Mary Cheh not running for re-election?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Frumin is literally Cheh’s campaign treasurer so he has a full donor list to work from.

Cheh's donor lists have been public since OCF publishes who donates and this goes back for decades. Platforms like ActBlue and Nationbuilder, which all of the campaigns use, provide that information to the candidates and their campaigns. It isn't secret.

In other words, all of the campaigns know who in the ward have been supportive of Cheh over the different cycles. So being the treasurer in and of itself, is not an advantage. As such, the fact that Frumin's message resonates with the voters in the Ward in a more significant way than the other candidates, is a metric that people can go on the gauge support. In the alternative, the lack of support means either the candidate isn't trying or they are trying and the message is falling flat.

The lists are public but his job was literally to cultivate relationships with the donors. So he’s already called these people many times in the past and they would at least have some familiarity. They idea that you think it’s all about just the lists themselves tells me that you don’t really know a lot about how this stuff works.

LOL, I don't think you understand the role of a treasurer in a local DC race. He had nothing to do with cultivating relationships and everything to do with making sure all the books were right and that the filings with the office of campaign finance were accurate and timely.

The candidate is responsible for the fundraising and "cultivating" relationships.

Depends on the campaign. In the Mendelson campaign, the treasurer is the lobbyist who was hired by the Lab School to fix their lease of the Old Hardy School. I doubt he's a book-keeper.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it too late for some of the candidates to drop out and consolidate against Goulet?

It was too late a month ago. But it was really said that Bergman, Duncan, Finley and Frumin couldn't figure it out. If Goulet wins, we can blame their egos for that.

I am not sure why you would blame Frumin. He has outraised everyone else in the race and most particularly by donors from Ward 3. He cannot ask or force others to come to the rational decision that the other campaigns are not as viable as his.

Tricia Duncan’s campaign, endorsed by Cheh, is not as viable as Frumin?

Bergman and Finely are ego campaigns and pretty sad ones at that. But the idea that only Frumin, the perennial loser candidate, is the only viable one to win is silly. How many times has he lost in the past?

She literally received 12 donations in the last month. 12. And only a couple of those after the so-called endorsement. That is anemic and shows that other than the Palisades community Association, her campaign has zero traction across the Ward.

This is a stupid point of comparison and irrelevant as a point of comparison. Frumin is literally Cheh’s campaign treasurer so he has a full donor list to work from. Monash has done well at fundraising, it’s totally meaningless as a gauge of anything.

Wouldn't that be a tell if it were true that Frumin was using Cheh's donor list and they, you know, were supporting him and not Duncan?

Maybe the Councilmember isn't the savviest retail politician out there?

What it tells me is that Frumin started at an advanced with the obvious, low-hanging fruit donors from his exposure as part of his role with Cheh and prior campaigns. It’s also just factually true that he started the race with higher name recognition.

Duncan’s task was always going to be to get traction outside Palisades. I’m not sure that she’s been that successful, however I don’t think the number of donations have anything to do with it. She didn’t position herself constructively on redistricting, so win over any reliable, primary voters in an off-year election in Cleveland Park. So it’s a stance that hurt her on net on an issue that could have given her a platform to show that she can differentiate herself and bridge boundaries.

But while I don’t think she’s going to win, I also don’t think she should drop out. Same as Frumin, he’s not going to win either but he’s earned the right to see this out.

Finley, on the other hand, should have dropped out the day after not getting the GGW endorsement because that is his whole campaign. Why he chose to stay in the race without that endorsement, I have no idea. Plus, he’s not even running a credible campaign. Where are his signs? If there was a priority it would be browbeating Finley into quitting the race.

Beau Finley, not surprisingly, got the coveted endorsement of the Bob Ward/Cleveland Park Smart Growth echo chamber. “They” seem to be going all out to support Finley’s campaign. What about “Ward 3 Vision”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Frumin is literally Cheh’s campaign treasurer so he has a full donor list to work from.

Cheh's donor lists have been public since OCF publishes who donates and this goes back for decades. Platforms like ActBlue and Nationbuilder, which all of the campaigns use, provide that information to the candidates and their campaigns. It isn't secret.

In other words, all of the campaigns know who in the ward have been supportive of Cheh over the different cycles. So being the treasurer in and of itself, is not an advantage. As such, the fact that Frumin's message resonates with the voters in the Ward in a more significant way than the other candidates, is a metric that people can go on the gauge support. In the alternative, the lack of support means either the candidate isn't trying or they are trying and the message is falling flat.

The lists are public but his job was literally to cultivate relationships with the donors. So he’s already called these people many times in the past and they would at least have some familiarity. They idea that you think it’s all about just the lists themselves tells me that you don’t really know a lot about how this stuff works.

LOL, I don't think you understand the role of a treasurer in a local DC race. He had nothing to do with cultivating relationships and everything to do with making sure all the books were right and that the filings with the office of campaign finance were accurate and timely.

The candidate is responsible for the fundraising and "cultivating" relationships.

Depends on the campaign. In the Mendelson campaign, the treasurer is the lobbyist who was hired by the Lab School to fix their lease of the Old Hardy School. I doubt he's a book-keeper.

Then maybe learn what the roles were in the Cheh 2018 and 2022 campaigns before you continue to spout falsehoods.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it too late for some of the candidates to drop out and consolidate against Goulet?

It was too late a month ago. But it was really said that Bergman, Duncan, Finley and Frumin couldn't figure it out. If Goulet wins, we can blame their egos for that.

I am not sure why you would blame Frumin. He has outraised everyone else in the race and most particularly by donors from Ward 3. He cannot ask or force others to come to the rational decision that the other campaigns are not as viable as his.

Tricia Duncan’s campaign, endorsed by Cheh, is not as viable as Frumin?

Bergman and Finely are ego campaigns and pretty sad ones at that. But the idea that only Frumin, the perennial loser candidate, is the only viable one to win is silly. How many times has he lost in the past?

She literally received 12 donations in the last month. 12. And only a couple of those after the so-called endorsement. That is anemic and shows that other than the Palisades community Association, her campaign has zero traction across the Ward.

This is a stupid point of comparison and irrelevant as a point of comparison. Frumin is literally Cheh’s campaign treasurer so he has a full donor list to work from. Monash has done well at fundraising, it’s totally meaningless as a gauge of anything.

Wouldn't that be a tell if it were true that Frumin was using Cheh's donor list and they, you know, were supporting him and not Duncan?

Maybe the Councilmember isn't the savviest retail politician out there?

What it tells me is that Frumin started at an advanced with the obvious, low-hanging fruit donors from his exposure as part of his role with Cheh and prior campaigns. It’s also just factually true that he started the race with higher name recognition.

Duncan’s task was always going to be to get traction outside Palisades. I’m not sure that she’s been that successful, however I don’t think the number of donations have anything to do with it. She didn’t position herself constructively on redistricting, so win over any reliable, primary voters in an off-year election in Cleveland Park. So it’s a stance that hurt her on net on an issue that could have given her a platform to show that she can differentiate herself and bridge boundaries.

But while I don’t think she’s going to win, I also don’t think she should drop out. Same as Frumin, he’s not going to win either but he’s earned the right to see this out.

Finley, on the other hand, should have dropped out the day after not getting the GGW endorsement because that is his whole campaign. Why he chose to stay in the race without that endorsement, I have no idea. Plus, he’s not even running a credible campaign. Where are his signs? If there was a priority it would be browbeating Finley into quitting the race.

Beau Finley, not surprisingly, got the coveted endorsement of the Bob Ward/Cleveland Park Smart Growth echo chamber. “They” seem to be going all out to support Finley’s campaign. What about “Ward 3 Vision”?

Part of a regional non-profit and thus cannot make endorsements.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Vote Frumin. It’s on balance, smart, predictable and not messy

Frumin’s relatable but the only thing that is predictable is that he tends to pander and waffle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it too late for some of the candidates to drop out and consolidate against Goulet?

It was too late a month ago. But it was really said that Bergman, Duncan, Finley and Frumin couldn't figure it out. If Goulet wins, we can blame their egos for that.

I am not sure why you would blame Frumin. He has outraised everyone else in the race and most particularly by donors from Ward 3. He cannot ask or force others to come to the rational decision that the other campaigns are not as viable as his.

Tricia Duncan’s campaign, endorsed by Cheh, is not as viable as Frumin?

Bergman and Finely are ego campaigns and pretty sad ones at that. But the idea that only Frumin, the perennial loser candidate, is the only viable one to win is silly. How many times has he lost in the past?

She literally received 12 donations in the last month. 12. And only a couple of those after the so-called endorsement. That is anemic and shows that other than the Palisades community Association, her campaign has zero traction across the Ward.

This is a stupid point of comparison and irrelevant as a point of comparison. Frumin is literally Cheh’s campaign treasurer so he has a full donor list to work from. Monash has done well at fundraising, it’s totally meaningless as a gauge of anything.

Wouldn't that be a tell if it were true that Frumin was using Cheh's donor list and they, you know, were supporting him and not Duncan?

Maybe the Councilmember isn't the savviest retail politician out there?

What it tells me is that Frumin started at an advanced with the obvious, low-hanging fruit donors from his exposure as part of his role with Cheh and prior campaigns. It’s also just factually true that he started the race with higher name recognition.

Duncan’s task was always going to be to get traction outside Palisades. I’m not sure that she’s been that successful, however I don’t think the number of donations have anything to do with it. She didn’t position herself constructively on redistricting, so win over any reliable, primary voters in an off-year election in Cleveland Park. So it’s a stance that hurt her on net on an issue that could have given her a platform to show that she can differentiate herself and bridge boundaries.

But while I don’t think she’s going to win, I also don’t think she should drop out. Same as Frumin, he’s not going to win either but he’s earned the right to see this out.

Finley, on the other hand, should have dropped out the day after not getting the GGW endorsement because that is his whole campaign. Why he chose to stay in the race without that endorsement, I have no idea. Plus, he’s not even running a credible campaign. Where are his signs? If there was a priority it would be browbeating Finley into quitting the race.

Beau Finley, not surprisingly, got the coveted endorsement of the Bob Ward/Cleveland Park Smart Growth echo chamber. “They” seem to be going all out to support Finley’s campaign. What about “Ward 3 Vision”?

Part of a regional non-profit and thus cannot make endorsements.

Which regional nonprofit ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it too late for some of the candidates to drop out and consolidate against Goulet?

It was too late a month ago. But it was really said that Bergman, Duncan, Finley and Frumin couldn't figure it out. If Goulet wins, we can blame their egos for that.

I am not sure why you would blame Frumin. He has outraised everyone else in the race and most particularly by donors from Ward 3. He cannot ask or force others to come to the rational decision that the other campaigns are not as viable as his.

Tricia Duncan’s campaign, endorsed by Cheh, is not as viable as Frumin?

Bergman and Finely are ego campaigns and pretty sad ones at that. But the idea that only Frumin, the perennial loser candidate, is the only viable one to win is silly. How many times has he lost in the past?

She literally received 12 donations in the last month. 12. And only a couple of those after the so-called endorsement. That is anemic and shows that other than the Palisades community Association, her campaign has zero traction across the Ward.

This is a stupid point of comparison and irrelevant as a point of comparison. Frumin is literally Cheh’s campaign treasurer so he has a full donor list to work from. Monash has done well at fundraising, it’s totally meaningless as a gauge of anything.

Wouldn't that be a tell if it were true that Frumin was using Cheh's donor list and they, you know, were supporting him and not Duncan?

Maybe the Councilmember isn't the savviest retail politician out there?

What it tells me is that Frumin started at an advanced with the obvious, low-hanging fruit donors from his exposure as part of his role with Cheh and prior campaigns. It’s also just factually true that he started the race with higher name recognition.

Duncan’s task was always going to be to get traction outside Palisades. I’m not sure that she’s been that successful, however I don’t think the number of donations have anything to do with it. She didn’t position herself constructively on redistricting, so win over any reliable, primary voters in an off-year election in Cleveland Park. So it’s a stance that hurt her on net on an issue that could have given her a platform to show that she can differentiate herself and bridge boundaries.

But while I don’t think she’s going to win, I also don’t think she should drop out. Same as Frumin, he’s not going to win either but he’s earned the right to see this out.

Finley, on the other hand, should have dropped out the day after not getting the GGW endorsement because that is his whole campaign. Why he chose to stay in the race without that endorsement, I have no idea. Plus, he’s not even running a credible campaign. Where are his signs? If there was a priority it would be browbeating Finley into quitting the race.

That Greater Greater Washington endorsement of Bergman calls Bergman an ideologue. Not quite the best endorsement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Frumin is literally Cheh’s campaign treasurer so he has a full donor list to work from.

Cheh's donor lists have been public since OCF publishes who donates and this goes back for decades. Platforms like ActBlue and Nationbuilder, which all of the campaigns use, provide that information to the candidates and their campaigns. It isn't secret.

In other words, all of the campaigns know who in the ward have been supportive of Cheh over the different cycles. So being the treasurer in and of itself, is not an advantage. As such, the fact that Frumin's message resonates with the voters in the Ward in a more significant way than the other candidates, is a metric that people can go on the gauge support. In the alternative, the lack of support means either the candidate isn't trying or they are trying and the message is falling flat.

The lists are public but his job was literally to cultivate relationships with the donors. So he’s already called these people many times in the past and they would at least have some familiarity. They idea that you think it’s all about just the lists themselves tells me that you don’t really know a lot about how this stuff works.

LOL, I don't think you understand the role of a treasurer in a local DC race. He had nothing to do with cultivating relationships and everything to do with making sure all the books were right and that the filings with the office of campaign finance were accurate and timely.

The candidate is responsible for the fundraising and "cultivating" relationships.

Depends on the campaign. In the Mendelson campaign, the treasurer is the lobbyist who was hired by the Lab School to fix their lease of the Old Hardy School. I doubt he's a book-keeper.

Then maybe learn what the roles were in the Cheh 2018 and 2022 campaigns before you continue to spout falsehoods.

If you're going to accuse me of spouting falsehoods please say exactly what was false in my statement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Frumin is literally Cheh’s campaign treasurer so he has a full donor list to work from.

Cheh's donor lists have been public since OCF publishes who donates and this goes back for decades. Platforms like ActBlue and Nationbuilder, which all of the campaigns use, provide that information to the candidates and their campaigns. It isn't secret.

In other words, all of the campaigns know who in the ward have been supportive of Cheh over the different cycles. So being the treasurer in and of itself, is not an advantage. As such, the fact that Frumin's message resonates with the voters in the Ward in a more significant way than the other candidates, is a metric that people can go on the gauge support. In the alternative, the lack of support means either the candidate isn't trying or they are trying and the message is falling flat.

The lists are public but his job was literally to cultivate relationships with the donors. So he’s already called these people many times in the past and they would at least have some familiarity. They idea that you think it’s all about just the lists themselves tells me that you don’t really know a lot about how this stuff works.

LOL, I don't think you understand the role of a treasurer in a local DC race. He had nothing to do with cultivating relationships and everything to do with making sure all the books were right and that the filings with the office of campaign finance were accurate and timely.

The candidate is responsible for the fundraising and "cultivating" relationships.

Depends on the campaign. In the Mendelson campaign, the treasurer is the lobbyist who was hired by the Lab School to fix their lease of the Old Hardy School. I doubt he's a book-keeper.

Then maybe learn what the roles were in the Cheh 2018 and 2022 campaigns before you continue to spout falsehoods.

If you're going to accuse me of spouting falsehoods please say exactly what was false in my statement.

The falsehood that Frumin was cultivating Cheh's donors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it too late for some of the candidates to drop out and consolidate against Goulet?

It was too late a month ago. But it was really said that Bergman, Duncan, Finley and Frumin couldn't figure it out. If Goulet wins, we can blame their egos for that.

I am not sure why you would blame Frumin. He has outraised everyone else in the race and most particularly by donors from Ward 3. He cannot ask or force others to come to the rational decision that the other campaigns are not as viable as his.

Tricia Duncan’s campaign, endorsed by Cheh, is not as viable as Frumin?

Bergman and Finely are ego campaigns and pretty sad ones at that. But the idea that only Frumin, the perennial loser candidate, is the only viable one to win is silly. How many times has he lost in the past?

She literally received 12 donations in the last month. 12. And only a couple of those after the so-called endorsement. That is anemic and shows that other than the Palisades community Association, her campaign has zero traction across the Ward.

This is a stupid point of comparison and irrelevant as a point of comparison. Frumin is literally Cheh’s campaign treasurer so he has a full donor list to work from. Monash has done well at fundraising, it’s totally meaningless as a gauge of anything.

Wouldn't that be a tell if it were true that Frumin was using Cheh's donor list and they, you know, were supporting him and not Duncan?


Maybe the Councilmember isn't the savviest retail politician out there?

What it tells me is that Frumin started at an advanced with the obvious, low-hanging fruit donors from his exposure as part of his role with Cheh and prior campaigns. It’s also just factually true that he started the race with higher name recognition.

Duncan’s task was always going to be to get traction outside Palisades. I’m not sure that she’s been that successful, however I don’t think the number of donations have anything to do with it. She didn’t position herself constructively on redistricting, so win over any reliable, primary voters in an off-year election in Cleveland Park. So it’s a stance that hurt her on net on an issue that could have given her a platform to show that she can differentiate herself and bridge boundaries.

But while I don’t think she’s going to win, I also don’t think she should drop out. Same as Frumin, he’s not going to win either but he’s earned the right to see this out.

Finley, on the other hand, should have dropped out the day after not getting the GGW endorsement because that is his whole campaign. Why he chose to stay in the race without that endorsement, I have no idea. Plus, he’s not even running a credible campaign. Where are his signs? If there was a priority it would be browbeating Finley into quitting the race.

I really think you are underestimating the value of donations and yard signs, which generally go and in hand with them. Look at that DC Geek map, Duncan's donations are all from the first month and are generally located in her neighborhood. Frumin's are all over the ward, as a comparison.

I'm canvassing DC voters. I've canvassed plenty of voters who have a candidate sign in their yard who can be persuaded or are actually voting for other candidates. I don't think they are as strong a sign of support as people think they are. I hate them because they are such a waste-both of $$ and supplies. They are also blocking dropoff areas at libraries, schools and rec centers which need to be clear for people with disabilities.

Based on what I'm hearing at the doors. It is anyone's race still. I just wish more candidates would outline what policies they support.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it too late for some of the candidates to drop out and consolidate against Goulet?

It was too late a month ago. But it was really said that Bergman, Duncan, Finley and Frumin couldn't figure it out. If Goulet wins, we can blame their egos for that.

I am not sure why you would blame Frumin. He has outraised everyone else in the race and most particularly by donors from Ward 3. He cannot ask or force others to come to the rational decision that the other campaigns are not as viable as his.

Tricia Duncan’s campaign, endorsed by Cheh, is not as viable as Frumin?

Bergman and Finely are ego campaigns and pretty sad ones at that. But the idea that only Frumin, the perennial loser candidate, is the only viable one to win is silly. How many times has he lost in the past?

She literally received 12 donations in the last month. 12. And only a couple of those after the so-called endorsement. That is anemic and shows that other than the Palisades community Association, her campaign has zero traction across the Ward.

This is a stupid point of comparison and irrelevant as a point of comparison. Frumin is literally Cheh’s campaign treasurer so he has a full donor list to work from. Monash has done well at fundraising, it’s totally meaningless as a gauge of anything.

Wouldn't that be a tell if it were true that Frumin was using Cheh's donor list and they, you know, were supporting him and not Duncan?


Maybe the Councilmember isn't the savviest retail politician out there?

What it tells me is that Frumin started at an advanced with the obvious, low-hanging fruit donors from his exposure as part of his role with Cheh and prior campaigns. It’s also just factually true that he started the race with higher name recognition.

Duncan’s task was always going to be to get traction outside Palisades. I’m not sure that she’s been that successful, however I don’t think the number of donations have anything to do with it. She didn’t position herself constructively on redistricting, so win over any reliable, primary voters in an off-year election in Cleveland Park. So it’s a stance that hurt her on net on an issue that could have given her a platform to show that she can differentiate herself and bridge boundaries.

But while I don’t think she’s going to win, I also don’t think she should drop out. Same as Frumin, he’s not going to win either but he’s earned the right to see this out.

Finley, on the other hand, should have dropped out the day after not getting the GGW endorsement because that is his whole campaign. Why he chose to stay in the race without that endorsement, I have no idea. Plus, he’s not even running a credible campaign. Where are his signs? If there was a priority it would be browbeating Finley into quitting the race.

I really think you are underestimating the value of donations and yard signs, which generally go and in hand with them. Look at that DC Geek map, Duncan's donations are all from the first month and are generally located in her neighborhood. Frumin's are all over the ward, as a comparison.

I'm canvassing DC voters. I've canvassed plenty of voters who have a candidate sign in their yard who can be persuaded or are actually voting for other candidates. I don't think they are as strong a sign of support as people think they are. I hate them because they are such a waste-both of $$ and supplies. They are also blocking dropoff areas at libraries, schools and rec centers which need to be clear for people with disabilities.

Based on what I'm hearing at the doors. It is anyone's race still. I just wish more candidates would outline what policies they support.

They all have websites that outline policy positions.
They have all participated in a number of debates and forums, the video of which are generally available online.
Worse case, you can email then and they will most likely be responsive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it too late for some of the candidates to drop out and consolidate against Goulet?

It was too late a month ago. But it was really said that Bergman, Duncan, Finley and Frumin couldn't figure it out. If Goulet wins, we can blame their egos for that.

I am not sure why you would blame Frumin. He has outraised everyone else in the race and most particularly by donors from Ward 3. He cannot ask or force others to come to the rational decision that the other campaigns are not as viable as his.

Tricia Duncan’s campaign, endorsed by Cheh, is not as viable as Frumin?

Bergman and Finely are ego campaigns and pretty sad ones at that. But the idea that only Frumin, the perennial loser candidate, is the only viable one to win is silly. How many times has he lost in the past?

She literally received 12 donations in the last month. 12. And only a couple of those after the so-called endorsement. That is anemic and shows that other than the Palisades community Association, her campaign has zero traction across the Ward.

This is a stupid point of comparison and irrelevant as a point of comparison. Frumin is literally Cheh’s campaign treasurer so he has a full donor list to work from. Monash has done well at fundraising, it’s totally meaningless as a gauge of anything.

Wouldn't that be a tell if it were true that Frumin was using Cheh's donor list and they, you know, were supporting him and not Duncan?


Maybe the Councilmember isn't the savviest retail politician out there?

What it tells me is that Frumin started at an advanced with the obvious, low-hanging fruit donors from his exposure as part of his role with Cheh and prior campaigns. It’s also just factually true that he started the race with higher name recognition.

Duncan’s task was always going to be to get traction outside Palisades. I’m not sure that she’s been that successful, however I don’t think the number of donations have anything to do with it. She didn’t position herself constructively on redistricting, so win over any reliable, primary voters in an off-year election in Cleveland Park. So it’s a stance that hurt her on net on an issue that could have given her a platform to show that she can differentiate herself and bridge boundaries.

But while I don’t think she’s going to win, I also don’t think she should drop out. Same as Frumin, he’s not going to win either but he’s earned the right to see this out.

Finley, on the other hand, should have dropped out the day after not getting the GGW endorsement because that is his whole campaign. Why he chose to stay in the race without that endorsement, I have no idea. Plus, he’s not even running a credible campaign. Where are his signs? If there was a priority it would be browbeating Finley into quitting the race.

I really think you are underestimating the value of donations and yard signs, which generally go and in hand with them. Look at that DC Geek map, Duncan's donations are all from the first month and are generally located in her neighborhood. Frumin's are all over the ward, as a comparison.

I'm canvassing DC voters. I've canvassed plenty of voters who have a candidate sign in their yard who can be persuaded or are actually voting for other candidates. I don't think they are as strong a sign of support as people think they are. I hate them because they are such a waste-both of $$ and supplies. They are also blocking dropoff areas at libraries, schools and rec centers which need to be clear for people with disabilities.

Based on what I'm hearing at the doors. It is anyone's race still. I just wish more candidates would outline what policies they support.

Agreed. I'm a donor for one of the candidates and I still have no clue who I'm voting for. I kinda hope they would drop out and make my life easier.

[Anonymous]

My sense is that may be happening. Rumors are circulating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My sense is that may be happening. Rumors are circulating.

oooh do tell

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Frumin is literally Cheh’s campaign treasurer so he has a full donor list to work from.

Cheh's donor lists have been public since OCF publishes who donates and this goes back for decades. Platforms like ActBlue and Nationbuilder, which all of the campaigns use, provide that information to the candidates and their campaigns. It isn't secret.

In other words, all of the campaigns know who in the ward have been supportive of Cheh over the different cycles. So being the treasurer in and of itself, is not an advantage. As such, the fact that Frumin's message resonates with the voters in the Ward in a more significant way than the other candidates, is a metric that people can go on the gauge support. In the alternative, the lack of support means either the candidate isn't trying or they are trying and the message is falling flat.

The lists are public but his job was literally to cultivate relationships with the donors. So he’s already called these people many times in the past and they would at least have some familiarity. They idea that you think it’s all about just the lists themselves tells me that you don’t really know a lot about how this stuff works.

LOL, I don't think you understand the role of a treasurer in a local DC race. He had nothing to do with cultivating relationships and everything to do with making sure all the books were right and that the filings with the office of campaign finance were accurate and timely.

The candidate is responsible for the fundraising and "cultivating" relationships.

Depends on the campaign. In the Mendelson campaign, the treasurer is the lobbyist who was hired by the Lab School to fix their lease of the Old Hardy School. I doubt he's a book-keeper.

Then maybe learn what the roles were in the Cheh 2018 and 2022 campaigns before you continue to spout falsehoods.

If you're going to accuse me of spouting falsehoods please say exactly what was false in my statement.

The falsehood that Frumin was cultivating Cheh's donors.

You responded to the wrong post. I was cultivating the truehood that Mendelson's finance chair is the Lab School's lobbyist.