I've been following this thread, and other threads on the city races for a
while, and there are so may things that are easily forgotten or simply not
discussed.
No one brings up the fact that Peter McLaughlin is running on an
anti-progressive "law-and-order" campaign message at a time when this city just
when through a painful fight over questionable practices by Minneapolis Police
and another one over the nomination of a new police chief.
Almost everyone seems to have forgotten that Don Samuels has praised Natalie
Johnson-Lee several times, promised NOT to challenge Natalie Johnson-Lee and
promised to move in to the new third ward during his initial campaign. Few
people mention, or perhaps don't notice that he seems to have changed his mind
for political convenience.
We seem to have all forgotten RT Rybak's campaign promises to limit fundraising
and to limit campaign contributions, that Gary Schiff and Robert Lilligren once
ran as progressives, but since getting elected have become "Law-and-Order"
conservatives...no offense meant to genuine conservatives.....
....and when talking about the council races we only focus on the DFL. We sort
of don't talk about how the 5th and 6th ward incumbants are Green (I think
Natalie Johnson-Lee is one of the best council members this city has ever seen
and will probably be re-elected, hence my venting in the above paragraph) and
that there will be more than one political party running candidates, and more
than one political party represented on the city council.
I think a Green or an independent also has a good chance of winning the 8th and
3rd ward seats.
I see where Booker is comming from, but as I'm (probably) not going to vote DFL
for my council race (I live in the new ward 1 and I'm not really a big fan of
President Ostrow) I don't really care whether the DFL delagates delay
endorsement or not, nor do I care who they endorse.
I'm not one of those people who buy in to the mythology of the "DFL Machine,"
but from what I've heard from many of those who went to the local DFL to
support Howard Dean or Dennis Kucinich and were systematically kept out of the
process, the DFL is NOT the place to inact political change.
The vicious partisanship of some DFLers toward elected officials who share many
of their values but aren't elected within the DFL process (ie. the Delay like
redistricting fiasco which was so obviously directed at Green Council Members)
is somewhat baffling to me.
I urge everyone to take an open minded and objective look at the Green, IP and
independent candidates as well as DFL candidates. You might find that you
agree more with the other parties. I'm convinced that Minneapolis can only
benifit from their greater participation.
Of course, I'm something of a third party partisan with no one really inspiring
for whom to vote.
Tamir Nolley
Holland.
Now in ward 1
Tim Bonham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>An interesting notion put forth at the end of Booker Hodges's latest
>Minnesota Spokesman-Recorder column:
>
>"I believe that the Minneapolis DFL should not endorse candidates in this
>year's mayoral, 8th, & 5th ward city council races until after the primary.
>Endorsement in these races would do nothing but divide the community and the
>party."
>
>Bill Dooley
>Kenny - Ward 13
>
This is a common ploy by newspapers & other media.
They would much prefer that their own editorial endorsement be the major
one in the race, instead of the endorsement of several thousand DFL
delegates.
The Strib tried this a few years ago, when they refused to publish
endorsements (except their own) in the voters guide. If they couldn't stop
parties & other groups from making endorsements, they could at least try to
keep people from finding out about those endorsements. That didn't last,
either.
And this isn't even getting into the discussion of the financial
self-interest the media has in encouraging such intra-party battles. Just
like their preference for primaries over precinct caucuses -- they sell
lots of ads for a primary, but not for precinct caucuses.
Finally, it isn't the endorsement that "divides the party"; that happens
when a losing candidate decides to run against the endorsed candidate
anyway. If the party was already evenly divided, there would not have been
any endorsement, since a super-majority 60% vote is required to
endorse. Saying the party endorsement causes the division is rather like
saying women in 'provocative' clothes cause rape!
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more.
REMINDERS:
1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If
you think a member is in violation, contact 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 Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn
E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[email protected]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
