BOE - who are people voting for?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apple Ballot all the way. Our entire family is fed up with the crazy legacy members in office right now.

You do realize that all those incumbent members you hate were endorsed by the Apple Ballot at one time, right? You’ll be saying the same about this new slate of apple ballot candidates once they get voted in start the job.

Most were, not all.

Nobody currently on the Apple Ballot is an incumbent.

Correct. But the PP was trying to point out that many of the incumbents had been endorsed by the Apple Ballot during earlier elections, even if they were not this year or two years ago. Specifically: Evans, Smondrowski, Silvestre, and Wolff had each been on the Apple Ballot when they first ran for the board, but were not when they ran for reelection in either 2022 or 2024.

I think the Apple Ballot got it right when it endorsed these candidates.

They did! Hard to go wrong with the Apple ballot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apple Ballot all the way. Our entire family is fed up with the crazy legacy members in office right now.

You do realize that all those incumbent members you hate were endorsed by the Apple Ballot at one time, right? You’ll be saying the same about this new slate of apple ballot candidates once they get voted in start the job.

Most were, not all.

Nobody currently on the Apple Ballot is an incumbent.

Correct. But the PP was trying to point out that many of the incumbents had been endorsed by the Apple Ballot during earlier elections, even if they were not this year or two years ago. Specifically: Evans, Smondrowski, Silvestre, and Wolff had each been on the Apple Ballot when they first ran for the board, but were not when they ran for reelection in either 2022 or 2024.

I think the Apple Ballot got it right when it endorsed these candidates.

They did! Hard to go wrong with the Apple ballot.

+1 for Shebra Evans and the others who have had the Apple Ballot endorsement. Can’t go wrong with their picks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apple Ballot all the way. Our entire family is fed up with the crazy legacy members in office right now.

You do realize that all those incumbent members you hate were endorsed by the Apple Ballot at one time, right? You’ll be saying the same about this new slate of apple ballot candidates once they get voted in start the job.

Most were, not all.

Nobody currently on the Apple Ballot is an incumbent.

Correct. But the PP was trying to point out that many of the incumbents had been endorsed by the Apple Ballot during earlier elections, even if they were not this year or two years ago. Specifically: Evans, Smondrowski, Silvestre, and Wolff had each been on the Apple Ballot when they first ran for the board, but were not when they ran for reelection in either 2022 or 2024.

I think the Apple Ballot got it right when it endorsed these candidates.

They did! Hard to go wrong with the Apple ballot.

+1 for Shebra Evans and the others who have had the Apple Ballot endorsement. Can’t go wrong with their picks.

Nice try. The Apple Ballot has endorsed Evans's opponent Laura Stewart.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reminder Brenda Diaz is the moms4liberty candidate

She’s endorsed by Republicans . Do not say she bipartisan she’s not
She supports libsoftiktok look them up they are tied to horrible activities
She touts the Heritage foundations curriculum
She wants religion taught in schools
She’s a liar and can not answer one question coherently she deflects nonsense.

She also got fired from employment with MCPS.

Why? She will not anwser basic questions about her background or employment history.

She definitely will not.
I asked her twice now and she replies with deflection.

Same with her idea of curriculum from The Heritage Foundation. Deflection and honesty nonsensical.

She was at a recent forum I looked at those answers as well and boy is she all over the place

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apple Ballot all the way. Our entire family is fed up with the crazy legacy members in office right now.

You do realize that all those incumbent members you hate were endorsed by the Apple Ballot at one time, right? You’ll be saying the same about this new slate of apple ballot candidates once they get voted in start the job.

Most were, not all.

Nobody currently on the Apple Ballot is an incumbent.

Correct. But the PP was trying to point out that many of the incumbents had been endorsed by the Apple Ballot during earlier elections, even if they were not this year or two years ago. Specifically: Evans, Smondrowski, Silvestre, and Wolff had each been on the Apple Ballot when they first ran for the board, but were not when they ran for reelection in either 2022 or 2024.

I think the Apple Ballot got it right when it endorsed these candidates.

They did! Hard to go wrong with the Apple ballot.

+1 for Shebra Evans and the others who have had the Apple Ballot endorsement. Can’t go wrong with their picks.

We went wrong and things under the current boe are a hot mess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apple Ballot all the way. Our entire family is fed up with the crazy legacy members in office right now.

You do realize that all those incumbent members you hate were endorsed by the Apple Ballot at one time, right? You’ll be saying the same about this new slate of apple ballot candidates once they get voted in start the job.

Most were, not all.

Nobody currently on the Apple Ballot is an incumbent.

Correct. But the PP was trying to point out that many of the incumbents had been endorsed by the Apple Ballot during earlier elections, even if they were not this year or two years ago. Specifically: Evans, Smondrowski, Silvestre, and Wolff had each been on the Apple Ballot when they first ran for the board, but were not when they ran for reelection in either 2022 or 2024.

I think the Apple Ballot got it right when it endorsed these candidates.

They did! Hard to go wrong with the Apple ballot.

+1 for Shebra Evans and the others who have had the Apple Ballot endorsement. Can’t go wrong with their picks.

Nice try. The Apple Ballot has endorsed Evans's opponent Laura Stewart.

The Apple Ballot has also endorsed Shebra Evans. That endorsement was made long before Stewart decided to run for office.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apple Ballot all the way. Our entire family is fed up with the crazy legacy members in office right now.

You do realize that all those incumbent members you hate were endorsed by the Apple Ballot at one time, right? You’ll be saying the same about this new slate of apple ballot candidates once they get voted in start the job.

Most were, not all.

Nobody currently on the Apple Ballot is an incumbent.

Correct. But the PP was trying to point out that many of the incumbents had been endorsed by the Apple Ballot during earlier elections, even if they were not this year or two years ago. Specifically: Evans, Smondrowski, Silvestre, and Wolff had each been on the Apple Ballot when they first ran for the board, but were not when they ran for reelection in either 2022 or 2024.

I think the Apple Ballot got it right when it endorsed these candidates.

They did! Hard to go wrong with the Apple ballot.

+1 for Shebra Evans and the others who have had the Apple Ballot endorsement. Can’t go wrong with their picks.

Nice try. The Apple Ballot has endorsed Evans's opponent Laura Stewart.

The Apple Ballot has also endorsed Shebra Evans. That endorsement was made long before Stewart decided to run for office.

It's 2024. Endorsements from past elections aren't relevant. In 2024, the Apple Ballot decided not to endorse Evans, and instead endorsed Stewart.

[Anonymous]

Looking forward to Montoya taking out Harris.

[Anonymous]

Reminder that the League of Women Voters BOE candidate forum is this Wednesday night.

https://lwvmocomd.org/content.aspx?page_id=4091&club_id=513039&item_id=2360459

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apple Ballot all the way. Our entire family is fed up with the crazy legacy members in office right now.

You do realize that all those incumbent members you hate were endorsed by the Apple Ballot at one time, right? You’ll be saying the same about this new slate of apple ballot candidates once they get voted in start the job.

Most were, not all.

Nobody currently on the Apple Ballot is an incumbent.

Correct. But the PP was trying to point out that many of the incumbents had been endorsed by the Apple Ballot during earlier elections, even if they were not this year or two years ago. Specifically: Evans, Smondrowski, Silvestre, and Wolff had each been on the Apple Ballot when they first ran for the board, but were not when they ran for reelection in either 2022 or 2024.

I think the Apple Ballot got it right when it endorsed these candidates.

They did! Hard to go wrong with the Apple ballot.

+1 for Shebra Evans and the others who have had the Apple Ballot endorsement. Can’t go wrong with their picks.

Nice try. The Apple Ballot has endorsed Evans's opponent Laura Stewart.

The Apple Ballot has also endorsed Shebra Evans. That endorsement was made long before Stewart decided to run for office.

It's 2024. Endorsements from past elections aren't relevant. In 2024, the Apple Ballot decided not to endorse Evans, and instead endorsed Stewart.

I’m sure they got it right just like when they endorsed Shebra Evans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apple Ballot all the way. Our entire family is fed up with the crazy legacy members in office right now.

You do realize that all those incumbent members you hate were endorsed by the Apple Ballot at one time, right? You’ll be saying the same about this new slate of apple ballot candidates once they get voted in start the job.

Most were, not all.

Nobody currently on the Apple Ballot is an incumbent.

Correct. But the PP was trying to point out that many of the incumbents had been endorsed by the Apple Ballot during earlier elections, even if they were not this year or two years ago. Specifically: Evans, Smondrowski, Silvestre, and Wolff had each been on the Apple Ballot when they first ran for the board, but were not when they ran for reelection in either 2022 or 2024.

I think the Apple Ballot got it right when it endorsed these candidates.

They did! Hard to go wrong with the Apple ballot.

+1 for Shebra Evans and the others who have had the Apple Ballot endorsement. Can’t go wrong with their picks.

Nice try. The Apple Ballot has endorsed Evans's opponent Laura Stewart.

The Apple Ballot has also endorsed Shebra Evans. That endorsement was made long before Stewart decided to run for office.

It's 2024. Endorsements from past elections aren't relevant. In 2024, the Apple Ballot decided not to endorse Evans, and instead endorsed Stewart.

I’m sure they got it right just like when they endorsed Shebra Evans.

Yes, Stewart is the better choice this year, even if Evans was a reasonable choice 8 years ago. Now it's time for a change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apple Ballot all the way. Our entire family is fed up with the crazy legacy members in office right now.

You do realize that all those incumbent members you hate were endorsed by the Apple Ballot at one time, right? You’ll be saying the same about this new slate of apple ballot candidates once they get voted in start the job.

Most were, not all.

Nobody currently on the Apple Ballot is an incumbent.

Correct. But the PP was trying to point out that many of the incumbents had been endorsed by the Apple Ballot during earlier elections, even if they were not this year or two years ago. Specifically: Evans, Smondrowski, Silvestre, and Wolff had each been on the Apple Ballot when they first ran for the board, but were not when they ran for reelection in either 2022 or 2024.

I think the Apple Ballot got it right when it endorsed these candidates.

They did! Hard to go wrong with the Apple ballot.

+1 for Shebra Evans and the others who have had the Apple Ballot endorsement. Can’t go wrong with their picks.

Nice try. The Apple Ballot has endorsed Evans's opponent Laura Stewart.

The Apple Ballot has also endorsed Shebra Evans. That endorsement was made long before Stewart decided to run for office.

It's 2024. Endorsements from past elections aren't relevant. In 2024, the Apple Ballot decided not to endorse Evans, and instead endorsed Stewart.

I’m sure they got it right just like when they endorsed Shebra Evans.

Yes, Stewart is the better choice this year, even if Evans was a reasonable choice 8 years ago. Now it's time for a change.

I would not say that is the case. While I understand the disdain for the incumbents, and Shebra by extension of being an incumbent, if you’ve seen Laura’s interviews and forum performances, there’s definitely a lot to be concerned about. She is naive, awkward and fumbles over her words quite often. Laura Stewart is most certainly a shaky candidate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apple Ballot all the way. Our entire family is fed up with the crazy legacy members in office right now.

You do realize that all those incumbent members you hate were endorsed by the Apple Ballot at one time, right? You’ll be saying the same about this new slate of apple ballot candidates once they get voted in start the job.

Most were, not all.

Nobody currently on the Apple Ballot is an incumbent.

Correct. But the PP was trying to point out that many of the incumbents had been endorsed by the Apple Ballot during earlier elections, even if they were not this year or two years ago. Specifically: Evans, Smondrowski, Silvestre, and Wolff had each been on the Apple Ballot when they first ran for the board, but were not when they ran for reelection in either 2022 or 2024.

I think the Apple Ballot got it right when it endorsed these candidates.

They did! Hard to go wrong with the Apple ballot.

+1 for Shebra Evans and the others who have had the Apple Ballot endorsement. Can’t go wrong with their picks.

Nice try. The Apple Ballot has endorsed Evans's opponent Laura Stewart.

The Apple Ballot has also endorsed Shebra Evans. That endorsement was made long before Stewart decided to run for office.

It's 2024. Endorsements from past elections aren't relevant. In 2024, the Apple Ballot decided not to endorse Evans, and instead endorsed Stewart.

I’m sure they got it right just like when they endorsed Shebra Evans.

Yes, Stewart is the better choice this year, even if Evans was a reasonable choice 8 years ago. Now it's time for a change.

I would not say that is the case. While I understand the disdain for the incumbents, and Shebra by extension of being an incumbent, if you’ve seen Laura’s interviews and forum performances, there’s definitely a lot to be concerned about. She is naive, awkward and fumbles over her words quite often. Laura Stewart is most certainly a shaky candidate.

Shebra Evans cares a lot, and has learned a lot over the past 8 years, with the mentorship of ex-longtime BOE member Mike Durso to guide her. The biggest drawback to Shebra Evans was her undying loyalty to the past superintendent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Looking forward to Montoya taking out Harris.

Me too! Already voted for Montoya.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apple Ballot all the way. Our entire family is fed up with the crazy legacy members in office right now.

You do realize that all those incumbent members you hate were endorsed by the Apple Ballot at one time, right? You’ll be saying the same about this new slate of apple ballot candidates once they get voted in start the job.

Most were, not all.

Nobody currently on the Apple Ballot is an incumbent.

Correct. But the PP was trying to point out that many of the incumbents had been endorsed by the Apple Ballot during earlier elections, even if they were not this year or two years ago. Specifically: Evans, Smondrowski, Silvestre, and Wolff had each been on the Apple Ballot when they first ran for the board, but were not when they ran for reelection in either 2022 or 2024.

I think the Apple Ballot got it right when it endorsed these candidates.

They did! Hard to go wrong with the Apple ballot.

+1 for Shebra Evans and the others who have had the Apple Ballot endorsement. Can’t go wrong with their picks.

Nice try. The Apple Ballot has endorsed Evans's opponent Laura Stewart.

The Apple Ballot has also endorsed Shebra Evans. That endorsement was made long before Stewart decided to run for office.

It's 2024. Endorsements from past elections aren't relevant. In 2024, the Apple Ballot decided not to endorse Evans, and instead endorsed Stewart.

I’m sure they got it right just like when they endorsed Shebra Evans.

Yes, Stewart is the better choice this year, even if Evans was a reasonable choice 8 years ago. Now it's time for a change.

I would not say that is the case. While I understand the disdain for the incumbents, and Shebra by extension of being an incumbent, if you’ve seen Laura’s interviews and forum performances, there’s definitely a lot to be concerned about. She is naive, awkward and fumbles over her words quite often. Laura Stewart is most certainly a shaky candidate.

Shebra Evans cares a lot, and has learned a lot over the past 8 years, with the mentorship of ex-longtime BOE member Mike Durso to guide her. The biggest drawback to Shebra Evans was her undying loyalty to the past superintendent.

She doesn't care nor will she vote against the other BOE members. The current BOE members, including Evans have run MCPS into the ground financially, closing vital programs, wasting money on their unnecessary pet projects, dumbing down the curriculum, allowing schools to be unsafe, and much more. They ALL need to go and be held accountable