New Poll has Nutter Moving

The Next Mayor has a new poll, and it will make certain people on this blog really happy:

In the last poll from Susquehanna Polling and Research (SP&R), conducted for the Pennsylvanians for Effective Government and soon to be released by KYW, Michael Nutter has moved up into a "statistical tie" for first with Tom Knox. You'll remember that in the last poll released by PEG and conducted by SP&R from March 13-14, Knox took the lead with 22%, followed by Fattah at 17% and the rest in a statistical tie from 10-13%.

Now, Nutter has moved from 12% to 18% and Knox has dropped from 22% to 20% while his unfavorables have increased from 12% in March to 21% now.

According to a memo accompanying the poll, it looks like Nutter's gains are due to a surge in his support among white Democrats where he leads Knox 29% to 24%. The memo also indicates that Nutter may be benefitting from the fact that Brady's unfavorables have continued to climb. Meanwhile, Fattah, as in other polls, continues to enjoy the lead in support among black voters with Knox, surprisingly, maintaining second place in that category. However, 32% of the black voters surveyed remain undecided so there is room for any candidate to move there. The memo concludes by stating that it appears Knox "may have peaked too early." (ed. - Is that what the kids are calling it these days?)

Candidate Today March December Trend
Fattah 14 17 29 -15
Brady 9 13 10 -1
Evans 7 10 12 -5
Nutter 18 12 12 +6
Knox 20 22 9 +11

Obviously, the poll trends here are good for Nutter. But, what is clear is that if the poll is right, anything can happen in the next few weeks. Why? Because when they asked people if they were definitely supporting their candidate, Fattah had 10%, Nutter had 12% and Knox had 14%. In other words, this is looking pretty fluid.

This thing gets crazier all the time.

And, by the way, this poll has 49% white, and 44% African American as its sample size. That likely artificially deflates Fattah by at least a couple of points. (I am wrong- that was the March poll's numbers.)

Sample demographic correction

And, by the way, this poll has 49% white, and 44% African American as its sample size.

No it doesn't.

Q12. Is your main racial heritage of Caucasian, African­ American, Hispanic, Asian American or another
background? (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)
1. Caucasian 213 47%
2. African American 212 47%
3. Hispanic 5 01%
4. Asian or Pacific Islander 2 01% ­­
5. Native American 2 01% ­­
6. Other 15 03%
7. Refuse 5 01%

[Three columns omitted for clarity.]

I support Michael Nutter for Mayor.

Ooops. That was the March

Ooops. That was the March poll. I will correct. Anyway, this is still likely wrong on the demo numbers.

Also, I cannot tell you what

Also, I cannot tell you what a pain in the butt it was to make that table.

I noticed that

I noticed that and I was impressed. I don't know how you did it, but it looks nice.

I support Michael Nutter for Mayor.

you're a hero

Nice looking table, and very helpful at seeing the trends.

I agree that probably the biggest take-home here is how soft all the numbers are right now. People have been talking as though Knox was a real force of nature, unstoppable, etc., but it's clear that some more ads from other guys, plus some negative coverage, have introduced a lot of doubt among his supporters. (Am interested by the possibility that those looking for "any outsider" might see Nutter The Reformer as a good alternative.) There's still a lot of time for various developments, endorsements, and so forth. And that's all before we get to Election Day and throw in the last-minute effect of ground troops...


Demographic breakdown

See this old post from The Next Mayor on demographic breakdowns:

".... in terms of performance most pollsters and numbers crunchers - including those working on the various mayoral campaigns i've talked to - think on election day the votes will be closer to 46% to 48% white"

I support Michael Nutter for Mayor

More interesting pro-Nutter observations

Unfavorables comparisons from last month:
Fattah jumped from 16% to 25%
Brady jumped from 24% to 32%
Evans jumped from 11% to 17%
Nutter fell from 18% to 16%
Knox jumped from 12% to 21%

Favorables comparisons from last month:
Fattah fell from 52% to 48%
Brady fell from 38% to 36%
Evans fell from 49% to 46%
Nutter jumped from 44% to 58%
Knox fell from 49% to 47%

"Q7b. If undecided, are you leaning towards voting for any of the candidates?"
Fattah 8% ­­
Brady 5% ­­
Evans 2%
Nutter 8%
Knox 5%

I support Michael Nutter for Mayor.

Good For Nutter, OK for Fattah, Bad for Brady

This poll can only be described as good for Nutter. (I polled earlier that I didn't think he had any chance of winning, so there is no spin here.)

Crime is far and away the top issue and no other issue seems to be important. (My only blog is Its the Crime Stupid and that has not changed but gotten stronger.) Nutter has not been running very hard on crime, but on change. So he is attracting voters who want a change. He seems to be connecting with white voters and suggesting change will fix problems like crime. That's a surprise.

Those white voters are coming from two sources -- Brady and Knox. My gut feeling is that Nutter is going to do very well in wards 5, 8, 21, 9, etc., but he must have much broader support than that.

The problem is that Brady's numbers have not moved appreciably even after advertising and his negatives have gone up. (That implies that the more people know, the more they are not positively moved by his candidacy.) A lot of that is a function of the Paper's tacit endorsement of Nutter. (No need to pub it in the editorial section, they do it in deciding what to publish.) Nutter has very low negatives and I'd be hard pressed to point out a negative article.

So those negative stories and the increased attacks on Knox are pushing white voters to Nutter. (That violates an assumption about Philadelphia politics that race trumps everything.)

For Fattah, no great movement downward, even though his campaign is not taking off. So he has a core support of voters that are going to vote for him no matter what. However, there are a lot of undecided African American voters. With Evans fading out of the picture, those voters are going to find a home w/ Fattah. (The same thing happened with John Street.) I also think that turnout is going to be a little higher African American voters -- as opposed to 47/47, I think it could be 49-45. That's worth a point or two for Fattah.

For Brady, there is not a lot of good news. With the papers pushing Nutter's candidacy, middle class white voters are fleeing towards Nutter. When people get dissatisfied with Knox, they are not going towards Brady, but towards Nutter.

Its a little early to call, because of what some have called the Rizzo effect. I think that's going to shrink Nutter's numbers a bit. I think that Brady's numbers are going to be strong in S. Philly, the River Wards and the Northeast. But if that's true, his numbers would be better. I think that some of the voters that are for Nutter may end up voting for Brady. (Particularly if he takes my unsolicited advise to go hard on crime.)

For Knox, the best way to keep his numbers is to go negative on the other candidates. But the late negative news ads will start to take its toll, given that the media is completely pro Nutter at this point.

But Nutter has momentum. The issue is will he have enough GOTV to get that momentum to the polls.

I do not work for/support any candidate for any office in Philadelphia.

5th Ward

Overwhelmingly for Nutter. Not a full "consensus," but most of the committeeperson letters will go out with his name on them. For what it's worth -- some people may be willing to give his run more credence if they realize that he has some institutional support as well as just loose supporters in various areas...


"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."
— Margaret Mead

I wonder what kind of tax breaks the mediaglomerates

and their big advertisers will get from Nutter as he grinds down the BPT? Of course, that's not corruption, just objective concern with public policy.


Stan - what the heck are you even talking about?

Disclaimer: I support Nutter for Mayor, McClure for 4th District, Stier, D. Green, Reynolds Brown, and Kenney for Council-at-Large and Barack Obama for President. I also like dogs, asian food, the East Falls School Committee, and PhillyCarShare.

I too like Pina Coladas

and long walks in the rain....actually, I have never had one ( I drink scotch or Jack Daniels), just thought it went well with Friedman's disclaimer.

"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."
— Margaret Mead


your disclaimer just made my day

your disclaimer just made my day.

where can I get me one of those?


Stan: Why wasn't I in on that meeting?

If the newspaper owners and the big advertisers are handing down marching orders, you'd think I'd be on the list.

Maybe you don't have as much clout as you

thought you have, clout.

But folks, calm down. We all know that the media are the only entity on earth that never acts in its own self-interest. The very idea that they would act in their own self interest and pretend that it's only the public interest that they care about is so bizarre that Friedman, rightfully, doesn't even understand what I'm talking about. Humblest apologies for any illusions I may have inadvertently pierced while presenting such incomprehensible ideas.

And, btw, I want you to know that all the zillions of lobbyists that the media has roaming the halls of congress are doing so on behalf of all of us. Media consolidation, preventing free use of the airwaves for political candidates, barring states from regulating cable access, all of these things are being fought for day and night, at great cost to the mediaglomerates, just for you and for me. And Santa Claus is coming to town.

Also assuming that the

Also assuming that the political beliefs of the paper could have in no way be in line with citizens of the City, right?

So, let ,e guess, everyone that endorses Fattah is enlightened and everyone that doesn't is serving their self interests?

Staff member of Longacre for 5th Council District.
Longacre Website

No, that's not

my point. It's just that the fact of self-interest is there when the press speaks. Most of us readily admit we vote for someone who advances policies that we believe, at least to some extent, are in our own interest. That's certainly true of the press as well, but they don't admit it. So in evaluating what they say, we should be aware that they are no more fully consumed with the public interest than any other corporate entity. Part of the reason nationally that the right has become so powerful is that the corporate agenda has been so successfully wrapped in the American flag and in the language of economic growth for everyone. Their well-paid spin doctors make it seem as if big corporations take the largesse that Congress bestows on them only to benefit the poor unwashed masses. The increasingly corporate dominated press is at the very center of the spin machine. And at the center of that machine locally, is the Philadelphia Inquirer.

Which is not to say that everything the Inquirer says, or its reporters, is necessarily wrong. But it has biases based on its interests. It's wise for us to be aware of that as we look to it for guidance.

Ok, I can go with you on

Ok, I can go with you on that. It has just gotten to the point that, much as your example with the media, we have to take what you say in regards to Nutter with a grain of salt as well and realize where it is coming from.

I think you can understand how some people would be skeptical of your comment and expected a completely different reaction if Inky came out to support Fattah. I would bet a lot of people would have expected you to say something like "The Inky gets what is important to the City's growth." as opposed to telling people to discount the endorsement for Fattah because "they would pay less taxes in a profits only environment and that is why they are supporting them".

Staff member of Longacre for 5th Council District.
Longacre Website

I'm not any more completely objective than

the next guy. And it's true that the impending Nutter endorsement by what may be almost the entire press corps brought to the top of my head stuff that was previously not at the top of my blog list of priorities. But I'm glad you can agree with my point even though you may disagree with what motivated my making it when I did.

And I did say, btw, that notwithstanding its self-interested bias, the Inky isn't always wrong. So, and I'm sure you can see me smiling, if it happened to endorse Fattah, that would be one of those times. Of course, there is today's unbelievable puff piece, which has Nutter merely "keeping the wage- and business-tax cuts in place" rather than zealously driving to wipe out the BPT, which is the reality. After that I would bet on the waters parting before I would bet on the Inquirer agonizing for more than 3 minutes over whom to endorse.

Some people on this forum

Some people on this forum try to make me out to be a bad guy, but I think in any of our conversations, you have frequently seen me concede points that I believe are accurate, even if they undercut a position of mine. As I believe you would agree, truth is more important than being right.

So yes, I agree, that the Inky endorsement has to be taken with a grain of salt, as any endorsement does.

Staff member of Longacre for 5th Council District.
Longacre Website

Newspaper Endorsements

If you listen to the Inquirer Interviews, and I did for Nutter, that was some pretty contentious questions and heated debate. I'm sure the knives were out for everyone else too.

And they polled LIKELY VOTERS!

Glancing through the methodology, I think this is the best-done poll among the several that have come out in the last couple of weeks. They have a decent sample size (450), they only target LIKELY voters, and they reveal breakdowns by race, age, and wards.

I think Olivia gets a cut of

I think Olivia gets a cut of this one. Seriously.

Volunteering for Michael Nutter

Nutter is a Viable Challenger to Knox

One of the great things about these poll numbers is that they show voters starting to move toward a single challenger to Knox. For Knox to be defeated, the anti-Knox vote needs to coalesce around one of the challengers. Somebody has to rise above the field. Of course, as a Nutter supporter (not working for the campaign), I'm thrilled to see this poll showing Nutter moving in that position. On election day, though, it will all come down to GOTV!

Agree w/JPorter

It will absolutely come down to GOTV on election day. And, as I've said elsewhere, when it comes to GOTV operations, you can never overlook Bob Brady. And didn't Clout write today of a link between John Dougherty + Tom Knox? Don't underestimate IBEW's effectiveness in GOTV operations either. Frankly, I can't see any of the other candidates doing election day GOTV as well as Brady or Knox (the latter assuming that Clout's report is accurate).

Things that make you 'hmm,'

Actually, when it comes to

Actually, when it comes to GOTV operations, you can never overlook money.

THAT is where I think Knox's money will come into play, not the ads.

He can afford to hire a lot of professional tree shakers.

Staff member of Longacre for 5th Council District.
Longacre Website

Brady will probably do

Brady will probably do better than the polls show because of his GOTV machine, but my sense is that he's overestimating his ability in that area. Philly's machine is directed at getting people to the polls who probably wouldn't vote otherwise. In contrast, I think Nutter's votes are much more reliable. The Nutter Movement is about change and reform. More and more people are seeing just how dysfunctional city government is and are gravitating toward the candidate most reform-minded. Nutter's support is probably more solid and reliable than a machine-oriented voter.

If this poll is to be

If this poll is to be believed, and its not half bad as polls go, Brady's biggest concern should be that white Democratic voters are going from Knox to Nutter. That should be a very big concern in the Brady camp.

I believe that most undecided African American voters will break for Fattah or stay at home. (That will only help Nutter and Knox as the percentage of white/black voters may turn higher for white voters.) Fattah is fairly well known, so the fact that he has not consolidated most of the African American vote should concern the campaign a little. With Evans fading, and Nutter pressing more conservative in strategy, a late push for Fattah could bring voters his way.

But it is very much an open race.

I do not work for/support any candidate for any office in Philadelphia.

Money + IBEW 98...

... as Tom Kean might have said a few years back, 'puh-fect together.'

Ironic, no?

Above Average Jane has also

Above Average Jane has also endorsed Michael Nutter for Mayor.

I think we're going to start seeing more and more people who are in the business of advocating for better, more effective city government and who don't represent narrow special interests come out in support of Nutter. He really does stand out from the rest of the field as the most reform-minded candidate, with a proven track record and an impressive understanding of city government. He is the unity candidate that all Philadelphians, regardless of economic, racial, educational or political background, can support.

just for the record

just for the record, that's A Smoke-Filled Room. I don't think Jane has taken a position yet (and may not, from the burbs)...


I'm sorry, that's correct. I

I'm sorry, that's correct. I had AAJ on the brain.

I'm sure

I'm sure she'd be flattered...

To say that the News Media

To say that the News Media in Philly has direct marching orders is not to far from the truth. There is no dark room where they pass it out, but the coverage tends to favor the business candidate. Negative stories on one, positive spin stories on another, it adds up to a perceptible bias.

The Media was for Katz and against Street. For Rendell and against Blackwell. For Weinberg, then against Weinberg, but never for Street. (Oddly enough, Milton Street is a media favorite, b/c who says the stuff he says.) For Goode and against Rizzo, etc. (Although Rizzo was also a media favorite.) Just look at the number of positive stories against negative ones, it usually lines up the editorial boards endorsement.

The print media are under pressure to turn stories around quickly. So what most campaign staffers do is call them up. Establish relationships, and then have background conversations about what they think is really going on in the campaign. When an issue is hot, the reporters call on their established sources to give them guidance and background. Sometimes these folks -- remember they work for campaigns or elected officials -- provide people to quote to fill in a story. (They need to print stories and stories require backup, hence the need for quotes.)

So a lot of what you read as investigative journalism on political matters, started as a hatchet job that someone else planted/suggested. With the consolidation of the papers, there is going to be much less independent thinking and more headline driven AP type reports.

There are hard working reporters out there, but then they come with their own biases. The papers love to print municipal corruption stories. That's how you win those neat awards and get your articles above the fold and on the front page. (Story placement is how you tell the importance of what the paper's editors want.) So, if you are a reporter, do you write about that neat little block that's turned around in Northern Liberties, or the inspector on the take. One will get you a Pulitzer.

So to make a name for themselves, many intrepid reporters are trolling for dirt. Guess who is ever willing to give it to them, those media shills that make their living passing along dirt. You can read b/w the lines in most stories to get a sense of who the sources were that planted the story or spun it. (It may be called "anonymous sources", "high ranking city official", "sources close to the candidate"). Those are the folks that feed the story.

But the real bias is that most reporters don't live in the City or live in Center City. (That's why Fattah's tax on Center City got so much attention.) It's not that issues in other areas don't matter, but to the reporters, their frame of reference is skewed by what they hear.

The media love Nutter. He is good for quotes. Has been friendly for years. Always willing to do an interview. So, the media think "Smart Guy, he should run the City." (I am not offering a critique of that view.) They are naturally inclined to like him. Hence, all of the positive media ads in the beginning of his campaign. He is willing to sit down with reporters, talk to them about his vision, etc.

A lot of candidates have a fear or strong dislike of reporters, in large part, b/c many reporters already have a story in their head that they want to tell and are looking for quotes from you. (Municipal government is screwing this up, here's some business people that say why the City is being destroyed b/c of it, here is an elected official that doesn't get it.) A lot of candidates don't want to be that elected official, so they decline interviews. Also, they do try to get attention for the positive stuff they do, but that's not the kind of stories people want to read.

But, to the extent that you can describe the media in one generalization -- which is difficult b/c reporters are people, and some really do have the desire to do positive coverage -- it is clear that they bring a set of biases that often supports the business friendly candidate. There is a host of literature that confirms/dissects this problem in campaigns.

I do not work for/support any candidate for any office in Philadelphia.

truthtold: Who is "the News Media"? I know a little bit

about the Daily News and all 3 of the political reporters live in the city. I don't know whether or not they love Nutter because I've never asked them. I do know he's not as good on quotes as some of the other candidates. I do like the idea of collating stories and seeing how much coverage each candidate is getting. Not sure how you'd decide what is "negative" and what is "positive," but maybe someone at the Annenberg School could do it. As for getting marching orders being "not far from the truth," I'm still waiting to be invited to that meeting. Here I am flailing around with no marching orders.

Anyone seen any stories

examining both sides of the "tax debate," (as discussed ad infinitum/nauseum? here at YPP)?

Endorsing a candidate is one thing. Only reporting on both sides of some issues and not others is another thing.

Its not that there are

Its not that there are marching orders, but each paper/outlet has an audience that it likes to cater too. For the Inky, that's suburban readers. Which is why I thought it odd when it dropped Philadelphia from the trucks. For the DN, that's rowhome readers -- they don't have to live in a rowhome either.

For City Paper and Philadelphia Weekly, its Center City readers. For the rest of the print, its their area of distribution.

That slant/bias/preference/priority whatever you term it, affects what gets reported. The editors decide where to place, how much space to give, what time to allow.

For a political campaign it has some very slanting effects. You are dying to get press to distinguish yourself. In a district race, it could be some very serious differences on what part of the district and issues get priority. In a citywide race, it could be more candidate driven. But given that one of the goals of each candidate is to get attention, and nothing beats an "impartial" article, these priorities are important.

For the Inky, whose average reader lives in the suburbs and pays the Wage Tax, shock of shocks, talk about the Wage Tax or cutting taxes generally and you will get their attention. That means that if you take the stance about cutting taxes (as opposed to explaining why cutting taxes means cutting services), you will get the Inky's general attention.

For the DN, whose average reader does not, the articles are a little more Mayfair Diner than Le Bec Fin fare. The DN focuses a lot on personalities as if it were a clash of feudal kingdoms. So to get the DN's attention, if you are a candidate or operative, spread some insider dirt. That means that the only important issues are those involving clashes of personalities -- Fumo v. Doc. Interesting debate, but what about Fattah v. Tasco. Why does that not get any publicity?

The other local papers don't have such sharp distinctions b/w advertising and editing. So, if you buy an ad, you have a pretty good chance of getting a good article about your candidate/money you gave to a rec center/ etc.

Those are the marching orders that I am referring to.

As to individual reporters, many are very, very good and try conciously not to get spun. But where they get spun is in reporting trash. Good example, Angel Ortiz did something to anger someone in the Latino community -- I can't remember who or what. That person went all around town and said he was going to make Angel pay for not supporting whatever issue.

Two days later, every outlet reports that Angel didn't have a driver's license. Is that news, sure, but is it new? The taste for dirt allowed someone with a political grudge to dictate what the news cycle said. (Not that a City Councilman in a City car driving w/o license isn't interesting stuff.) I use it as an example -- perhaps hyperbolic -- of what happens on campaigns all the time.

So then you read the papers and see what candidate/campaign got its spin in the paper. Whether that spin is accepted or not, is a function of the outlet's bias/preference, and those are the marching orders.

This is not a universal theory -- Jill Porter and Elmer don't come from the same school of thought. But there is a lot of well documented truth in the media bias issue. (And I am not referring to the right wing conspiracy that some say is Fox News.)

I do not work for/support any candidate for any office in Philadelphia.

"The other local papers

"The other local papers don't have such sharp distinctions b/w advertising and editing. So, if you buy an ad, you have a pretty good chance of getting a good article about your candidate/money you gave to a rec center/ etc."

This is so true. It's just like my last article for Philadelphia Weekly: "TS Destiny provides excellent service."

True - you guys did have a

True - you guys did have a good article on the mural at 15th & waverly that the historical commission went outside of its own regs to try to take down.

Bias Media

Isn't this the argument conservatives have been spouting for years? It's amazing how people are so much more willing to selectively adopt arguments that conveniently suit their agenda.

No, it's the exact opposite

and they were wrong.

What are the odds your tune

What are the odds your tune would change if the Inquirer endorses Fattah? Newspapers, especially the Inquirer, routinely endorse Democrats in general elections. To say that now they are suddenly motivated by their own self-interest and can't be trusted to offer valuable insight into which candidate would be best for the city, sounds a bit self-serving itself. Yes, all endorsements should be taken with a grain of salt, but the media endorsements and those of grassroots organizations advocating for ethical effective government do count for something and can't simply be dismissed when they don't serve your personal interests. I have no idea who the Inquirer or any other organization will endorse, but I'm confident that Nutter's intelligence and proven commitment to making city government work for all Philadelphians puts him in the best position to be recognized by the Inquirer and others as the obvious choice for mayor.

If I recall correctly...

The Inky endorsed Sam Katz in 1999, and perhaps also in '03. Whatever his political views, he was certainly running as a Republican each time, rather than as a Dem.


Is that a rainbow behind those clouds?

I know this is just horse race stuff, but it's fun:

If we assume for the moment that thanks to his money and his lead, Tom Knox will be in the mix on election day, and that because Knox will be there, Bob Brady won't (sorry committeefolk, you guys'll have the best field team May 15, but you'll likely be pulling out a lot of Knox supporters accidentally), three likely e-day scenarios emerge:

1) A Crowded Field: Knox in first, Michael Nutter in second, and Chaka Fattah in third or some variation

2) Knox and Nutter, pulling away from the field

3) Fattah regains second place, and he pulls away from the field with Knox

Oh, I forgot Dwight Evans. Good guy. Not going to win. Should have had John White's votes in 1999 but ran a crazy campaign. More on him later.

Since Fattah has so little money for TV, it seems unlikely that he CAN reverse his downward spiral, so scenario 3, while still feasible, probably won't happen.

But KnoxStoppers may not want that scenario anyway. Because if Fattah pulls away with Knox, sure, some Evans' supporters will come over to Fattah on election day (as Evans' supporters came over to Street in '99), but Nutter's supporters probably won't come over. Nutter-supporters are, in fact, more White and less prone to Knox-anxiety because of their relative similarity as Reform candidates. So with Fattah battling Knox, we'll likely see some last-minute anti-Knox supporters from Evans coming over to Fattah on e-day, but relatively few from anyone else.

BUT if Nutter pulls away with Knox, I'd argue that (1) a similar number of Evans' supporters would come over to Nutter on election day, AND (2) because his supporters are mostly African-American and more likely to seek a Knox-alternative, a fair number of Fattah's supporters would come over to Nutter too, if they believed Nutter had the best chance of Stopping Knox. Thus, with Nutter battling Knox on e-day, supporters from TWO candidates (Evans and Fattah), rather than one, likely would come over to Nutter.

That's why I argue that if KnoxStopping is your passion, you should prefer a Knox-Nutter race to a Knox-Fattah race, even if, for some, it is counterintuitive.

The campaign that Michael has run, HELL the career Michael has had, makes him, as Jill points out, a natural Unity Candidate. Such candidates can snowball to victory at the end of campaigns. It's been known to happen.

People can actually feel GOOD about the executive candidate they are voting for.

Sometimes the butterflies and rainbows scenario actually works.

Proudly supporting the BEAUTIFUL Philly For Change Council Slate and MICHAEL NUTTER for Mayor

Bang on...

'People can actually feel GOOD about the executive candidate they are voting for.'

Sam, this is perhaps the most succinct reason to vote for Nutter that I've ever seen. It's certainly a good summary of my reasons.

In a related note, I still like the article from the PW a few weeks back entitled "Nerds for Nutter." It makes me feel even better to think that, in a city w/as racially-charged a history as Philly, we could perhaps actually be seeing the first example of race-irrelevant voting.

Which would be an insanely-great thing,

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Syndicate content