SouthernWolf
Junior
Dean Wermer; when is the parade?
Posts: 139
|
Post by SouthernWolf on Mar 23, 2009 15:42:05 GMT -6
Another candidate said "I wouldn't give the teachers a dime"... I do think there's a bit too much fear and supposition though with regards to a new majority. Apprantly the current majority is honky dory with how it has conducted itself. Absent a new majority, nothing will change whatsoever. From my understanding; this email quote did NOT come from Mark or his campaign. Irrregardless; I dont see what the issue is though with whoever said it. I am not so sure I like the "not get a dime" statement from whichever candidate mentioned it. I just think all options should be on the table for the new school board. If all things were equal I would much rather invest in quality teachers than in almost anything else (hey we just plopped 150M down for a 3rd HS based on 10,400 enrollees and now we think from the march 2008 data its going to be like 8400). However, it may not be doable to get our fiscal house in order by putting the teachers in a sealed bubble labeled "do not touch" My wife is a teacher (well not currently active but will probably start up subing next fall...) so if anything I am tilted towards teachers in general (since I married one  ) but we are in a serious economic period in the US and also with our district. Nothing should be verboten to review for the new school board. |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Mar 23, 2009 15:42:46 GMT -6
I don't believe I said ALL, did I? SOME did say it, as SOME are saying to vote for these 4 and not those 4.. because somehow one majority is better than the other majority. Really? So, "they" actually translates to "some?" Well, I wish you would've said so in the first place. ;D So are the some sending out the emails the same some who were trying to ditch WV? Or is it a whole new some?  It does not translate to 'all' like you implied. And yes, there is some cross pollination on the emails for who is sending them around... If one isn't in your inbox yet, it may be soon....so check it frequently and go back and watch some school board meeting videos and pay attention to who says what as well as checking some LTE's from last year... You may have a lightbulb moment. |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Mar 23, 2009 15:43:56 GMT -6
Another candidate said "I wouldn't give the teachers a dime"... I do think there's a bit too much fear and supposition though with regards to a new majority. Apprantly the current majority is honky dory with how it has conducted itself. Absent a new majority, nothing will change whatsoever. From my understanding; this email quote did NOT come from Mark or his campaign. Irrregardless; I dont see what the issue is though with whoever said it. I am not so sure I like the "not get a dime" statement from whichever candidate mentioned it. I just think all options should be on the table for the new school board. If all things were equal I would much rather invest in quality teachers than in almost anything else (hey we just plopped 150M down for a 3rd HS based on 10,400 enrollees and now we think from the march 2008 data its going to be like 8400). However, it may not be doable to get our fiscal house in order by putting the teachers in a sealed bubble labeled "do not touch" My wife is a teacher (well not currently active but will probably start up subing next fall...) so if anything I am tilted towards teachers in general (since I married one ) but we are in a serious economic period in the US and also with our district. Nothing should be verboten to review for the new school board. MR did not say the dime comment, but someone else on the unofficial slate of DeSart, Rising, Rasmus, Piehl did. I just hope the Daily Herald actually prints it. |
|
|
|
Post by rural on Mar 23, 2009 15:47:32 GMT -6
Really? So, "they" actually translates to "some?" Well, I wish you would've said so in the first place. ;D So are the some sending out the emails the same some who were trying to ditch WV? Or is it a whole new some? It does not translate to 'all' like you implied. And yes, there is some cross pollination on the emails for who is sending them around... If one isn't in your inbox yet, it may be soon....so check it frequently and go back and watch some school board meeting videos and pay attention to who says what as well as checking some LTE's from last year... You may have a lightbulb moment. I actually have quite a good spam filter. ;D ETA: I actually remember quite vividly the speakers and the LTEs to which you refer from the land acquisition meeting. I also remember quite vividly some of the speakers and LTEs from the boundary meetings. We are surrounded. |
|
SouthernWolf
Junior
Dean Wermer; when is the parade?
Posts: 139
|
Post by SouthernWolf on Mar 23, 2009 15:49:35 GMT -6
I don't believe anyone is running as a slate except the 4 whose names are all on the same sign. One can assume others are running as a slate because some people put them together as who they are voting for. I'm voting for Yuming Huang, Janey Wagner, CV and Stick. Are they a slate too then? I don't think the above four are a slate, no. I just found it funny that the pdf criticized a group running as a slate and then went on to endorse a slate.  Furthermore, I think everyone should vote for whatever candidate (regardless of slate, location, etc.) best meets the criteria they deem important. Couldnt agree with you more Macy. an emailer critizing one slate (because its a slate) and then recommending another slate that they made up from their own picks ;D I am sick of all this politco rigamarol. I just want CHANGE (for the better) |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Mar 23, 2009 15:52:32 GMT -6
It does not translate to 'all' like you implied. And yes, there is some cross pollination on the emails for who is sending them around... If one isn't in your inbox yet, it may be soon....so check it frequently and go back and watch some school board meeting videos and pay attention to who says what as well as checking some LTE's from last year... You may have a lightbulb moment. I actually have quite a good spam filter. ;D ETA: I actually remember quite vividly the speakers and the LTEs to which you refer from the land acquisition meeting. I also remember quite vividly some of the speakers and LTEs from the boundary meetings. We are surrounded. And which ones are specifically saying don't vote for DeSart, Rasmus, Piehl and Rising? Any? If you have such a lovely piece of artwork or chain of emails, please share them... I'll even host the image file for you. |
|
SouthernWolf
Junior
Dean Wermer; when is the parade?
Posts: 139
|
Post by SouthernWolf on Mar 23, 2009 16:03:11 GMT -6
I actually have quite a good spam filter. ;D ETA: I actually remember quite vividly the speakers and the LTEs to which you refer from the land acquisition meeting. I also remember quite vividly some of the speakers and LTEs from the boundary meetings. We are surrounded. And which ones are specifically saying don't vote for DeSart, Rasmus, Piehl and Rising? Any? If you have such a lovely piece of artwork or chain of emails, please share them... I'll even host the image file for you. I have to agree with Arch here. Whoever is emailng out this stuff is focused on irrational fear and is using negative tactics (dont vote for these 4..the bad guys....vote for these 4...the good guys). Hijack Hijack!! This is the same nastiness I saw at some of the SB meetings last year that got me so riled up. I also agree I have not seen anything like this from anyone planning on voting for the taxpayer slate of 4. THAT SAID, you cant hold individual candidates responsbile for various voters out there that are "meanies" at heart . Mark is running an individual campaign cant help it if a few wackos dummy up a PDF and email it to the rest of the mean team bunch ;D Hell, I could do the same thing; give me a couple hours and I will have a neato nasty negative email sent out to all my friends neighbors and co-workers dissing the candidates I dont like and wont be voting for and then recommending the ones I do like. Maybe its just me, but I would never do that. I would much rather focus on the WHY you should take a look at some of the candidates I like and if you feel the same, consider learning more and maybe get off the couch and go vote ;D? |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Mar 23, 2009 16:06:28 GMT -6
Fasttimes,
This is where it would be nice if candidates (who know of this activity) make a statement saying they do not support or condone the behavior.
|
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Mar 23, 2009 16:18:38 GMT -6
I don't think the above four are a slate, no. I just found it funny that the pdf criticized a group running as a slate and then went on to endorse a slate. Furthermore, I think everyone should vote for whatever candidate (regardless of slate, location, etc.) best meets the criteria they deem important. Couldnt agree with you more Macy. an emailer critizing one slate (because its a slate) and then recommending another slate that they made up from their own picks ;D I am sick of all this politco rigamarol. I just want CHANGE (for the better) any of the 4 candidates of the NEW SLATE that do not agree with the content of the PDF or the string of emails flying around from PTSA officers needs to step up now and publicly denounce this stuff-- or else be included in the group that condones such behavior IMHO. It really is out of control. |
|
|
|
Post by researching on Mar 23, 2009 16:19:28 GMT -6
I don't think the above four are a slate, no. I just found it funny that the pdf criticized a group running as a slate and then went on to endorse a slate. Furthermore, I think everyone should vote for whatever candidate (regardless of slate, location, etc.) best meets the criteria they deem important. Couldnt agree with you more Macy. an emailer critizing one slate (because its a slate) and then recommending another slate that they made up from their own picks ;D I am sick of all this politco rigamarol. I just want CHANGE (for the better) Me too! Personally I love the rhetoric. It makes my decision REALLY easy. I will look at the candidates being endorsed by the fear mongers and I will immediately scratch them off my list. I will not vote for ANYONE engaging in (or guilty by association) these negative tactics. This FUD is EXACTLY the same used year after year by the current SB / Admin. to get what they want. If it is change we want then we must elect SB members who are above this. |
|
|
|
Post by lurker on Mar 23, 2009 16:47:10 GMT -6
Couldnt agree with you more Macy. an emailer critizing one slate (because its a slate) and then recommending another slate that they made up from their own picks ;D I am sick of all this politco rigamarol. I just want CHANGE (for the better) Me too! Personally I love the rhetoric. It makes my decision REALLY easy. I will look at the candidates being endorsed by the fear mongers and I will immediately scratch them off my list. I will not vote for ANYONE engaging in (or guilty by association) these negative tactics. This FUD is EXACTLY the same used year after year by the current SB / Admin. to get what they want. If it is change we want then we must elect SB members who are above this. Does the same hold true for Crockett telling the world not to vote for Strick (as quoted in the Herald)? Or the quote from his e-mail, "There is one obstacle, however, the math. In order to institute the change in leadership that assures our voices will be heard we need four candidates to get elected. The status quo only needs one. " The implication of Mike's statement is clear, you better get out and vote for the 4 because all could be lost if certain people win a seat and the slate doesn't get in as a block. This is blatant fearmongering on Mike's part on behalf of the slate, isn't it? I want it understood that I don't hold this against Mike in any way -- I was leaning his way until he effectively pulled out of the race. As one who seems to get a lot of these crazy e-mails from all sides I'd like to share my observation that the volume of crazy "north" e-mails increased in intensity and frequency after Mike's e-mail announcement went out. I guess one person's fearmongering is another person's effective campaign strategy. I'm not trying to stir up a hornets nest, just curious as to where the group draws the line. I don't see anything wrong with a candidate or their surrogates telling the voters not to vote for their opponent(s). We just went through 2 years of this crud at the federal level and while at times unpleasant, it certainly was effective. I wish it weren't so as I want to hold all of our candidates up to the highest standards possible, but if I actually bought into the he said/she said garbage that's now floating around on ALL sides I wouldn't be able to vote in this election. It is my humble opinion that there are candidates in this election who have the right stuff and candidates who don't. Some of these candidates who have the right stuff are part of the slate of 4, some are clearly not. But mudslinging by candidates or surrogates doesn't change the core capabilities of the candidates who have what it takes to lead us. I agree with fasttimes, that's just the unpleasant side of politics. |
|
SouthernWolf
Junior
Dean Wermer; when is the parade?
Posts: 139
|
Post by SouthernWolf on Mar 23, 2009 16:50:44 GMT -6
Fasttimes, This is where it would be nice if candidates (who know of this activity) make a statement saying they do not support or condone the behavior. Arch, Dr. Who and Researching. yes I agree. not sure it would go to all the same recipients as the original email ( example email blast statement from MR), but it would at least be out there. I would bet on one coming out this week. But what do I know, I only win at Texsas Holdem and anytime I gamble other than holdem..I lose. I am so sick of this crap. All this negative junk just takes away from what the candidates need to be speaking about (what they want to do to raise the bar for our district) GOD knows, the bar is pretty low right now and needs to be raised. I think M2 is standing on the bar driving it into the mud beneath his sausage like toes. |
|
|
|
Post by rural on Mar 23, 2009 16:51:31 GMT -6
Couldnt agree with you more Macy. an emailer critizing one slate (because its a slate) and then recommending another slate that they made up from their own picks ;D I am sick of all this politco rigamarol. I just want CHANGE (for the better) Me too! Personally I love the rhetoric. It makes my decision REALLY easy. I will look at the candidates being endorsed by the fear mongers and I will immediately scratch them off my list. I will not vote for ANYONE engaging in (or guilty by association) these negative tactics. This FUD is EXACTLY the same used year after year by the current SB / Admin. to get what they want. If it is change we want then we must elect SB members who are above this. I guess everyone has their preferred method of choosing candidates. Scratching someone off your list just because of who supports them isn't much different that voting for someone for that same reason. My suggestion: do your own research. Make an informed decision based on what the candidate stands for not based on who does or doesn't stand for the candidate. ETA: word choice. |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Mar 23, 2009 16:56:49 GMT -6
Lurker,
You make great points of why to not vote for Crockett because he specifically said not to vote for someone else and mentioned them by name.
|
|
|
|
Post by macy on Mar 23, 2009 16:58:13 GMT -6
Me too! Personally I love the rhetoric. It makes my decision REALLY easy. I will look at the candidates being endorsed by the fear mongers and I will immediately scratch them off my list. I will not vote for ANYONE engaging in (or guilty by association) these negative tactics. This FUD is EXACTLY the same used year after year by the current SB / Admin. to get what they want. If it is change we want then we must elect SB members who are above this. I guess everyone has their preferred method of choosing candidates. Scratching someone off your list just because of who supports them isn't much different that voting for someone for that same reason. My suggestion: do your own research. Make an informed decision because of what the candidate stands for not because of who does or doesn't stand for the candidate. Rural, I agree with you. That is another reason why this FUD flyer is a bit ridiculous to me. In the flyer it states: "Mike Crockett has dropped out of the race to back these four candidates. He is the one who was instrumental in suing the school board when the Metea site was moved to Eola Road. Do Not Vote For: Eric Hepburn Don Moscato Jerry Huang Doug DiFusco" Why the sudden flurry of negative email campaigns/flyers pushing certain candidates telling us who NOT to vote for? This flyer was a joke. If I were one of the 4 "new slate" candidates it endorsed, I'd be embarassed. |
|
) but we are in a serious economic period in the US and also with our district. Nothing should be verboten to review for the new school board. 
