Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Bowser campaign reminds me so much of Obama in 2008, including having an opponent that the other side doesn't like and is happy to see lose.

Just stop. "Obama Derangement Syndrome" is worse than Ebola.

What?! SMH at the stupidity.

Anonymous wrote:The Bowser campaign reminds me so much of Obama in 2008, including having an opponent that the other side doesn't like and is happy to see lose.

Just stop. "Obama Derangement Syndrome" is worse than Ebola.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Bowser campaign reminds me so much of Obama in 2008, including having an opponent that the other side doesn't like and is happy to see lose.

This may be the worst comparison ever. The Obama 2008 campaign was most notable for the support by masses of super-enthusiastic young people fighting for change.

If that's the case, those masses must feel really stupid for the change they fought for verses what they ended up getting.

Wow--you thread trolls are absolutely obsessed with President Obama. What does he have to do with Bowser or this thread?

McCain and Romney lost, and much like the southern states, you need to GET.OVER.IT.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Bowser campaign reminds me so much of Obama in 2008, including having an opponent that the other side doesn't like and is happy to see lose.

This may be the worst comparison ever. The Obama 2008 campaign was most notable for the support by masses of super-enthusiastic young people fighting for change.

If that's the case, those masses must feel really stupid for the change they fought for verses what they ended up getting.

I think near universal health insurance, which has been on the Dems agenda since Harry Truman, was a big accomplishment. I am not sure what Bowser is proposing that is equivalent.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Bowser campaign reminds me so much of Obama in 2008, including having an opponent that the other side doesn't like and is happy to see lose.

This may be the worst comparison ever. The Obama 2008 campaign was most notable for the support by masses of super-enthusiastic young people fighting for change.

If that's the case, those masses must feel really stupid for the change they fought for verses what they ended up getting.

Anonymous wrote:The Bowser campaign reminds me so much of Obama in 2008, including having an opponent that the other side doesn't like and is happy to see lose.

This may be the worst comparison ever. The Obama 2008 campaign was most notable for the support by masses of super-enthusiastic young people fighting for change.

Anonymous wrote:I'm dumb. Where can I watch the debate?

Prepare to become even dumber:

http://www.american.edu/communityrelations/AUDebate.cfm

I'm dumb. Where can I watch the debate?

The Bowser campaign reminds me so much of Obama in 2008, including having an opponent that the other side doesn't like and is happy to see lose.

Because this was driving me crazy (not that I'm obsessive/compulsive or anything), I just watched the debate again. At one point, Bowser said that she would "transform 4 middle schools" and later said that she would make an "investment in 4 middle schools". The second reference seemed to be to the four schools proposed in the DME recommendations. However, the first reference focuses on "transformation". You can't "transform" a nonexistent school so that would seem to apply to existing schools. However, her written policy says she will focus on the "transformation" of 13 middle schools. So, it is unclear exactly how many schools she will "transform" and in how many she will "invest".

So, the bottom line is that I don't know what Bowser was talking about during the debate and I'm not convinced she does either. My best bet is that she wants to open four new schools and transform the existing schools. Also, she wants to do that all by 2020.

Perhaps Bowser's "re-imagining" middle schools involves new signage out front:
Alice Deal Middle School #1
Alice Deal Middle School #2
Alice Deal Middle School #3
....

Let me just add a vent that Bowser's document is incredibly hard to read in electronic form. It's almost as if they didn't want you to read it. It is formatted on 8 1/2 by 11 pages with two columns. So, you have to read and scroll down, the scroll back up, and then read and scroll down. Plus, no page numbers. So, you can't easily move around the document. In my opinion, failure to properly format for a computer is a disqualifying factor for mayoral elections.

In Muriel Bowser's new "Priorities" document, she says this about middle schools:

"As Mayor, Muriel Bowser will work with the Chancellor to completely transform the District’s Middle Schools by 2020, a process that will include the identification of those schools that need change the fastest, the renovation and/or construction of new buildings, and the evaluation and re-imagination of the curricular and extra-curricular offerings at each of the District’s 13 stand-alone Middle Schools, which serve nearly 6,000 students, and for middle school students enrolled in K-8 educational settings."

If I heard correctly, at the debate last night, Bowser repeatedly said that she would reform "four" middle schools. Can someone confirm or correct this?

Second, I can't figure out which schools are the 13 stand-alone middle schools she mentions. Does that number include the four proposed middle schools in the DME recommendations? Bowser's document also talks about funding she obtained for planning two Ward 4 middle schools, so presumably those two remain on her agenda. If she is only committed to four middle schools and two are the new Ward 4 schools, the rest of the city may have some questions.