Muriel Bowser bad for DC

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Muriel inherited the corrupt Marion Barry political machine, and revitalized it:



As someone who lived in DC through the Barry years (both his pre and post-prison years), it was bad. Really bad. There were constant exposes of his corruption. His administration was corrupt from top to bottom.

No surprise Bowser’s administration is inept, at best, and likely as corrupt as Barry’s.

You can say that Barry was not great, but he was not corrupt. Sorry. He was an amazing leader at first and then his personal vices got the best of him, but he did not profit from the city. You can say that in his later years he was not good, but he was not corrupt.

She is 1000x worse than Barry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The deputy mayor Nina Albert really outshines Bowser when she speaks. Also, Bowser is bringing Fenty back to help with the gallery place task force? And some of his former staff? Maybe the mayor reads DCUM?

Nina is fantastic. I don't know why she's going to the City, but I am grateful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bowser was literally the “moderate” Democrat in the primary. The rest were waaaaaay more lax on crime.

vote Republican.

After you guys staged a coup and tried to ban abortion? No thanks.

You are setting this city up for failure. There are many Republicans who are not Trumpers--I would bet any who are running for DC City Council are pretty moderate on social issues, you could, you know, read their platform, just likely to take Allen-esque stance on the soaring crime. It's difficuly to "fix a party". Can you "fix" the DC Democratic party for us, given what a batsh*t crazy job they're doing? Please go on and "fix" it.
I voted ALL moderate independent, Republican or write-in on the last round of elections. The Democrats who have run in this city since the excellent Tony Williams (a technocrat who I very much doubt has any party ideology ) and so-so Adrian Fenty (did a nice job on parks and recreation) have been a HUGE fail for our city. But do carry on. --DC Native

Oh, not Trumpists?
1. I don't believe you. You're talking about pre-Trump Republicans, not the current crop.
2. So just run of the mill trickle-down economics, anti-public education, anti-union, anti-choice, anti-immigrant, anti-LGBTQ, etc...

No thanks

Most Republicans I know who live in DC are socially pretty liberal. They are also not anti public school--that's a false narrative for people who hate folks having school choice to choose public school or not. It's more they are for the option of public charter and voucher, not anti public. We do know nanny state Democrats hate people having choices though.

You forgot anti-crime. But keep painting those big paranoid brushstrokes and enjoy your crime ridden city spiraling the drain.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bowser was literally the “moderate” Democrat in the primary. The rest were waaaaaay more lax on crime.

vote Republican.

Fix your party first. No way I'm banding together with the Trump party.

The Democrat Party needs fixing just as badly. Pot, meet kettle. Dems got DC in the shape it’s in. Voting for more Dems isn’t going to change anything. What’s that definition for “insanity”, again? “Doing the same thing over and over, expecting a different outcome”. That’s you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s the people who VOTED for Bowser, who are bad for DC.

Most of you on this forum are to blame.

So true!

Remind me, who was the much better candidate on the ballot running against her? As bad as she is, the rest were weak on crime, even more bumbling, et cetera.

Not this past election, but David Catania opposed her before. He was a reasonably strong candidate - too bad he didn’t win.

He last ran for Mayor 10 years ago. His continued involvement in politics has been... dicey. He last chaired the campaign to have Kathryn Allen replace Elissa Silverman... but it turned out that more than half of the signatures collected for Allen were fraudulent. https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-politics/board-boots-business-backed-council-candidate-from-dc-ballot-citing-signature-fraud/2018/09/11/553453aa-b48e-11e8-a2c5-3187f427e253_story.html

The POINT is that no one of any quality opposes these nut cases because DC ites say things like "I would never vote for a centrist independent" or "I would never vote for a Republican" because abortion, gay marriage (as if a couple of non Democrats in city government are going to make it their PRIORITY to roll that back. OK--you have a city run by far left san francisco liberals. Are any of them even FROM here? But hang on to those principles.

Wow, so you think DC is strictly wedded to Dems only? That's pretty weird since I routinely see DC Statehood / Green Party also getting votes. A candidate who doesn't want to run as a Dem would be better off running as Independent / Third Party than Republican tho.

Wow, yes I think DC is strictly wedded to Dems. Are you even serious?

One party rule is a threat to democracy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bowser was literally the “moderate” Democrat in the primary. The rest were waaaaaay more lax on crime.

vote Republican.

Fix your party first. No way I'm banding together with the Trump party.

The Democrat Party needs fixing just as badly. Pot, meet kettle. Dems got DC in the shape it’s in. Voting for more Dems isn’t going to change anything. What’s that definition for “insanity”, again? “Doing the same thing over and over, expecting a different outcome”. That’s you.

Yep. It’s hard to refute this. That’s not saying the only alternative is to vote R. DC has other parties running other candidates. Statehood Party, Green Party, Libertarian Party. There are lots of viable alternatives to the Dems who have wrecked this city.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bowser was literally the “moderate” Democrat in the primary. The rest were waaaaaay more lax on crime.

vote Republican.

After you guys staged a coup and tried to ban abortion? No thanks.

You are setting this city up for failure. There are many Republicans who are not Trumpers--I would bet any who are running for DC City Council are pretty moderate on social issues, you could, you know, read their platform, just likely to take Allen-esque stance on the soaring crime. It's difficuly to "fix a party". Can you "fix" the DC Democratic party for us, given what a batsh*t crazy job they're doing? Please go on and "fix" it.
I voted ALL moderate independent, Republican or write-in on the last round of elections. The Democrats who have run in this city since the excellent Tony Williams (a technocrat who I very much doubt has any party ideology ) and so-so Adrian Fenty (did a nice job on parks and recreation) have been a HUGE fail for our city. But do carry on. --DC Native

Oh, not Trumpists?
1. I don't believe you. You're talking about pre-Trump Republicans, not the current crop.
2. So just run of the mill trickle-down economics, anti-public education, anti-union, anti-choice, anti-immigrant, anti-LGBTQ, etc...

No thanks

Most Republicans I know who live in DC are socially pretty liberal. They are also not anti public school--that's a false narrative for people who hate folks having school choice to choose public school or not. It's more they are for the option of public charter and voucher, not anti public. We do know nanny state Democrats hate people having choices though.

You forgot anti-crime. But keep painting those big paranoid brushstrokes and enjoy your crime ridden city spiraling the drain.

We're all anti-crime. It's just Republicans think you can arrest your way to zero crime. Kind of like your war on drugs and war on terror. How are those going by the way? At least some Democrats try to do better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bowser was literally the “moderate” Democrat in the primary. The rest were waaaaaay more lax on crime.

vote Republican.

Fix your party first. No way I'm banding together with the Trump party.

The Democrat Party needs fixing just as badly. Pot, meet kettle. Dems got DC in the shape it’s in. Voting for more Dems isn’t going to change anything. What’s that definition for “insanity”, again? “Doing the same thing over and over, expecting a different outcome”. That’s you.

Yep. It’s hard to refute this. That’s not saying the only alternative is to vote R. DC has other parties running other candidates. Statehood Party, Green Party, Libertarian Party. There are lots of viable alternatives to the Dems who have wrecked this city.

Maybe libertarian depending on what flavor... You think statehood and green would be LESS far left?????, bahahahah.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bowser was literally the “moderate” Democrat in the primary. The rest were waaaaaay more lax on crime.

vote Republican.

After you guys staged a coup and tried to ban abortion? No thanks.

You are setting this city up for failure. There are many Republicans who are not Trumpers--I would bet any who are running for DC City Council are pretty moderate on social issues, you could, you know, read their platform, just likely to take Allen-esque stance on the soaring crime. It's difficuly to "fix a party". Can you "fix" the DC Democratic party for us, given what a batsh*t crazy job they're doing? Please go on and "fix" it.
I voted ALL moderate independent, Republican or write-in on the last round of elections. The Democrats who have run in this city since the excellent Tony Williams (a technocrat who I very much doubt has any party ideology ) and so-so Adrian Fenty (did a nice job on parks and recreation) have been a HUGE fail for our city. But do carry on. --DC Native

Oh, not Trumpists?
1. I don't believe you. You're talking about pre-Trump Republicans, not the current crop.
2. So just run of the mill trickle-down economics, anti-public education, anti-union, anti-choice, anti-immigrant, anti-LGBTQ, etc...

No thanks

Most Republicans I know who live in DC are socially pretty liberal. They are also not anti public school--that's a false narrative for people who hate folks having school choice to choose public school or not. It's more they are for the option of public charter and voucher, not anti public. We do know nanny state Democrats hate people having choices though.

You forgot anti-crime. But keep painting those big paranoid brushstrokes and enjoy your crime ridden city spiraling the drain.

We're all anti-crime. It's just Republicans think you can arrest your way to zero crime. Kind of like your war on drugs and war on terror. How are those going by the way? At least some Democrats try to do better.

I really doubt that any Republican thinks you can "arrest your way" to zero crime. Especially given the prosecution rates in DC when people are arrested. These are whole system failures with whole system solutions. You're likely right that as PART of that Republicans would focus more on say adding police to the streets than violent interruptors. How are those going by the way?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s the people who VOTED for Bowser, who are bad for DC.

Most of you on this forum are to blame.

So true!

Remind me, who was the much better candidate on the ballot running against her? As bad as she is, the rest were weak on crime, even more bumbling, et cetera.

Not this past election, but David Catania opposed her before. He was a reasonably strong candidate - too bad he didn’t win.

He last ran for Mayor 10 years ago. His continued involvement in politics has been... dicey. He last chaired the campaign to have Kathryn Allen replace Elissa Silverman... but it turned out that more than half of the signatures collected for Allen were fraudulent. https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-politics/board-boots-business-backed-council-candidate-from-dc-ballot-citing-signature-fraud/2018/09/11/553453aa-b48e-11e8-a2c5-3187f427e253_story.html

The POINT is that no one of any quality opposes these nut cases because DC ites say things like "I would never vote for a centrist independent" or "I would never vote for a Republican" because abortion, gay marriage (as if a couple of non Democrats in city government are going to make it their PRIORITY to roll that back. OK--you have a city run by far left san francisco liberals. Are any of them even FROM here? But hang on to those principles.

DC voters have a long and growing list of litmus tests that any candidate must pass to get a vote. Unfortunately the number of people that can pass all these tests and effectively run a city is about zero. In the end, most people with shallow roots will probably choose to move (to a more conservative area!) than vote for anyone that doesn't check every single box.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s the people who VOTED for Bowser, who are bad for DC.

Most of you on this forum are to blame.

There wasn't a great alternative. But terms limits should be a thing.

You are the problem. You did this to DC.

PP, who, in your estimation would have been better for DC? TW or RW? And in what world is TW electable if he is your choice?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bowser was literally the “moderate” Democrat in the primary. The rest were waaaaaay more lax on crime.

vote Republican.

Fix your party first. No way I'm banding together with the Trump party.

The Democrat Party needs fixing just as badly. Pot, meet kettle. Dems got DC in the shape it’s in. Voting for more Dems isn’t going to change anything. What’s that definition for “insanity”, again? “Doing the same thing over and over, expecting a different outcome”. That’s you.

And Dems were in power when DC was doing great. It's not a D vs. R issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bowser was literally the “moderate” Democrat in the primary. The rest were waaaaaay more lax on crime.

vote Republican.

Fix your party first. No way I'm banding together with the Trump party.

The Democrat Party needs fixing just as badly. Pot, meet kettle. Dems got DC in the shape it’s in. Voting for more Dems isn’t going to change anything. What’s that definition for “insanity”, again? “Doing the same thing over and over, expecting a different outcome”. That’s you.

And Dems were in power when DC was doing great. It's not a D vs. R issue.

Tony Williams and Fenty were very reasonable, centrist city service oriented technocrats..that is not today's democrats in DC. At least not the elected ones. Where are the Dems like these two?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Bowser was literally the “moderate” Democrat in the primary. The rest were waaaaaay more lax on crime.

True. Scroll down this thread and consider if Trayon or Robert would have been better on the issue? Consider McDuffie who may run for mayor. (Last time he ran for AG even though NOT QUALIFIED. Of course, they later changed the qualifications so his minimal legal experience would not be a bar to that office now.) Pinto may run for mayor but we need to have at least one person like her on the Council. Used to have a few, back when things were safer...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bowser was literally the “moderate” Democrat in the primary. The rest were waaaaaay more lax on crime.

vote Republican.

Fix your party first. No way I'm banding together with the Trump party.

The Democrat Party needs fixing just as badly. Pot, meet kettle. Dems got DC in the shape it’s in. Voting for more Dems isn’t going to change anything. What’s that definition for “insanity”, again? “Doing the same thing over and over, expecting a different outcome”. That’s you.

And Dems were in power when DC was doing great. It's not a D vs. R issue.

Tony Williams and Fenty were very reasonable, centrist city service oriented technocrats..that is not today's democrats in DC. At least not the elected ones. Where are the Dems like these two?

They’d both be called far-right republicans today.