Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean who wouldn’t want more of this.

If you think Nadeau’s approach on crime has worked, George is your candidate.

https://www.popville.com/2020/05/shots-fired-near-petworth-metro-around-1115am/

This happened in Ward 4. Nadeau had nothing to do with it. Blame Brandon Todd and ask if we want more of his approach.

Yeah, I read that Popville post and the comments are filled with the same Todd supporters who chime in with anti-George comments on every Popville post about Ward 4 crime. But Todd is the current council member, so why would incidents inWard 4 reflect poorly on George?

Spurred on and abetted by the click-whoring dope who runs that site, the Popville comments section is filled with racist cretins who recently moved here from places like Omaha and Hartford and and are shocked that DC isn't exactly the same whitebread place. Not sure it should be used to illustrate anything.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean who wouldn’t want more of this.

If you think Nadeau’s approach on crime has worked, George is your candidate.

https://www.popville.com/2020/05/shots-fired-near-petworth-metro-around-1115am/

This happened in Ward 4. Nadeau had nothing to do with it. Blame Brandon Todd and ask if we want more of his approach.

Yeah, I read that Popville post and the comments are filled with the same Todd supporters who chime in with anti-George comments on every Popville post about Ward 4 crime. But Todd is the current council member, so why would incidents inWard 4 reflect poorly on George?

Fine, is this 6:30 pm shooting more to your liking?

Also, council members have an impact on city wide policies, not just their wards.

https://www.popville.com/2020/05/double-shooting-in-columbia-heights-just-before-7pm-monday/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve met them both. Todd strikes me as slimey and agree that I would not want to vote for Bowsers sidekick, especially after the past few months.

Janeese is earnest, but her extreme position on crime is dangerous and ignorant.

This is how I feel. I really don't like George's position on crime but I do like her endorsement by Racine.

I loathe Todd, though. He and his supporters brag about his constituent services but I found them extremely lacking. The one time I reached out I had a conversation with a staffer (Carnes) who said he'd look into my issue and call me back with a solution. He never did; after a week I called him back and left a message. Left 6 more unreturned messages. Then to put a cherry on top, Todd knocks on my door asking for my vote and when I tell him I had a bad experience with his office his response was "no you didn't, constituent services is my strength!" (I am absolutely not making this up, that's a quote.)

So I think I'll vote George and hope for the best, because she has the best chance of unseating him. Although if my mailbox is to be believed Todd has infinity dollars to spend on outreach so it might be tough.

Todd constituent here. We had a very similar experience. We asked him for help with something. He said he would help us, and then we would hear nothing. We would ask again, and he would say our request fell through the cracks or that the staffer responsible for our issue was sick, and that he would get on it. But then he never would. We would ask again and again and again. And there was always some excuse about how he meant to help us, but something came up but that he was on it and then...nothing.

I honestly find it very strange that any constituent of Todd's would vote for him. Literally anyone else would be an improvement.

+1

Todd is literally the worst representative I've ever had at any level of government. Seriously, it cannot possibly get any worse.

If he loses, it will get worse.

Trust me, as someone who has lived in Nadeau's ward for the entirety of her tenure: it can get worse.

I used to live in Ward 1 when Jim Graham was the CM. Nadeau is an improvement. Do you think paid family leave is a bad idea?

I think the massive spike in crime is a bad idea. But I guess paid family leave will solve that problem?

Well, parents being better able to take care of their newborns is pretty important. Part of the bigger picture, but yes, important.

Name one concrete thing she's done to address the rising crime in her ward.

You'd need to first understand that policing isn't the only avenue to address crime. Try reading up on the impact of lead in water on crime. Now expand that thought to everything else that impacts kids growing up (and adults). So, you probably don't care about work she's done on housing stability. Or oversight of Special Police Officers. I'm guessing you don't care about harassment of poor people of color. That's not the crime you're worried about. Other people get there connection, but not you. Not until you open your ears more.

Is there any point where you think, notwithstanding hardships growing up, someone has to take personal responsibility for committing violent crimes. Put another way, is there any point where you believe someone presents enough of a danger to the rest of society that he should be locked up, even if he had considerable hardships growing up.

Alternatively, we could extend the “Youth” Act to 40, expand the type of crimes that can be eligible, and expand the number of crimes that can be functionally washed away. That’s definitely one way to a more “just” society.

Why not address both a person's personal responsibility AND the structural issues that drive crime? And let's focus our $$ where it's most effective and drives equity/justice.

It costs us a lot less to help a person get on the right track than to jail them. And it's the right thing to do because they're our fellow people.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/residents-in-northeast-washington-community-feel-trapped-by-gunfire/2020/05/22/1a3d9490-9917-11ea-89fd-28fb313d1886_story.html

FitzGerald, the police commander, said he has poured every resource he has into Carver-Langston, and more will be added with the summer crime initiative. He said he needs more help from the judiciary system to target repeat gun offenders, adding, “The police can always do better, but I don’t see much help coming from other parts of the system.”

He told residents in an email, and repeated in an interview, that he was “unaware of any positive effects by violence interrupters.”

On Tuesday, Mayor Muriel E. Bowser (D) proposed cuts to the violence interrupter initiative, saying other programs seemed to do better.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean who wouldn’t want more of this.

If you think Nadeau’s approach on crime has worked, George is your candidate.

https://www.popville.com/2020/05/shots-fired-near-petworth-metro-around-1115am/

This happened in Ward 4. Nadeau had nothing to do with it. Blame Brandon Todd and ask if we want more of his approach.

Yeah, I read that Popville post and the comments are filled with the same Todd supporters who chime in with anti-George comments on every Popville post about Ward 4 crime. But Todd is the current council member, so why would incidents inWard 4 reflect poorly on George?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean who wouldn’t want more of this.

If you think Nadeau’s approach on crime has worked, George is your candidate.

https://www.popville.com/2020/05/shots-fired-near-petworth-metro-around-1115am/

This happened in Ward 4. Nadeau had nothing to do with it. Blame Brandon Todd and ask if we want more of his approach.

Yeah, I read that Popville post and the comments are filled with the same Todd supporters who chime in with anti-George comments on every Popville post about Ward 4 crime. But Todd is the current council member, so why would incidents inWard 4 reflect poorly on George?

Fine, is this 6:30 pm shooting more to your liking?

Also, council members have an impact on city wide policies, not just their wards.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean who wouldn’t want more of this.

If you think Nadeau’s approach on crime has worked, George is your candidate.

https://www.popville.com/2020/05/shots-fired-near-petworth-metro-around-1115am/

This happened in Ward 4. Nadeau had nothing to do with it. Blame Brandon Todd and ask if we want more of his approach.

Yeah, I read that Popville post and the comments are filled with the same Todd supporters who chime in with anti-George comments on every Popville post about Ward 4 crime. But Todd is the current council member, so why would incidents inWard 4 reflect poorly on George?

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean who wouldn’t want more of this.

If you think Nadeau’s approach on crime has worked, George is your candidate.

https://www.popville.com/2020/05/shots-fired-near-petworth-metro-around-1115am/

This happened in Ward 4. Nadeau had nothing to do with it. Blame Brandon Todd and ask if we want more of his approach.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve met them both. Todd strikes me as slimey and agree that I would not want to vote for Bowsers sidekick, especially after the past few months.

Janeese is earnest, but her extreme position on crime is dangerous and ignorant.

This is how I feel. I really don't like George's position on crime but I do like her endorsement by Racine.

I loathe Todd, though. He and his supporters brag about his constituent services but I found them extremely lacking. The one time I reached out I had a conversation with a staffer (Carnes) who said he'd look into my issue and call me back with a solution. He never did; after a week I called him back and left a message. Left 6 more unreturned messages. Then to put a cherry on top, Todd knocks on my door asking for my vote and when I tell him I had a bad experience with his office his response was "no you didn't, constituent services is my strength!" (I am absolutely not making this up, that's a quote.)

So I think I'll vote George and hope for the best, because she has the best chance of unseating him. Although if my mailbox is to be believed Todd has infinity dollars to spend on outreach so it might be tough.

Todd constituent here. We had a very similar experience. We asked him for help with something. He said he would help us, and then we would hear nothing. We would ask again, and he would say our request fell through the cracks or that the staffer responsible for our issue was sick, and that he would get on it. But then he never would. We would ask again and again and again. And there was always some excuse about how he meant to help us, but something came up but that he was on it and then...nothing.

I honestly find it very strange that any constituent of Todd's would vote for him. Literally anyone else would be an improvement.

+1

Todd is literally the worst representative I've ever had at any level of government. Seriously, it cannot possibly get any worse.

If he loses, it will get worse.

Trust me, as someone who has lived in Nadeau's ward for the entirety of her tenure: it can get worse.

I used to live in Ward 1 when Jim Graham was the CM. Nadeau is an improvement. Do you think paid family leave is a bad idea?

I think the massive spike in crime is a bad idea. But I guess paid family leave will solve that problem?

Well, parents being better able to take care of their newborns is pretty important. Part of the bigger picture, but yes, important.

Name one concrete thing she's done to address the rising crime in her ward.

You'd need to first understand that policing isn't the only avenue to address crime. Try reading up on the impact of lead in water on crime. Now expand that thought to everything else that impacts kids growing up (and adults). So, you probably don't care about work she's done on housing stability. Or oversight of Special Police Officers. I'm guessing you don't care about harassment of poor people of color. That's not the crime you're worried about. Other people get there connection, but not you. Not until you open your ears more.

Is there any point where you think, notwithstanding hardships growing up, someone has to take personal responsibility for committing violent crimes. Put another way, is there any point where you believe someone presents enough of a danger to the rest of society that he should be locked up, even if he had considerable hardships growing up.

Alternatively, we could extend the “Youth” Act to 40, expand the type of crimes that can be eligible, and expand the number of crimes that can be functionally washed away. That’s definitely one way to a more “just” society.

Why not address both a person's personal responsibility AND the structural issues that drive crime? And let's focus our $$ where it's most effective and drives equity/justice.

It costs us a lot less to help a person get on the right track than to jail them. And it's the right thing to do because they're our fellow people.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve met them both. Todd strikes me as slimey and agree that I would not want to vote for Bowsers sidekick, especially after the past few months.

Janeese is earnest, but her extreme position on crime is dangerous and ignorant.

This is how I feel. I really don't like George's position on crime but I do like her endorsement by Racine.

I loathe Todd, though. He and his supporters brag about his constituent services but I found them extremely lacking. The one time I reached out I had a conversation with a staffer (Carnes) who said he'd look into my issue and call me back with a solution. He never did; after a week I called him back and left a message. Left 6 more unreturned messages. Then to put a cherry on top, Todd knocks on my door asking for my vote and when I tell him I had a bad experience with his office his response was "no you didn't, constituent services is my strength!" (I am absolutely not making this up, that's a quote.)

So I think I'll vote George and hope for the best, because she has the best chance of unseating him. Although if my mailbox is to be believed Todd has infinity dollars to spend on outreach so it might be tough.

Todd constituent here. We had a very similar experience. We asked him for help with something. He said he would help us, and then we would hear nothing. We would ask again, and he would say our request fell through the cracks or that the staffer responsible for our issue was sick, and that he would get on it. But then he never would. We would ask again and again and again. And there was always some excuse about how he meant to help us, but something came up but that he was on it and then...nothing.

I honestly find it very strange that any constituent of Todd's would vote for him. Literally anyone else would be an improvement.

+1

Todd is literally the worst representative I've ever had at any level of government. Seriously, it cannot possibly get any worse.

If he loses, it will get worse.

Trust me, as someone who has lived in Nadeau's ward for the entirety of her tenure: it can get worse.

I used to live in Ward 1 when Jim Graham was the CM. Nadeau is an improvement. Do you think paid family leave is a bad idea?

I think the massive spike in crime is a bad idea. But I guess paid family leave will solve that problem?

Well, parents being better able to take care of their newborns is pretty important. Part of the bigger picture, but yes, important.

Name one concrete thing she's done to address the rising crime in her ward.

You'd need to first understand that policing isn't the only avenue to address crime. Try reading up on the impact of lead in water on crime. Now expand that thought to everything else that impacts kids growing up (and adults). So, you probably don't care about work she's done on housing stability. Or oversight of Special Police Officers. I'm guessing you don't care about harassment of poor people of color. That's not the crime you're worried about. Other people get there connection, but not you. Not until you open your ears more.

Is there any point where you think, notwithstanding hardships growing up, someone has to take personal responsibility for committing violent crimes. Put another way, is there any point where you believe someone presents enough of a danger to the rest of society that he should be locked up, even if he had considerable hardships growing up.

Alternatively, we could extend the “Youth” Act to 40, expand the type of crimes that can be eligible, and expand the number of crimes that can be functionally washed away. That’s definitely one way to a more “just” society.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve met them both. Todd strikes me as slimey and agree that I would not want to vote for Bowsers sidekick, especially after the past few months.

Janeese is earnest, but her extreme position on crime is dangerous and ignorant.

This is how I feel. I really don't like George's position on crime but I do like her endorsement by Racine.

I loathe Todd, though. He and his supporters brag about his constituent services but I found them extremely lacking. The one time I reached out I had a conversation with a staffer (Carnes) who said he'd look into my issue and call me back with a solution. He never did; after a week I called him back and left a message. Left 6 more unreturned messages. Then to put a cherry on top, Todd knocks on my door asking for my vote and when I tell him I had a bad experience with his office his response was "no you didn't, constituent services is my strength!" (I am absolutely not making this up, that's a quote.)

So I think I'll vote George and hope for the best, because she has the best chance of unseating him. Although if my mailbox is to be believed Todd has infinity dollars to spend on outreach so it might be tough.

Todd constituent here. We had a very similar experience. We asked him for help with something. He said he would help us, and then we would hear nothing. We would ask again, and he would say our request fell through the cracks or that the staffer responsible for our issue was sick, and that he would get on it. But then he never would. We would ask again and again and again. And there was always some excuse about how he meant to help us, but something came up but that he was on it and then...nothing.

I honestly find it very strange that any constituent of Todd's would vote for him. Literally anyone else would be an improvement.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve met them both. Todd strikes me as slimey and agree that I would not want to vote for Bowsers sidekick, especially after the past few months.

Janeese is earnest, but her extreme position on crime is dangerous and ignorant.

This is how I feel. I really don't like George's position on crime but I do like her endorsement by Racine.

I loathe Todd, though. He and his supporters brag about his constituent services but I found them extremely lacking. The one time I reached out I had a conversation with a staffer (Carnes) who said he'd look into my issue and call me back with a solution. He never did; after a week I called him back and left a message. Left 6 more unreturned messages. Then to put a cherry on top, Todd knocks on my door asking for my vote and when I tell him I had a bad experience with his office his response was "no you didn't, constituent services is my strength!" (I am absolutely not making this up, that's a quote.)

So I think I'll vote George and hope for the best, because she has the best chance of unseating him. Although if my mailbox is to be believed Todd has infinity dollars to spend on outreach so it might be tough.

Todd constituent here. We had a very similar experience. We asked him for help with something. He said he would help us, and then we would hear nothing. We would ask again, and he would say our request fell through the cracks or that the staffer responsible for our issue was sick, and that he would get on it. But then he never would. We would ask again and again and again. And there was always some excuse about how he meant to help us, but something came up but that he was on it and then...nothing.

I honestly find it very strange that any constituent of Todd's would vote for him. Literally anyone else would be an improvement.

+1

Todd is literally the worst representative I've ever had at any level of government. Seriously, it cannot possibly get any worse.

If he loses, it will get worse.

Trust me, as someone who has lived in Nadeau's ward for the entirety of her tenure: it can get worse.

I used to live in Ward 1 when Jim Graham was the CM. Nadeau is an improvement. Do you think paid family leave is a bad idea?

I think the massive spike in crime is a bad idea. But I guess paid family leave will solve that problem?

Well, parents being better able to take care of their newborns is pretty important. Part of the bigger picture, but yes, important.

Name one concrete thing she's done to address the rising crime in her ward.

You'd need to first understand that policing isn't the only avenue to address crime. Try reading up on the impact of lead in water on crime. Now expand that thought to everything else that impacts kids growing up (and adults). So, you probably don't care about work she's done on housing stability. Or oversight of Special Police Officers. I'm guessing you don't care about harassment of poor people of color. That's not the crime you're worried about. Other people get there connection, but not you. Not until you open your ears more.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve met them both. Todd strikes me as slimey and agree that I would not want to vote for Bowsers sidekick, especially after the past few months.

Janeese is earnest, but her extreme position on crime is dangerous and ignorant.

This is how I feel. I really don't like George's position on crime but I do like her endorsement by Racine.

I loathe Todd, though. He and his supporters brag about his constituent services but I found them extremely lacking. The one time I reached out I had a conversation with a staffer (Carnes) who said he'd look into my issue and call me back with a solution. He never did; after a week I called him back and left a message. Left 6 more unreturned messages. Then to put a cherry on top, Todd knocks on my door asking for my vote and when I tell him I had a bad experience with his office his response was "no you didn't, constituent services is my strength!" (I am absolutely not making this up, that's a quote.)

So I think I'll vote George and hope for the best, because she has the best chance of unseating him. Although if my mailbox is to be believed Todd has infinity dollars to spend on outreach so it might be tough.

Todd constituent here. We had a very similar experience. We asked him for help with something. He said he would help us, and then we would hear nothing. We would ask again, and he would say our request fell through the cracks or that the staffer responsible for our issue was sick, and that he would get on it. But then he never would. We would ask again and again and again. And there was always some excuse about how he meant to help us, but something came up but that he was on it and then...nothing.

I honestly find it very strange that any constituent of Todd's would vote for him. Literally anyone else would be an improvement.

+1

Todd is literally the worst representative I've ever had at any level of government. Seriously, it cannot possibly get any worse.

If he loses, it will get worse.

Trust me, as someone who has lived in Nadeau's ward for the entirety of her tenure: it can get worse.

I used to live in Ward 1 when Jim Graham was the CM. Nadeau is an improvement. Do you think paid family leave is a bad idea?

I think the massive spike in crime is a bad idea. But I guess paid family leave will solve that problem?

Well, parents being better able to take care of their newborns is pretty important. Part of the bigger picture, but yes, important.

Name one concrete thing she's done to address the rising crime in her ward.

You'd need to first understand that policing isn't the only avenue to address crime. Try reading up on the impact of lead in water on crime. Now expand that thought to everything else that impacts kids growing up (and adults). So, you probably don't care about work she's done on housing stability. Or oversight of Special Police Officers. I'm guessing you don't care about harassment of poor people of color. That's not the crime you're worried about. Other people get there connection, but not you. Not until you open your ears more.

DP. What a bunch of sanctimonious BS. Most of the long time African American residents of the community- the people who are most often victims of crime - are against efforts to block effective policing. It is mostly white newcomers, who are less likely to be victimized, who advocate for these “reforms.”

Policing certainly isn’t the only part of the solution to crime, but it is a part of it. That’s something Nadeau doesn’t seem to recognize and we don’t need more of that.

Yeah, a bunch of white newcomers like Black Lives Matter DC. Do you know how dumb you sound?

Anonymous wrote:I mean who wouldn’t want more of this.

If you think Nadeau’s approach on crime has worked, George is your candidate.

https://www.popville.com/2020/05/shots-fired-near-petworth-metro-around-1115am/

Anonymous wrote:Todd is everything wrong with DC politics.

Nobody knows what he's accomplished or what he stands for. His constituents hate him. The only way he stays in office is by using all the money real estate developers give him to trash anyone who runs against him.