Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here. It’s a pretty ridiculous point of view that someone can only be a Democrat if they run for the Dem endorsement with the unfair caucus process.

No, you don't have to run in the caucus but it's disingenuous to not even run and then try to say you are a Democrat on par with the candidates who voters actually picked in the Dem caucus. Paul is an independent and I'll vote accordingly.

Whut?

PP. He knows that the only real way to win is to be on the D sample ballot. He chose not to participate in the caucus process, but then tried to force the D's to include him on their sample ballot by claiming to be a Dem himself. Trust me, I hate that the Arlington Democrats do this caucus, but he tried to game the system. I have no real idea whether he's a Dem or Independent.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here. It’s a pretty ridiculous point of view that someone can only be a Democrat if they run for the Dem endorsement with the unfair caucus process.

No, you don't have to run in the caucus but it's disingenuous to not even run and then try to say you are a Democrat on par with the candidates who voters actually picked in the Dem caucus. Paul is an independent and I'll vote accordingly.

Those horrible independents.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here. It’s a pretty ridiculous point of view that someone can only be a Democrat if they run for the Dem endorsement with the unfair caucus process.

No, you don't have to run in the caucus but it's disingenuous to not even run and then try to say you are a Democrat on par with the candidates who voters actually picked in the Dem caucus. Paul is an independent and I'll vote accordingly.

Whut?

What don't you understand?

The entire first (run-on) sentence doesn't make sense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anyone not backed by APE at this point.

Ugghh I saw WaPo is moderating their forum. Worse than ArlNow sucking up to them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here. It’s a pretty ridiculous point of view that someone can only be a Democrat if they run for the Dem endorsement with the unfair caucus process.

No, you don't have to run in the caucus but it's disingenuous to not even run and then try to say you are a Democrat on par with the candidates who voters actually picked in the Dem caucus. Paul is an independent and I'll vote accordingly.

Whut?

What don't you understand?

Anonymous wrote:I voted Weiss, the 2 democratic caucus nominees are either ape or not very experienced. I know I was supposed to choose 2 but I picked only 1

You are sadly misinformed. Neither of the Dems are APE and Kathleen has loads of experience.

I voted Weiss, the 2 democratic caucus nominees are either ape or not very experienced. I know I was supposed to choose 2 but I picked only 1

Anyone not backed by APE at this point.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here. It’s a pretty ridiculous point of view that someone can only be a Democrat if they run for the Dem endorsement with the unfair caucus process.

No, you don't have to run in the caucus but it's disingenuous to not even run and then try to say you are a Democrat on par with the candidates who voters actually picked in the Dem caucus. Paul is an independent and I'll vote accordingly.

Whut?

Anonymous wrote:NP here. It’s a pretty ridiculous point of view that someone can only be a Democrat if they run for the Dem endorsement with the unfair caucus process.

No, you don't have to run in the caucus but it's disingenuous to not even run and then try to say you are a Democrat on par with the candidates who voters actually picked in the Dem caucus. Paul is an independent and I'll vote accordingly.

Anonymous wrote:NP here. It’s a pretty ridiculous point of view that someone can only be a Democrat if they run for the Dem endorsement with the unfair caucus process.

Which attracts between 1000-2000 voters despite the General Election having well over 50,000 voters. Someone needs to stop the madness of this caucus.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m voting for Paul Weiss because I think the board needs a teacher’s perspective. Haven’t decided between the other two Democratic candidates yet. Plan to vote in October.

He's not a teacher in APS anymore if that matters to you. He has no connection to APS anymore, so no skin in the game.

Also I don't like that he's misrepresenting himself as a Democrat when he didn't even run for the Dem endorsement.

OMG.
First of all, he resigned from APS so he could run for SB.
Second of all, he left APS for DC public schools -- that should say something about his dedication to both teaching and running for APS SB.
Third of all, BS on not being a Democrat just because he didn't want to suck-up and kiss rings.
Fourth of all, read his posts on AEM. He is a dem.

Nope, he's claiming to be a Dem without even entering the Dem caucus. He could split the progressive vote and we could end up with Rives.

The likelihood of that happening is about zero. Are you new to Arlington? If he splits the vote enough, he'll be one of the victors.

NP here. It’s a pretty ridiculous point of view that someone can only be a Democrat if they run for the Dem endorsement with the unfair caucus process.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m voting for Paul Weiss because I think the board needs a teacher’s perspective. Haven’t decided between the other two Democratic candidates yet. Plan to vote in October.

He's not a teacher in APS anymore if that matters to you. He has no connection to APS anymore, so no skin in the game.

Also I don't like that he's misrepresenting himself as a Democrat when he didn't even run for the Dem endorsement.

OMG.
First of all, he resigned from APS so he could run for SB.
Second of all, he left APS for DC public schools -- that should say something about his dedication to both teaching and running for APS SB.
Third of all, BS on not being a Democrat just because he didn't want to suck-up and kiss rings.
Fourth of all, read his posts on AEM. He is a dem.

Nope, he's claiming to be a Dem without even entering the Dem caucus. He could split the progressive vote and we could end up with Rives.

Anonymous wrote:Kathleen is the best candidate by far. Zuraya will win because she has the Dem machine money behind her but she has zero background in APS prior to 2024.

Rives is a nut. Weiss is from out of nowhere. Claiming to be Dem but didn’t try to get endorsed via the caucus.

+1000

Voting for Kathleen with enthusiasm, and also Zuraya.