Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Gaskins v Jackson race is interesting in how much it parallels the two Wilson v Silberberg matchups.

I do wonder if the CLA/BIBA crowd will back Jackson (even though she voted for the ZFH package) or put up an alternative candidate. I have to imagine that candidate would only split the conservative-leaning vote basically handing the election to Gaskins.

More likely they will support a few right wing anti-development candidates in the Council election.

This entire post is what is wrong with Alexandria. Amy is very liberal and not at all like Silberberg. Simply because she isn’t lock step with Wilson does not not negate her liberal views.

Too many Wilson die hard supporters cannot understand that many, many liberals do not have the same views on local issues. I was personally not in favor of the zoning amendments as drafted but I am much more liberal on national issues than some who support ZFH. Most of my friends are the same way and none of us are part of the CLA/BIBA groups.

Honestly it’s just lazy and divisive the way Wilson’s group lobs insults at those who are not in lock step with them. But I am also the person who is sick of the Dem machine selecting candidates for us. Didn’t think learn their lesson with McAuliffe?

What was the insult here - calling Jackson more conservative than Gaskins? I don't think that's a very controversial position, let alone insulting.

Jackson’s policy views are very divergent from Silberberg’s. So what exactly is the basis for comparison?

In terms of local issues that are the purview of the city council, I'd put Jackson to the left of Silberberg and to the right of Gaskins. I don't mean that as an insult, just my observation on their votes, comments, and inclinations to change.

I don’t know if it is accurate to describe positions on Alexandria issues as left or right.

I think Jackson has shown more inclination to oppose at times urban vision of Alexandria represented by Wilson and more willingness to be swayed by loud groups like BIBA. This is why Jackson is compared with Silberberg. As many pointed out, her voting record in the end hasn’t been that different from Gaskins.

Gaskins, to me, is consistent with Wilson, et al.’s policy positions. She seems like she has a good temperament and not to be disdainful of opposing views like Wilson. I would like to learn more about her.

I agree with the comments on John Chapman above - I may not always agree with him but he seems like he is clear with his views but engages meaningfully with those with differing views.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's true that Jackson ultimately voted for ZFH in full after trying to pull out the SFH rezoining, primarly with the argument that a mailer didn't go out. Shades of Silberberg in the process argument for delay and discomfort with anything other than full consensus.

In terms of the Mayor position, to the extent it's not just another Council vote, you chair the council and can somewhat shape the direction of the debate. It's not as big a deal some might think given the title. But in attitude, especially on zoning/development but on policy in general, Gaskins and Jackson have different temperaments and inclinations to action, and that's where the difference lies.

This is a solid comparison. Out of curiosity, if you had to name the candidate most likely to consider local needs and constituent feedback when voting, which candidate would you choose?

John Chapman. You may not agree with him but he is super honest about his thought process and cares deeply about constituent feedback.

He is good about that. Do you know if he’s also considering joining the mayoral race?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Gaskins v Jackson race is interesting in how much it parallels the two Wilson v Silberberg matchups.

I do wonder if the CLA/BIBA crowd will back Jackson (even though she voted for the ZFH package) or put up an alternative candidate. I have to imagine that candidate would only split the conservative-leaning vote basically handing the election to Gaskins.

More likely they will support a few right wing anti-development candidates in the Council election.

This entire post is what is wrong with Alexandria. Amy is very liberal and not at all like Silberberg. Simply because she isn’t lock step with Wilson does not not negate her liberal views.

Too many Wilson die hard supporters cannot understand that many, many liberals do not have the same views on local issues. I was personally not in favor of the zoning amendments as drafted but I am much more liberal on national issues than some who support ZFH. Most of my friends are the same way and none of us are part of the CLA/BIBA groups.

Honestly it’s just lazy and divisive the way Wilson’s group lobs insults at those who are not in lock step with them. But I am also the person who is sick of the Dem machine selecting candidates for us. Didn’t think learn their lesson with McAuliffe?

What was the insult here - calling Jackson more conservative than Gaskins? I don't think that's a very controversial position, let alone insulting.

Jackson’s policy views are very divergent from Silberberg’s. So what exactly is the basis for comparison?

In terms of local issues that are the purview of the city council, I'd put Jackson to the left of Silberberg and to the right of Gaskins. I don't mean that as an insult, just my observation on their votes, comments, and inclinations to change.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids aren’t props. It’s strange that Gaskins would choose to dedicate herself to a relatively unfamiliar city over her two small children.
As a voter, I suspect we’ll receive similar treatment when she’s done adding another line item on her resume and moves on the next thing. The transparency of it all is embarrassing.

Speaking of embarrassing, this post is very much so

It’s the “I just met you, but I’m in love,” ruse. Normally between a rich widow and a handsome charlatan, Gaskins uses the same ploy with Alexandria.

Go to her campaign website and look at all of the organizations she’s supposedly involved with.

The details tell the story. Moves to the city, rushes to sign up for as much as she can to *sound* involved, and runs for council. How long did she live here when she ran?

She’s not the first to pursue this cheap political climbing tactic.

Alexandria is being used as a stepping stone in her political career, and I have no interest in being used.

I’d hope next person in the role plans to stick around long enough to endure the policies they work to put in place. Highly doubtful that describes this candidate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids aren’t props. It’s strange that Gaskins would choose to dedicate herself to a relatively unfamiliar city over her two small children.
As a voter, I suspect we’ll receive similar treatment when she’s done adding another line item on her resume and moves on the next thing. The transparency of it all is embarrassing.

Speaking of embarrassing, this post is very much so

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Gaskins v Jackson race is interesting in how much it parallels the two Wilson v Silberberg matchups.

I do wonder if the CLA/BIBA crowd will back Jackson (even though she voted for the ZFH package) or put up an alternative candidate. I have to imagine that candidate would only split the conservative-leaning vote basically handing the election to Gaskins.

More likely they will support a few right wing anti-development candidates in the Council election.

This entire post is what is wrong with Alexandria. Amy is very liberal and not at all like Silberberg. Simply because she isn’t lock step with Wilson does not not negate her liberal views.

Too many Wilson die hard supporters cannot understand that many, many liberals do not have the same views on local issues. I was personally not in favor of the zoning amendments as drafted but I am much more liberal on national issues than some who support ZFH. Most of my friends are the same way and none of us are part of the CLA/BIBA groups.

Honestly it’s just lazy and divisive the way Wilson’s group lobs insults at those who are not in lock step with them. But I am also the person who is sick of the Dem machine selecting candidates for us. Didn’t think learn their lesson with McAuliffe?

I'm not sure how much national issues are relevant to Alexandria city politics. Development and zoning are one of the biggest issues that the Mayor and council have a significant impact on. If there's an argument that Jackson is more progressive than Gaskins on these issues, I think that would be an interesting debate.

Ok, but no reason to call fellow Dems racist and MAGA because they do not agree with you on issues surrounding development.

Also given the support from right wing orgs and developers, I am not sure everyone agrees that supporting these proposals make you more progressive. I know supporters like to paint it that way, but not everyone liberal shares those views.

PP here, I didn't call anyone racist or MAGA, but I found ZFH/ZFA support to be a progressive agenda (which both Gaskins and Jackson supported! But I believe Gaskins supported it more zealously and would be more likely to lean in on further reforms going forward). It's OK to disagree and make arguments to the contrary. No offense intended.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Gaskins v Jackson race is interesting in how much it parallels the two Wilson v Silberberg matchups.

I do wonder if the CLA/BIBA crowd will back Jackson (even though she voted for the ZFH package) or put up an alternative candidate. I have to imagine that candidate would only split the conservative-leaning vote basically handing the election to Gaskins.

More likely they will support a few right wing anti-development candidates in the Council election.

This entire post is what is wrong with Alexandria. Amy is very liberal and not at all like Silberberg. Simply because she isn’t lock step with Wilson does not not negate her liberal views.

Too many Wilson die hard supporters cannot understand that many, many liberals do not have the same views on local issues. I was personally not in favor of the zoning amendments as drafted but I am much more liberal on national issues than some who support ZFH. Most of my friends are the same way and none of us are part of the CLA/BIBA groups.

Honestly it’s just lazy and divisive the way Wilson’s group lobs insults at those who are not in lock step with them. But I am also the person who is sick of the Dem machine selecting candidates for us. Didn’t think learn their lesson with McAuliffe?

I'm not sure how much national issues are relevant to Alexandria city politics. Development and zoning are one of the biggest issues that the Mayor and council have a significant impact on. If there's an argument that Jackson is more progressive than Gaskins on these issues, I think that would be an interesting debate.

Ok, but no reason to call fellow Dems racist and MAGA because they do not agree with you on issues surrounding development.

Also given the support from right wing orgs and developers, I am not sure everyone agrees that supporting these proposals make you more progressive. I know supporters like to paint it that way, but not everyone liberal shares those views.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Gaskins v Jackson race is interesting in how much it parallels the two Wilson v Silberberg matchups.

I do wonder if the CLA/BIBA crowd will back Jackson (even though she voted for the ZFH package) or put up an alternative candidate. I have to imagine that candidate would only split the conservative-leaning vote basically handing the election to Gaskins.

More likely they will support a few right wing anti-development candidates in the Council election.

This entire post is what is wrong with Alexandria. Amy is very liberal and not at all like Silberberg. Simply because she isn’t lock step with Wilson does not not negate her liberal views.

Too many Wilson die hard supporters cannot understand that many, many liberals do not have the same views on local issues. I was personally not in favor of the zoning amendments as drafted but I am much more liberal on national issues than some who support ZFH. Most of my friends are the same way and none of us are part of the CLA/BIBA groups.

Honestly it’s just lazy and divisive the way Wilson’s group lobs insults at those who are not in lock step with them. But I am also the person who is sick of the Dem machine selecting candidates for us. Didn’t think learn their lesson with McAuliffe?

What was the insult here - calling Jackson more conservative than Gaskins? I don't think that's a very controversial position, let alone insulting.

Jackson’s policy views are very divergent from Silberberg’s. So what exactly is the basis for comparison?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's true that Jackson ultimately voted for ZFH in full after trying to pull out the SFH rezoining, primarly with the argument that a mailer didn't go out. Shades of Silberberg in the process argument for delay and discomfort with anything other than full consensus.

In terms of the Mayor position, to the extent it's not just another Council vote, you chair the council and can somewhat shape the direction of the debate. It's not as big a deal some might think given the title. But in attitude, especially on zoning/development but on policy in general, Gaskins and Jackson have different temperaments and inclinations to action, and that's where the difference lies.

This is a solid comparison. Out of curiosity, if you had to name the candidate most likely to consider local needs and constituent feedback when voting, which candidate would you choose?

John Chapman. You may not agree with him but he is super honest about his thought process and cares deeply about constituent feedback.

He is good about that. Do you know if he’s also considering joining the mayoral race?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's true that Jackson ultimately voted for ZFH in full after trying to pull out the SFH rezoining, primarly with the argument that a mailer didn't go out. Shades of Silberberg in the process argument for delay and discomfort with anything other than full consensus.

In terms of the Mayor position, to the extent it's not just another Council vote, you chair the council and can somewhat shape the direction of the debate. It's not as big a deal some might think given the title. But in attitude, especially on zoning/development but on policy in general, Gaskins and Jackson have different temperaments and inclinations to action, and that's where the difference lies.

This is a solid comparison. Out of curiosity, if you had to name the candidate most likely to consider local needs and constituent feedback when voting, which candidate would you choose?

John Chapman. You may not agree with him but he is super honest about his thought process and cares deeply about constituent feedback.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Gaskins v Jackson race is interesting in how much it parallels the two Wilson v Silberberg matchups.

I do wonder if the CLA/BIBA crowd will back Jackson (even though she voted for the ZFH package) or put up an alternative candidate. I have to imagine that candidate would only split the conservative-leaning vote basically handing the election to Gaskins.

More likely they will support a few right wing anti-development candidates in the Council election.

This entire post is what is wrong with Alexandria. Amy is very liberal and not at all like Silberberg. Simply because she isn’t lock step with Wilson does not not negate her liberal views.

Too many Wilson die hard supporters cannot understand that many, many liberals do not have the same views on local issues. I was personally not in favor of the zoning amendments as drafted but I am much more liberal on national issues than some who support ZFH. Most of my friends are the same way and none of us are part of the CLA/BIBA groups.

Honestly it’s just lazy and divisive the way Wilson’s group lobs insults at those who are not in lock step with them. But I am also the person who is sick of the Dem machine selecting candidates for us. Didn’t think learn their lesson with McAuliffe?

I'm not sure how much national issues are relevant to Alexandria city politics. Development and zoning are one of the biggest issues that the Mayor and council have a significant impact on. If there's an argument that Jackson is more progressive than Gaskins on these issues, I think that would be an interesting debate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's true that Jackson ultimately voted for ZFH in full after trying to pull out the SFH rezoining, primarly with the argument that a mailer didn't go out. Shades of Silberberg in the process argument for delay and discomfort with anything other than full consensus.

In terms of the Mayor position, to the extent it's not just another Council vote, you chair the council and can somewhat shape the direction of the debate. It's not as big a deal some might think given the title. But in attitude, especially on zoning/development but on policy in general, Gaskins and Jackson have different temperaments and inclinations to action, and that's where the difference lies.

This is a solid comparison. Out of curiosity, if you had to name the candidate most likely to consider local needs and constituent feedback when voting, which candidate would you choose?

If I was a local constituent who favored progress on the elements laid out in ZFH Phase 2 - just to take an example that will likely be a key decision point in the upcoming Council term - I'd say Gaskins. If on the other hand I favored not moving forward with those elements, I'd say Jackson.

Said more shortly, depends on the constituents and needs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Gaskins v Jackson race is interesting in how much it parallels the two Wilson v Silberberg matchups.

I do wonder if the CLA/BIBA crowd will back Jackson (even though she voted for the ZFH package) or put up an alternative candidate. I have to imagine that candidate would only split the conservative-leaning vote basically handing the election to Gaskins.

More likely they will support a few right wing anti-development candidates in the Council election.

This entire post is what is wrong with Alexandria. Amy is very liberal and not at all like Silberberg. Simply because she isn’t lock step with Wilson does not not negate her liberal views.

Too many Wilson die hard supporters cannot understand that many, many liberals do not have the same views on local issues. I was personally not in favor of the zoning amendments as drafted but I am much more liberal on national issues than some who support ZFH. Most of my friends are the same way and none of us are part of the CLA/BIBA groups.

Honestly it’s just lazy and divisive the way Wilson’s group lobs insults at those who are not in lock step with them. But I am also the person who is sick of the Dem machine selecting candidates for us. Didn’t think learn their lesson with McAuliffe?

What was the insult here - calling Jackson more conservative than Gaskins? I don't think that's a very controversial position, let alone insulting.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's true that Jackson ultimately voted for ZFH in full after trying to pull out the SFH rezoining, primarly with the argument that a mailer didn't go out. Shades of Silberberg in the process argument for delay and discomfort with anything other than full consensus.

In terms of the Mayor position, to the extent it's not just another Council vote, you chair the council and can somewhat shape the direction of the debate. It's not as big a deal some might think given the title. But in attitude, especially on zoning/development but on policy in general, Gaskins and Jackson have different temperaments and inclinations to action, and that's where the difference lies.

This is a solid comparison. Out of curiosity, if you had to name the candidate most likely to consider local needs and constituent feedback when voting, which candidate would you choose?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's true that Jackson ultimately voted for ZFH in full after trying to pull out the SFH rezoining, primarly with the argument that a mailer didn't go out. Shades of Silberberg in the process argument for delay and discomfort with anything other than full consensus.

In terms of the Mayor position, to the extent it's not just another Council vote, you chair the council and can somewhat shape the direction of the debate. It's not as big a deal some might think given the title. But in attitude, especially on zoning/development but on policy in general, Gaskins and Jackson have different temperaments and inclinations to action, and that's where the difference lies.

This is a solid comparison. Out of curiosity, if you had to name the candidate most likely to consider local needs and constituent feedback when voting, which candidate would you choose?