JLG vs McDuffie on public schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a McDuffie supporter. I've posted several negative things about him in this thread and my main complaint is that I don't really like either of these candidates.

The tone of the JLG support in the thread is very off putting. I think some people are just posting reasons nable arguments for her (thank you) but there is one or more posters who keep spamming the thread with long talking points that aren't even related to education, making snarky and rude (but not substantive) arguments attacking anyone who expresses skepticism about JLG, or making ad hominem attacks like "you hate teachers" if someone expresses disagreement would th JLG or the teachers union.

I made the point that NEITHER of these candidates are right with it extreme (were talking about two different brands of Democrats, not Nazis) and the response was to immediately compare people who don't support JLG to Nazis.

You need to log off.

You’re being disingenuous, there have been McDuffie posters lying about teachers and our ‘agenda.’ The WTU is teachers, not a separate entity. Therefore, saying things as a non-teacher about what we want is the same thing as what some JLG posters are doing.

You try to come off as a ‘neutral’ person but it’s clear you are not or you would be disagreeing with both groups. Some have even said things like ‘oh you are writing like this and your a dcps teacher’ -saying or implying they are stupid or the like.

And it was a McDuffie posters lying who mention JLG voters were like the Nazis first. Which is why it was stated that if the Neo Nazis we’re to choose either of these people it’d be big business Duffie.

The WTU is not equal to teachers. First, there are many teachers in DC who aren't even in WTU. Second, not even all WTU members fully support everything the WTU does and says. I know many DCPS teachers and none would talk about the union the way it's being discussed in this thread -- they support the union but view it as a separate entity from themselves, and don't support every single thing the union does or its leaders say.

Also, it's estimated than fewer than half of WTU's members are DC residents. So not only does the union not equal teachers, it also doesn't equal the will of DC voters. It's a special interest group, that's it.

Where is your data? I could say it’s estimated that over 95% of you on this forum are white and only care about other whites.

Just because you say something doesn’t make it true.

The union IS teachers. It’s full of teachers and the like. Some absolutely don’t live here and don’t care -that’s true.

If we are going to compare the WTU to special interest groups (that are killing children -funny how you all choose that one) that’s what this group is. Full of gentrifiers and those who’d like all ‘the poors’ -who are generally POC to get out of your way.

DCPS teachers aren’t good enough for you unless they are in an affluent NW school -which often translates to predominantly white teachers.

This is why in every other DC forum they call this one nasty and full of toxic people.

Wow.

DP
I think sometimes some of you all don't know how your words and actions look to many POC. This country has a divide and so does this city.

Please explain why stating that the WTU does not represent all teachers makes someone racist and classist. I actually don't understand. Or saying WTU is a special interest group (that is definitionally what it is) or pointing out that not all WTU members are DC residents (this is simply true). If these are racist or classist things to say, please explain how, I want to know.

I'm also baffled as to how in a mayoral race between two black, liberal candidates, this debate devolves into people calling each other racists. Is the suggestion that McDuffie is racist?

FWIW, most white people I know are voting JLG, she seems to be the consensus pick of white progressives. I know more black people voting McDuffie than white people. I live in Ward 5 and people are more family with Duff. They don't love him, but he feels like status quo to more people. My black neighbors and friends tend to be more conservative (little c) in that respect -- the devil you know.

So I am genuinely confused by the allegation that not voting for JLG, or not fully supporting the WTU and everything they do, makes me racist. But if I'm missing something, please illuminate me.

Oh so the nazi comments are conveniently forgotten?

I have not called anyone a Nazi in this thread. In fact I explicitly said that no one in this race nor any of the supporters on either side are Nazis, because I think the rhetoric around this race is bizarrely amped up for two candidates who are honestly very close to each other ideologically.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a McDuffie supporter. I've posted several negative things about him in this thread and my main complaint is that I don't really like either of these candidates.

The tone of the JLG support in the thread is very off putting. I think some people are just posting reasons nable arguments for her (thank you) but there is one or more posters who keep spamming the thread with long talking points that aren't even related to education, making snarky and rude (but not substantive) arguments attacking anyone who expresses skepticism about JLG, or making ad hominem attacks like "you hate teachers" if someone expresses disagreement would th JLG or the teachers union.

I made the point that NEITHER of these candidates are right with it extreme (were talking about two different brands of Democrats, not Nazis) and the response was to immediately compare people who don't support JLG to Nazis.

You need to log off.

You’re being disingenuous, there have been McDuffie posters lying about teachers and our ‘agenda.’ The WTU is teachers, not a separate entity. Therefore, saying things as a non-teacher about what we want is the same thing as what some JLG posters are doing.

You try to come off as a ‘neutral’ person but it’s clear you are not or you would be disagreeing with both groups. Some have even said things like ‘oh you are writing like this and your a dcps teacher’ -saying or implying they are stupid or the like.

And it was a McDuffie posters lying who mention JLG voters were like the Nazis first. Which is why it was stated that if the Neo Nazis we’re to choose either of these people it’d be big business Duffie.

The WTU is not equal to teachers. First, there are many teachers in DC who aren't even in WTU. Second, not even all WTU members fully support everything the WTU does and says. I know many DCPS teachers and none would talk about the union the way it's being discussed in this thread -- they support the union but view it as a separate entity from themselves, and don't support every single thing the union does or its leaders say.

Also, it's estimated than fewer than half of WTU's members are DC residents. So not only does the union not equal teachers, it also doesn't equal the will of DC voters. It's a special interest group, that's it.

Where is your data? I could say it’s estimated that over 95% of you on this forum are white and only care about other whites.

Just because you say something doesn’t make it true.

The union IS teachers. It’s full of teachers and the like. Some absolutely don’t live here and don’t care -that’s true.

If we are going to compare the WTU to special interest groups (that are killing children -funny how you all choose that one) that’s what this group is. Full of gentrifiers and those who’d like all ‘the poors’ -who are generally POC to get out of your way.

DCPS teachers aren’t good enough for you unless they are in an affluent NW school -which often translates to predominantly white teachers.

This is why in every other DC forum they call this one nasty and full of toxic people.

Wow.

DP
I think sometimes some of you all don't know how your words and actions look to many POC. This country has a divide and so does this city.

Please explain why stating that the WTU does not represent all teachers makes someone racist and classist. I actually don't understand. Or saying WTU is a special interest group (that is definitionally what it is) or pointing out that not all WTU members are DC residents (this is simply true). If these are racist or classist things to say, please explain how, I want to know.

I'm also baffled as to how in a mayoral race between two black, liberal candidates, this debate devolves into people calling each other racists. Is the suggestion that McDuffie is racist?

FWIW, most white people I know are voting JLG, she seems to be the consensus pick of white progressives. I know more black people voting McDuffie than white people. I live in Ward 5 and people are more family with Duff. They don't love him, but he feels like status quo to more people. My black neighbors and friends tend to be more conservative (little c) in that respect -- the devil you know.

So I am genuinely confused by the allegation that not voting for JLG, or not fully supporting the WTU and everything they do, makes me racist. But if I'm missing something, please illuminate me.

Oh so the nazi comments are conveniently forgotten?

I have not called anyone a Nazi in this thread. In fact I explicitly said that no one in this race nor any of the supporters on either side are Nazis, because I think the rhetoric around this race is bizarrely amped up for two candidates who are honestly very close to each other ideologically.

But others have. The point is often times it seems people on this forum are unable to be cordial. Whether you vote for JLG or Duff, at the end of the day we all have to work together to help fight for all public schools. There's no need to say any candidate hates or doesn't want something unless they have said it or shown it explicitly through their actions.

[Anonymous]

The vitriol of the JLG supporters is off-putting. If you question the progressive sacred cows of violence interruptors, excessive spending by the city on councilmember vanity projects like composting or paying WABA $250 per hour to teach bicycling, defining "juveniles" as age 26 for purposes of sentencing, or suggesting that perhaps tenants who are violent towards other residents or building staff should be subject to quicker eviction proceedings, then you quickly get labelled racist, classist, MAGA, etc. JLG supports all of those policies (well, except holding violent tenants accountable---she would not support expedited eviction). We can (and should) have reasoned policy debates over these progressive positions---but I never get the sense that any progressive politician on the DC Council cares one whit about listening to any viewpoint which contradicts their positions, even when those viewpoints are grounded in real life experience.

[Anonymous]

decide -- ranking Goodweather #1. mcduffie #2, not ranking anyone else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm just looking for who to rank my 1. Rini? GG? ANYONE? So sad no one is really talking schools in a way I agree with. This city is the realm of the rising child-free elite.

Curious what GG is saying about schools that you don't agree with?

Here is Goodweather's plan for education:

https://www.goodweatherfordc.com/education

some highlights -- he wants to make sure kids don't pass through 3rd grade without being able to read:

"The 3rd grade checkpoint is an intervention trigger, not a punishment. Every student who does not meet the benchmark receives an Individual Reading Plan, parent notification within 10 days, summer reading support, and access to free one-on-one tutoring. There are multiple retest windows and good-cause exemptions for English language learners, students with IEPs, and those already receiving long-term intervention. Mississippi uses this model. It produced the largest NAEP reading gains in the country."

He also wants to reform IMPACT:

Teacher accountability and teacher voice are not opposites. The current IMPACT system was designed without meaningful teacher input, and teachers have no right to bargain over how they are evaluated. Reform means bringing teachers to the table — not eliminating high standards. The goal is an evaluation system that teachers trust because they helped build it, with metrics that reflect the full scope of what good teaching looks like.

Hes been endorsed by the DC Charter School Action advocacy group.

I like his specific strategies to address some of the major issues in the system. We are not educating children right now- we are passing them along. We do not expect them to read, do basic math, come to school, be on time, etc. We have set zero expectations for students through policy choices. The only people who even try to hold kids accountable are teachers. And they are the ones affected, through IMPACT, when no one else holds kids accountable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The vitriol of the JLG supporters is off-putting. If you question the progressive sacred cows of violence interruptors, excessive spending by the city on councilmember vanity projects like composting or paying WABA $250 per hour to teach bicycling, defining "juveniles" as age 26 for purposes of sentencing, or suggesting that perhaps tenants who are violent towards other residents or building staff should be subject to quicker eviction proceedings, then you quickly get labelled racist, classist, MAGA, etc. JLG supports all of those policies (well, except holding violent tenants accountable---she would not support expedited eviction). We can (and should) have reasoned policy debates over these progressive positions---but I never get the sense that any progressive politician on the DC Council cares one whit about listening to any viewpoint which contradicts their positions, even when those viewpoints are grounded in real life experience.

I voted for JLG, not everything she wants will work. But I'm interested in ambition, action, openness, and accountability. We're at an equilibrium point that isn't satisfactory and need to see some different inputs. Bring yours to the table. Complain AND suggest.

I see JLG as a change candidate and McDuffie himself is running as a continuity candidate. How would you rank the two?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a McDuffie supporter. I've posted several negative things about him in this thread and my main complaint is that I don't really like either of these candidates.

The tone of the JLG support in the thread is very off putting. I think some people are just posting reasons nable arguments for her (thank you) but there is one or more posters who keep spamming the thread with long talking points that aren't even related to education, making snarky and rude (but not substantive) arguments attacking anyone who expresses skepticism about JLG, or making ad hominem attacks like "you hate teachers" if someone expresses disagreement would th JLG or the teachers union.

I made the point that NEITHER of these candidates are right with it extreme (were talking about two different brands of Democrats, not Nazis) and the response was to immediately compare people who don't support JLG to Nazis.

You need to log off.

You’re being disingenuous, there have been McDuffie posters lying about teachers and our ‘agenda.’ The WTU is teachers, not a separate entity. Therefore, saying things as a non-teacher about what we want is the same thing as what some JLG posters are doing.

You try to come off as a ‘neutral’ person but it’s clear you are not or you would be disagreeing with both groups. Some have even said things like ‘oh you are writing like this and your a dcps teacher’ -saying or implying they are stupid or the like.

And it was a McDuffie posters lying who mention JLG voters were like the Nazis first. Which is why it was stated that if the Neo Nazis we’re to choose either of these people it’d be big business Duffie.

The WTU is not equal to teachers. First, there are many teachers in DC who aren't even in WTU. Second, not even all WTU members fully support everything the WTU does and says. I know many DCPS teachers and none would talk about the union the way it's being discussed in this thread -- they support the union but view it as a separate entity from themselves, and don't support every single thing the union does or its leaders say.

Also, it's estimated than fewer than half of WTU's members are DC residents. So not only does the union not equal teachers, it also doesn't equal the will of DC voters. It's a special interest group, that's it.

Where is your data? I could say it’s estimated that over 95% of you on this forum are white and only care about other whites.

Just because you say something doesn’t make it true.

The union IS teachers. It’s full of teachers and the like. Some absolutely don’t live here and don’t care -that’s true.

If we are going to compare the WTU to special interest groups (that are killing children -funny how you all choose that one) that’s what this group is. Full of gentrifiers and those who’d like all ‘the poors’ -who are generally POC to get out of your way.

DCPS teachers aren’t good enough for you unless they are in an affluent NW school -which often translates to predominantly white teachers.

This is why in every other DC forum they call this one nasty and full of toxic people.

Wow.

DP
I think sometimes some of you all don't know how your words and actions look to many POC. This country has a divide and so does this city.

Please explain why stating that the WTU does not represent all teachers makes someone racist and classist. I actually don't understand. Or saying WTU is a special interest group (that is definitionally what it is) or pointing out that not all WTU members are DC residents (this is simply true). If these are racist or classist things to say, please explain how, I want to know.

I'm also baffled as to how in a mayoral race between two black, liberal candidates, this debate devolves into people calling each other racists. Is the suggestion that McDuffie is racist?

FWIW, most white people I know are voting JLG, she seems to be the consensus pick of white progressives. I know more black people voting McDuffie than white people. I live in Ward 5 and people are more family with Duff. They don't love him, but he feels like status quo to more people. My black neighbors and friends tend to be more conservative (little c) in that respect -- the devil you know.

So I am genuinely confused by the allegation that not voting for JLG, or not fully supporting the WTU and everything they do, makes me racist. But if I'm missing something, please illuminate me.

Oh so the nazi comments are conveniently forgotten?

I have not called anyone a Nazi in this thread. In fact I explicitly said that no one in this race nor any of the supporters on either side are Nazis, because I think the rhetoric around this race is bizarrely amped up for two candidates who are honestly very close to each other ideologically.

But others have. The point is often times it seems people on this forum are unable to be cordial. Whether you vote for JLG or Duff, at the end of the day we all have to work together to help fight for all public schools. There's no need to say any candidate hates or doesn't want something unless they have said it or shown it explicitly through their actions.

I think you are twisting things. Multiple posters have expressed concern that JLG is anti-charter based on her own words. That's not a failure to be cordial -- it really seems like she has antipathy for charters even if she doesn't say it in so many words.

Meanwhile JLG supporters have resorted to ad hominem attacks like calling people racist or saying they hate teachers. Not attacking McDuffie but attacking people on this thread who have expressed skepticism about JLG.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The vitriol of the JLG supporters is off-putting. If you question the progressive sacred cows of violence interruptors, excessive spending by the city on councilmember vanity projects like composting or paying WABA $250 per hour to teach bicycling, defining "juveniles" as age 26 for purposes of sentencing, or suggesting that perhaps tenants who are violent towards other residents or building staff should be subject to quicker eviction proceedings, then you quickly get labelled racist, classist, MAGA, etc. JLG supports all of those policies (well, except holding violent tenants accountable---she would not support expedited eviction). We can (and should) have reasoned policy debates over these progressive positions---but I never get the sense that any progressive politician on the DC Council cares one whit about listening to any viewpoint which contradicts their positions, even when those viewpoints are grounded in real life experience.

I voted for JLG, not everything she wants will work. But I'm interested in ambition, action, openness, and accountability. We're at an equilibrium point that isn't satisfactory and need to see some different inputs. Bring yours to the table. Complain AND suggest.

I see JLG as a change candidate and McDuffie himself is running as a continuity candidate. How would you rank the two?

DP but I dont' think either of them are change candidates. I think it's ridiculous for JLG to position herself as DC's Mamdani -- she obviously isn't. They are both more of the same. I suspect whoever wins, little in DC will change.

That's the problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The business establishment isn’t backing him because they like Duff’s smile.
DC’s entire business and real estate lobby has consolidated behind McDuffie.
Opportunity DC, a super PAC backed by real estate executives and large donors, spent heavily to elect him to the at-large seat in 2022, unseating the progressive incumbent Elissa Silverman.

These groups don’t back candidates out of civic spirit. They back candidates they believe will govern in their interest. When the chain restaurants lobby, the real estate lobby, and the business establishment all line up behind the same person, the reasonable question is: who is he going to govern for?

How do you not understand that this EXACTLY the criticism of JLG being made in this thread regarding her adherence to WTU dogma? And also the people who defend McDuffie's business ties do so in the exact same way that people defend JLG's special interest relationships. They'll say "well, what's wrong with business and real estate? don't we want the city to be friendly to business interests in order to encourage economic development that leads to jobs, tax dollars, and more civic spirit?" And yes, there's cynicism in this argument but there is also truth -- I do actually want a mayor who will seek to advance economic investment in the city, and who will make the city more attractive to (gasp!) real estate developers and businesses of all size who are willing to put money into the city, hire people, and make this a good place to live.

I don't like Kenyon McDuffie, but this cynical argument is actually more compelling to me than the idea that JLG will magically be better on education because she sits in the back pocket of a teachers union that I can assure you has not always worked in the best interests of my kids or my family.

I'm confused as to why you think a teachers union is set up to work for the best interest of YOUR kids and family. A teachers union is in place to advocate for labor rights for educators- such as negotiating salaries, improving work environments for them, etc. Secondly, are you that narcissistic to believe that everything should always work in the favor of your kids and your family? That's not the way life works- the world doesn't revolve around you and you don't get what you want 100% of the time. This is what it means to live in a community.

NP but that PP doesn't think that the WTU exists to serve their kids' best interests - that's their point. So people in this thread repeatedly screaming "YOU HATE TEACHERS" if anyone pushes back against the WTU's positions are very, very dumb. Teachers are entitled to a union that supports their labor rights, but they're not entitled to anyone who has other priorities being demonized because the teachers union is not their moral compass.

PP here and yes, exactly. It's the job of the WTU to advocate for its members. But it's the job of the mayor to advocate for all constituents, not just teachers. Not all DCPS teachers are even DC residents. I don't want the mayor and the teacher's union to be completely unified on school issues, that doesn't make sense. Of course WTU should exist and advocate as it sees fit. I want a voice too, though.

Parents and kids will have zero say in schools if JLG is elected. You can't have a mayor who is backing WTU 100 percent of the time. Sometimes their interests do not align with anyone else's.

If JLG is elected, WTU will demand next year that school ends every Wednesday at noon (early release on Wednesday is a growing and ugly trend). They'll say teachers need time to plan or recharge or whatever. Who will say no to them if not the mayor? JLG will never say no to the union.

This is what I worry about. Parents will be completely cut out and have no say in anything.

It's hard for me to understand why any parent could vote for JLG. You're voting to ensure you have no voice in school related decisions.

Can't wait to see what kind of *insane* demands WTU makes next year if she's elected. It will be a great moment for them to have truly crazy demands.

Unfortunately, this thread has gone off the rails. But I keep coming back to it.

I don’t think the WTU will make insane demands. I think the biggest ask will be to improve IMPACT, and I think if she can do it, it will make DCPS better. Overhauling IMPACT will be an enormous task that requires a lot of care to ensure it’s being replaced with something better.

IMPACT was initially useful for two specific reasons:

One — it helped clear out the worst teachers in DCPS when it was first implemented. But for the most part, that had already happened through RIFs.

Two — it helped change the culture to one of extremely high expectations for DCPS teachers. If you want to teach in DCPS you have to be a very hard worker.

However, IMPACT has probably reached its limit for how much it will improve schools. We don’t need it to keep a culture of high expectations. It is a distraction from other things that are not working. And for every terrible teacher that it drives out (that could also be driven out with a better evaluation system), it is also drives out talented people who would rather find a new school system or even a new career than play the IMPACT game every year.

I also think the most ardent pro-charter people on this thread should honestly be pleased that Lewis George is talking about improving IMPACT. That will take considerable time, effort and political capital, meaning it will leave very little time for meddling with charters. And here is what anyone who is honest and knows the landscape knows about charters: maybe one-third of charters are either very good or at least comparable to the average DCPS (most of those are the ones mentioned on this forum and then a few others); the other two-thirds range from barely mediocre to significant messes, with some bordering on total incompetency and wastes of taxpayer dollars. It’s a compromise that DC has made over the past thirty years — we get some truly excellent charter schools but it means we also fund and allow kids to go to some very, very questionable charter schools. This is why DCPS now routinely outperforms the charter sector on just about every standardized test. One day we will have to grapple with that fact, but many posts on this thread are good examples of what happens when a politician even says the word charter — people go crazy and accuse you of hating all charter schools.

My shorter take is this: I think it’s good that Lewis George wants to improve IMPACT. I think it’s even better she talks about truancy and middle schools as needing attention. I really don’t think she will be a puppet of the WTU. And I think the charter panic happening in this thread is way over the top.

I’m ranking Lewis George #1 and Rini #2

Just to speak from this perspective... so our child is currently at BASIS and loving it and learning a ton, and I have no doubt he will be well prepared to succeed in college. He getting a very rigorous STEM education and can compete on the debate team and is being supported by a system that gets kids all the way through 12th and into very, very good colleges.

If we didn't have that charter school, he would be at Cardozo High School.

Those are the options. Is there any doubt in my mind that his life path would be dramatically different if he had to go through Cardozo instead of BASIS?

So that's why charter parents feel nervous about voting for a mayor who doesn't like charters. I personally will not be ranking here, and will hold my nose and vote for McDuffie.

But where is this idea that she doesn’t like charters even coming from? I honestly hadn’t heard that except people on this thread saying it.

Also, even if someone did hate charters, schools like BASIS would be the last place they’d be looking to make changes! The first place would be the plethora of charter schools that are terrible. I think we should normalize being pro-charter but also willing to question if all charters are the best use of taxpayer dollars.

Here is every instance that she mentions charters in her WTU questionaire. I don't see any love here:

The vast majority of mid-year mobility flows into our high-need DCPS schools, often from
charter schools after Count Day. The current system of funding DCPS based on its projected
October enrollment and charter schools based on their actual October enrollment provides too
much incentive for charter schools to push students out.

I believe that if charter schools want to be funded like DCPS, they should adhere to the same
transparency requirements as the traditional public schools system.

Parents with children in charter schools often ask me for help as a Councilmember and it can be difficult to support them
in our current system.


Please address your thoughts and philosophy on what a “strong” school is, and decisions
around opening and closing schools in both DCPS and DCPCS, including a moratorium on
charter openings.
● Include a description of what the process would look like.

Planning for strong DC public schools as a system does not seem to be a priority with current
leadership. We cannot simply rely on market forces or parents’ willingness to move mountains to
get their kids into better performing schools far from home. A strong neighborhood public school
system requires thoughtful investment and support. Strong schools offer students a full education:
not only reading and math, but also science, social studies, arts, music and vocational offerings.
Strong schools have activities like sports and clubs that draw students in and keep them showing
up every day. We need thoughtful, coordinated planning cross-sector but also within DCPS about
what’s needed and a commitment that extra resources will be provided long-term.

So you think she wants to destroy all charters because some cheat after count day and should be held accountable.
You think it’s a negative to make DCPS better and actually have more MS and HS options.

IMPACT is an enormous treasure and makes DCPS teachers so much better but you think holding all charters to the same standard would be ‘unfair.’

Mkay.

I just don't want to vote for her. I'm sorry! The bullying is really helping her cause, though.

+1 I have to step back from this thread because I was truly undecided before reading it but the bizarre behavior of the JLG supporter(s) on here are really turning me off. You should be able to have a rational discussion about both candidates flaws and assets without acting so hateful. This is not a choice between Trump and Obama. It a choice between two liberal DC council members, one who is more corporate/business focused and one who is further to the left with more progressive ideas. We're talking like 2-3 notches apart. I get not liking McDuffie but he's just just a Bowser clone, not a member of the Nazi party.

This.

If you dare question anything JLG does, they call you a Trumpie or a Karen or they try to drown you out by spamming the thread with talking points on entirely different subjects.

Probably a good sign of the quality of the policy debate we'll get if she's elected. Janeese will institute early release Wednesdays, saying teacher need more me time or whatever, and that other school systems are doing it so we have to too, and parents will complain and then they'll call them MAGA or Karens or whatever and then that will be it. Don't say you weren't warned.

Reminds me of Covid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The vitriol of the JLG supporters is off-putting. If you question the progressive sacred cows of violence interruptors, excessive spending by the city on councilmember vanity projects like composting or paying WABA $250 per hour to teach bicycling, defining "juveniles" as age 26 for purposes of sentencing, or suggesting that perhaps tenants who are violent towards other residents or building staff should be subject to quicker eviction proceedings, then you quickly get labelled racist, classist, MAGA, etc. JLG supports all of those policies (well, except holding violent tenants accountable---she would not support expedited eviction). We can (and should) have reasoned policy debates over these progressive positions---but I never get the sense that any progressive politician on the DC Council cares one whit about listening to any viewpoint which contradicts their positions, even when those viewpoints are grounded in real life experience.

I voted for JLG, not everything she wants will work. But I'm interested in ambition, action, openness, and accountability. We're at an equilibrium point that isn't satisfactory and need to see some different inputs. Bring yours to the table. Complain AND suggest.

I see JLG as a change candidate and McDuffie himself is running as a continuity candidate. How would you rank the two?

huh? openness and accountability are not exactly her strong suit. if you question anything she does, they'll call you maga. the irony, of course, is that she is the most trump-like candidate in the mayoral race.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:decide -- ranking Goodweather #1. mcduffie #2, not ranking anyone else.

Exactly my plan

[Anonymous]

I voted for JLG, not everything she wants will work. But I'm interested in ambition, action, openness, and accountability. We're at an equilibrium point that isn't satisfactory and need to see some different inputs. Bring yours to the table. Complain AND suggest.

I see JLG as a change candidate and McDuffie himself is running as a continuity candidate. How would you rank the two?

Oh I think JLG will be a change candidate. Just change in a wrong direction. I'm not in favor of increasing income taxes, I am in favor of DC decreasing spending. I'm not in favor of more money being directed to violence interruptors when there is no evidence that it works and a lot more evidence that it is rife with grifting. I'm not in favor of spending DC pension fund money on housing projects when the real problem is that DC's landlord tenant laws are so one-sided that market investors deem the District toxic for residential development. There is literally no one on the DC Council who understands how business works (except maybe Brooke Pinto) and why creating a more business friendly climate in the city is essential now that the rug has been pulled out from the federal workforce. DC is in economic freefall and none of the policies being promoted by JLG and her progressive FreeDC slate will help it---they will only make it worse. I am tired of seeing business and real estate developers in particular being demonized by the progressives when U Street, H Street, NoMA, the Navy Yard, Union Market and the Wharf---all redeveloped areas which create an enormous amount of tax revenue for the District---would not exist but for the pragmatism of Tony Williams in attracting private investment to the District. Not crazy about McDuffie but when faced with the lesser of two evils, he is it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The vitriol of the JLG supporters is off-putting. If you question the progressive sacred cows of violence interruptors, excessive spending by the city on councilmember vanity projects like composting or paying WABA $250 per hour to teach bicycling, defining "juveniles" as age 26 for purposes of sentencing, or suggesting that perhaps tenants who are violent towards other residents or building staff should be subject to quicker eviction proceedings, then you quickly get labelled racist, classist, MAGA, etc. JLG supports all of those policies (well, except holding violent tenants accountable---she would not support expedited eviction). We can (and should) have reasoned policy debates over these progressive positions---but I never get the sense that any progressive politician on the DC Council cares one whit about listening to any viewpoint which contradicts their positions, even when those viewpoints are grounded in real life experience.

I voted for JLG, not everything she wants will work. But I'm interested in ambition, action, openness, and accountability. We're at an equilibrium point that isn't satisfactory and need to see some different inputs. Bring yours to the table. Complain AND suggest.

I see JLG as a change candidate and McDuffie himself is running as a continuity candidate. How would you rank the two?

huh? openness and accountability are not exactly her strong suit. if you question anything she does, they'll call you maga. the irony, of course, is that she is the most trump-like candidate in the mayoral race.

Hmm sounds like gaslighting to me.

[Anonymous]

Anything bad about McDuffie and supporters is a personal attack but anything said about JLG is true and factual.

Hahaha. Ok, I’ll be voting for more business corruption instead.

That was sarcasm, I’ll be voting JLG. It’s funny JLG voters have stated why they are going to vote for her but Duffy voters haven’t.

The charter comments are not substantive enough. Especially because Duff hasn’t done anything for charters or shown support. You believe his words but not hers? That’s weird.

So instead of trying to distract of with JLG hate spam, why don’t you give reason Duff is actually the best choice?

Because you know he’s not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:decide -- ranking Goodweather #1. mcduffie #2, not ranking anyone else.

Exactly my plan

+1