to meet with voters. Instead we're picking based on who has the best website and who is the best public speaker in a debate format. ACDC needs to get rid of this stupid caucus once and for all.

My feelings are mixed on this topic. Both parties disappoint me, and, in some ideal world, I'd prefer a partyless political system. But for how long would that system last? Wouldn't people just begin forming new parties around shared interests and opinions? Parties are also somewhat successful at voter turnout. Nonpartisan offices have some of the least participation nationwide. At least the ACDC brings attention to these races with advertisements, forums, and their sample ballot.

Even Sandy, who is usually not a Democrat, benefits from being a part of a larger caucus like this. More people are hearing her voice than they otherwise would. If she and her supporters are unhappy with the system, perhaps they should lobby the Rs to host a similar caucus - or they might work with Symone to host independents-only events that can be advertised to the community.

The problem with the second option is how do you inspire partisan voters to participate? Isn't it better for a big group of voters, even if they are mostly Ds, to choose our school board members than for a tiny group of extremist voters or another group of voters who make their choices based superfluous info like names or appearances?

I think I am agreeing with qualifiers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh wow! Someone on AEM just threw it down on the whole "poor Symone" narrative. It's kind of classic, actually. It really takes down the whole argument, quoting an Office of Special Counsel opinion from 2009 pretty much describing this situation and how it's not permissible. How can Symone's campaign really claim that this is a newfound and more conservative interpretation of the Hatch Act? As if THIS administration takes a more conservative view of any ethics law!

I really appreciated this too. I like Symone- and may be happy to vote for her as an independent- but her seeking the democratic endorsement was plainly illegal.
The blame lies at the foot of the ACDC- for insisting on controlling what should be a non-partisan election, not on Terron or anyone who wants laws to be followed.

Illegal and totally unfair to all of the other feds who might have run if not for the Hatch Act, and who know perfectly well that if you don't have the ACDC endorsement then you can't win. (Even John Vihstadt, who has done a good job, lost to nobody Matt di Ferranti last year--no way is anyone not on the Dem sample ballot winning in 2020.) We lose out on lots of good candidates because of the ACDC caucus process that turns this "non-partisan" race into something that precludes tons of good, qualified people from running.

[Anonymous]

We're confusing two things here. Whether the system is fair or not, Symone looks terrible here. Whether you agree with the law or not, I want a School Board member who respects and follows the law. Either Symone is dumb, careless or thinks the rules don't apply to her. IDK her personally so IDK which one fits, but those aren't traits I want in my next Board member.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like what NVD says. It matters to me that people are kind.

Steven seems like he's pretty arrogant. He certainly was in that FB mess he got himself into.

I already like David, but maybe I'll rethink Cristina as my #2 instead of Sandy, though i still wish she hadn't oversold herself initially.

LOL, "kind" and "NVD" do not belong in the same arena.

Then you don't know her. She comes across very aggressively, yes, and that can be off-putting. But she really, really cares about kids and has a big heart.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like what NVD says. It matters to me that people are kind.

Steven seems like he's pretty arrogant. He certainly was in that FB mess he got himself into.

I already like David, but maybe I'll rethink Cristina as my #2 instead of Sandy, though i still wish she hadn't oversold herself initially.

LOL, "kind" and "NVD" do not belong in the same arena.

Then you don't know her. She comes across very aggressively, yes, and that can be off-putting. But she really, really cares about kids and has a big heart.

The first sentence here doesn't support your statement that she's "kind." The second statement may be true; but doesn't mean she's "kind." NVD is "kind" to you as long as you are in agreement with her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like what NVD says. It matters to me that people are kind.

Steven seems like he's pretty arrogant. He certainly was in that FB mess he got himself into.

I already like David, but maybe I'll rethink Cristina as my #2 instead of Sandy, though i still wish she hadn't oversold herself initially.

LOL, "kind" and "NVD" do not belong in the same arena.

Then you don't know her. She comes across very aggressively, yes, and that can be off-putting. But she really, really cares about kids and has a big heart.

The first sentence here doesn't support your statement that she's "kind." The second statement may be true; but doesn't mean she's "kind." NVD is "kind" to you as long as you are in agreement with her.

LOL -- reading comp please. Where is my "statement that she's kind"???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
LOL, "kind" and "NVD" do not belong in the same arena.

Then you don't know her. She comes across very aggressively, yes, and that can be off-putting. But she really, really cares about kids and has a big heart.

The first sentence here doesn't support your statement that she's "kind." The second statement may be true; but doesn't mean she's "kind." NVD is "kind" to you as long as you are in agreement with her.

LOL -- reading comp please. Where is my "statement that she's kind"???

Repost when you see it!

[Anonymous]

Y'all...I just can't with AEM anymore. I know I should leave the group, but it's like rubbernecking at a car crash. I can't seem to look away.

Let me start by saying I'm not the hugest Terron fan, but it has nothing to do with all that Symone nonsense. I just ranked him #3 on my ballot (in front of only Priddy and Krieger).

But the crap that gets heaped on him by those AEM posters seems quite unfair. One thread now is criticizing him for "trying to steal Symone's thunder on the dyslexia assessment issue" on the SEPTA candidate questionnaire. I have a child with an IEP, so I read that SEPTA questionnaire and guess what? Terron disclosed that he has had dyslexia and a stutter since childhood. But apparently, by disclosing that he HIMSELF has dyslexia, he was trying to steal Symone's thunder on an issue that she has already claimed as her own because of her son's dyslexia. WTF, AEM people? Is that what that forum and this SB race has come to -- that just because Symone is essentially running on her pet issue, no one else can claim any experience with it, even if it's personal experience by the candidate? This is so disheartening.

[Anonymous]

I liked Symone more before her supporters showed how ignorant they are. The more they talk about getting turned in my another candidate, it makes me think more about her judgment and how she could have actually thought she was above the law.

[Anonymous]

Just ignore the silly AEM stuff. There is still useful stuff that appears there. It's like any other forum, this one included.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just ignore the silly AEM stuff. There is still useful stuff that appears there. It's like any other forum, this one included.

Agreed. It's unfortunate people feel it is necessary to be so negative, but it's the internet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just ignore the silly AEM stuff. There is still useful stuff that appears there. It's like any other forum, this one included.

Agreed. It's unfortunate people feel it is necessary to be so negative, but it's the internet.

Good advice from both of you to remember, so thank you. Had just hit my limit last night, I guess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just ignore the silly AEM stuff. There is still useful stuff that appears there. It's like any other forum, this one included.

But it takes so much time and effort to find the useful stuff!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like what NVD says. It matters to me that people are kind.

Steven seems like he's pretty arrogant. He certainly was in that FB mess he got himself into.

I already like David, but maybe I'll rethink Cristina as my #2 instead of Sandy, though i still wish she hadn't oversold herself initially.

LOL, "kind" and "NVD" do not belong in the same arena.

Then you don't know her. She comes across very aggressively, yes, and that can be off-putting. But she really, really cares about kids and has a big heart.

The first sentence here doesn't support your statement that she's "kind." The second statement may be true; but doesn't mean she's "kind." NVD is "kind" to you as long as you are in agreement with her.

LOL -- reading comp please. Where is my "statement that she's kind"???

Read the sequence:
A: "kind and NVD don't belong in the same arena"
B: "Then you don't know her....." - implying that kind and NVD DO belong in the same arena.