Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Questions 1, 2, and 4 are invalid. They make you sound like an OpenFCPSer.
1&2: FCPS is not a club for parents, students, and teachers. We live in a community where all can participate.
3: Absolutely valid.
4: no politician will ever admit to this. People running for president "are focused on their current jobs right now". We all know the drill. Grow up.

This post makes you sound like Karl Frisch

+1
#1 should be a requirement. No skin in the game, don’t run.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Questions 1, 2, and 4 are invalid. They make you sound like an OpenFCPSer.
1&2: FCPS is not a club for parents, students, and teachers. We live in a community where all can participate.

True. But some stakeholders are more vested in others and it raises questions. If they are not an employee, student, or family member WHY are they so interested in being around someone else's child? There are bad actors out there and we want to keep kids safe.

Whoa. Seriously?

The question should be asked. If they are not an employee, a relative, or caregiver, WHY are they interested and seek access to children? Some may have legitimate answers.

What on earth are you talking about? These people are running for School Board, not to be a middle-school gym teacher who insists on personally handing out the towels.

Many current members need to be unseated because their decisions and priorities as School Board members have been consistently bad, but this type of innuendo will only rally people to their defense.

Maybe to better society? School board members aren’t even around children that much, and they’re never alone with them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Questions 1, 2, and 4 are invalid. They make you sound like an OpenFCPSer.
1&2: FCPS is not a club for parents, students, and teachers. We live in a community where all can participate.

True. But some stakeholders are more vested in others and it raises questions. If they are not an employee, student, or family member WHY are they so interested in being around someone else's child? There are bad actors out there and we want to keep kids safe.

Whoa. Seriously?

The question should be asked. If they are not an employee, a relative, or caregiver, WHY are they interested and seek access to children? Some may have legitimate answers.

What on earth are you talking about? These people are running for School Board, not to be a middle-school gym teacher who insists on personally handing out the towels.

Many current members need to be unseated because their decisions and priorities as School Board members have been consistently bad, but this type of innuendo will only rally people to their defense.

.

There was a post making an assertion that FCPS is not a club for parents, teachers, and students. Those are the most vested stakeholders. There are gay couples with children. That’s not the issue. We have a SB member who is just the partner of teacher and his highest level of education is high school. THAT’s the issue. That is a reason why we are seeing disastrous student progress being covered up with distracting social issues.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Questions 1, 2, and 4 are invalid. They make you sound like an OpenFCPSer.
1&2: FCPS is not a club for parents, students, and teachers. We live in a community where all can participate.

True. But some stakeholders are more vested in others and it raises questions. If they are not an employee, student, or family member WHY are they so interested in being around someone else's child? There are bad actors out there and we want to keep kids safe.

Whoa. Seriously?

The question should be asked. If they are not an employee, a relative, or caregiver, WHY are they interested and seek access to children? Some may have legitimate answers.

What on earth are you talking about? These people are running for School Board, not to be a middle-school gym teacher who insists on personally handing out the towels.

Many current members need to be unseated because their decisions and priorities as School Board members have been consistently bad, but this type of innuendo will only rally people to their defense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Used to be appointed. Also supposed to be nonpartisan at some point in the past. Now it’s Blue No Matter Who/Blue w/o a Clue.

What exactly has red got you

Blue is the only way unless you are a alt right single race supporting kind of person

Ds in Fairfax were long associated with moderation and good governance. The current Ds on the School Board have tarnished the brand because they stand only for woke ideology and mismanagement. So many will be voted off if they run again.

Of course not. All the incumbents will win.

Tell Ilryong Moon, Ted Velkoff and Patty Reed about it.

And they all lost after cycles when the School Board hadn’t made utter fools out of themselves.

One of those essentially was gamed in the “primary” but even so, for a 13-member board, the paucity of examples supports the conclusion that incumbents win and the vast majority of the current board will be back intact.

Uh, there are only 3 members out of the 12 elected in 2019 (no idea why you’d include a student rep who serves a 1-year term and wasn’t on a ballot) who were incumbents. And the prior board wasn’t as incompetent as some of the one-term wonders on the current SB.

Many stand to be defeated if they run again.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Questions 1, 2, and 4 are invalid. They make you sound like an OpenFCPSer.
1&2: FCPS is not a club for parents, students, and teachers. We live in a community where all can participate.

True. But some stakeholders are more vested in others and it raises questions. If they are not an employee, student, or family member WHY are they so interested in being around someone else's child? There are bad actors out there and we want to keep kids safe.

Whoa. Seriously?

The question should be asked. If they are not an employee, a relative, or caregiver, WHY are they interested and seek access to children? Some may have legitimate answers.

Some time in the near ish future Omeish is expected to marry and birth children. SAHM -ness is a very strong cultural norm as is breastfeeding.

It will be interesting to see what she does.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Questions 1, 2, and 4 are invalid. They make you sound like an OpenFCPSer.
1&2: FCPS is not a club for parents, students, and teachers. We live in a community where all can participate.

True. But some stakeholders are more vested in others and it raises questions. If they are not an employee, student, or family member WHY are they so interested in being around someone else's child? There are bad actors out there and we want to keep kids safe.

Whoa. Seriously?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:why would any of them even want to continue to be on the SB?

That’s what I wonder, too! They have been subject to so much hate and so many attacks! But I guess I just have a different personality type because they seem to be interested in continuing.

Omeish has made a huge social media following by attacking parents as well as making racist and anti-Semitic remarks. Doubt she willingly gives up her free content creator lifestyle and will probably end up moving up in politics since everyone votes straight D ticket.

Anonymous wrote:Questions 1, 2, and 4 are invalid. They make you sound like an OpenFCPSer.
1&2: FCPS is not a club for parents, students, and teachers. We live in a community where all can participate.

True. But some stakeholders are more vested in others and it raises questions. If they are not an employee, student, or family member WHY are they so interested in being around someone else's child? There are bad actors out there and we want to keep kids safe.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Used to be appointed. Also supposed to be nonpartisan at some point in the past. Now it’s Blue No Matter Who/Blue w/o a Clue.

What exactly has red got you

Blue is the only way unless you are a alt right single race supporting kind of person

Ds in Fairfax were long associated with moderation and good governance. The current Ds on the School Board have tarnished the brand because they stand only for woke ideology and mismanagement. So many will be voted off if they run again.

I wouldn’t be so sure. Who are the challengers? If they start throwing around “woke ideology”, they’ll lose me.

Challengers will start to emerge over the coming year. Many of the seats are ripe for the taking.

Of course, but not knowing who the challengers will be I’m not going to definitively say that the incumbents “will be voted off if they run again”.

It would take some exceptionally poor challengers to return some obvious failures like Frisch, Tholen, and Cohen to office. And the fact they’re so vulnerable makes it more likely that better challengers will emerge.

Time will tell.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Used to be appointed. Also supposed to be nonpartisan at some point in the past. Now it’s Blue No Matter Who/Blue w/o a Clue.

What exactly has red got you

Blue is the only way unless you are a alt right single race supporting kind of person

Ds in Fairfax were long associated with moderation and good governance. The current Ds on the School Board have tarnished the brand because they stand only for woke ideology and mismanagement. So many will be voted off if they run again.

I wouldn’t be so sure. Who are the challengers? If they start throwing around “woke ideology”, they’ll lose me.

Challengers will start to emerge over the coming year. Many of the seats are ripe for the taking.

Of course, but not knowing who the challengers will be I’m not going to definitively say that the incumbents “will be voted off if they run again”.

It would take some exceptionally poor challengers to return some obvious failures like Frisch, Tholen, and Cohen to office. And the fact they’re so vulnerable makes it more likely that better challengers will emerge.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Used to be appointed. Also supposed to be nonpartisan at some point in the past. Now it’s Blue No Matter Who/Blue w/o a Clue.

What exactly has red got you

Blue is the only way unless you are a alt right single race supporting kind of person

Ds in Fairfax were long associated with moderation and good governance. The current Ds on the School Board have tarnished the brand because they stand only for woke ideology and mismanagement. So many will be voted off if they run again.

I wouldn’t be so sure. Who are the challengers? If they start throwing around “woke ideology”, they’ll lose me.

Challengers will start to emerge over the coming year. Many of the seats are ripe for the taking.

Of course, but not knowing who the challengers will be I’m not going to definitively say that the incumbents “will be voted off if they run again”.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Used to be appointed. Also supposed to be nonpartisan at some point in the past. Now it’s Blue No Matter Who/Blue w/o a Clue.

What exactly has red got you

Blue is the only way unless you are a alt right single race supporting kind of person

Ds in Fairfax were long associated with moderation and good governance. The current Ds on the School Board have tarnished the brand because they stand only for woke ideology and mismanagement. So many will be voted off if they run again.

Of course not. All the incumbents will win.

Tell Ilryong Moon, Ted Velkoff and Patty Reed about it.

And they all lost after cycles when the School Board hadn’t made utter fools out of themselves.

One of those essentially was gamed in the “primary” but even so, for a 13-member board, the paucity of examples supports the conclusion that incumbents win and the vast majority of the current board will be back intact.

Anonymous wrote:why would any of them even want to continue to be on the SB?

That’s what I wonder, too! They have been subject to so much hate and so many attacks! But I guess I just have a different personality type because they seem to be interested in continuing.