Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More like term-limited by politicians who otherwise couldn't keep him out of office because his constituents kept voting him in. Many at the polls don't make the connection between an abstract idea, like term limits, and the effect, like term-limiting the County Executive position without grandfathering in prior periods of service meaning that the candidates for that office at the next election may well be less desirable than the incumbent one had preferred to that point.

Honestly, the way the prior post is written, "term-limited by his constituents" sounds like a shill for Friedson, trying to cast a shade at his opponent, Jawando, whom Elrich decided to support, instead.

Can you answer the question instead of virtue signaling?

can you say what you mean instead of using MAGA code?

I'm not that poster, but defaulting to MAGA just because other Democrats disagree with you is really off-putting, and nobody takes you seriously.

There are different and complicated policy approaches on housing - and there is by no means some clear policy winner here.

Plus, Elrich needs to care about more than housing. He needs to care about business and jobs -- but he notoriously does not. After all, he once said he'd rather put jobs in Frederick. Elrich serves Elrich's pet interests and nobody else's.

+1. We have to be more effective as the left and better at winning elections as the left. That means running better candidates (like not Elrich) who clearly care about helping their constituents. His track record on housing and jobs is atrocious for the reasons listed above.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More like term-limited by politicians who otherwise couldn't keep him out of office because his constituents kept voting him in. Many at the polls don't make the connection between an abstract idea, like term limits, and the effect, like term-limiting the County Executive position without grandfathering in prior periods of service meaning that the candidates for that office at the next election may well be less desirable than the incumbent one had preferred to that point.

Honestly, the way the prior post is written, "term-limited by his constituents" sounds like a shill for Friedson, trying to cast a shade at his opponent, Jawando, whom Elrich decided to support, instead.

No. 68% of the voters in the county approved that referendum to kick him out after two terms. 68%


Elrich historically only wins by a tiny plurality. That's why we need rank choice voting so these crappy primaries give us what the people truly want.

404,000 registered democrats in MoCo in 2022.
143,000 voted in 2022 primary.
55,000 voted for Elrich.

People don't like Elrich.
The system does.

Those who are registered unaffiliated (independent) and actually care about who runs this county, need to switch to Democrat for the primary and vote.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More like term-limited by politicians who otherwise couldn't keep him out of office because his constituents kept voting him in. Many at the polls don't make the connection between an abstract idea, like term limits, and the effect, like term-limiting the County Executive position without grandfathering in prior periods of service meaning that the candidates for that office at the next election may well be less desirable than the incumbent one had preferred to that point.

Honestly, the way the prior post is written, "term-limited by his constituents" sounds like a shill for Friedson, trying to cast a shade at his opponent, Jawando, whom Elrich decided to support, instead.

Can you answer the question instead of virtue signaling?

can you say what you mean instead of using MAGA code?

I'm not that poster, but defaulting to MAGA just because other Democrats disagree with you is really off-putting, and nobody takes you seriously.

There are different and complicated policy approaches on housing - and there is by no means some clear policy winner here.

Plus, Elrich needs to care about more than housing. He needs to care about business and jobs -- but he notoriously does not. After all, he once said he'd rather put jobs in Frederick. Elrich serves Elrich's pet interests and nobody else's.

What Elrich actually said was this: "I made what I thought was an observation anyone else would make—we shouldn’t have people commuting that far away to jobs,” Elrich said. “I don’t think anyone thinks this is a good pattern." GGW took Elrich out of context to try to argue for upzoning. As with many things, Elrich hasn't done much to create a job friendly environment, but then again none of the three executive candidates have either.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More like term-limited by politicians who otherwise couldn't keep him out of office because his constituents kept voting him in. Many at the polls don't make the connection between an abstract idea, like term limits, and the effect, like term-limiting the County Executive position without grandfathering in prior periods of service meaning that the candidates for that office at the next election may well be less desirable than the incumbent one had preferred to that point.

Honestly, the way the prior post is written, "term-limited by his constituents" sounds like a shill for Friedson, trying to cast a shade at his opponent, Jawando, whom Elrich decided to support, instead.

No. 68% of the voters in the county approved that referendum to kick him out after two terms. 68%


Elrich historically only wins by a tiny plurality. That's why we need rank choice voting so these crappy primaries give us what the people truly want.

404,000 registered democrats in MoCo in 2022.
143,000 voted in 2022 primary.
55,000 voted for Elrich.

People don't like Elrich.
The system does.

Those who are registered unaffiliated (independent) and actually care about who runs this county, need to switch to Democrat for the primary and vote. [b]

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More like term-limited by politicians who otherwise couldn't keep him out of office because his constituents kept voting him in. Many at the polls don't make the connection between an abstract idea, like term limits, and the effect, like term-limiting the County Executive position without grandfathering in prior periods of service meaning that the candidates for that office at the next election may well be less desirable than the incumbent one had preferred to that point.

Honestly, the way the prior post is written, "term-limited by his constituents" sounds like a shill for Friedson, trying to cast a shade at his opponent, Jawando, whom Elrich decided to support, instead.

No. 68% of the voters in the county approved that referendum to kick him out after two terms. 68%


Elrich historically only wins by a tiny plurality. That's why we need rank choice voting so these crappy primaries give us what the people truly want.

404,000 registered democrats in MoCo in 2022.
143,000 voted in 2022 primary.
55,000 voted for Elrich.

People don't like Elrich.
The system does.

Those who are registered unaffiliated (independent) and actually care about who runs this county, need to switch to Democrat for the primary and vote. [b]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The developers seem to already be out in full force already in this thread. Let's be clear: lots of people support term limits regardless of which candidate it affects. I enthusiastically support Elrich, but I think two terms is enough for anyone. Just think about it: tons of people like their Congressperson but think Congress needs term limits. Same idea. Just because you like a candidate, that doesn't mean you believe they are entitled to hold an office forever.

The developers have a tough time understanding this concept because their hatred of Elrich runs so deep and so they think everyone else must hate him also. But the truth is that developers are truly reviled by the majority of voters, and Elrich is very popular. He easily would have won a third term, which is why the developers put forth the term limits idea.

Um, people care about a lot of different issues. Not just housing. You are the only monomaniacal poster here.

+1. I have plenty of progressive friends who revile Elrich. Apart from his track record on affordable housing, he also has a history of being needlessly combative with other local elected officials, almost all of whom belong to his party. With Trump in the White House, now is the time for unity, not petty infighting, in the Democratic Party.

-1

I have plenty of progressive friends who like Elrich a lot. He actually did a great job reigning in the superintendent's irrational capital budget for new schools.

- -1 (so +1)? Of course there are progressives who like Elrich a lot. His relationship with unions is pretty baller, for example. However, there are many progressives who realize his leadership is not helpful for the cause and that he cares more about building data centers than affordable housing. Those priorities are seriously off.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The developers seem to already be out in full force already in this thread. Let's be clear: lots of people support term limits regardless of which candidate it affects. I enthusiastically support Elrich, but I think two terms is enough for anyone. Just think about it: tons of people like their Congressperson but think Congress needs term limits. Same idea. Just because you like a candidate, that doesn't mean you believe they are entitled to hold an office forever.

The developers have a tough time understanding this concept because their hatred of Elrich runs so deep and so they think everyone else must hate him also. But the truth is that developers are truly reviled by the majority of voters, and Elrich is very popular. He easily would have won a third term, which is why the developers put forth the term limits idea.

Um, people care about a lot of different issues. Not just housing. You are the only monomaniacal poster here.

+1. I have plenty of progressive friends who revile Elrich. Apart from his track record on affordable housing, he also has a history of being needlessly combative with other local elected officials, almost all of whom belong to his party. With Trump in the White House, now is the time for unity, not petty infighting, in the Democratic Party.

-1

I have plenty of progressive friends who like Elrich a lot. He actually did a great job reigning in the superintendent's irrational capital budget for new schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More like term-limited by politicians who otherwise couldn't keep him out of office because his constituents kept voting him in. Many at the polls don't make the connection between an abstract idea, like term limits, and the effect, like term-limiting the County Executive position without grandfathering in prior periods of service meaning that the candidates for that office at the next election may well be less desirable than the incumbent one had preferred to that point.

Honestly, the way the prior post is written, "term-limited by his constituents" sounds like a shill for Friedson, trying to cast a shade at his opponent, Jawando, whom Elrich decided to support, instead.

Can you answer the question instead of virtue signaling?

can you say what you mean instead of using MAGA code?

I'm not that poster, but defaulting to MAGA just because other Democrats disagree with you is really off-putting, and nobody takes you seriously.

There are different and complicated policy approaches on housing - and there is by no means some clear policy winner here.

Plus, Elrich needs to care about more than housing. He needs to care about business and jobs -- but he notoriously does not. After all, he once said he'd rather put jobs in Frederick. Elrich serves Elrich's pet interests and nobody else's.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More like term-limited by politicians who otherwise couldn't keep him out of office because his constituents kept voting him in. Many at the polls don't make the connection between an abstract idea, like term limits, and the effect, like term-limiting the County Executive position without grandfathering in prior periods of service meaning that the candidates for that office at the next election may well be less desirable than the incumbent one had preferred to that point.

Honestly, the way the prior post is written, "term-limited by his constituents" sounds like a shill for Friedson, trying to cast a shade at his opponent, Jawando, whom Elrich decided to support, instead.

Can you answer the question instead of virtue signaling?

can you say what you mean instead of using MAGA code?

I'm not that poster, but defaulting to MAGA just because other Democrats disagree with you is really off-putting, and nobody takes you seriously.

There are different and complicated policy approaches on housing - and there is by no means some clear policy winner here.

Plus, Elrich needs to care about more than housing. He needs to care about business and jobs -- but he notoriously does not. After all, he once said he'd rather put jobs in Frederick. Elrich serves Elrich's pet interests and nobody else's.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The developers seem to already be out in full force already in this thread. Let's be clear: lots of people support term limits regardless of which candidate it affects. I enthusiastically support Elrich, but I think two terms is enough for anyone. Just think about it: tons of people like their Congressperson but think Congress needs term limits. Same idea. Just because you like a candidate, that doesn't mean you believe they are entitled to hold an office forever.

The developers have a tough time understanding this concept because their hatred of Elrich runs so deep and so they think everyone else must hate him also. But the truth is that developers are truly reviled by the majority of voters, and Elrich is very popular. He easily would have won a third term, which is why the developers put forth the term limits idea.

Um, people care about a lot of different issues. Not just housing. You are the only monomaniacal poster here.

+1. I have plenty of progressive friends who revile Elrich. Apart from his track record on affordable housing, he also has a history of being needlessly combative with other local elected officials, almost all of whom belong to his party. With Trump in the White House, now is the time for unity, not petty infighting, in the Democratic Party.

-1

I have plenty of progressive friends who like Elrich a lot. He actually did a great job reigning in the superintendent's irrational capital budget for new schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The developers seem to already be out in full force already in this thread. Let's be clear: lots of people support term limits regardless of which candidate it affects. I enthusiastically support Elrich, but I think two terms is enough for anyone. Just think about it: tons of people like their Congressperson but think Congress needs term limits. Same idea. Just because you like a candidate, that doesn't mean you believe they are entitled to hold an office forever.

The developers have a tough time understanding this concept because their hatred of Elrich runs so deep and so they think everyone else must hate him also. But the truth is that developers are truly reviled by the majority of voters, and Elrich is very popular. He easily would have won a third term, which is why the developers put forth the term limits idea.

Um, people care about a lot of different issues. Not just housing. You are the only monomaniacal poster here.

+1. I have plenty of progressive friends who revile Elrich. Apart from his track record on affordable housing, he also has a history of being needlessly combative with other local elected officials, almost all of whom belong to his party. With Trump in the White House, now is the time for unity, not petty infighting, in the Democratic Party.

Anonymous wrote:Technically, he can't run with others as a slate because he is using public campaign financing. But Debbie Spielberg is running in district 1, and she is his long-time employee. Both when he was at council and for his entire term as executive. He definitely wants her to win.

Don't know about the others but my guess would be Izola Shaw for district 3 and Josie Caballero at large.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More like term-limited by politicians who otherwise couldn't keep him out of office because his constituents kept voting him in. Many at the polls don't make the connection between an abstract idea, like term limits, and the effect, like term-limiting the County Executive position without grandfathering in prior periods of service meaning that the candidates for that office at the next election may well be less desirable than the incumbent one had preferred to that point.

Honestly, the way the prior post is written, "term-limited by his constituents" sounds like a shill for Friedson, trying to cast a shade at his opponent, Jawando, whom Elrich decided to support, instead.

Can you answer the question instead of virtue signaling?

can you say what you mean instead of using MAGA code?

I'm not that poster, but defaulting to MAGA just because other Democrats disagree with you is really off-putting, and nobody takes you seriously.

There are different and complicated policy approaches on housing - and there is by no means some clear policy winner here.

Plus, Elrich needs to care about more than housing. He needs to care about business and jobs -- but he notoriously does not. After all, he once said he'd rather put jobs in Frederick. Elrich serves Elrich's pet interests and nobody else's.