[APS] Who is funding newly-incorporated APE

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me the relationship between APE and the lawsuit that was filed a bit ago trying to compel APS to hold in person instruction? A lot of my opinion about APE and its right-wing roots stems from what I saw on the Twitter feed (relating to January 6) of one of the men pursuing that lawsuit. If he and his efforts are not part of APE, I would be interested in knowing that.

This was covered extensively at the time. The man who filed the lawsuit is/was a member of APE, but APE specifically declined to participate in or support the lawsuit, in part because much of APE’s leadership specifically disagreed with his lawsuit.

On his Twitter feed, he talked about “giving quarter” to what turned out to be insurrectionists. Kind of dark stuff in retrospect. Even if APE didn’t support the lawsuit, the guy left a very lasting impression that spills over to APE.

Only because of people like you who promote a false narrative to smear people who have different opinion from you.

My opinion was formed based upon his public Twitter account and his vocal support of APE. My opinion is definitely different than those seeking to “give quarter” to those responsible for the events of Jan. 6. Sometimes the loudest member of a group can impact public perception of that group.

It’s unfortunate you lack the critical thinking skills to distinguish between an organization and the separate activities of a single non-leadership member. There’s no point is discussing the merits with you because you will simply make stuff up and parrot off-topic hyper partisan talking points.

DP. What did the PP say that was “made up”?

The made up part was attributing to APE activities that not only did not come from APE but which APE specifically disavowed. Apparently they know they can’t win the argument on the merits so they need to mislead and deflect. Smart Restart is nothing more than a handful of crazies with too much time on their hands. Perhaps they all need to get real jobs.

Where exactly did PP attribute activities to APE? I don’t see that above.

So you admit that APE had nothing to do with the lawsuit or this one guy’s Twitter comments? You agree that APE should not be held accountable for his personal conduct?

Good, then we are in agreement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wasn’t the lawsuit guy the person who did all of the signs?

Do you have a basis for saying that or is it rank speculation? I’m not in APE so I don’t know the answer, so I would like to know the source for your claim.

I’m not part of APE so I’m not 100% sure, but it has been mentioned on here.
“I think everyone in APE is pretty done with him. He did the work to get the signs going and that helped raise visibility but every other post of his is a little nuts (on the AEM scale). Don’t want him representing the group”

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/30/945117.page#19145539

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me the relationship between APE and the lawsuit that was filed a bit ago trying to compel APS to hold in person instruction? A lot of my opinion about APE and its right-wing roots stems from what I saw on the Twitter feed (relating to January 6) of one of the men pursuing that lawsuit. If he and his efforts are not part of APE, I would be interested in knowing that.

This was covered extensively at the time. The man who filed the lawsuit is/was a member of APE, but APE specifically declined to participate in or support the lawsuit, in part because much of APE’s leadership specifically disagreed with his lawsuit.

On his Twitter feed, he talked about “giving quarter” to what turned out to be insurrectionists. Kind of dark stuff in retrospect. Even if APE didn’t support the lawsuit, the guy left a very lasting impression that spills over to APE.

Only because of people like you who promote a false narrative to smear people who have different opinion from you.

My opinion was formed based upon his public Twitter account and his vocal support of APE. My opinion is definitely different than those seeking to “give quarter” to those responsible for the events of Jan. 6. Sometimes the loudest member of a group can impact public perception of that group.

It’s unfortunate you lack the critical thinking skills to distinguish between an organization and the separate activities of a single non-leadership member. There’s no point is discussing the merits with you because you will simply make stuff up and parrot off-topic hyper partisan talking points.

DP. What did the PP say that was “made up”?

The made up part was attributing to APE activities that not only did not come from APE but which APE specifically disavowed. Apparently they know they can’t win the argument on the merits so they need to mislead and deflect. Smart Restart is nothing more than a handful of crazies with too much time on their hands. Perhaps they all need to get real jobs.

Where exactly did PP attribute activities to APE? I don’t see that above.

So you admit that APE had nothing to do with the lawsuit or this one guy’s Twitter comments? You agree that APE should not be held accountable for his personal conduct?

Good, then we are in agreement.

I have no idea what APE did or didn’t do.

I’m trying to figure out why the PP was accusing the other PP of “making stuff up”. I didn’t see that in any of PP’s posts above. More BS perhaps?

[Anonymous]

APE was a big tent last year by necessity because they faced such long odds on reopening the closed schools. Can't fault them for that. APE tolerated some of the RW crazies (lawsuit guy) and one person floated a balloon about recall (like other similar nova groups). They probably would have given lawsuit guy the boot earlier if they could do it all over again, and the group never seriously considered an effort to recall Dems. Why would they? Their leader is a longstanding Dem, and most of the members are Dems. There's no there there on the whole R angle for APE. No more big tent that accommodates crazies. They're solidly Dem/leaning bipartisan now coming up with independent ideas very much in the Vihstadt mold. APE is focused mostly on issues that most parents care about it. They're very engaged, and appropriately so.
Everyone should move on. APE did. They're looking to the future.

[Anonymous]

Should be interesting to see who APE endorses…
“Coming soon: APE will be providing an educational scorecard of candidates in the November election so you can better understand their positions.”


And they are bringing up Northam & “school closures” again. So transparent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:APE was a big tent last year by necessity because they faced such long odds on reopening the closed schools. Can't fault them for that. APE tolerated some of the RW crazies (lawsuit guy) and one person floated a balloon about recall (like other similar nova groups). They probably would have given lawsuit guy the boot earlier if they could do it all over again, and the group never seriously considered an effort to recall Dems. Why would they? Their leader is a longstanding Dem, and most of the members are Dems. There's no there there on the whole R angle for APE. No more big tent that accommodates crazies. They're solidly Dem/leaning bipartisan now coming up with independent ideas very much in the Vihstadt mold. APE is focused mostly on issues that most parents care about it. They're very engaged, and appropriately so.
Everyone should move on. APE did. They're looking to the future.

OP here. I’m focused on what APE is doing now. That the entire point of this thread although some PPs went off-topic.

In the past few weeks, APE has:
Newly reorganized as a political lobbying organization
Sent newsletters & spoke at SB meetings
Spread misinformation that feeds GOP talking points

And just today…they brought up “school closures” again despite the state mandate.

Should be interesting to see who they endorse.

[Anonymous]

APE is almost certainly going to endorse Youngkin because of the school closure angle. But that doesn't mean it is R leaning. This is just an odd year. APE is solidly Dem in most respects that matter and don't peddle GOP talking points at all. Name a single one. They're not talking election integrity, cRT or any of that nonsense. Youngkin is likely to win because he doesn't need nova, he just needs to peel off enough Dems b/c school closures. Just because APE aligns with that doesn't mean they are GOP, they're just anti-closure, which is a solidly bi-partisan or non-partisan issue. AGain, it's just an unusual year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:APE is almost certainly going to endorse Youngkin because of the school closure angle. But that doesn't mean it is R leaning. This is just an odd year. APE is solidly Dem in most respects that matter and don't peddle GOP talking points at all. Name a single one. They're not talking election integrity, cRT or any of that nonsense. Youngkin is likely to win because he doesn't need nova, he just needs to peel off enough Dems b/c school closures. Just because APE aligns with that doesn't mean they are GOP, they're just anti-closure, which is a solidly bi-partisan or non-partisan issue. AGain, it's just an unusual year.

Lol, stop acting like you know anything. You don’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:APE is almost certainly going to endorse Youngkin because of the school closure angle. But that doesn't mean it is R leaning. This is just an odd year. APE is solidly Dem in most respects that matter and don't peddle GOP talking points at all. Name a single one. They're not talking election integrity, cRT or any of that nonsense. Youngkin is likely to win because he doesn't need nova, he just needs to peel off enough Dems b/c school closures. Just because APE aligns with that doesn't mean they are GOP, they're just anti-closure, which is a solidly bi-partisan or non-partisan issue. AGain, it's just an unusual year.

Oh my, this is hilarious. Do you really think a critical mass of Dems will vote for an anti-vax, Trump-supporting, anti-abortion Republican out of spite, even though public schools are open full time statewide because our current Democratic governor made it so?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:APE is almost certainly going to endorse Youngkin because of the school closure angle. But that doesn't mean it is R leaning. This is just an odd year. APE is solidly Dem in most respects that matter and don't peddle GOP talking points at all. Name a single one. They're not talking election integrity, cRT or any of that nonsense. Youngkin is likely to win because he doesn't need nova, he just needs to peel off enough Dems b/c school closures. Just because APE aligns with that doesn't mean they are GOP, they're just anti-closure, which is a solidly bi-partisan or non-partisan issue. AGain, it's just an unusual year.

Oh my, this is hilarious. Do you really think a critical mass of Dems will vote for an anti-vax, Trump-supporting, anti-abortion Republican out of spite, even though public schools are open full time statewide because our current Democratic governor made it so?

Not a lot, but enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:APE is almost certainly going to endorse Youngkin because of the school closure angle. But that doesn't mean it is R leaning. This is just an odd year. APE is solidly Dem in most respects that matter and don't peddle GOP talking points at all. Name a single one. They're not talking election integrity, cRT or any of that nonsense. Youngkin is likely to win because he doesn't need nova, he just needs to peel off enough Dems b/c school closures. Just because APE aligns with that doesn't mean they are GOP, they're just anti-closure, which is a solidly bi-partisan or non-partisan issue. AGain, it's just an unusual year.

Lol, stop acting like you know anything. You don’t.

It's obvious APE is leaning in that direction. They're not trying to hide it or anything. And there's nothing wrong with taking politics out of education. The closures became way too political. This would help right the ship in important ways, and APE is helping with that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:APE is almost certainly going to endorse Youngkin because of the school closure angle. But that doesn't mean it is R leaning. This is just an odd year. APE is solidly Dem in most respects that matter and don't peddle GOP talking points at all. Name a single one. They're not talking election integrity, cRT or any of that nonsense. Youngkin is likely to win because he doesn't need nova, he just needs to peel off enough Dems b/c school closures. Just because APE aligns with that doesn't mean they are GOP, they're just anti-closure, which is a solidly bi-partisan or non-partisan issue. AGain, it's just an unusual year.

Oh my, this is hilarious. Do you really think a critical mass of Dems will vote for an anti-vax, Trump-supporting, anti-abortion Republican out of spite, even though public schools are open full time statewide because our current Democratic governor made it so?

I’m going to Not out of spite but bc of a lack of trust and concern or what could happen in the future

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:APE is almost certainly going to endorse Youngkin because of the school closure angle. But that doesn't mean it is R leaning. This is just an odd year. APE is solidly Dem in most respects that matter and don't peddle GOP talking points at all. Name a single one. They're not talking election integrity, cRT or any of that nonsense. Youngkin is likely to win because he doesn't need nova, he just needs to peel off enough Dems b/c school closures. Just because APE aligns with that doesn't mean they are GOP, they're just anti-closure, which is a solidly bi-partisan or non-partisan issue. AGain, it's just an unusual year.

Pushing “anti-closure” NOW, as Delta is winding down, after we have a state mandate to keep schools open, *during an election* is a transparent GOP campaign ploy.

They didn’t even try to come up with something better. Lame.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:APE is almost certainly going to endorse Youngkin because of the school closure angle. But that doesn't mean it is R leaning. This is just an odd year. APE is solidly Dem in most respects that matter and don't peddle GOP talking points at all. Name a single one. They're not talking election integrity, cRT or any of that nonsense. Youngkin is likely to win because he doesn't need nova, he just needs to peel off enough Dems b/c school closures. Just because APE aligns with that doesn't mean they are GOP, they're just anti-closure, which is a solidly bi-partisan or non-partisan issue. AGain, it's just an unusual year.

Oh my, this is hilarious. Do you really think a critical mass of Dems will vote for an anti-vax, Trump-supporting, anti-abortion Republican out of spite, even though public schools are open full time statewide because our current Democratic governor made it so?

I’m going to Not out of spite but bc of a lack of trust and concern or what could happen in the future

Yup. That is the GOP “concern” machine in action.

Bathrooms!
CRT!
Math!
School closures!

And we have APE trying to slip a couple of those in there…interesting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:APE is almost certainly going to endorse Youngkin because of the school closure angle. But that doesn't mean it is R leaning. This is just an odd year. APE is solidly Dem in most respects that matter and don't peddle GOP talking points at all. Name a single one. They're not talking election integrity, cRT or any of that nonsense. Youngkin is likely to win because he doesn't need nova, he just needs to peel off enough Dems b/c school closures. Just because APE aligns with that doesn't mean they are GOP, they're just anti-closure, which is a solidly bi-partisan or non-partisan issue. AGain, it's just an unusual year.

Oh my, this is hilarious. Do you really think a critical mass of Dems will vote for an anti-vax, Trump-supporting, anti-abortion Republican out of spite, even though public schools are open full time statewide because our current Democratic governor made it so?

I’m going to Not out of spite but bc of a lack of trust and concern or what could happen in the future

Really? Interesting. Because I don’t know any Democrats who are voting for a Republican who would actually implement all sorts of anti-Democratic priorities- abortion bans, prohibitions on vaccine or mask mandates, tax cuts for rich people, etc - on the fear that a Dem governor might maybe allow school closures, despite his Dem successor requiring school reopenings even before vaccines are authorized for elementary age kids. Because that makes no sense.