Annie Young writes: And it's always fun to watch Rick [Stafford -- Council DFL appointee] play his obvious games, get caught in a jam and then watch how he works his way out of it so he still looks like the good guy. I don't know if his last ditch vote can help save his reputation but it was a brilliant vote and at that point he knew the votes for the plan and had nothing to lose. He got what he wanted - protected those he needed to and to some might appear that he came out "smelling like a rose". Amazing!
=========================================================== Thanks for this analysis Annie. I often disagree with you, but on this, I agree with you 100%. Some of this plan seemed to be Stafford settling a few scores. He does well at that one. I think with a matchup between Robert Lilligren and Dean Zimmerman, Lilligren can win easily. He has a good ability to bring together smart people to help him with his campaign. It is definitely a "screw the incumbent greens" plan. At the same time, I agree with another poster, is this gives the greens a good opportunity in the new ward 10. At 11:39 PM 04/13/2002 -0500, Rosalind Nelson wrote: >Zimmerman has talked about moving to remain within Ward 6 boundaries. Has >Lilligren said anything similar? > >As for benefits for Ward 8, a number of people feel that Ward 5 has lost >influence because of losing the prosperous downtown areas. Ward 8 is losing a >chunk of Phillips but gaining the more prosperous blocks on the west section of >Powderhorn and in Kingfield. Will this make Ward 8 more influential? > >I am (for not very good reasons) pleased that Bancroft is still part of Ward >8. I seem to enjoy drama a little too much. > I agree to a point with Rosalind. To me, Lake St and 35W seem like natural barriers. I worked very hard to get a council member who was going to be an energetic and hard worker on the council -- and not someone who was going to be a pawn of others on the council. I don't want to lose that. I've talked to some people in the ward who are concerned that the DFL insiders have someone in mind to run for this seat -- some are saying Vicki Brock -- personally I can't believe they would be that stupid. The one thing that is nice, is that Caucuses who choose delegates for the DFL endorsement will be held -- and a fresh set of delegates chosen. People who care about the neigborhood and can stomach going to DFL caucuses will have to make sure to get to the caucuses, so the choice isn't someone chosen by DFL insiders and Labor hacks. This means someone who is going to fight to rehab good quality properties in the neighborhood rather than tear them down and rebuild poor quality housing at an inflated price -- something the MCDA is known for. This is one reason, I will be suspicious of someone who gets building and trades union endorsement. I'm all in favor of unions in terms of the right to collectively bargain and negotiate contracts. I am suspicious when they do things to try to create make work jobs at public expense for their members. The building and trades unions for example are some of the biggest boosters of raising our taxes to build a stadium. I ofcourse, would like to see this as an opportunity for a republican candidate who has strong neighborhood experience -- and there are people in this ward who would fit that role -- but realistically that would be an uphill struggle. Will the Stonewall DFL endorsement matter to the Gay and Lesbian residents in this ward? Not a bit. Stonewall has a lot of work to regain credibility here. Karen Louise Boothe (who is, or recently was communications director for the DFL) has written a shot accross the bow in Lavender. http://www.lavendermagazine.com/179/179_letters_14.html from the article: Even within the halls of DFL Party headquarters, caucus leadership and influence are sadly ridiculed. If that weren't enough of a wake-up call, the caucus fails to represent the diversity of GLBT voters. So, what can the caucus do to raise its clout, and gain more status and appreciation in the eyes of party staff, candidates and voters? It can begin by serving as a watchdog on the records of those it endorses and especially of those it doesn't endorse. The Stonewall DFL Caucus can free itself from the grip of its own internal political struggles, and educate voters about the issues, legislation, and voting records of our leaders. ============================================================ Stonewall DFL doesn't do this. Part of the reason their endorsement matters little to educated GLBT voters is that their most important question is whether the candidate will abide by DFL endorsement. While that might be important to DFL activists, it is not something that is important to the GLBT population in general. It is certainly not relevant to Gay voters who aren't democrat, but will sometimes cross over to vote for dems when the republican candidate seems to come from the Leviticus Crowd. Eva Eva Young Central Neighborhood Minneapolis "You do not have the right to never be offended. This country is based on freedom, and that means freedom for everyone - not just you! You may leave the room, turn the channel, express a different opinion, etc., but the world is full of idiots, and probably always will be." --Article II of the Bill of Non-Rights. _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
