BOE election candidates 2024

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rolling Stone has taken notice of the Bethany Mandel campaign:

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/bethany-mandel-conservative-school-board-1234968716/

This is just click-bait.

She's not running as a Democrat. It's a nonpartisan race. She's registered as a Democrat because in this county it's the only way to have an impact on the primary race. I wish MD had open primaries.

Signed,
Stewart supporter

Someone should let Stewart it’s a nonpartisan race.

Signed,
A Democrat who voted for Jawando and Mink

When one of your opponents is Bethany Mandel, I don't think it's possible to campaign without mentioning partisan political issues.

It’s not the issues that bother me. It’s the “Vote for me because I’m a leader in the women’s democratic club” that bothers me.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rolling Stone has taken notice of the Bethany Mandel campaign:

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/bethany-mandel-conservative-school-board-1234968716/

This is just click-bait.

She's not running as a Democrat. It's a nonpartisan race. She's registered as a Democrat because in this county it's the only way to have an impact on the primary race. I wish MD had open primaries.

Signed,
Stewart supporter

Someone should let Stewart it’s a nonpartisan race.

Signed,
A Democrat who voted for Jawando and Mink

When one of your opponents is Bethany Mandel, I don't think it's possible to campaign without mentioning partisan political issues.

It’s not the issues that bother me. It’s the “Vote for me because I’m a leader in the women’s democratic club” that bothers me.”

Could care less about that. Am more interested in who would do the best job and it's not Mandel or any incumbent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rolling Stone has taken notice of the Bethany Mandel campaign:

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/bethany-mandel-conservative-school-board-1234968716/

This is just click-bait.

She's not running as a Democrat. It's a nonpartisan race. She's registered as a Democrat because in this county it's the only way to have an impact on the primary race. I wish MD had open primaries.

Signed,
Stewart supporter

Someone should let Stewart it’s a nonpartisan race.

Signed,
A Democrat who voted for Jawando and Mink

When one of your opponents is Bethany Mandel, I don't think it's possible to campaign without mentioning partisan political issues.

It’s not the issues that bother me. It’s the “Vote for me because I’m a leader in the women’s democratic club” that bothers me.”

It's a relevant part of her background, no? Do you think she just shouldn't mention it?

Vote for her, don't vote for her, it's your decision not mine, but I do think it's interesting how the vast majority, like 90% of posts, on this thread are about one candidate, as though nobody else were running for BoE. It's also interesting how apparently this one candidate is bad both because she hides her background and also because she doesn't hide her background.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rolling Stone has taken notice of the Bethany Mandel campaign:

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/bethany-mandel-conservative-school-board-1234968716/

This is just click-bait.

She's not running as a Democrat. It's a nonpartisan race. She's registered as a Democrat because in this county it's the only way to have an impact on the primary race. I wish MD had open primaries.

Signed,
Stewart supporter

Someone should let Stewart it’s a nonpartisan race.

Signed,
A Democrat who voted for Jawando and Mink

When one of your opponents is Bethany Mandel, I don't think it's possible to campaign without mentioning partisan political issues.

It’s not the issues that bother me. It’s the “Vote for me because I’m a leader in the women’s democratic club” that bothers me.”

It's a relevant part of her background, no? Do you think she just shouldn't mention it?

Vote for her, don't vote for her, it's your decision not mine, but I do think it's interesting how the vast majority, like 90% of posts, on this thread are about one candidate, as though nobody else were running for BoE. It's also interesting how apparently this one candidate is bad both because she hides her background and also because she doesn't hide her background.

Yes, it’s relevant because it tells me that she wants to make the BOE another blatantly partisan governing body. That’s a good reason not to vote for her.

To your other question, the at-large race has a clearly better alternative to Harris in Kim and there’s not much to know about the District 2 race yet because it doesn’t seem like the candidates are campaigning yet. Stewart and Mandel are the only two really campaigning so far, so there’s more to discuss. Mandel is not worth discussing as an alternative to Evans, so it’s really about whether Stewart is a viable replacement for Evans. So far, the answer is no.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rolling Stone has taken notice of the Bethany Mandel campaign:

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/bethany-mandel-conservative-school-board-1234968716/

This is just click-bait.

She's not running as a Democrat. It's a nonpartisan race. She's registered as a Democrat because in this county it's the only way to have an impact on the primary race. I wish MD had open primaries.

Signed,
Stewart supporter

Someone should let Stewart it’s a nonpartisan race.

Signed,
A Democrat who voted for Jawando and Mink

When one of your opponents is Bethany Mandel, I don't think it's possible to campaign without mentioning partisan political issues.

It’s not the issues that bother me. It’s the “Vote for me because I’m a leader in the women’s democratic club” that bothers me.”

It's a relevant part of her background, no? Do you think she just shouldn't mention it?

Vote for her, don't vote for her, it's your decision not mine, but I do think it's interesting how the vast majority, like 90% of posts, on this thread are about one candidate, as though nobody else were running for BoE. It's also interesting how apparently this one candidate is bad both because she hides her background and also because she doesn't hide her background.

Yes, it’s relevant because it tells me that she wants to make the BOE another blatantly partisan governing body. That’s a good reason not to vote for her.

To your other question, the at-large race has a clearly better alternative to Harris in Kim and there’s not much to know about the District 2 race yet because it doesn’t seem like the candidates are campaigning yet. Stewart and Mandel are the only two really campaigning so far, so there’s more to discuss. Mandel is not worth discussing as an alternative to Evans, so it’s really about whether Stewart is a viable replacement for Evans. So far, the answer is no.

Whatever. You get to make your own decisions. I don't think this particular opinion of yours will be widely shared by the voters, but who knows.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rolling Stone has taken notice of the Bethany Mandel campaign:

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/bethany-mandel-conservative-school-board-1234968716/

This is just click-bait.

She's not running as a Democrat. It's a nonpartisan race. She's registered as a Democrat because in this county it's the only way to have an impact on the primary race. I wish MD had open primaries.

Signed,
Stewart supporter

Someone should let Stewart it’s a nonpartisan race.

Signed,
A Democrat who voted for Jawando and Mink

When one of your opponents is Bethany Mandel, I don't think it's possible to campaign without mentioning partisan political issues.

It’s not the issues that bother me. It’s the “Vote for me because I’m a leader in the women’s democratic club” that bothers me.”

It's a relevant part of her background, no? Do you think she just shouldn't mention it?

Vote for her, don't vote for her, it's your decision not mine, but I do think it's interesting how the vast majority, like 90% of posts, on this thread are about one candidate, as though nobody else were running for BoE. It's also interesting how apparently this one candidate is bad both because she hides her background and also because she doesn't hide her background.

Yes, it’s relevant because it tells me that she wants to make the BOE another blatantly partisan governing body. That’s a good reason not to vote for her.

To your other question, the at-large race has a clearly better alternative to Harris in Kim and there’s not much to know about the District 2 race yet because it doesn’t seem like the candidates are campaigning yet. Stewart and Mandel are the only two really campaigning so far, so there’s more to discuss. Mandel is not worth discussing as an alternative to Evans, so it’s really about whether Stewart is a viable replacement for Evans. So far, the answer is no.

Whatever. You get to make your own decisions. I don't think this particular opinion of yours will be widely shared by the voters, but who knows.

I actually think the fact that she deleted all of her previous political statements and positions on twitter in lieu of just telling people in shorthand that she is Chair of x group or a VP of y democratic club means that she is trying to be less partisan and not bogged down in the weeds of the day-to-day political minutiae that she often commented on before her candidacy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rolling Stone has taken notice of the Bethany Mandel campaign:

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/bethany-mandel-conservative-school-board-1234968716/

This is just click-bait.

She's not running as a Democrat. It's a nonpartisan race. She's registered as a Democrat because in this county it's the only way to have an impact on the primary race. I wish MD had open primaries.

Signed,
Stewart supporter

Someone should let Stewart it’s a nonpartisan race.

Signed,
A Democrat who voted for Jawando and Mink

When one of your opponents is Bethany Mandel, I don't think it's possible to campaign without mentioning partisan political issues.

It’s not the issues that bother me. It’s the “Vote for me because I’m a leader in the women’s democratic club” that bothers me.”

It's a relevant part of her background, no? Do you think she just shouldn't mention it?

Vote for her, don't vote for her, it's your decision not mine, but I do think it's interesting how the vast majority, like 90% of posts, on this thread are about one candidate, as though nobody else were running for BoE. It's also interesting how apparently this one candidate is bad both because she hides her background and also because she doesn't hide her background.

I don't care that she was once involved with the democratic party. In fact, that's way better than being part of the MAGA party these days.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rolling Stone has taken notice of the Bethany Mandel campaign:

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/bethany-mandel-conservative-school-board-1234968716/

This is just click-bait.

She's not running as a Democrat. It's a nonpartisan race. She's registered as a Democrat because in this county it's the only way to have an impact on the primary race. I wish MD had open primaries.

Signed,
Stewart supporter

Someone should let Stewart it’s a nonpartisan race.

Signed,
A Democrat who voted for Jawando and Mink

When one of your opponents is Bethany Mandel, I don't think it's possible to campaign without mentioning partisan political issues.

It’s not the issues that bother me. It’s the “Vote for me because I’m a leader in the women’s democratic club” that bothers me.”

It's a relevant part of her background, no? Do you think she just shouldn't mention it?

Vote for her, don't vote for her, it's your decision not mine, but I do think it's interesting how the vast majority, like 90% of posts, on this thread are about one candidate, as though nobody else were running for BoE. It's also interesting how apparently this one candidate is bad both because she hides her background and also because she doesn't hide her background.

Yes, it’s relevant because it tells me that she wants to make the BOE another blatantly partisan governing body. That’s a good reason not to vote for her.

To your other question, the at-large race has a clearly better alternative to Harris in Kim and there’s not much to know about the District 2 race yet because it doesn’t seem like the candidates are campaigning yet. Stewart and Mandel are the only two really campaigning so far, so there’s more to discuss. Mandel is not worth discussing as an alternative to Evans, so it’s really about whether Stewart is a viable replacement for Evans. So far, the answer is no.

Whatever. You get to make your own decisions. I don't think this particular opinion of yours will be widely shared by the voters, but who knows.

I actually think the fact that she deleted all of her previous political statements and positions on twitter in lieu of just telling people in shorthand that she is Chair of x group or a VP of y democratic club means that she is trying to be less partisan and not bogged down in the weeds of the day-to-day political minutiae that she often commented on before her candidacy.

I didn't get the impression she did that to cover anything up but out of a concern for her personal privacy and safety.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rolling Stone has taken notice of the Bethany Mandel campaign:

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/bethany-mandel-conservative-school-board-1234968716/

This is just click-bait.

She's not running as a Democrat. It's a nonpartisan race. She's registered as a Democrat because in this county it's the only way to have an impact on the primary race. I wish MD had open primaries.

Signed,
Stewart supporter

Someone should let Stewart it’s a nonpartisan race.

Signed,
A Democrat who voted for Jawando and Mink

When one of your opponents is Bethany Mandel, I don't think it's possible to campaign without mentioning partisan political issues.

It’s not the issues that bother me. It’s the “Vote for me because I’m a leader in the women’s democratic club” that bothers me.”

It's a relevant part of her background, no? Do you think she just shouldn't mention it?

Vote for her, don't vote for her, it's your decision not mine, but I do think it's interesting how the vast majority, like 90% of posts, on this thread are about one candidate, as though nobody else were running for BoE. It's also interesting how apparently this one candidate is bad both because she hides her background and also because she doesn't hide her background.

Yes, it’s relevant because it tells me that she wants to make the BOE another blatantly partisan governing body. That’s a good reason not to vote for her.

To your other question, the at-large race has a clearly better alternative to Harris in Kim and there’s not much to know about the District 2 race yet because it doesn’t seem like the candidates are campaigning yet. Stewart and Mandel are the only two really campaigning so far, so there’s more to discuss. Mandel is not worth discussing as an alternative to Evans, so it’s really about whether Stewart is a viable replacement for Evans. So far, the answer is no.

Whatever. You get to make your own decisions. I don't think this particular opinion of yours will be widely shared by the voters, but who knows.

I actually think the fact that she deleted all of her previous political statements and positions on twitter in lieu of just telling people in shorthand that she is Chair of x group or a VP of y democratic club means that she is trying to be less partisan and not bogged down in the weeds of the day-to-day political minutiae that she often commented on before her candidacy.

She hid her old twitter account because it made her look very chummy with the current board and because she used it to express political views that were at the fringe even among Democrats. It was in no way a grand gesture toward no partisanship.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rolling Stone has taken notice of the Bethany Mandel campaign:

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/bethany-mandel-conservative-school-board-1234968716/

This is just click-bait.

She's not running as a Democrat. It's a nonpartisan race. She's registered as a Democrat because in this county it's the only way to have an impact on the primary race. I wish MD had open primaries.

Signed,
Stewart supporter

Someone should let Stewart it’s a nonpartisan race.

Signed,
A Democrat who voted for Jawando and Mink

When one of your opponents is Bethany Mandel, I don't think it's possible to campaign without mentioning partisan political issues.

It’s not the issues that bother me. It’s the “Vote for me because I’m a leader in the women’s democratic club” that bothers me.”

It's a relevant part of her background, no? Do you think she just shouldn't mention it?

Vote for her, don't vote for her, it's your decision not mine, but I do think it's interesting how the vast majority, like 90% of posts, on this thread are about one candidate, as though nobody else were running for BoE. It's also interesting how apparently this one candidate is bad both because she hides her background and also because she doesn't hide her background.

Yes, it’s relevant because it tells me that she wants to make the BOE another blatantly partisan governing body. That’s a good reason not to vote for her.

To your other question, the at-large race has a clearly better alternative to Harris in Kim and there’s not much to know about the District 2 race yet because it doesn’t seem like the candidates are campaigning yet. Stewart and Mandel are the only two really campaigning so far, so there’s more to discuss. Mandel is not worth discussing as an alternative to Evans, so it’s really about whether Stewart is a viable replacement for Evans. So far, the answer is no.

Whatever. You get to make your own decisions. I don't think this particular opinion of yours will be widely shared by the voters, but who knows.

I actually think the fact that she deleted all of her previous political statements and positions on twitter in lieu of just telling people in shorthand that she is Chair of x group or a VP of y democratic club means that she is trying to be less partisan and not bogged down in the weeds of the day-to-day political minutiae that she often commented on before her candidacy.

I didn't get the impression she did that to cover anything up but out of a concern for her personal privacy and safety.

such a sad testament to the state of affairs when someone who is a public figure like she is, who testifies publicly before the BOE, writes op-eds, etc. all while having a twitter account has to close it once she files for a BOE candidacy. No wonder why we can't attract good candidates if the mere act of running for BOE all of a sudden opens up an otherwise public figure to privacy and safety threats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rolling Stone has taken notice of the Bethany Mandel campaign:

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/bethany-mandel-conservative-school-board-1234968716/

This is just click-bait.

She's not running as a Democrat. It's a nonpartisan race. She's registered as a Democrat because in this county it's the only way to have an impact on the primary race. I wish MD had open primaries.

Signed,
Stewart supporter

Someone should let Stewart it’s a nonpartisan race.

Signed,
A Democrat who voted for Jawando and Mink

When one of your opponents is Bethany Mandel, I don't think it's possible to campaign without mentioning partisan political issues.

It’s not the issues that bother me. It’s the “Vote for me because I’m a leader in the women’s democratic club” that bothers me.”

It's a relevant part of her background, no? Do you think she just shouldn't mention it?

Vote for her, don't vote for her, it's your decision not mine, but I do think it's interesting how the vast majority, like 90% of posts, on this thread are about one candidate, as though nobody else were running for BoE. It's also interesting how apparently this one candidate is bad both because she hides her background and also because she doesn't hide her background.

Yes, it’s relevant because it tells me that she wants to make the BOE another blatantly partisan governing body. That’s a good reason not to vote for her.

To your other question, the at-large race has a clearly better alternative to Harris in Kim and there’s not much to know about the District 2 race yet because it doesn’t seem like the candidates are campaigning yet. Stewart and Mandel are the only two really campaigning so far, so there’s more to discuss. Mandel is not worth discussing as an alternative to Evans, so it’s really about whether Stewart is a viable replacement for Evans. So far, the answer is no.

Wow, you did an Olympic-sized long jump to get to that conclusion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rolling Stone has taken notice of the Bethany Mandel campaign:

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/bethany-mandel-conservative-school-board-1234968716/

This is just click-bait.

She's not running as a Democrat. It's a nonpartisan race. She's registered as a Democrat because in this county it's the only way to have an impact on the primary race. I wish MD had open primaries.

Signed,
Stewart supporter

Someone should let Stewart it’s a nonpartisan race.

Signed,
A Democrat who voted for Jawando and Mink

When one of your opponents is Bethany Mandel, I don't think it's possible to campaign without mentioning partisan political issues.

It’s not the issues that bother me. It’s the “Vote for me because I’m a leader in the women’s democratic club” that bothers me.”

It's a relevant part of her background, no? Do you think she just shouldn't mention it?

Vote for her, don't vote for her, it's your decision not mine, but I do think it's interesting how the vast majority, like 90% of posts, on this thread are about one candidate, as though nobody else were running for BoE. It's also interesting how apparently this one candidate is bad both because she hides her background and also because she doesn't hide her background.

Yes, it’s relevant because it tells me that she wants to make the BOE another blatantly partisan governing body. That’s a good reason not to vote for her.

To your other question, the at-large race has a clearly better alternative to Harris in Kim and there’s not much to know about the District 2 race yet because it doesn’t seem like the candidates are campaigning yet. Stewart and Mandel are the only two really campaigning so far, so there’s more to discuss. Mandel is not worth discussing as an alternative to Evans, so it’s really about whether Stewart is a viable replacement for Evans. So far, the answer is no.

Whatever. You get to make your own decisions. I don't think this particular opinion of yours will be widely shared by the voters, but who knows.

I actually think the fact that she deleted all of her previous political statements and positions on twitter in lieu of just telling people in shorthand that she is Chair of x group or a VP of y democratic club means that she is trying to be less partisan and not bogged down in the weeds of the day-to-day political minutiae that she often commented on before her candidacy.

I didn't get the impression she did that to cover anything up but out of a concern for her personal privacy and safety.

such a sad testament to the state of affairs when someone who is a public figure like she is, who testifies publicly before the BOE, writes op-eds, etc. all while having a twitter account has to close it once she files for a BOE candidacy. No wonder why we can't attract good candidates if the mere act of running for BOE all of a sudden opens up an otherwise public figure to privacy and safety threats.

No current elected official in this county has felt the need to do this. Maybe it says more about one candidate than it does about the state of affairs.

[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:Rolling Stone has taken notice of the Bethany Mandel campaign:

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/bethany-mandel-conservative-school-board-1234968716/

This is just click-bait.

She's not running as a Democrat. It's a nonpartisan race. She's registered as a Democrat because in this county it's the only way to have an impact on the primary race. I wish MD had open primaries.

Signed,
Stewart supporter

Someone should let Stewart it’s a nonpartisan race.

Signed,
A Democrat who voted for Jawando and Mink

When one of your opponents is Bethany Mandel, I don't think it's possible to campaign without mentioning partisan political issues.

It’s not the issues that bother me. It’s the “Vote for me because I’m a leader in the women’s democratic club” that bothers me.”

It's a relevant part of her background, no? Do you think she just shouldn't mention it?

Vote for her, don't vote for her, it's your decision not mine, but I do think it's interesting how the vast majority, like 90% of posts, on this thread are about one candidate, as though nobody else were running for BoE. It's also interesting how apparently this one candidate is bad both because she hides her background and also because she doesn't hide her background.

Yes, it’s relevant because it tells me that she wants to make the BOE another blatantly partisan governing body. That’s a good reason not to vote for her.

To your other question, the at-large race has a clearly better alternative to Harris in Kim and there’s not much to know about the District 2 race yet because it doesn’t seem like the candidates are campaigning yet. Stewart and Mandel are the only two really campaigning so far, so there’s more to discuss. Mandel is not worth discussing as an alternative to Evans, so it’s really about whether Stewart is a viable replacement for Evans. So far, the answer is no.

Whatever. You get to make your own decisions. I don't think this particular opinion of yours will be widely shared by the voters, but who knows.

I actually think the fact that she deleted all of her previous political statements and positions on twitter in lieu of just telling people in shorthand that she is Chair of x group or a VP of y democratic club means that she is trying to be less partisan and not bogged down in the weeds of the day-to-day political minutiae that she often commented on before her candidacy.

I didn't get the impression she did that to cover anything up but out of a concern for her personal privacy and safety.

such a sad testament to the state of affairs when someone who is a public figure like she is, who testifies publicly before the BOE, writes op-eds, etc. all while having a twitter account has to close it once she files for a BOE candidacy. No wonder why we can't attract good candidates if the mere act of running for BOE all of a sudden opens up an otherwise public figure to privacy and safety threats.

No current elected official in this county has felt the need to do this. Maybe it says more about one candidate than it does about the state of affairs.

She's not an elected official (yet). What does it say about the state of affairs that a couple of assiduous posters on DCUM are obsessed with this one candidate?

[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:Rolling Stone has taken notice of the Bethany Mandel campaign:

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/bethany-mandel-conservative-school-board-1234968716/

This is just click-bait.

She's not running as a Democrat. It's a nonpartisan race. She's registered as a Democrat because in this county it's the only way to have an impact on the primary race. I wish MD had open primaries.

Signed,
Stewart supporter

Someone should let Stewart it’s a nonpartisan race.

Signed,
A Democrat who voted for Jawando and Mink

When one of your opponents is Bethany Mandel, I don't think it's possible to campaign without mentioning partisan political issues.

It’s not the issues that bother me. It’s the “Vote for me because I’m a leader in the women’s democratic club” that bothers me.”

It's a relevant part of her background, no? Do you think she just shouldn't mention it?

Vote for her, don't vote for her, it's your decision not mine, but I do think it's interesting how the vast majority, like 90% of posts, on this thread are about one candidate, as though nobody else were running for BoE. It's also interesting how apparently this one candidate is bad both because she hides her background and also because she doesn't hide her background.

Yes, it’s relevant because it tells me that she wants to make the BOE another blatantly partisan governing body. That’s a good reason not to vote for her.

To your other question, the at-large race has a clearly better alternative to Harris in Kim and there’s not much to know about the District 2 race yet because it doesn’t seem like the candidates are campaigning yet. Stewart and Mandel are the only two really campaigning so far, so there’s more to discuss. Mandel is not worth discussing as an alternative to Evans, so it’s really about whether Stewart is a viable replacement for Evans. So far, the answer is no.

Whatever. You get to make your own decisions. I don't think this particular opinion of yours will be widely shared by the voters, but who knows.

I actually think the fact that she deleted all of her previous political statements and positions on twitter in lieu of just telling people in shorthand that she is Chair of x group or a VP of y democratic club means that she is trying to be less partisan and not bogged down in the weeds of the day-to-day political minutiae that she often commented on before her candidacy.

I didn't get the impression she did that to cover anything up but out of a concern for her personal privacy and safety.

such a sad testament to the state of affairs when someone who is a public figure like she is, who testifies publicly before the BOE, writes op-eds, etc. all while having a twitter account has to close it once she files for a BOE candidacy. No wonder why we can't attract good candidates if the mere act of running for BOE all of a sudden opens up an otherwise public figure to privacy and safety threats.

No current elected official in this county has felt the need to do this. Maybe it says more about one candidate than it does about the state of affairs.

She's not an elected official (yet). What does it say about the state of affairs that a couple of assiduous posters on DCUM are obsessed with this one candidate?

It says you might as well go with an incumbent because the alternatives aren’t good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rolling Stone has taken notice of the Bethany Mandel campaign:

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/bethany-mandel-conservative-school-board-1234968716/

This is just click-bait.

She's not running as a Democrat. It's a nonpartisan race. She's registered as a Democrat because in this county it's the only way to have an impact on the primary race. I wish MD had open primaries.

Signed,
Stewart supporter

Someone should let Stewart it’s a nonpartisan race.

Signed,
A Democrat who voted for Jawando and Mink

When one of your opponents is Bethany Mandel, I don't think it's possible to campaign without mentioning partisan political issues.

It’s not the issues that bother me. It’s the “Vote for me because I’m a leader in the women’s democratic club” that bothers me.”

It's a relevant part of her background, no? Do you think she just shouldn't mention it?

Vote for her, don't vote for her, it's your decision not mine, but I do think it's interesting how the vast majority, like 90% of posts, on this thread are about one candidate, as though nobody else were running for BoE. It's also interesting how apparently this one candidate is bad both because she hides her background and also because she doesn't hide her background.

Yes, it’s relevant because it tells me that she wants to make the BOE another blatantly partisan governing body. That’s a good reason not to vote for her.

To your other question, the at-large race has a clearly better alternative to Harris in Kim and there’s not much to know about the District 2 race yet because it doesn’t seem like the candidates are campaigning yet. Stewart and Mandel are the only two really campaigning so far, so there’s more to discuss. Mandel is not worth discussing as an alternative to Evans, so it’s really about whether Stewart is a viable replacement for Evans. So far, the answer is no.

Whatever. You get to make your own decisions. I don't think this particular opinion of yours will be widely shared by the voters, but who knows.

I actually think the fact that she deleted all of her previous political statements and positions on twitter in lieu of just telling people in shorthand that she is Chair of x group or a VP of y democratic club means that she is trying to be less partisan and not bogged down in the weeds of the day-to-day political minutiae that she often commented on before her candidacy.

You. Again. You are back on this anonymous forum ranting about Laura Stewart, with the same old (yes, it's already old) nonsense about Stewart's Twitter feed and Stewart's being active as a Democrat. You are not going to get Shebra reelected with this stuff.