Rolling gun battle in Capitol Hill tonight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Useful idiot is correct. Running for the Council would be a hardship on most people’s CVs. Can we get a young, smart kid to run? Howard University graduate? Let’s get this done. And save this city like at least $100k and just as many lives

So you want to use a young Black person? Wow! HU grads are too smart for this crap, and you should keep your embarrassingly horrid ideas to yourself.

“Use”? No. I’d like to encourage and lend support to someone who is from or spent formative years in and around Ward 6.
What would you like? To keep the old political failure carpetbagger in the office ad nauseam to inflict further harm?

You're a dinosaur, and young educated people are not on your side.

Your boss is a dinosaur. Toxicosaurus

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, people groan when he’s mentioned on the Hill. Groan and eye roll. His own party

Anyway this was fun but is kind of pointless. He’s finished. A political goner

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you're against gun control, but for "tough on crime" policies, and think that a city councilman is the big problem, I cannot take seriously your claims of being traumatized by last night's shootings. Seems like some of you are just waiting for something like this, an opportunity to push your ideas that aren't backed by science, studies, or the real world.

And yes, Fox News has something to do with this, even though you all will not admit. I know how you are, you act like you don't watch it but it's obvious you do. Fox News manufactured this whole "cities run by liberals are hellscapes!" line, and they run stories, broadcasted out to wherever, hundreds of miles away, to go along, about DC, Chicago, etc., to the point that relatives who live in really far off places call me about shootings I haven't even heard about yet. And it's not because they care about DC.

Crime is bad, but y'all are dupes. I thought trolls, yes, but it's worse than that. You are dupes. You didn't listen when the courts said that Fox is "entertainment" and not news. You didn't listen when Fox said it intentionally misled you.

Cities are liberal because liberal people live here. Cities have more crime. Open your poisoned little minds and consider some reasons, besides liberals and Charles Allen, that crime may have increased these past years, and not just here but everywhere? And finally, 14 year old carjackers are not weighing sentencing outcomes while contemplating their crime ... probably not the 19 year olds either. Do better, and work for real solutions, like gun control and weapon bans.

What are these reasons, oh you sage?

Wow, maybe the pandemic, for one? Exactly how dim are you?

the pandemic - you mean when Charles Allen supported closing schools for poor Ward 6 kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you're against gun control, but for "tough on crime" policies, and think that a city councilman is the big problem, I cannot take seriously your claims of being traumatized by last night's shootings. Seems like some of you are just waiting for something like this, an opportunity to push your ideas that aren't backed by science, studies, or the real world.

And yes, Fox News has something to do with this, even though you all will not admit. I know how you are, you act like you don't watch it but it's obvious you do. Fox News manufactured this whole "cities run by liberals are hellscapes!" line, and they run stories, broadcasted out to wherever, hundreds of miles away, to go along, about DC, Chicago, etc., to the point that relatives who live in really far off places call me about shootings I haven't even heard about yet. And it's not because they care about DC.

Crime is bad, but y'all are dupes. I thought trolls, yes, but it's worse than that. You are dupes. You didn't listen when the courts said that Fox is "entertainment" and not news. You didn't listen when Fox said it intentionally misled you.

Cities are liberal because liberal people live here. Cities have more crime. Open your poisoned little minds and consider some reasons, besides liberals and Charles Allen, that crime may have increased these past years, and not just here but everywhere? And finally, 14 year old carjackers are not weighing sentencing outcomes while contemplating their crime ... probably not the 19 year olds either. Do better, and work for real solutions, like gun control and weapon bans.

Hi, reality here.

Like it or not guns are so ingrained in American culture, and the Supreme Court has recently ingrained them further, that there is literally no way to stop people from getting them. None. It’s not happening. I think they are stupid. But I am a realist.

So instead let’s focus on real life.

Let’s arrest and crack down on violent crime. Let’s implement stop and frisk. Stop chastising police. Stop voting for progressive criminal justice reform that exacerbates crime. Grow up.

Hello, this is science here. There are policies that work to drastically reduce gun deaths. It's called gun control and weapons bans. On the other hand, studies do not show that "tough on crime" policies work at all. There are people who study this. I am not one of them, but I do like to support what works. You're vilifying a local politician based on your crappy ideas, which let's face it, were reinforced to you by Fox News. You love it.

I am all for gun control but pessimistic about it happening. And there’s nothing DC can do to implement it.

But “tough on crime” measures can absolutely reduce crime. There’s plenty of evidence. For example: https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-publications/research-publications/2022/20220621_Recidivsm-SentLength.pdf

[Anonymous]

Prediction: He’ll try to keep his job by proposing and dangling the reparations in front of people for a few years to decades.

[Anonymous]

That he full well knows he can’t afford.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All these people complaining about Allen and yet he ran totally unopposed. Why don’t any of you get off your asses and run against him if you think you can do better? It’s easy to just sit on anon and throw insults. Let’s see the actual plans you have for making things better, and then run so we can vote for you.

the real reason: only a black or latino moderate with kids in DCPS could beat him, and they all have the sense to not live in W6.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All these people complaining about Allen and yet he ran totally unopposed. Why don’t any of you get off your asses and run against him if you think you can do better? It’s easy to just sit on anon and throw insults. Let’s see the actual plans you have for making things better, and then run so we can vote for you.

It’s interesting to me that people keep mentioning this. There was some opposition forming to Allen last year, but the person most likely to run got redistricted out of the Ward when they redrew the ward maps. The fact that he ran unopposed is more of an accident than evidence of how beloved he is. People are also burned out from Covid. No one I know loves CA’s performance.

Also, DC really suffers from the Hyde Act. A lot if the most qualified people I know are feds who wouldn’t be able to run for office unless they quit their jobs first. Most people have families. It’s not a realistic ask. One if a number of reasons we have such sub-par leadership in DC.

wow this is a great point. let’s start lobbying to repeal. unless you have a direct conflict of interest, you should be able to run for office.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All these people complaining about Allen and yet he ran totally unopposed. Why don’t any of you get off your asses and run against him if you think you can do better? It’s easy to just sit on anon and throw insults. Let’s see the actual plans you have for making things better, and then run so we can vote for you.

the real reason: only a black or latino moderate with kids in DCPS could beat him, and they all have the sense to not live in W6.

I personally think a white person could win against Allen, with the right background and ideas. I mean, Allen won and he's white. W6 is pretty white and gets whiter every day.

I would like to see a black or brown person instead, but I am brown. I honestly don't know how much appetite there is for that in W6 anymore. There are still pockets of this area that are very much majority black, but it feels like the pendulum has swung in terms of where power lies. Allen's term is also counter-cyclical (meaning he only ever runs in non-presidential years) which depresses turnout, especially among the Ward's poorer residents.

FWIW, the people I know who dislike him the most are my older black neighbors who are actually very interested in a "tough on crime" approach because it's the only thing they've seen work in these neighborhoods over their lengthy tenures through some really high crime times. Their main concern would be any policing that targets and discriminates against black people, which makes sense. I think a candidate who argued for better enforcement against violent crimes and increased police presence AND was really big on accountability for police officers, would be really popular among this crowd. I'm not sure how much the race of the candidate would matter. They definitely see Allen as a do-nothing opportunist, though people think he's nice (not always said as a compliment).

[Anonymous]

This:

They definitely see Allen as a do-nothing opportunist

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All these people complaining about Allen and yet he ran totally unopposed. Why don’t any of you get off your asses and run against him if you think you can do better? It’s easy to just sit on anon and throw insults. Let’s see the actual plans you have for making things better, and then run so we can vote for you.

the real reason: only a black or latino moderate with kids in DCPS could beat him, and they all have the sense to not live in W6.

I personally think a white person could win against Allen, with the right background and ideas. I mean, Allen won and he's white. W6 is pretty white and gets whiter every day.

I would like to see a black or brown person instead, but I am brown. I honestly don't know how much appetite there is for that in W6 anymore. There are still pockets of this area that are very much majority black, but it feels like the pendulum has swung in terms of where power lies. Allen's term is also counter-cyclical (meaning he only ever runs in non-presidential years) which depresses turnout, especially among the Ward's poorer residents.

FWIW, the people I know who dislike him the most are my older black neighbors who are actually very interested in a "tough on crime" approach because it's the only thing they've seen work in these neighborhoods over their lengthy tenures through some really high crime times. Their main concern would be any policing that targets and discriminates against black people, which makes sense. I think a candidate who argued for better enforcement against violent crimes and increased police presence AND was really big on accountability for police officers, would be really popular among this crowd. I'm not sure how much the race of the candidate would matter. They definitely see Allen as a do-nothing opportunist, though people think he's nice (not always said as a compliment).

My thinking was that white “progressives” would be more likely to vote for a moderate POC than moderate white person.

Agree on you observation about long-time residents.

[Anonymous]

Would a tough-on-crime black candidate like an Eric Adams fly in W6? If so who could be encouraged to run?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Would a tough-on-crime black candidate like an Eric Adams fly in W6? If so who could be encouraged to run?

No, an Eric Adams type would not fly in W6. You need a true progressive, but I think people are hungry for someone more pragmatic than Allen or Silverman (I know she wasn't the W6 rep but she lives on the Hill and has a pretty big presence here).

I've said this on these boards before, but I would love to see more Councilmembers like Christina Henderson. She's liberal but super pragmatic, not wandering around in the land of make believe like some of these folks are. She chooses issues that she knows she can make an impact on (some of her pet issues have been things like addressing the licensing requirements for childcare workers, and the parking permit system -- nuts and bolds municipal government stuff that can have genuine impacts on people's lives). Whenever I have interacted with her, it's always been clear to me that she is actually working on things and trying to accomplish goals. I'd love someone like that as Ward rep.

[Anonymous]

Anyone. I’d vote for anyone. I wrote in a name. I’m not the only one. That’s how much people despise him and that was before he made himself a persona non grata in his own party

[Anonymous]

Over 6% of voters voting in his unopposed race bothered to write in another name; again that was before