Anonymous wrote:Goulet is not being supported by "out of state" interests. Goulet does have the support of a lot of business interests who appreciate the fact that Goulet has YEARS of experience understanding the DC budget and how taxes and revenue works. Goulet is the only candidate sounding the alarm about how the DC budget has continued to expand significantly at the same time the city is losing residents. Goulet understands that when the next round of tax assessments is done on all the vacant office buildings downtown, the city's coffers are going to decrease as well. The city council has far too many relative novices in understanding how all those moving pieces work together.
Anonymous wrote:Dammit. I sealed my ballot last night and planned to mail it today
Anonymous wrote:Dammit. I sealed my ballot last night and planned to mail it today
Anonymous wrote:This appears to be the article and action that was the catalyzing moment.
https://washingtoncitypaper.com/article/558653/eric-goulet-says-hes-seen-a-poll-in-the-ward-3-race-hes-telling-shifting-stories-about-how-he-got-it/
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I just want to say, as someone who has voted for Eric Goulet, that my vote has nothing to do with whatever advertising "dark" or any other money may have bought. I really haven't seen any advertising other than the campaign signs up and down the roads in Ward 3. My vote has mainly been based on what I have read in these forums, including my positive reaction to Goulet's interest in speaking up and doing something about crime in Ward 3 and my negative reaction to the obvious smear campaign a few people have been engaged in against him. I want to see more Council members who are centrist, business-friendly and serious about reducing out-of-control crime in our city. I want the Ward 3 Councilmember to actually represent Ward 3.
This is why most people are not supporting Goulet. He is being supported by out of state interests and has very little actual in-ward financial support. He has done nothing in the community and now wants to swoop in and play councilmember.
Exactly. He is the least likely to represent the residents of Ward 3 since he’s beholden to the out-of-state interests that have bankrolled him.
But Frumin is beholden to development interests.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I just want to say, as someone who has voted for Eric Goulet, that my vote has nothing to do with whatever advertising "dark" or any other money may have bought. I really haven't seen any advertising other than the campaign signs up and down the roads in Ward 3. My vote has mainly been based on what I have read in these forums, including my positive reaction to Goulet's interest in speaking up and doing something about crime in Ward 3 and my negative reaction to the obvious smear campaign a few people have been engaged in against him. I want to see more Council members who are centrist, business-friendly and serious about reducing out-of-control crime in our city. I want the Ward 3 Councilmember to actually represent Ward 3.
This is why most people are not supporting Goulet. He is being supported by out of state interests and has very little actual in-ward financial support. He has done nothing in the community and now wants to swoop in and play councilmember.
Exactly. He is the least likely to represent the residents of Ward 3 since he’s beholden to the out-of-state interests that have bankrolled him.
But Frumin is beholden to development interests.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I just want to say, as someone who has voted for Eric Goulet, that my vote has nothing to do with whatever advertising "dark" or any other money may have bought. I really haven't seen any advertising other than the campaign signs up and down the roads in Ward 3. My vote has mainly been based on what I have read in these forums, including my positive reaction to Goulet's interest in speaking up and doing something about crime in Ward 3 and my negative reaction to the obvious smear campaign a few people have been engaged in against him. I want to see more Council members who are centrist, business-friendly and serious about reducing out-of-control crime in our city. I want the Ward 3 Councilmember to actually represent Ward 3.
This is why most people are not supporting Goulet. He is being supported by out of state interests and has very little actual in-ward financial support. He has done nothing in the community and now wants to swoop in and play councilmember.
Exactly. He is the least likely to represent the residents of Ward 3 since he’s beholden to the out-of-state interests that have bankrolled him.
Anonymous wrote:Where’s Ben?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I just want to say, as someone who has voted for Eric Goulet, that my vote has nothing to do with whatever advertising "dark" or any other money may have bought. I really haven't seen any advertising other than the campaign signs up and down the roads in Ward 3. My vote has mainly been based on what I have read in these forums, including my positive reaction to Goulet's interest in speaking up and doing something about crime in Ward 3 and my negative reaction to the obvious smear campaign a few people have been engaged in against him. I want to see more Council members who are centrist, business-friendly and serious about reducing out-of-control crime in our city. I want the Ward 3 Councilmember to actually represent Ward 3.
This is why most people are not supporting Goulet. He is being supported by out of state interests and has very little actual in-ward financial support. He has done nothing in the community and now wants to swoop in and play councilmember.
Exactly. He is the least likely to represent the residents of Ward 3 since he’s beholden to the out-of-state interests that have bankrolled him.
Thank you Frumin campaign staff. You have hit your talking points.
LOL. I’m the PP, and I was on the fence between Duncan and Frumin until a few hours ago, when Duncan’s decision made my decision for me. But I am anti-Goulet like it was my job.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I just want to say, as someone who has voted for Eric Goulet, that my vote has nothing to do with whatever advertising "dark" or any other money may have bought. I really haven't seen any advertising other than the campaign signs up and down the roads in Ward 3. My vote has mainly been based on what I have read in these forums, including my positive reaction to Goulet's interest in speaking up and doing something about crime in Ward 3 and my negative reaction to the obvious smear campaign a few people have been engaged in against him. I want to see more Council members who are centrist, business-friendly and serious about reducing out-of-control crime in our city. I want the Ward 3 Councilmember to actually represent Ward 3.
This is why most people are not supporting Goulet. He is being supported by out of state interests and has very little actual in-ward financial support. He has done nothing in the community and now wants to swoop in and play councilmember.
Exactly. He is the least likely to represent the residents of Ward 3 since he’s beholden to the out-of-state interests that have bankrolled him.
Thank you Frumin campaign staff. You have hit your talking points.
Anonymous wrote:Where’s Ben?