Elisa Silverman found guilty of violating campaign finance rules with Ward 3 poll

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thing is really sleazy. She needs to go.

LOL. Of all the unethical things that take place daily among DC politicians, taking a poll for which a candidate later has to reimburse the costs of is the final straw for you?

Not the final straw because there are a thousand reasons to get rid of her. She is a truly awful person. I don't know why people like her even go into politics. She seems to despise voters.

And no one fought harder than Silverman to keep schools closed here long, long, long after they had opened everywhere else. We're now seeing the results of that in the ridiculously bad test scores coming out of DC that are a direct result. That alone should be disqualifying.

But since you asked, and regarding this in particular:

1. You can't spend campaign money on races in which you're not even running!

2. You can't use public money to thwart the will of voters. If she hadn't done this, Goulet would have won.

3. All of this is obviously an illegal in-kind contribution to the other candidates in that race.

Multiple, serious violations.

Not the final straw. Just another reason to get finally get rid of her.

I claim BS on this.

The person who won the primary has DEEP ties across Ward 3, had a ton of organic support in the form of donations and volunteers at public places throughout the campaign. He was the clear leader from the drop of the hat, ran a solid campiaign and would have won, with, or without Silveman;s interference.

There is absolutely no proof that Goulet would have won, because his only real support was among developers and the Washington Post endorsement.

The only reason any of this even happened with because Silverman was worried Goulet would win.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:All of you who are so concerned about a rules violations should remember that McDuffie attempted to run for an office for which he wasn't even eligible. He pursued his legal rights of appeal just as Silverman is doing. Those are rights we all have. What's strange about McDuffie is that he used to be on the Council and apparently didn't want to stay there. That's why he ran for AG. I'm not sure why he wants to get back on the Council after having just quit it, other than he needs a job.

Is anyone taking the side of IDGAF about rules violations from a supposed public servant? Weird position to hold.

It is also a bizarre comparison to make.

One person filed to run for an office, was determined ineligible and not allowed to run.

Another person was found to have breached campaign finance rule, and by extension was engaged in unethical conduct, in their campaign’s use of public money.

These two things are not even remotely similar.

Actually, both are very similar. Both of them took actions that they believed were consistent with the rules. Both were found to be in violation of the rules. Both appealed the decisions. Let's see how Silverman's appeal turns out.

Do you really think that Silverman would knowingly take an unethical action but and not only tell everyone about it, but report it to OCF?

One of many problems with this defense is that Karim Marshall is the one who requested an investigation.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/08/23/karim-marshall-elissa-silverman-poll-council/

Yes, but Silverman reported the expenditures for the poll on her finance reports that she filed with OCF. She wasn't trying to hide anything.

She has other ethics lapses on her record and has consistently shown a “rules don’t apply to me” arrogance, so nothing surprised me.

Do you want to list those lapses or are you still in the process of pulling them out of your butt?

https://twitter.com/BarrasReport/status/1585999970141962242?t=ZRMs0Q_2_VlHY2J_3Yk2hg&s=19

The first of those incidences was not an ethical lapse. And, I say that as someone who was a Frumin supporter when that happened and was angry with Silverman about it. The second issue is what is being discussed in this thread. So, I'll still wait for your list which currently is only one item long.

Recall, she tried to talk Frumin out of the race in 2014. She has no love for him and never has. The effort this year was not done to benefit Frumin, at all. There was a reason she was discussing this with Duncan and Bergman, and not Frumin.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:All of you who are so concerned about a rules violations should remember that McDuffie attempted to run for an office for which he wasn't even eligible. He pursued his legal rights of appeal just as Silverman is doing. Those are rights we all have. What's strange about McDuffie is that he used to be on the Council and apparently didn't want to stay there. That's why he ran for AG. I'm not sure why he wants to get back on the Council after having just quit it, other than he needs a job.

Is anyone taking the side of IDGAF about rules violations from a supposed public servant? Weird position to hold.

It is also a bizarre comparison to make.

One person filed to run for an office, was determined ineligible and not allowed to run.

Another person was found to have breached campaign finance rule, and by extension was engaged in unethical conduct, in their campaign’s use of public money.

These two things are not even remotely similar.

Actually, both are very similar. Both of them took actions that they believed were consistent with the rules. Both were found to be in violation of the rules. Both appealed the decisions. Let's see how Silverman's appeal turns out.

Do you really think that Silverman would knowingly take an unethical action but and not only tell everyone about it, but report it to OCF?

One of many problems with this defense is that Karim Marshall is the one who requested an investigation.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/08/23/karim-marshall-elissa-silverman-poll-council/

Yes, but Silverman reported the expenditures for the poll on her finance reports that she filed with OCF. She wasn't trying to hide anything.

She has other ethics lapses on her record and has consistently shown a “rules don’t apply to me” arrogance, so nothing surprised me.

Do you want to list those lapses or are you still in the process of pulling them out of your butt?

https://twitter.com/mysikix/status/1575518411916017666?t=fKyF8_XQdr7rty8FDjYq2g&s=19

https://twitter.com/AllysnCarpenter/status/1575632683975442432?t=-UM2w1CsudhO52aPXILoRA&s=19

As her biggest supporter, do you also consider anyone who doesn't support her an anti-semite? Because she apparently does, especially if they're a POC. So disgusting.

Do you base all of your knowledge on tweets? I don't know if what is described there is true or not, but I've known Silverman for about 15 years and never encountered anything like what those tweets say. I will note that one of them is apparently paid by the Bowers administration so there may be some political motivation. When Silverman ran against Frumin, I was a very vocal Frumin backer and routinely posted anti-Silverman posts. She never called me an anti-Semite, and no I don't agree that anyone who doesn't support her is one. Nor do I believe she thinks that. However, if you don't believe that she has been the victim of anti-Semitism, you are very uninformed. She was called a fake Jew at a rally while a Bowser official held the megaphone (literally, held it). That was only one incident.

BTW, even after all my pro-Frumin, anti-Silverman posts, Elissa and I have had very pleasant conversations. I have not encountered a negative side of her that you all claim to see all the time.

I don't base all my knowledge on tweets, but also don't base them on the personal anecdotes of one very ardent supporter, either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thing is really sleazy. She needs to go.

LOL. Of all the unethical things that take place daily among DC politicians, taking a poll for which a candidate later has to reimburse the costs of is the final straw for you?

Not the final straw because there are a thousand reasons to get rid of her. She is a truly awful person. I don't know why people like her even go into politics. She seems to despise voters.

And no one fought harder than Silverman to keep schools closed here long, long, long after they had opened everywhere else. We're now seeing the results of that in the ridiculously bad test scores coming out of DC that are a direct result. That alone should be disqualifying.

But since you asked, and regarding this in particular:

1. You can't spend campaign money on races in which you're not even running!

2. You can't use public money to thwart the will of voters. If she hadn't done this, Goulet would have won.

3. All of this is obviously an illegal in-kind contribution to the other candidates in that race.

Multiple, serious violations.

Not the final straw. Just another reason to get finally get rid of her.

I claim BS on this.

The person who won the primary has DEEP ties across Ward 3, had a ton of organic support in the form of donations and volunteers at public places throughout the campaign. He was the clear leader from the drop of the hat, ran a solid campiaign and would have won, with, or without Silveman;s interference.

There is absolutely no proof that Goulet would have won, because his only real support was among developers and the Washington Post endorsement.

The only reason any of this even happened with because Silverman was worried Goulet would win.

She was asked for endorsements and she obviously didn't want to back a losing campaign. If you look at the OCF filings from the time, it was clear that Frumin was way out in front of everyone else in the race. Anyone who thought either Bergman or Duncan had a snowballs chance in this race, was crazy. Clearly the polling confirmed what everyone already knew.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:All of you who are so concerned about a rules violations should remember that McDuffie attempted to run for an office for which he wasn't even eligible. He pursued his legal rights of appeal just as Silverman is doing. Those are rights we all have. What's strange about McDuffie is that he used to be on the Council and apparently didn't want to stay there. That's why he ran for AG. I'm not sure why he wants to get back on the Council after having just quit it, other than he needs a job.

Is anyone taking the side of IDGAF about rules violations from a supposed public servant? Weird position to hold.

It is also a bizarre comparison to make.

One person filed to run for an office, was determined ineligible and not allowed to run.

Another person was found to have breached campaign finance rule, and by extension was engaged in unethical conduct, in their campaign’s use of public money.

These two things are not even remotely similar.

Actually, both are very similar. Both of them took actions that they believed were consistent with the rules. Both were found to be in violation of the rules. Both appealed the decisions. Let's see how Silverman's appeal turns out.

Do you really think that Silverman would knowingly take an unethical action but and not only tell everyone about it, but report it to OCF?

One of many problems with this defense is that Karim Marshall is the one who requested an investigation.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/08/23/karim-marshall-elissa-silverman-poll-council/

Yes, but Silverman reported the expenditures for the poll on her finance reports that she filed with OCF. She wasn't trying to hide anything.

She has other ethics lapses on her record and has consistently shown a “rules don’t apply to me” arrogance, so nothing surprised me.

Do you want to list those lapses or are you still in the process of pulling them out of your butt?

https://twitter.com/BarrasReport/status/1585999970141962242?t=ZRMs0Q_2_VlHY2J_3Yk2hg&s=19

The first of those incidences was not an ethical lapse. And, I say that as someone who was a Frumin supporter when that happened and was angry with Silverman about it. The second issue is what is being discussed in this thread. So, I'll still wait for your list which currently is only one item long.

Recall, she tried to talk Frumin out of the race in 2014. She has no love for him and never has. The effort this year was not done to benefit Frumin, at all. There was a reason she was discussing this with Duncan and Bergman, and not Frumin.

I'm not sure what that has to do with anything. The 2014 incident was listed as an ethical lapse. It wasn't one. Silverman took a poll that showed that she and Frumin were splitting votes but that she was significantly ahead. So, she proposed that he drop out and she would support him in a future race. There is really nothing unethical about that. That's politics. If you can't make deals, you don't belong in a position that requires making deals.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:All of you who are so concerned about a rules violations should remember that McDuffie attempted to run for an office for which he wasn't even eligible. He pursued his legal rights of appeal just as Silverman is doing. Those are rights we all have. What's strange about McDuffie is that he used to be on the Council and apparently didn't want to stay there. That's why he ran for AG. I'm not sure why he wants to get back on the Council after having just quit it, other than he needs a job.

Is anyone taking the side of IDGAF about rules violations from a supposed public servant? Weird position to hold.

It is also a bizarre comparison to make.

One person filed to run for an office, was determined ineligible and not allowed to run.

Another person was found to have breached campaign finance rule, and by extension was engaged in unethical conduct, in their campaign’s use of public money.

These two things are not even remotely similar.

Actually, both are very similar. Both of them took actions that they believed were consistent with the rules. Both were found to be in violation of the rules. Both appealed the decisions. Let's see how Silverman's appeal turns out.

Do you really think that Silverman would knowingly take an unethical action but and not only tell everyone about it, but report it to OCF?

One of many problems with this defense is that Karim Marshall is the one who requested an investigation.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/08/23/karim-marshall-elissa-silverman-poll-council/

Yes, but Silverman reported the expenditures for the poll on her finance reports that she filed with OCF. She wasn't trying to hide anything.

She has other ethics lapses on her record and has consistently shown a “rules don’t apply to me” arrogance, so nothing surprised me.

Do you want to list those lapses or are you still in the process of pulling them out of your butt?

https://twitter.com/BarrasReport/status/1585999970141962242?t=ZRMs0Q_2_VlHY2J_3Yk2hg&s=19

The first of those incidences was not an ethical lapse. And, I say that as someone who was a Frumin supporter when that happened and was angry with Silverman about it. The second issue is what is being discussed in this thread. So, I'll still wait for your list which currently is only one item long.

Recall, she tried to talk Frumin out of the race in 2014. She has no love for him and never has. The effort this year was not done to benefit Frumin, at all. There was a reason she was discussing this with Duncan and Bergman, and not Frumin.

I'm not sure what that has to do with anything. The 2014 incident was listed as an ethical lapse. It wasn't one. Silverman took a poll that showed that she and Frumin were splitting votes but that she was significantly ahead. So, she proposed that he drop out and she would support him in a future race. There is really nothing unethical about that. That's politics. If you can't make deals, you don't belong in a position that requires making deals.

I wasn't suggesting anything unethical about 2014, but noting the "deal making" which seemed to be in play this time as well, as OCF confirmed conversations between Silverman, Bergman and Duncan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thing is really sleazy. She needs to go.

LOL. Of all the unethical things that take place daily among DC politicians, taking a poll for which a candidate later has to reimburse the costs of is the final straw for you?

Not the final straw because there are a thousand reasons to get rid of her. She is a truly awful person. I don't know why people like her even go into politics. She seems to despise voters.

And no one fought harder than Silverman to keep schools closed here long, long, long after they had opened everywhere else. We're now seeing the results of that in the ridiculously bad test scores coming out of DC that are a direct result. That alone should be disqualifying.

But since you asked, and regarding this in particular:

1. You can't spend campaign money on races in which you're not even running!

2. You can't use public money to thwart the will of voters. If she hadn't done this, Goulet would have won.

3. All of this is obviously an illegal in-kind contribution to the other candidates in that race.

Multiple, serious violations.

Not the final straw. Just another reason to get finally get rid of her.

I claim BS on this.

The person who won the primary has DEEP ties across Ward 3, had a ton of organic support in the form of donations and volunteers at public places throughout the campaign. He was the clear leader from the drop of the hat, ran a solid campiaign and would have won, with, or without Silveman;s interference.

There is absolutely no proof that Goulet would have won, because his only real support was among developers and the Washington Post endorsement.

So it was just a coincidence that Silverman polled voters in the middle of the summer, right before an election, in which she wasn't a candidate, in a contest where the moderate Democrats was poised to win, because progressives were splitting their votes among other candidates, and shortly after Silverman conducted the poll, some of those progressive candidates suddenly dropped out, allowing the lefties to unite behind a single candidate to defeat the moderate? That was just happenstance?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thing is really sleazy. She needs to go.

LOL. Of all the unethical things that take place daily among DC politicians, taking a poll for which a candidate later has to reimburse the costs of is the final straw for you?

Not the final straw because there are a thousand reasons to get rid of her. She is a truly awful person. I don't know why people like her even go into politics. She seems to despise voters.

And no one fought harder than Silverman to keep schools closed here long, long, long after they had opened everywhere else. We're now seeing the results of that in the ridiculously bad test scores coming out of DC that are a direct result. That alone should be disqualifying.

But since you asked, and regarding this in particular:

1. You can't spend campaign money on races in which you're not even running!

2. You can't use public money to thwart the will of voters. If she hadn't done this, Goulet would have won.

3. All of this is obviously an illegal in-kind contribution to the other candidates in that race.

Multiple, serious violations.

Not the final straw. Just another reason to get finally get rid of her.

I claim BS on this.

The person who won the primary has DEEP ties across Ward 3, had a ton of organic support in the form of donations and volunteers at public places throughout the campaign. He was the clear leader from the drop of the hat, ran a solid campiaign and would have won, with, or without Silveman;s interference.

There is absolutely no proof that Goulet would have won, because his only real support was among developers and the Washington Post endorsement.

So it was just a coincidence that Silverman polled voters in the middle of the summer, right before an election, in which she wasn't a candidate, in a contest where the moderate Democrats was poised to win, because progressives were splitting their votes among other candidates, and shortly after Silverman conducted the poll, some of those progressive candidates suddenly dropped out, allowing the lefties to unite behind a single candidate to defeat the moderate? That was just happenstance?

You think Frumin is a progressive? Sad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thing is really sleazy. She needs to go.

LOL. Of all the unethical things that take place daily among DC politicians, taking a poll for which a candidate later has to reimburse the costs of is the final straw for you?

Not the final straw because there are a thousand reasons to get rid of her. She is a truly awful person. I don't know why people like her even go into politics. She seems to despise voters.

And no one fought harder than Silverman to keep schools closed here long, long, long after they had opened everywhere else. We're now seeing the results of that in the ridiculously bad test scores coming out of DC that are a direct result. That alone should be disqualifying.

But since you asked, and regarding this in particular:

1. You can't spend campaign money on races in which you're not even running!

2. You can't use public money to thwart the will of voters. If she hadn't done this, Goulet would have won.

3. All of this is obviously an illegal in-kind contribution to the other candidates in that race.

Multiple, serious violations.

Not the final straw. Just another reason to get finally get rid of her.

I claim BS on this.

The person who won the primary has DEEP ties across Ward 3, had a ton of organic support in the form of donations and volunteers at public places throughout the campaign. He was the clear leader from the drop of the hat, ran a solid campiaign and would have won, with, or without Silveman;s interference.

There is absolutely no proof that Goulet would have won, because his only real support was among developers and the Washington Post endorsement.

So it was just a coincidence that Silverman polled voters in the middle of the summer, right before an election, in which she wasn't a candidate, in a contest where the moderate Democrats was poised to win, because progressives were splitting their votes among other candidates, and shortly after Silverman conducted the poll, some of those progressive candidates suddenly dropped out, allowing the lefties to unite behind a single candidate to defeat the moderate? That was just happenstance?

Goulet would have been better off rejecting the DFER/Koch Brother support.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thing is really sleazy. She needs to go.

LOL. Of all the unethical things that take place daily among DC politicians, taking a poll for which a candidate later has to reimburse the costs of is the final straw for you?

Not the final straw because there are a thousand reasons to get rid of her. She is a truly awful person. I don't know why people like her even go into politics. She seems to despise voters.

And no one fought harder than Silverman to keep schools closed here long, long, long after they had opened everywhere else. We're now seeing the results of that in the ridiculously bad test scores coming out of DC that are a direct result. That alone should be disqualifying.

But since you asked, and regarding this in particular:

1. You can't spend campaign money on races in which you're not even running!

2. You can't use public money to thwart the will of voters. If she hadn't done this, Goulet would have won.

3. All of this is obviously an illegal in-kind contribution to the other candidates in that race.

Multiple, serious violations.

Not the final straw. Just another reason to get finally get rid of her.

I claim BS on this.

The person who won the primary has DEEP ties across Ward 3, had a ton of organic support in the form of donations and volunteers at public places throughout the campaign. He was the clear leader from the drop of the hat, ran a solid campiaign and would have won, with, or without Silveman;s interference.

There is absolutely no proof that Goulet would have won, because his only real support was among developers and the Washington Post endorsement.

So it was just a coincidence that Silverman polled voters in the middle of the summer, right before an election, in which she wasn't a candidate, in a contest where the moderate Democrats was poised to win, because progressives were splitting their votes among other candidates, and shortly after Silverman conducted the poll, some of those progressive candidates suddenly dropped out, allowing the lefties to unite behind a single candidate to defeat the moderate? That was just happenstance?

Three progressive candidates suddenly dropped out of the race within a week of Silverman's poll, even though people were just beginning to vote, and they threw their support behind Frumin, the candidate Silverman backed. Probably just a random series of events though...

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thing is really sleazy. She needs to go.

LOL. Of all the unethical things that take place daily among DC politicians, taking a poll for which a candidate later has to reimburse the costs of is the final straw for you?

Not the final straw because there are a thousand reasons to get rid of her. She is a truly awful person. I don't know why people like her even go into politics. She seems to despise voters.

And no one fought harder than Silverman to keep schools closed here long, long, long after they had opened everywhere else. We're now seeing the results of that in the ridiculously bad test scores coming out of DC that are a direct result. That alone should be disqualifying.

But since you asked, and regarding this in particular:

1. You can't spend campaign money on races in which you're not even running!

2. You can't use public money to thwart the will of voters. If she hadn't done this, Goulet would have won.

3. All of this is obviously an illegal in-kind contribution to the other candidates in that race.

Multiple, serious violations.

Not the final straw. Just another reason to get finally get rid of her.

I claim BS on this.

The person who won the primary has DEEP ties across Ward 3, had a ton of organic support in the form of donations and volunteers at public places throughout the campaign. He was the clear leader from the drop of the hat, ran a solid campiaign and would have won, with, or without Silveman;s interference.

There is absolutely no proof that Goulet would have won, because his only real support was among developers and the Washington Post endorsement.

So it was just a coincidence that Silverman polled voters in the middle of the summer, right before an election, in which she wasn't a candidate, in a contest where the moderate Democrats was poised to win, because progressives were splitting their votes among other candidates, and shortly after Silverman conducted the poll, some of those progressive candidates suddenly dropped out, allowing the lefties to unite behind a single candidate to defeat the moderate? That was just happenstance?

Three progressive candidates suddenly dropped out of the race within a week of Silverman's poll, even though people were just beginning to vote, and they threw their support behind Frumin, the candidate Silverman backed. Probably just a random series of events though...

Are you new to politics? This is pretty standard stuff. Do you remember Buttigieg, Klobuchar, and Steyer dropping out of the Democratic primary just before the South Carolina vote? That was to help Biden and prevent Sanders from winning. Did you collapse on your fainting couch back then? Do you think there might have been a poll or two involved?

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thing is really sleazy. She needs to go.

LOL. Of all the unethical things that take place daily among DC politicians, taking a poll for which a candidate later has to reimburse the costs of is the final straw for you?

Not the final straw because there are a thousand reasons to get rid of her. She is a truly awful person. I don't know why people like her even go into politics. She seems to despise voters.

And no one fought harder than Silverman to keep schools closed here long, long, long after they had opened everywhere else. We're now seeing the results of that in the ridiculously bad test scores coming out of DC that are a direct result. That alone should be disqualifying.

But since you asked, and regarding this in particular:

1. You can't spend campaign money on races in which you're not even running!

2. You can't use public money to thwart the will of voters. If she hadn't done this, Goulet would have won.

3. All of this is obviously an illegal in-kind contribution to the other candidates in that race.

Multiple, serious violations.

Not the final straw. Just another reason to get finally get rid of her.

I claim BS on this.

The person who won the primary has DEEP ties across Ward 3, had a ton of organic support in the form of donations and volunteers at public places throughout the campaign. He was the clear leader from the drop of the hat, ran a solid campiaign and would have won, with, or without Silveman;s interference.

There is absolutely no proof that Goulet would have won, because his only real support was among developers and the Washington Post endorsement.

So it was just a coincidence that Silverman polled voters in the middle of the summer, right before an election, in which she wasn't a candidate, in a contest where the moderate Democrats was poised to win, because progressives were splitting their votes among other candidates, and shortly after Silverman conducted the poll, some of those progressive candidates suddenly dropped out, allowing the lefties to unite behind a single candidate to defeat the moderate? That was just happenstance?

Three progressive candidates suddenly dropped out of the race within a week of Silverman's poll, even though people were just beginning to vote, and they threw their support behind Frumin, the candidate Silverman backed. Probably just a random series of events though...

Are you new to politics? This is pretty standard stuff. Do you remember Buttigieg, Klobuchar, and Steyer dropping out of the Democratic primary just before the South Carolina vote? That was to help Biden and prevent Sanders from winning. Did you collapse on your fainting couch back then? Do you think there might have been a poll or two involved?

You're skipping over a few facts. The other progressive candidates refused to drop out -- that's why Silverman conducted the poll, to show them Goulet was going to win. Polling in local races is sparse and those other candidates couldnt afford polling because they had run through all their money. That's why Silverman stepped in with this highly illegal arrangement. I do enjoy though how Silverman just blatantly lies about how the poll had nothing to do with any of that, that she just wanted to know what people there were thinking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thing is really sleazy. She needs to go.

LOL. Of all the unethical things that take place daily among DC politicians, taking a poll for which a candidate later has to reimburse the costs of is the final straw for you?

Not the final straw because there are a thousand reasons to get rid of her. She is a truly awful person. I don't know why people like her even go into politics. She seems to despise voters.

And no one fought harder than Silverman to keep schools closed here long, long, long after they had opened everywhere else. We're now seeing the results of that in the ridiculously bad test scores coming out of DC that are a direct result. That alone should be disqualifying.

But since you asked, and regarding this in particular:

1. You can't spend campaign money on races in which you're not even running!

2. You can't use public money to thwart the will of voters. If she hadn't done this, Goulet would have won.

3. All of this is obviously an illegal in-kind contribution to the other candidates in that race.

Multiple, serious violations.

Not the final straw. Just another reason to get finally get rid of her.

I claim BS on this.

The person who won the primary has DEEP ties across Ward 3, had a ton of organic support in the form of donations and volunteers at public places throughout the campaign. He was the clear leader from the drop of the hat, ran a solid campiaign and would have won, with, or without Silveman;s interference.

There is absolutely no proof that Goulet would have won, because his only real support was among developers and the Washington Post endorsement.

So it was just a coincidence that Silverman polled voters in the middle of the summer, right before an election, in which she wasn't a candidate, in a contest where the moderate Democrats was poised to win, because progressives were splitting their votes among other candidates, and shortly after Silverman conducted the poll, some of those progressive candidates suddenly dropped out, allowing the lefties to unite behind a single candidate to defeat the moderate? That was just happenstance?

Three progressive candidates suddenly dropped out of the race within a week of Silverman's poll, even though people were just beginning to vote, and they threw their support behind Frumin, the candidate Silverman backed. Probably just a random series of events though...

Are you new to politics? This is pretty standard stuff. Do you remember Buttigieg, Klobuchar, and Steyer dropping out of the Democratic primary just before the South Carolina vote? That was to help Biden and prevent Sanders from winning. Did you collapse on your fainting couch back then? Do you think there might have been a poll or two involved?

You're skipping over a few facts. The other progressive candidates refused to drop out -- that's why Silverman conducted the poll, to show them Goulet was going to win. Polling in local races is sparse and those other candidates couldnt afford polling because they had run through all their money. That's why Silverman stepped in with this highly illegal arrangement. I do enjoy though how Silverman just blatantly lies about how the poll had nothing to do with any of that, that she just wanted to know what people there were thinking.

100% this.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thing is really sleazy. She needs to go.

LOL. Of all the unethical things that take place daily among DC politicians, taking a poll for which a candidate later has to reimburse the costs of is the final straw for you?

Not the final straw because there are a thousand reasons to get rid of her. She is a truly awful person. I don't know why people like her even go into politics. She seems to despise voters.

And no one fought harder than Silverman to keep schools closed here long, long, long after they had opened everywhere else. We're now seeing the results of that in the ridiculously bad test scores coming out of DC that are a direct result. That alone should be disqualifying.

But since you asked, and regarding this in particular:

1. You can't spend campaign money on races in which you're not even running!

2. You can't use public money to thwart the will of voters. If she hadn't done this, Goulet would have won.

3. All of this is obviously an illegal in-kind contribution to the other candidates in that race.

Multiple, serious violations.

Not the final straw. Just another reason to get finally get rid of her.

I claim BS on this.

The person who won the primary has DEEP ties across Ward 3, had a ton of organic support in the form of donations and volunteers at public places throughout the campaign. He was the clear leader from the drop of the hat, ran a solid campiaign and would have won, with, or without Silveman;s interference.

There is absolutely no proof that Goulet would have won, because his only real support was among developers and the Washington Post endorsement.

So it was just a coincidence that Silverman polled voters in the middle of the summer, right before an election, in which she wasn't a candidate, in a contest where the moderate Democrats was poised to win, because progressives were splitting their votes among other candidates, and shortly after Silverman conducted the poll, some of those progressive candidates suddenly dropped out, allowing the lefties to unite behind a single candidate to defeat the moderate? That was just happenstance?

Three progressive candidates suddenly dropped out of the race within a week of Silverman's poll, even though people were just beginning to vote, and they threw their support behind Frumin, the candidate Silverman backed. Probably just a random series of events though...

Are you new to politics? This is pretty standard stuff. Do you remember Buttigieg, Klobuchar, and Steyer dropping out of the Democratic primary just before the South Carolina vote? That was to help Biden and prevent Sanders from winning. Did you collapse on your fainting couch back then? Do you think there might have been a poll or two involved?

You're skipping over a few facts. The other progressive candidates refused to drop out -- that's why Silverman conducted the poll, to show them Goulet was going to win. Polling in local races is sparse and those other candidates couldnt afford polling because they had run through all their money. That's why Silverman stepped in with this highly illegal arrangement. I do enjoy though how Silverman just blatantly lies about how the poll had nothing to do with any of that, that she just wanted to know what people there were thinking.

I don't think you are in a position to know Silverman's motives unless you are a skilled mindreader. But, again, using polls to demonstrate that vote splitting is hurting a candidate is just normal political behavior. No different than what happened before the Democratic primary in South Carolina. No different than what happens in elections all over the place. The fact that a poll was used to convince candidates to drop out is perfectly normal and not unethical in the least. The only issue that concerned OCF was who paid for it. OCF determined that public funds shouldn't have been used, not that a poll shouldn't have been taken.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thing is really sleazy. She needs to go.

LOL. Of all the unethical things that take place daily among DC politicians, taking a poll for which a candidate later has to reimburse the costs of is the final straw for you?

Not the final straw because there are a thousand reasons to get rid of her. She is a truly awful person. I don't know why people like her even go into politics. She seems to despise voters.

And no one fought harder than Silverman to keep schools closed here long, long, long after they had opened everywhere else. We're now seeing the results of that in the ridiculously bad test scores coming out of DC that are a direct result. That alone should be disqualifying.

But since you asked, and regarding this in particular:

1. You can't spend campaign money on races in which you're not even running!

2. You can't use public money to thwart the will of voters. If she hadn't done this, Goulet would have won.

3. All of this is obviously an illegal in-kind contribution to the other candidates in that race.

Multiple, serious violations.

Not the final straw. Just another reason to get finally get rid of her.

I claim BS on this.

The person who won the primary has DEEP ties across Ward 3, had a ton of organic support in the form of donations and volunteers at public places throughout the campaign. He was the clear leader from the drop of the hat, ran a solid campiaign and would have won, with, or without Silveman;s interference.

There is absolutely no proof that Goulet would have won, because his only real support was among developers and the Washington Post endorsement.

So it was just a coincidence that Silverman polled voters in the middle of the summer, right before an election, in which she wasn't a candidate, in a contest where the moderate Democrats was poised to win, because progressives were splitting their votes among other candidates, and shortly after Silverman conducted the poll, some of those progressive candidates suddenly dropped out, allowing the lefties to unite behind a single candidate to defeat the moderate? That was just happenstance?

Three progressive candidates suddenly dropped out of the race within a week of Silverman's poll, even though people were just beginning to vote, and they threw their support behind Frumin, the candidate Silverman backed. Probably just a random series of events though...

Are you new to politics? This is pretty standard stuff. Do you remember Buttigieg, Klobuchar, and Steyer dropping out of the Democratic primary just before the South Carolina vote? That was to help Biden and prevent Sanders from winning. Did you collapse on your fainting couch back then? Do you think there might have been a poll or two involved?

You're skipping over a few facts. The other progressive candidates refused to drop out -- that's why Silverman conducted the poll, to show them Goulet was going to win. Polling in local races is sparse and those other candidates couldnt afford polling because they had run through all their money. That's why Silverman stepped in with this highly illegal arrangement. I do enjoy though how Silverman just blatantly lies about how the poll had nothing to do with any of that, that she just wanted to know what people there were thinking.

I don't think you are in a position to know Silverman's motives unless you are a skilled mindreader. But, again, using polls to demonstrate that vote splitting is hurting a candidate is just normal political behavior. No different than what happened before the Democratic primary in South Carolina. No different than what happens in elections all over the place. The fact that a poll was used to convince candidates to drop out is perfectly normal and not unethical in the least. The only issue that concerned OCF was who paid for it. OCF determined that public funds shouldn't have been used, not that a poll shouldn't have been taken.

Keep digging. By your own admission she illegally used public funds to influence an election. You previously have argued that DFER’s now proven legal support to Goulet was disqualifying. It’s cool if you want to be like this. But just understand that you’re not fooling anyone.