Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:McDuffie seems like the more sensible choice.
I disagree. He is insipid and lackluster. What platform is he even running on? Anti-Janeese platform? He seems to be all about pick me, I’m Bowser 2.0.
Janeese at least has some personality. I’m hopeful that if she wins, Mamdani, Bernie and AOC will help guide her until she finds her footing.
Anonymous wrote:McDuffie seems like the more sensible choice.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Lewis George said using curfews as a tool with young people is “dangerous,” pointing to the presence of federal troops and immigration agents in the city who she said are “not individuals who are trained in de-escalation,” and “are not accountable to to D.C. residents.”
Democrats going to Democrat. It's now "dangerous" to discipline the budding criminal.
https://wtop.com/dc/2026/05/dc-mayoral-candidates-offer-competing-visions-on-teen-curfews-housing-economy/
I was open to Janeese, have many friends who are publicly backing her, but everything she has said and done this week has made me really, really nervous.
She always sees crime from the point of view of the criminals, and never from the perspective of the victims of violent crime, and of law abiding people who want to feel safe. Maybe this is because of her experience as a prosecutor? But it's no good. Pouring money into rec centers and giving criminals jobs is fine. But a mayor needs to be very, very clear that people who commit violent crimes will be punished. I've never heard her talk about punishment.
+1 I don’t see why it has to be either or. Do the crime prevention programs but also punish crimes when they happen.
Wild, that's exactly what Janeese has said and done.
Wrong. She's voted against making strangulation a felony, she's voted against allowing landlords to evict adjudicated violent criminals, and her highest-paid campaign staffer is the co-chair of the Defund MPD Coalition and a police abolitionist.
Everything that she has done indicates that she will continue to coddle criminals, not punish them.
There you go cherry picking things out of context. You think we're too dumb to see political cheap shots? I stop caring about the rest of what you write. It reflects really poorly on McDuffie.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Lewis George said using curfews as a tool with young people is “dangerous,” pointing to the presence of federal troops and immigration agents in the city who she said are “not individuals who are trained in de-escalation,” and “are not accountable to to D.C. residents.”
Democrats going to Democrat. It's now "dangerous" to discipline the budding criminal.
https://wtop.com/dc/2026/05/dc-mayoral-candidates-offer-competing-visions-on-teen-curfews-housing-economy/
I was open to Janeese, have many friends who are publicly backing her, but everything she has said and done this week has made me really, really nervous.
She always sees crime from the point of view of the criminals, and never from the perspective of the victims of violent crime, and of law abiding people who want to feel safe. Maybe this is because of her experience as a prosecutor? But it's no good. Pouring money into rec centers and giving criminals jobs is fine. But a mayor needs to be very, very clear that people who commit violent crimes will be punished. I've never heard her talk about punishment.
+1 I don’t see why it has to be either or. Do the crime prevention programs but also punish crimes when they happen.
Wild, that's exactly what Janeese has said and done.
Wrong. She's voted against making strangulation a felony, she's voted against allowing landlords to evict adjudicated violent criminals, and her highest-paid campaign staffer is the co-chair of the Defund MPD Coalition and a police abolitionist.
Everything that she has done indicates that she will continue to coddle criminals, not punish them.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Lewis George said using curfews as a tool with young people is “dangerous,” pointing to the presence of federal troops and immigration agents in the city who she said are “not individuals who are trained in de-escalation,” and “are not accountable to to D.C. residents.”
Democrats going to Democrat. It's now "dangerous" to discipline the budding criminal.
https://wtop.com/dc/2026/05/dc-mayoral-candidates-offer-competing-visions-on-teen-curfews-housing-economy/
I was open to Janeese, have many friends who are publicly backing her, but everything she has said and done this week has made me really, really nervous.
She always sees crime from the point of view of the criminals, and never from the perspective of the victims of violent crime, and of law abiding people who want to feel safe. Maybe this is because of her experience as a prosecutor? But it's no good. Pouring money into rec centers and giving criminals jobs is fine. But a mayor needs to be very, very clear that people who commit violent crimes will be punished. I've never heard her talk about punishment.
+1 I don’t see why it has to be either or. Do the crime prevention programs but also punish crimes when they happen.
Wild, that's exactly what Janeese has said and done.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Lewis George said using curfews as a tool with young people is “dangerous,” pointing to the presence of federal troops and immigration agents in the city who she said are “not individuals who are trained in de-escalation,” and “are not accountable to to D.C. residents.”
Democrats going to Democrat. It's now "dangerous" to discipline the budding criminal.
https://wtop.com/dc/2026/05/dc-mayoral-candidates-offer-competing-visions-on-teen-curfews-housing-economy/
I was open to Janeese, have many friends who are publicly backing her, but everything she has said and done this week has made me really, really nervous.
She always sees crime from the point of view of the criminals, and never from the perspective of the victims of violent crime, and of law abiding people who want to feel safe. Maybe this is because of her experience as a prosecutor? But it's no good. Pouring money into rec centers and giving criminals jobs is fine. But a mayor needs to be very, very clear that people who commit violent crimes will be punished. I've never heard her talk about punishment.
+1 I don’t see why it has to be either or. Do the crime prevention programs but also punish crimes when they happen.
Anonymous wrote:I watched last night’s debate and I think Lewis George came across as the most impressive. I thought the question about how they would deal with the possibility of losing federal dollars for standing up to the federal government was tough and the moderators pushed them to give real answers. McDuffie and Goodweather both struggled repeatedly to answer it, but I thought Lewis George’s answer about using litigation and working with Congress was the most realistic and most thoughtful. Same with her identifying chronic absenteeism and middle schools as two of the biggest problems in education.
It seemed like McDuffie came with a list of jabs for Lewis George and it got tiresome about ten minutes in. I also think it’s true that he has done a 180 pivot on public safety…he authored and championed the NEAR Act which created the office that runs the violence interrupters program. You would think the police union would hate him for that, but most of their fury seems to directed at Lewis George. It’s the same for many posters on this thread; people seem to think he is much more law and order but nothing about his record supports that. Based on what he said and did on the Council versus what he’s been saying on the campaign trail, it’s hard to know what McDuffie actually believes on public safety or what his approach would be as mayor. I’m also the previous poster who finds his stance on reckless driving so bad I won’t rank him. Obviously I wasn’t swayed by the debate.
Goodweather was fine but he doesn’t have a shot. I was hoping they would have let Rini in the debate.
Anonymous wrote:
I was open to Janeese, have many friends who are publicly backing her, but everything she has said and done this week has made me really, really nervous.
She always sees crime from the point of view of the criminals, and never from the perspective of the victims of violent crime, and of law abiding people who want to feel safe. Maybe this is because of her experience as a prosecutor? But it's no good. Pouring money into rec centers and giving criminals jobs is fine. But a mayor needs to be very, very clear that people who commit violent crimes will be punished. I've never heard her talk about punishment.
This is exactly how I feel. Empathy is good. But empathy without accountability is just cheering for crime.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Lewis George said using curfews as a tool with young people is “dangerous,” pointing to the presence of federal troops and immigration agents in the city who she said are “not individuals who are trained in de-escalation,” and “are not accountable to to D.C. residents.”
Democrats going to Democrat. It's now "dangerous" to discipline the budding criminal.
https://wtop.com/dc/2026/05/dc-mayoral-candidates-offer-competing-visions-on-teen-curfews-housing-economy/
I was open to Janeese, have many friends who are publicly backing her, but everything she has said and done this week has made me really, really nervous.
She always sees crime from the point of view of the criminals, and never from the perspective of the victims of violent crime, and of law abiding people who want to feel safe. Maybe this is because of her experience as a prosecutor? But it's no good. Pouring money into rec centers and giving criminals jobs is fine. But a mayor needs to be very, very clear that people who commit violent crimes will be punished. I've never heard her talk about punishment.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Lewis George said using curfews as a tool with young people is “dangerous,” pointing to the presence of federal troops and immigration agents in the city who she said are “not individuals who are trained in de-escalation,” and “are not accountable to to D.C. residents.”
Democrats going to Democrat. It's now "dangerous" to discipline the budding criminal.
https://wtop.com/dc/2026/05/dc-mayoral-candidates-offer-competing-visions-on-teen-curfews-housing-economy/
I was open to Janeese, have many friends who are publicly backing her, but everything she has said and done this week has made me really, really nervous.
She always sees crime from the point of view of the criminals, and never from the perspective of the victims of violent crime, and of law abiding people who want to feel safe. Maybe this is because of her experience as a prosecutor? But it's no good. Pouring money into rec centers and giving criminals jobs is fine. But a mayor needs to be very, very clear that people who commit violent crimes will be punished. I've never heard her talk about punishment.