WaPo editorial calls out “machinations… of the council’s far left wing” in trying to stop Goulet

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is so nutty.

First, no one person writes any Washington Post editorial. That's not how it works. They're written by the entire board.

Second, I'm not aware of anyone on the board who hasn't lived here forever. Jo-Ann Armao has been here for 40 years. Who cares if she technically lives in Silver Spring? (Are you begrudging teachers who can't afford to live in D.C. and live in PG County?)

It seems *extremely* disingenuous to compare her or anyone else on the board to an outside dark money group.

I am not sure why you believe you can call this "nutty" when you clearly have no understanding of how Post editorials about DC are written. The entire board is not writing these. As for who cares that the primary editorial writer for DC lives in Maryland, I care. I don't know what teachers who live outside DC have to do with this. They can't vote and don't have access to DFERS's million dollars or the Post's readership.

I think we should be honest that DFER reflects the views of outside millionaires and the Post represents the views of suburban commuters. If you are good with that, that is your right. It is certainly not "nutty" for me to point it out.

One correction Jeff -- not millionaires, billionaires.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All this criticism of the Post's editorial board is designed to deflect from the substance of the original post, i.e., that the far left political interests in DC are highly coordinated. And as far as "outsiders" pulling the strings---the far left in DC receives a great deal of support from national progressive groups because the city (like SF) is seen as a potential testing grounds for a lot of far left ideas (such as not prosecuting crime). Of course, all of us actual District residents are getting to experience how THAT idea is working out . . . .

If this is about the Frumin race, trying to paint Mary Cheh and Tricia Duncan as far left is... interesting. They might not be as to the right as Goulet, but Cheh has always been a more moderate member of the council, and Duncan would have continued her policies. This race is not about ideology (Bergmann and Duncan disagreed on a lot) but instead about preventing our elections from being bought by massive amounts of out-of-state money supported by organizations like WaPo, which are run by residents of MD and VA.

You are welcome to read the editorial for yourself.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/15/washington-dc-democratic-primary-endorsements/

Not PP, but I cannot because I am not subscribed to the post! Really cool to have an organization that has so much sway over our elections have paywalls to read their articles!

You'd think if they were trying to be influential in local politics they wouldn't put it behind the paywall.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is so nutty.

First, no one person writes any Washington Post editorial. That's not how it works. They're written by the entire board.

Second, I'm not aware of anyone on the board who hasn't lived here forever. Jo-Ann Armao has been here for 40 years. Who cares if she technically lives in Silver Spring? (Are you begrudging teachers who can't afford to live in D.C. and live in PG County?)

It seems *extremely* disingenuous to compare her or anyone else on the board to an outside dark money group.

I am not sure why you believe you can call this "nutty" when you clearly have no understanding of how Post editorials about DC are written. The entire board is not writing these. As for who cares that the primary editorial writer for DC lives in Maryland, I care. I don't know what teachers who live outside DC have to do with this. They can't vote and don't have access to DFERS's million dollars or the Post's readership.

I think we should be honest that DFER reflects the views of outside millionaires and the Post represents the views of suburban commuters. If you are good with that, that is your right. It is certainly not "nutty" for me to point it out.

1. You've obviously never worked at the Post. If you think the Washington Post (or any other major newspaper) allows its editorial writers to just write whatever they want, without the input of a whole lot of other people, you're out of your mind. The editing process at these places is no joke.

2. To compare the Washington Post, one of the greatest newspapers in the world, to some shady dark money group is just loony.

3. Who knew that a reporter who's been here for 40 years can so completely lose touch with the city simply by moving across the border into Maryland?

It is no secret that largely one person is responsible for the editorials about DC. Any additional input is very limited. Did any of the other editorial team members even interview candidates? My understanding is "no".

The Washington Post and DFER are aligned with one-another in support of the same candidates. I am not sure why you keep describing obvious things as "loony" or "nutty". I agree that it is loony for the Post to put a Maryland resident in charge of writing opinions about DC.

When did she move to Maryland? Certainly not recently. Sadly, yes, she has been out of touch with DC for some time. It's one reason that her endorsed candidates have so frequently lost.

I think anyone who has worked at the Post would be bemused by your account of how it works.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is so nutty.

First, no one person writes any Washington Post editorial. That's not how it works. They're written by the entire board.

Second, I'm not aware of anyone on the board who hasn't lived here forever. Jo-Ann Armao has been here for 40 years. Who cares if she technically lives in Silver Spring? (Are you begrudging teachers who can't afford to live in D.C. and live in PG County?)

It seems *extremely* disingenuous to compare her or anyone else on the board to an outside dark money group.

I am not sure why you believe you can call this "nutty" when you clearly have no understanding of how Post editorials about DC are written. The entire board is not writing these. As for who cares that the primary editorial writer for DC lives in Maryland, I care. I don't know what teachers who live outside DC have to do with this. They can't vote and don't have access to DFERS's million dollars or the Post's readership.

I think we should be honest that DFER reflects the views of outside millionaires and the Post represents the views of suburban commuters. If you are good with that, that is your right. It is certainly not "nutty" for me to point it out.

One correction Jeff -- not millionaires, billionaires.

Yes, true. Thanks for reminding me.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The latest “machinations” indicate that these two groups may actually have a very good understanding of Ward 3 voters. We’ll find out on Election Day.

Was it a "machination" when Buttigieg and Klobuchar dropped out and endorsed Biden? That's politics. In a crowded field, the candidate of out of state millionaires and Maryland commuters could win with a minority of the vote. Rather than splitting their votes, the candidate opposed to outside influence are uniting so that their candidate can get a majority.

That’s not what happened though, right?

We can acknowledge Silverman’s intervention, attempt to consolidate power and play king maker in Ward 3?

If Bowser/Mendelson tried to pull something like this, the howling would be audible from space, as we can see from the reaction to DFER.

It’s a bit of a double standard at play by the far left, which is indeed politics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is so nutty.

First, no one person writes any Washington Post editorial. That's not how it works. They're written by the entire board.

Second, I'm not aware of anyone on the board who hasn't lived here forever. Jo-Ann Armao has been here for 40 years. Who cares if she technically lives in Silver Spring? (Are you begrudging teachers who can't afford to live in D.C. and live in PG County?)

It seems *extremely* disingenuous to compare her or anyone else on the board to an outside dark money group.

I am not sure why you believe you can call this "nutty" when you clearly have no understanding of how Post editorials about DC are written. The entire board is not writing these. As for who cares that the primary editorial writer for DC lives in Maryland, I care. I don't know what teachers who live outside DC have to do with this. They can't vote and don't have access to DFERS's million dollars or the Post's readership.

I think we should be honest that DFER reflects the views of outside millionaires and the Post represents the views of suburban commuters. If you are good with that, that is your right. It is certainly not "nutty" for me to point it out.

1. You've obviously never worked at the Post. If you think the Washington Post (or any other major newspaper) allows its editorial writers to just write whatever they want, without the input of a whole lot of other people, you're out of your mind. The editing process at these places is no joke.

2. To compare the Washington Post, one of the greatest newspapers in the world, to some shady dark money group is just loony.

3. Who knew that a reporter who's been here for 40 years can so completely lose touch with the city simply by moving across the border into Maryland?

It is no secret that largely one person is responsible for the editorials about DC. Any additional input is very limited. Did any of the other editorial team members even interview candidates? My understanding is "no".

The Washington Post and DFER are aligned with one-another in support of the same candidates. I am not sure why you keep describing obvious things as "loony" or "nutty". I agree that it is loony for the Post to put a Maryland resident in charge of writing opinions about DC.

When did she move to Maryland? Certainly not recently. Sadly, yes, she has been out of touch with DC for some time. It's one reason that her endorsed candidates have so frequently lost.

I think anyone who has worked at the Post would be bemused by your account of how it works.

You can get free weekly online access to the Post through the public library.

[Anonymous]

These nutty lefties on the council are all going to get washed out. It will be like the DA race in San Francisco. People who won election with barely any votes in previous years are going to get slaughtered this year when the public is in a sour, throw-the-bums out mood. People forget how few people actually voted for some of these council members. In her last primary, Brianne Nadeau won with less than 6,000 votes. That's not going to come anywhere close to cutting it in a year like this.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:The Post's editorials about DC are written by someone who doesn't live in DC. The perspective provided may accurately reflect that of suburban commuters, but not necessarily the views of DC residents. Just like the outside funds coming from DFER, we get outside opinions from the Post.

Yeah, no.

It reflect my opinion of a resident of SE DC who wants more establishment types. Even more moderate types, but that’s a pipe dream.

You’re the owner of this forum, why haven’t you clamped down on any of these anti-Goulet AstroTurf posters here who start these little small potatoes opposition research threads trying to throw mud? It seems like you censor anything too conservative, but allow folks to come on here spreading salacious rumors of racism, probably spread by campaign staffers of competing candidates?

Also, crime is rising, so I applaud the post for sticking with bowser, as she can read the tea leaves, see voters frustration and sees that maybe folks like Charles Allen and his Yourh rehab act and wasted millions on violence interruptors that do nothing for crime, aren’t that popular. I love that wapo is taking a more moderate approach. I’m genuinely surprised they haven’t pulled for the more of the Uber progressive candidates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:These nutty lefties on the council are all going to get washed out. It will be like the DA race in San Francisco. People who won election with barely any votes in previous years are going to get slaughtered this year when the public is in a sour, throw-the-bums out mood. People forget how few people actually voted for some of these council members. In her last primary, Brianne Nadeau won with less than 6,000 votes. That's not going to come anywhere close to cutting it in a year like this.

They won’t get washed out. DC is woke as a joke. We pulled 96% for Hillary. Charles Allen ran unopposed. There is no hope, but only that we get the least bad progressive. Even then it’s all tax hikes and siding with criminals over tax payers. The UMC folks who all buy $900k town houses in Shaw can’t get enough of crime, because they keep voting for soft on crime council members. It’s sort of this perforative self flagellation routine. I get it. Yes, much of it is misguided altruism. Yes, there are some batsht conservatives out there, but why do we have to veer to the batsht progressives here who keep doubling down on policies that exacerbate crime?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:These nutty lefties on the council are all going to get washed out. It will be like the DA race in San Francisco. People who won election with barely any votes in previous years are going to get slaughtered this year when the public is in a sour, throw-the-bums out mood. People forget how few people actually voted for some of these council members. In her last primary, Brianne Nadeau won with less than 6,000 votes. That's not going to come anywhere close to cutting it in a year like this.

That recall election had an extremely low turnout, and the margin ended up being below 55-45. High turnout tends to help more progressive candidates. I think the attention the W3 race is getting now is bad news for Goulet, whose only chance of winning was with something like 23% of a low-turnout election where more liberal candidates split votes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The latest “machinations” indicate that these two groups may actually have a very good understanding of Ward 3 voters. We’ll find out on Election Day.

Was it a "machination" when Buttigieg and Klobuchar dropped out and endorsed Biden? That's politics. In a crowded field, the candidate of out of state millionaires and Maryland commuters could win with a minority of the vote. Rather than splitting their votes, the candidate opposed to outside influence are uniting so that their candidate can get a majority.

That’s not what happened though, right?

We can acknowledge Silverman’s intervention, attempt to consolidate power and play king maker in Ward 3?

If Bowser/Mendelson tried to pull something like this, the howling would be audible from space, as we can see from the reaction to DFER.

It’s a bit of a double standard at play by the far left, which is indeed politics.

The only thing she did was talk Tricia Duncan out of the race.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These nutty lefties on the council are all going to get washed out. It will be like the DA race in San Francisco. People who won election with barely any votes in previous years are going to get slaughtered this year when the public is in a sour, throw-the-bums out mood. People forget how few people actually voted for some of these council members. In her last primary, Brianne Nadeau won with less than 6,000 votes. That's not going to come anywhere close to cutting it in a year like this.

They won’t get washed out. DC is woke as a joke. We pulled 96% for Hillary. Charles Allen ran unopposed. There is no hope, but only that we get the least bad progressive. Even then it’s all tax hikes and siding with criminals over tax payers. The UMC folks who all buy $900k town houses in Shaw can’t get enough of crime, because they keep voting for soft on crime council members. It’s sort of this perforative self flagellation routine. I get it. Yes, much of it is misguided altruism. Yes, there are some batsht conservatives out there, but why do we have to veer to the batsht progressives here who keep doubling down on policies that exacerbate crime?

Who is the mayor that crime is deteriating under?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:The Post's editorials about DC are written by someone who doesn't live in DC. The perspective provided may accurately reflect that of suburban commuters, but not necessarily the views of DC residents. Just like the outside funds coming from DFER, we get outside opinions from the Post.

Yeah, no.

It reflect my opinion of a resident of SE DC who wants more establishment types. Even more moderate types, but that’s a pipe dream.

You’re the owner of this forum, why haven’t you clamped down on any of these anti-Goulet AstroTurf posters here who start these little small potatoes opposition research threads trying to throw mud? It seems like you censor anything too conservative, but allow folks to come on here spreading salacious rumors of racism, probably spread by campaign staffers of competing candidates?

Also, crime is rising, so I applaud the post for sticking with bowser, as she can read the tea leaves, see voters frustration and sees that maybe folks like Charles Allen and his Yourh rehab act and wasted millions on violence interruptors that do nothing for crime, aren’t that popular. I love that wapo is taking a more moderate approach. I’m genuinely surprised they haven’t pulled for the more of the Uber progressive candidates.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These nutty lefties on the council are all going to get washed out. It will be like the DA race in San Francisco. People who won election with barely any votes in previous years are going to get slaughtered this year when the public is in a sour, throw-the-bums out mood. People forget how few people actually voted for some of these council members. In her last primary, Brianne Nadeau won with less than 6,000 votes. That's not going to come anywhere close to cutting it in a year like this.

They won’t get washed out. DC is woke as a joke. We pulled 96% for Hillary. Charles Allen ran unopposed. There is no hope, but only that we get the least bad progressive. Even then it’s all tax hikes and siding with criminals over tax payers. The UMC folks who all buy $900k town houses in Shaw can’t get enough of crime, because they keep voting for soft on crime council members. It’s sort of this perforative self flagellation routine. I get it. Yes, much of it is misguided altruism. Yes, there are some batsht conservatives out there, but why do we have to veer to the batsht progressives here who keep doubling down on policies that exacerbate crime?

Who is the mayor that crime is deteriating under?

Not her fault she has completely woke council members either vetoing stronger attempts or advancing soft on crime bills.

I mean the whole thing is so obvious. The city is half haves and half have nots. The have nots have strong voting power and can ensure weak on crime bills and vote for weak on crime candidates. At the same time the haves are more of the kind of wealthy, benevolent, cultured, altruistic types, those who favor urbanism and density and bikes and sht like that and who want to show they’re in tune with criminal justice reform for the sake of fairness and blah blah blah. Basically, you get incredibly educated smart do gooders who don’t mind tax increases, and who favor walkability, and then you’ve got a strong density of poor people who basically vote for candidates like anti-Semitic climate comment folks like Trayon white. It’s a weird dichotomy. A shifting juxtaposition of values if you will.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All this criticism of the Post's editorial board is designed to deflect from the substance of the original post, i.e., that the far left political interests in DC are highly coordinated. And as far as "outsiders" pulling the strings---the far left in DC receives a great deal of support from national progressive groups because the city (like SF) is seen as a potential testing grounds for a lot of far left ideas (such as not prosecuting crime). Of course, all of us actual District residents are getting to experience how THAT idea is working out . . . .

+100

Attacking the messenger.

Not attacking, just pointing out that the messenger lives in Maryland.

You are trying to discredit the messenger, and thereby the message. Are you seriously disputing that?