Election Results

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are 80,000+ people in Ward 3. How many do you actually think have heard what will happen to Connecticut Ave? 1000? 2000? 3000? Not many.

If you look at the precinct counts for the voters who live closest to Connecticut Avenue, Frumin actually outperformed his returns in other areas of the Ward. Given the bike lanes were the primary focus of Frumin's opponent, and given the discussion on the neighborhood email lists, one would conclude that if they were a major issue, Krucoff would have done better in those areas. That he actually did worse is quite instructive.

Also the fact that he's a Republican and the national election was about Roe and January 6th.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are 80,000+ people in Ward 3. How many do you actually think have heard what will happen to Connecticut Ave? 1000? 2000? 3000? Not many.

If you look at the precinct counts for the voters who live closest to Connecticut Avenue, Frumin actually outperformed his returns in other areas of the Ward. Given the bike lanes were the primary focus of Frumin's opponent, and given the discussion on the neighborhood email lists, one would conclude that if they were a major issue, Krucoff would have done better in those areas. That he actually did worse is quite instructive.

For the bike supporters, this is a myopic religious issue. We get it. But there were many other issues Krucoff was running on from housing vouchers, to Hardy/GDS site, to prop 82, lower taxes, more police, and others. The fact that you think it was a referendum on bike lanes is comical and slightly sad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are 80,000+ people in Ward 3. How many do you actually think have heard what will happen to Connecticut Ave? 1000? 2000? 3000? Not many.

If you look at the precinct counts for the voters who live closest to Connecticut Avenue, Frumin actually outperformed his returns in other areas of the Ward. Given the bike lanes were the primary focus of Frumin's opponent, and given the discussion on the neighborhood email lists, one would conclude that if they were a major issue, Krucoff would have done better in those areas. That he actually did worse is quite instructive.

For the bike supporters, this is a myopic religious issue. We get it. But there were many other issues Krucoff was running on from housing vouchers, to Hardy/GDS site, to prop 82, lower taxes, more police, and others. The fact that you think it was a referendum on bike lanes is comical and slightly sad.

And yet, HE DID WORSE IN THE PRECINCTS DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY BIKE LANES

get it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are 80,000+ people in Ward 3. How many do you actually think have heard what will happen to Connecticut Ave? 1000? 2000? 3000? Not many.

If you look at the precinct counts for the voters who live closest to Connecticut Avenue, Frumin actually outperformed his returns in other areas of the Ward. Given the bike lanes were the primary focus of Frumin's opponent, and given the discussion on the neighborhood email lists, one would conclude that if they were a major issue, Krucoff would have done better in those areas. That he actually did worse is quite instructive.

For the bike supporters, this is a myopic religious issue. We get it. But there were many other issues Krucoff was running on from housing vouchers, to Hardy/GDS site, to prop 82, lower taxes, more police, and others. The fact that you think it was a referendum on bike lanes is comical and slightly sad.

And yet, HE DID WORSE IN THE PRECINCTS DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY BIKE LANES

get it?

BECAUSE THAT IS WHERE ALL THE SINGLE ANGRY UNMARRIED WHITE MEN LIVE IN TINY APARTMENTS WITH THEIR BIKES.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are 80,000+ people in Ward 3. How many do you actually think have heard what will happen to Connecticut Ave? 1000? 2000? 3000? Not many.

If you look at the precinct counts for the voters who live closest to Connecticut Avenue, Frumin actually outperformed his returns in other areas of the Ward. Given the bike lanes were the primary focus of Frumin's opponent, and given the discussion on the neighborhood email lists, one would conclude that if they were a major issue, Krucoff would have done better in those areas. That he actually did worse is quite instructive.

For the bike supporters, this is a myopic religious issue. We get it. But there were many other issues Krucoff was running on from housing vouchers, to Hardy/GDS site, to prop 82, lower taxes, more police, and others. The fact that you think it was a referendum on bike lanes is comical and slightly sad.

And yet, HE DID WORSE IN THE PRECINCTS DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY BIKE LANES

get it?

BECAUSE THAT IS WHERE ALL THE SINGLE ANGRY UNMARRIED WHITE MEN LIVE IN TINY APARTMENTS WITH THEIR BIKES.

You wouldn't know that reading the Cleveland Park group - all the single family dwellers clutching their pearls over the DOOM of the pending bike lanes suggests otherwise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are 80,000+ people in Ward 3. How many do you actually think have heard what will happen to Connecticut Ave? 1000? 2000? 3000? Not many.

If you look at the precinct counts for the voters who live closest to Connecticut Avenue, Frumin actually outperformed his returns in other areas of the Ward. Given the bike lanes were the primary focus of Frumin's opponent, and given the discussion on the neighborhood email lists, one would conclude that if they were a major issue, Krucoff would have done better in those areas. That he actually did worse is quite instructive.

For the bike supporters, this is a myopic religious issue. We get it. But there were many other issues Krucoff was running on from housing vouchers, to Hardy/GDS site, to prop 82, lower taxes, more police, and others. The fact that you think it was a referendum on bike lanes is comical and slightly sad.

And yet, HE DID WORSE IN THE PRECINCTS DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY BIKE LANES

get it?

BECAUSE THAT IS WHERE ALL THE SINGLE ANGRY UNMARRIED WHITE MEN LIVE IN TINY APARTMENTS WITH THEIR BIKES.

Ahh yes, Commissioners Siddiqui, Tandaric, David, Gore, Pagats are all white men. Oh wait, none of them are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are 80,000+ people in Ward 3. How many do you actually think have heard what will happen to Connecticut Ave? 1000? 2000? 3000? Not many.

If you look at the precinct counts for the voters who live closest to Connecticut Avenue, Frumin actually outperformed his returns in other areas of the Ward. Given the bike lanes were the primary focus of Frumin's opponent, and given the discussion on the neighborhood email lists, one would conclude that if they were a major issue, Krucoff would have done better in those areas. That he actually did worse is quite instructive.

For the bike supporters, this is a myopic religious issue. We get it. But there were many other issues Krucoff was running on from housing vouchers, to Hardy/GDS site, to prop 82, lower taxes, more police, and others. The fact that you think it was a referendum on bike lanes is comical and slightly sad.

And yet, HE DID WORSE IN THE PRECINCTS DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY BIKE LANES

get it?

BECAUSE THAT IS WHERE ALL THE SINGLE ANGRY UNMARRIED WHITE MEN LIVE IN TINY APARTMENTS WITH THEIR BIKES.

Ahh yes, Commissioners Siddiqui, Tandaric, David, Gore, Pagats are all white men. Oh wait, none of them are.

All these ANCs are apartment dwellers? Hmmmm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are 80,000+ people in Ward 3. How many do you actually think have heard what will happen to Connecticut Ave? 1000? 2000? 3000? Not many.

If you look at the precinct counts for the voters who live closest to Connecticut Avenue, Frumin actually outperformed his returns in other areas of the Ward. Given the bike lanes were the primary focus of Frumin's opponent, and given the discussion on the neighborhood email lists, one would conclude that if they were a major issue, Krucoff would have done better in those areas. That he actually did worse is quite instructive.

For the bike supporters, this is a myopic religious issue. We get it. But there were many other issues Krucoff was running on from housing vouchers, to Hardy/GDS site, to prop 82, lower taxes, more police, and others. The fact that you think it was a referendum on bike lanes is comical and slightly sad.

And yet, HE DID WORSE IN THE PRECINCTS DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY BIKE LANES

get it?

BECAUSE THAT IS WHERE ALL THE SINGLE ANGRY UNMARRIED WHITE MEN LIVE IN TINY APARTMENTS WITH THEIR BIKES.

Ahh yes, Commissioners Siddiqui, Tandaric, David, Gore, Pagats are all white men. Oh wait, none of them are.

All these ANCs are apartment dwellers? Hmmmm.

no, they are not all apartment dwellers

and even if they were, do apartment dwellers have fewer rights than single family home dwellers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are 80,000+ people in Ward 3. How many do you actually think have heard what will happen to Connecticut Ave? 1000? 2000? 3000? Not many.

If you look at the precinct counts for the voters who live closest to Connecticut Avenue, Frumin actually outperformed his returns in other areas of the Ward. Given the bike lanes were the primary focus of Frumin's opponent, and given the discussion on the neighborhood email lists, one would conclude that if they were a major issue, Krucoff would have done better in those areas. That he actually did worse is quite instructive.

For the bike supporters, this is a myopic religious issue. We get it. But there were many other issues Krucoff was running on from housing vouchers, to Hardy/GDS site, to prop 82, lower taxes, more police, and others. The fact that you think it was a referendum on bike lanes is comical and slightly sad.

And yet, HE DID WORSE IN THE PRECINCTS DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY BIKE LANES

get it?

BECAUSE THAT IS WHERE ALL THE SINGLE ANGRY UNMARRIED WHITE MEN LIVE IN TINY APARTMENTS WITH THEIR BIKES.

You wouldn't know that reading the Cleveland Park group - all the single family dwellers clutching their pearls over the DOOM of the pending bike lanes suggests otherwise.

Thought you said it was.one perason?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are 80,000+ people in Ward 3. How many do you actually think have heard what will happen to Connecticut Ave? 1000? 2000? 3000? Not many.

If you look at the precinct counts for the voters who live closest to Connecticut Avenue, Frumin actually outperformed his returns in other areas of the Ward. Given the bike lanes were the primary focus of Frumin's opponent, and given the discussion on the neighborhood email lists, one would conclude that if they were a major issue, Krucoff would have done better in those areas. That he actually did worse is quite instructive.

For the bike supporters, this is a myopic religious issue. We get it. But there were many other issues Krucoff was running on from housing vouchers, to Hardy/GDS site, to prop 82, lower taxes, more police, and others. The fact that you think it was a referendum on bike lanes is comical and slightly sad.

And yet, HE DID WORSE IN THE PRECINCTS DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY BIKE LANES

get it?

BECAUSE THAT IS WHERE ALL THE SINGLE ANGRY UNMARRIED WHITE MEN LIVE IN TINY APARTMENTS WITH THEIR BIKES.

Ahh yes, Commissioners Siddiqui, Tandaric, David, Gore, Pagats are all white men. Oh wait, none of them are.

Only one of them lives in an apartment. A couple seem to live in condos and a couple in single family homes.

[Anonymous]

You people are sick. WTH

[Anonymous]

Someone posted on the Cleveland Park listserv a photo of five recently-elected ANC 3C commissioners actually giving the middle finger to a Save Connecticut Avenue sign displayed in the window of one of the Cleveland Park businesses that oppose DDOT Option C. One of the commissioners who posted the photo on her Twitter wrote “’F’ the ops” (“ops” meaning opposition). That’s an “F’” to all who don’t happen agree with them.

Some of these 3C commissioners in the photo were elected by default because they were the only candidates who filed to be on the ballot. Two of them won contested races by narrow margins. So their Twitter photo and "winner-take-all" attitude are incredibly rude, arrogant, and immature. Their job as ANC commissioners is not to act as if they have a mandate to push though their personal agendas over "the opps." It is to listen and represent the views of their various constituents and to try to address the concerns of as many stakeholders as possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Someone posted on the Cleveland Park listserv a photo of five recently-elected ANC 3C commissioners actually giving the middle finger to a Save Connecticut Avenue sign displayed in the window of one of the Cleveland Park businesses that oppose DDOT Option C. One of the commissioners who posted the photo on her Twitter wrote “’F’ the ops” (“ops” meaning opposition). That’s an “F’” to all who don’t happen agree with them.

Some of these 3C commissioners in the photo were elected by default because they were the only candidates who filed to be on the ballot. Two of them won contested races by narrow margins. So their Twitter photo and "winner-take-all" attitude are incredibly rude, arrogant, and immature. Their job as ANC commissioners is not to act as if they have a mandate to push though their personal agendas over "the opps." It is to listen and represent the views of their various constituents and to try to address the concerns of as many stakeholders as possible.

If you really cared, you would have run.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Someone posted on the Cleveland Park listserv a photo of five recently-elected ANC 3C commissioners actually giving the middle finger to a Save Connecticut Avenue sign displayed in the window of one of the Cleveland Park businesses that oppose DDOT Option C.

Two of the five commissioners are not giving the finger to the sign.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Someone posted on the Cleveland Park listserv a photo of five recently-elected ANC 3C commissioners actually giving the middle finger to a Save Connecticut Avenue sign displayed in the window of one of the Cleveland Park businesses that oppose DDOT Option C.

Two of the five commissioners are not giving the finger to the sign.

Thanks. I feel better already.