Kristin Mink

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Btw I estimate there are approximately two DCUM posters that live in Mink's district. The rest of you have no power to vote her out.

Who wants to vote her out? They might replace her with someone effective. Besides, it’s too
much.

Very few people in Mink's district for sure. You are all fooling yourselves in thinking this "scandal" means anything at all.

DP here.

While this isn’t a “scandal,” it does confirm my concerns about Mink: I question her judgment. This is a terribly bad look for her. She has been very vocal recently about MCPD. To use them in this capacity after calling for less police presence in the county? It’s seriously hypocritical. I’m not impressed at all.

And no, I have no connection to the FOP.

I actually think it's quite ridiculous, and dangerous, to say because she doesn't think police should be in charge of traffic enforcement, that she can't call then when there is a safety issue. They currently receive taxpayer funding for traffic safety. She is a taxpayer and is entitled to those services. She shouldn't call the District Commander for them, but to say she shouldn't use them at all is BS, that's just trying to discourage certain political positions because you don't like them. You all are big defenders of MCPD, but they are not perfect at all and neither is Fire and Rescue. You're trying to prevent people from criticizing them by saying they can't do that and receive taxpayer funded services. That's not okay, that's the real abuse of power by the FOP here.

What a gross misinterpretation of my words! I didn’t say she can’t call them when she has a safety issue. She shouldn’t call the district commander! Are you seriously okay with that? Seriously? I’d be more impressed if she (or her supporters, in this case) could just own up to this being a bad choice. To dig in and defend it just makes it worse.

I am also not discouraging different political positions. Where did I do that? I am calling her out for hypocrisy, which isn’t difficult to do considering her calls for fewer police will make very non-emergency calls like this one very hard for police to report to. The hostile environment toward police caused by this council is one of the main reasons WHY our county’s police department is so short staffed

Mink can criticize them all she wants. (She already has been.) I’d respect her beliefs more if I felt she actually knew what the police do. Perhaps she’ll take this as an opportunity to do a ride along or visit district stations. Getting to see the reality of policing in the county may actually help her in her role on the safety committee.

I literally said "she shouldn't call the district commander". At this point you are not interested in debating, just attacking. You are out of your mind.

Where an I attacking? Where am I out of my mind? I read my response twice and see nothing unreasonable. It’s all easily backed up by references to Mink’s actions or county council policies.

Once again, you’ve decided to interpret my words in an unusual way. Mink is not above reproach. If you would actually debate instead of misconstruing words, I’d be up for it. As it stands, we’ll just have to disagree.

It's really sad that you don't see how completely unhinged you sound. Clearly I struck a nerve.

Nope. No nerve. What I wrote was reasonable. Disagreeing with you is not the same thing as being “completely unhinged.”

You didn't disagree with me - you completely flipped out about me apparently being ok with Mink calling the District Commander after I literally said she shouldn't have done that. You refuse to admit that you are trying to discourage certain political positions after you said her actions are bad specifically because of her political positions. You are a crazy f&-ing fascist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Btw I estimate there are approximately two DCUM posters that live in Mink's district. The rest of you have no power to vote her out.

Who wants to vote her out? They might replace her with someone effective. Besides, it’s too
much.

Very few people in Mink's district for sure. You are all fooling yourselves in thinking this "scandal" means anything at all.

DP here.

While this isn’t a “scandal,” it does confirm my concerns about Mink: I question her judgment. This is a terribly bad look for her. She has been very vocal recently about MCPD. To use them in this capacity after calling for less police presence in the county? It’s seriously hypocritical. I’m not impressed at all.

And no, I have no connection to the FOP.

I actually think it's quite ridiculous, and dangerous, to say because she doesn't think police should be in charge of traffic enforcement, that she can't call then when there is a safety issue. They currently receive taxpayer funding for traffic safety. She is a taxpayer and is entitled to those services. She shouldn't call the District Commander for them, but to say she shouldn't use them at all is BS, that's just trying to discourage certain political positions because you don't like them. You all are big defenders of MCPD, but they are not perfect at all and neither is Fire and Rescue. You're trying to prevent people from criticizing them by saying they can't do that and receive taxpayer funded services. That's not okay, that's the real abuse of power by the FOP here.

What a gross misinterpretation of my words! I didn’t say she can’t call them when she has a safety issue. She shouldn’t call the district commander! Are you seriously okay with that? Seriously? I’d be more impressed if she (or her supporters, in this case) could just own up to this being a bad choice. To dig in and defend it just makes it worse.

I am also not discouraging different political positions. Where did I do that? I am calling her out for hypocrisy, which isn’t difficult to do considering her calls for fewer police will make very non-emergency calls like this one very hard for police to report to. The hostile environment toward police caused by this council is one of the main reasons WHY our county’s police department is so short staffed

Mink can criticize them all she wants. (She already has been.) I’d respect her beliefs more if I felt she actually knew what the police do. Perhaps she’ll take this as an opportunity to do a ride along or visit district stations. Getting to see the reality of policing in the county may actually help her in her role on the safety committee.

I literally said "she shouldn't call the district commander". At this point you are not interested in debating, just attacking. You are out of your mind.

Where an I attacking? Where am I out of my mind? I read my response twice and see nothing unreasonable. It’s all easily backed up by references to Mink’s actions or county council policies.

Once again, you’ve decided to interpret my words in an unusual way. Mink is not above reproach. If you would actually debate instead of misconstruing words, I’d be up for it. As it stands, we’ll just have to disagree.

It's really sad that you don't see how completely unhinged you sound. Clearly I struck a nerve.

Nope. No nerve. What I wrote was reasonable. Disagreeing with you is not the same thing as being “completely unhinged.”

You didn't disagree with me - you completely flipped out about me apparently being ok with Mink calling the District Commander after I literally said she shouldn't have done that. You refuse to admit that you are trying to discourage certain political positions after you said her actions are bad specifically because of her political positions. You are a crazy f&-ing fascist.

Wow.

I suspect most people reading this thread will be able to determine what I wrote was a reasonable response to Mink’s poor decision. Nowhere do I “flip out” or come across as “crazy” or “fascist.” It’s clear you are attacking me instead of what I wrote, which (unfortunately) is common on DCUM.

I hope you find peace. Your response to my post was unnecessarily hostile.

[Anonymous]

I voted for her. I like her. I think this was pretty tone deaf of her. And super petty if the officer to then take this to the press. Not a good look on either side here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I voted for her. I like her. I think this was pretty tone deaf of her. And super petty if the officer to then take this to the press. Not a good look on either side here.

+1 absolutely, neither side looks good here. She should not have called the District Commander, it shows a total lack of understand of the work first responders do. And the FOP is just blatantly lying, she did not call to her her tire changed neither did police change her tire

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I voted for her. I like her. I think this was pretty tone deaf of her. And super petty if the officer to then take this to the press. Not a good look on either side here.

She could have put this to bed pretty quickly with a real apology instead of the word salad she tweeted.

More likely, she knows she’s safe anyway so she’s just going to let it blow over, since moco voters will never hold her accountable as long as she loudly virtue signals about national issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I voted for her. I like her. I think this was pretty tone deaf of her. And super petty if the officer to then take this to the press. Not a good look on either side here.

She could have put this to bed pretty quickly with a real apology instead of the word salad she tweeted.

More likely, she knows she’s safe anyway so she’s just going to let it blow over, since moco voters will never hold her accountable as long as she loudly virtue signals about national issues.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I knew I couldn't support her when I came across a video of her where she seems absolutely crazed and unhinged, repeatedly screaming, "Trans women are women!" in front of the Supreme Court. It's all about performance and virtue signaling with her. The county will be worse off due to her time on the Council.

That video is nuts. She’s wearing her baby too!! That was poor decision making to me. What happens to that baby if god forbid sh!t gets out of hand?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I knew I couldn't support her when I came across a video of her where she seems absolutely crazed and unhinged, repeatedly screaming, "Trans women are women!" in front of the Supreme Court. It's all about performance and virtue signaling with her. The county will be worse off due to her time on the Council.

That video is nuts. She’s wearing her baby too!! That was poor decision making to me. What happens to that baby if god forbid sh!t gets out of hand?

It’s all about the attention. You have to turn it up when the cameras are on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I knew I couldn't support her when I came across a video of her where she seems absolutely crazed and unhinged, repeatedly screaming, "Trans women are women!" in front of the Supreme Court. It's all about performance and virtue signaling with her. The county will be worse off due to her time on the Council.

That video is nuts. She’s wearing her baby too!! That was poor decision making to me. What happens to that baby if god forbid sh!t gets out of hand?

Here's the video: https://twitter.com/cmclymer/status/1181649394422210562

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I knew I couldn't support her when I came across a video of her where she seems absolutely crazed and unhinged, repeatedly screaming, "Trans women are women!" in front of the Supreme Court. It's all about performance and virtue signaling with her. The county will be worse off due to her time on the Council.

That video is nuts. She’s wearing her baby too!! That was poor decision making to me. What happens to that baby if god forbid sh!t gets out of hand?

Here's the video: https://twitter.com/cmclymer/status/1181649394422210562

And that person has was “in awe.”

Wait until someone plays “got your nose” with them, it’s going to blow their mind.

[Anonymous]

Her entire claim to fame was screaming at the old EPA while he was at a restaurant.

Surely she would be fine if people did that to her then as well, yes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I knew I couldn't support her when I came across a video of her where she seems absolutely crazed and unhinged, repeatedly screaming, "Trans women are women!" in front of the Supreme Court. It's all about performance and virtue signaling with her. The county will be worse off due to her time on the Council.

That video is nuts. She’s wearing her baby too!! That was poor decision making to me. What happens to that baby if god forbid sh!t gets out of hand?

It’s all about the attention. You have to turn it up when the cameras are on.

She’s literally using her baby as a shield. Assuming no one will physically get her off the stage because of it. That’s pretty psycho, if you ask me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I knew I couldn't support her when I came across a video of her where she seems absolutely crazed and unhinged, repeatedly screaming, "Trans women are women!" in front of the Supreme Court. It's all about performance and virtue signaling with her. The county will be worse off due to her time on the Council.

That video is nuts. She’s wearing her baby too!! That was poor decision making to me. What happens to that baby if god forbid sh!t gets out of hand?

It’s all about the attention. You have to turn it up when the cameras are on.

She’s literally using her baby as a shield. Assuming no one will physically get her off the stage because of it. That’s pretty psycho, if you ask me.

She is a nut job. There was no reason for her to be up on that stage with that poor baby. She's not only a hypocrite but a desperate clout seeker.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I knew I couldn't support her when I came across a video of her where she seems absolutely crazed and unhinged, repeatedly screaming, "Trans women are women!" in front of the Supreme Court. It's all about performance and virtue signaling with her. The county will be worse off due to her time on the Council.

That video is nuts. She’s wearing her baby too!! That was poor decision making to me. What happens to that baby if god forbid sh!t gets out of hand?

Here's the video: https://twitter.com/cmclymer/status/1181649394422210562

I have never seen this video. My biggest problem with this is that she is using her baby as a tool/shield. I have no problem with her protesting or what she was protesting, but I have a major problem with her exploiting her child for the protest.

[Anonymous]

That was the fastest political career since Santos! She's toast.