Anonymous wrote:

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.

I didn't say city wide. The topic was Connecticut Avenue, and for that, this election confirmed the majority opinion. There will be bike lanes, as there were already going to be bike lanes. There is no political will to change what the mayor has already decided. The ANCs and Councilmember-Elect all favor bike lanes.

Let's move on.

Anonymous wrote:That an ANC representative who was elected with 12 votes supports bike lanes doesnt seem particularly important.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This. The lesson for Siddiqui after his close race is that he needs to listen more to his constituents and find consensus solutions that work for more stakeholders.

There are bike lanes, or there are not bike lanes. The anti-bike lane folks put up a candidate who lost. Do you think if Nike Ide had won, that the pro-bike lane people would be expecting a consensus opinion from him that included bike lane support? Get real.

Do you think republicans who lost the senate expect democrats to suddenly adopt a pro-life, anti-abortion stance?

The election was about so much more than bike lanes. Stop trying to spin it as some statement about bike lanes.

Certain ANC races were all about bike lanes and nothing else. The pro-bike lane people won almost all of those races.
In the council race, the precincts with the pro-bike lane candidate fared better for that candidate, by 3-4 points, than other precincts around the Ward.

IOW, there is absolutely no mandate to discontinue the effort to get bike lanes installed. The Mayor supports it, the Councilmember and Councilmember elect both support it, and the majority of current and incoming ANC commissioners in 3C, 3F, and 3/4G all support it.

In 3C, there is actually more incoming support than existing support.

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.

This. The lesson for Siddiqui after his close race is that he needs to listen more to his constituents and find consensus solutions that work for more stakeholders.

There are bike lanes, or there are not bike lanes. The anti-bike lane folks put up a candidate who lost. Do you think if Nike Ide had won, that the pro-bike lane people would be expecting a consensus opinion from him that included bike lane support? Get real.

Do you think republicans who lost the senate expect democrats to suddenly adopt a pro-life, anti-abortion stance?

The election was about so much more than bike lanes. Stop trying to spin it as some statement about bike lanes.

Certain ANC races were all about bike lanes and nothing else. The pro-bike lane people won almost all of those races.
In the council race, the precincts with the pro-bike lane candidate fared better for that candidate, by 3-4 points, than other precincts around the Ward.

IOW, there is absolutely no mandate to discontinue the effort to get bike lanes installed. The Mayor supports it, the Councilmember and Councilmember elect both support it, and the majority of current and incoming ANC commissioners in 3C, 3F, and 3/4G all support it.

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.

This. The lesson for Siddiqui after his close race is that he needs to listen more to his constituents and find consensus solutions that work for more stakeholders.

There are bike lanes, or there are not bike lanes. The anti-bike lane folks put up a candidate who lost. Do you think if Nike Ide had won, that the pro-bike lane people would be expecting a consensus opinion from him that included bike lane support? Get real.

Do you think republicans who lost the senate expect democrats to suddenly adopt a pro-life, anti-abortion stance?

The election was about so much more than bike lanes. Stop trying to spin it as some statement about bike lanes.

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.

This. The lesson for Siddiqui after his close race is that he needs to listen more to his constituents and find consensus solutions that work for more stakeholders.

There are bike lanes, or there are not bike lanes. The anti-bike lane folks put up a candidate who lost. Do you think if Nike Ide had won, that the pro-bike lane people would be expecting a consensus opinion from him that included bike lane support? Get real.

Do you think republicans who lost the senate expect democrats to suddenly adopt a pro-life, anti-abortion stance?

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.

This is not at all surprising. Cleveland Park's self-styled "Ward boss," who pushed his slate of pro-Smart Growth and pro-Option C ANC candidates, has a very Trumpy history.

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.

This. The lesson for Siddiqui after his close race is that he needs to listen more to his constituents and find consensus solutions that work for more stakeholders.

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:

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:But like what if the promise of bike lanes is all a dream and we can go back to having spaces that care about cars and car injuries?

Then in 5 years, the city can undo it. This is very unlikely to happen given the GenZ and Millennials who will be the ones moving into the area and are more concerned about climate change and healthcare outcomes than their parents.

Anonymous wrote:But like what if the promise of bike lanes is all a dream and we can go back to having spaces that care about cars and car injuries?