How Come BOE Candidate Stephen Austin Won’t Say What His Employment Is??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This. Go to the OneMontgomery Facebook page and you will see that there is no shortage of mean, bullying behavior on their part. The worst part is that a lot of people displaying this behavior are attached to MCPS. I used to follow them but no longer. It's appalling.

Plus they hide behind the "One Montgomery" name. Come on. If you want to attack people, use your own name. Put some skin in the game!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Stephen Austin pity party continues. You are running for public office, sir. People are going to vet and question you. Some will even say mean things. Put on your big boy pants and answer substantively. Stop playing the victim card, it makes you look weak. You say you are for transparency. Okay release a complete resume so voters can determine exactly what your purported financial expertise is. Given the little information
you have shared about your work history, you could be called “hedge fund guy” or “high-end developer dude” or maybe even “risky investment man” rather than your self-proclaimed “finance guy” moniker. If you don’t like being criticized for being vague ... don’t be vague.

Listen, I'm not voting for Austin but the bullying against him and his supporters is outrageous and beyond anything I've seen in the past. Those people are just plain mean. He gave his job title and company name. How is that different from the other candidates? No one else like Guan (who I'm voting for) and other candidates are going through this.

This isn't bullying, and I find it very odd that people are characterizing it as bullying. I'm with the top PP; this is normal stuff for a candidate running for public office. In fact, far worse things have been said about candidates running for public office. What matters is how you respond to it. Do you ignore it and run a positive campaign? Do you address it factually and then move on? Or do you bemoan all of the mean things your opponents are saying about innocent li'l you, all the while saying mean things about your opponents?

Unfortunately, he seems to have chosen the last option. I don't know if he thought that people wouldn't oppose him, or if he personally likes to think of himself as the innocent victim of his mean opponents' mean attacks, or if he thinks it's strategic to play the innocent victim, or what, and really, his motivations don't really matter anyway. Seeing what he does, is enough.

Can you imagine how he would react if he is on the BOE and people attack his policies like some have been attacking current BOE members?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This. Go to the OneMontgomery Facebook page and you will see that there is no shortage of mean, bullying behavior on their part. The worst part is that a lot of people displaying this behavior are attached to MCPS. I used to follow them but no longer. It's appalling.

Plus they hide behind the "One Montgomery" name. Come on. If you want to attack people, use your own name. Put some skin in the game!

Some of the stuff that is happening to Stephen really isn't his direct fault. His campaign signs that were placed all over on public property (which is illegal) were done by his supporters who vastly overestimated demand for the signs and needed someplace to put them. Really wish he had the backbone to tell them to slow their roll. Sure, they are giving him lots of money, but they are wrecking his campaign. Sad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
This isn't bullying, and I find it very odd that people are characterizing it as bullying. I'm with the top PP; this is normal stuff for a candidate running for public office. In fact, far worse things have been said about candidates running for public office.

The difference to me is that this is a lowly BOE race, not running for higher office. We've never seen anything like this for a BOE race in the past, at least as far back as I can remember.

It's not like a seat on the BOE is worth it for $$, power, or prestige. You get paid $25k/year, and everyone complains at you all day. My guess is this is why the current at-large member decided not to run again -- she know it would be like this and she didn't need the stress for a $25k/year thankless job (and I dont' blame her).

Looking on DCUM, there have been so many threads about Austin -- one of 15 candidates -- that Jeff even had to lock a few. That just seems way out of hand. I don't see even 1 thread on most of the candidates. What gives? The thread topics tend to be negative towards Austin, so I doubt it's his supporters starting them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This. Go to the OneMontgomery Facebook page and you will see that there is no shortage of mean, bullying behavior on their part. The worst part is that a lot of people displaying this behavior are attached to MCPS. I used to follow them but no longer. It's appalling.

Plus they hide behind the "One Montgomery" name. Come on. If you want to attack people, use your own name. Put some skin in the game!

Some of the stuff that is happening to Stephen really isn't his direct fault. His campaign signs that were placed all over on public property (which is illegal) were done by his supporters who vastly overestimated demand for the signs and needed someplace to put them. Really wish he had the backbone to tell them to slow their roll. Sure, they are giving him lots of money, but they are wrecking his campaign. Sad.

Um, yeah.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
This isn't bullying, and I find it very odd that people are characterizing it as bullying. I'm with the top PP; this is normal stuff for a candidate running for public office. In fact, far worse things have been said about candidates running for public office.

The difference to me is that this is a lowly BOE race, not running for higher office. We've never seen anything like this for a BOE race in the past, at least as far back as I can remember.

It's not like a seat on the BOE is worth it for $$, power, or prestige. You get paid $25k/year, and everyone complains at you all day. My guess is this is why the current at-large member decided not to run again -- she know it would be like this and she didn't need the stress for a $25k/year thankless job (and I dont' blame her).

Looking on DCUM, there have been so many threads about Austin -- one of 15 candidates -- that Jeff even had to lock a few. That just seems way out of hand. I don't see even 1 thread on most of the candidates. What gives? The thread topics tend to be negative towards Austin, so I doubt it's his supporters starting them.

I don't remember anyone in the past running a campaign like Stephen Austin. So that seems like a plausible explanation for it, to me.

[Anonymous]

You can tell a lot about a candidate by the type of people who flock to them. Austin's supporters don't care about the laws about putting signs on public property. That's also how they view the public education system, a "public" system for their benefit without regard for the needs of others. They're also bullies as demonstrated by their reprehensible behavior at the boundary study meetings. Austin is running a Trumpian campaign in the was he gives a green light to worst elements of our community.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You can tell a lot about a candidate by the type of people who flock to them. Austin's supporters don't care about the laws about putting signs on public property. That's also how they view the public education system, a "public" system for their benefit without regard for the needs of others. They're also bullies as demonstrated by their reprehensible behavior at the boundary study meetings. Austin is running a Trumpian campaign in the was he gives a green light to worst elements of our community.

Do you normally care about illegal sign placement or is it just for his campaign? Are you seriously telling me you’ve never seen your side’s campaign ( boe, president, congressperson) signs illegally placed or placed or left after the election time is over? It happens on both sides so don’t pretend like it’s a reflection on the candidate. I guarantee you most campaign volunteers are just placing them where they can I don’t care if you’re Republican, democratic, Green party, independent, illegal signs happen with every single candidate for every single election.

- a Democrat fed up with all of this bs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can tell a lot about a candidate by the type of people who flock to them. Austin's supporters don't care about the laws about putting signs on public property. That's also how they view the public education system, a "public" system for their benefit without regard for the needs of others. They're also bullies as demonstrated by their reprehensible behavior at the boundary study meetings. Austin is running a Trumpian campaign in the was he gives a green light to worst elements of our community.

Do you normally care about illegal sign placement or is it just for his campaign? Are you seriously telling me you’ve never seen your side’s campaign ( boe, president, congressperson) signs illegally placed or placed or left after the election time is over? It happens on both sides so don’t pretend like it’s a reflection on the candidate. I guarantee you most campaign volunteers are just placing them where they can I don’t care if you’re Republican, democratic, Green party, independent, illegal signs happen with every single candidate for every single election.

- a Democrat fed up with all of this bs

Yes, I do.

But I especially care about illegal sign placement when the candidate is specifically running to oppose actions by the Board of Education which the candidate claims were illegal. When you accuse others of illegal action, it's prudent for you to avoid illegal actions yourself. He's been warned about the illegal signs. Regardless of who put them there, the enforcement action for illegal signs is to fine his campaign. Has he told his supporters to pull up the illegal signs? Has he gone around pulling up the illegal signs? I don't know. I do know that there are still illegal signs.

I've also seen some illegal signs from some of the other candidates, and they should get pulled up as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can tell a lot about a candidate by the type of people who flock to them. Austin's supporters don't care about the laws about putting signs on public property. That's also how they view the public education system, a "public" system for their benefit without regard for the needs of others. They're also bullies as demonstrated by their reprehensible behavior at the boundary study meetings. Austin is running a Trumpian campaign in the was he gives a green light to worst elements of our community.

Do you normally care about illegal sign placement or is it just for his campaign? Are you seriously telling me you’ve never seen your side’s campaign ( boe, president, congressperson) signs illegally placed or placed or left after the election time is over? It happens on both sides so don’t pretend like it’s a reflection on the candidate. I guarantee you most campaign volunteers are just placing them where they can I don’t care if you’re Republican, democratic, Green party, independent, illegal signs happen with every single candidate for every single election.

- a Democrat fed up with all of this bs

I'm the PP and yes. I remember seeing a lot of illegally placed signs for at least one county executive candidate last election and it partially contributed to how I voted. I've also never seen it violated at the scale that Austin's campaign did it, so yes, I take that into account. I might give a pass if it weren't totally consistent with the rest of his disgusting campaign, but when you run the face of an ugly Facebook mob that screams at children, I'm going to judge the things you do. That's reasonable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
This isn't bullying, and I find it very odd that people are characterizing it as bullying. I'm with the top PP; this is normal stuff for a candidate running for public office. In fact, far worse things have been said about candidates running for public office.

The difference to me is that this is a lowly BOE race, not running for higher office. We've never seen anything like this for a BOE race in the past, at least as far back as I can remember.

It's not like a seat on the BOE is worth it for $$, power, or prestige. You get paid $25k/year, and everyone complains at you all day. My guess is this is why the current at-large member decided not to run again -- she know it would be like this and she didn't need the stress for a $25k/year thankless job (and I dont' blame her).

Looking on DCUM, there have been so many threads about Austin -- one of 15 candidates -- that Jeff even had to lock a few. That just seems way out of hand. I don't see even 1 thread on most of the candidates. What gives? The thread topics tend to be negative towards Austin, so I doubt it's his supporters starting them.

I don't remember anyone in the past running a campaign like Stephen Austin. So that seems like a plausible explanation for it, to me.

+1 His positions and rhetoric have been polarizing. That's fine. He has a right and should express his position, but if those positions are polarizing, then you'd better be ready for dissension and visceral reactions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
This isn't bullying, and I find it very odd that people are characterizing it as bullying. I'm with the top PP; this is normal stuff for a candidate running for public office. In fact, far worse things have been said about candidates running for public office.

The difference to me is that this is a lowly BOE race, not running for higher office. We've never seen anything like this for a BOE race in the past, at least as far back as I can remember.

It's not like a seat on the BOE is worth it for $$, power, or prestige. You get paid $25k/year, and everyone complains at you all day. My guess is this is why the current at-large member decided not to run again -- she know it would be like this and she didn't need the stress for a $25k/year thankless job (and I dont' blame her).

Looking on DCUM, there have been so many threads about Austin -- one of 15 candidates -- that Jeff even had to lock a few. That just seems way out of hand. I don't see even 1 thread on most of the candidates. What gives? The thread topics tend to be negative towards Austin, so I doubt it's his supporters starting them.

I don't remember anyone in the past running a campaign like Stephen Austin. So that seems like a plausible explanation for it, to me.

+1 His positions and rhetoric have been polarizing. That's fine. He has a right and should express his position, but if those positions are polarizing, then you'd better be ready for dissension and visceral reactions.

Here's his website:
https://stephenaustin4boe.com/

I hardly see anything polarizing on there. I suspect most voters will check out his website, as well as voter guiders like from League of Women Voters. I don't see anything really polarizing there also.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Here's his website:
https://stephenaustin4boe.com/

I hardly see anything polarizing on there. I suspect most voters will check out his website, as well as voter guiders like from League of Women Voters. I don't see anything really polarizing there also.

PP, with all due respect: that's gaslighting. There may not be anything polarizing on his campaign website, but he has nonetheless done and said plenty of polarizing things since last fall.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
This isn't bullying, and I find it very odd that people are characterizing it as bullying. I'm with the top PP; this is normal stuff for a candidate running for public office. In fact, far worse things have been said about candidates running for public office.

The difference to me is that this is a lowly BOE race, not running for higher office. We've never seen anything like this for a BOE race in the past, at least as far back as I can remember.

It's not like a seat on the BOE is worth it for $$, power, or prestige. You get paid $25k/year, and everyone complains at you all day. My guess is this is why the current at-large member decided not to run again -- she know it would be like this and she didn't need the stress for a $25k/year thankless job (and I dont' blame her).

Looking on DCUM, there have been so many threads about Austin -- one of 15 candidates -- that Jeff even had to lock a few. That just seems way out of hand. I don't see even 1 thread on most of the candidates. What gives? The thread topics tend to be negative towards Austin, so I doubt it's his supporters starting them.

I don't remember anyone in the past running a campaign like Stephen Austin. So that seems like a plausible explanation for it, to me.

+1 His positions and rhetoric have been polarizing. That's fine. He has a right and should express his position, but if those positions are polarizing, then you'd better be ready for dissension and visceral reactions.

Here's his website:
https://stephenaustin4boe.com/

I hardly see anything polarizing on there. I suspect most voters will check out his website, as well as voter guiders like from League of Women Voters. I don't see anything really polarizing there also.

He is polarizing because one side is extremely invested in keeping the Teacher's Union strong by owning the MCPS Board. Austin's side is more concerned with providing a high quality education to all students in MCPS than goose-stepping in line. If you do anything that may take away their power, they fight back as hard as they possibly can. I'm assuming that 80% of the Austin bashers are teachers union reps - the other 20% are just your run of the mill social justice warriors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
This isn't bullying, and I find it very odd that people are characterizing it as bullying. I'm with the top PP; this is normal stuff for a candidate running for public office. In fact, far worse things have been said about candidates running for public office.

The difference to me is that this is a lowly BOE race, not running for higher office. We've never seen anything like this for a BOE race in the past, at least as far back as I can remember.

It's not like a seat on the BOE is worth it for $$, power, or prestige. You get paid $25k/year, and everyone complains at you all day. My guess is this is why the current at-large member decided not to run again -- she know it would be like this and she didn't need the stress for a $25k/year thankless job (and I dont' blame her).

Looking on DCUM, there have been so many threads about Austin -- one of 15 candidates -- that Jeff even had to lock a few. That just seems way out of hand. I don't see even 1 thread on most of the candidates. What gives? The thread topics tend to be negative towards Austin, so I doubt it's his supporters starting them.

I don't remember anyone in the past running a campaign like Stephen Austin. So that seems like a plausible explanation for it, to me.

+1 His positions and rhetoric have been polarizing. That's fine. He has a right and should express his position, but if those positions are polarizing, then you'd better be ready for dissension and visceral reactions.

Here's his website:
https://stephenaustin4boe.com/

I hardly see anything polarizing on there. I suspect most voters will check out his website, as well as voter guiders like from League of Women Voters. I don't see anything really polarizing there also.

He is polarizing because one side is extremely invested in keeping the Teacher's Union strong by owning the MCPS Board. Austin's side is more concerned with providing a high quality education to all students in MCPS than goose-stepping in line. If you do anything that may take away their power, they fight back as hard as they possibly can. I'm assuming that 80% of the Austin bashers are teachers union reps - the other 20% are just your run of the mill social justice warriors.

"Social justice warrior" being anyone who doesn't support Austin's segregationist inspired bullying campaign, presumably.