- 'An End to the Southern Strategy, But No Post-Racial America' says David Love
- "A Question of Place": An essay on the power of community
- Just Equally Speaking….
- Eagles owe Philadelphia the 8 million it needs to keep libraries open
- who would like to see Verizon offer cable TV in Phila?
- Council Committee Passed the Freeze
- Carol Campbell Passes Away
- My first trip to the public library
- Fight digital exclusion
- What if half of Philadelphia didn't have roads?
Math at Large
Submitted by Detorn on Sun, 05/13/2007 - 11:10am.
I’ve been holding off talking about candidates till now because I was being paid by a few of them and I thought it improper to advocate for a candidate while I was collecting money. Now, however, my contracts are up and I am a free of that concern so I wanted to weigh in on a race or two.
Most important is City Council at Large. We, as a community, finally have a candidate who is a real progressive and who is a real challenger for a spot on Council, and I am befuddled as to why we aren’t rallying the troops behind him. Marc Stier has been fighting for progressive, and simple everyday causes for years now. The Daily News commented that he is one of the outsiders with a real shot, and the Inquirer has endorsed him. So why is it as level headed people, who want to see change in the city, are we not throwing all of our support behind him? If we could run up the numbers for one of our people we could really have a shot at having someone on the inside.
I agree that we have put forth a lot of qualified candidates, who would make great council people, but look at the reality, there is actually a chance at getting this one in. We should all be advocating a bullet vote for Marc! We should not have endorsed any incumbents every vote you give to an incumbent makes it that much harder to get one of our people in. They all have a base, and you will be adding to the numbers of that base, making a seat flip that much harder. If you are following one of the many ballots out there, please drop the incumbents!
It’s my opinion that we all should have got behind one person from the beginning and pushed as hard as we could for them. Since that horse has left the barn, I am just going to appeal to your math skills and ask you to bullet Marc (and tell your friends to) and try to get one of ours in Council.
That’s all for now, check out my last post to see my opinion on the Mayoral.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
Stier, McClure and Toy
I support Marc and will vote for him. But he needs assiatnce on city council to perform for us the way we want and expect him to. What good can Marc do if we also elect candidates who are not cut from the same cloth of integrity and progressiveness? We also need to get behind Matt McClure in the 4th, and many here are behind Irv Acklesburg in the 8th. (Sorry if I spelled that wrong Irv, no time to go look it up now). And what about Andy Toy? We can change the direction of this city in one election, beginning with MIchael Nutter and a strong ethically based city council. We need to get all of these people in to have a city government where all are pushing in the same direction.
I know there are other candidates out there which should be included, but in making the rounds this election season, McClure, Stier and Toy are the ones I have seen the most, and been most impressed by.
Can't support Marc unless he's not supporting Campbell
Would love to support a guy like Marc, but I'm concerned that as a committeman in the 21st Ward, he is following his ward leader and supporting Carol Campbell.
--
Disclosure: I support McClure for Council, Nutter for Mayor, and Murphy's Irish Saloonery.
Don't Bullet Me and Other Issues
First, I appreciate Detorn's support, but I am not advocating that progressives bullet vote for me. There is a certain logic to bullet voting, if you think that one person is the best qualified and / or most likely progressive to win.
But this year, when a number of incumbents are vulnerable, we may have a chance to pick up more than one at-large seats. Since January, I have been arguing inside and outside Neighborhood Networks that it makes sense for progressives to support three at-large challengers (and no more). And the ideal thing to do is for progressives to vote for the three best at-large candidates who can combine progressive support with other support from divergent parts of the city. That way, the three candidates can together maximize the vote for progressives around the city. Of course, all of us progressives running for council at large are competing with one another. But if we really want to elect progressives, and get elected ourselves, we should not be trying to take progressive votes from one another, but instead be encouraging progressives to vote for all three of us, while competing outside the progressive community for as many other votes as we can get.
I think the New Direction Philly slate exemplifies the political logic I just laid out.
As for other races, the difficulty we at-large candidates have is that we are running city wide and trying to pull together coalitions of disparate elements. That is why none of us have endorsed any Mayoral candidates or any candidates for district races. We simply don't want to make enemies where we don't have to. Believe me this is difficult for someone who likes to express his opinions, but I've tried to follow this rule.
I am a committee person in the 21st ward which is in teh 4th district. But because I am running city wide, I will not be at my polling place on Election Day. My partner in the 24th division will decide what ballots to hand out in our division.
You guys make it so hard
You guys make it so hard to help the candidates you support. Marc is on our ballot and highlighted in much of the ward. I also helped get him on many other ward ballots. So is Derek Green. But with all the baggage and obstacles so-called progressives put in the way to help someone like Marc and Derek sometimes make it seem like its not worth the effort.
If you would not support Marc because I support Carol shows a political naivete that is astounding.
Marc is on my ballot and many other Wards because he is a good candidate. Your candidate is supported by Tom Knox. Is this a reason not to vote for him?
Lou, you have nothing to do with this....
Lou, no offense, but my question wasn't about you. There are several people on your ballot that I fully support. I would withhold my vote for Marc if HE were supporting Carol Campbell. Your devotion to her isn't relevant to my question of Marc. Look, I'm not trying to make this into a big thing. Marc is an elected official of the democratic party, and as such, I just wanted to know where he stood in terms of his own district. I still do not know the answer to that, but his evasive response leaves me puzzled.
My guy was endorsed by Michael Nutter, and that makes me very pleased.
My response was totally clear.
I'm not endorsing district candidates in any district and, because I will be campaigning for myself on Election Day, I'm not working the polls in my divison on Tuesday.
There are 18 or so other at-large candidates. I think that a few of them are committepeople and all live in districts that will elect a district council member. Have you asked all of them who they support for district Council? Have you asked the district Council candidates who they are supporting for Council at Large? Have you asked the other at-Large candidates who they support for Council at Large? Have you asked all the Council candidates to say who they support for Mayor?
I have gone a bit further than others in saying who I support for Council at Large besides myself. Most of the at-large candidates are keeping mum about who they support in other races. And we are all doing that for the same, good reason: none of us want to jeopardize our own chances of winning by getting in the middle of other disputes.
Finally...
It took an reply from someone who registered on YPP yesterday, a well intentioned but not really relevant response from Lou, and two long emails from you to answer the question and say that you're not endorsing any district councilpeople. That's all I wanted to know. Good luck to you.
Vote for 5!
#1 Think about your favorite candidate (in my case Caryn Hunt)
#2 Then thank about your least favorite candidate (any pro-casino candidate)
#3 Are there people in between that you would vote for OVER your least favorite candidate? If yes, vote for them. A vote for them, will be a vote AGAINST your least favorite candidate.
There are many awesome progressives this year. I advocate for trying to get them all in. By voting for your 5 favorites, you will increase the likelihood that at least 1, perhaps 2, and even 3 may get in this year of great change.
There is a very good reason that people run slates - they work!
My five are:
Caryn Hunt, Matt Ruben, Andy Toy, Marc Stier, and Derek Green.
Anne - Who ARE my least
Anne -
Who ARE my least favorite at-large candidates? I've only heard about the good ones thus far. All I've got in my "don't vote for..." docket is the Inqy's non-endorsement of the slumlord running for judge.
***
Volunteering for Michael Nutter
I want to see new faces
I don't have a beef with anyone, but since the incumbents have a vast unfair advantage, I ranked them last. I very much like some of the incumbents, but I want to give my favorite challengers a leg up.
The choices I made are primarily based on degrees of anti-casino stance. The 5 ones I chose are the most anti-casino of the challengers, with Caryn, Matt, Marc, and Derek being "no casinos at all" and Andy "resite them".
I know Caryn and Matt very well and think they could (and will) change Philadelphia politics as we know it. They are both deeply committed activists: they both rose through activist ranks rather than political and really connect with and respect voters. Both are smarter than hell and have some of the most innovative ideas I've seen.
(Disclaimer: I am volunteering for both of them at the moment.)
2 + 2 = Vote for 5
Arguments like this are why we have trouble building and maintaing a "base" to call our own. If we really want to get into math problems, we need to talk more about how voter turnout is expected to be less than 50% in one of the most important elections we've seen in decades in Philadelphia. This isn't representative democracy -- the next mayor will get elected with barely 1 out of 5 people actually casting a vote for him.
This is not about whether Matt Ruben, or Marc Stier, or Derek Green gets a bullet vote on Tuesday. Philadelphia isn't just the "next great city," it IS a great city! But when we're plagued with crime, petty corruption, failing schools, poverty, and trash on our streets, we need to look at the big picture and stop fighting among ourselves. Because we're not focusing on the most important aspect, which is changing what's wrong with Philadelphia!
We've fought hard this entire campaign to show why our candidates are better than others, but in the end, win or lose, we've got some amazing challengers this year who are either going to become Councilmen, or who are going to stay in the fight as community leaders, activists, and are going to eventually make it to City Council, or Harrisburg, or whatever other office they decide to run for.
So let's cast our votes, but let's look to the future on why we fight so hard for our candidates in the first place. Let's vote for changing our city for the better.