Ward 4 Election

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's over - Lisa getting absolutely smoked in the $$

https://x.com/alisonhorndc/status/1758200212802187766?s=46&t=EwM4bfthPj_yHwyhXgwkdw

Remember when Brandon Todd had a huge fundraising edge over JLG four years ago? That race was so over.

Brandon Todd wasn't doing public financing. He drew big $$ from the big money trying to kiss his a$$.

Gore has less support than Johnson. That's not the sign of a serious candidate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Seriously, what is the council good for if they refuse to address crime, and claim their well-documented efforts to defund failed even as crime skyrocketed? Maybe we can elect someone who doesn’t gaslight that crime in our ward is significantly worse than before her time in office and is willing to address it.

Janeese knows her constituents despise her stance on crime, and she knows she is going to lose in June, so we just have to suffer through her lame talking points between now and then. To wit, she says:

1. Crime isn't nearly as bad as people say

2. If it is that bad, it's not her fault. It's the mayor's fault or the police's fault or the attorney general's fault or Republicans' fault. But it's never her fault (and it's *never* a criminal's fault)

3. Yes, she ran on defunding the police department but she failed, so what's the problem?

4. City council members have no power over crime (even through they're constantly voting to decriminalize something and opposing every single bill Bowser puts up to crack down crime). See #2.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was another armed robbery spree throughout Ward 4 last night with hits on military road and elsewhere.

Thankfully, and despite JLG’s continued effort to undermine their work, MPD arrested one of the suspects today.

Oh okay I get it. If it is bad, then we should lay that at the feet of JLG. If it is good, then clearly it happened in spite of her being present on this planet.

Makes sense. Let's call it the JLG-centric Theory of the Bad-verse. You read it first on DCUM, folks!

When you have a leader who is explicitly anti-police, it is no surprise that armed crime sprees become a weekly commonplace in Ward 4.

Not just anti-police. She is the face of defunding the police. She wants to gut the police department. She's not shy about it.

The beauty of democracy is that I can vote for her, and understand that this whole thing is not true, no matter how many times you say it.

If you’re still alive to do so. Living in Ward 4, we’re taking our chances every day.

Tell me again you don't understand actual risk. You're more likely to get hurt driving around your new suburbs. Good luck!

I’m a different poster. Still in Ward 4 but hoping we see real change soon.

Dismissing 4 armed robberies on a mathematical level of “risk assessment” is beyond pathetic and shows why crime is so rampant.

I'm all about dealing with the issue. I'm just not ok with hyperbole. It's ok to feel upset about crime, I do too. We just need to deal with it rationally.

NP but can I ask what crime has happened in your neighborhood? Because in my neighborhood in a three week period there was an armed robbery on the corner at 5 pm, a helicopter filled police manhunt that ended with a guy handcuffed to my next door neighbor’s fence while police dogs sniffed around our garbages, and a person was car jacked and seriously injured a few blocks away. I am not prone to hyperbole but this really brings me pause. On top of the two shootings near my kid’s school that led to lockdowns last spring, the biker who was shot and killed and the people stealing frenchies.

I'm in Ward 4. I'm not seeing that type of crime in my neighborhood. With that said, I am not leaving, but I am also not voting for JLG under any circumstances. I thought Brandon Todd was dumb, but wow!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's over - Lisa getting absolutely smoked in the $$

https://x.com/alisonhorndc/status/1758200212802187766?s=46&t=EwM4bfthPj_yHwyhXgwkdw

She has like another $60k in public funding coming soon (and she would already have it if she didn't screw up her initial campaign filing)

She also has screwed up in a giant ANC email thread - claiming she was hacked when she replied all instead of forwarding an email as attended. Gore is really off to the races to show she is not competent enough to be on Council, which says a lot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's over - Lisa getting absolutely smoked in the $$

https://x.com/alisonhorndc/status/1758200212802187766?s=46&t=EwM4bfthPj_yHwyhXgwkdw

She has like another $60k in public funding coming soon (and she would already have it if she didn't screw up her initial campaign filing)

She also has screwed up in a giant ANC email thread - claiming she was hacked when she replied all instead of forwarding an email as attended. Gore is really off to the races to show she is not competent enough to be on Council, which says a lot.

Intended, not attended. My bad!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's over - Lisa getting absolutely smoked in the $$

https://x.com/alisonhorndc/status/1758200212802187766?s=46&t=EwM4bfthPj_yHwyhXgwkdw

She has like another $60k in public funding coming soon (and she would already have it if she didn't screw up her initial campaign filing)

She also has screwed up in a giant ANC email thread - claiming she was hacked when she replied all instead of forwarding an email as attended. Gore is really off to the races to show she is not competent enough to be on Council, which says a lot.

Are you actually familiar with the Council? "No crime crisis!" Phil? "J$ws control the weather!" Trayon?

Reply all to an email is hardly disqualifying. Crime is a very serious issue, one you clearly dismiss in bringing up such an utterly trifling point to try to deflect. Wow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's over - Lisa getting absolutely smoked in the $$

https://x.com/alisonhorndc/status/1758200212802187766?s=46&t=EwM4bfthPj_yHwyhXgwkdw

She has like another $60k in public funding coming soon (and she would already have it if she didn't screw up her initial campaign filing)

She also has screwed up in a giant ANC email thread - claiming she was hacked when she replied all instead of forwarding an email as attended. Gore is really off to the races to show she is not competent enough to be on Council, which says a lot.

Are you actually familiar with the Council? "No crime crisis!" Phil? "J$ws control the weather!" Trayon?

Reply all to an email is hardly disqualifying. Crime is a very serious issue, one you clearly dismiss in bringing up such an utterly trifling point to try to deflect. Wow.

A very serious issue that benefits from a deep understanding of the issues. That's what I've seen from Janeese Lewis George. I appreciate that she doesn't just blow with the winds of what's popular. We had Brandon Todd before and he'd do exactly that. It's useless, and I don't want to go back to that. I'd rather be able to have a meaningful discussion with Janeese even if we're not eye to eye on every issue.

I'm sure the mayor would love to go back to having another lackey on the council.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's over - Lisa getting absolutely smoked in the $$

https://x.com/alisonhorndc/status/1758200212802187766?s=46&t=EwM4bfthPj_yHwyhXgwkdw

She has like another $60k in public funding coming soon (and she would already have it if she didn't screw up her initial campaign filing)

She also has screwed up in a giant ANC email thread - claiming she was hacked when she replied all instead of forwarding an email as attended. Gore is really off to the races to show she is not competent enough to be on Council, which says a lot.

Are you actually familiar with the Council? "No crime crisis!" Phil? "J$ws control the weather!" Trayon?

Reply all to an email is hardly disqualifying. Crime is a very serious issue, one you clearly dismiss in bringing up such an utterly trifling point to try to deflect. Wow.

A very serious issue that benefits from a deep understanding of the issues. That's what I've seen from Janeese Lewis George. I appreciate that she doesn't just blow with the winds of what's popular. We had Brandon Todd before and he'd do exactly that. It's useless, and I don't want to go back to that. I'd rather be able to have a meaningful discussion with Janeese even if we're not eye to eye on every issue.

I'm sure the mayor would love to go back to having another lackey on the council.

DP but let's assume for the sake of discussion that JLG does have a deep understanding of the issues. What "benefits" on crime have you seen from that understanding? How exactly is crime getting better? Where are the benefits? Be specific, and don't just use platitudes from a website. What has she done to improve anything w/r/t crime? Because all I see from her is blowing with the winds of what's popular - blew in on an AOC current and now, just in the last two months, finally starting to smell that the wind is coming from a different direction and tries to pay lip service to the idea that her consituents don't actually want to dodge bullets daily. She's not good at paying lip service which is probably to her credit - she believes the stuff she said the first time and it hurts her spirit to pretend to get along with cops or want criminals arrested - but she's trying to say what people want to hear anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's over - Lisa getting absolutely smoked in the $$

https://x.com/alisonhorndc/status/1758200212802187766?s=46&t=EwM4bfthPj_yHwyhXgwkdw

She has like another $60k in public funding coming soon (and she would already have it if she didn't screw up her initial campaign filing)

She also has screwed up in a giant ANC email thread - claiming she was hacked when she replied all instead of forwarding an email as attended. Gore is really off to the races to show she is not competent enough to be on Council, which says a lot.

Are you actually familiar with the Council? "No crime crisis!" Phil? "J$ws control the weather!" Trayon?

Reply all to an email is hardly disqualifying. Crime is a very serious issue, one you clearly dismiss in bringing up such an utterly trifling point to try to deflect. Wow.

A very serious issue that benefits from a deep understanding of the issues. That's what I've seen from Janeese Lewis George. I appreciate that she doesn't just blow with the winds of what's popular. We had Brandon Todd before and he'd do exactly that. It's useless, and I don't want to go back to that. I'd rather be able to have a meaningful discussion with Janeese even if we're not eye to eye on every issue.

I'm sure the mayor would love to go back to having another lackey on the council.

DP but let's assume for the sake of discussion that JLG does have a deep understanding of the issues. What "benefits" on crime have you seen from that understanding? How exactly is crime getting better? Where are the benefits? Be specific, and don't just use platitudes from a website. What has she done to improve anything w/r/t crime? Because all I see from her is blowing with the winds of what's popular - blew in on an AOC current and now, just in the last two months, finally starting to smell that the wind is coming from a different direction and tries to pay lip service to the idea that her consituents don't actually want to dodge bullets daily. She's not good at paying lip service which is probably to her credit - she believes the stuff she said the first time and it hurts her spirit to pretend to get along with cops or want criminals arrested - but she's trying to say what people want to hear anyway.

Yes, her heart is not in trying to crack down on crime and she couldn’t give less of a sht about regular families that have been victims.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's over - Lisa getting absolutely smoked in the $$

https://x.com/alisonhorndc/status/1758200212802187766?s=46&t=EwM4bfthPj_yHwyhXgwkdw

She has like another $60k in public funding coming soon (and she would already have it if she didn't screw up her initial campaign filing)

She also has screwed up in a giant ANC email thread - claiming she was hacked when she replied all instead of forwarding an email as attended. Gore is really off to the races to show she is not competent enough to be on Council, which says a lot.

Are you actually familiar with the Council? "No crime crisis!" Phil? "J$ws control the weather!" Trayon?

Reply all to an email is hardly disqualifying. Crime is a very serious issue, one you clearly dismiss in bringing up such an utterly trifling point to try to deflect. Wow.

A very serious issue that benefits from a deep understanding of the issues. That's what I've seen from Janeese Lewis George. I appreciate that she doesn't just blow with the winds of what's popular. We had Brandon Todd before and he'd do exactly that. It's useless, and I don't want to go back to that. I'd rather be able to have a meaningful discussion with Janeese even if we're not eye to eye on every issue.

I'm sure the mayor would love to go back to having another lackey on the council.

DP but let's assume for the sake of discussion that JLG does have a deep understanding of the issues. What "benefits" on crime have you seen from that understanding? How exactly is crime getting better? Where are the benefits? Be specific, and don't just use platitudes from a website. What has she done to improve anything w/r/t crime? Because all I see from her is blowing with the winds of what's popular - blew in on an AOC current and now, just in the last two months, finally starting to smell that the wind is coming from a different direction and tries to pay lip service to the idea that her consituents don't actually want to dodge bullets daily. She's not good at paying lip service which is probably to her credit - she believes the stuff she said the first time and it hurts her spirit to pretend to get along with cops or want criminals arrested - but she's trying to say what people want to hear anyway.

As a councilmember, her job is policy and budget. The mayor and MPD are responsible for executing. So your question can't actually be answered unless she put on a cape and started Bat-manning criminals at night.

Your last paragraph is just demonstrably false - she's always worked with MPD.

Who are you and why are you bantering around talking points? As a ward 4 resident I find that extremely off-putting and only more of a reason to support Janeese.

[Anonymous]

I honestly don't know how to vote in the next election. I think JLG does understand crime issues very well, and I used to agree with her that we need to focus on prevention and rehabilitation instead of incarceration, but 10 years in Petworth has worn me down. It's so unsettling to be a Ward 4 resident east of the park right now. Petworth/Brightwood are not safe. It's gotten significantly worse, not better. The only thing that helped were the multiple arrests made of the Kennedy Street Crew last summer, which was largely due to the effort of multiple federal agencies.

I attended JLG's safety meeting a few weeks back. Lisa Gore showed up and asked the last question. She was...not impressive. Her question was barely intelligible---I don't even remember what it was. She seemed flustered and just there to make a point---that she's running. I was excited for a JLG challenger who says she's tougher on crime, but that did not instill confidence at all. So, do I vote for the more competent option who isn't as tough on crime as I would like, or vote for the less competent option?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's over - Lisa getting absolutely smoked in the $$

https://x.com/alisonhorndc/status/1758200212802187766?s=46&t=EwM4bfthPj_yHwyhXgwkdw

She has like another $60k in public funding coming soon (and she would already have it if she didn't screw up her initial campaign filing)

She also has screwed up in a giant ANC email thread - claiming she was hacked when she replied all instead of forwarding an email as attended. Gore is really off to the races to show she is not competent enough to be on Council, which says a lot.

Are you actually familiar with the Council? "No crime crisis!" Phil? "J$ws control the weather!" Trayon?

Reply all to an email is hardly disqualifying. Crime is a very serious issue, one you clearly dismiss in bringing up such an utterly trifling point to try to deflect. Wow.

A very serious issue that benefits from a deep understanding of the issues. That's what I've seen from Janeese Lewis George. I appreciate that she doesn't just blow with the winds of what's popular. We had Brandon Todd before and he'd do exactly that. It's useless, and I don't want to go back to that. I'd rather be able to have a meaningful discussion with Janeese even if we're not eye to eye on every issue.

I'm sure the mayor would love to go back to having another lackey on the council.

DP but let's assume for the sake of discussion that JLG does have a deep understanding of the issues. What "benefits" on crime have you seen from that understanding? How exactly is crime getting better? Where are the benefits? Be specific, and don't just use platitudes from a website. What has she done to improve anything w/r/t crime? Because all I see from her is blowing with the winds of what's popular - blew in on an AOC current and now, just in the last two months, finally starting to smell that the wind is coming from a different direction and tries to pay lip service to the idea that her consituents don't actually want to dodge bullets daily. She's not good at paying lip service which is probably to her credit - she believes the stuff she said the first time and it hurts her spirit to pretend to get along with cops or want criminals arrested - but she's trying to say what people want to hear anyway.

As a councilmember, her job is policy and budget. The mayor and MPD are responsible for executing. So your question can't actually be answered unless she put on a cape and started Bat-manning criminals at night.

Your last paragraph is just demonstrably false - she's always worked with MPD.

Who are you and why are you bantering around talking points? As a ward 4 resident I find that extremely off-putting and only more of a reason to support Janeese.

Who am I? A Ward 4 resident asking you to back up your talking points. You are on here caping for her as the best option who has a deep understanding of the issues and then . . . cannot back it up with even one word. You also don't appear to know what a paragraph is, which is not a testament to whatever elementary school you attended. Support who you want but people can see lack of substance and hopping on here every month to crow about campaign contributions is not changing hearts and minds like you think.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I honestly don't know how to vote in the next election. I think JLG does understand crime issues very well, and I used to agree with her that we need to focus on prevention and rehabilitation instead of incarceration, but 10 years in Petworth has worn me down. It's so unsettling to be a Ward 4 resident east of the park right now. Petworth/Brightwood are not safe. It's gotten significantly worse, not better. The only thing that helped were the multiple arrests made of the Kennedy Street Crew last summer, which was largely due to the effort of multiple federal agencies.

I attended JLG's safety meeting a few weeks back. Lisa Gore showed up and asked the last question. She was...not impressive. Her question was barely intelligible---I don't even remember what it was. She seemed flustered and just there to make a point---that she's running. I was excited for a JLG challenger who says she's tougher on crime, but that did not instill confidence at all. So, do I vote for the more competent option who isn't as tough on crime as I would like, or vote for the less competent option?

For me Lisa Gore doesn't have to be impressive because I'm voting against JLG. But I also voted for JLG as a "no" vote for Todd, so I may end up spinning my wheels in the carousel of dysfunction that is DC local politics forever. If the Charles Allen recall has any legs and George comes close to losing, they might get their heads out of their butts and stop blocking all meaningful Safety legislation. Probably not, but it's the best option available atm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I honestly don't know how to vote in the next election. I think JLG does understand crime issues very well, and I used to agree with her that we need to focus on prevention and rehabilitation instead of incarceration, but 10 years in Petworth has worn me down. It's so unsettling to be a Ward 4 resident east of the park right now. Petworth/Brightwood are not safe. It's gotten significantly worse, not better. The only thing that helped were the multiple arrests made of the Kennedy Street Crew last summer, which was largely due to the effort of multiple federal agencies.

I attended JLG's safety meeting a few weeks back. Lisa Gore showed up and asked the last question. She was...not impressive. Her question was barely intelligible---I don't even remember what it was. She seemed flustered and just there to make a point---that she's running. I was excited for a JLG challenger who says she's tougher on crime, but that did not instill confidence at all. So, do I vote for the more competent option who isn't as tough on crime as I would like, or vote for the less competent option?

Ah, welcome to DC politics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's over - Lisa getting absolutely smoked in the $$

https://x.com/alisonhorndc/status/1758200212802187766?s=46&t=EwM4bfthPj_yHwyhXgwkdw

She has like another $60k in public funding coming soon (and she would already have it if she didn't screw up her initial campaign filing)

She also has screwed up in a giant ANC email thread - claiming she was hacked when she replied all instead of forwarding an email as attended. Gore is really off to the races to show she is not competent enough to be on Council, which says a lot.

Are you actually familiar with the Council? "No crime crisis!" Phil? "J$ws control the weather!" Trayon?

Reply all to an email is hardly disqualifying. Crime is a very serious issue, one you clearly dismiss in bringing up such an utterly trifling point to try to deflect. Wow.

A very serious issue that benefits from a deep understanding of the issues. That's what I've seen from Janeese Lewis George. I appreciate that she doesn't just blow with the winds of what's popular. We had Brandon Todd before and he'd do exactly that. It's useless, and I don't want to go back to that. I'd rather be able to have a meaningful discussion with Janeese even if we're not eye to eye on every issue.

I'm sure the mayor would love to go back to having another lackey on the council.

DP but let's assume for the sake of discussion that JLG does have a deep understanding of the issues. What "benefits" on crime have you seen from that understanding? How exactly is crime getting better? Where are the benefits? Be specific, and don't just use platitudes from a website. What has she done to improve anything w/r/t crime? Because all I see from her is blowing with the winds of what's popular - blew in on an AOC current and now, just in the last two months, finally starting to smell that the wind is coming from a different direction and tries to pay lip service to the idea that her consituents don't actually want to dodge bullets daily. She's not good at paying lip service which is probably to her credit - she believes the stuff she said the first time and it hurts her spirit to pretend to get along with cops or want criminals arrested - but she's trying to say what people want to hear anyway.

As a councilmember, her job is policy and budget. The mayor and MPD are responsible for executing. So your question can't actually be answered unless she put on a cape and started Bat-manning criminals at night.

Your last paragraph is just demonstrably false - she's always worked with MPD.

Who are you and why are you bantering around talking points? As a ward 4 resident I find that extremely off-putting and only more of a reason to support Janeese.

Who am I? A Ward 4 resident asking you to back up your talking points. You are on here caping for her as the best option who has a deep understanding of the issues and then . . . cannot back it up with even one word. You also don't appear to know what a paragraph is, which is not a testament to whatever elementary school you attended. Support who you want but people can see lack of substance and hopping on here every month to crow about campaign contributions is not changing hearts and minds like you think.

I don't think you're worth a detailed explanation. So sorry about mixing up paragraph vs. part of your post. I can see that's extremely upsetting to you. Have a great day.