Greater Greater Washington

Vote for mayor with your heart, or strategically?

It's a perennial question in DC politics and one that's likely to arise in this year's mayoral race: If your favorite candidate isn't considered highly likely to win, should you vote for your favorite, or pick the best of the frontrunners if you feel there is a clear difference between them?


Photo by Keith Ivey on Flickr.

Reader Max faces this dilemma. He wrote this letter (before the Washington Post endorsed Muriel Bowser):

The race is highly congested with none of the candidates really gaining much momentum. The candidate doing the best is probably the worst on GGW issues and that's Bowser (exhibit A).

As I see it, its a choice between Gray and Wells. ... I am personally torn. I gave Wells a small contribution, but right now would vote for Gray because he has a better chance of beating Bowser. Is it worth the risk to support a guy that may peak at 25%, instead of backing Gray who has been a very solid mayor and who could lose to someone that stands for absolutely nothing.

Note: Neither I nor Greater Greater Washington have made any endorsements yet, and we will be posting video of interviews with the candidates so that readers can make up their own minds. You will be able to see my discussion with Bowser, so that you can decide for yourself if she is bad on Greater Greater Washington's issues, or not, before hearing the contributors' opinion. But I have certainly spoken to a number of people who feel the same way as Max.

The Washington Post's endorsement really should not come as much of a surprise, whether you agree with it or not. Muriel Bowser is one of the most closely aligned to the Post editorial board's view on a number of issues. For example, she is a more conservative Democrat on fiscal matters, as are the members of the editorial board. Harry Jaffe predicted this outcome weeks ago. Still, their choice will influence many voters who have less personal knowledge of the candidates and the Post editors.

As a result, some voters who prefer a candidate other than Gray or Bowser have considered switching their support to the candidate among those two who they consider best, or at least not worst. What do you think Max, and voters thinking along similar lines, should do?

David Alpert is the Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Greater Greater Washington and Greater Greater Education. He worked as a Product Manager for Google for six years and has lived in the Boston, San Francisco, and New York metro areas in addition to Washington, DC. He loves the area which is, in many ways, greater than those others, and wants to see it become even greater. 

Comments

Add a comment »

I agree with Max 100%. The electorate has to stop splitting votes. I am supporting Gray.

by William on Feb 24, 2014 10:22 am • linkreport

For those who vote with your hearts, things like this are your fault and will always be your fault, and no amount of moralizing changes that fundamental reality. http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-politics/dc-election-officials-report-low-turnout-in-council-at-large-race/2013/04/23/49276024-ac3e-11e2-a8b9-2a63d75b5459_story.html

by Kyle on Feb 24, 2014 10:23 am • linkreport

Dave, I was one of the few people here who thought your endorsement - and the logic behind you endorsement -- of Gray was very strong.

Where Gray continues to be strong is understanding how government works. I don't see that in Broswer at all. Or Wells.

Ultimately, despite attempts to politicize them, the majority of issues discussed here aren't political -- they are what happens to urban areas and cities. What does matter is the ability to get things done.

And where the discussion needs to move to is how things can be done better -- and that is not turning discussion of plowing streets into hashtags.

by charlie on Feb 24, 2014 10:26 am • linkreport

Vote your heart or don't vote at all.

There are less than 700,000 people in this city. If more people voted their conscience, a better crop of politicians would be the inevitable result, maybe not this election cycle, but over time. Politics is a long game. You don't see radical conservatives voting for moderate Republicans just to bear Democrats, but you always see radical leftists voting for some moderate schmoe in hopes of beating a more conservative opponent. It took the Republicans several election cycles to get out of the shadow of Nixon, but they eventually prevailed. And they weren't voting for moderates in the meantime. Leftists, learn patience and build a coalition over several election cycles. The long goal is worth more than the short win.

by Alan P on Feb 24, 2014 10:49 am • linkreport

just to *beat

not bear.

Typo.

by Alan P on Feb 24, 2014 10:50 am • linkreport

@Alan P - Anita Bonds applauds this endorsement.

by Kyle on Feb 24, 2014 10:53 am • linkreport

"It took the Republicans several election cycles to get out of the shadow of Nixon, but they eventually prevailed. And they weren't voting for moderates in the meantime."

LOL!

by GeorgeHWBush on Feb 24, 2014 10:57 am • linkreport

@Kyle

You thoroughly missed the point. Keep looking at politics as a one-election-cycle-at-a-time enterprise.

by Alan P. on Feb 24, 2014 10:58 am • linkreport

@GeorgeHWBush

Were you making some failed attempt at sarcasm as someone who forgot Reagan's first two terms? Oh.

by Alan P. on Feb 24, 2014 10:59 am • linkreport

No one in this race is anything more than a disappointment. Under these circumstances, Gray is the best of the bunch. The Post really jumped the shark on this one. Except for Colbert King, they don't know or care about the District, so they just checked boxes.

by Steve on Feb 24, 2014 11:00 am • linkreport

It's impossible to have this discussion without mentioning that Catania is out there, ready to make a play in the general election. Think of how many people wrote-in Fenty during the last general. If Gray wins the Democratic primary with a relatively small plurality, he will be seen as vulnerable and many of the reflexive Jack Evans Democrats will smell blood in the water. Depending on if the progressive/Wells set goes along with it, a Catania victory could well happen.

by Dizzy on Feb 24, 2014 11:10 am • linkreport

I am reminding people that conservative Republicans DID vote strategically for "moderates", when the choice was a moderate or a liberal. They also voted for Gerald Ford over Jimmy Carter.

Clearly strategic voting works differently in a two party system, or a system with a runoff. You vote your heart in the primary (or the first election in a runoff system) than vote strategically in the general election/runoff.

In a one round one party system, with multiple candidates, there is less opportunity to vote your heart, because there is no chance to vote strategically in a second round.

Those DC voters who think Catania is a viable candidate, and a preferred choice to their non-heart candidates, can take the approach of voting their heart in the Democratic primary and then voting strategically in the second round. Those voters who do not see Catania as viable, or who do not like Catania, will not have the same opportunity.

And yes, AFAICT while tea partiers tend to vote their hearts in primaries, they almost always vote for establishment Republicans over liberal Dems in general elections. And most non tea party conservative Republicans (and some tea partiers) avoid challenging moderate Republicans in primaries in heavily Dem districts. Those Tea Partiers who are not strategic in that way, are losing influence because their politcal naivete has weakened the GOP.

by GeorgeHWBush on Feb 24, 2014 11:10 am • linkreport

Head, heart, kidneys, tongue, whatever - just do NOT under any circumstances let Bowser win.

by LowHeadways on Feb 24, 2014 11:14 am • linkreport

I am glad to see this issue raised here and I very much hope this consideration will play into GGW's endorsement. Voters most concerned with a greater Washington should vote for a candidate who can win and who can represent their interests. I hope you will recommend as such.

CM Wells has been an early adopter and rhetorically a great champion of the issues this blog tackles and so deservedly has won respect. But if he is not truly in the running to win the primary, voting against CM Bowser is a noble enough cause on its own.

by Elections have consequenses on Feb 24, 2014 11:16 am • linkreport

@Dizzy

I just wish I knew where Catania stood on issues besides education, stadium financing, and health care. Those are all important issues, but he's a black box as far as I can tell on all the issues important to the GGW crowd.

by TM on Feb 24, 2014 11:17 am • linkreport

@Dizzy, the difference being that Jack Evans whole reason for running was because he thought Gray wasn't going to. Unless something changes, I cannot see a scenario where Evans doesn't support Gray in the general election. There are other candidates who have clearer policy distinctions (other than clearing Wisconsin Avenue) than those two.

by William on Feb 24, 2014 11:19 am • linkreport

The conservative "vote-your-heart" strategy has managed to take the electoral juggernaut of the 1980s to the edge of being a permanent minority party. The Republicans would likely have taken the Senate two cycles ago, were it not for nominating super-right-wing nut-jobs instead of mere right-wing nut-jobs (I don't think there are any "moderates" left in that party). In the meantime, the Democratic Party, which now consistently nominates moderates at the Presidential level, has such a lock on the Electoral College that they re-elected a black President with over 7% unemployment.

Liberals stick with moderates like Obama, despite a lot of grousing, because most of us remember the last time that the left voted with their hearts... for Ralph Nader. Because of the logic of winner-take-all elections, those people actually were voting for George W. Bush.

by alurin on Feb 24, 2014 11:23 am • linkreport

@georgehwbush

Then what was the point of using the handle "George HW Bush"?

Just accept your sarcasm fail.

ps: Voting for Gerald Ford for "re-election" (election after "selection", anyway) in '76 over a Democrat is not the same as voting for a moderate Republican over a conservative Republican in a primary. You're mixing apples, oranges, and canteloupes. Reagan's strong primary challenge in '76 was a sign of the coming conservative insurgency. Ford didn't win because Republicans thought he could beat Carter, he won because political parties inherently favor the person occupying the office at hand/incumbents. No surprise there, the surprise was how strong Reagan's primary challenge was against a sitting opponent.

by Alan P on Feb 24, 2014 11:23 am • linkreport

Muriel Bowser seems to have not thought at all on any issue beyond whatever pandering talk she needs to give to the next group she's in front of.

I am with Max; to me it seems a choice between Gray and Wells, and I am not sure who to go with. I look forward to reading/watching the candidate interviews on GGW.

by MLD on Feb 24, 2014 11:25 am • linkreport

"The Republicans would likely have taken the Senate two cycles ago"

And yet MoveOn just sent me an email pleading for money because the Republicans are poised to take control of the Senate in the mid-terms, so your point is a few months from becoming moot (unless MoveOn's internal polling is terribly off).

by Alan P. on Feb 24, 2014 11:26 am • linkreport

@Elections +1 I fully agree that we need to vote ways that can make a difference and I hope GGW endorsement is reflective of that.

I went to a Tommy Wells event last night. While I liked him, I definitely have concerns about his electability. One item that came up during the Q&A was about the council having too much power. Perhaps it's not as much the candidates at this point as the system. Should greater focus (for now) be made on trying to 1) reduce council power (larger body?) and 2) trying to get a runoff (or some adjusted) system for the primary elections to make it easier to have 2 shots at the better candidate.

by GP Steve on Feb 24, 2014 11:29 am • linkreport

@alurin

When has the radical left ever controlled either house of Congress? Even if I gave you the 2008-2010 House (Pelosi/Conyers), they immediately precluded pursuing their more radical policies (reparations bill from Conyers, for example). Keep going for half-measures if you want to keep getting halway towards your policy goals. I'm tapping out of this convo.

by Alan P. on Feb 24, 2014 11:30 am • linkreport

@William
the difference being that Jack Evans whole reason for running was because he thought Gray wasn't going to.

If that's the case, then why is Evans still in the race?

by MLD on Feb 24, 2014 11:31 am • linkreport

1. You said lefties vote for moderates over lefties for strategic reasons, while righties don't. In the 1988 general election, righties overwhelming supported GHWBush, not because they loved him, but to beat Michael Dukakis. IE for strategic reasons.

2. I was not referring to voting in a PRIMARY. Yes, conservative Republicans almost always vote for the most conservative in a primary (knowing they can vote strategically in the general if necessary). I would venture lefties do exactly the same. Most lefties voted for Dean in 2004, not for Kerry in the primary. They voted for Obama under the belief (perhaps misguided - falsely generalizing from his opposition to the Iraq war, which loomed very large in 2008) that he was more liberal than Hillary Clinton. I do not agree that lefties are more strategic than righties (and certainly they were not in the 2000 general election for President) it may just be that its harder to see that, since there are far fewer lefties in the Dem party nationally than there are extreme conservatives in the GOP

3. None of which has much to do with a primary in a one party jurisdiction. For reasons explained above. I am also not sure who the "lefty" candidate in the DC Dem mayoral candidate is, unless you are supporting Shallal. Wells is a moderate generally, and if he is the "extreme" candidate on issues of walkability and urbanism, he has not emphasized those issues in his primary campaign.

by GeorgeHWBush on Feb 24, 2014 11:32 am • linkreport

No Muriel, No How.

On the Catania issue, being a parent with a 5 year old in a DC charter school pre-K program, I believe David is right on with his emphasis on reforming our education system. In a certain sense, this is the most important issue our City must solve because if it does not, all the progress that has been made to attract residents who demand all the great things we have in DC will leave for greener pastures. Not all of these folks can afford private schools when their kids get to middle school age, and not all of them will get into the charter school of their choice, or any charter school, if the public schools don't move forward.

I am very interested in what Catania thinks about the issues this blog focuses on, but he has not said. Perhaps myopically, I believe that if the schools get fixed, everything else falls into place. That is, if right minded folks get to stay in the City, issues like opposition to zoning law changes become a non-issue because the majority of residents would be in favor of them.

No, I have not solved the sticky gentrification issues - don't lambaste me for not addressing. Just saying that the schools are the key issue.

by fongfong on Feb 24, 2014 11:41 am • linkreport

@MLD, it is a great opportunity to squeeze donors!

by charlie on Feb 24, 2014 11:55 am • linkreport

@MLD He has raised over $1 Million, and in my opinion, is too far in to get out.

by William on Feb 24, 2014 12:07 pm • linkreport

@William

@Dizzy, the difference being that Jack Evans whole reason for running was because he thought Gray wasn't going to. Unless something changes, I cannot see a scenario where Evans doesn't support Gray in the general election.

Evans surely will, but I rather doubt he's going to go to bat for Gray. As it is, Jack doesn't really have much of a 'base' per se, not one he can readily swing behind another candidate. He is a safe, known status quo candidate who is backed (and whose influence and vote is informally purchased) by status quo interests.

by Dizzy on Feb 24, 2014 12:09 pm • linkreport

Also, I co-sign what fongfong said.

by Dizzy on Feb 24, 2014 12:11 pm • linkreport

I'm sort of frustrated by this blog playing coy with who they support. Wells is the GGW, candidate, right? Throw your support behind him, early and often. He's going to need it.

by 11luke on Feb 24, 2014 12:33 pm • linkreport

If more people voted their conscience

It's the first word in this sentence where your position lost all of its footing.

by David C on Feb 24, 2014 12:49 pm • linkreport

The last poll I saw in January, had Wells, Evans and Bowser in a virtual dead heat, but well behind Gray. Based on that poll, the odds of Bowser winning right now are very low and not much higher than those of Wells winning. So if any of those 4 are your favorite, you should vote for them. However, my advice will change as new polls come in.

by David C on Feb 24, 2014 12:55 pm • linkreport

Liberals stick with moderates like Obama, despite a lot of grousing, because most of us remember the last time that the left voted with their hearts... for Ralph Nader. Because of the logic of winner-take-all elections, those people actually were voting for George W. Bush.

If you voted for Ralph Nader in DC in 2000, you actually voted for Al Gore. Because Gore won DC. It's not that simple. Florida Nader voters who supported Gore over Bush did, in fact, help Bush get elected.

by David C on Feb 24, 2014 12:58 pm • linkreport

I'm pretty sure I'm going to hold my nose and vote Gray. But Catania is going to merit a strong look.

by BTA on Feb 24, 2014 1:04 pm • linkreport

I've seen a little hemming and hawing on other blogs that recalled classic elections poli sci talk: If you're running against an incumbent, you need to make an arguable case against a status quo.

In 2014 DC, everyone is tacitly arguing not that the city isn't better off than it was 4 years ago - hell, DC arguably is doing better than it ever has been, but that the Mayor is corrupt.

The main problem is that voters do not care about ethics as a number 1 priority -- See Barry, Marion for a recap (sidebar, given our history, Gray cannot even begin to be called corrupt).

Additionally, none of these clowns have a vision for the city, let alone one that is distinct from One city.

A source in the Washington city paper said it best.

“If the field were the Wizard of Oz, Jack is clearly the Tin Man, no heart,” says the source. “Muriel is the scarecrow. And Tommy is the lion.”

Now if only we could get Jim Graham to take on the role of the Wicked Witch of Northwest, we'd have a movie to make.

RE bowser, I have one final memory from the Ward 8 straw Poll:

Bowser: "[bs about how no one else cares about East of the River]"
Gray: "By the way, I live East of the River"

by potomacaveres on Feb 24, 2014 1:05 pm • linkreport

Wells lost me with his shameful pandering on the Height Act. Right now my plan is vote for Gray (IMO, the least bad option) in the primary, then for Bruce Majors (the libertarian candidate) in the general.

by John C on Feb 24, 2014 1:14 pm • linkreport

I definitely don't Wells is the GGW candidate. He seems like a great guy and an absolutely positive force in the government. Is he mayor material? I haven't seen that yet. Gray has a mixed record but he has proven himself to be a shrewd a leader and has led the city during a reawakening though he doesnt deserve nearly all the credit for that. So when you vote you are voting for or against him and his policies. Illegality is a funny thing. Most of us break some little law here and there. I doubt most people worry enough about election law nor do we necessarily believe any of the other candidates are without fault on something or the other. As far as I see it it's completely Grays race to lose -- up until the General election that is.

by BTA on Feb 24, 2014 1:20 pm • linkreport

lol @ potomac : You know I think if we hope hard enough Brianne might just drop a house on Graham.

by BTA on Feb 24, 2014 1:22 pm • linkreport

Well, at least we know Gray's already bought and paid for. The others are still entertaining offers.

by Crickey7 on Feb 24, 2014 1:28 pm • linkreport

DC politics is, more than most places, a corrupt Machiavellian enterprise. Absent any real reform movement progressives have traditionally stuck with the one-term-and they're-out approach to moderating corruption.

I don't see anything redeeming about Gray to support tenure. If anything his corrupt and illegal last campaign was basically financed by skimming Medicaid money through Thompson, a feat that ranks up there with Harry Thomas Jr.'s siphoning little league funds.

Unfortunately Gray will almost certainly get a plurality thanks to his best chum Jack Evans.

Whether Catania runs for mayor will depend on his odds since he would have to give up his at-large Council seat to run for mayor. Certainly he's the most intelligent.

by Tom Coumaris on Feb 24, 2014 1:29 pm • linkreport

I worked at the DC Council for a while, and my take on Bowser is that not only is she an empty suit, her word means nothing whatsoever. I would not vote for her ever. I would take Kwame Brown or Harry Thomas Jr. anytime over Bowser.

by Zorba on Feb 24, 2014 1:29 pm • linkreport

I would happily vote for any candidate who supported a runoff election system. If nobody gets 51% in the primary, the top two, or maybe even the top three, go into a runoff election.

I just get so incredibly frustrated seeing election after election after election where the majority of voters decided they didn't want the winner anymore, but they just couldn't agree on who they wanted instead, so the crowded field split the vote up and the one that was NOT voted for by the overwhelming majority of voters wins anyway. At least with a runoff model, you kick out the majority of the contenders in the field and let people pick between a smaller number of viable candidates. Then you can always vote your heart, because if that person doesn't make it to the runoff, you can vote your head in the runoff election. Once you get to the runoff, vote for who you really want without worrying about splitting the vote and letting the one you dislike win.

by ShawGuy on Feb 24, 2014 1:30 pm • linkreport

@David C.: I am assuming that the majority of Nader voters would have preferred Al Gore to GWB, given a true forced-choice. By casting their votes for another candidate, they were effectively weakening Gore. It's not a matter of who ultimately won, but who would have gotten those votes if not Nader.
Due to the quirks of our idiotic electoral system, DC voters who plumped for Nader rather than Gore had little effect on the outcome, but that's beside the point.

by alurin on Feb 24, 2014 1:31 pm • linkreport

Who would you support though, Tom? It's a field full of hot air and empty promises.

by BTA on Feb 24, 2014 1:32 pm • linkreport

@Alan P: Your fundraising emails from Move On are irrelevant. I am referring to the 2010 and 2012 election cycles. The Dems are vulnerable in the Senate again, and this time the Republicans might have figured out not to "vote their hearts". But it is pretty certain that the Senate would have been in Republican hands for the last four years, had not Republican primary voters favored unelectable Tea Party candidates in otherwise winnnable races, such as Harry Reid's seat in Nevada in 2010.

And I never said that the "radical left" ever controlled Congress. The Democrats remade themselves as a fairly centrist party after Reagan and Bush beat the crap out of them in three successive elections. But I think most Dems are aware that it's better to have, say, Obama and Pelosi disappointing you half the time, rather than having Bush and Hastert fucking you over continually.

by alurin on Feb 24, 2014 1:36 pm • linkreport

"Now if only we could get Jim Graham to take on the role of the Wicked Witch of Northwest, we'd have a movie to make."

Nah, Mary Cheh is more like the wicked witch of the Northwest and Graham would be the fairy good witch.

by JR on Feb 24, 2014 1:37 pm • linkreport

Evans lost me when he failed to provide oversight over the property tax lien scandal before it blew up in his face and he couldn't let it continue as planned.

Gray is super smart and would be a no brainer, but there's no chance I'm voting for someone who might still be criminally indicted and convicted and sent to prison. Even if Ron Machen drops his investigation before April Fools' Day, and Gray is in the clear; I'll likely vote for someone else given the stain Gray's crony scandal has left on the city. Gray's scandal will be a cloud over the entire city for years after he leaves office and, and in the meantime, diminishes his ability to lure in quality agency heads to replace the lackluster ones we have now (except for Nick Majett at DCRA and Bill Howland at DPW who are both doing a competent job — given what they're working with).

Catania's pretty smart and witty, but that arrogant condescending attitude, really undermines his whole persona. Someone needs to give that dude a kitten and monitor how he treats it; if he campaigns with a kitten in hand, he might win!

by Selena K on Feb 24, 2014 1:45 pm • linkreport

@BTA

This really is a circus. Bowser can see Maryland from her house!

@Tom Coumaris

The city is booming financially, the schools are steadily improving, infrastructure is being built like mad for Bikes, Cars, Peds, and rail. Unemployment and crime are down.

What about that doesnt merit re-election?

Im not even looking at the shadow campaign as a factor, because, quite frankly, any single one of them is doing something shady. And they'd all do the same thing if the opportunity to pad their coffers came about... except wells, because i dont think he can spell coffers.

by potomacaveres on Feb 24, 2014 1:48 pm • linkreport

@JR

"The Wicked Witch of Upper Northwest" does have a better ring to it.

Graham does look more like a member of the Lollipop guild anyway

by potomacaveres on Feb 24, 2014 1:49 pm • linkreport

It's not a matter of who ultimately won, but who would have gotten those votes if not Nader.

For president, votes only matter to the extent that they lead to Electoral College votes. If Gore had gotten every Nader vote outside of Florida he still would not have been president. In essence, it's 51 separate games, without any single one having impact on any of the others. Only the Florida game could have been changed by Nader voters.

by David C on Feb 24, 2014 2:03 pm • linkreport

The city is booming financially, the schools are steadily improving, infrastructure is being built like mad for Bikes, Cars, Peds, and rail. Unemployment and crime are down.

What about that doesnt merit re-election?

He may very well have broken the law during the 2010 election. I think most people think he did.

Imagine if instead, Gray had gone to Seattle and murdered a homeless person and got away with it because a key witness died before testifying. That really doesn't impact DC. Who cares as long as crime in DC is down and the treasury is full? But, I wouldn't be able to vote for that guy. For some people this is a similar - if much less dramatic issue. Do you vote for someone who you think is a criminal because they happen to be doing a good job?

It's a little like the Woody Allen question. Do you go see a highly regarded movie even though you think the Director/Writer might be a pedophile, or do you skip it on principle?

by David C on Feb 24, 2014 2:09 pm • linkreport

@ potomacaveres

Can I borrow your rose-colored sunglasses?

Violent crime and property crime are up in Shaw — Wells Ward 6, formerly in Evans' Ward 2 — don't take my word for it, view MPD data for geographic region ANC6E here: http://crimemap.dc.gov/CrimeMapSearch.aspx
https://twitter.com/ShawingtonTimes/status/438013710037049344

You must not have ANY good friends who are parents looking for good middle schools and are considering leaving the District or shelling out the big bucks for private schools.

Unemployment is likely only down because one needs to register as unemployed to be counted as unemployed, the long term undocumented unemployed as many national polls show, are still unemployed and growing in number, they're just tired of dealing with the bureaucracy and DC DOES incompetence/mismanagement.

1000-1100 people may be moving into the District, but 3000-4000 are moving out (being pushed out) each month because of an out of control housing market, incumbents who repeatedly (intentionally?) fail to real it in, and Federal govt schemes to underfund DCHA's ability to preserve and create affordable housing. This housing crisis lands squarely at the feet of elected officials, but politicians love to blame bogeymen gentrifiers and pit residents against residents — to take blame off their own underhanded corporate financed corporate welfare policy making.

by @ShawingtonTimes on Feb 24, 2014 2:20 pm • linkreport

@ David C

Leave Woody out of this. I love Woody Allen flicks; Norman Rockwell was apparently a womanizing pig; Picasso was a mean fckr; Dumas exerted zero restraint over his johnson; Polanski's a genius/perv; most Hollywood movies are racist and misogynistic on some level (I'm kinda eager to see if artist Andy Shallal has any fun scandalous tricks up his sleeve). Fans rarely fault sports heroes for their sexual indiscretions or the NFL for its exploitation and physical and financial destruction of athletes.

DC will cease to live under a cloud of corruption only when residents stop being deluded by corporate financed officials bent on corporate and labor union welfare.

by @ShawingtonTimes on Feb 24, 2014 2:38 pm • linkreport

"1000-1100 people may be moving into the District, but 3000-4000 are moving out "

since the population of DC is increasing, and mostly not due to natural increase IIUC, there is something wrong with the arithmetic here.

by AWalkerInTheCity on Feb 24, 2014 2:44 pm • linkreport

I'm voting for Bowser and I think this article was a waste of time and energy.

by Jack Madison on Feb 24, 2014 2:50 pm • linkreport

@David C.: Post-hoc, yes, we can say that. But when people were actually casting their votes, there was a lot more uncertainty about who would win which states. Again, in DC you can vote for Frosty the Snowman for all I care, because the Democrat will still win by a large margin. But in states that are not so one-sided, if you go to the polls not knowing for 100% sure that your preferred candidate of the major parties is going to win, voting for another candidate makes it more likely that your less-preferred candidate will win; the same logic applies to local elections. If you know that either A or B is going to win, but you're not sure which, and you have a preference (however slight), you should vote for your preferred candidate, rather than candidate C.

by alurin on Feb 24, 2014 2:54 pm • linkreport

@ShawingtonTimes: The District has gained a net 45000 residents since 2010, so your math is wrong. That's a net 1200 per month, so if 4000 are moving out, 5200 have to be moving in.

by alurin on Feb 24, 2014 2:57 pm • linkreport

@David C

On that Logic, even you, me, or, David Alpert could be a serial murder... trust no one. But I do see your point. What I say to answer that is

1). How did Tommy Wells get his first job in the city?
2). How did Bowser handle dissent when she was on the ANC?
3). How many ethics probe's has Evans faced since he's been on the Council.

If we want to say that corruption disqualifies a candidate from office, who is there to elect? I know I know "status quo, raising the water, etc...change, etc" But looking at the field as is, there is a very blurry mix of ethics and a very clear distribution of brain cells.

@Shawingtontimes

You can borrow my glasses if I can borrow your tinfoil hat. Just because crime in shaw is "up" (If you exclude sex abuse, it is relatively flat. Logic being that increased sex crimes tend to reflect increased reporting rather than increased incidence). Robbery (collapsed) is also down in your neighborhood.I'd also be interested to see what the crime rate is v. incidence.

RE the whole paragraph on housing: where are you getting those numbers... if 3-4k were "being pushed out a month," while 1000 are moving into the district, why is population increasing? The Council and the Mayoral administrations have been working for years to deal with affordability. We're replacing more and more closed off housing projects with mixed income (see navy yard), with even more planned. The DC market isn't "out of control," it is marked by scarcity and high demand.

by potomacaveres on Feb 24, 2014 3:04 pm • linkreport

How did Tommy Wells get his first job in the city?

Since his first job in the city was selling "gadgets in a kitchen specialty store" I'm going to guess it wasn't by managing an enormous, illegally-funded shadow campaign and offering someone a very high-paying job for which they were clearly unqualified in return for them staying in the job hunt and attacking his competitors. But perhaps you know otherwise.

If you have accusations to make, by all means make them.

by David C on Feb 24, 2014 3:19 pm • linkreport

Apologies, meant to write, "with the city"?

Point being, he began his career with city government and later city politics as part of the Barry political machine after calling in a favor to Anita Bonds. Nothing inherently wrong with that.. I just find it a little rich that he likes to shake his fist at the very political machine that made him

http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/articles/44547/livable-walkable-electable-tommy-wells/

by potomacaveres on Feb 24, 2014 3:38 pm • linkreport

So...something completely ethical - asking someone for help finding a job - is similar to something un-ethical and possibly illegal?

You're grasping at straws if you're trying to make this look hypocritical.

by David C on Feb 24, 2014 3:48 pm • linkreport

Can someone explain why so many people dislike Bowser? I've seen disparaging comments about her on this and other blogs, but no specific reasons given. I was surprised to get an email from a friend of mine the other day talking about how wonderful and responsive Bowser and her staff are to constituent concerns (my friend lives in Takoma) so I really have no idea what to think about her.

by grumpy on Feb 24, 2014 4:00 pm • linkreport

Y'all can argue Wells supposed merits all day, but the simple and irrefutable fact is, he is not electable to the position of Mayor. Maybe in ~12 years, if DC's electorate continues its quick gentrification, but this is a pure numbers things, and simply put, there is no way that Wells wins.

by Arkie on Feb 24, 2014 4:03 pm • linkreport

@grumpy

I cannot speak for others, but I have noticed two things that I am critical of:

1) In terms of constituent services, she tends to play favorites and is selective in her responsiveness.

2) She doesn't have any compass when it comes to her decision-making process. her stump speech changes depending on who she is talking to, and where she does come down on an issue, it usually results in a nebulous discussion of something tangentially related.

The biggest problem I have with her in this race is that she really doesn't have any professional experience or achievement that lends itself to any confidence in her ability to run the city. Additionally, her legislative record is, at best, weak.

Other than Vince Orange and Reta Jo Lewis, she is easily the worst option in this election.

by William on Feb 24, 2014 4:08 pm • linkreport

@grumpy

Basically what William said, but more specifically, she is just the ultimate panderer. On a political level she's got a gift for saying exactly what an audience wants to hear, regardless of its merits as policy or its logic as a concept.

The few areas in which Bowser has seemed consistent also happen to be those with which I vehemently disagree. E.g., her opposition to dedicated transit lanes on 16th Street NW, her continuing promise to privilege old people at the expense of everyone else, and her unabashed, unmoderated love affair with the automobile, with cyclists, transit-riders, pedestrians, and anyone not behind the wheel of a car at risk thanks to her misguided nostalgia for a 1950s DC she never actually knew.

by Low Headways on Feb 24, 2014 4:27 pm • linkreport

Arkie, if nothing changes, you're probably right. But a Gray indictment could change that, or someone dropping out. But basically, at this point, only two people seem to have a shot. Gray and Catania.

by David C on Feb 24, 2014 4:40 pm • linkreport

Is he going to get indicted? I took Gray's entering the race late to indicate that his thought is he won't be indicted.

by MLD on Feb 24, 2014 4:42 pm • linkreport

If they planned to ever indict Gray it would seem terribly political if they did it now.

by BTA on Feb 24, 2014 5:02 pm • linkreport

"If they planned to ever indict Gray it would seem terribly political if they did it now."

US Attorney Ron Machen has been tasked with cleaning up criminality and corruption in the District, a huge, ongoing issue by any stretch of the imagination. It will be a grand jury that will ultimately make a decision about whether or not Mr. Machen and his team have provided enough evidence to bring charges against Mr. Gray, if it should come to that.

In the meantime, the DC landscape is littered with enough corrupt detritus that also commands Mr. Machen's attention and it is no wonder that his office needs as much time as it takes to research the evidence generated by the Gray 2010 mayoral campaign.

http://www.wusa9.com/story/news/local/dc/2014/02/20/20-plus-arrested-for-dc-health-care-fraud/5646923/

by LongTimeRez on Feb 24, 2014 10:05 pm • linkreport

"Catania's pretty smart and witty, but that arrogant condescending attitude, really undermines his whole persona. Someone needs to give that dude a kitten and monitor how he treats it; if he campaigns with a kitten in hand, he might win!"

@Selena K--ROTFLMAO... that is the best comment of the current campaign season! I'm going to suggest it to David.

by LongTimeRez on Feb 24, 2014 10:08 pm • linkreport

Is he going to get indicted?

Before April 1? I doubt it. But I was just mentioning it as something that could upturn the race.

by David C on Feb 24, 2014 10:32 pm • linkreport

Is this really GGW. The "progressive" blog that covers issues such as ethics, transportation and school reform?

Vince Gray should be scratched off anyone's list that cares about the above. VG has been lackluster on Education reform. He hasn't begun any new initiatives, implemented innovative programs or kept DCPS capital projects on their timelines.He did what his supporters wanted him to do. Stall.

He's also failed the bar on transportation. The biggest failure is the street car. Four deadlines have come and gone and the first line still isn't operational. In fact they just scrapped a time frame all together. It was Gray as chairman who opposed the system and did everything within his power to slow it down or strip it's funding.DDOT has lacked innovation since the departure of Gabe Klein and Gray has been unable to attract a qualified replacement. It seems like DDOT went from one of the most responsive progressive agencies to bureaucratic slug over night.While they have tons of "plans" in the pipeline they have struggled with implementation and community buy in across the board.

Oh and ethics... Even if not indicted, the issues surrounding his 2010 campaign can't be ignored. Another candidate was paid to attend forums and blast Fenty. Several of his closest friends have plead guilty to crimes related to the campaign and there is still a massive ongoing investigation. We are all intelligent here. Even if Gray did nothing wrong he had to have some knowledge of what went down. We as a city can't look pass that. Until we get a new mayor our city will be under an ethical cloud.

Now to the candidates. Early voting starts on March 17. Thats around the corner. With that said, Muriel is the best positioned candidate to win. But I'll indulge the Wells supporters. Wells has been a steady transformation advocate with a strong background in social services which would come in handy when addressing the homeless issue (on homeless issue: Gray ran DHS into the ground when he was the Director. so this current predicament isn't a surprise). But someone asked the most important question about Wells, Is he electable? The short answer to that is no... The odds are stacked against him. While he has a solid base in w6 it will be impossible to make up ground across the city with such a small war chest. And yes he's committed to not taking corporate donations which is good. But if you're going to take that stance you better know how to fund raise. even if you subtract corporate contributions from Gray and Bowsers war chest they still have a huge advantage. Wells also comes off as a bit of a panderer. He will say whatever it takes in front of any given group to get their vote. and then there's the elephant in the room.. race. Dc is not ready to elect a white mayor just yet. The demographics haven't shifted enough for that. And if the city was to elect a white Mayor I don't think Tommy would be a shoe in.

Evans is a distant 3-4 depending on how you score these things. I've yet to see anything out of his camp that shows he can pull a win out. Another disappointing run for the cash king.

Then there's Muriel. While her legislative record isn't as strong as Evans she has done some solid work. What some people have left out has been her fight to keep Walter Reed on track. While Wells was trying to move money from the project Muriel ensured the funds needed to actually secure the site and transfer it from fed to city use were in place. Without that leadership that would be another stalled project under the Grey Administration. Her work to offer seniors that make under 125k a year property tax relief was also solid. As the city continues to get more expensive it's important that we have an advocate that will insure our seniors can age in place. I also like her stance on the stadium deal. I don't think the trade of Reeves Center is the best way to get the deal done. The city will get more for the building if they open it up for competitive bidding and go with the developer that offers the most cash, affordable housing and flexibility on vision. It's always best to have multiple options in these scenarios. So yes, build the stadium, invest in infrastructure but rethink the trade of Reeves. The biggest pro for Bowser however isn't tied to her legislative history. Bowsers energy and tenacity will go along way in attracting new agency directors that think outside of the box. The Gray administration has failed to attract competent agency heads. Muriel can change that.

All in all, it's a bit disheartening to see anyone really considering Gray over the other candidates. He's manged the government well yes, but we need more than a manager with a ethics cloud over our head. We have Chief Elorbee for that.

by Disapointed on Feb 25, 2014 12:11 pm • linkreport

@Disapointed
VG has been lackluster on Education reform.

So Muriel is your candidate? What's her position on the current direction at DCPS? Gray basically kept the Rhee reforms continuing by appointing her deputy; would Muriel keep things on the same track or appoint someone different, someone with a different direction in mind?

by MLD on Feb 25, 2014 12:30 pm • linkreport

But someone asked the most important question about Wells, Is he electable? The short answer to that is no

His polling numbers are almost identical to Bowser's.

Here are two ways Tommy could win. Remember: The winner only needs about 25% of the vote to win

1. Gray is indicted. The city gets all fired up about ethics and people vote for Tommy.

2. Evans or Shallal drops out and endorses Tommy. If Wells can move up to 2nd in polling, he'll be seen as the alternative to Gray and opposition might coalesce around him.

3. Bowser blows up. She could pull a Todd Akin and fall out of contention and then Tommy becomes "the alternative" to Gray.

4. Tommy out campaigns Bowser. Tommy starts outpolling Bowser, not because someone else stumbled but because he hits his stride. Again, "the alternative" label wins him the primary.

None of these seem to be likely right now. But then, neither does a Bowser win.

by David C on Feb 25, 2014 12:35 pm • linkreport

That's actually four ways, I thought of a couple while I was writing.

by David C on Feb 25, 2014 12:36 pm • linkreport

"Then there's Muriel. While her legislative record isn't as strong as Evans she has done some solid work."

What legislation has Evans passed that's worthy of note? Two decades without a single legislative accomplishment worth naming that I can think of (and I've lived here 20-plus years).

On that same note, what's Wells' signature legislative accomplishment, outside of the bag fee?

I'll give Orange the minimum wage hike, which he fought for, although that's - what? - in his fourth term on the Council before he did anything worth mentioning?

I think that Bowser, Wells, and Evans need to stay on the council until they do something noteworthy *there*. Show me how you can lead amongst 13 people, then I'll consider voting for you to lead a *city*.

Gray is the default pick. Even with the things he's screwed up, like the streetcar, at least now he has on-the-job training. Why let someone new screw things up in a brand new way?

This analysis applies to Shallal as well, who seems well meaning enough, but there's a big difference between leading a panoply of city agencies and running a restaurant chain.

by spirit on Feb 25, 2014 12:41 pm • linkreport

Actually, that should be *three decades for Evans. God he's been in office for a long time. Can anyone name a single landmark bill he's passed that a progressive should care about, remotely?

by spirit on Feb 25, 2014 12:44 pm • linkreport

Going into his third decade, that is.

by spirit on Feb 25, 2014 12:45 pm • linkreport

@MLD while she's be non-committal on if she would keep Henderson, I like her focus on middle schools. DCPS has failed historically in preparing youth for high schools because of a broken middle school system. Bowser's focus has been studying the most successful middle school to see what can be replicated across the city. This administration has also been bad at actually keeping middle school construction on schedule. Ward 5 is a perfect example of that. All of their planned middle schools where delayed at some point.

by Disapointed on Feb 25, 2014 12:48 pm • linkreport

On that same note, what's Wells' signature legislative accomplishment, outside of the bag fee?

You mean what's his signature legislative accomplishment outside of his signature legislative accomplishment?

There's the bicycle safety act, the bicycle parking act, the marijuana decriminalization act. The marriage officiant law. He tried to pass ethics legislation that was better than what the council passed. That's off the top of my head. I'm sure there's more.

by David C on Feb 25, 2014 1:01 pm • linkreport

IF Gray is indicted all bets are off, Bowser(unfortunately) would pull ahead a bit I guess for a variety of reasons. But he won't be now. That said it's going to be an all nighter on this primary no matter what happens. I can't see anyone getting more than say 35% of the vote. I think Evans dropping would actually be a potential boost for Bowser as well. The only thing that would put it in the bag is if anyone significant dropped out and endorsed Gray but they are all clearly in it for the long haul now.

by BTA on Feb 25, 2014 1:02 pm • linkreport

Alpert- Dude come on? You endorsed Vince Gray much to the dismay of the GGW group in the last election. Now you manage to preempt any endorsement by making this if Tommy can't win maybe we should stick with Gray? This is absurd. This is the reality. Muriel Bowser has won both straw polls (Ward 8 and Ward 4). Gray was defeated in his own back yard and was unable to hold on to Ward 4 (which he decisively won in 2010.)Tommy only had 13 supporters show up to vote for him in Ward 8 and only 21 in Ward 4. He talks up ethics but neither him nor Jack have had the courage to call on Vince Gray to resign. Mureil Bowser on the other hand has. We are 35 days away from election. Here are the facts. Bowser has the most cash on hand, Washington Post endorsement, straw poll victories and city wide campaign infrastructure. And guess what she actually campaigns. She may not be the perfect candidate for some of us but I will be dammed if we are somehow led to believe that Vince Gray is our next best thing after Tommy. Dave wake up and smell the coffee. Your past political endorsements have always been terrible. How about we keep GGW focused on what is and should continue to be. A forum for progressive thinkers to publish their ideas and influence policy decisions. Not your personal space to offer misguided political advice.

by ComeoneDave on Feb 25, 2014 1:09 pm • linkreport

I can't believe anyone would actually think Bowser was ever a viable option for the GGW endorsement.

by BTA on Feb 25, 2014 1:22 pm • linkreport

Is the GGW crowd really that sold on Gray?

Capital Bikeshare has been a great success and there have been some additional bike lanes (but lots also unbuilt) but it is hard to overlook the M Street capitulation but the streetcar roll out has been a debacle and IMHO we are only talking about a larger streetcar network because the city is rolling in money.

I've seen nothing of note on improved Circulator or WMATA bus routes and I'm still waiting for something/anything to happen on Pedestrian Safety initiatives.

And the Zoning Re-write has been nothing but a painfully drawn out series of capitulations and similarly Gray didn't manage to get any support for DC getting self determination on the Height Act and I lump these two issues together because they both go to Gray's lack of political savvy or sway with the Council and the broader public.

And for whatever its merits the DC United deal seems to be stumbling along.

There has been a lot of in-fill development which has improved neighborhoods and boosted transit use while it has also swelled the tax rolls and enabled the city to spend a lot of money on schools and parks (though from my experience that money has not been spent particularly wisely)but it is unclear to me how much credit Gray should get for that and I at least am not thrilled about Wal-Mart making inroads into DC and what seems to be the Mayor's infatuation with the Walton clan.

I'm in the anyone but Bowser camp (and really Orange, Evans & Lewis too but I don't believe they are viable) but I'm somewhat bewildered that Gray is on such a pedestal here?

Yes a Mayor Bowser will be worse but I'm not sure she will be so terrible relative to the baseline.

by TomQ on Feb 25, 2014 1:43 pm • linkreport

I don't think anyone actually likes Gray that much. I think it's a devil you know situation. Plus I do think he has shown he is willing to sit down at the table with people of our ilk even if he's not entirely convinced.

by BTA on Feb 25, 2014 1:48 pm • linkreport

We need ranked voting and end this ridiculous process that allows 25% to mean victory.

Can we please stop bashing the DC government as corrupt? There is corruption, sure. But any more than anywhere else? Hmmm... Chicago? Philadelphia? Boston? now those places ARE REALLY corrupt. And plenty of states too.

Everyone likes to bash government and then we all turn around an vote the same people in to run it.

by MikeR on Feb 25, 2014 2:39 pm • linkreport

I like her focus on middle schools. DCPS has failed historically in preparing youth for high schools because of a broken middle school system. Bowser's focus has been studying the most successful middle school to see what can be replicated across the city.

I'll save her some time - it has a higher concentration of highly educated, mid-to-high SES families than any other middle school in the city. Since the campaign staff apparently has found GGW, I'm interested to find out how that can be replicated.

It's not just the blatant pandering, it's that her proposals, and she, appear to be entirely devoid of substance. From a mailer I received just last night, touting Bowser's education "plan" - "Muriel introduced a resolution calling for access to 'Alice Deal' quality middle schools for all students." So, we can all rest easy, I suppose - there's a resolution. Will she supply the fairy dust to sprinkle on the middle schools to improve them? Or maybe we should all just click our heals together three times and chant, "There's no place like Alice Deal."

by dcd on Feb 26, 2014 7:58 am • linkreport

@TomQ

The only people left are Wells and Shallal, neither of whom are polling well, so yes, Gray is the one that is most viable who is somewhat aligned with the agenda of this blog.

Bowser, Orange and Lewis would be downright scary, and Evans is somewhat scary.

by William on Feb 26, 2014 9:02 am • linkreport

It's pretty amusing that here, on Twitter, or really, everywhere, you see people touting that Muriel Bowser should be mayor "because of a straw poll" or "she got an endorsement" or "look at how many yard signs we have up."

The Bowser camp is literally the most horserace-obsessessed, devoid-of-substance, pandering-and-saying-nothing campaign I've ever witnessed. And the few times she does bother to articulate a policy, it's in opposition to something commonsense, like modern parking codes or dedicated transit lanes. I cannot think of anyone less qualified.

Christ, I'd take a Republican over Bowser.

by Low Headways on Feb 26, 2014 10:27 am • linkreport

and then there's the elephant in the room.. race. Dc is not ready to elect a white mayor just yet.

I also take issue with this. It's ridiculous. We have a white council chair, 2 out 4 At-large members are white, both our shadow senators are white as is the at-large member of the state board of education. Of 11 city-wide offices, white people hold 6 of them. Clearly, people are more capable of looking past race when voting then you give them credit for. if you need more evidence, we live in a majority white country and have a black president.

This is not the issue it once was.

by David C on Feb 26, 2014 10:43 am • linkreport

I dunno I have to agree, I don't think DC wants a white mayor at this point. Ironically, I think the guy that has the best chance to make that leap is Catania.

by BTA on Feb 26, 2014 10:57 am • linkreport

@William

I completely agree with your sentiment. After seeing the latest poll, this is going to come down to Bowser vs Gray. Gray is miles ahead of Bowser in my mind, and I think a near unanimity of the readers/contributors here would agree.

With this in mind, and with my respect for the contributors here, I HIGHLY expect Gray to be endorsed here, and I highly expect the VAST majority of people on this blog to get out and stand in line the morning of April 1 to tick the box to keep Bowser out of office.

by Kyle-w on Feb 26, 2014 12:02 pm • linkreport

Mmmmmm. If Gray is so far ahead that it will take a miracle for anyone else to win, I will probably just vote my heart. I mean my candidate is just as likely to be the recipient of a miracle as any of the others.

by David C on Feb 26, 2014 12:23 pm • linkreport

"You don't see radical conservatives voting for moderate Republicans just to bear Democrats"

A strategy which has backfired spectacularly. The GOP would easily have taken control of the Senate in 2010 (and probably held it since) if the radical conservatives hadn't nominated right-wing extremists like Sharon Angle, Christine O'Donnel and Joe Miller who then went on to lose the general election.

by Jacob on Feb 26, 2014 6:36 pm • linkreport

Just read a twitter convo that included David Alpert and was even further turned off and confused by the logic of Wells supporters backing Gray since he has no chance.

Wells entire campaign is based on Gray being an unethical crook. Wells spends every possible moment pointing out the transgressions of the 2010 campaign. Their views on the direction of the city are polar opposites and Wells doesn't hold a punch to criticize the administration on it. How could one who supports Wells for these reasons then turn around and say they are supporting Gray?

This seems to be more about Wells supporters being upset that their guy isn't number two and they can't swallow the fact that he isn't electable.

The most troubling part of the discussion was Alpert stating that people are voting for Bowser because they are uninformed voters who wanted to vote in a Fenty Clone. If this was the case wouldn't wells be polling better in wards 1, 2 & 3?

The cold fact is Wells isn't wanted by anyone except for a small group of diehard day 1 believers. Look at the recent poll. Wells isn't even leading Gray as peoples second choice for Mayor. Bowser though, has momentum and cross appeal on her side. While the other contenders have fell off she gained 8 points since the last poll. Nabbed a few endorsements and has managed to own basically every press cycle lately.

If this was really about electing a progressive why not field someone people could actually get excited about voting for... McDuffie or Grosso? Wells was never that candidate.

This is a two person race. Anyone who disagrees just isn't a fan of facts. People can waste a vote for Gray or vote for Bowser. When people say they would change their vote from Wells to Gray what they are really saying is that they are fine with the possibility of having a sitting mayor indicted and tax payers footing the cost for yet another special election.

by Disapointed on Feb 27, 2014 9:26 pm • linkreport

How could one who supports Wells for these reasons then turn around and say they are supporting Gray?

Because they prefer Gray to Bowser.

The cold fact is Wells isn't wanted by anyone except for a small group of diehard day 1 believers.

12% of voters support Wells in the latest poll. That's the same % that supported Bowser just 1 month ago.

If this was really about electing a progressive why not field someone people could actually get excited about voting for... McDuffie or Grosso?

They didn't run.

This is a two person race. Anyone who disagrees just isn't a fan of facts.

It's too early to say that. I'm not sure the quinella of Gray and Bowser is the sure-fire winner you think it is.

People can waste a vote for Gray or vote for Bowser.

A vote for the likely winner is not a wasted vote.

When people say they would change their vote from Wells to Gray what they are really saying is that they are fine with the possibility of having a sitting mayor indicted and tax payers footing the cost for yet another special election.

They are saying they prefer that to Mayor Bowser. Yes. Maybe Wells will win the special election.

by David C on Feb 27, 2014 10:49 pm • linkreport

I have yet to see a policy discussion, a really substantive one, where Bowser shows any intellect or passion or conviction of beliefs.

I will stand with the Mayor despite the possibility that he may be indicted. The fact is, the city is in better shape today than it was 3 years ago under his stewardship. It isn't perfect, but I am a voter who will stick with what seems to be working.

by William on Feb 27, 2014 11:17 pm • linkreport

I don't care much for Bowser, but I really fear Gray can't beat Cantania.

by aa on Feb 28, 2014 9:03 am • linkreport

Add a Comment

Name: (will be displayed on the comments page)

Email: (must be your real address, but will be kept private)

URL: (optional, will be displayed)

Your comment:

By submitting a comment, you agree to abide by our comment policy.
Notify me of followup comments via email. (You can also subscribe without commenting.)
Save my name and email address on this computer so I don't have to enter it next time, and so I don't have to answer the anti-spam map challenge question in the future.

or