Arl Dems Caucus Endorsement - School Board - In the Candidates' Words

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Been telling neighbors about the kid and they can’t believe he’s 22. Maybe a couple of them make it out to vote.

So where do the candidates stand on standards based grading?

APE asked about it in the candidate questionnaire: https://www.arlingtonparentsforeducation.org/school-board-2023. Only Miranda answered. Looks like Angelo didn't bother responding at all. Sounds par for the course. He's a no show at the advisory committee meetings, a no show at at least two forums, no show at his own election, and not bothering to engage with a community group. Whether you like APE or not, not responding is not the action of a community leader who wants to work with everyone.

Maybe that's because there is no separation between APE and MT's campaign? He might as well stop by the Turner family reunion to campaign. And APE has constantly criticized APS for standards-based grading. Just like the missing middle people, they always claim to be opposed to "the process" when anyone proposes something progressive. Frankly, I think it's principled to not respond to APE's questionnaire. I don't want a community leader that touches such a divisive group even with a 10-foot pole.

Agreed. APE is a LOBBYING GROUP. They have been trying to get Miranda elected for years. They may as well be her personal PAC. Angelo is smart to not answer their little questionnaire. He answered the AGIA questionnaire and did a dang good job with it too.

People keep putting him down for his age but he's proving himself to be savvy.

APE derangement runs deep. What is wrong with their "little" questionnaire?

From Miranda's page, it looks like they asked about 1) Remedying subsitute (Gasp!); 2) Standards-based grading (pearl clutch); 3) Reducing class sizes (Pass the smelling salts!); 4) Learning Loss and Achievement gaps (Dastardly!) 5) device usage at schools (villians!)

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/6041ba6620a81d18855bdb62/t/64512b38322df0273fd9abe7/1683041080616/APE+Miranda+Turner+Responses+April+2023.docx.pdf

It's 5 questions. Written responses. Seems like a fair arrangement so that there was an equal playing field. He could have asked Reid to do his homework for him if he was too busy finishing his finals.

He could have but he didn't want to play APE's game. Good for him. APE isn't a legit org. They're a lobbying group, and right now they exist to elect Miranda.

He answered the AGIA questions so it's not like he's against answering questions from a LEGIT group.

omg I swear you sound like the exact person who would be engaging g in the kind of FB groups and making the same disgusting comments as these people.I wouldn’t even be surprised if you were actually part of a group just like this in Arlington. If Angelo has you a supporter he is exactly the kind of person I don’t want bc I don’t want him bringing crazy people like you along with him

https://wjla.com/news/local/loudoun-love-warriors-facebook-group-threats-buta-biberaj-juli-briskman-ian-serotkin-brenda-sheridan-atoosa-reaser-erika-ogedegbe-craig-buckley-phyllis-randall-puja-khanna-anne-donohuemark-winn-county-school-board-parents#

And here comes the APE/Miranda attack brigade again. Triggered because someone truthfully pointed out that APE is a lobbying group, and that Angelo answered the AGIA questions but not APE's.

People in Arlington who are engaged in the same smear tactics as the ironically named “loudoun love warriors” should be careful before they end up becoming the story. Not hard to see who is obsessed with APE, Miranda and it’s members. Doubt they want their names trotted out in local news stories.

We see exactly what you are doing. You just made a thinly veiled threat to TROT OUT THE NAMES IN LOCAL NEWS STORIES of those who disagree with Miranda and APE. Not hard to see where this is coming from, given that you made the threat against those who are "obsessed" with APE, Miranda and APE members.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Been telling neighbors about the kid and they can’t believe he’s 22. Maybe a couple of them make it out to vote.

So where do the candidates stand on standards based grading?

APE asked about it in the candidate questionnaire: https://www.arlingtonparentsforeducation.org/school-board-2023. Only Miranda answered. Looks like Angelo didn't bother responding at all. Sounds par for the course. He's a no show at the advisory committee meetings, a no show at at least two forums, no show at his own election, and not bothering to engage with a community group. Whether you like APE or not, not responding is not the action of a community leader who wants to work with everyone.

Maybe that's because there is no separation between APE and MT's campaign? He might as well stop by the Turner family reunion to campaign. And APE has constantly criticized APS for standards-based grading. Just like the missing middle people, they always claim to be opposed to "the process" when anyone proposes something progressive. Frankly, I think it's principled to not respond to APE's questionnaire. I don't want a community leader that touches such a divisive group even with a 10-foot pole.

Agreed. APE is a LOBBYING GROUP. They have been trying to get Miranda elected for years. They may as well be her personal PAC. Angelo is smart to not answer their little questionnaire. He answered the AGIA questionnaire and did a dang good job with it too.

People keep putting him down for his age but he's proving himself to be savvy.

APE derangement runs deep. What is wrong with their "little" questionnaire?

From Miranda's page, it looks like they asked about 1) Remedying subsitute (Gasp!); 2) Standards-based grading (pearl clutch); 3) Reducing class sizes (Pass the smelling salts!); 4) Learning Loss and Achievement gaps (Dastardly!) 5) device usage at schools (villians!)

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/6041ba6620a81d18855bdb62/t/64512b38322df0273fd9abe7/1683041080616/APE+Miranda+Turner+Responses+April+2023.docx.pdf

It's 5 questions. Written responses. Seems like a fair arrangement so that there was an equal playing field. He could have asked Reid to do his homework for him if he was too busy finishing his finals.

He could have but he didn't want to play APE's game. Good for him. APE isn't a legit org. They're a lobbying group, and right now they exist to elect Miranda.

He answered the AGIA questions so it's not like he's against answering questions from a LEGIT group.

I also heard from ACDC peeps that APE asked for a debate and AC turned them DOWN. Never got confirmation though, so I don't know if APE ever wanted a debate and didn't get it, or if it's just a rumor. I agree PP, I'd say it's a power move and APE just doesn't like when they're spurned.

That APE questionnaire was a "power move?" And just what "power" do you think it has? They put out something to address the issues they want addressed. The opponent chose not to respond - when responding would have given him a prime opportunity to distinguish himself/his views on the very specific topics everyone is so critical of APE for.

I'm pretty sure, actually, that APE put it out on its FB page for people to ask questions they wanted asked of the candidates. They also survey members to select priorities. So it's a pretty democratic process.

As for astroturfing, if you watch what they are doing, they actually ARE advocating for more transparency, etc. They pushed for the dashboard. They are asking APS to show more data. This is a real thing the org does.

Thanks, Jeff, for deleting the other link and explaining why. I clicked on it, and that was some crazy conspiracy stuff, that, again, mostly boiled down to the fact that Turner has friends who are Republicans.

DP. You’re minimizing her relationships. She partnered with them for years. One works at a Koch think tank. And you’re overlooking the bullying/vitriol that she found acceptable.

NP. Are you saying we should never advocate alongside someone unless we agree 100%? The dude works for a GMU think tank that receives limited funding from Koch (like many other museums and other great causes). Looks like a libertarian group. Hardly worthy of the insinuations of your post.

I wouldn’t advocate and partner with people who were all out abusive to others in our community. In the same community she’s seeking a public office.

Sounds like you should vote for MT. Angelo’s supporters are interfering in an election and posting conspiracy theories under an anonymous account. He is aligned with them unless he denounces them and demands them to reveal their names and state the truth.

Just to be clear, there are no Angelo supporters. There are only Miranda haters.

I would maybe prefer someone with more ties to Arlington, but I think he's a good candidate. He can bring a fresh perspective.

I support him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I am not going to allow links to the Google doc to which some posters have linked. We generally do not allow anonymous criticism of non-public figures by name unless the poster also identifies themselves. The document in question mentions several non-public figures and is being circulated by someone using the pseudonym "Deep Throat". If Mr. or Ms. Throat would like to identify themselves, posters will be free to link to the document. But, short of that, I will remove any such links.

I'd encourage Mr. or Ms. Throat to identify themselves too but I think it's relevant, and I wouldn't characterize the board members of an org that is one candidate's brainchild (Miranda is literally a founder) as "non-public figures," especially when one of them is her campaign manager and they're all public tweets and quotes from APE's website. It raises some very valid character issues. I for one found it shocking. I mean I knew there were some strange bedfellows with Miranda, but it seems like her whole universe is Rs with really out-of-the-mainstream ideas.

I'd suggest a review of the matter since I feel it's more than fair game but I guess all I'll say is people can look for themselves if interested on Twitter @/protectarled but not linking anything without your say so, message received.

I suspect you know exactly who set up that Twitter because it’s you. Even if everything on there was true (and it is not), none of it is anything Miranda Turner said or did. It’s all slimy insinuations and smears that are very tenuously linked to the actual candidate.

No some of it was exactly what Miranda said/did. It was the positions APE took when she led APE. That is her record and it is relevant to this campaign. Maybe Mr./Ms. Throat could repost that part. It shouldn't be controversial.

Agree that her husband's political views are not relevant. I still think the public statements made by the APE board members and Miranda's campaign manager are fair game. They put them out there, why can't we talk about them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Been telling neighbors about the kid and they can’t believe he’s 22. Maybe a couple of them make it out to vote.

So where do the candidates stand on standards based grading?

APE asked about it in the candidate questionnaire: https://www.arlingtonparentsforeducation.org/school-board-2023. Only Miranda answered. Looks like Angelo didn't bother responding at all. Sounds par for the course. He's a no show at the advisory committee meetings, a no show at at least two forums, no show at his own election, and not bothering to engage with a community group. Whether you like APE or not, not responding is not the action of a community leader who wants to work with everyone.

Maybe that's because there is no separation between APE and MT's campaign? He might as well stop by the Turner family reunion to campaign. And APE has constantly criticized APS for standards-based grading. Just like the missing middle people, they always claim to be opposed to "the process" when anyone proposes something progressive. Frankly, I think it's principled to not respond to APE's questionnaire. I don't want a community leader that touches such a divisive group even with a 10-foot pole.

Agreed. APE is a LOBBYING GROUP. They have been trying to get Miranda elected for years. They may as well be her personal PAC. Angelo is smart to not answer their little questionnaire. He answered the AGIA questionnaire and did a dang good job with it too.

People keep putting him down for his age but he's proving himself to be savvy.

APE derangement runs deep. What is wrong with their "little" questionnaire?

From Miranda's page, it looks like they asked about 1) Remedying subsitute (Gasp!); 2) Standards-based grading (pearl clutch); 3) Reducing class sizes (Pass the smelling salts!); 4) Learning Loss and Achievement gaps (Dastardly!) 5) device usage at schools (villians!)

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/6041ba6620a81d18855bdb62/t/64512b38322df0273fd9abe7/1683041080616/APE+Miranda+Turner+Responses+April+2023.docx.pdf

It's 5 questions. Written responses. Seems like a fair arrangement so that there was an equal playing field. He could have asked Reid to do his homework for him if he was too busy finishing his finals.

He could have but he didn't want to play APE's game. Good for him. APE isn't a legit org. They're a lobbying group, and right now they exist to elect Miranda.

He answered the AGIA questions so it's not like he's against answering questions from a LEGIT group.

I also heard from ACDC peeps that APE asked for a debate and AC turned them DOWN. Never got confirmation though, so I don't know if APE ever wanted a debate and didn't get it, or if it's just a rumor. I agree PP, I'd say it's a power move and APE just doesn't like when they're spurned.

That APE questionnaire was a "power move?" And just what "power" do you think it has? They put out something to address the issues they want addressed. The opponent chose not to respond - when responding would have given him a prime opportunity to distinguish himself/his views on the very specific topics everyone is so critical of APE for.

I'm pretty sure, actually, that APE put it out on its FB page for people to ask questions they wanted asked of the candidates. They also survey members to select priorities. So it's a pretty democratic process.

As for astroturfing, if you watch what they are doing, they actually ARE advocating for more transparency, etc. They pushed for the dashboard. They are asking APS to show more data. This is a real thing the org does.

Thanks, Jeff, for deleting the other link and explaining why. I clicked on it, and that was some crazy conspiracy stuff, that, again, mostly boiled down to the fact that Turner has friends who are Republicans.

DP. You’re minimizing her relationships. She partnered with them for years. One works at a Koch think tank. And you’re overlooking the bullying/vitriol that she found acceptable.

NP. Are you saying we should never advocate alongside someone unless we agree 100%? The dude works for a GMU think tank that receives limited funding from Koch (like many other museums and other great causes). Looks like a libertarian group. Hardly worthy of the insinuations of your post.

I wouldn’t advocate and partner with people who were all out abusive to others in our community. In the same community she’s seeking a public office.

Sounds like you should vote for MT. Angelo’s supporters are interfering in an election and posting conspiracy theories under an anonymous account. He is aligned with them unless he denounces them and demands them to reveal their names and state the truth.

If people are posting facts, then it's not really a "conspiracy theory" or "election interference".

Why are you trying to dismiss her behavior and previous experience with APS? It's very relevant. She didn't just share beliefs with the bullies, she worked side-by-side with them. For years. For her earlier election and this one.

She's a non-starter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Been telling neighbors about the kid and they can’t believe he’s 22. Maybe a couple of them make it out to vote.

So where do the candidates stand on standards based grading?

APE asked about it in the candidate questionnaire: https://www.arlingtonparentsforeducation.org/school-board-2023. Only Miranda answered. Looks like Angelo didn't bother responding at all. Sounds par for the course. He's a no show at the advisory committee meetings, a no show at at least two forums, no show at his own election, and not bothering to engage with a community group. Whether you like APE or not, not responding is not the action of a community leader who wants to work with everyone.

Maybe that's because there is no separation between APE and MT's campaign? He might as well stop by the Turner family reunion to campaign. And APE has constantly criticized APS for standards-based grading. Just like the missing middle people, they always claim to be opposed to "the process" when anyone proposes something progressive. Frankly, I think it's principled to not respond to APE's questionnaire. I don't want a community leader that touches such a divisive group even with a 10-foot pole.

Agreed. APE is a LOBBYING GROUP. They have been trying to get Miranda elected for years. They may as well be her personal PAC. Angelo is smart to not answer their little questionnaire. He answered the AGIA questionnaire and did a dang good job with it too.

People keep putting him down for his age but he's proving himself to be savvy.

APE derangement runs deep. What is wrong with their "little" questionnaire?

From Miranda's page, it looks like they asked about 1) Remedying subsitute (Gasp!); 2) Standards-based grading (pearl clutch); 3) Reducing class sizes (Pass the smelling salts!); 4) Learning Loss and Achievement gaps (Dastardly!) 5) device usage at schools (villians!)

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/6041ba6620a81d18855bdb62/t/64512b38322df0273fd9abe7/1683041080616/APE+Miranda+Turner+Responses+April+2023.docx.pdf

It's 5 questions. Written responses. Seems like a fair arrangement so that there was an equal playing field. He could have asked Reid to do his homework for him if he was too busy finishing his finals.

He could have but he didn't want to play APE's game. Good for him. APE isn't a legit org. They're a lobbying group, and right now they exist to elect Miranda.

He answered the AGIA questions so it's not like he's against answering questions from a LEGIT group.

I also heard from ACDC peeps that APE asked for a debate and AC turned them DOWN. Never got confirmation though, so I don't know if APE ever wanted a debate and didn't get it, or if it's just a rumor. I agree PP, I'd say it's a power move and APE just doesn't like when they're spurned.

That APE questionnaire was a "power move?" And just what "power" do you think it has? They put out something to address the issues they want addressed. The opponent chose not to respond - when responding would have given him a prime opportunity to distinguish himself/his views on the very specific topics everyone is so critical of APE for.

I'm pretty sure, actually, that APE put it out on its FB page for people to ask questions they wanted asked of the candidates. They also survey members to select priorities. So it's a pretty democratic process.

As for astroturfing, if you watch what they are doing, they actually ARE advocating for more transparency, etc. They pushed for the dashboard. They are asking APS to show more data. This is a real thing the org does.

Thanks, Jeff, for deleting the other link and explaining why. I clicked on it, and that was some crazy conspiracy stuff, that, again, mostly boiled down to the fact that Turner has friends who are Republicans.

DP. You’re minimizing her relationships. She partnered with them for years. One works at a Koch think tank. And you’re overlooking the bullying/vitriol that she found acceptable.

NP. Are you saying we should never advocate alongside someone unless we agree 100%? The dude works for a GMU think tank that receives limited funding from Koch (like many other museums and other great causes). Looks like a libertarian group. Hardly worthy of the insinuations of your post.

I wouldn’t advocate and partner with people who were all out abusive to others in our community. In the same community she’s seeking a public office.

Sounds like you should vote for MT. Angelo’s supporters are interfering in an election and posting conspiracy theories under an anonymous account. He is aligned with them unless he denounces them and demands them to reveal their names and state the truth.

Just to be clear, there are no Angelo supporters. There are only Miranda haters.

Haven’t you learned dcum logic by now? Facts don’t matter. MT haters are conspiracy haters who like to create fake accounts to spread lies. They are abusive and want her to lose. Angelo also wants MT lose….ipso facto angelo is spreading lies and aligning himself with those crazies. No thank you. Will not support conspiracy theorist interfering in a misinformation campaign to internet w the election.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I am not going to allow links to the Google doc to which some posters have linked. We generally do not allow anonymous criticism of non-public figures by name unless the poster also identifies themselves. The document in question mentions several non-public figures and is being circulated by someone using the pseudonym "Deep Throat". If Mr. or Ms. Throat would like to identify themselves, posters will be free to link to the document. But, short of that, I will remove any such links.

I'd encourage Mr. or Ms. Throat to identify themselves too but I think it's relevant, and I wouldn't characterize the board members of an org that is one candidate's brainchild (Miranda is literally a founder) as "non-public figures," especially when one of them is her campaign manager and they're all public tweets and quotes from APE's website. It raises some very valid character issues. I for one found it shocking. I mean I knew there were some strange bedfellows with Miranda, but it seems like her whole universe is Rs with really out-of-the-mainstream ideas.

I'd suggest a review of the matter since I feel it's more than fair game but I guess all I'll say is people can look for themselves if interested on Twitter @/protectarled but not linking anything without your say so, message received.

I suspect you know exactly who set up that Twitter because it’s you. Even if everything on there was true (and it is not), none of it is anything Miranda Turner said or did. It’s all slimy insinuations and smears that are very tenuously linked to the actual candidate.

No some of it was exactly what Miranda said/did. It was the positions APE took when she led APE. That is her record and it is relevant to this campaign. Maybe Mr./Ms. Throat could repost that part. It shouldn't be controversial.

Agree that her husband's political views are not relevant. I still think the public statements made by the APE board members and Miranda's campaign manager are fair game. They put them out there, why can't we talk about them?

Interesting. I haven't heard anything about her husband's political views. Is she married to a Trumper? If so, that shows questionable judgment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Been telling neighbors about the kid and they can’t believe he’s 22. Maybe a couple of them make it out to vote.

So where do the candidates stand on standards based grading?

APE asked about it in the candidate questionnaire: https://www.arlingtonparentsforeducation.org/school-board-2023. Only Miranda answered. Looks like Angelo didn't bother responding at all. Sounds par for the course. He's a no show at the advisory committee meetings, a no show at at least two forums, no show at his own election, and not bothering to engage with a community group. Whether you like APE or not, not responding is not the action of a community leader who wants to work with everyone.

Maybe that's because there is no separation between APE and MT's campaign? He might as well stop by the Turner family reunion to campaign. And APE has constantly criticized APS for standards-based grading. Just like the missing middle people, they always claim to be opposed to "the process" when anyone proposes something progressive. Frankly, I think it's principled to not respond to APE's questionnaire. I don't want a community leader that touches such a divisive group even with a 10-foot pole.

Agreed. APE is a LOBBYING GROUP. They have been trying to get Miranda elected for years. They may as well be her personal PAC. Angelo is smart to not answer their little questionnaire. He answered the AGIA questionnaire and did a dang good job with it too.

People keep putting him down for his age but he's proving himself to be savvy.

APE derangement runs deep. What is wrong with their "little" questionnaire?

From Miranda's page, it looks like they asked about 1) Remedying subsitute (Gasp!); 2) Standards-based grading (pearl clutch); 3) Reducing class sizes (Pass the smelling salts!); 4) Learning Loss and Achievement gaps (Dastardly!) 5) device usage at schools (villians!)

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/6041ba6620a81d18855bdb62/t/64512b38322df0273fd9abe7/1683041080616/APE+Miranda+Turner+Responses+April+2023.docx.pdf

It's 5 questions. Written responses. Seems like a fair arrangement so that there was an equal playing field. He could have asked Reid to do his homework for him if he was too busy finishing his finals.

He could have but he didn't want to play APE's game. Good for him. APE isn't a legit org. They're a lobbying group, and right now they exist to elect Miranda.

He answered the AGIA questions so it's not like he's against answering questions from a LEGIT group.

I also heard from ACDC peeps that APE asked for a debate and AC turned them DOWN. Never got confirmation though, so I don't know if APE ever wanted a debate and didn't get it, or if it's just a rumor. I agree PP, I'd say it's a power move and APE just doesn't like when they're spurned.

That APE questionnaire was a "power move?" And just what "power" do you think it has? They put out something to address the issues they want addressed. The opponent chose not to respond - when responding would have given him a prime opportunity to distinguish himself/his views on the very specific topics everyone is so critical of APE for.

I'm pretty sure, actually, that APE put it out on its FB page for people to ask questions they wanted asked of the candidates. They also survey members to select priorities. So it's a pretty democratic process.

As for astroturfing, if you watch what they are doing, they actually ARE advocating for more transparency, etc. They pushed for the dashboard. They are asking APS to show more data. This is a real thing the org does.

Thanks, Jeff, for deleting the other link and explaining why. I clicked on it, and that was some crazy conspiracy stuff, that, again, mostly boiled down to the fact that Turner has friends who are Republicans.

DP. You’re minimizing her relationships. She partnered with them for years. One works at a Koch think tank. And you’re overlooking the bullying/vitriol that she found acceptable.

NP. Are you saying we should never advocate alongside someone unless we agree 100%? The dude works for a GMU think tank that receives limited funding from Koch (like many other museums and other great causes). Looks like a libertarian group. Hardly worthy of the insinuations of your post.

I wouldn’t advocate and partner with people who were all out abusive to others in our community. In the same community she’s seeking a public office.

Sounds like you should vote for MT. Angelo’s supporters are interfering in an election and posting conspiracy theories under an anonymous account. He is aligned with them unless he denounces them and demands them to reveal their names and state the truth.

Just to be clear, there are no Angelo supporters. There are only Miranda haters.

Haven’t you learned dcum logic by now? Facts don’t matter. MT haters are conspiracy haters who like to create fake accounts to spread lies. They are abusive and want her to lose. Angelo also wants MT lose….ipso facto angelo is spreading lies and aligning himself with those crazies. No thank you. Will not support conspiracy theorist interfering in a misinformation campaign to internet w the election.

Here come MT's bullies. In attack mode.

Facts are facts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Been telling neighbors about the kid and they can’t believe he’s 22. Maybe a couple of them make it out to vote.

So where do the candidates stand on standards based grading?

APE asked about it in the candidate questionnaire: https://www.arlingtonparentsforeducation.org/school-board-2023. Only Miranda answered. Looks like Angelo didn't bother responding at all. Sounds par for the course. He's a no show at the advisory committee meetings, a no show at at least two forums, no show at his own election, and not bothering to engage with a community group. Whether you like APE or not, not responding is not the action of a community leader who wants to work with everyone.

Maybe that's because there is no separation between APE and MT's campaign? He might as well stop by the Turner family reunion to campaign. And APE has constantly criticized APS for standards-based grading. Just like the missing middle people, they always claim to be opposed to "the process" when anyone proposes something progressive. Frankly, I think it's principled to not respond to APE's questionnaire. I don't want a community leader that touches such a divisive group even with a 10-foot pole.

Agreed. APE is a LOBBYING GROUP. They have been trying to get Miranda elected for years. They may as well be her personal PAC. Angelo is smart to not answer their little questionnaire. He answered the AGIA questionnaire and did a dang good job with it too.

People keep putting him down for his age but he's proving himself to be savvy.

APE derangement runs deep. What is wrong with their "little" questionnaire?

From Miranda's page, it looks like they asked about 1) Remedying subsitute (Gasp!); 2) Standards-based grading (pearl clutch); 3) Reducing class sizes (Pass the smelling salts!); 4) Learning Loss and Achievement gaps (Dastardly!) 5) device usage at schools (villians!)

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/6041ba6620a81d18855bdb62/t/64512b38322df0273fd9abe7/1683041080616/APE+Miranda+Turner+Responses+April+2023.docx.pdf

It's 5 questions. Written responses. Seems like a fair arrangement so that there was an equal playing field. He could have asked Reid to do his homework for him if he was too busy finishing his finals.

He could have but he didn't want to play APE's game. Good for him. APE isn't a legit org. They're a lobbying group, and right now they exist to elect Miranda.

He answered the AGIA questions so it's not like he's against answering questions from a LEGIT group.

omg I swear you sound like the exact person who would be engaging g in the kind of FB groups and making the same disgusting comments as these people.I wouldn’t even be surprised if you were actually part of a group just like this in Arlington. If Angelo has you a supporter he is exactly the kind of person I don’t want bc I don’t want him bringing crazy people like you along with him

https://wjla.com/news/local/loudoun-love-warriors-facebook-group-threats-buta-biberaj-juli-briskman-ian-serotkin-brenda-sheridan-atoosa-reaser-erika-ogedegbe-craig-buckley-phyllis-randall-puja-khanna-anne-donohuemark-winn-county-school-board-parents#

And here comes the APE/Miranda attack brigade again. Triggered because someone truthfully pointed out that APE is a lobbying group, and that Angelo answered the AGIA questions but not APE's.

Uh oh. Are Miranda’s angry dad bros going to scream at everyone again? Take cover.

worse, they're threatening to put the names of those who disagree with Miranda/APE in news stories.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Been telling neighbors about the kid and they can’t believe he’s 22. Maybe a couple of them make it out to vote.

So where do the candidates stand on standards based grading?

APE asked about it in the candidate questionnaire: https://www.arlingtonparentsforeducation.org/school-board-2023. Only Miranda answered. Looks like Angelo didn't bother responding at all. Sounds par for the course. He's a no show at the advisory committee meetings, a no show at at least two forums, no show at his own election, and not bothering to engage with a community group. Whether you like APE or not, not responding is not the action of a community leader who wants to work with everyone.

Maybe that's because there is no separation between APE and MT's campaign? He might as well stop by the Turner family reunion to campaign. And APE has constantly criticized APS for standards-based grading. Just like the missing middle people, they always claim to be opposed to "the process" when anyone proposes something progressive. Frankly, I think it's principled to not respond to APE's questionnaire. I don't want a community leader that touches such a divisive group even with a 10-foot pole.

Agreed. APE is a LOBBYING GROUP. They have been trying to get Miranda elected for years. They may as well be her personal PAC. Angelo is smart to not answer their little questionnaire. He answered the AGIA questionnaire and did a dang good job with it too.

People keep putting him down for his age but he's proving himself to be savvy.

APE derangement runs deep. What is wrong with their "little" questionnaire?

From Miranda's page, it looks like they asked about 1) Remedying subsitute (Gasp!); 2) Standards-based grading (pearl clutch); 3) Reducing class sizes (Pass the smelling salts!); 4) Learning Loss and Achievement gaps (Dastardly!) 5) device usage at schools (villians!)

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/6041ba6620a81d18855bdb62/t/64512b38322df0273fd9abe7/1683041080616/APE+Miranda+Turner+Responses+April+2023.docx.pdf

It's 5 questions. Written responses. Seems like a fair arrangement so that there was an equal playing field. He could have asked Reid to do his homework for him if he was too busy finishing his finals.

He could have but he didn't want to play APE's game. Good for him. APE isn't a legit org. They're a lobbying group, and right now they exist to elect Miranda.

He answered the AGIA questions so it's not like he's against answering questions from a LEGIT group.

I also heard from ACDC peeps that APE asked for a debate and AC turned them DOWN. Never got confirmation though, so I don't know if APE ever wanted a debate and didn't get it, or if it's just a rumor. I agree PP, I'd say it's a power move and APE just doesn't like when they're spurned.

That APE questionnaire was a "power move?" And just what "power" do you think it has? They put out something to address the issues they want addressed. The opponent chose not to respond - when responding would have given him a prime opportunity to distinguish himself/his views on the very specific topics everyone is so critical of APE for.

I'm pretty sure, actually, that APE put it out on its FB page for people to ask questions they wanted asked of the candidates. They also survey members to select priorities. So it's a pretty democratic process.

As for astroturfing, if you watch what they are doing, they actually ARE advocating for more transparency, etc. They pushed for the dashboard. They are asking APS to show more data. This is a real thing the org does.

Thanks, Jeff, for deleting the other link and explaining why. I clicked on it, and that was some crazy conspiracy stuff, that, again, mostly boiled down to the fact that Turner has friends who are Republicans.

DP. You’re minimizing her relationships. She partnered with them for years. One works at a Koch think tank. And you’re overlooking the bullying/vitriol that she found acceptable.

NP. Are you saying we should never advocate alongside someone unless we agree 100%? The dude works for a GMU think tank that receives limited funding from Koch (like many other museums and other great causes). Looks like a libertarian group. Hardly worthy of the insinuations of your post.

I wouldn’t advocate and partner with people who were all out abusive to others in our community. In the same community she’s seeking a public office.

Sounds like you should vote for MT. Angelo’s supporters are interfering in an election and posting conspiracy theories under an anonymous account. He is aligned with them unless he denounces them and demands them to reveal their names and state the truth.

Just to be clear, there are no Angelo supporters. There are only Miranda haters.

Haven’t you learned dcum logic by now? Facts don’t matter. MT haters are conspiracy haters who like to create fake accounts to spread lies. They are abusive and want her to lose. Angelo also wants MT lose….ipso facto angelo is spreading lies and aligning himself with those crazies. No thank you. Will not support conspiracy theorist interfering in a misinformation campaign to internet w the election.

Here come MT's bullies. In attack mode.

Facts are facts.

If facts are facts why aren’t you posting this on AEM or Twitter under your real name?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Been telling neighbors about the kid and they can’t believe he’s 22. Maybe a couple of them make it out to vote.

So where do the candidates stand on standards based grading?

APE asked about it in the candidate questionnaire: https://www.arlingtonparentsforeducation.org/school-board-2023. Only Miranda answered. Looks like Angelo didn't bother responding at all. Sounds par for the course. He's a no show at the advisory committee meetings, a no show at at least two forums, no show at his own election, and not bothering to engage with a community group. Whether you like APE or not, not responding is not the action of a community leader who wants to work with everyone.

Maybe that's because there is no separation between APE and MT's campaign? He might as well stop by the Turner family reunion to campaign. And APE has constantly criticized APS for standards-based grading. Just like the missing middle people, they always claim to be opposed to "the process" when anyone proposes something progressive. Frankly, I think it's principled to not respond to APE's questionnaire. I don't want a community leader that touches such a divisive group even with a 10-foot pole.

Agreed. APE is a LOBBYING GROUP. They have been trying to get Miranda elected for years. They may as well be her personal PAC. Angelo is smart to not answer their little questionnaire. He answered the AGIA questionnaire and did a dang good job with it too.

People keep putting him down for his age but he's proving himself to be savvy.

APE derangement runs deep. What is wrong with their "little" questionnaire?

From Miranda's page, it looks like they asked about 1) Remedying subsitute (Gasp!); 2) Standards-based grading (pearl clutch); 3) Reducing class sizes (Pass the smelling salts!); 4) Learning Loss and Achievement gaps (Dastardly!) 5) device usage at schools (villians!)

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/6041ba6620a81d18855bdb62/t/64512b38322df0273fd9abe7/1683041080616/APE+Miranda+Turner+Responses+April+2023.docx.pdf

It's 5 questions. Written responses. Seems like a fair arrangement so that there was an equal playing field. He could have asked Reid to do his homework for him if he was too busy finishing his finals.

He could have but he didn't want to play APE's game. Good for him. APE isn't a legit org. They're a lobbying group, and right now they exist to elect Miranda.

He answered the AGIA questions so it's not like he's against answering questions from a LEGIT group.

I also heard from ACDC peeps that APE asked for a debate and AC turned them DOWN. Never got confirmation though, so I don't know if APE ever wanted a debate and didn't get it, or if it's just a rumor. I agree PP, I'd say it's a power move and APE just doesn't like when they're spurned.

That APE questionnaire was a "power move?" And just what "power" do you think it has? They put out something to address the issues they want addressed. The opponent chose not to respond - when responding would have given him a prime opportunity to distinguish himself/his views on the very specific topics everyone is so critical of APE for.

I'm pretty sure, actually, that APE put it out on its FB page for people to ask questions they wanted asked of the candidates. They also survey members to select priorities. So it's a pretty democratic process.

As for astroturfing, if you watch what they are doing, they actually ARE advocating for more transparency, etc. They pushed for the dashboard. They are asking APS to show more data. This is a real thing the org does.

Thanks, Jeff, for deleting the other link and explaining why. I clicked on it, and that was some crazy conspiracy stuff, that, again, mostly boiled down to the fact that Turner has friends who are Republicans.

DP. You’re minimizing her relationships. She partnered with them for years. One works at a Koch think tank. And you’re overlooking the bullying/vitriol that she found acceptable.

blah blah blah

We'll find out soon enough if Arlington is as concerned about a mid-level guy at GMU or think she is to answer for other's behavior. Can we retire this if she wins?

If she wins and she's on the school board, then her ties to RWNJs are even more relevant. I'd like to know who our school members are beholden to, and who we can thank if our school board stops standing up to Youngkin nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Been telling neighbors about the kid and they can’t believe he’s 22. Maybe a couple of them make it out to vote.

So where do the candidates stand on standards based grading?

APE asked about it in the candidate questionnaire: https://www.arlingtonparentsforeducation.org/school-board-2023. Only Miranda answered. Looks like Angelo didn't bother responding at all. Sounds par for the course. He's a no show at the advisory committee meetings, a no show at at least two forums, no show at his own election, and not bothering to engage with a community group. Whether you like APE or not, not responding is not the action of a community leader who wants to work with everyone.

Maybe that's because there is no separation between APE and MT's campaign? He might as well stop by the Turner family reunion to campaign. And APE has constantly criticized APS for standards-based grading. Just like the missing middle people, they always claim to be opposed to "the process" when anyone proposes something progressive. Frankly, I think it's principled to not respond to APE's questionnaire. I don't want a community leader that touches such a divisive group even with a 10-foot pole.

Agreed. APE is a LOBBYING GROUP. They have been trying to get Miranda elected for years. They may as well be her personal PAC. Angelo is smart to not answer their little questionnaire. He answered the AGIA questionnaire and did a dang good job with it too.

People keep putting him down for his age but he's proving himself to be savvy.

APE derangement runs deep. What is wrong with their "little" questionnaire?

From Miranda's page, it looks like they asked about 1) Remedying subsitute (Gasp!); 2) Standards-based grading (pearl clutch); 3) Reducing class sizes (Pass the smelling salts!); 4) Learning Loss and Achievement gaps (Dastardly!) 5) device usage at schools (villians!)

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/6041ba6620a81d18855bdb62/t/64512b38322df0273fd9abe7/1683041080616/APE+Miranda+Turner+Responses+April+2023.docx.pdf

It's 5 questions. Written responses. Seems like a fair arrangement so that there was an equal playing field. He could have asked Reid to do his homework for him if he was too busy finishing his finals.

He could have but he didn't want to play APE's game. Good for him. APE isn't a legit org. They're a lobbying group, and right now they exist to elect Miranda.

He answered the AGIA questions so it's not like he's against answering questions from a LEGIT group.

I also heard from ACDC peeps that APE asked for a debate and AC turned them DOWN. Never got confirmation though, so I don't know if APE ever wanted a debate and didn't get it, or if it's just a rumor. I agree PP, I'd say it's a power move and APE just doesn't like when they're spurned.

That APE questionnaire was a "power move?" And just what "power" do you think it has? They put out something to address the issues they want addressed. The opponent chose not to respond - when responding would have given him a prime opportunity to distinguish himself/his views on the very specific topics everyone is so critical of APE for.

I'm pretty sure, actually, that APE put it out on its FB page for people to ask questions they wanted asked of the candidates. They also survey members to select priorities. So it's a pretty democratic process.

As for astroturfing, if you watch what they are doing, they actually ARE advocating for more transparency, etc. They pushed for the dashboard. They are asking APS to show more data. This is a real thing the org does.

Thanks, Jeff, for deleting the other link and explaining why. I clicked on it, and that was some crazy conspiracy stuff, that, again, mostly boiled down to the fact that Turner has friends who are Republicans.

DP. You’re minimizing her relationships. She partnered with them for years. One works at a Koch think tank. And you’re overlooking the bullying/vitriol that she found acceptable.

NP. Are you saying we should never advocate alongside someone unless we agree 100%? The dude works for a GMU think tank that receives limited funding from Koch (like many other museums and other great causes). Looks like a libertarian group. Hardly worthy of the insinuations of your post.

I wouldn’t advocate and partner with people who were all out abusive to others in our community. In the same community she’s seeking a public office.

Sounds like you should vote for MT. Angelo’s supporters are interfering in an election and posting conspiracy theories under an anonymous account. He is aligned with them unless he denounces them and demands them to reveal their names and state the truth.

Just to be clear, there are no Angelo supporters. There are only Miranda haters.

I would maybe prefer someone with more ties to Arlington, but I think he's a good candidate. He can bring a fresh perspective.

I support him.

I'm going to support Angelo because he's taking a firm line on standing up to Youngkin and the RWNJs in Richmond. We already know Miranda won't do that. She can't because her base supports them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Been telling neighbors about the kid and they can’t believe he’s 22. Maybe a couple of them make it out to vote.

So where do the candidates stand on standards based grading?

APE asked about it in the candidate questionnaire: https://www.arlingtonparentsforeducation.org/school-board-2023. Only Miranda answered. Looks like Angelo didn't bother responding at all. Sounds par for the course. He's a no show at the advisory committee meetings, a no show at at least two forums, no show at his own election, and not bothering to engage with a community group. Whether you like APE or not, not responding is not the action of a community leader who wants to work with everyone.

Maybe that's because there is no separation between APE and MT's campaign? He might as well stop by the Turner family reunion to campaign. And APE has constantly criticized APS for standards-based grading. Just like the missing middle people, they always claim to be opposed to "the process" when anyone proposes something progressive. Frankly, I think it's principled to not respond to APE's questionnaire. I don't want a community leader that touches such a divisive group even with a 10-foot pole.

Agreed. APE is a LOBBYING GROUP. They have been trying to get Miranda elected for years. They may as well be her personal PAC. Angelo is smart to not answer their little questionnaire. He answered the AGIA questionnaire and did a dang good job with it too.

People keep putting him down for his age but he's proving himself to be savvy.

APE derangement runs deep. What is wrong with their "little" questionnaire?

From Miranda's page, it looks like they asked about 1) Remedying subsitute (Gasp!); 2) Standards-based grading (pearl clutch); 3) Reducing class sizes (Pass the smelling salts!); 4) Learning Loss and Achievement gaps (Dastardly!) 5) device usage at schools (villians!)

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/6041ba6620a81d18855bdb62/t/64512b38322df0273fd9abe7/1683041080616/APE+Miranda+Turner+Responses+April+2023.docx.pdf

It's 5 questions. Written responses. Seems like a fair arrangement so that there was an equal playing field. He could have asked Reid to do his homework for him if he was too busy finishing his finals.

He could have but he didn't want to play APE's game. Good for him. APE isn't a legit org. They're a lobbying group, and right now they exist to elect Miranda.

He answered the AGIA questions so it's not like he's against answering questions from a LEGIT group.

I also heard from ACDC peeps that APE asked for a debate and AC turned them DOWN. Never got confirmation though, so I don't know if APE ever wanted a debate and didn't get it, or if it's just a rumor. I agree PP, I'd say it's a power move and APE just doesn't like when they're spurned.

That APE questionnaire was a "power move?" And just what "power" do you think it has? They put out something to address the issues they want addressed. The opponent chose not to respond - when responding would have given him a prime opportunity to distinguish himself/his views on the very specific topics everyone is so critical of APE for.

I'm pretty sure, actually, that APE put it out on its FB page for people to ask questions they wanted asked of the candidates. They also survey members to select priorities. So it's a pretty democratic process.

As for astroturfing, if you watch what they are doing, they actually ARE advocating for more transparency, etc. They pushed for the dashboard. They are asking APS to show more data. This is a real thing the org does.

Thanks, Jeff, for deleting the other link and explaining why. I clicked on it, and that was some crazy conspiracy stuff, that, again, mostly boiled down to the fact that Turner has friends who are Republicans.

DP. You’re minimizing her relationships. She partnered with them for years. One works at a Koch think tank. And you’re overlooking the bullying/vitriol that she found acceptable.

NP. Are you saying we should never advocate alongside someone unless we agree 100%? The dude works for a GMU think tank that receives limited funding from Koch (like many other museums and other great causes). Looks like a libertarian group. Hardly worthy of the insinuations of your post.

I wouldn’t advocate and partner with people who were all out abusive to others in our community. In the same community she’s seeking a public office.

Sounds like you should vote for MT. Angelo’s supporters are interfering in an election and posting conspiracy theories under an anonymous account. He is aligned with them unless he denounces them and demands them to reveal their names and state the truth.

Just to be clear, there are no Angelo supporters. There are only Miranda haters.

Haven’t you learned dcum logic by now? Facts don’t matter. MT haters are conspiracy haters who like to create fake accounts to spread lies. They are abusive and want her to lose. Angelo also wants MT lose….ipso facto angelo is spreading lies and aligning himself with those crazies. No thank you. Will not support conspiracy theorist interfering in a misinformation campaign to internet w the election.

Here come MT's bullies. In attack mode.

Facts are facts.

If facts are facts why aren’t you posting this on AEM or Twitter under your real name?

I'm not posting anything. That is someone else.

Maybe they are afraid that the bullies will attack them. It's happened before.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Been telling neighbors about the kid and they can’t believe he’s 22. Maybe a couple of them make it out to vote.

So where do the candidates stand on standards based grading?

APE asked about it in the candidate questionnaire: https://www.arlingtonparentsforeducation.org/school-board-2023. Only Miranda answered. Looks like Angelo didn't bother responding at all. Sounds par for the course. He's a no show at the advisory committee meetings, a no show at at least two forums, no show at his own election, and not bothering to engage with a community group. Whether you like APE or not, not responding is not the action of a community leader who wants to work with everyone.

Maybe that's because there is no separation between APE and MT's campaign? He might as well stop by the Turner family reunion to campaign. And APE has constantly criticized APS for standards-based grading. Just like the missing middle people, they always claim to be opposed to "the process" when anyone proposes something progressive. Frankly, I think it's principled to not respond to APE's questionnaire. I don't want a community leader that touches such a divisive group even with a 10-foot pole.

Agreed. APE is a LOBBYING GROUP. They have been trying to get Miranda elected for years. They may as well be her personal PAC. Angelo is smart to not answer their little questionnaire. He answered the AGIA questionnaire and did a dang good job with it too.

People keep putting him down for his age but he's proving himself to be savvy.

APE derangement runs deep. What is wrong with their "little" questionnaire?

From Miranda's page, it looks like they asked about 1) Remedying subsitute (Gasp!); 2) Standards-based grading (pearl clutch); 3) Reducing class sizes (Pass the smelling salts!); 4) Learning Loss and Achievement gaps (Dastardly!) 5) device usage at schools (villians!)

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/6041ba6620a81d18855bdb62/t/64512b38322df0273fd9abe7/1683041080616/APE+Miranda+Turner+Responses+April+2023.docx.pdf

It's 5 questions. Written responses. Seems like a fair arrangement so that there was an equal playing field. He could have asked Reid to do his homework for him if he was too busy finishing his finals.

He could have but he didn't want to play APE's game. Good for him. APE isn't a legit org. They're a lobbying group, and right now they exist to elect Miranda.

He answered the AGIA questions so it's not like he's against answering questions from a LEGIT group.

I also heard from ACDC peeps that APE asked for a debate and AC turned them DOWN. Never got confirmation though, so I don't know if APE ever wanted a debate and didn't get it, or if it's just a rumor. I agree PP, I'd say it's a power move and APE just doesn't like when they're spurned.

That APE questionnaire was a "power move?" And just what "power" do you think it has? They put out something to address the issues they want addressed. The opponent chose not to respond - when responding would have given him a prime opportunity to distinguish himself/his views on the very specific topics everyone is so critical of APE for.

I'm pretty sure, actually, that APE put it out on its FB page for people to ask questions they wanted asked of the candidates. They also survey members to select priorities. So it's a pretty democratic process.

As for astroturfing, if you watch what they are doing, they actually ARE advocating for more transparency, etc. They pushed for the dashboard. They are asking APS to show more data. This is a real thing the org does.

Thanks, Jeff, for deleting the other link and explaining why. I clicked on it, and that was some crazy conspiracy stuff, that, again, mostly boiled down to the fact that Turner has friends who are Republicans.

DP. You’re minimizing her relationships. She partnered with them for years. One works at a Koch think tank. And you’re overlooking the bullying/vitriol that she found acceptable.

NP. Are you saying we should never advocate alongside someone unless we agree 100%? The dude works for a GMU think tank that receives limited funding from Koch (like many other museums and other great causes). Looks like a libertarian group. Hardly worthy of the insinuations of your post.

I wouldn’t advocate and partner with people who were all out abusive to others in our community. In the same community she’s seeking a public office.

Sounds like you should vote for MT. Angelo’s supporters are interfering in an election and posting conspiracy theories under an anonymous account. He is aligned with them unless he denounces them and demands them to reveal their names and state the truth.

Just to be clear, there are no Angelo supporters. There are only Miranda haters.

I would maybe prefer someone with more ties to Arlington, but I think he's a good candidate. He can bring a fresh perspective.

I support him.

I'm going to support Angelo because he's taking a firm line on standing up to Youngkin and the RWNJs in Richmond. We already know Miranda won't do that. She can't because her base supports them.

Her base, including one of her biggest donors, her husband.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I am not going to allow links to the Google doc to which some posters have linked. We generally do not allow anonymous criticism of non-public figures by name unless the poster also identifies themselves. The document in question mentions several non-public figures and is being circulated by someone using the pseudonym "Deep Throat". If Mr. or Ms. Throat would like to identify themselves, posters will be free to link to the document. But, short of that, I will remove any such links.

I'd encourage Mr. or Ms. Throat to identify themselves too but I think it's relevant, and I wouldn't characterize the board members of an org that is one candidate's brainchild (Miranda is literally a founder) as "non-public figures," especially when one of them is her campaign manager and they're all public tweets and quotes from APE's website. It raises some very valid character issues. I for one found it shocking. I mean I knew there were some strange bedfellows with Miranda, but it seems like her whole universe is Rs with really out-of-the-mainstream ideas.

I'd suggest a review of the matter since I feel it's more than fair game but I guess all I'll say is people can look for themselves if interested on Twitter @/protectarled but not linking anything without your say so, message received.

I suspect you know exactly who set up that Twitter because it’s you. Even if everything on there was true (and it is not), none of it is anything Miranda Turner said or did. It’s all slimy insinuations and smears that are very tenuously linked to the actual candidate.

No some of it was exactly what Miranda said/did. It was the positions APE took when she led APE. That is her record and it is relevant to this campaign. Maybe Mr./Ms. Throat could repost that part. It shouldn't be controversial.

Agree that her husband's political views are not relevant. I still think the public statements made by the APE board members and Miranda's campaign manager are fair game. They put them out there, why can't we talk about them?

Interesting. I haven't heard anything about her husband's political views. Is she married to a Trumper? If so, that shows questionable judgment.

Dang. I just checked him out. He is in deep with Youngkin, Asra Nomani, Ron DeSantis, Ian Prior, etc.

She is MARRIED to a Trumper. WTAF?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I am not going to allow links to the Google doc to which some posters have linked. We generally do not allow anonymous criticism of non-public figures by name unless the poster also identifies themselves. The document in question mentions several non-public figures and is being circulated by someone using the pseudonym "Deep Throat". If Mr. or Ms. Throat would like to identify themselves, posters will be free to link to the document. But, short of that, I will remove any such links.

I'd encourage Mr. or Ms. Throat to identify themselves too but I think it's relevant, and I wouldn't characterize the board members of an org that is one candidate's brainchild (Miranda is literally a founder) as "non-public figures," especially when one of them is her campaign manager and they're all public tweets and quotes from APE's website. It raises some very valid character issues. I for one found it shocking. I mean I knew there were some strange bedfellows with Miranda, but it seems like her whole universe is Rs with really out-of-the-mainstream ideas.

I'd suggest a review of the matter since I feel it's more than fair game but I guess all I'll say is people can look for themselves if interested on Twitter @/protectarled but not linking anything without your say so, message received.

I suspect you know exactly who set up that Twitter because it’s you. Even if everything on there was true (and it is not), none of it is anything Miranda Turner said or did. It’s all slimy insinuations and smears that are very tenuously linked to the actual candidate.

No some of it was exactly what Miranda said/did. It was the positions APE took when she led APE. That is her record and it is relevant to this campaign. Maybe Mr./Ms. Throat could repost that part. It shouldn't be controversial.

Agree that her husband's political views are not relevant. I still think the public statements made by the APE board members and Miranda's campaign manager are fair game. They put them out there, why can't we talk about them?

Interesting. I haven't heard anything about her husband's political views. Is she married to a Trumper? If so, that shows questionable judgment.

Lol no he is not a trumper. The conspiracy theorist is assuming someone on twitter w a troll account is her husband….but it’s not. I know this for a fact. I don’t think the conspiracy theorist is making the point they think they are. They’re trying to paint ape as some evil cabal but they just make the ape haters look deranged. Anyone with even the slightest discerning judgment can see that.