Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://twitter.com/DataProgress/status/1548012096096391168

For reference... Riemer places a distant third at 20%

Among people who have already voted, Elrich has a bigger lead.

Elrich: 39
Blair: 35
Riemer: 26

It is completely obvious that Riemer is playing the spoiler here and intentionally so.

Interesting that Elrich leads by 6 points among those who have already voted. Pretty consistent with the 6 point lead from prior polling. Makes sense that people who have not yet voted would probably trend against Elrich, but also makes sense that they would be less motivated to vote.

Voting turnout has been alarmingly low. Very few took advantage of early voting. And very few mail in ballots have been returned.

The MoCo BOE is taking a long time to record ballots as returned. Mail-in turnout is much higher than the numbers suggest.

It might be true but there is no way for you to know this.

In any case, mail voters will likely skew older which would also favor Elrich. Unless there is a huge wave of young voters with high enthusiasm for Riemer who show up on Tuesday, he’s done.

Based on the polling, election day turnout should swing to Blair but the key question will be how many people turn out on a Tuesday in mid-July. My guess is not many.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://twitter.com/DataProgress/status/1548012096096391168

For reference... Riemer places a distant third at 20%

Among people who have already voted, Elrich has a bigger lead.

Elrich: 39
Blair: 35
Riemer: 26

It is completely obvious that Riemer is playing the spoiler here and intentionally so.

Interesting that Elrich leads by 6 points among those who have already voted. Pretty consistent with the 6 point lead from prior polling. Makes sense that people who have not yet voted would probably trend against Elrich, but also makes sense that they would be less motivated to vote.

Voting turnout has been alarmingly low. Very few took advantage of early voting. And very few mail in ballots have been returned.

The MoCo BOE is taking a long time to record ballots as returned. Mail-in turnout is much higher than the numbers suggest.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://twitter.com/DataProgress/status/1548012096096391168

For reference... Riemer places a distant third at 20%

Among people who have already voted, Elrich has a bigger lead.

Elrich: 39
Blair: 35
Riemer: 26

It is completely obvious that Riemer is playing the spoiler here and intentionally so.

Interesting that Elrich leads by 6 points among those who have already voted. Pretty consistent with the 6 point lead from prior polling. Makes sense that people who have not yet voted would probably trend against Elrich, but also makes sense that they would be less motivated to vote.

Voting turnout has been alarmingly low. Very few took advantage of early voting. And very few mail in ballots have been returned.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://twitter.com/DataProgress/status/1548012096096391168

For reference... Riemer places a distant third at 20%

Among people who have already voted, Elrich has a bigger lead.

Elrich: 39
Blair: 35
Riemer: 26

It is completely obvious that Riemer is playing the spoiler here and intentionally so.

Interesting that Elrich leads by 6 points among those who have already voted. Pretty consistent with the 6 point lead from prior polling. Makes sense that people who have not yet voted would probably trend against Elrich, but also makes sense that they would be less motivated to vote.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://twitter.com/DataProgress/status/1548012096096391168

For reference... Riemer places a distant third at 20%

Among people who have already voted, Elrich has a bigger lead.

Elrich: 39
Blair: 35
Riemer: 26

It is completely obvious that Riemer is playing the spoiler here and intentionally so.

Anonymous wrote:https://twitter.com/DataProgress/status/1548012096096391168

For reference... Riemer places a distant third at 20%

Anonymous wrote:I see negative ads from Riemer on a regular basis. Then I got a flyer in the mail from him saying he is running a positive campaign. It is so disingenuous and makes me never want to vote for him.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Voted for Riemer! DH and I are super proud to vote for him.

What makes you “super proud” to vote for him? What will he do as county executive than he wasn’t able to do on his 12 long years on the council? How do you see those council years as successful? How will he actually support schools, beyond the usual promises he has made during election season about improving educational outcomes and student safety? Will he continue to say he was all for opening schools when he regularly voted against it? How will he address increasing crime in the county, especially since he is so hostile toward MCPD? Does he still support the Reimagining Public Safety Task Force suggestion of reducing officers in parts of the county by 50%?

He fundamentally doesn't understand public safety. He keeps underscoring the need for police to focus on investigations. He doesn't understand two things:

1) Police "must" answer calls for service and when they are 85 officers short (about 6-7% of sworn), personnel get shifted from detective/investigative work to answering calls. The Department has already been doing that for special situations.
2) MCPD's closure rate for violent crime investigations is still higher -- much higher than the national average. He doesn't have to keep calling for what they already do well.

If he ever supported cutting patrol staff by 50%, he's a danger to the community. Black and brown people are disproportionately the victims of crime, violent crime. People are getting hurt (or worse) because there are fewer police on the streets. I am so tired of the talking heads who know NOTHING. There are evidence-based ways to police, do it constitutionally, justly, and safely. These politicians don't have to reinvent the wheel, and when they do, they directly harm people, vulnerable people.

https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2021/04/20/988769793/when-you-add-more-police-to-a-city-what-happens

ACAB

Refute the above with a solid argument. Most people are going to roll their eyes at that tired acronym.

I would love to see a huge reduction in the police force. I don't trust cops and I don't like cops. All my interactions with them involve them being super suspicious and trying to find some reason to arrest me. I don't commit crimes but that doesn't stop them from suspecting me just for existing. I would never call them and I wish there were fewer of them. I have never had a single good interaction with a cop in my life.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Voted for Riemer! DH and I are super proud to vote for him.

What makes you “super proud” to vote for him? What will he do as county executive than he wasn’t able to do on his 12 long years on the council? How do you see those council years as successful? How will he actually support schools, beyond the usual promises he has made during election season about improving educational outcomes and student safety? Will he continue to say he was all for opening schools when he regularly voted against it? How will he address increasing crime in the county, especially since he is so hostile toward MCPD? Does he still support the Reimagining Public Safety Task Force suggestion of reducing officers in parts of the county by 50%?

He fundamentally doesn't understand public safety. He keeps underscoring the need for police to focus on investigations. He doesn't understand two things:

1) Police "must" answer calls for service and when they are 85 officers short (about 6-7% of sworn), personnel get shifted from detective/investigative work to answering calls. The Department has already been doing that for special situations.
2) MCPD's closure rate for violent crime investigations is still higher -- much higher than the national average. He doesn't have to keep calling for what they already do well.

If he ever supported cutting patrol staff by 50%, he's a danger to the community. Black and brown people are disproportionately the victims of crime, violent crime. People are getting hurt (or worse) because there are fewer police on the streets. I am so tired of the talking heads who know NOTHING. There are evidence-based ways to police, do it constitutionally, justly, and safely. These politicians don't have to reinvent the wheel, and when they do, they directly harm people, vulnerable people.

https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2021/04/20/988769793/when-you-add-more-police-to-a-city-what-happens

ACAB

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Voted for Riemer! DH and I are super proud to vote for him.

What makes you “super proud” to vote for him? What will he do as county executive than he wasn’t able to do on his 12 long years on the council? How do you see those council years as successful? How will he actually support schools, beyond the usual promises he has made during election season about improving educational outcomes and student safety? Will he continue to say he was all for opening schools when he regularly voted against it? How will he address increasing crime in the county, especially since he is so hostile toward MCPD? Does he still support the Reimagining Public Safety Task Force suggestion of reducing officers in parts of the county by 50%?

He fundamentally doesn't understand public safety. He keeps underscoring the need for police to focus on investigations. He doesn't understand two things:

1) Police "must" answer calls for service and when they are 85 officers short (about 6-7% of sworn), personnel get shifted from detective/investigative work to answering calls. The Department has already been doing that for special situations.
2) MCPD's closure rate for violent crime investigations is still higher -- much higher than the national average. He doesn't have to keep calling for what they already do well.

If he ever supported cutting patrol staff by 50%, he's a danger to the community. Black and brown people are disproportionately the victims of crime, violent crime. People are getting hurt (or worse) because there are fewer police on the streets. I am so tired of the talking heads who know NOTHING. There are evidence-based ways to police, do it constitutionally, justly, and safely. These politicians don't have to reinvent the wheel, and when they do, they directly harm people, vulnerable people.

https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2021/04/20/988769793/when-you-add-more-police-to-a-city-what-happens

ACAB

Refute the above with a solid argument. Most people are going to roll their eyes at that tired acronym.

I would love to see a huge reduction in the police force. I don't trust cops and I don't like cops. All my interactions with them involve them being super suspicious and trying to find some reason to arrest me. I don't commit crimes but that doesn't stop them from suspecting me just for existing. I would never call them and I wish there were fewer of them. I have never had a single good interaction with a cop in my life.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Voted for Riemer! DH and I are super proud to vote for him.

What makes you “super proud” to vote for him? What will he do as county executive than he wasn’t able to do on his 12 long years on the council? How do you see those council years as successful? How will he actually support schools, beyond the usual promises he has made during election season about improving educational outcomes and student safety? Will he continue to say he was all for opening schools when he regularly voted against it? How will he address increasing crime in the county, especially since he is so hostile toward MCPD? Does he still support the Reimagining Public Safety Task Force suggestion of reducing officers in parts of the county by 50%?

He fundamentally doesn't understand public safety. He keeps underscoring the need for police to focus on investigations. He doesn't understand two things:

1) Police "must" answer calls for service and when they are 85 officers short (about 6-7% of sworn), personnel get shifted from detective/investigative work to answering calls. The Department has already been doing that for special situations.
2) MCPD's closure rate for violent crime investigations is still higher -- much higher than the national average. He doesn't have to keep calling for what they already do well.

If he ever supported cutting patrol staff by 50%, he's a danger to the community. Black and brown people are disproportionately the victims of crime, violent crime. People are getting hurt (or worse) because there are fewer police on the streets. I am so tired of the talking heads who know NOTHING. There are evidence-based ways to police, do it constitutionally, justly, and safely. These politicians don't have to reinvent the wheel, and when they do, they directly harm people, vulnerable people.

https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2021/04/20/988769793/when-you-add-more-police-to-a-city-what-happens

ACAB

Refute the above with a solid argument. Most people are going to roll their eyes at that tired acronym.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Voted for Riemer! DH and I are super proud to vote for him.

What makes you “super proud” to vote for him? What will he do as county executive than he wasn’t able to do on his 12 long years on the council? How do you see those council years as successful? How will he actually support schools, beyond the usual promises he has made during election season about improving educational outcomes and student safety? Will he continue to say he was all for opening schools when he regularly voted against it? How will he address increasing crime in the county, especially since he is so hostile toward MCPD? Does he still support the Reimagining Public Safety Task Force suggestion of reducing officers in parts of the county by 50%?

He fundamentally doesn't understand public safety. He keeps underscoring the need for police to focus on investigations. He doesn't understand two things:

1) Police "must" answer calls for service and when they are 85 officers short (about 6-7% of sworn), personnel get shifted from detective/investigative work to answering calls. The Department has already been doing that for special situations.
2) MCPD's closure rate for violent crime investigations is still higher -- much higher than the national average. He doesn't have to keep calling for what they already do well.

If he ever supported cutting patrol staff by 50%, he's a danger to the community. Black and brown people are disproportionately the victims of crime, violent crime. People are getting hurt (or worse) because there are fewer police on the streets. I am so tired of the talking heads who know NOTHING. There are evidence-based ways to police, do it constitutionally, justly, and safely. These politicians don't have to reinvent the wheel, and when they do, they directly harm people, vulnerable people.

https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2021/04/20/988769793/when-you-add-more-police-to-a-city-what-happens

ACAB

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Voted for Riemer! DH and I are super proud to vote for him.

What makes you “super proud” to vote for him? What will he do as county executive than he wasn’t able to do on his 12 long years on the council? How do you see those council years as successful? How will he actually support schools, beyond the usual promises he has made during election season about improving educational outcomes and student safety? Will he continue to say he was all for opening schools when he regularly voted against it? How will he address increasing crime in the county, especially since he is so hostile toward MCPD? Does he still support the Reimagining Public Safety Task Force suggestion of reducing officers in parts of the county by 50%?

He fundamentally doesn't understand public safety. He keeps underscoring the need for police to focus on investigations. He doesn't understand two things:

1) Police "must" answer calls for service and when they are 85 officers short (about 6-7% of sworn), personnel get shifted from detective/investigative work to answering calls. The Department has already been doing that for special situations.
2) MCPD's closure rate for violent crime investigations is still higher -- much higher than the national average. He doesn't have to keep calling for what they already do well.

If he ever supported cutting patrol staff by 50%, he's a danger to the community. Black and brown people are disproportionately the victims of crime, violent crime. People are getting hurt (or worse) because there are fewer police on the streets. I am so tired of the talking heads who know NOTHING. There are evidence-based ways to police, do it constitutionally, justly, and safely. These politicians don't have to reinvent the wheel, and when they do, they directly harm people, vulnerable people.

https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2021/04/20/988769793/when-you-add-more-police-to-a-city-what-happens