Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was no mandate on the Conn Ave bike lanes - In the contested ANC3C races, bike go slow/bike critical candidates either won or came close. Sauleh was almost defeated.

None of them were weighted down with a party affiliation, so they outperformed Krucoff by about 30 points. Frumin's bike support was nuanced, wants to hear everybody out and make accommodations "where possible".

Disagree. The olny race the anti-bike lane people won was Rick Nash. It doesn't matter that Sauleh's race was close, he won. So when people like you say "everyone is opposed to the bike lanes" it simply isn't true, and in fact, all of the ANC's on CT Ave still maintain a pro-bike lane majority. Frumin's bike support wasn't nuanced. He and every Dem candidate in the primary supported the bike lanes and nothing has changed. The Mayor and DDOT are moving forward with them, and there i nothing politically that will stop it.

So how about we cease with the divisive languages and the false petitions that create empty hope for something that was never going to happen?

It’s you who is divisive. You refuse to acknowledge or give legitimacy to those who aren’t 100% on board with the bike lanes. The fact that the contested races, including Sauleh’s, were so close DOES matter, and if the ANC reps are representing all of their constituents, not just those who voted for them, they won’t be dismissive. Sauleh squeaked by and his victory shouldn’t be viewed as handing him a mandate. I hope he sees that.

But we do acknowledge that your aren't 100% with the bike lanes. But ultimately, it is a binary decision, either there will be bike lanes, or there won't. In election after election, the pro-bike lane candidates have won, so other than acknwledging you, what do you want? You cannot expect that candidates who ran on a pro-bike lane agenda simply kowtow to the will of the minority view on this, right?

Yes, the ANC is supposed to represent the community, but when decisions have to be made, there cannot be an expectation that the minority opinion is the one that carries the day.

If we had that, then we would have a border wall, no abortion rights, and a Christo-fascist country.

Oh, wait...

It’s definitely not binary. There are changes everyone can agree on. Greater traffic enforcement, dedicated bud lanes, HAWKS, etc. Its you who are being Trumpian with us scorched earth, winner take all approach.

You want a tyranny of the minority opinion. Move to a red state where that is encouraged.

Wait, what? You think most people in DC favor bikes over cars? Dude, you live in a teeny, tiny bubble if so.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was no mandate on the Conn Ave bike lanes - In the contested ANC3C races, bike go slow/bike critical candidates either won or came close. Sauleh was almost defeated.

None of them were weighted down with a party affiliation, so they outperformed Krucoff by about 30 points. Frumin's bike support was nuanced, wants to hear everybody out and make accommodations "where possible".

Disagree. The olny race the anti-bike lane people won was Rick Nash. It doesn't matter that Sauleh's race was close, he won. So when people like you say "everyone is opposed to the bike lanes" it simply isn't true, and in fact, all of the ANC's on CT Ave still maintain a pro-bike lane majority. Frumin's bike support wasn't nuanced. He and every Dem candidate in the primary supported the bike lanes and nothing has changed. The Mayor and DDOT are moving forward with them, and there i nothing politically that will stop it.

So how about we cease with the divisive languages and the false petitions that create empty hope for something that was never going to happen?

It’s you who is divisive. You refuse to acknowledge or give legitimacy to those who aren’t 100% on board with the bike lanes. The fact that the contested races, including Sauleh’s, were so close DOES matter, and if the ANC reps are representing all of their constituents, not just those who voted for them, they won’t be dismissive. Sauleh squeaked by and his victory shouldn’t be viewed as handing him a mandate. I hope he sees that.

But we do acknowledge that your aren't 100% with the bike lanes. But ultimately, it is a binary decision, either there will be bike lanes, or there won't. In election after election, the pro-bike lane candidates have won, so other than acknwledging you, what do you want? You cannot expect that candidates who ran on a pro-bike lane agenda simply kowtow to the will of the minority view on this, right?

Yes, the ANC is supposed to represent the community, but when decisions have to be made, there cannot be an expectation that the minority opinion is the one that carries the day.

If we had that, then we would have a border wall, no abortion rights, and a Christo-fascist country.

Oh, wait...

It’s definitely not binary. There are changes everyone can agree on. Greater traffic enforcement, dedicated bud lanes, HAWKS, etc. Its you who are being Trumpian with us scorched earth, winner take all approach.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was no mandate on the Conn Ave bike lanes - In the contested ANC3C races, bike go slow/bike critical candidates either won or came close. Sauleh was almost defeated.

None of them were weighted down with a party affiliation, so they outperformed Krucoff by about 30 points. Frumin's bike support was nuanced, wants to hear everybody out and make accommodations "where possible".

Disagree. The olny race the anti-bike lane people won was Rick Nash. It doesn't matter that Sauleh's race was close, he won. So when people like you say "everyone is opposed to the bike lanes" it simply isn't true, and in fact, all of the ANC's on CT Ave still maintain a pro-bike lane majority. Frumin's bike support wasn't nuanced. He and every Dem candidate in the primary supported the bike lanes and nothing has changed. The Mayor and DDOT are moving forward with them, and there i nothing politically that will stop it.

So how about we cease with the divisive languages and the false petitions that create empty hope for something that was never going to happen?

It’s you who is divisive. You refuse to acknowledge or give legitimacy to those who aren’t 100% on board with the bike lanes. The fact that the contested races, including Sauleh’s, were so close DOES matter, and if the ANC reps are representing all of their constituents, not just those who voted for them, they won’t be dismissive. Sauleh squeaked by and his victory shouldn’t be viewed as handing him a mandate. I hope he sees that.

But we do acknowledge that your aren't 100% with the bike lanes. But ultimately, it is a binary decision, either there will be bike lanes, or there won't. In election after election, the pro-bike lane candidates have won, so other than acknwledging you, what do you want? You cannot expect that candidates who ran on a pro-bike lane agenda simply kowtow to the will of the minority view on this, right?

Yes, the ANC is supposed to represent the community, but when decisions have to be made, there cannot be an expectation that the minority opinion is the one that carries the day.

If we had that, then we would have a border wall, no abortion rights, and a Christo-fascist country.

Oh, wait...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was no mandate on the Conn Ave bike lanes - In the contested ANC3C races, bike go slow/bike critical candidates either won or came close. Sauleh was almost defeated.

None of them were weighted down with a party affiliation, so they outperformed Krucoff by about 30 points. Frumin's bike support was nuanced, wants to hear everybody out and make accommodations "where possible".

Disagree. The olny race the anti-bike lane people won was Rick Nash. It doesn't matter that Sauleh's race was close, he won. So when people like you say "everyone is opposed to the bike lanes" it simply isn't true, and in fact, all of the ANC's on CT Ave still maintain a pro-bike lane majority. Frumin's bike support wasn't nuanced. He and every Dem candidate in the primary supported the bike lanes and nothing has changed. The Mayor and DDOT are moving forward with them, and there i nothing politically that will stop it.

So how about we cease with the divisive languages and the false petitions that create empty hope for something that was never going to happen?

It’s you who is divisive. You refuse to acknowledge or give legitimacy to those who aren’t 100% on board with the bike lanes. The fact that the contested races, including Sauleh’s, were so close DOES matter, and if the ANC reps are representing all of their constituents, not just those who voted for them, they won’t be dismissive. Sauleh squeaked by and his victory shouldn’t be viewed as handing him a mandate. I hope he sees that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was no mandate on the Conn Ave bike lanes - In the contested ANC3C races, bike go slow/bike critical candidates either won or came close. Sauleh was almost defeated.

None of them were weighted down with a party affiliation, so they outperformed Krucoff by about 30 points. Frumin's bike support was nuanced, wants to hear everybody out and make accommodations "where possible".

Disagree. The olny race the anti-bike lane people won was Rick Nash. It doesn't matter that Sauleh's race was close, he won. So when people like you say "everyone is opposed to the bike lanes" it simply isn't true, and in fact, all of the ANC's on CT Ave still maintain a pro-bike lane majority. Frumin's bike support wasn't nuanced. He and every Dem candidate in the primary supported the bike lanes and nothing has changed. The Mayor and DDOT are moving forward with them, and there i nothing politically that will stop it.

So how about we cease with the divisive languages and the false petitions that create empty hope for something that was never going to happen?

Anonymous wrote:There was no mandate on the Conn Ave bike lanes - In the contested ANC3C races, bike go slow/bike critical candidates either won or came close. Sauleh was almost defeated.

None of them were weighted down with a party affiliation, so they outperformed Krucoff by about 30 points. Frumin's bike support was nuanced, wants to hear everybody out and make accommodations "where possible".

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Krucoff would have done better if he could have been photographed next to Frumin more. Krucoff came off as polished, though out of his depth.

Polished? He had an 8th grader grasp of the issues. But that is standard for the GOP.

Anonymous wrote:Krucoff would have done better if he could have been photographed next to Frumin more. Krucoff came off as polished, though out of his depth.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bike Lane mafia is not doing so great in Ward 3. Maybe time for a real conversation?

?

All of the ANC's will still be pro-bike lane.
Frumin out-polled Cheh and is pro-bike lane.

IOW, bike lanes are happening.

The ANC races are 50/50 on bike lanes. Siddiqui won by 6 votes. Tandaric lost. The neighbors are sharply divided, now they are actually paying attention. Time for a reset.

It appears the pro bike folks like both candidates in that race:

https://twitter.com/Ward3Bikes/status/1580940779853582336

And Siddiqui was the biggest pro-bike person on ANC 3C and he had an opponent that spent a lot of money and had a lot of support from the Macwood contingent and CPCA/CPHS crowd and still won.

So yeah I think the pro bike crowd is pretty happy with this outcome.

How can they be happy? The competitive races show the community its sharply divided. We can now dispense with the “wide community support” narrative. The bike crowd should be embarrassed for the scam they’ve run the past two years.

Repost from page 2 of this thread:

Funny. I was just telling a friend today: "Next NIMBY talking point: elections don't really matter."

Quite the opposite. The elections DI matter. They show the community is split on the issue. We’re all neighbors and if we make policy on the basis of 51%-49% votes, this will not be a pleasant place to live. Now is the time to heal, come together, and find consensus on how to make Connecticut Ave safer: more enforcement, dedicated bus lanes, increased bike amenities around metro, etc. There are many places for agreement.

The decision had already been made by the mayor. Everything that has happened since, the petition, the lies on the neighborhood email lists, etc, are what is divisive. If you want to come together and heal, then the way to do it is to understand the bike lanes are happening and help make the design as good as possible. Neither the ANC, the Councilmember-Elect nor the Mayor are reversing the decision.

You're right. The lies have been what is so divisive. The lies about popularity. The lies about a mandate. The lies about community awareness. The lies about impact. We cannot come together until you all stop the lies.

Kind of looks like a mandate, given the many victories of bike lane proponents up and down the avenue.

This is just asinine. No one was even thinking about bike lanes in these elections. And the leading progressive on the city council was defeated. The city council is going to swing back towards the center after all this.

The republican candidate literally had it on his signs and he captured a few votes.
Several ANC Commissioners made opposing them the cornerstone of their campaigns, most of them lost.
There are at least two threads in this forum that talk about the bike lanes and the various candidates positions, and there is the Frumin v Krucoff thread that also talks about them.

But sure, no one was thinking about them. At all.

Pfft. Nobody cares about ANC races or any of the Republican candidates. The only thing that matters that happened yesterday was the Silverman, the queen of leftwing white people, was defeated in favor of a business friendly Democrat. That's a political earthquake.

I think most people think of ANC representatives as glorified 311 operators.

That is literally their job. Except there is somehow the belief among the urbanist crowd that ANCs have real political power and somehow winning an ANC election (or for the vast majority being uncontested) provides some sort of broad policy mandate. It’s totally crazy and honestly getting so out of control that they should just be abolished.

they have so little power that they are such a big risk that they should be abolished. makes sense!

You seem to lack comprehension. They are supposed to have a very limited role and are taking it upon themselves to try and go beyond that role. I do not think they are effective at shaping city policy, because why would they be? Regardless their chief role is supposed to be serving as an information conduit for their neighbors to understand what is going on in the community and interact with the government. It appears that they instead are trying to control the flow of information, which is sad. That is why they should be abolished. They are abusing their limited role, so what’s the point of having them?

Can you provide even a single example of your ANC controlling the flow of information?

Holding straw votes of ANC reps for policy questions is certainly outside of their role and mandate. Their role is to connect citizens with the government directly so that they can be engaged. Not to presume some sort of mandate on their behalf. That doesn’t serve neighbors and tries to stove pipe and control information flow to the government agencies.

Huh? You didn't answer the question.

I exactly did. Their role is to enhance and promote direct citizen engagement. Not to presume to be a small d democratic intermediary/middle man on their behalf. They are not some sort of sub-DC Council policy making body that can speak on behalf of their neighbors. The fact that many think that they are is bizarre and a strong reason for their abolishment.

ANC representatives need to stick to their lane. We're not interested in their opinions on how much the city should spend on Medicaid or what to do with parole violators or what environmental standards restaurants should follow or how much to tax businesses or how much to pay teachers or what they think about any form of transportation.

I see. You don’t like who your neighbors elected so you want to abolish the whole representative body.

We already have a mayor and a city council. If you want to make substantive decisions, you're free to run for one of those. But no one wants to hear what the 25 year old white guy who was elected ANC with 12 votes thinks.

It’s in the DC code. Just because you have some weird anti-ANC fixation doesn’t change the law.

Right. But ANC was created specifically as a nonpartisan office. And with good reason. It’s not supposed to set policy. One young lady just won an ANC seat saying she wanted to make the neighborhood more “pro labor.” Wut? These Gen Z activists have completely corrupted these offices which were established to help their neighbors navigate the DC bureaucracy and get overflowing trash cans serviced. If they want to stroke their egos and fill their FB pages with cool posts, then run for Council and be subject to then primary election process.

They didn't set policy. They were asked by DDOT to weigh in on the reconfiguration of Connecticut Avenue.

They were asked to weigh in on behalf of themselves personally or their respective communities?

Considering the precincts most exposed to Conn Ave had some of the strongest Frumin support... Gonna go with *you* are part of an out of touch minority who refuses to accept that.

+1

Krucoff simply flushed out the out of touch single family dwellers who thought their loud voices on a neighborhood email list would somehow prevail in contested elections. The numbers don't lie.

I don’t think you know how to read election results. Krukoff way over performed. In Ward 3 he received 3x as many votes as the GOP mayoral candidate. In heavily Democratic Ward 3, that is an incredible rate of ticket splitting. He received almost 10x the amount of votes in the general vs. primary. And, even more remarkable when you consider the Connecticut Ave issue only impacts a portion of the Ward and the Democratic machine and cheating that we know occurred.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bike Lane mafia is not doing so great in Ward 3. Maybe time for a real conversation?

?

All of the ANC's will still be pro-bike lane.
Frumin out-polled Cheh and is pro-bike lane.
IOW, bike lanes are happening.

The ANC races are 50/50 on bike lanes. Siddiqui won by 6 votes. Tandaric lost. The neighbors are sharply divided, now they are actually paying attention. Time for a reset.

It appears the pro bike folks like both candidates in that race:

https://twitter.com/Ward3Bikes/status/1580940779853582336

And Siddiqui was the biggest pro-bike person on ANC 3C and he had an opponent that spent a lot of money and had a lot of support from the Macwood contingent and CPCA/CPHS crowd and still won.

So yeah I think the pro bike crowd is pretty happy with this outcome.

How can they be happy? The competitive races show the community its sharply divided. We can now dispense with the “wide community support” narrative. The bike crowd should be embarrassed for the scam they’ve run the past two years.

Repost from page 2 of this thread:

Funny. I was just telling a friend today: "Next NIMBY talking point: elections don't really matter."

Quite the opposite. The elections DI matter. They show the community is split on the issue. We’re all neighbors and if we make policy on the basis of 51%-49% votes, this will not be a pleasant place to live. Now is the time to heal, come together, and find consensus on how to make Connecticut Ave safer: more enforcement, dedicated bus lanes, increased bike amenities around metro, etc. There are many places for agreement.

The decision had already been made by the mayor. Everything that has happened since, the petition, the lies on the neighborhood email lists, etc, are what is divisive. If you want to come together and heal, then the way to do it is to understand the bike lanes are happening and help make the design as good as possible. Neither the ANC, the Councilmember-Elect nor the Mayor are reversing the decision.

You're right. The lies have been what is so divisive. The lies about popularity. The lies about a mandate. The lies about community awareness. The lies about impact. We cannot come together until you all stop the lies.

Kind of looks like a mandate, given the many victories of bike lane proponents up and down the avenue.

This is just asinine. No one was even thinking about bike lanes in these elections. And the leading progressive on the city council was defeated. The city council is going to swing back towards the center after all this.

The republican candidate literally had it on his signs and he captured a few votes.
Several ANC Commissioners made opposing them the cornerstone of their campaigns, most of them lost.
There are at least two threads in this forum that talk about the bike lanes and the various candidates positions, and there is the Frumin v Krucoff thread that also talks about them.

But sure, no one was thinking about them. At all.

Pfft. Nobody cares about ANC races or any of the Republican candidates. The only thing that matters that happened yesterday was the Silverman, the queen of leftwing white people, was defeated in favor of a business friendly Democrat. That's a political earthquake.

I think most people think of ANC representatives as glorified 311 operators.

That is literally their job. Except there is somehow the belief among the urbanist crowd that ANCs have real political power and somehow winning an ANC election (or for the vast majority being uncontested) provides some sort of broad policy mandate. It’s totally crazy and honestly getting so out of control that they should just be abolished.

they have so little power that they are such a big risk that they should be abolished. makes sense!

You seem to lack comprehension. They are supposed to have a very limited role and are taking it upon themselves to try and go beyond that role. I do not think they are effective at shaping city policy, because why would they be? Regardless their chief role is supposed to be serving as an information conduit for their neighbors to understand what is going on in the community and interact with the government. It appears that they instead are trying to control the flow of information, which is sad. That is why they should be abolished. They are abusing their limited role, so what’s the point of having them?

Can you provide even a single example of your ANC controlling the flow of information?

Holding straw votes of ANC reps for policy questions is certainly outside of their role and mandate. Their role is to connect citizens with the government directly so that they can be engaged. Not to presume some sort of mandate on their behalf. That doesn’t serve neighbors and tries to stove pipe and control information flow to the government agencies.

Huh? You didn't answer the question.

I exactly did. Their role is to enhance and promote direct citizen engagement. Not to presume to be a small d democratic intermediary/middle man on their behalf. They are not some sort of sub-DC Council policy making body that can speak on behalf of their neighbors. The fact that many think that they are is bizarre and a strong reason for their abolishment.

ANC representatives need to stick to their lane. We're not interested in their opinions on how much the city should spend on Medicaid or what to do with parole violators or what environmental standards restaurants should follow or how much to tax businesses or how much to pay teachers or what they think about any form of transportation.

I see. You don’t like who your neighbors elected so you want to abolish the whole representative body.

We already have a mayor and a city council. If you want to make substantive decisions, you're free to run for one of those. But no one wants to hear what the 25 year old white guy who was elected ANC with 12 votes thinks.

It’s in the DC code. Just because you have some weird anti-ANC fixation doesn’t change the law.

Right. But ANC was created specifically as a nonpartisan office. And with good reason. It’s not supposed to set policy. One young lady just won an ANC seat saying she wanted to make the neighborhood more “pro labor.” Wut? These Gen Z activists have completely corrupted these offices which were established to help their neighbors navigate the DC bureaucracy and get overflowing trash cans serviced. If they want to stroke their egos and fill their FB pages with cool posts, then run for Council and be subject to then primary election process.

They didn't set policy. They were asked by DDOT to weigh in on the reconfiguration of Connecticut Avenue.

They were asked to weigh in on behalf of themselves personally or their respective communities?

Considering the precincts most exposed to Conn Ave had some of the strongest Frumin support... Gonna go with *you* are part of an out of touch minority who refuses to accept that.

I’m not sure what that response has to do with ANC reps but nice non-sequitur.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I don’t think you know how to read election results. Krukoff way over performed. In Ward 3 he received 3x as many votes as the GOP mayoral candidate. In heavily Democratic Ward 3, that is an incredible rate of ticket splitting. He received almost 10x the amount of votes in the general vs. primary. And, even more remarkable when you consider the Connecticut Ave issue only impacts a portion of the Ward and the Democratic machine and cheating that we know occurred.

Ward 3 is the most Republican Ward in the city. Krucoff did worse than all of Cheh's general election challengers. Frumin did better than Cheh did in a general in any of her races. I like Matt, but his doing that despite not being an incumbent speaks way more about Krucoff being a terrible candidate. Also lol at the democratic machine and cheating concerns. The people of Ward 3 did not fall for David's BS.

Ward 3 is NOT the most Republican ward in the city. Gasp! And you will be happy to know that there are several thousand fewer republicans in Ward 3 in 2022 vs. 2018. Are you done embarrassing yourself?