Elrich slate?

[Anonymous]

I hear Marc Elrich is running for county council after being term-limited by his constituents and has a slate of county council candidates he wants to win/is ostensibly supporting. Does anyone know which candidates are on his slate?

[Anonymous]

More like term-limited by politicians who otherwise couldn't keep him out of office because his constituents kept voting him in. Many at the polls don't make the connection between an abstract idea, like term limits, and the effect, like term-limiting the County Executive position without grandfathering in prior periods of service meaning that the candidates for that office at the next election may well be less desirable than the incumbent one had preferred to that point.

Honestly, the way the prior post is written, "term-limited by his constituents" sounds like a shill for Friedson, trying to cast a shade at his opponent, Jawando, whom Elrich decided to support, instead.

[Anonymous]

Technically, he can't run with others as a slate because he is using public campaign financing. But Debbie Spielberg is running in district 1, and she is his long-time employee. Both when he was at council and for his entire term as executive. He definitely wants her to win.

Don't know about the others but my guess would be Izola Shaw for district 3 and Josie Caballero at large.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:More like term-limited by politicians who otherwise couldn't keep him out of office because his constituents kept voting him in. Many at the polls don't make the connection between an abstract idea, like term limits, and the effect, like term-limiting the County Executive position without grandfathering in prior periods of service meaning that the candidates for that office at the next election may well be less desirable than the incumbent one had preferred to that point.

Honestly, the way the prior post is written, "term-limited by his constituents" sounds like a shill for Friedson, trying to cast a shade at his opponent, Jawando, whom Elrich decided to support, instead.

No. 68% of the voters in the county approved that referendum to kick him out after two terms. 68%


Elrich historically only wins by a tiny plurality. That's why we need rank choice voting so these crappy primaries give us what the people truly want.

404,000 registered democrats in MoCo in 2022.
143,000 voted in 2022 primary.
55,000 voted for Elrich.

People don't like Elrich.
The system does.

Those who are registered unaffiliated (independent) and actually care about who runs this county, need to switch to Democrat for the primary and vote.

[Anonymous]

The developers seem to already be out in full force already in this thread. Let's be clear: lots of people support term limits regardless of which candidate it affects. I enthusiastically support Elrich, but I think two terms is enough for anyone. Just think about it: tons of people like their Congressperson but think Congress needs term limits. Same idea. Just because you like a candidate, that doesn't mean you believe they are entitled to hold an office forever.

The developers have a tough time understanding this concept because their hatred of Elrich runs so deep and so they think everyone else must hate him also. But the truth is that developers are truly reviled by the majority of voters, and Elrich is very popular. He easily would have won a third term, which is why the developers put forth the term limits idea.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The developers seem to already be out in full force already in this thread. Let's be clear: lots of people support term limits regardless of which candidate it affects. I enthusiastically support Elrich, but I think two terms is enough for anyone. Just think about it: tons of people like their Congressperson but think Congress needs term limits. Same idea. Just because you like a candidate, that doesn't mean you believe they are entitled to hold an office forever.

The developers have a tough time understanding this concept because their hatred of Elrich runs so deep and so they think everyone else must hate him also. But the truth is that developers are truly reviled by the majority of voters, and Elrich is very popular. He easily would have won a third term, which is why the developers put forth the term limits idea.

Um, people care about a lot of different issues. Not just housing. You are the only monomaniacal poster here.

[Anonymous]

If the developers thought they could have defeated Elrich at the ballot box, they would have done that and relished the opportunity to have their own pro-development candidate for three terms. But they knew that wouldn't happen, and Elrich would win. That was why they knew they needed the term limits ballot question, and it played out like they hoped: lots of pro-Elrich people voted for it on principle, and it passed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The developers seem to already be out in full force already in this thread. Let's be clear: lots of people support term limits regardless of which candidate it affects. I enthusiastically support Elrich, but I think two terms is enough for anyone. Just think about it: tons of people like their Congressperson but think Congress needs term limits. Same idea. Just because you like a candidate, that doesn't mean you believe they are entitled to hold an office forever.

The developers have a tough time understanding this concept because their hatred of Elrich runs so deep and so they think everyone else must hate him also. But the truth is that developers are truly reviled by the majority of voters, and Elrich is very popular. He easily would have won a third term, which is why the developers put forth the term limits idea.

Um, people care about a lot of different issues. Not just housing. You are the only monomaniacal poster here.

You can't rewrite history:

"The Committee for Better Government, which is working to pass a ballot question reducing term limits for the county executive from three to two, has filed a new campaign finance report listing tens of thousands of dollars in contributions over the last two weeks. . . . From October 7 through October 20, the committee received $66,460. The biggest single contribution of $50,000 came from Progressives for Progress PAC, a group chaired by Washington Property Company President Charlie Nulsen. Five thousand dollars each came from concrete contractor Miller and Long, real estate company DSC Partners and an entity affiliated with the Bernstein Companies, another real estate firm."

https://montgomeryperspective.com/2024/10/21/term-limits-group-spends-on-tv/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The developers seem to already be out in full force already in this thread. Let's be clear: lots of people support term limits regardless of which candidate it affects. I enthusiastically support Elrich, but I think two terms is enough for anyone. Just think about it: tons of people like their Congressperson but think Congress needs term limits. Same idea. Just because you like a candidate, that doesn't mean you believe they are entitled to hold an office forever.

The developers have a tough time understanding this concept because their hatred of Elrich runs so deep and so they think everyone else must hate him also. But the truth is that developers are truly reviled by the majority of voters, and Elrich is very popular. He easily would have won a third term, which is why the developers put forth the term limits idea.

Most people hate Elrich because he sucks. But they get what they deserve because they don't vote in the primary.

[Anonymous]

The people voted for term limits. Let's honor their wishes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The developers seem to already be out in full force already in this thread. Let's be clear: lots of people support term limits regardless of which candidate it affects. I enthusiastically support Elrich, but I think two terms is enough for anyone. Just think about it: tons of people like their Congressperson but think Congress needs term limits. Same idea. Just because you like a candidate, that doesn't mean you believe they are entitled to hold an office forever.

The developers have a tough time understanding this concept because their hatred of Elrich runs so deep and so they think everyone else must hate him also. But the truth is that developers are truly reviled by the majority of voters, and Elrich is very popular. He easily would have won a third term, which is why the developers put forth the term limits idea.

Um, people care about a lot of different issues. Not just housing. You are the only monomaniacal poster here.

+1. I have plenty of progressive friends who revile Elrich. Apart from his track record on affordable housing, he also has a history of being needlessly combative with other local elected officials, almost all of whom belong to his party. With Trump in the White House, now is the time for unity, not petty infighting, in the Democratic Party.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:More like term-limited by politicians who otherwise couldn't keep him out of office because his constituents kept voting him in. Many at the polls don't make the connection between an abstract idea, like term limits, and the effect, like term-limiting the County Executive position without grandfathering in prior periods of service meaning that the candidates for that office at the next election may well be less desirable than the incumbent one had preferred to that point.

Honestly, the way the prior post is written, "term-limited by his constituents" sounds like a shill for Friedson, trying to cast a shade at his opponent, Jawando, whom Elrich decided to support, instead.

Can you answer the question instead of virtue signaling?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The developers seem to already be out in full force already in this thread. Let's be clear: lots of people support term limits regardless of which candidate it affects. I enthusiastically support Elrich, but I think two terms is enough for anyone. Just think about it: tons of people like their Congressperson but think Congress needs term limits. Same idea. Just because you like a candidate, that doesn't mean you believe they are entitled to hold an office forever.

The developers have a tough time understanding this concept because their hatred of Elrich runs so deep and so they think everyone else must hate him also. But the truth is that developers are truly reviled by the majority of voters, and Elrich is very popular. He easily would have won a third term, which is why the developers put forth the term limits idea.

Um, people care about a lot of different issues. Not just housing. You are the only monomaniacal poster here.

+1. I have plenty of progressive friends who revile Elrich. Apart from his track record on affordable housing, he also has a history of being needlessly combative with other local elected officials, almost all of whom belong to his party. With Trump in the White House, now is the time for unity, not petty infighting, in the Democratic Party.

Elrich has been more accurate in diagnosing the housing market than any of the council members or anyone at planning. He hasn’t put forward remedies (and that’s a major shortcoming) but his image of the housing market is the right starting point for better policy. Read his critiques of the developer subsidy bills and the upzoning bill. Elrich’s analysis is built on a sounder economic footing and market analysis than the bills themselves. I’d rather Elrich than any of the candidates who think that the problem is zoning or who think that developers shouldn’t pay property taxes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More like term-limited by politicians who otherwise couldn't keep him out of office because his constituents kept voting him in. Many at the polls don't make the connection between an abstract idea, like term limits, and the effect, like term-limiting the County Executive position without grandfathering in prior periods of service meaning that the candidates for that office at the next election may well be less desirable than the incumbent one had preferred to that point.

Honestly, the way the prior post is written, "term-limited by his constituents" sounds like a shill for Friedson, trying to cast a shade at his opponent, Jawando, whom Elrich decided to support, instead.

Can you answer the question instead of virtue signaling?

can you say what you mean instead of using MAGA code?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More like term-limited by politicians who otherwise couldn't keep him out of office because his constituents kept voting him in. Many at the polls don't make the connection between an abstract idea, like term limits, and the effect, like term-limiting the County Executive position without grandfathering in prior periods of service meaning that the candidates for that office at the next election may well be less desirable than the incumbent one had preferred to that point.

Honestly, the way the prior post is written, "term-limited by his constituents" sounds like a shill for Friedson, trying to cast a shade at his opponent, Jawando, whom Elrich decided to support, instead.

Can you answer the question instead of virtue signaling?

can you say what you mean instead of using MAGA code?

I'm not that poster, but defaulting to MAGA just because other Democrats disagree with you is really off-putting, and nobody takes you seriously.

There are different and complicated policy approaches on housing - and there is by no means some clear policy winner here.

Plus, Elrich needs to care about more than housing. He needs to care about business and jobs -- but he notoriously does not. After all, he once said he'd rather put jobs in Frederick. Elrich serves Elrich's pet interests and nobody else's.