Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Jawando’s base is a bit broader than Elrich’s base. Sure, Jawando’s colleagues don’t seem to care for him. But a lot of people don’t care for Jawando’s colleagues, so the more the other council members complain about Jawando, the more some people will like him. This dynamic helped Elrich in his first run for executive.

It's not just Jawando's colleagues, though. In MoCo, a lot of folks are involved in political life. Maybe something minor like a meet-and-greet or more time consuming like a volunteer council on pedestrian safety.

Every time one of those regular folks has to interact with Jawando (or his team), he loses a vote.

I'm always wary of these "likeability" tests. People don't need to be likeable to do a good job, and conversely people can be likeable but have awful policies. Likeability tests is how we destroyed people like Hillary Clinton.

Likeability matters a lot more at the local level, though. Municipal politics are much closer to the impacted humans, which means it matters more whether an elected official and his team can productively interact with commissions, or with constituent groups.

I am a member of a constituent group and Jawando has been great. Friedson just mansplains and Glass seems angry and mean.

They are all terrible. Jawando will just be more of the same as Elrich - just totally fiscally irresponsible and lots of terrible choices. But at least he has put out a budget proposal, awful as it may be. Glass and Friedson haven't really shared what they would do if it were up to them.

He’s shown himself to be more fiscally responsible so far. Where are the Glass and Friedson budget proposals? Or are they just going along with NFG’s tax increases?

No, Jawando's budget proposal is truly awful. He is proposing cutting a lot of stuff that will have to be paid for later. Classic kick the can down the road bs so he can give the unions their full and unaffordable raises.

People can disagree about what to cut. Friedson and Glass have claimed to oppose increasing taxes but they haven’t come out with any cuts. Until they have a plan that doesn’t include a big tax increase, Jawando owns this issue and my vote.

Maybe because they are working within the council president's framework. Which is what a council is supposed to do. But maybe it's hard for some to deal with women in leadership positions.

The council president’s framework includes a 12 percent property increase for a home assessed at the median home price in Montgomery County. The rate of increase is even higher for cheaper homes. If a landlord did this, it would be a constructive eviction (and illegal). I’m happy to have some alternatives instead of groupthink around big tax increases.

I haven’t heard the council president complain that Jawando is willing to cut. If Friedson and Glass are happy following someone else, they shouldn’t be running for executive.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Jawando’s base is a bit broader than Elrich’s base. Sure, Jawando’s colleagues don’t seem to care for him. But a lot of people don’t care for Jawando’s colleagues, so the more the other council members complain about Jawando, the more some people will like him. This dynamic helped Elrich in his first run for executive.

It's not just Jawando's colleagues, though. In MoCo, a lot of folks are involved in political life. Maybe something minor like a meet-and-greet or more time consuming like a volunteer council on pedestrian safety.

Every time one of those regular folks has to interact with Jawando (or his team), he loses a vote.

I'm always wary of these "likeability" tests. People don't need to be likeable to do a good job, and conversely people can be likeable but have awful policies. Likeability tests is how we destroyed people like Hillary Clinton.

Likeability matters a lot more at the local level, though. Municipal politics are much closer to the impacted humans, which means it matters more whether an elected official and his team can productively interact with commissions, or with constituent groups.

I am a member of a constituent group and Jawando has been great. Friedson just mansplains and Glass seems angry and mean.

They are all terrible. Jawando will just be more of the same as Elrich - just totally fiscally irresponsible and lots of terrible choices. But at least he has put out a budget proposal, awful as it may be. Glass and Friedson haven't really shared what they would do if it were up to them.

He’s shown himself to be more fiscally responsible so far. Where are the Glass and Friedson budget proposals? Or are they just going along with NFG’s tax increases?

No, Jawando's budget proposal is truly awful. He is proposing cutting a lot of stuff that will have to be paid for later. Classic kick the can down the road bs so he can give the unions their full and unaffordable raises.

People can disagree about what to cut. Friedson and Glass have claimed to oppose increasing taxes but they haven’t come out with any cuts. Until they have a plan that doesn’t include a big tax increase, Jawando owns this issue and my vote.

Maybe because they are working within the council president's framework. Which is what a council is supposed to do. But maybe it's hard for some to deal with women in leadership positions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Jawando’s base is a bit broader than Elrich’s base. Sure, Jawando’s colleagues don’t seem to care for him. But a lot of people don’t care for Jawando’s colleagues, so the more the other council members complain about Jawando, the more some people will like him. This dynamic helped Elrich in his first run for executive.

It's not just Jawando's colleagues, though. In MoCo, a lot of folks are involved in political life. Maybe something minor like a meet-and-greet or more time consuming like a volunteer council on pedestrian safety.

Every time one of those regular folks has to interact with Jawando (or his team), he loses a vote.

I'm always wary of these "likeability" tests. People don't need to be likeable to do a good job, and conversely people can be likeable but have awful policies. Likeability tests is how we destroyed people like Hillary Clinton.

Likeability matters a lot more at the local level, though. Municipal politics are much closer to the impacted humans, which means it matters more whether an elected official and his team can productively interact with commissions, or with constituent groups.

I am a member of a constituent group and Jawando has been great. Friedson just mansplains and Glass seems angry and mean.

They are all terrible. Jawando will just be more of the same as Elrich - just totally fiscally irresponsible and lots of terrible choices. But at least he has put out a budget proposal, awful as it may be. Glass and Friedson haven't really shared what they would do if it were up to them.

He’s shown himself to be more fiscally responsible so far. Where are the Glass and Friedson budget proposals? Or are they just going along with NFG’s tax increases?

No, Jawando's budget proposal is truly awful. He is proposing cutting a lot of stuff that will have to be paid for later. Classic kick the can down the road bs so he can give the unions their full and unaffordable raises.

People can disagree about what to cut. Friedson and Glass have claimed to oppose increasing taxes but they haven’t come out with any cuts. Until they have a plan that doesn’t include a big tax increase, Jawando owns this issue and my vote.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My vote will be based on who is least likely to favor the widespread elimination of SFH zoning, and so I'm voting for Jawando.

+1 Plus Jawando voted against the absurd tax breaks for for-profit developers that have contributed to the budgetary crisis in the county.

Thanks for this info. This seals my vote for Jawando.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Jawando’s base is a bit broader than Elrich’s base. Sure, Jawando’s colleagues don’t seem to care for him. But a lot of people don’t care for Jawando’s colleagues, so the more the other council members complain about Jawando, the more some people will like him. This dynamic helped Elrich in his first run for executive.

It's not just Jawando's colleagues, though. In MoCo, a lot of folks are involved in political life. Maybe something minor like a meet-and-greet or more time consuming like a volunteer council on pedestrian safety.

Every time one of those regular folks has to interact with Jawando (or his team), he loses a vote.

I'm always wary of these "likeability" tests. People don't need to be likeable to do a good job, and conversely people can be likeable but have awful policies. Likeability tests is how we destroyed people like Hillary Clinton.

Likeability matters a lot more at the local level, though. Municipal politics are much closer to the impacted humans, which means it matters more whether an elected official and his team can productively interact with commissions, or with constituent groups.

I am a member of a constituent group and Jawando has been great. Friedson just mansplains and Glass seems angry and mean.

They are all terrible. Jawando will just be more of the same as Elrich - just totally fiscally irresponsible and lots of terrible choices. But at least he has put out a budget proposal, awful as it may be. Glass and Friedson haven't really shared what they would do if it were up to them.

He’s shown himself to be more fiscally responsible so far. Where are the Glass and Friedson budget proposals? Or are they just going along with NFG’s tax increases?

No, Jawando's budget proposal is truly awful. He is proposing cutting a lot of stuff that will have to be paid for later. Classic kick the can down the road bs so he can give the unions their full and unaffordable raises.

I’ve been to several MoCo Council meetings over the years and what’s always struck me about Evan Glass each and every darn time is that he’s been staring at his phone, completely oblivious to what’s happening around him, the entire time. Most recently at a Council hearing at Montgomery Blair. Hundreds of constituents in attendance, and the guy was fixed on his iPhone (or whatever phone brand it is) for more than two hours. Lame.

Anonymous wrote:My vote will be based on who is least likely to favor the widespread elimination of SFH zoning, and so I'm voting for Jawando.

+1 Plus Jawando voted against the absurd tax breaks for for-profit developers that have contributed to the budgetary crisis in the county.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Jawando’s base is a bit broader than Elrich’s base. Sure, Jawando’s colleagues don’t seem to care for him. But a lot of people don’t care for Jawando’s colleagues, so the more the other council members complain about Jawando, the more some people will like him. This dynamic helped Elrich in his first run for executive.

It's not just Jawando's colleagues, though. In MoCo, a lot of folks are involved in political life. Maybe something minor like a meet-and-greet or more time consuming like a volunteer council on pedestrian safety.

Every time one of those regular folks has to interact with Jawando (or his team), he loses a vote.

I'm always wary of these "likeability" tests. People don't need to be likeable to do a good job, and conversely people can be likeable but have awful policies. Likeability tests is how we destroyed people like Hillary Clinton.

Likeability matters a lot more at the local level, though. Municipal politics are much closer to the impacted humans, which means it matters more whether an elected official and his team can productively interact with commissions, or with constituent groups.

I am a member of a constituent group and Jawando has been great. Friedson just mansplains and Glass seems angry and mean.

They are all terrible. Jawando will just be more of the same as Elrich - just totally fiscally irresponsible and lots of terrible choices. But at least he has put out a budget proposal, awful as it may be. Glass and Friedson haven't really shared what they would do if it were up to them.

He’s shown himself to be more fiscally responsible so far. Where are the Glass and Friedson budget proposals? Or are they just going along with NFG’s tax increases?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Jawando’s base is a bit broader than Elrich’s base. Sure, Jawando’s colleagues don’t seem to care for him. But a lot of people don’t care for Jawando’s colleagues, so the more the other council members complain about Jawando, the more some people will like him. This dynamic helped Elrich in his first run for executive.

It's not just Jawando's colleagues, though. In MoCo, a lot of folks are involved in political life. Maybe something minor like a meet-and-greet or more time consuming like a volunteer council on pedestrian safety.

Every time one of those regular folks has to interact with Jawando (or his team), he loses a vote.

I'm always wary of these "likeability" tests. People don't need to be likeable to do a good job, and conversely people can be likeable but have awful policies. Likeability tests is how we destroyed people like Hillary Clinton.

Likeability matters a lot more at the local level, though. Municipal politics are much closer to the impacted humans, which means it matters more whether an elected official and his team can productively interact with commissions, or with constituent groups.

I am a member of a constituent group and Jawando has been great. Friedson just mansplains and Glass seems angry and mean.

They are all terrible. Jawando will just be more of the same as Elrich - just totally fiscally irresponsible and lots of terrible choices. But at least he has put out a budget proposal, awful as it may be. Glass and Friedson haven't really shared what they would do if it were up to them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Jawando’s base is a bit broader than Elrich’s base. Sure, Jawando’s colleagues don’t seem to care for him. But a lot of people don’t care for Jawando’s colleagues, so the more the other council members complain about Jawando, the more some people will like him. This dynamic helped Elrich in his first run for executive.

It's not just Jawando's colleagues, though. In MoCo, a lot of folks are involved in political life. Maybe something minor like a meet-and-greet or more time consuming like a volunteer council on pedestrian safety.

Every time one of those regular folks has to interact with Jawando (or his team), he loses a vote.

I'm always wary of these "likeability" tests. People don't need to be likeable to do a good job, and conversely people can be likeable but have awful policies. Likeability tests is how we destroyed people like Hillary Clinton.

Likeability matters a lot more at the local level, though. Municipal politics are much closer to the impacted humans, which means it matters more whether an elected official and his team can productively interact with commissions, or with constituent groups.

I am a member of a constituent group and Jawando has been great. Friedson just mansplains and Glass seems angry and mean.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Jawando’s base is a bit broader than Elrich’s base. Sure, Jawando’s colleagues don’t seem to care for him. But a lot of people don’t care for Jawando’s colleagues, so the more the other council members complain about Jawando, the more some people will like him. This dynamic helped Elrich in his first run for executive.

It's not just Jawando's colleagues, though. In MoCo, a lot of folks are involved in political life. Maybe something minor like a meet-and-greet or more time consuming like a volunteer council on pedestrian safety.

Every time one of those regular folks has to interact with Jawando (or his team), he loses a vote.

I'm always wary of these "likeability" tests. People don't need to be likeable to do a good job, and conversely people can be likeable but have awful policies. Likeability tests is how we destroyed people like Hillary Clinton.

Likeability matters a lot more at the local level, though. Municipal politics are much closer to the impacted humans, which means it matters more whether an elected official and his team can productively interact with commissions, or with constituent groups.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My vote will be based on who is least likely to favor the widespread elimination of SFH zoning, and so I'm voting for Jawando.

Same.

Really? I thought Jawando was also pro more multi family housing?
I’m still upset with Jawando for pushing for the removal of SROs from schools—I think that was him, right?

Honestly it’s hard to really see much daylight between the candidates — none of them seem particularly great.

I think Jawando has been best about opposing widespread elimination of SFH zoning:

https://montgomeryperspective.com/2025/01/07/jawando-calls-for-pause-on-attainable-housing/

He's also destroyed our schools while his go to private (or at least some go to private)

"Will Jawando’s four children have attended Montgomery County public schools. One now attends a private school."

https://bethesdamagazine.com/2026/03/30/county-executive-candidates-wheaton-collective-forum/

In the past they all attended privates, maybe since he had more kids he couldn't keep up the cost. He openly bragged about it on his social media. Why don't they all go to public?

Jawando himself is the product of private school, so he may see a family legacy there.

But I do notice (and think voters notice) that Jawando is only "good" on issues when he has skin in the game. When he didn't own a home, he was in favor of denser zoning. Once he bought a home, he became more of a NIMBY. When his kids were in private schools, he stripped SROs out of schools but he's mellowed on that issue now that some of his kids are back in public.

I think voters see through that, and it bothers them that his politics all seem self-interested.

That’s one of at to look at how his positions have evolved. Another way is that he actually listens to people. Of all the council members, I’ve found him most receptive to hearing out opposing views. On zoning, I suspect that he does still support denser zoning near metro. The Friedson zoning bill was nothing like that. It is a sprawly mess. On SROs, he participated in designing the CEO program and he still supports it as far as I know. If you’ve seen something different please post a link.

I would much rather have someone who listens and evolves their policies to meet the moment better. The other two candidates are ideologues.

Who was Jawando listening to when he pushed for SROs out of schools? Parents wanted them. Kids wanted them. School administration uniformly wanted them.

So...where was the listening when he make schools less safe for our children?

Everybody was wanting to have PG County was doing it right so they created a program just like PG County. It’s literally the SRO program with a few tweaks.

I feel like most of you have no idea what the SRO or the CSO program do or how they’re different, and more important how 99.9% of it is exactly the same.

This isn't true. There is a best practice model called the triad where officers function as mentor, teacher, and law enforcement. The mentorship piece, which provides and opportunity to do relationship building, is absent in the Montgomery County model and it is the evidence-based piece that helps reduce violence. The current county model forces police heavily into a reactive law enforcement role where they are mostly just responding when a student has done something wrong. That reinforces negative perceptions of law enforcement and does nothing to increase safety.

PG County officers are in schools allowing plenty of non enforcement interactions with students.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jawando. Glass and Friedson are competing for the same voters.

Sadly, this will be the outcome. Same as when Elrich won in the primary by about 100 votes. The reasonable voters' votes were spread across 2-3 candidates, so Elrich just courted one or two smaller groups (unions, socialists) and sealed the win.

This is why we need open primaries. We'd then end up with one fringe D and one normal D on the general election ballot, so the normal D might win.

25% of registered voters in MoCo do not have a party affiliation, so they get little say in the primaries (only BOE)

100% correct, but the Democrats will never allow it. They run this county and the entire state of Maryland like the mob. They want absolutely certainty that they can green light anything they want, whenever they want, without so much as a whisper of a debate or accountability. This coming from the party that claims that it wants to defend democracy. How many tons of irony is that?

I switched my registration a few years ago after being an independent for my entire life just so I could vote in the primary. It didn't matter. The screaming Abbie Hoffman replicants still won. I switched back to non affiliated and am currently reconsidering about where I will spend the rest of my days as MoCo and MD continue to regress under negligent governorship.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My vote will be based on who is least likely to favor the widespread elimination of SFH zoning, and so I'm voting for Jawando.

Same.

Really? I thought Jawando was also pro more multi family housing?
I’m still upset with Jawando for pushing for the removal of SROs from schools—I think that was him, right?

Honestly it’s hard to really see much daylight between the candidates — none of them seem particularly great.

I think Jawando has been best about opposing widespread elimination of SFH zoning:

https://montgomeryperspective.com/2025/01/07/jawando-calls-for-pause-on-attainable-housing/

He's also destroyed our schools while his go to private (or at least some go to private)

"Will Jawando’s four children have attended Montgomery County public schools. One now attends a private school."

https://bethesdamagazine.com/2026/03/30/county-executive-candidates-wheaton-collective-forum/

In the past they all attended privates, maybe since he had more kids he couldn't keep up the cost. He openly bragged about it on his social media. Why don't they all go to public?

Jawando himself is the product of private school, so he may see a family legacy there.

But I do notice (and think voters notice) that Jawando is only "good" on issues when he has skin in the game. When he didn't own a home, he was in favor of denser zoning. Once he bought a home, he became more of a NIMBY. When his kids were in private schools, he stripped SROs out of schools but he's mellowed on that issue now that some of his kids are back in public.

I think voters see through that, and it bothers them that his politics all seem self-interested.

That’s one of at to look at how his positions have evolved. Another way is that he actually listens to people. Of all the council members, I’ve found him most receptive to hearing out opposing views. On zoning, I suspect that he does still support denser zoning near metro. The Friedson zoning bill was nothing like that. It is a sprawly mess. On SROs, he participated in designing the CEO program and he still supports it as far as I know. If you’ve seen something different please post a link.

I would much rather have someone who listens and evolves their policies to meet the moment better. The other two candidates are ideologues.

Who was Jawando listening to when he pushed for SROs out of schools? Parents wanted them. Kids wanted them. School administration uniformly wanted them.

So...where was the listening when he make schools less safe for our children?

Everybody was wanting to have PG County was doing it right so they created a program just like PG County. It’s literally the SRO program with a few tweaks.

I feel like most of you have no idea what the SRO or the CSO program do or how they’re different, and more important how 99.9% of it is exactly the same.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who would be the absolute worst for Montgomery County?

Because that’s who I’d like to vote for.

What?

I live here. I hate this place. The people around me have voted for the people who’ve made this county the mess it is. I owe it to them to punish them by voting for the absolute worst, most unqualified candidates that I can. I will support anyone who promises to raise taxes, especially property taxes.

We aready pay plenty in property taxes.

Whatever you’re paying, it’s not enough. And I’ll vote for anyone who will insist your taxes should be much, much higher. Because you’ve earned it by electing people like this. And I want to make sure you get what you deserve.