My second post, so I guess this will be my last words
on this.
> > Eric Mitchell wrote: >> I have to disagree with
> the underlying tone or blame. >>
>
> . [ds] I see no underlying tone or blame in
> Booker's comment that was simply stating an
> objective fact. No one can disagree that
> redistricting moved the boundary line which caused
> Samuel's home to be switched from the 3rd ward to
> the 5th ward.
(Eric)
The line was moved BEFORE Samuels ran. Samuels still
made the decision to run knowing he would be in Fifth
Ward. He knew he would have to move, or take on the
incumbent if he were to stay in office. Samuels, to
his credit, had not decided if he was going to run
again or do something else. Point is, the line was
drawn BEFORE the special election went into effect
> > Eric Mitchell wrote: >> Booker is playing
> a little loose with the redistricting timeline to
> suggest that it may be the cause of this. The lines
> were drawn before Samuels got in the race and won
> the election ...There is/was no conspiracy...>>
>
> . [ds] Unless I have missed something from
> a previous post, I see nothing in this post by
> Booker to suggest a conspiracy. Someone please
> point it out to me if it exists, but thus far, I
> have read no media reports with credible evidence
> of a plot. While it may be playing a little loose
> to blame individuals of conspiring, one must admit
> that there has been an interesting coincidence of
> events.
>
> - First, the Green Party candidate, Johnson Lee,
> defeated the DFL candidate, Cherryhomes, in Ward 5.
> - Then, a DFL upstart, Samuels, was redistricted out
>
> of Ward 3- where he a few months later challenged
> and defeated the DFL endorsee.
> - Now, Samuels, redistricted into Ward 5, is a
> strong
> DFL challenger against the Green Party incumbent,
> Johnson Lee- and is no longer a challenger in Ward
> 3.
(Eric)
I don't need the rudimentary explanation of a
conspiracy. In politics, all it takes is for the
repetition of false information over a period of time
for it to be a real problem of perception.
You (*last time was October 6th), and others(including
Hodges) have consistently questioned the motives
behind the new redistricting lines. The DFL is out to
get the Greens (though Samuels is a DFLer) and so
forth. Repeat it long enough and the perception
becomes a reality. The national Republican Party have
taken this to a level of near perfection.
Joe Barasonzi addressed this point right here back in
June. Again, Your timeline is off. I'll let Joe's
words explain it. Afterall, he was Samuels Campaign
Manager:
1. The current unfortunate plan was passed with the
support of the Green
Party representative on the Commission.
2. There was no effort to put Councilmember Lee into
the same district
as a close ally. The close ally DFL Councilmember
Samuels was not a
council member at the time. When he ran for office he
knew that his
neighborhood would not be in the Third Ward after
redistricting. This
fact was regularly used against Don during the
election.
3. The efforts to overturn the redistricting plan have
been consistently
supported in both time and money by many active DFLers
including DFL
officer holders since the beginning.
Eric Mitchell
St Paul
*Wednesday, October 06,
Is it at all
possible that DFL insiders in April 2002 could have
speculated that Samuels might be a good DFL
contender against Johnson Lee in the next election?
Dave Stack,
Harrison
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do?
http://my.yahoo.com
REMINDERS:
1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL
PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list.
2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html
For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract
________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
