Thanks to everyone for an informative discussion. Not OP but have also been struggling with this decision. I’m wavering between Friedson and Glass and may end up at Friedson after this.

I think you have to pick the least bad.

Friedson is definitely in bed with developers, who fund him. But, he might be good for business, which the county desperately needs (and to get big businesses here, as in large company headquarters, MCPS has to improve, traffic has to improve and housing costs need to improve)

Jawando talks a good game about MCPS, but he can't fix the funding problem (there isn't enough and we can't seem to get more big businesses here)

Glass seems more talk/politician than any actual action to me. Adding a Council person to oversee MCPS for example was tried, when they sent over Essie Maguire. How'd that work out? And that he's from the eastern part of the county is a turnoff for me - that area only cares about that area, and the CE needs to think about how policies affect the entire county

Jawando will raise your taxes.

Friedson is backed by private PACs. The Greater Capital Area Association of Realtors has canvassers out who appear to be representing the Dem party, endorsing Friedson. I've seen them in my neighborhood.

“Don’t be fooled by this misleading T-shirt,” Jim Michaels, a member of the MCDCC, declared via Facebook. “Canvassers were seen going door-to-door today in my District 16 wearing this T-shirt. They are paid canvassers who are handing out literature printed by the Greater Capital Area Association of Realtors (GCAAR) to promote specific candidates endorsed by GCAAR.”

Literature handed out by the GCAAR canvassers promoted “Montgomery County Democrats who will fight for us” in large lettering, and included the names of several candidates endorsed by the association: District 1 Councilmember Andrew Friedson for county executive, and former MCDCC Chair Scott Goldberg, Gaithersburg City Councilmember Jim McNulty, and county Board of Education member Karla Silvestre for County Council at large.

https://bethesdamagazine.com/2026/06/03/jawando-says-maxed-out-public-matching-funds/

I'm going with Glass, and won't be voting for Silvestre either.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elrich has left the executive branch in a shambles and glass and Friedson are the only ones who "might" clean things up a bit. Friedson cares about good governance. But honestly none of the three has any relevant managerial experience.

I am quite concerned with Jawando and how much worse he will make Elrich's current disaster.

Without having more insight on how close they are, I feel this is a Friedson - Jawando race and for that reason alone, I'm voting Friedson.

This is a vote for the least bad of the three.

If I was really convinced Glass didn't have a shot, I would agree with you. But polling is all over the map, lots can change in the last few weeks, and the last county exec race was won by three dozen votes. Given it is neck-and-neck, I'm voting who I actually think is the least bad...which is Glass.

Open to being convinced though. Why do you think he doesn't have a shot?

I'd be thrilled if Glass has a shot, so
I hope I am wrong. But I am following the money. Who are the PACs funding? Would they invest so much on the negative campaign against Jawando if they didn't think he was the biggest threat?

Oh well that one is easy. I'm fairly certain that the PACs don't just think Jawando is the biggest threat, it is that he is the ONLY threat. They are fine with Glass. If they were not OR if they thought he didn't have a chance, all they have to do is come out and endorse Friedson. It wouldn't cost them a dime. The PACs attacking Jawando haven't done that.

So I draw the opposite conclusion...they either are fine with him or think he has a shot, or both.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elrich has left the executive branch in a shambles and glass and Friedson are the only ones who "might" clean things up a bit. Friedson cares about good governance. But honestly none of the three has any relevant managerial experience.

I am quite concerned with Jawando and how much worse he will make Elrich's current disaster.

Without having more insight on how close they are, I feel this is a Friedson - Jawando race and for that reason alone, I'm voting Friedson.

This is a vote for the least bad of the three.

If I was really convinced Glass didn't have a shot, I would agree with you. But polling is all over the map, lots can change in the last few weeks, and the last county exec race was won by three dozen votes. Given it is neck-and-neck, I'm voting who I actually think is the least bad...which is Glass.

Open to being convinced though. Why do you think he doesn't have a shot?

I'd be thrilled if Glass has a shot, so
I hope I am wrong. But I am following the money. Who are the PACs funding? Would they invest so much on the negative campaign against Jawando if they didn't think he was the biggest threat?

Anonymous wrote:Would you say Friedson is least likely to raise taxes?

Personally, I would not say that. They all have basically the same record on the topic. Friedson made a political decision in the middle of a campaign and made it seem like more than it was.

If raising taxes is your main concern, that rules out Jawando by a hair. It doesn't break a tie between the other two. Need to move to second most important issue to you....

Would you say Friedson is least likely to raise taxes?

Anonymous wrote:Elrich has left the executive branch in a shambles and glass and Friedson are the only ones who "might" clean things up a bit. Friedson cares about good governance. But honestly none of the three has any relevant managerial experience.

I am quite concerned with Jawando and how much worse he will make Elrich's current disaster.

Without having more insight on how close they are, I feel this is a Friedson - Jawando race and for that reason alone, I'm voting Friedson.

This is a vote for the least bad of the three.

If I was really convinced Glass didn't have a shot, I would agree with you. But polling is all over the map, lots can change in the last few weeks, and the last county exec race was won by three dozen votes. Given it is neck-and-neck, I'm voting who I actually think is the least bad...which is Glass.

Open to being convinced though. Why do you think he doesn't have a shot?

Anonymous wrote:Election day is coming soon in MoCo. I have my ballot mostly down, including niche positions like sheriff and registrar of wills. Yet, I still don't know who to choose for County Exec. Jawando seems like a career politician and the whole scandal with the Board of Elections puts me off. Friedson chose not to take public financing, which seems scummy, and attacks his opponents without having much policy besides not raising taxes. I'm leaning Evan but I'm not entirely sure if I should.

I'm leaning Evan following basically the same thought process as you.

The tipping point for me is not policy, but ways of governing. I went to either meet and greets or forums where I heard them all speak. Given the "career politician" nature of Jawando and the general "scumminess" of Friedson, Glass appeared to be the one who would go about the job in the most collaborative and thoughtful way (admitting that the bar on that is low)

Anonymous wrote:Elrich has left the executive branch in a shambles and glass and Friedson are the only ones who "might" clean things up a bit. Friedson cares about good governance. But honestly none of the three has any relevant managerial experience.

I am quite concerned with Jawando and how much worse he will make Elrich's current disaster.

Without having more insight on how close they are, I feel this is a Friedson - Jawando race and for that reason alone, I'm voting Friedson.

This is a vote for the least bad of the three.

Same

Do I love developers? Nope. But developers aren't the main challenge right now. Jawando will just want to pander to the interest groups who, however well intentioned, have been a disaster for the Democratic party and for local communities.

See I don’t want Friedson and was wondering if that means I should vote Jawando

Elrich has left the executive branch in a shambles and glass and Friedson are the only ones who "might" clean things up a bit. Friedson cares about good governance. But honestly none of the three has any relevant managerial experience.

I am quite concerned with Jawando and how much worse he will make Elrich's current disaster.

Without having more insight on how close they are, I feel this is a Friedson - Jawando race and for that reason alone, I'm voting Friedson.

This is a vote for the least bad of the three.

Anonymous wrote:Election day is coming soon in MoCo. I have my ballot mostly down, including niche positions like sheriff and registrar of wills. Yet, I still don't know who to choose for County Exec. Jawando seems like a career politician and the whole scandal with the Board of Elections puts me off. Friedson chose not to take public financing, which seems scummy, and attacks his opponents without having much policy besides not raising taxes. I'm leaning Evan but I'm not entirely sure if I should.

None of the three will be great. None of them will be any more terrible than the others.

If you prioritize spending on MCPS, vote for Jawando.

If you prioritize subsidies for developers, vote for Friedson.

If you prioritize banning right turns on red and gas leaf blowers, vote for Glass.

No good choice. MoCo downward spiral continues. Tax will go up again no matter who wins, MCPS will decline again if that’s even possible. Yeah we are totally fked.

Election day is coming soon in MoCo. I have my ballot mostly down, including niche positions like sheriff and registrar of wills. Yet, I still don't know who to choose for County Exec. Jawando seems like a career politician and the whole scandal with the Board of Elections puts me off. Friedson chose not to take public financing, which seems scummy, and attacks his opponents without having much policy besides not raising taxes. I'm leaning Evan but I'm not entirely sure if I should.