Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was personally unsure about Cristina's campaign because of some of the things that have already been mentioned. I did email the campaign to see if I could meet with her personally and we had coffee together. I would encourage you all to at a minimum make your consideration on who she is, what you think her capability and impact will be, and from hearing her personally. You are free to vote for whomever you choose, but again I would encourage you to at least hear what she's got to say. She's got one of my votes and I can't wait to learn about where my second vote will go.

I don't need to have coffee with her and ascertain whether or not she is a pleasant person. I can see that she is a carpet bagger and the darling of the ACDC. She's not the ACDC darling b/c of the good they think she can do for APS- she's the ACDC darling because they are grooming her for higher office and think that SB is a good stepping stone.

I don't want a SB member who is using it as stepping stone. I also don't want a SB who taught for three years with no training (other than minimal teach for america training) and thinks that experience tells her everything she needs to know about teaching in APS. (And note she refers to herself as an 'educator' and and education policy expert.)

I want a SB member who knows when to push back on the staff and when to respect their expertise. I want a SB member who will hold the superintendent accountable. I want someone who has a personal stake in what is happening- who realizes that the mundane issues (e.g. the calendar) really affect us- and that the science of reading matters. The other 4 candidates all offer this in some degree-- Sandy Munnell clearly has the knowledge and experience. Simone has been extremely focused on promoting the science of reading. She also has a focus on inequities in the system- she knows what the APS inequities actually are. Terron and Dave offer this to a lesser extent. Cristina offers it not at all.

Why do you think so many prominent people have endorsed her? If she’s as awful and horrible as some make her seem, why would these important county folks stake their good name and come out in sweeping support for her when they could easily just stay quiet. They could easily have said no thanks. Of the endorsements that I have found, the sheriff, school board chair, commonwealth attorney, and one of the two county board members have children. It makes zero sense for them to endorse if they also personally didn’t think she was the best fit for their own kids. At this point, I agree that this is all very mysterious and I do plan on learning more about all the candidates and giving them all a fair shot after I have more information. It’s too early to tell as of now, but there is a craving to learn more about this Cristina candidate and see what all the hype is about.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was personally unsure about Cristina's campaign because of some of the things that have already been mentioned. I did email the campaign to see if I could meet with her personally and we had coffee together. I would encourage you all to at a minimum make your consideration on who she is, what you think her capability and impact will be, and from hearing her personally. You are free to vote for whomever you choose, but again I would encourage you to at least hear what she's got to say. She's got one of my votes and I can't wait to learn about where my second vote will go.

I don't need to have coffee with her and ascertain whether or not she is a pleasant person. I can see that she is a carpet bagger and the darling of the ACDC. She's not the ACDC darling b/c of the good they think she can do for APS- she's the ACDC darling because they are grooming her for higher office and think that SB is a good stepping stone.

I don't want a SB member who is using it as stepping stone. I also don't want a SB who taught for three years with no training (other than minimal teach for america training) and thinks that experience tells her everything she needs to know about teaching in APS. (And note she refers to herself as an 'educator' and and education policy expert.)

I want a SB member who knows when to push back on the staff and when to respect their expertise. I want a SB member who will hold the superintendent accountable. I want someone who has a personal stake in what is happening- who realizes that the mundane issues (e.g. the calendar) really affect us- and that the science of reading matters. The other 4 candidates all offer this in some degree-- Sandy Munnell clearly has the knowledge and experience. Simone has been extremely focused on promoting the science of reading. She also has a focus on inequities in the system- she knows what the APS inequities actually are. Terron and Dave offer this to a lesser extent. Cristina offers it not at all.

Why do you think so many prominent people have endorsed her? If she’s as awful and horrible as some make her seem, why would these important county folks stake their good name and come out in sweeping support for her when they could easily just stay quiet. They could easily have said no thanks. Of the endorsements that I have found, the sheriff, school board chair, commonwealth attorney, and one of the two county board members have children. It makes zero sense for them to endorse if they also personally didn’t think she was the best fit for their own kids. At this point, I agree that this is all very mysterious and I do plan on learning more about all the candidates and giving them all a fair shot after I have more information. It’s too early to tell as of now, but there is a craving to learn more about this Cristina candidate and see what all the hype is about.

hmmmm... you raise a valid point that I didn’t think about. They could have said scram, but they didn’t and why didn’t they.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was personally unsure about Cristina's campaign because of some of the things that have already been mentioned. I did email the campaign to see if I could meet with her personally and we had coffee together. I would encourage you all to at a minimum make your consideration on who she is, what you think her capability and impact will be, and from hearing her personally. You are free to vote for whomever you choose, but again I would encourage you to at least hear what she's got to say. She's got one of my votes and I can't wait to learn about where my second vote will go.

I don't need to have coffee with her and ascertain whether or not she is a pleasant person. I can see that she is a carpet bagger and the darling of the ACDC. She's not the ACDC darling b/c of the good they think she can do for APS- she's the ACDC darling because they are grooming her for higher office and think that SB is a good stepping stone.

I don't want a SB member who is using it as stepping stone. I also don't want a SB who taught for three years with no training (other than minimal teach for america training) and thinks that experience tells her everything she needs to know about teaching in APS. (And note she refers to herself as an 'educator' and and education policy expert.)

I want a SB member who knows when to push back on the staff and when to respect their expertise. I want a SB member who will hold the superintendent accountable. I want someone who has a personal stake in what is happening- who realizes that the mundane issues (e.g. the calendar) really affect us- and that the science of reading matters. The other 4 candidates all offer this in some degree-- Sandy Munnell clearly has the knowledge and experience. Simone has been extremely focused on promoting the science of reading. She also has a focus on inequities in the system- she knows what the APS inequities actually are. Terron and Dave offer this to a lesser extent. Cristina offers it not at all.

Why do you think so many prominent people have endorsed her? If she’s as awful and horrible as some make her seem, why would these important county folks stake their good name and come out in sweeping support for her when they could easily just stay quiet. They could easily have said no thanks. Of the endorsements that I have found, the sheriff, school board chair, commonwealth attorney, and one of the two county board members have children. It makes zero sense for them to endorse if they also personally didn’t think she was the best fit for their own kids. At this point, I agree that this is all very mysterious and I do plan on learning more about all the candidates and giving them all a fair shot after I have more information. It’s too early to tell as of now, but there is a craving to learn more about this Cristina candidate and see what all the hype is about.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was personally unsure about Cristina's campaign because of some of the things that have already been mentioned. I did email the campaign to see if I could meet with her personally and we had coffee together. I would encourage you all to at a minimum make your consideration on who she is, what you think her capability and impact will be, and from hearing her personally. You are free to vote for whomever you choose, but again I would encourage you to at least hear what she's got to say. She's got one of my votes and I can't wait to learn about where my second vote will go.

I don't need to have coffee with her and ascertain whether or not she is a pleasant person. I can see that she is a carpet bagger and the darling of the ACDC. She's not the ACDC darling b/c of the good they think she can do for APS- she's the ACDC darling because they are grooming her for higher office and think that SB is a good stepping stone.

I don't want a SB member who is using it as stepping stone. I also don't want a SB who taught for three years with no training (other than minimal teach for america training) and thinks that experience tells her everything she needs to know about teaching in APS. (And note she refers to herself as an 'educator' and and education policy expert.)

I want a SB member who knows when to push back on the staff and when to respect their expertise. I want a SB member who will hold the superintendent accountable. I want someone who has a personal stake in what is happening- who realizes that the mundane issues (e.g. the calendar) really affect us- and that the science of reading matters. The other 4 candidates all offer this in some degree-- Sandy Munnell clearly has the knowledge and experience. Simone has been extremely focused on promoting the science of reading. She also has a focus on inequities in the system- she knows what the APS inequities actually are. Terron and Dave offer this to a lesser extent. Cristina offers it not at all.

Why do you think so many prominent people have endorsed her? If she’s as awful and horrible as some make her seem, why would these important county folks stake their good name and come out in sweeping support for her when they could easily just stay quiet. They could easily have said no thanks. Of the endorsements that I have found, the sheriff, school board chair, commonwealth attorney, and one of the two county board members have children. It makes zero sense for them to endorse if they also personally didn’t think she was the best fit for their own kids. At this point, I agree that this is all very mysterious and I do plan on learning more about all the candidates and giving them all a fair shot after I have more information. It’s too early to tell as of now, but there is a craving to learn more about this Cristina candidate and see what all the hype is about.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was personally unsure about Cristina's campaign because of some of the things that have already been mentioned. I did email the campaign to see if I could meet with her personally and we had coffee together. I would encourage you all to at a minimum make your consideration on who she is, what you think her capability and impact will be, and from hearing her personally. You are free to vote for whomever you choose, but again I would encourage you to at least hear what she's got to say. She's got one of my votes and I can't wait to learn about where my second vote will go.

I don't need to have coffee with her and ascertain whether or not she is a pleasant person. I can see that she is a carpet bagger and the darling of the ACDC. She's not the ACDC darling b/c of the good they think she can do for APS- she's the ACDC darling because they are grooming her for higher office and think that SB is a good stepping stone.

I don't want a SB member who is using it as stepping stone. I also don't want a SB who taught for three years with no training (other than minimal teach for america training) and thinks that experience tells her everything she needs to know about teaching in APS. (And note she refers to herself as an 'educator' and and education policy expert.)

I want a SB member who knows when to push back on the staff and when to respect their expertise. I want a SB member who will hold the superintendent accountable. I want someone who has a personal stake in what is happening- who realizes that the mundane issues (e.g. the calendar) really affect us- and that the science of reading matters. The other 4 candidates all offer this in some degree-- Sandy Munnell clearly has the knowledge and experience. Simone has been extremely focused on promoting the science of reading. She also has a focus on inequities in the system- she knows what the APS inequities actually are. Terron and Dave offer this to a lesser extent. Cristina offers it not at all.

Why do you think so many prominent people have endorsed her? If she’s as awful and horrible as some make her seem, why would these important county folks stake their good name and come out in sweeping support for her when they could easily just stay quiet. They could easily have said no thanks. Of the endorsements that I have found, the sheriff, school board chair, commonwealth attorney, and one of the two county board members have children. It makes zero sense for them to endorse if they also personally didn’t think she was the best fit for their own kids. At this point, I agree that this is all very mysterious and I do plan on learning more about all the candidates and giving them all a fair shot after I have more information. It’s too early to tell as of now, but there is a craving to learn more about this Cristina candidate and see what all the hype is about.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Seriously. She got her BA in 2013, and her Masters in 2016. She taught for three years, was on the Hill for about a year, and has now been consulting for about 3. Total post-undergrad work experience: 7.

Interesting. Now I'm curious to know if any of the other candidates have formal education credentials. Anyone know??