Bowser is the worst mayor we've had since Pratt-Kelly. Sad!!!

[Anonymous]

Can we get rid of her? The District is turning into an urban wasteland full of thugs and criminals.

[Anonymous]

Your subject title is exactly like a Trump tweet! Got me giggling! Hard to take you seriously, OP.

[Anonymous]

Well, people's choice OP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can we get rid of her? The District is turning into an urban wasteland full of thugs and criminals.

Bowser is certainly a half-wit but to say that DC is turning into an "urban wasteland full of thugs and criminals" due to her is a stretch.

[Anonymous]

Agreed. As someone who resided here in the early 90's, when it was a REAL urban wasteland, y'all ain't seen nothing.

But she is a dumbass. Personally, I think Tony Williams was the best mayor D.C. ever had.

But Bowser will probably be the last black mayor D.C. has for a while. The city has changed demographically, and there isn't enough of a chocolate city voting bloc anymore to guarantee the office always goes to a black candidate.

[Anonymous]

Tony Williams was the Giuliani of DC. Fixed the potholes, took out the trash and slashed crime. He was awesome.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Agreed. As someone who resided here in the early 90's, when it was a REAL urban wasteland, y'all ain't seen nothing.

But she is a dumbass. Personally, I think Tony Williams was the best mayor D.C. ever had.

But Bowser will probably be the last black mayor D.C. has for a while. The city has changed demographically, and there isn't enough of a chocolate city voting bloc anymore to guarantee the office always goes to a black candidate.

It's pretty idiotic, not to mention offensive, to assume DC residents only vote along racial lines. Also idiotic and offensive to imply that a white mayor wouldn't be a dumbass.

[Anonymous]

I really don't care what you think is idiotic or not.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:I really don't care what you think is idiotic or not.

I don't care that you don't care. So, na, na, na.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Tony Williams was the Giuliani of DC. Fixed the potholes, took out the trash and slashed crime. He was awesome.

Williams had his good points but he gave away the store on the stadium. Will never forgive him for that.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

It's pretty idiotic, not to mention offensive, to assume DC residents only vote along racial lines. Also idiotic and offensive to imply that a white mayor wouldn't be a dumbass.

Black voters, especially those from the lower end of the socioeconomic/educational spectrum will tend to vote for a black candidate when offered a choice between otherwise dissimilarly qualified candidates. This isn't exactly a mystery. It explains why Sharon Pratt Kelly was a mayor and Carol Schwartz wasn't, despite Schwartz being a much better choice. Black people vote for other black people, and that shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.

And now there's many fewer black people in DC, and less of a guaranteed vote for a black candidate.

There isn't anything "offensive" to this, unless you're speaking about the tendency of blacks to vote on racial lines. Because I'd agree with you then, that IS offensive

[Anonymous]

You obviously didn't live here under Barry and during the crack epidemic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can we get rid of her? The District is turning into an urban wasteland full of thugs and criminals.

Oh puh-lease, I didn't vote for her and I don't find her wildly inspiring but I don't see some huge increase in crime and the city is definitely not an urban wasteland. Stop hyperventilating, OP.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

It's pretty idiotic, not to mention offensive, to assume DC residents only vote along racial lines. Also idiotic and offensive to imply that a white mayor wouldn't be a dumbass.

Black voters, especially those from the lower end of the socioeconomic/educational spectrum will tend to vote for a black candidate when offered a choice between otherwise dissimilarly qualified candidates. This isn't exactly a mystery. It explains why Sharon Pratt Kelly was a mayor and Carol Schwartz wasn't, despite Schwartz being a much better choice. Black people vote for other black people, and that shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.

And now there's many fewer black people in DC, and less of a guaranteed vote for a black candidate.

There isn't anything "offensive" to this, unless you're speaking about the tendency of blacks to vote on racial lines. Because I'd agree with you then, that IS offensive

I thought you didn't care what I thought? Interesting that you have black voters figured out. What do you have to say about white voters? We both know that they routinely vote for black candidates over white candidates (and, while you don't seem to know it, black voters frequently vote for white candidates over black candidates).

According to you, when black voters voted for Sharon Pratt Kelly over Carol Schwartz, it was due to race. But, what about when black voters voted for Anthony Williams (who was a write-in candidate!) over Carol Schwartz? Was that also due to race or were black voters simply smart that time? What about the fact that DC is heavily Democratic and Schwartz was a Republican? Less important than race in your mind?

Phil Mendelson routinely beats black opponents city-wide. David Catania, David Grosso, Elissa Silverman also beat black opponents in city-wide elections. Dave Clarke used to do it all the time. None of them could do it without black votes.

There are individuals of every race who are partial to candidates of their own race. But to suggest that either white or black DC voters vote in lockstep due to race is simply wrong.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

It's pretty idiotic, not to mention offensive, to assume DC residents only vote along racial lines. Also idiotic and offensive to imply that a white mayor wouldn't be a dumbass.

Black voters, especially those from the lower end of the socioeconomic/educational spectrum will tend to vote for a black candidate when offered a choice between otherwise dissimilarly qualified candidates. This isn't exactly a mystery. It explains why Sharon Pratt Kelly was a mayor and Carol Schwartz wasn't, despite Schwartz being a much better choice. Black people vote for other black people, and that shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.

And now there's many fewer black people in DC, and less of a guaranteed vote for a black candidate.

There isn't anything "offensive" to this, unless you're speaking about the tendency of blacks to vote on racial lines. Because I'd agree with you then, that IS offensive

I thought you didn't care what I thought? Interesting that you have black voters figured out. What do you have to say about white voters? We both know that they routinely vote for black candidates over white candidates (and, while you don't seem to know it, black voters frequently vote for white candidates over black candidates).

According to you, when black voters voted for Sharon Pratt Kelly over Carol Schwartz, it was due to race. But, what about when black voters voted for Anthony Williams (who was a write-in candidate!) over Carol Schwartz? Was that also due to race or were black voters simply smart that time? What about the fact that DC is heavily Democratic and Schwartz was a Republican? Less important than race in your mind?

Phil Mendelson routinely beats black opponents city-wide. David Catania, David Grosso, Elissa Silverman also beat black opponents in city-wide elections. Dave Clarke used to do it all the time. None of them could do it without black votes.

There are individuals of every race who are partial to candidates of their own race. But to suggest that either white or black DC voters vote in lockstep due to race is simply wrong.

Tony Williams was the best mayor Washington ever had. I'm proud to have voted for him twice. Along the way, I voted for Schwartz and cast my first vote for Sharon Pratt/Dixon/Kelly. (BTW, I'm white, as if that should matter.) Sharon turned out to be way over her head but she was still way better than DC's infamous mayor-for-life.