- 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?
- You know, let's not even worry about the City Commissioners office messing up voter registration processing
- Bold ideas to fix the budget
- Mayor Nutter's Town Hall Meeting Schedule
- City Releases Library Information to City Council
- Size of Philadelphia government?
Predictions
Submitted by truthtold on Thu, 05/10/2007 - 10:50am.
These are not endorsements, but who I think will win.
Mayor:
1. Nutter
2. Knox
3. Fattah
4. Brady
5. Evans
Given that that's what all of the polls say, not really displaying a profile in courage.
District Council
1. DiCicco
2. Verna
3. Blackwell (again not a profile in courage either)
4. McClure (Campbell before, electorate has turned. High voter turnout in Roxborough and East Falls and Nutter's surge has it. Also, perception of missing community events.)
5. Clarke
6. Krajewski
7. Too Close to Call. Leaning Savage.
8. Miller/Bass/Irv/Paulmier (This is volatile, so I may change with information.)
9. Tasco
Council At Large
1. Blondell/Kenney (Electorate turned from my prior #1 of Goode).
3. Goode
4. Greenlee
5. Street (Sharif)
6. Stier
7. Ramos
8. Toy
9. Green
Bookmark/Search this post with:
Cut Greenlee before Ramos
If you're gonna cut out an incumbent, Ramos is not the one. He has a great relationship with the city's middle class labor community and is the voice for the latino community. Do we really want a City Council that has opted for no hispanic representation?
Ramos is my guy on Tuesday, I'm predicting a #2 finish for the Councilman
In terms of what I want, I
In terms of what I want, I like Juan a lot and what you say is about him is absolutely correct. But, with Ben Ramos on the ballot, I don't see it this time for him. He could win, b/c the race is very fluid and it is a turnout race. But the Nutter surge is also tapping into an anti-incumbent feeling, which may hurt him.
__________________________________________________________________________
I do not work for/support any candidate for any office in Philadelphia.
Cut Greenlee
Anti Incumbent Maybe, but when you're talking reformers, we need to include more incumbents. Blondell, Wilson and Juan are Reformers! All have ran against the machine and all have won. Now that they're in, we want them out? Sure I like some of the challengers such as Toy and Ruben. But these 3 have a great record in council. Juan Ramos is second to legislation only to Dicicco. Wilson Goode has been the voice of reason since he came on Council. Why would we want them out?
I'm up for change but I think we need to be realistic about how important certain people are. Juan is way too important to the spanish community which most on this site seem to ignore.
Greenlee Headed Center City Reform Democrats
Bill Greenlee, an aide to my father Councilman David Cohen for 26 years, met him when working to elect the 1979 "Clean Sweep" ticket, of which my father was a part.
While working for Councilman Cohen as a highly regarded constituent services advocate, Greenlee served at different times as President of the Center City Reform Democrats and the Southeastern Pennsylvania chapter of Americans for Democratic Action.
He was elected leader of the 15th Ward (Fairmount Area) in 1994, defeating an incumbent wardleader whose sister was a traffic court judge. He was the candidate of the anti-machine Democrats in that campaign.
He starts his service as an elected member of City Council with more service in City Council than any member of Council except President Anna Verna. This gives him an excellent potential for future leadership there.
Greenlee?
Have you heard him speak publicly? With all do respect Rep. Cohen, He's gotten heckled at places where his former boss once ruled. He seems like a nice guy who cares about philly, but he hasnt seemed to hold his own quite yet. Maybe time will tell
David Cohen Was Heckled, Too
David Cohen won seven elections for Councilman at Large, and one for Councilman from the 8th District. He had too deal with heckling in every election from diverse sources, being variously attacked as too old, too independent, too liberal, too much a part of the Democratic Party organization, too oriented towards community needs at the expense of businesses, too pro-labor, too unwilling to follow orders, etc.
Being heckled and responding to heckling is one of the great joys of Philadelphia politics. Philadelphians treat their elected officials with the same mixture of emotions that they treat their professional athletes.
Great Analogy Rep Cohen!
I love the analogy Rep Cohen! But again, this isnt about the Great David Cohen, this is about Greenlee simply not "having it". Again, I think he's a nice guy, who has a great record of service, but I don't see him as being a powerful voice in Council like David Cohen was. I am curious, Rep Cohen, whom are you supporting for City Council at large besides Greenlee. Or at least whom do you like?
I'm Limiting Myself to Telling the Truth About Bill Greenlee
I tend to make very few primary endorsements.
I'm limiting myself here to telling the truth about Bill Greenlee, whom I have worked with on a regular basis for 28 years.
In the 8th, I highly doubt
In the 8th, I highly doubt that Bass will do better than Irv and Greg. I am a little biased, considering that I have known Irv and Greg since I was 5, but looking at the landscape, I highly doubt that she will beat them. She will, however, take a lot of votes away from Donna, which bolds well for both of my friends.
Bass will definitely do
Bass will definitely do better than Greg. Greg's not pulling a lot of votes.
As b/w Irv and Bass, it's a tough call, b/c Irv will do very well in Chestnut Hill and they are coming to vote. (They come to vote every election, but this will be lots of folks.)
__________________________________________________________________________
I do not work for/support any candidate for any office in Philadelphia.
There is one, and only one
There is one, and only one candidate, who has been running a real campaign, in every part of the district. DVD's, literature, door knocking, thousands of phone calls, voter identification, big number of volunteers, union endorsements, and just flat out energy.
Which Green? Aardharts predictions.
My bold predictions (which I would only bet on if given odds):
* Evans will not finish fifth; possibly as high as third. No one besides Nutter and Knox get more than 15%. Nutter wins by more than 6%.
* Stier and Toy win seets.
* Blackwell wins. (This one I would lay odds on.)
* At least one of the following loses: DiCicco, Verna, or Clarke.
* Maria Quiñones Sanchez wins.
* Queena beats Jesus for the coveted 6th place.
----
I support Michael Nutter for Mayor. My slate.
Stier?
While he has been getting more notiriety, he's lacking something he's lacked in the Past, humility. Marc is coming off quite arrogant these days. A little dose of humble pie could do him well. Toys a nice guy, but we need folks who are willing to get their hands dirty, Toy would have a nervous breakdown.
By getting their hands
By getting their hands dirty, you mean....?
Challenging the system
Many of these challengers (and incumbents) come off very polished and speak very well. However their are times when we're they're going to have to stand up and challenge the system. The Mayor and several council people made that march up to Harrisburg only go get insulted by many of the state legislators. They have to challenge each other and be willing to be seen on the streets on a daily basis. Getting their hands dirty is just to point out that its not all suits and cuff links, its alot of sleepless weekends, non stop days, doing whats right before your fellow man, even if cost your political career.
How you can suggest that Marc Stier is some sort
of elitist who won't mix it up with the powers that be is beyond me. He was one of the key leaders in the minimum wage fight, in which role he did everything from stand outside a courthouse getting petitions signed in Altoona, to giving stump speeches, to attending endless coalition meetings, to rallying labor to the cause, to going office to office in Harrisburg raising legislators from their stupor over the issue. He was no less important in the effort to win voter approval for the Ethics Commission or in the beginning stages of the ongoing effort to enact inclusionary housing legislation. I have never seen him in cuff links and doubt very much he owns a pair or would know what to do with them if he did.
The fact that he works harder on issues than any other two people I know almost obscures that he is also a brilliant intellectual force in developing workable approaches to improve city life. Given that he's already proven he can build the coalitions needed to enact legislation, there aren't too many qualities left for success as a Councilmember that I can think of that Marc lacks. All he needs now is enough votes on May 15 to get him to the fourth floor. And it looks like he's got a pretty good plan to accomplish that too.
This is a list about who I
This is a list about who I think will win, not a list of who should win.
On candidates:
I feel similarly about Juan. He is a nice personable guy with a long track record of being a labor and a reformer in the Latino community. He has long been an organizer with deep appreciated roots in both communities. I am distressed b/c on this site, being a reformer means someone who is not connected to labor and often new. Which means that folks who have long histories organizing neighborhoods often go overlooked. Also, it does concern me that most of what's posted on this site would remove elected officials of color and many of the things said about those elected officials are disparaging. That used to concern me until it occurred to me that most of what was said about most elected officials was disparaging.
But Juan has a tough road in this election. Ben Ramos is a very good candidate, but not well funded. His credentials in the Latino community are long. He has the same name and that is always bad. Also, Juan will get cut all across the City b/c of his support for Dwight -- which is to say he does not support Brady.
Angel Ortiz won as part of push to get a Latino councilmember. He, Street and Goode (not together or in unison), led parts of the fight to get the 7th as a Latino seat in the early 80s and then early 90s and then Goode supported Angel for Council At Large. (Angel was at CLS the first time in the 80s if memory serves me correctly.)
But he lost support when he did not support a higher percentage in the 7th district of Latino voters. Also, many grassroots organizations in the Latino community disliked the fact that Angel took on larger Latino causes, e.g. Vieques, without complaining about constituent service or more mundane crime issues in the Community. Angel's answer to that was that he was a legislator not a bureaucrat.
Juan comes from the opposite side of thinking on that issue, and was elected, in part, to remove Angel. However, I do think it is important to have a Latino councilman, given that 10-15% of the City are Latinos. I just don't think Juan can do it this time.
Marc Stier has made a lot of inroads, but he will get cut/not carried in many African American wards. However, he has spent a lot of money on mail -- as best I can tell -- and his name is out there. I don't see it to be enough to come in 5th, b/c there is some feeling that he is not as in touch with voters, but I am not sure if that is true or not.
Andy Toy is a candidate that if you lined up the resumes of all of the challengers, his is the best. He clearly has the best ideas and great experience. His work at LISC should be enough to win a spot alone. More candidates with his background should win.
However, as I point out constantly to folks looking at these things, its a Citywide race with working class blacks and working class whites, not Center City and Chestnut Hill. Expect Toy to crush in Center City and Chestnut Hill. There are folks who would vote for him 5 times. Nutter's surge will certainly help bring out more voters likely to vote for Toy. But I don't see that as being enough, which is unfortunate in some respects.
Bill Greenlee is also going to get cut in a lot of Black wards. But he is going to be carried in a lot of white wards. I think that he is going to be pushed heavily in many. He is the Party's at large candidate this year -- I understand that there is no consensus, but that's what folks say -- and I expect that that combined with the incumbency thing should be enough.
__________________________________________________________________________
I do not work for/support any candidate for any office in Philadelphia.
Well Said Truth
For the Record, one Ben Ramos I would not consider a good candidate. There should be more of an outrage for a guy who simply puts "RAMOS" on his lit, an obvious ploy to cause confusion amongst voters. Ben was beat by Angel in 2000, was never approved by the senate for his secretary of state appointment, and was fired from the hispanic chamber of commerce. I cant stand that he's running for council simply because he needs a job. The REAL Ramos is JUAN who has been a reformer since he was 18. And all these so called reformers have been endorsed by some union, even MARIA. I dont see any of them turning them away. Let us not forget that Councilman JUAN RAMOS is the only Councilperson who actually worked as a construction worker for many years and knows the importance of having a union for fair wages, job security and a pension. I think the combination of his Reform History and his knack for the poor and middle class should make him more of a Shoe in for this years primary election.
What I see in the "reform"
What I see in the "reform" community as it is described on the web tends to have elements of an educational elitism that prizes education over experience. (Which given that many Philadelphia politicians are anti-intellectuals, I am not altogether disappointed about that change.)
So what you will notice is that candidates who are supported all tend to have advanced degrees and they are usually posed against/contrasted with incumbents with nothing more than a high school diploma.
For example:
Roberts, JD, Verna, HS
McClure, JD, Campbell, HS
Ackelsberg, JD, Miller, not sure. (This is bad example. Irv worked at CLS for 30 years, that's really like community experience w/ a law degree. But I feel compelled to show it as an example.)
Toy, Stier, Green (Derek), Goode (advanced degrees), Ramos, and others, no advanced degree.
I think that educated candidates are a good thing. But prizing it over community activism and organizing -- in the name of a liberal agenda -- will have the effect of having a class slant to candidates. Given that most Philadelphians do not have an advanced degree, you will get elected officials that are more delegates rather than representatives.
I actually don't have a problem with this as long as we respect the fact that community organizing/activism in poor neighborhoods is not a lesser form of political activity than social work. (Better put, its a good idea, but let's not pretend its pure progressive politics.)
__________________________________________________________________________
I do not work for/support any candidate for any office in Philadelphia.
Interesting Truthtold...
That's a theory. But having an advanced degree shouldn't necessarily be looked as "elitist" you nor should you take the inference from it that a person with an advanced degree doesn't have community activism and organizing experience. Matt McClure is a very good friend of mine. He is a fourth generation Philadelphia whose family came from Society Hill before it was expensive and fashionable. Matt comes from humble beginnings but has worked his ass off to get where he is, JD and all.
Everyone works their butt
Everyone works their butt off to get an advanced degree, but my comment is that those promoting those candidates do so b/c of their education. It is as if to get the support of the "reform" community, you need an advanced degree. It's a comment on the reformers, not the candidates.
I would also comment that McClure has also worked his tail off in this race as well.
__________________________________________________________________________
I do not work for/support any candidate for any office in Philadelphia.
Education
Juan Ramos I believe graduated from college with a degree in labor studies from Cheyney.
He did. It's not just
He did. It's not just college, its the degree after that is key to my theory.
__________________________________________________________________________
I do not work for/support any candidate for any office in Philadelphia.
I've never mentioned
my advanced degree or the university from which it was received on the campaign trail. (A few political friends have encouraged me to call myself Dr. Stier saying that if Henry Kissinger could do it, I could too. But I've always responded that this would be ridiculously pretentious.)
I do talk about my community organizing work all the time. That is a much better gauge of what I can bring to Council than my formal education.
I can think of only one example in which a supporter has mentioned my education.
And much the same can be said of the other progressive candidates. Andy and Derek don't mention their advanced degrees. Matt Ruben does only because he recently received his Ph. D. And he doesn't make a big deal about it.
So I think this whole elitism theory is pretty specious. All of the folks you mentioned have a track record far more impressive than the educations we received.
You missed my point, which I
You missed my point, which I repeated above.
ITS NOT THE CANDIDATES. ITS THOSE WHO CALL THEMSELVES REFORMERS WHO SUPPORT YOU. It's not done b/c of your advanced degrees. There is no cabal demanding that you have an advanced degree. No candidate is trotting out there credentials about that.
But there is a host of stuff on this site and others that cite candidates as "smart" as a good thing and those who are not as bad. The folks who blast candidates position papers represent a small subset of voters. We also all have computers. However, those candidates tend to prefer educated candidates. Which given that many of the folks on this site have an education, not a surprise.
But it is not enough to say that it is just a coincidence that all of these college educated folks that trot out their credentials from time to time PREFER candidates that have degrees, even if they have other stated reasons for doing so.
That's the elitism. Other commentators have pointed it out. Unfortunately, in the blogosphere, it tends to be highly educated liberal whites which are a subset of Philadelphia voters. (That argument/discussion is on about five threads on this site.)
__________________________________________________________________________
I do not work for/support any candidate for any office in Philadelphia.
College Degrees and Elected Officials
Whenever the larger/more well known national political blogs, such as MyDD and Daily Kos, have surveyed their readers they have found that the "average" reader is white, over 30, holds an advanced degree, and (according to this blogad survey) makes roughly double the median income of the nation as a whole (which may be a function of the advanced degree, I don't know). Given these demographics it is unsurprising that this group (insofar as blog readers are the same group as those who you are labeling "reformers") would overemphasize education over experience, since you'd obviously have to believe that grad degrees were worthy of your time to go through the hassle of going for one.
However, I believe that "reformers" care a good deal more about a candidate having a college degree than an advanced degree. I was attacked by one of Verna's staff when I compared the educational backgrounds of Verna and Roberts, and maybe I am elitist, but I have a hard time believing that any amount of experience can make up for a lack of college education when dealing with complex issues, esp those where it is tough to determine the cause of a problem or where there is a question about causation vs. correlation. Again, this opinion is skewed due to my own experiences, but I really cannot see any situation where experience alone can make up for ones lack of education (though I will admit that the reverse is also true- education cannot make up for a lack of experience).
I, for one, would have a hard time voting for anyone who did not have at least a BA, and I really don't mind being seen as "elitist"- education is simply that important (try to get a job without a BA these days and you'll find that almost every employer shares my elitist attitude). There are definitely exceptions to this (for example, if Nutter wasn't in the race I would consider voting for Brady), but I think that under emphasizing the educational attainment of our elected officials sends a very clear message to our young people: "Hey, don't worry about college! Verna/Brady/Fattah/Campbell didn't get a BA (and yes, I know Fattah got some special degrees without a BA) and look how they turned out!"
I'm sorry Alex, but I would
I'm sorry Alex, but I would stack Verna's 30 plus years experience dealing with legislative issues over someone's history degree or whatever from wherever. It is elitist--and knowing that district, will not serve you well.
Plus, generationally, someone like Verna came up in a time where most Italian American women from where she is didn't go to college. For crying out loud, context matters.
The tyranny of the educated
I said I am elitist. I said that experience matters. I also understand the context. However, I would question why you, from Verna's district, bothered to get a post-grad degree if it is so irrelevant. It's quite obvious that you have electoral aspirations, so why go down the "elitist" road if you don't think it matters?
I'm not sure if the silly degree mention is aimed at Marc, Damon, Matt or someone else (I assume it is a figment of your imagination), but whatever, I look forward to watching you burn your degree in defiance of the "elitists" when you decide to run for office (down with the tyranny of the educated!). I mean, you just said that valuing a degree will not serve you well in South Philly, right? You wouldn't just use
sophistrhetoric like that when you feel it serves your aspirations, would you? (I struck the sophist mention because it's just way too academic/elitist)Let me ask you a question, Mr "anti-elitist", do you think that judges should have to have studied and practiced the law before they can judge the law? Assuming your answer is yes, then why not hold those who craft the laws to the same standard?
The study of law is
The study of law is necessary for a judge to judge according to the law. This takes training. Plus, the law requires a judge to be trained in law--that is something the legislature saw fit to impose.
The role of a council person is different--they do not interpret the law based on legal principles hundreds of years old. They speak for the will of their constituency.
I had the means, unlike my mother's generation in my family to attain an education--so I did. Having a degree is valued in South Philly. Flaunting a degree is not--especially in a place where most adults do not have them.
Education was pushed in my family because the thought was every generation does a bit better in terms of choice and income. Perhaps it is an old immigrant thing. There is no denying being educated gives me choices that some of my friends do not have. Similarly, it is statistically shown that people with higher degrees earn more.
Oh, and the comment was aimed at no one in particular. But, one cannot simply forget that experience matters.
Electoral aspirations? I
Electoral aspirations? I think I know where you are going with that, Alex. And, I'm not entirely sure why.
I think it is like Gaetano
I think it is like Gaetano said, it is contextual.
As in that example, Verna is from a different generation so not having a college degree is completely understandable.
Now, say Verna retired and you had two new candidates in their 30s. Then I would say a degree would hold more weight as a comparison.
Should corporations fire all of their older employees that didn't go through college for the new younger generation that do have degrees?
Also, I think what the degree is and from where is a BIG factor. If you are going to be academic elitist, do it right. ;) There are a lot of colleges and degrees out there that you get as long as you sign the tuition check and show up to half of the classes.
On the reverse, here is an anecdote from the Longacre campaign in the 5th. The topic of degrees did come up. The final ruling was not to mention it, even though Clarke has no degree. With the low graduation rates, let alone college educated residents of the fifth, it was felt having a college degree isn't a bonus and could be even a negative in certain areas, when running against an incumbent that doesn't have one.
So, even though Longacre is an economics major from Temple and a Fels member from Penn in Government Administration, we didn't push it more than just in his bio.
I thought it was sort of a telling point about Philadelphia when a college education can have a negative connotation.
As for Gaetano, I am guessing he got a degree because he has to pay the bills first. ;)
--------------------------------------------------
Staff member of Longacre for 5th Council District.
Longacre Website
Bingo
Paying the bills is a priority.
Oh, and one really cool thing about Longacre--he is a big Temple guy.
Yes he is. www.owlscoop.com
Yes he is.
www.owlscoop.com is his site.
--------------------------------------------------
Staff member of Longacre for 5th Council District.
Longacre Website
Bingo!
This is why I mentioned Gaetano's aspirations:
I agree that it is contextual, and, again, I don't mean to overemphasize education over experience (and to some degree the only reason that the context is relevant in regards to the council president is because Verna graduated from High School a few years after World War II, when college truly was only starting to become something that non-wealthy folks could attend), but I find the reverse to be much more prevalent in this city and this nation (which seems pretty darned anti-intellectual at times).
And in regards to this:
I would please ask you not to say such nasty things about the Ivys. They really try to do their best.
I would please ask you not
Very nice. You got a solid chuckle out of me for that one. ;)
Back on track though ...
Could you clarify about the "Gaetano aspirations"? Not sure I am getting your message.
--------------------------------------------------
Staff member of Longacre for 5th Council District.
Longacre Website
Well...
I cannot say with any certainty what Gaetano plans to do with his life, but he certainly seems to have electoral aspirations. I could be 100% wrong, and it wouldn't be the first time this morning, but certain actions of his in regards to a certain council race (and not one I'm involved in) highly suggest someone hedging their bets and/or being very cautious about who they piss off. That might be for familial/community reasons, rather than political aspirations, but
I would say more, but since Gaetano has never disclosed who he is supporting on this site in regards to a certain Council race (unlike just about everyone else) I'll leave it at that.
Wow! One day I'm this, the next day I'm that . . .
Most of my energy related to council races have been in organizing the Take Back Our City "coalition." The beneficiaries of that coalition speak for themselves. The site will be updated today--so please, check it out.
Other than that, my other efforts are focused on protecting South Philly from Casinos along with the brave souls at the DRNA. Something I have been doing since June! That is my issue right now.
At this time, I'm not working for any council campaign. I'm not working against anyone either. I'm just a popular guy--it must be from my glory days of quarterbacking the Gladstone Street touch football team.
Aspirations, right now--to make sure that Foxwoods is either moved from where it is now or doesn't get built. Also, to stand with people from the North to make sure they are fully protected from Sugarhouse in whatever way they see fit.
Come on dude. I’m with
Come on dude. I’m with you all the way on this thread, but we all know that you have electoral aspirations. I don’t blame you for making your allegiances. I think that we in the progressive community need to do more of that.
What is "working"?
Listing one's self on the Host Committee for a fundraiser constitutes working for a council campaign, in my book.
No, it is giving a donation
No, it is giving a donation and being a part of a host committee. Sorry, I do not consider showing up a bar and having a drink "work." Why? Because it isn't. And, likewise, writing a check isn't "work" either. Oh--and forwarding an email really isn't work either.
I guess you and I have vastly different definitions of work. You know what I consider work:
Billing time to protect the rights and interests of clients;
Standing in front of a judge arguing a legal point;
Ensuring partners are happying with my work product;
Testifying in front of council related to casinos; and
Working to prevent casinos from destroying the place I know and love.
There are other things, but certainly not what you say is "work." Drinking--not so much.
I resent that...
I think I can speak for drinkers across the nation when I say "drinking is work".
Wholly Agreed
I'm sorry Mr. Urevick-Ackelsburg has to remind himself that he's a drunk.
Well, he said it.
***
Volunteering for Michael Nutter
The race that must not be named
Look, the ballot box is a sacred space. You don't have to disclose to anyone who you will vote for.
If you want to campaign for someone, go ahead. Otherwise, don't. Gaetano has every right to not campaign.
And don't think this race doesn't have any importance to us -- our neighborhoods are at stake. This isn't a personal game for either of us. There may some real causalities as the result of the sum of the election results on Tuesday. Forgive us if we are thinking beyond the contest of two men on election day and instead are fighting the potential annihilation of our neighborhood.
The only thing I would add
The only thing I would add to this is "neighborhoods." The ripple effect in Philly is strong--and considering in South Philly, the two rivers are only 3 miles apart, this is so vitally important.
Thank you Anne! As aways, perfectly well said.
And your point is?
I'm sure I have no idea what you are talking about when you say:
There are no disclosure policies at the ballot box, but there are here on YPP. And I feel that acting on someone's host committee for a fundraiser for one candidate is a form of volunteering. I also believe that publicly criticizing his opponent, is, despite giving to the other candidate, a violation of the disclosure policy here. Again, this isn't the ballot box, and there is nothing sacred about YPP (despite what Dan thinks).
AAAAA Chooo! Oh, I'm sorry, I'm allergic to hyperbole (except when it emanates from my mouth/fingers). Seriously, what does my statement have to do with the casinos. Is one candidate for them being placed where they are slated to go, and one opposed?
I also didn't even mention you, or who you support for anything. Do you have a guilty conscience? Feel free to confess any sins, you sinner, you!
I talked with Dan about
I talked with Dan about these issues months ago. And, it was a full and frank discussion on my part. I'm relying on that conversation. And, if you look at Vern's pre-resignation PAC you'd probably find a familiar name there too. But, you probably haven't. So, I guess that would cancel this all out. I've tried to be reasonable here and your interpretation of what "work" is different than my own.
Alex, I don't get what your problem with me is. I'm sorry if my opinion on how something will play in the 2nd bothers you. But, that really has nothing to do with me. Why does what I think mean so much to you? Or any future aspirations? Anna Verna has 30 years of experience. I think that stacks up pretty nicely to a degree. Sorry.
Again, I'm not working for anyone in the 2007 races--so far. If that changes I'll let the community know.
Here is what is has to do
Here is what is has to do with casinos, and I've tried to explain this before to no avail, the people who are working hard to protect their communities will keep fighting regardless of who wins on the 15th.
Interesting take on causation vs. correlation
because you conflate the two yourself.
A college education isn't what enables someone to have the skills to deal with complex problems. Try putting putting together an inside corner joint of fancy crown moulding sometime, fella. Try navigating in the open sea by the stars and the "feel" of the waves and the air the way uneducated fisherman do (epistimologists still can't figure out the algorithm they use).
Basically, having a college education indicates that you grew up with the means to acquire one, and in a family that was oriented towards the importance of attaining a higher degree. (Of course, there are exceptions). How well has George Bush's Harvard MBA enabled him to understand causation vs. correlation?
Look, I'm not saying that having a college education is necessarily irrelevant to performing well in elected office. Certainly, the more you know about relevant issues the better the position you'd be in to find solutions to complex problems, but certainly, sometimes spending time on a college campus has little to do with gaining relevant knowledge. It all depends.
I'd prefer to make evaluations of candidates on an individual basis.
DEII, I couldn't agree more.
DEII, I couldn't agree more. Well said.
You must have missed the part...
Where I said that the reverse is also true- that education is not a substitute for experience.
I also appreciate that a degree doesn't mean that you will necessarily mean that you will have superior reasoning skills than someone without a degree, but I do feel very strongly that higher education gives you more of a chance at honing your higher reasoning skills.
Again, I know I'm biased, and I'm not ashamed to say that I highly value higher education. To put it another way, as Bob Brady said when he was asked if he supported abstinence only education: "I support all education on any level."
That was a pretty funny
That was a pretty funny qoute.
I think I know what you are
I think I know what you are saying Alex and I am going to attempt to maybe reword it.
Higher education doesn't guarantee quality, but it at least assumes some level of baseline for experience then to have a launching pad from.
And my comment:
As with many things, there is diminishing returns. I am guessing most people also would not want a 50 year old Mayor that has two PhDs and has never done anything except write books while locked in his den.
Education is a factor, but far from the end all be all.
--------------------------------------------------
Staff member of Longacre for 5th Council District.
Longacre Website
Nope, didn't miss it
But I don't see how that's relevant to my point.
Your contention is that a college education "causes" (at least to some degree) the ability to solve complex problems. I say that it entirely depends on the context of the problems and the substance of the education. I'm sure that you can think of many of your best college professors who would have been absolutely terrible at resolving complex problems that face city government officials.
They used to think that studying Latin improved one's ability to think logically. There has been a lot of effort to prove such kinds of transfer. No one has been able to do it. Studying Latin improves your ability to understand Latin.
Essentially, experience is one form of education. Attending college is another. Either might, or might not, be relevant to the work of being an elected official.
Upgrade your grey matter, cause one day it may matter...
Where did I say anything about reasoning and education from a causal perspective?
Here is what I said:
Does a healthy diet and exercise cause one to live a long and healthy life (or, in other words, does a healthy lifestyle cause a long and healthy life)? Of course not, life is much too complicated for such a causal relationship. But, taking all other factors into consideration, does healthy eating and exercise make it more likely that you will live a long and healthy life? Of course. The same goes for learning: it does not guarantee that will expand your reasoning abilities or that you will have any more knowledge about anything. It does, however, make it more likely.
(And the title of this post is from a Deltron3030 song, just an fyi)
You implied a causal connection
when you said that a college education, enables one to "hone" their higher-reasoning skills more than relevant experience such as Verna's.
This is in no way an endorsement of Verna. I support Damon, and I've heard and seen him apply his reasoning skills to complex problems to very good effect. But I'd contend that there are many aspects of his life experience other than his college experiences (such as his immigrant expriences)that are at least as relevant if not more relevant to his potential to solve the problems confronting an elected official.
Alex, I know that you're not an elitist - but I think what you're saying on this issue displays a lack of understanding of cognitive development. You're talking about some kind of forumla for the enhancement of generic "higher-reasoning skills," and I'm questioning that concept. Higher-reasoning skills are, primarily, contextual. They can be developed within particular domains, but the extent to which they transfer is highly questionable. It seems to me that the relevant question here is to look at in what domains a potential office-holder has developed their thinking skills, and to evaluate their relevance to performing their job.
In your latest statement, you equate school experience with "learning." And I see the fact that people in our culture equate the kinds of experience that correlate with a college degree with "higher-reasoning skills," as self-serving, not based on cognitive science, and ultimately, only perpetuates existing class status quo.
I officially declare this issue as beaten into the ground.
What is a "causal relationship?"
According to the dictionary:
In other words, two correlated relationships can share a "causal relationship" without one causing the other. I never even alluded to education causing increased reasoning abilities, any more than I alluded to exercise causing a long, healthy life. So, is there a correlation, or to use your term a "causal relationship," between education and reasoning? Of course (I doubt you are arguing that there isn't). Is it a causal relationship? Of course it is not, and I never claimed, or even hinted, that it was.
As far as your statement in regards to my knowledge of cognitive development, I hate to tell you, but I studied cognitive psych (including a good deal of research into developmental psych and varying notions of IQ, including contextual intelligence, something I firmly believe in), and I'd say that it shows a basic misunderstanding of what I am saying (or, to put it another way, I'm probably not explaining myself well enough), since I am not arguing that reasoning is the sole form of IQ, that education is the sole or even best way to increase your intelligence, nor am I arguing that education is the be-all, end-all of cognitive development (again, far from it). But if you don't think that these here internets, that all of this technology that surrounds you, that writing itself is not a function of education and the attainment of knowledge, than I really don't know what to say.
In sum, you say:
But your argument seems more akin to saying that you don't think his education means much at all.
I am not arguing for one thing over another, I am arguing against the dismissal of one in favor of the other.
Ok, I tried to drop it
because I think we're more in agreement than not, and are essentially disagreeing over semantics - but seriously, your language, as someone who's studied the issues, floors me.
...since I am not arguing that reasoning is the sole form of IQ, that education is the sole or even best way to increase your intelligence, nor am I arguing that education is the be-all, end-all of cognitive development (again, far from it).
Alex, even if you buy the concept of IQ (which I don't, because of the inherent prejudices that are the foundation of the concept), how can you even imply that education "increases" intelligence? This speaks to the basic confusion I find running throughout your comments on this subject. Again, if you by the concept of IQ, then you know that while education increase knowledge, it doesn't increase intelligence. Experience and cognitive development are interrelated, for sure, but the relevant cognitive development is more or less a done deal by the time you reach college age, and anyway, again you run into trouble when you make board generalizations associating specific types of experience with particular levels or attributes of cognitive development.
And I never said that Damon's education is irrelevant to his candidacy, because I don't believe that to be the case. What I'm saying is that I don't believe that in a generic sense, one candidate's experience in attending college makes them more qualified to solve the complex problems of elected office as compared to another's candidate's experience in holding office and networking and exploring relevant issues. I say instead, look at the sum of Damon's experience and the sum of Verna's and make an evaluation on that basis about their qualifications. Just as Damon's educational background might enhance his qualifications (in that he may have studied relevant material in-depth), I think that it would be hard to argue that Verna's experiences with the specific tasks of the role don't enhance her qualifications (although one could also argue that it would also make her less adaptable or more tied into existing and ineffective power stuctures). I would argue that both candidates have had opportunity to increase their relevant knowledge base because of their experiences, but I don't think that either of us is in a position to judge whether or not either candidate has been able to "hone" their problem-solving skills by virtue of the specifics of their experiences.
You say that you aren't arguing for one in favor of dismissal of the other. I'll take your word for it, but that summary of your position seems to be in direct contrast to the way you lay out your rationale.
True dat...
I did misspeak when I said that college could increase your intelligence. I'll leave the rest for now...
Even Bob Brady will proudly
Even Bob Brady will proudly point out that he's taught classes at Penn. Education has cachet -- both for the prestige value, whatever it says about your ability to connect with higher-educated voters, and because Philly's universities drive a huge chunk of its economy. That last part more than anything may be changing the way Philly politicians think about education.
It's really hard to get into
It's really hard to get into his classes at Penn. There are so few people in the world who can do the kind of politics he does.
---------
working for Ellen Green-Ceisler for Judge
College degrees
I don't think I attacked Alex, I think I called him out on elitism that he has now admitted.
Let’s talk about successful people without college degrees….Bill Gates….Harry Truman…Walt Disney…George Washington…Michael Dell…Thomas Edison…Abraham Lincoln…Peter Jennings…Sidney Kimmel…Eleanor Roosevelt…Delaware Governor Ruth Ann Minner.
A University of Wisconsin student asked a farmer how much education he had. The farmer replied: "6 years of schooling, 72 years of learning."
Education is not the sum or measure of a person.
Katie...
Come meet me in Kingsessing, in Tioga, in Point Breeze, in Gtown and we'll discuss my "elitism". Hell, we can debate it on the corner of Broad and Erie and we'll see who people think is "elitist" and who is fa real.
I look forward to you renouncing your Ivy degrees and I hope others will follow you noble anti-elitist path!
Why do I feel that this conversation could have easily have been held in early Communist Russia or China? Well, at least now I can be reasonably certain that I won't be purged for thinking that intellectualism matters.
BTW- that's a nice list of people who invented something/got somewhere without a degree. Care to try for a list of those who did something with a degree? I'm pretty sure there's a size limit to posts, so you may need to create about 10,000 of them to fit them all in.
Marc, who do you support in your division
Marc, you're a committeperson in the 21st ward. And you are, as far as i can tell, a candidate for reform. My question is, who are you supporting for council in your district? I'm legitimately curious. Are you following Lou's lead, or are you, and your division, supporting reform?
Stier with Campbell??
Sagacity II - I'd be really, really shocked if Stier was supporting Campbell. It just wouldn't make sense. Marc's definitely got a reform orientation, so it would be antithetical to his principles to go with her. I'd make the assumption that he's supporting McClure, but only Marc or somebody from his campaign could answer that one for sure.
Campaign Finance reports say...
You can search "stier" at the Philadelphia Department of Records website(http://phila-records.com/campaign-finance/eagleweb/docsearchPOST.jsp). Here's what comes up:
Name: FRIENDS OF DONNA REED MILLER
Name: Stier 2007
Name: COMMITTEE TO ELECT TONY PAYTON, JR.
Name: FRIENDS FOR DWIGHT EVANS
Name: Nutter for Mayor
Name: Friends of Anne Dicker
Name: Friends of LeAnna M. Washington
Name: FRIENDS OF MARIAN B TASCO
No Campbell.
Thanks "Dept"
I see that there's been no campaign giving, but I'm curious about election day support and who is going to be helping who. Again, it would be really, really weird if there was a Campbell-Stier connection.
Some corrections
I have spent very little on direct mail. It really is very expensive in an at-large race. I've done some very targted and small pieces and relied more on TV.
I think I'm doing pretty well in Black wards right now...and far better than I was two weeks ago. As importantly, however, is that I've been spending a great deal of time in the black community, and especially in North Philadelphia, where I've worked with community activists in four different neighborhoods. Most of them are supporting me now. And I've campaigned in North Philly pretty much every third day for the last three months.
And if you think I'm not connecting with voters, call me up and come to a couple of events in the next few days. When I started the campaign I hoped that a message focused on reform would play well in every community. But I wasn't sure that was true.
It is.
I don't want to debate the
I don't want to debate the specifics, b/c you are a good candidate and I wish you the best of luck. I am as knowledgeable about N. Philly wards/divisions as anyone out there and have a slightly different take.
My sense is that Goode, Blondell, Ramos, Street, Green (Derek), Greenlee and yourself are all candidates that will vie for votes in North Philly.
Running citywide is a very difficult race, so I appreciate the personal response (although I am sure your campaign hopes that you get sleep) for the push to the end.
My other sense I have is that the reform message is going to play well everywhere because people are pissed and want to send a message to let the system know that.
Good luck.
__________________________________________________________________________
I do not work for/support any candidate for any office in Philadelphia.
The Problem (Maybe) With Labor and Reform
Truthtold writes:
Actually, I think on this site, labor is pretty well respected -- and clearly, community activism is even more so. Even a lot of the academic folks on the site (myself included) come from union families and tend to be pro-union, at least in an abstract, pro-worker, pro-collective bargaining way. The criticism is usually limited to unions' participation in the political process -- where, yes, this being an ethically challenged city, some unions have been up to shenanigans in the past, and traditionally, through both money and bodies, have exerted so much influence that the air has been sucked out of the room for other issues, candidates, etc.
At any rate, I would argue that what seems like a contradiction or conflict between "the reform movement" and the union movement is more accidental than essential. And I would list two reasons why.
1) If you're running against an entrenched candidate (or candidates) with union support, one of the few ways you can get traction with the electorate is to position yourself as "a reformer." This is true whether you substantively embrace the issues associated with political reform -- in Philadelphia, this usually has something to do with how politicians and political campaigns get money or how city jobs and contracts get awarded -- or not. Tom Knox has run as a reformer, but his position hasn't so much been "let's pass ethics legislation," but more like "Nearly everyone in the system is bad" plus "I am incorruptible."
2) Many good, smart people in politics and in labor are uncomfortable with some of the reform proposals because they really do purport to change the status quo and really may have some unintended consequences for politics in the city and state. How do you raise money? What happens if a self-funded candidate jumps in? What if 100 lawyers can give more money than 1500 carpenters? It's a transition period -- really, it's always a transition period -- and everything is changing. But this makes people who are really keen on reform and people who spend and have spent most of their time thinking about completely different things a little skeptical of each other. I think ultimately, though, as the song goes, the farmer and the cowman should be friends.
You draw a distinction that
You draw a distinction that I glossed over -- which is that the "reformers" (and I use that term without giving any defintion) -- are not as much opposed to union/labor movement but are opposed to the status quo, which in Philly, unions are a part of.
I'd have to say that makes sense to me.
I do think that folks with education -- and bloggers almost always have a lot of it -- tend to prefer folks like themselves. (That's a political truism.) So it is not a suprise that what links the "reformers" is that they tend to have more education.
To me this is not a new phemonmenon, as the rise of Independent Black Politics had as a part a concern about throwing out the status quo politicians, who, compared to those in that movement, did not have as much education. They were also viewed as less qualified in running for office.
I appreciate the dialogue. It helped sharpen my thinking on this.
__________________________________________________________________________
I do not work for/support any candidate for any office in Philadelphia.
I've known Marc awhile
I see no arrogance in Marc Stier at all. I see a guy who wants to serve and I am eager to see both he and Andy Toy elected. In this election we have an opportunity to clean up city hall so here are Newman's Nominations:
Mayor,Michael Nutter, 4th District, Matt McClure, at large, Marc Stier, Andy Toy and of course for Judge Ellen Green Ceisler.
One point about predictions
One point about predictions -- its all about the turnout model. I expect a significant drop off b/w the top of the ticket and council. Top vote getters, I expect, around 50-55K, with the lowest much lower. So there is a good chance of movement b/w now and election day. Also, weather can be a big factor.
__________________________________________________________________________
I do not work for/support any candidate for any office in Philadelphia.
How many people do you think
How many people do you think will be voting on Tues?