Ward 4 Election

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm still happy with Janeese and going to vote for her again. I think her positions and actions on crime have been far more insightful than the standard Bowser stooge who's just looking at what polls well. Brandon Todd never did anything meaningful and we don't need a repeat of him.

Comparing Janeese to Brandon Todd is a pretty low bar. It’s been pretty surprising to me to see Janeese basically move in lock step with Nadeau.

Where's the difference between Lisa Gore and Brandon Todd? It's early in the campaign so I'll give her time to develop, but her initial message feels very Brandon Todd/ Green Team to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm still happy with Janeese and going to vote for her again. I think her positions and actions on crime have been far more insightful than the standard Bowser stooge who's just looking at what polls well. Brandon Todd never did anything meaningful and we don't need a repeat of him.

Comparing Janeese to Brandon Todd is a pretty low bar. It’s been pretty surprising to me to see Janeese basically move in lock step with Nadeau.

It's hilarious that JLG's (increasingly scared) supporters are trying to pin the "Bowser stooge" tag on Gore even though there is not one piece of evidence that she's aligned with her. The CityPaper's reporter/JLG campaign spokesman tried to find evidence and failed, so he had to resort to the usual weasel words -- "many people believe Gore has a quid pro quo with Bowser," or along those lines -- that pepper his reporting at all times. Good lord, he's lazy.

If anyone has evidence that Gore is aligned with Bowser, please show your work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm still happy with Janeese and going to vote for her again. I think her positions and actions on crime have been far more insightful than the standard Bowser stooge who's just looking at what polls well. Brandon Todd never did anything meaningful and we don't need a repeat of him.

Comparing Janeese to Brandon Todd is a pretty low bar. It’s been pretty surprising to me to see Janeese basically move in lock step with Nadeau.

Where's the difference between Lisa Gore and Brandon Todd? It's early in the campaign so I'll give her time to develop, but her initial message feels very Brandon Todd/ Green Team to me.

Oh, it feels that way to you. Good to know.

I am straight up voting anti JLG and Hope others join me.

[Anonymous]

Janeese Lewis George gets more pissed off about crime legislation than actual crime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm still happy with Janeese and going to vote for her again. I think her positions and actions on crime have been far more insightful than the standard Bowser stooge who's just looking at what polls well. Brandon Todd never did anything meaningful and we don't need a repeat of him.

There it is, folks. Please tell us how Janeese's actions on crime have been so "insightful."

She sends detailed newsletters with specifics of the issues and what she's doing about it. Have you actually read those? DC, especially Ward 4 crime / safety is discussed in a lot of those (maybe all?).

She's come to fairly contentious community meetings and given clear answers on what she can do and what she won't do. And she brings in MPD, USAO, and others as effectively as I think she can.

But if you want to spout slogans and vote based off "public safety and crime tops my list of priorities" without any meat behind it then you've made up your mind based on emotion not logic.

Janeese *cried* when Bowser said 17 year olds arrested for murder should be detained. She said jail would “traumatize” them. Next! I will vote for whoever is most likely to defeat this crazy person

[Anonymous]

I want to like Janeese because she seems to really care and show up for the community, but I'm not seeing the accomplishments on public safety that her supporters are claiming exist. She seems really into the whole "reduce crime by investing in the community" schtick (her conflict resolution legislation, investing more in youth services). Those aren't bad goals, it's not addressing the elephant in the room that is criminals throughout DC are acting without fear of consequences, because nobody seems to have the appetite to put them in place. 15-year-olds aren't carjacking because they never learned conflict resolution. I just don't think she's taking the issue seriously at all and she seems hostile to any sort of public safety legislation that's intended to address this. I just can't get on board with that approach. I appreciate Gore's insistence that this is priority number 1 for DC residents right now and I'm eager to hear more from her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm still happy with Janeese and going to vote for her again. I think her positions and actions on crime have been far more insightful than the standard Bowser stooge who's just looking at what polls well. Brandon Todd never did anything meaningful and we don't need a repeat of him.

+1

[Anonymous]

DSA almost certainly will endorse Janeese. Will she disavow this group after its grotesque actions of late?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm still happy with Janeese and going to vote for her again. I think her positions and actions on crime have been far more insightful than the standard Bowser stooge who's just looking at what polls well. Brandon Todd never did anything meaningful and we don't need a repeat of him.

Serious question: what are you talking about here? I hated Todd, supported and voted Janeese expecting insight and reasonable positions (she's a lawyer, she's clearly intelligent! She grew up in the area, she should have some level of concern for the constituents that goes beyond "what can they do for me?", etc.) but I've found her to be a complete and utter disappointment.

Both George & Todd seem to think photo ops and having someone from their office reply "we'll look into it!" are the hallmarks of good governance. At least Todd would send the leaf sweepers back around if they missed your block.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I want to like Janeese because she seems to really care and show up for the community, but I'm not seeing the accomplishments on public safety that her supporters are claiming exist. She seems really into the whole "reduce crime by investing in the community" schtick (her conflict resolution legislation, investing more in youth services). Those aren't bad goals, it's not addressing the elephant in the room that is criminals throughout DC are acting without fear of consequences, because nobody seems to have the appetite to put them in place. 15-year-olds aren't carjacking because they never learned conflict resolution. I just don't think she's taking the issue seriously at all and she seems hostile to any sort of public safety legislation that's intended to address this. I just can't get on board with that approach. I appreciate Gore's insistence that this is priority number 1 for DC residents right now and I'm eager to hear more from her.

+ a million

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I want to like Janeese because she seems to really care and show up for the community, but I'm not seeing the accomplishments on public safety that her supporters are claiming exist. She seems really into the whole "reduce crime by investing in the community" schtick (her conflict resolution legislation, investing more in youth services). Those aren't bad goals, it's not addressing the elephant in the room that is criminals throughout DC are acting without fear of consequences, because nobody seems to have the appetite to put them in place. 15-year-olds aren't carjacking because they never learned conflict resolution. I just don't think she's taking the issue seriously at all and she seems hostile to any sort of public safety legislation that's intended to address this. I just can't get on board with that approach. I appreciate Gore's insistence that this is priority number 1 for DC residents right now and I'm eager to hear more from her.

+1000. Youth services should be funded, and may help in a long-term, next-gen way to lower crime gradually. But the rest of us still have to live in a very crime-ridden city right tf now, and "nothing is illegal anymore, and also have you heard about our job fair? I'll be there to take pictures!" isn't working.

[Anonymous]

I knew Janeese would be an abject failure but even on my most pessimistic day I couldn't have predicted how bad things would become. We're on the precipice of a generational shift in the quality of life in DC. If we're turning back the clock to 1990, Janeese is the one with her hand on the dial.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm still happy with Janeese and going to vote for her again. I think her positions and actions on crime have been far more insightful than the standard Bowser stooge who's just looking at what polls well. Brandon Todd never did anything meaningful and we don't need a repeat of him.

Serious question: what are you talking about here? I hated Todd, supported and voted Janeese expecting insight and reasonable positions (she's a lawyer, she's clearly intelligent! She grew up in the area, she should have some level of concern for the constituents that goes beyond "what can they do for me?", etc.) but I've found her to be a complete and utter disappointment.

Both George & Todd seem to think photo ops and having someone from their office reply "we'll look into it!" are the hallmarks of good governance. At least Todd would send the leaf sweepers back around if they missed your block.

Have you read anything from her about crime or just skimmed the headlines?

I mean, she does take photos too, but if you're not seeing the depth that she brings then look a little harder. Here's an example:
https://janeeseward4.com/councilmember-lewis-george-holds-ward-4-summer-safety-strategic-meeting/

Here's another: https://janeeseward4.com/statement-on-the-tragic-killing-of-a-student/
"We cannot tolerate any degree of gun violence in our city, especially near our schools. Every agency and every community needs to be mobilized to keep our children safe. First, the individuals responsible for this horrific act need to be brought to justice."

This is someone who is smart on crime. The people pushing the "soft on crime" narrative sound like standard GOP/green team talking points. I don't buy it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm still happy with Janeese and going to vote for her again. I think her positions and actions on crime have been far more insightful than the standard Bowser stooge who's just looking at what polls well. Brandon Todd never did anything meaningful and we don't need a repeat of him.

Serious question: what are you talking about here? I hated Todd, supported and voted Janeese expecting insight and reasonable positions (she's a lawyer, she's clearly intelligent! She grew up in the area, she should have some level of concern for the constituents that goes beyond "what can they do for me?", etc.) but I've found her to be a complete and utter disappointment.

Both George & Todd seem to think photo ops and having someone from their office reply "we'll look into it!" are the hallmarks of good governance. At least Todd would send the leaf sweepers back around if they missed your block.

Have you read anything from her about crime or just skimmed the headlines?

I mean, she does take photos too, but if you're not seeing the depth that she brings then look a little harder. Here's an example:
https://janeeseward4.com/councilmember-lewis-george-holds-ward-4-summer-safety-strategic-meeting/

Here's another: https://janeeseward4.com/statement-on-the-tragic-killing-of-a-student/
"We cannot tolerate any degree of gun violence in our city, especially near our schools. Every agency and every community needs to be mobilized to keep our children safe. First, the individuals responsible for this horrific act need to be brought to justice."

This is someone who is smart on crime. The people pushing the "soft on crime" narrative sound like standard GOP/green team talking points. I don't buy it.

I read everything she sends, and I also watch what she does. Your assumption that anyone who is disappointed with her must be misinformed is pretty strange. She says we need to bring this criminal to justice, but then is the ONLY councilmember to vote against the emergency crime bill. She refuses to entertain the idea of pre-trial detainment for serious crimes, even though we're seeing again and again that the people being arrested for carjackings are already awaiting trial on previous charges. She's not "smart on crime" at all, but maybe she's smart on playing a certain type of voter if that one soundbite, which flies in the face of her actual votes, is all it takes for you to cheerlead her on anonymous message boards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm still happy with Janeese and going to vote for her again. I think her positions and actions on crime have been far more insightful than the standard Bowser stooge who's just looking at what polls well. Brandon Todd never did anything meaningful and we don't need a repeat of him.

Serious question: what are you talking about here? I hated Todd, supported and voted Janeese expecting insight and reasonable positions (she's a lawyer, she's clearly intelligent! She grew up in the area, she should have some level of concern for the constituents that goes beyond "what can they do for me?", etc.) but I've found her to be a complete and utter disappointment.

Both George & Todd seem to think photo ops and having someone from their office reply "we'll look into it!" are the hallmarks of good governance. At least Todd would send the leaf sweepers back around if they missed your block.

Have you read anything from her about crime or just skimmed the headlines?

I mean, she does take photos too, but if you're not seeing the depth that she brings then look a little harder. Here's an example:
https://janeeseward4.com/councilmember-lewis-george-holds-ward-4-summer-safety-strategic-meeting/

Here's another: https://janeeseward4.com/statement-on-the-tragic-killing-of-a-student/
"We cannot tolerate any degree of gun violence in our city, especially near our schools. Every agency and every community needs to be mobilized to keep our children safe. First, the individuals responsible for this horrific act need to be brought to justice."

This is someone who is smart on crime. The people pushing the "soft on crime" narrative sound like standard GOP/green team talking points. I don't buy it.

I read everything she sends, and I also watch what she does. Your assumption that anyone who is disappointed with her must be misinformed is pretty strange. She says we need to bring this criminal to justice, but then is the ONLY councilmember to vote against the emergency crime bill. She refuses to entertain the idea of pre-trial detainment for serious crimes, even though we're seeing again and again that the people being arrested for carjackings are already awaiting trial on previous charges. She's not "smart on crime" at all, but maybe she's smart on playing a certain type of voter if that one soundbite, which flies in the face of her actual votes, is all it takes for you to cheerlead her on anonymous message boards.

Pretrial detention can be used as a way to harass people who are not actually the violent criminals. It has a history of messing up innocent people's lives. There are times when it's appropriate but there's a balance there and oversimplifying it doesn't make you credible.