Who do you think will win MoCo county exec?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
While glass was the lead sponsor, it was unanimously consponsored by the entire council, including Jawando |
Anonymous
Wes Moore’s political endorsements in Montgomery County seem to defy intraparty ideology. He endorsed Jawando for county executive but endorsed Morrison for District 1 of County Council (the most Friedson-coded candidate in that race). Any policy-related rationale for the Mooredorsements is pure poppycock — there seems to be something else going on. |
Anonymous
Or maybe he isn’t myopically focused on just one policy. In the case of county executive, maybe he believes the other two candidates aren’t very good. That could also be part of it. Or maybe the super pac spending against Jawando offended his sensibilities. Probably a combination of all of the above. |
Anonymous
That's fine. "Mr. Glass sponsored it and I went along. But now I've heard from so many voters and reconsidered, and I vow to repeal it." |
Anonymous
I agree. Backroom deals for something else. |
Anonymous
Or maybe Jawando was one of the first to endorse Moore when he ran for governor the first time and Morrison works for the state government. This isn’t about being “myopically focused on just one policy” — the endorsements are clearly not policy-based (if they were, they’d be much more coherent). |
Anonymous
I get why it’s puzzling to you and other people in YIMBY echo chamber, but out here in the real world where developers aren’t going to build themselves to bankruptcy and an executive has to juggle multiple issues (market housing being the one the county government has the LEAST control over), maybe Moore made his decision based on the whole candidate, with policy-based considerations just part of the criteria. |
Anonymous
+1. The YIMBYs are exhausting. When something doesn't go their way, they are just totally apoplectic. |
Anonymous
Or none of the criteria! You went from arguing Moore’s endorsement made Jawando a YIMBY to arguing Moore endorsed him in spite of his NIMBY housing policy. You should get a degree in sports management because of how adept you are at moving the goalposts! |
Anonymous
I never stopped arguing that Moore’s endorsement means that Jawando is pro housing. Why would Moore endorse someone who would prevent him from achieving his housing goals? All the candidates are pro housing, though. You seem to be suffering from YIMBY cognitive disorder or maybe something worse. Were you one of the upvotes on the racist post on YIMBY MoCo about this? |
Anonymous
1. Jawando simply is not a pro-housing candidate. Many posters on this thread alone have said that they are supporting Jawando because they are NIMBYs and want a NIMBY for county exec. He claims to be pro-housing in theory but is not in practice. Look up Bill 29-20 and his rationale for opposing the AHSI (he cited “overburdened schools” at a time when MCPS enrollment is actively declining, creating many problems for the school system). Excuses, excuses, and more excuses that don’t pass the smell test. 2. I’m not aware of the post to which you are referring because I don’t live on this forum. However, I do know that racism constituted some NIMBY rationale in the past. |
Anonymous
DP. #1 is a shallow interpretation of the data. School populations are not declining uniformly around the county, just as current school overcrowding is not uniform. There are schools that are overcrowded and will remain so, even with the redistricting -- the Council has just shown it isn't suddenly going to decide to increase revenue to cover school capacity needs, doing exactly the opposite, robbing Peter to pay Paul with the capital to operational money shift. The places that are most likely to be affected by Thrive 2050/AHSI/recent sector plans (e.g., UBlvd)/etc. have plenty of that overcrowding/capital improvement need already. |
Anonymous
What YIMBYs don't understand is that you can be pro-housing but also believe that more housing should be built in a thoughtful way. Just abandoning all zoning and giving gobs of money to developers, and then hoping everything somehow works out, is not a rational or sane strategy. But that seems to be the strategy that YIMBYs want. We gave a $100 million tax break to a developer who built apartments at Strathmore with rents that go up to $12K/month. Part of me just doesn't care anymore because the YIMBYs are so annoying. They can have their preferred candidate (not sure if that's Friedson or Glass), and in four or eight years, after we've given developers the right to do anything they want (and paid them to do it), the YIMBYs will still be whining about how they can't afford anything and enough hasn't been built and it's all because of the NIMBYs. |
Anonymous
DP #2. If Friedson’s housing initiatives were like anything that Jake Day did in Salisbury, I would be voting for him, but Friedson just hands out incentives with nothing in return and with timelines that let people build at their own pace — basically giving away money for what people were going to do anyway. If Friedson is earnest, he’s very naive. The more I’ve seen of his campaign, the less I’m able to believe the earnest but naive explanation. The worst thing is that he’s given away leverage that someone else could use to get housing built more quickly. |
Anonymous
This. And he's not unintelligent, so... |