Who do you think will win MoCo county exec?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you care about special education go with Jawando

That's a BOE issue. Not CEX.

It still natters

If it matters so much, I guess that anti-Jawando PAC ad was on the money -- all the problems in the school system are Jawando's fault because he's the chair of the Education Committee.

That's what Friedson is desparately hoping people think instead of pinning him with the negative effects of his development initiatives that undercut school funding.

💯. Jawando is doing the work and has skin in the game when it comes to schools. Others not so much.

I early voted for Jawando but I’m thinking of getting a yard sign to support him, the first one I’ve ever had.

Just pick any of the many Jawando signs that illegally litter the public right-of-ways throughout the county. Good to know we have to spend taxpayer funds to remove these.

You are kidding right?
Wasting taxpayer monies that would be all Republicans running.

Diaz in particular running for BOE never even showed up for work and she got paid for god's sake. And you are complaining about signs?? COX is a scammer the other Republcian running is a criminal and this is your hill to die on.

There are signs for all of these idiots all over the place. Not just dems.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only thing that matters now in MoCo is money. The County spends far too much of it, and the growth which allowed them to do this from 1960 to 2010 has gone negative, leaving them with only three options: Raise taxes, borrow, or cut spending. Raising taxes will discourage growth, leading to residents and businesses leaving. This is a fiscal death spiral. Borrowing only raises future taxes, causing a similar death spiral. The only option left is cuts, both to spending and regulation. For those who say this is a "Republican position," well, it would have been, say, 15 years ago. Today it's a politically homeless position as both parties have abandoned economic reality for giveaways and magical thinking. From my perspective, Friedson is the only candidate who has any hope of realizing that this argument is true. Jawando will accelerate our County's economic suicide, as will Glass (maybe to a somewhat lesser degree.)

Friedson is the only one of the three who has never proposed cutting anything.

Friedson never cared about funding anything. Except trickle-down giveaways to his narrow donor base.

[Anonymous]

.

Forgot to add: my husband emailed Friedson telling him he was wrong about not wanting to raise taxes and… he emailed him back! Personally engaging with him about the issue (we still disagree, this isn’t the 1980s and the whole no new taxes thing is 🙄) but I was impressed that he took the time to engage with a voter who probably was not going to swing his way! I did like that about him and it kind of reminded me of the Gov Hogan who was smart and pragmatic enough to listen to the other side and occasionally even change his mind!

Someone actually thinks Moco should raises taxes again/more???!!

Good Lord.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only thing that matters now in MoCo is money. The County spends far too much of it, and the growth which allowed them to do this from 1960 to 2010 has gone negative, leaving them with only three options: Raise taxes, borrow, or cut spending. Raising taxes will discourage growth, leading to residents and businesses leaving. This is a fiscal death spiral. Borrowing only raises future taxes, causing a similar death spiral. The only option left is cuts, both to spending and regulation. For those who say this is a "Republican position," well, it would have been, say, 15 years ago. Today it's a politically homeless position as both parties have abandoned economic reality for giveaways and magical thinking. From my perspective, Friedson is the only candidate who has any hope of realizing that this argument is true. Jawando will accelerate our County's economic suicide, as will Glass (maybe to a somewhat lesser degree.)

Friedson is the only one of the three who has never proposed cutting anything.

Jawando's cuts were stupid theater. He might fool the general public but he doesn't fool those who actually know how the county runs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only thing that matters now in MoCo is money. The County spends far too much of it, and the growth which allowed them to do this from 1960 to 2010 has gone negative, leaving them with only three options: Raise taxes, borrow, or cut spending. Raising taxes will discourage growth, leading to residents and businesses leaving. This is a fiscal death spiral. Borrowing only raises future taxes, causing a similar death spiral. The only option left is cuts, both to spending and regulation. For those who say this is a "Republican position," well, it would have been, say, 15 years ago. Today it's a politically homeless position as both parties have abandoned economic reality for giveaways and magical thinking. From my perspective, Friedson is the only candidate who has any hope of realizing that this argument is true. Jawando will accelerate our County's economic suicide, as will Glass (maybe to a somewhat lesser degree.)

Friedson is the only one of the three who has never proposed cutting anything.

Friedson never cared about funding anything. Except trickle-down giveaways to his narrow donor base.

So true. The only people who have gotten tax breaks while Friedson has been on the council are people who have donated to his campaigns. Glass hasn’t really been a player on the budget, other than to help the groupthink along.

What I appreciate about Jawando is that he proposed cuts this time around. Some of his proposed cuts couldn’t be done, but he was out front suggesting a number for cutting MCPS. Jawando has been a big spender — and if the economy turns around he will be again — but this year he recognized that the times called for a different approach. This being an election year certainly informed his approach. I don’t have a problem with that. Elected officials should be responsive to constituents. Friedson couldn’t even muster that much. He did not engage the budget process, except to propose increases for his pet projects.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only thing that matters now in MoCo is money. The County spends far too much of it, and the growth which allowed them to do this from 1960 to 2010 has gone negative, leaving them with only three options: Raise taxes, borrow, or cut spending. Raising taxes will discourage growth, leading to residents and businesses leaving. This is a fiscal death spiral. Borrowing only raises future taxes, causing a similar death spiral. The only option left is cuts, both to spending and regulation. For those who say this is a "Republican position," well, it would have been, say, 15 years ago. Today it's a politically homeless position as both parties have abandoned economic reality for giveaways and magical thinking. From my perspective, Friedson is the only candidate who has any hope of realizing that this argument is true. Jawando will accelerate our County's economic suicide, as will Glass (maybe to a somewhat lesser degree.)

Friedson is the only one of the three who has never proposed cutting anything.

Friedson never cared about funding anything. Except trickle-down giveaways to his narrow donor base.

So true. The only people who have gotten tax breaks while Friedson has been on the council are people who have donated to his campaigns. Glass hasn’t really been a player on the budget, other than to help the groupthink along.

What I appreciate about Jawando is that he proposed cuts this time around. Some of his proposed cuts couldn’t be done, but he was out front suggesting a number for cutting MCPS. Jawando has been a big spender — and if the economy turns around he will be again — but this year he recognized that the times called for a different approach. This being an election year certainly informed his approach. I don’t have a problem with that. Elected officials should be responsive to constituents. Friedson couldn’t even muster that much. He did not engage the budget process, except to propose increases for his pet projects.

NFG would beg to differ!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only thing that matters now in MoCo is money. The County spends far too much of it, and the growth which allowed them to do this from 1960 to 2010 has gone negative, leaving them with only three options: Raise taxes, borrow, or cut spending. Raising taxes will discourage growth, leading to residents and businesses leaving. This is a fiscal death spiral. Borrowing only raises future taxes, causing a similar death spiral. The only option left is cuts, both to spending and regulation. For those who say this is a "Republican position," well, it would have been, say, 15 years ago. Today it's a politically homeless position as both parties have abandoned economic reality for giveaways and magical thinking. From my perspective, Friedson is the only candidate who has any hope of realizing that this argument is true. Jawando will accelerate our County's economic suicide, as will Glass (maybe to a somewhat lesser degree.)

Friedson is the only one of the three who has never proposed cutting anything.

Friedson never cared about funding anything. Except trickle-down giveaways to his narrow donor base.

So true. The only people who have gotten tax breaks while Friedson has been on the council are people who have donated to his campaigns. Glass hasn’t really been a player on the budget, other than to help the groupthink along.

What I appreciate about Jawando is that he proposed cuts this time around. Some of his proposed cuts couldn’t be done, but he was out front suggesting a number for cutting MCPS. Jawando has been a big spender — and if the economy turns around he will be again — but this year he recognized that the times called for a different approach. This being an election year certainly informed his approach. I don’t have a problem with that. Elected officials should be responsive to constituents. Friedson couldn’t even muster that much. He did not engage the budget process, except to propose increases for his pet projects.

NFG would beg to differ!

If we are being honest, all three positioned their rhetoric and votes based on what they thought would serve their campaigns best, rather than what they thought would serve the county best.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only thing that matters now in MoCo is money. The County spends far too much of it, and the growth which allowed them to do this from 1960 to 2010 has gone negative, leaving them with only three options: Raise taxes, borrow, or cut spending. Raising taxes will discourage growth, leading to residents and businesses leaving. This is a fiscal death spiral. Borrowing only raises future taxes, causing a similar death spiral. The only option left is cuts, both to spending and regulation. For those who say this is a "Republican position," well, it would have been, say, 15 years ago. Today it's a politically homeless position as both parties have abandoned economic reality for giveaways and magical thinking. From my perspective, Friedson is the only candidate who has any hope of realizing that this argument is true. Jawando will accelerate our County's economic suicide, as will Glass (maybe to a somewhat lesser degree.)

Friedson is the only one of the three who has never proposed cutting anything.

Friedson never cared about funding anything. Except trickle-down giveaways to his narrow donor base.

So true. The only people who have gotten tax breaks while Friedson has been on the council are people who have donated to his campaigns. Glass hasn’t really been a player on the budget, other than to help the groupthink along.

What I appreciate about Jawando is that he proposed cuts this time around. Some of his proposed cuts couldn’t be done, but he was out front suggesting a number for cutting MCPS. Jawando has been a big spender — and if the economy turns around he will be again — but this year he recognized that the times called for a different approach. This being an election year certainly informed his approach. I don’t have a problem with that. Elected officials should be responsive to constituents. Friedson couldn’t even muster that much. He did not engage the budget process, except to propose increases for his pet projects.

Or is Jawando just cynically playing to more moderate voters this time? Obviously the proposal to increase taxes is deeply unpopular. I don't see him as pragmatic or a 'doer' (unsurprising to hear some of his cuts couldn't be done), and simply don't trust him.

[Anonymous]

All of us will probably end up higher tax regardless of who wins today. I am hoping for Friedson over the other two.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:.

Forgot to add: my husband emailed Friedson telling him he was wrong about not wanting to raise taxes and… he emailed him back! Personally engaging with him about the issue (we still disagree, this isn’t the 1980s and the whole no new taxes thing is 🙄) but I was impressed that he took the time to engage with a voter who probably was not going to swing his way! I did like that about him and it kind of reminded me of the Gov Hogan who was smart and pragmatic enough to listen to the other side and occasionally even change his mind!

Someone actually thinks Moco should raises taxes again/more???!!

Good Lord.

Hogan??

Hogan left office with $2 million of Taxpayer monies that were not his and he funnelled monies to his own company. You are an idiot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All of us will probably end up higher tax regardless of who wins today. I am hoping for Friedson over the other two.

\

You think Friedson will not vote for higher taxes LOL

What will happen if Friedson is elected:

* The data center moratorium will end. Friedson was still opposing a moratorium on data centers at the beginning of June and doesn’t seem to grasp that some data center regulation mist happen at the state level, so the moratorium needs to be long enough for that to happen. Don’t trust Friedson’s flip flop this week. The affordable Maryland PAC has a lot of money from big tech and big tech wants data centers. Friedson delivers for his donors.

* The county’s inclusionary zoning program will be greatly scaled back or ended. This is a priority for his big donors and he’s demonstrated that he delivers for them.

* Rent stabilization will end even though housing production is already recovering from the Trump-induced pullback and rents are down for the first time in a very long time.

What will NOT happen if Friedson is elected:

* Ending single family zoning. The executive has no control over zoning. (Even though people love to blame Elrich for zoning)

* Tax cuts for homeowners and other residents. Friedson is a Reaganomics guy. He needs us to pay taxes so developers don’t have to. Friedson has not promised to cut taxes and he hasn’t even promised not to increase taxes. In a recent interview he even said explicitly that he wasn’t promising not to increase taxes.

• Infrastructure improvements. As a council member, Friedson has diverted money from transportation and school construction to fatten up developers’ profit margins.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of us will probably end up higher tax regardless of who wins today. I am hoping for Friedson over the other two.

\

You think Friedson will not vote for higher taxes LOL

What will happen if Friedson is elected:

* The data center moratorium will end. Friedson was still opposing a moratorium on data centers at the beginning of June and doesn’t seem to grasp that some data center regulation mist happen at the state level, so the moratorium needs to be long enough for that to happen. Don’t trust Friedson’s flip flop this week. The affordable Maryland PAC has a lot of money from big tech and big tech wants data centers. Friedson delivers for his donors.

* The county’s inclusionary zoning program will be greatly scaled back or ended. This is a priority for his big donors and he’s demonstrated that he delivers for them.

* Rent stabilization will end even though housing production is already recovering from the Trump-induced pullback and rents are down for the first time in a very long time.

What will NOT happen if Friedson is elected:

* Ending single family zoning. The executive has no control over zoning. (Even though people love to blame Elrich for zoning)

* Tax cuts for homeowners and other residents. Friedson is a Reaganomics guy. He needs us to pay taxes so developers don’t have to. Friedson has not promised to cut taxes and he hasn’t even promised not to increase taxes. In a recent interview he even said explicitly that he wasn’t promising not to increase taxes.

• Infrastructure improvements. As a council member, Friedson has diverted money from transportation and school construction to fatten up developers’ profit margins.

Maybe but far better than the other two choices. You do you.

[Anonymous]

Friedson seems to be the only one who cares about attracting young college educated professionals to live here and create more jobs. Everyone else seems fine with the status quo of developing nothing but low income housing and retirement homes, which is obviously a recipe for fiscal decay.

I don’t want everyone in the county polluting the environment on 495 on there way to work in Virginia because we don’t have enough high paying jobs here. I want people coming here to work, eat out, and shop here. That means building more housing for people who pay taxes and ensuring enough jobs are here that they don’t have to commute elsewhere. Friedson cares about these things more than the other options and he’s getting my vote.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Friedson seems to be the only one who cares about attracting young college educated professionals to live here and create more jobs. Everyone else seems fine with the status quo of developing nothing but low income housing and retirement homes, which is obviously a recipe for fiscal decay.

I don’t want everyone in the county polluting the environment on 495 on there way to work in Virginia because we don’t have enough high paying jobs here. I want people coming here to work, eat out, and shop here. That means building more housing for people who pay taxes and ensuring enough jobs are here that they don’t have to commute elsewhere. Friedson cares about these things more than the other options and he’s getting my vote.

What about the infrastructure to support this new housing? Where is that coming from?

[Anonymous]

Vote for Sullivan.