jsteele wrote:

jsteele wrote:
But, the most astonishing part of that article were the quotes by George T. Johnson, head of local 20 of AFSCME:

“People have perceptions about what this city is becoming .?.?. and they want this council to remain black, and if they don’t get out there and put black folks in there, there will be a white city council,” Johnson said. “That is a rough thing to say, but that is the truth.”

AFSCME had endorsed Brown and then immediately switched to Bonds when Brown dropped out. That suggests that Johnson and AFSCME leadership may be among the "people" who are concerned about having black council members.

Anita Bonds just said on the Kojo Show that she was glad to hear this comment. Voting by race is apparently considered a good idea in certain quarters.

Perry Redd also seemed to agree. I wish they had thought to say they hoped people would vote for them not because they're black, but because their policies would benefit the people of DC, both black and white. When Scott Bolden, with twice the campaign funds of Phil Mendelson, lost every single ward to Phil in the 2006 primary, I think we saw that the majority of voters, both black and white, can look beyond race. I wish our candidates could aspire to do the same.

I listened to the forum as well. I thought Redd was particularly well spoken and somehow wish he had a more viable campaign.

However, I was very troubled both by the Bonds response noted above as well as the back and forth about Silverman and her donation from Sinclair Skinner. Zukerberg also noted the lack of disclosure related to any expense associated with the effort to knock him and former candidate Settles off the ballot.

The response from Silverman was, in my opinion, very shrill. She somehow thinks it is ok to criticize Mara, Bonds and Frumin for their contributors, but hers are pristine? Really. I also find her stance on taxes (they are not too high and people are ok with paying them) to be naive.

jsteele wrote:

jsteele wrote:
But, the most astonishing part of that article were the quotes by George T. Johnson, head of local 20 of AFSCME:

“People have perceptions about what this city is becoming .?.?. and they want this council to remain black, and if they don’t get out there and put black folks in there, there will be a white city council,” Johnson said. “That is a rough thing to say, but that is the truth.”

AFSCME had endorsed Brown and then immediately switched to Bonds when Brown dropped out. That suggests that Johnson and AFSCME leadership may be among the "people" who are concerned about having black council members.

Anita Bonds just said on the Kojo Show that she was glad to hear this comment. Voting by race is apparently considered a good idea in certain quarters.

Yeah, she should have "finessed" that comment better - say something like people shouldn't vote on race but *I* happen to be a better representative of the whole city or some bullshit like that. She doesn't seem to think quickly.

jsteele wrote:
But, the most astonishing part of that article were the quotes by George T. Johnson, head of local 20 of AFSCME:

“People have perceptions about what this city is becoming .?.?. and they want this council to remain black, and if they don’t get out there and put black folks in there, there will be a white city council,” Johnson said. “That is a rough thing to say, but that is the truth.”

AFSCME had endorsed Brown and then immediately switched to Bonds when Brown dropped out. That suggests that Johnson and AFSCME leadership may be among the "people" who are concerned about having black council members.

Anita Bonds just said on the Kojo Show that she was glad to hear this comment. Voting by race is apparently considered a good idea in certain quarters.

Anonymous wrote:"Bonds and Mara appear to have the broadest support, based on past city voting patterns and the crowded field." - Washington Post's Tim Craig 4/7

Tim Craig is a very smart reporter who should have known better than to include this sentence in his article. If you read the entire article, it is clear that he believes the race is wide open. Mara will not get as many votes as he received in 2011. Mara has a vote ceiling that Frumin and Silverman don't face.

Here is the article in question:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-politics/browns-departure-makes-for-a-fluid-dc-council-race-featuring-six-candidates/2013/04/07/5b006766-9dfa-11e2-a941-a19bce7af755_story.html

A quote you neglected to cherry-pick:

"Local pollsters say surveys shows city voters hold deeply negative views about the GOP, even in wealthy neighborhoods such as Chevy Chase. That leaves an opening for the other Democrats in the race."

But, the most astonishing part of that article were the quotes by George T. Johnson, head of local 20 of AFSCME:

“People have perceptions about what this city is becoming .?.?. and they want this council to remain black, and if they don’t get out there and put black folks in there, there will be a white city council,” Johnson said. “That is a rough thing to say, but that is the truth.”

AFSCME had endorsed Brown and then immediately switched to Bonds when Brown dropped out. That suggests that Johnson and AFSCME leadership may be among the "people" who are concerned about having black council members.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jeff - You have more influence than you know. Mara is willing to work with all the reformers to get things done and, besides Bonds, is the far-and-away leader. Ask Matthew Frumin to share his poll with you. Silverman is under 10% too. Thank you for your work here.

Any of Frumin, Silverman, or Mara can make a convincing argument that they are the best hope for the reformers. I can argue that a vote for Mara is a vote for Bonds just as convincingly as you can argue that a vote for Frumin is a vote for Bonds. None of the three appears to be willing to throw in the towel. So, it is up to each campaign to get their voters to the polls.

Ah, but Frumin's own poll says something different. Mara leads him and Silverman by quite a large margin but with Anita's recent moves, she could move ahead starting with tomorrow's early voting.

You keep bringing up this poll. What is your source? I highly doubt that Frumin is sharing his private polling data with Mara supporters.

"Bonds and Mara appear to have the broadest support, based on past city voting patterns and the crowded field." - Washington Post's Tim Craig 4/7

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jeff - You have more influence than you know. Mara is willing to work with all the reformers to get things done and, besides Bonds, is the far-and-away leader. Ask Matthew Frumin to share his poll with you. Silverman is under 10% too. Thank you for your work here.

Any of Frumin, Silverman, or Mara can make a convincing argument that they are the best hope for the reformers. I can argue that a vote for Mara is a vote for Bonds just as convincingly as you can argue that a vote for Frumin is a vote for Bonds. None of the three appears to be willing to throw in the towel. So, it is up to each campaign to get their voters to the polls.

Ah, but Frumin's own poll says something different. Mara leads him and Silverman by quite a large margin but with Anita's recent moves, she could move ahead starting with tomorrow's early voting.

Bonds or Mara? We are doomed.

Anonymous wrote:Jeff - You have more influence than you know. Mara is willing to work with all the reformers to get things done and, besides Bonds, is the far-and-away leader. Ask Matthew Frumin to share his poll with you. Silverman is under 10% too. Thank you for your work here.

Any of Frumin, Silverman, or Mara can make a convincing argument that they are the best hope for the reformers. I can argue that a vote for Mara is a vote for Bonds just as convincingly as you can argue that a vote for Frumin is a vote for Bonds. None of the three appears to be willing to throw in the towel. So, it is up to each campaign to get their voters to the polls.

Jeff - You have more influence than you know. Mara is willing to work with all the reformers to get things done and, besides Bonds, is the far-and-away leader. Ask Matthew Frumin to share his poll with you. Silverman is under 10% too. Thank you for your work here.

Anita Bonds has some pretty brazen unions now and "independent" expenditures coming. WaPo's Tim Craig's new piece lays it out. Silverman or Frumin votes hand the election back to an ancient way of business in DC. Bonds is the favorite now.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-politics/browns-departure-makes-for-a-fluid-dc-council-race-featuring-six-candidates/2013/04/07/5b006766-9dfa-11e2-a941-a19bce7af755_story.html

jsteele wrote:I question your basic assumption which I believe to be a self-serving myth created by the Mara and Bonds campaigns. I don't believe it has any basis in fact. Since you don't want to debate that, I won't debate it. But, this thread is contributing to that myth and, therefore, I am compelled to point it out.

It may be that the Bonds and Mara supporters are spreading the idea, but the 2011 results that I quoted in an earlier post seem to lend independent credence to it. Also, I for one don't feel a great need to stop either Mara or Bonds, so I don't think it will affect my vote. But it does make me curious how the two rate on DCUM.

I don't think Orange had any visible support here, by the way, so we are not a great predictor.

I question your basic assumption which I believe to be a self-serving myth created by the Mara and Bonds campaigns. I don't believe it has any basis in fact. Since you don't want to debate that, I won't debate it. But, this thread is contributing to that myth and, therefore, I am compelled to point it out.

I just posted a message (anonymously, since I was inadvertently using a browser in which I had not signed in) that indicated that Bonds and Mara are the most likely to win, as has been asserted by at least one other poster in these special election threads. I am not interested in debating whether that is indeed the case or whether some other candidate has strength I'm overlooking, but I am curious how the two compare, at least in this little microcosm of the electorate:

Between the two, although I may agree with Bonds on more issues, I think I would choose Mara on grounds that he is a faster thinker and does more homework. Especially since the rest of the Council is so overwhelmingly Dem, I am not fearful of him tilting them in a conservative direction that would upset me. But I think he would liven up the their discussions.

Again, I still prefer Frumin or Silverman, but I'm curious how you feel about the two presumed front-runners.