- Rep. Vitali calls for moratorium on drilling in our forests on the same day as Rendell's Budget Address
- We have to burn down the school to save it? The really nice school?
- Hey Ben: Questions about tax amnesty
- US Rep. John Murtha, June 17, 1932 – February 8, 2010
- Getting Real Answers from Gubernatorial Candidates
- It is always a good thing when our government works well
- Courtfighter: Delaware County Judge Maureen Fitzpatrick A Bigot? You Judge How Often Bigotry Occurs In Media, PA
- We'll Get You Ready for State Budget Release Tuesday
- ONE Praises U.S. Treasury Announcement to Work with International Partners to Relieve Haiti’s Debt
- A giant toxic monster is coming your way OR no rigs before regs!
Oh. Crap.
Submitted by Dan U-A on Wed, 04/18/2007 - 7:08am.
As Gman says, Tom Knox has taken a big lead in the latest poll that is out:
17% Bob Brady
10% Dwight Evans
18% Chaka Fattah
32% Tom Knox
14% Michael Nutter
2% Other
7% Undecided
The number of undecideds is really low. The only way now that Knox loses, is if people start going after him hard on TV.
Where are my rich people when I need them? I need five people, who will each give my non existent PAC 200k a piece, as well as buy me a flatscreen TV, and help Ryan Howard rediscover his swing. OK, maybe not part 3, or even part 2. But, Philly voters should at least be given the chance to hear both sides of the Tom Knox story.
And this may hurt Nutter
And this may hurt Nutter even more with the fact he came out last week with completely different numbers. Does it paint him as false?
--------------------------------------------------
Staff member of Longacre for 5th Council District.
Where did this poll come from?
I'm curious. It doesn't look official to me. Can someone validate where it came from?
Survey USA, for NBC 10.
Survey USA, for NBC 10.
Disclosure
Esquisite... Need to disclose anything to us?
Esquisite?
Esquisite?
It's no secret
I'm with Mike! Sorry, I don't know how to do the fancy signatures. How about you Dan?
Michael Nutter for Mayor!
Go to "My Account" and then
Go to "My Account" and then "Edit" tab.
--------------------------------------------------
Staff member of Longacre for 5th Council District.
Longacre Website
with Mike?
Otis, is that you? Every paid staffer here has identified themselves as a paid staffer. Don't you think you should do the same if in fact you are who I think you are?
How about me what? Are you
How about me what?
Are you being paid by the Nutter campaign?
Yup...
So what's your point?
What the hell do you mean
What the hell do you mean what is my point?
You, as a longtime reader of this blog, know that paid staffers especially are supposed to disclose themselves. This is ridiculous.
test
testing
I actually think this poll may be screwed up
I am a Nutter supporter, but looking at this objectively - for the undecideds to go from 21-23 percent to 7 percent in A WEEK and so far out seems like the questions are being asked in some weird way.
These look more like "if someone held a gun to your head and forced you to the polls" numbers.
(Which is basically what the Knox campaign is going to do on election day anyway.)
Since Knox polls that well with a reform message, I still think Nutter has the greatest potential for growth. There are a couple of things that must happen in order for that to happen, but they are already starting, and I am very happy to see them.
Hannah
The Survey USA polls, as
The Survey USA polls, as noted below, have consistently had lower undecideds. Probably because the automated part doesnt let people hem and haw. But... either way, the trends are pretty clear.
The question was...
If you were standing in the voting booth today, who would you vote for?
Press secretary, Knox campaign. Blogger on hiatus, former award-winning journalist.
Credibility corroborated
Comparison-- Date Brad Evan Fatt Knox Nutt
Susquehanna 4/26 09% 7% 14% 20% 18%
Nutter int poll 4/13 11% 6% 15% 27% 18%
It looks like Nutter's poll had some credibility after all. The polls are extremely similar, except for Knox's numbers. I'd guess that's due to Philly is starting to listen to Dan U-A in the past week.
Dan UA, this is how I do tables. Brad could have 09%, or Brady could have 009%.
----
I support Michael Nutter for Mayor.
Knox outsider?
In a stunning shocker the Inquirer wrote a negative article about someone other than Bob Brady. This link is to an article is titled
Tom Knox: Outsider with ties to the inside
The mayoral candidate decries politics as usual. He has also benefited from it.
Link is below
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/home_top_stories/20070418_Outsider_with_t...
Just read it
Just read the *front page* Inquirer story...it's pretty damning of Knox. I believe there is much more out there, so maybe more to come. But as I've said on here for a while, this guy has made his living off of pay-to-play and insider contracts (in addition to the pay day loans). He is a total fraud, phony, and hypocrite.
Unfortunately, his TV spin has been allowed to go unchecked, and so people are believe the story line pitched by his consultants. This is tragic.
The other way
The other way for Knox to lose would be for two of Nutter, Fattah and Evans to drop out. Or for the cow to jump over the moon.
Yeah, I know. Include Brady
Yeah, I know. Include Brady in there too, who still might get kicked off anyway (and then Gaetano can buy me lunch).
Hell, it can be this machine the kids keep talking about coming together!
Evans should drop out....
Dwight should do the right thing, step aside, and throw his mighty Northwest Alliance behind Nutter. Dwight's great, but he ain't gonna win.
Or...
You can just consider the profound idea that maybe Evans brings something to the campaign that Nutter does not, and that there are good and multiple reasons why his supporters will stand behind him until the end. Even in the face of finishing dead last in May, he will still retain an energized and enthusiastic 10%. Dwight's supporters will vote for him because he's Dwight Evans, not because he's not John Street.
"I don't think so."
That is my favorite quote from Mace Windu (He didn't fare well, though. Perhaps I shouldn't have used it)
The biggest hurdle for Rep. Evans is widespread recognition. Not having 10 million to flood the airwaves tends to limit the casual "name recognition" and "buzz" that someone mentions of Knox. When I speak to folks outside of the forum/political scene, a lot of people don't know who he is. When I give them some information they become more interested. The next few weeks will see a lot more Dwight around Philadelphia!!!
Supporting Dwight Evans - A Safer Philadelphia - Block by Block
Other ways
I do not think that is true. If one backs out and vigorously backs another, there is hope for a ABK candidate to have a plurality. (Anyone but Knox).
This is off-thread, but there was a vigorous and well-written "Why I am supporting Michael Nutter" post a week ago that I wanted to email to friends and colleagues. I cannot recall who wrote it but I would like to track it down. If anyone can post a link to that post it would be much appreciated.
File me with the people who think Evans should call it a race and throw his support behind Michael Nutter. Evans is a good man whose influence at the state level may yet turn out to have a greater impact than he would as mayor. Both these guys care deeply about the city. If the future of the city is what they truly care about, it is time to close ranks and do what is needed.
You would think that after Katrina, Iraq, and Medicare D, the American Voter would start to understand that the rich guy who claims ignorance as a selling point is not to be trusted with their vote. He may have good intentions but he will be taken advantage of by people who do not have our best interests at heart. The city needs a seasoned politician in this role. ANY of the other 4 guys would be OK with me. Really. But it looks like Knox is a shoo-in at this point unless someone drops out for the good of the city.
Political Doc
Mike's Endorsement of Nutter
Here.
The ABK vote...
only exists on this site. Nutter should run as a republican because he ain't a Democrat. Only wishful thinking would have you believe that Evans would back Nutter.
Maybe I'm just being a cockeyed optimist here...
... but, the last time I checked, the only poll which mattered is in mid-May, not mid-April.
Plenty of stuff can happen in a month, including Brady, Nutter, Fattah, or Evans going after Knox enough to knock him down a peg.
-Z
Poll
What I do not understand about this poll is how Knox moved so much. It seems somewhat questionable in a time went his advertising went down, others went up on TV and he did not do so well in the debates, he went up so much. I would like to see another poll or an analysis of this one.
In addition Fattah, Evans and Brady will have the advantage on the street on election day.
Why Knox went up
1. Buzz
2. Name recognition (= Buzz)
3. Direct mailing (I have received a stack of it from Know at home this week. Clear, on message, effective.
Political Doc
mailings
I got the same mailings.
Yesterday, he talked about the gun laws he wanted to pass This, despite during the debate, saying his petitions were "thrown in the trash."
If this poll is true
and this trend continues, on May 16th my concience will be clear. You may not have agreed with my cure for this problem and beat me up roundly with it, but the disease is still active and threatens this city with terrible results.
Tom Knox as mayor will, I predict, result in one of the worst municipal workers strikes in the city's history. Knox, and those he will surround himself with, will exhibit an arrogance that will drive our employees to the street.
Knox's history of "turning companies around" consists of firing the employees and selling the company for his personal profit. He cannot sell this city to the highest bidder and fire the employees.
The citizens will be disappointed when the campaign rhetoric of paying for 1000 police officers with 400 million dollars hidden in the budget for "pay-to-play" contracts, turns out to be a bald faced lie. If the money was there to do what he claims, we would have done it already.
Twenty-four hour, seven days a week recreation centers and the opening of 40 new health centers is so ridiculous that even the most naive person would laugh at the notion, but television is still king. Sadly, folks seem to be buying this slight of screen, acid Trippi.
Sometimes, you actually get what you ask for. It should be a wonderful four years. Hope there is something and someone left here in 2012.
www.jameskenney.com
www.311forphilly.com
Well, Jim
frankly, you and a lot of the conventional thinkers in town bear a lot of responsibility for Knox's ability to tout fantasy. After all, we've been getting told for years that the more we cut taxes, the more revenue we'll have. So, if we can spin gold that way, why not with some other fairy tale?
And, after all, Knox wants to cut the BPT too. That will make up a lot of the deficit.
Well, Stan,
your one note song and irrational corporate hatred has nothing to do with the comment I made about this campaign and the scary potential of a Knox administration. You predictably bring everthing back to tax cuts.
www.jameskenney.com
www.311forphilly.com
Oh, I thought
I predictably bring everything back to hating Nutter.
Whether I'm predictable or not, the tax issue is the multi-hundred million dollar elephant in the room that everyone wants to ignore or distort. It won't go away, either now or when we get a new mayor.
And, if the implication of my previous post wasn't clear, I agree with you on Knox. He's very bad news. And you may recall I was not one of those who expressed outrage over your legislation to even the playing field. I was, and remain, ambivalent about it. The current regime does, at least, make a statement that campaign finances need regulation. Your bill sent a message that we were going backward. On the other hand, without your bill, Knox has predictably, been able to seize the playing field. Maybe if he is elected one of the lessons we'll learn is how badly we need public financing. And maybe the silver lining from the Fattah lawsuit is that he'll lose, and the legal field will be clear to work on public financing next term.
thanks
Thanks for your argument that the means justify the ends...so if you like the process, no matter how aweful the outcome, than it was a good thing.
The ends don't justify the means...but similarly, the means don't justify the ends.
What is going on right now does *not* serve the best interests of the city.
I am of the opinion that it
I am of the opinion that it is better to have a self-financed millionaire buy the mayoral election then to have powerfull interest groups buy the mayoral election, thus buying the mayor. While I do not believe that Knox is the best candidate, few people who bash him have taken the time to examine why his message resonates with the voters. THere is a HUGE chunk of the electorate that is fed up with the status quo of insider Philly politics, the pandering be it to the unions (Brady) or race (Fattah), and to them Knox comes across as the antithesis.
Now think about the fact that about 3% get their information from the internet and probably even less have attended candidate forums, it becomes pretty clear why so many people go for Knox instead of someone like Nutter who actually has reformer credentials. Also, alot of people are choosing Knox because they think he has the best chance to beat Fattah and Brady, it's interesting that this poll shows Nutter within striking distance, so maybe some of those people who believe Nutter is the better candidate, but can't stand the thought of a Fattah administration, will actually vote with their counsience, not just out of fear.
please expand on this
Expand I shall...
Sure I'll give it a shot:
Brady, he's a union guy, if you can't see that you're either in denial or live under a rock.
With Fattah, it's just a cumulative effect of everything that I've seen so far that leads me to believe that he panders to a certain racial constituency and ignores everyone else. His ad is a good example, not too many white faces are there? Beyond that, the issues the ad addresses, the people it targets (our streets, our kids, our communities) only speak to a specific targeted segment of the population. You could argue that poverty effects all races (and normally I would agree), but the visuals speak for themselves. Combine that with his statements to middle class audiences at multiple forums (your life will not fundamentally change in the next 4 years), the congestion tax, the reluctance to release tax returns (presumably for the fear of looking too wealthy to the people whose vote he's counting on)....he just comes accross as a very racially divisive person who wouldn't represent all of Philadelphia. I'm sure you disagree, but that is the conclusion that I've come to from the outside looking in.
Fattah is not a racial divider
though he may be a racial thinker, and there's a difference. Sharpton and Farakkhan are racial dividers. Fattah is simply making clear, in the open, that he thinks race, and particularly poverty, is an important issue that drives where we need to be going in public policy. And white liberals should, and often do, support that. We are not past the racial divide, which Katrina reminded us of just awhile ago, as a nation. And we're not innocent of racism, or at least of its affects, in Philadelphia. This used to be a sharply segregationist town, and, in housing patterns, it still is. Furthermore most poor people in Philly are black, and most black people go to lousy schools and are far more likely than whites to be unemployed and subject to murder. These are things, as you point out, but not strongly enough, that affect, and diminish, all of us. So I applaud Fattah's attention to these things, and to rallying the people most affected to believe that they, and therefore, we, have hope because he's focused on them.
And with that, I'm going on a short vacation from blogging, as I promised Ray.
I was a sociology major in
I was a sociology major in college, so believe me that I'm intimately familiar with issues surrounding race and poverty. The fact that Fattah chooses to address these issues is not what makes him divisive, what makes him divisive is that he does so while paying little more then lip service to the multitude of other issues facing this city. If he wins, he will have to be the mayor of the entire city, something that he does not seem prepared to do.
Also a quick note on the city's role in addressing poverty. It seems odd that as a member of the Democrat controlled House Appropriations Committee(in charge of $800 billion dollars of discretionary spending), he chose to run for mayor of a fiscally restrained city as a platform for fighting poverty. That just doesn't make any sense and will have devastating financial consequences on the city's budget. Fight the good fight at the federal level where there are the means and financial resources to really do something about socio-economic inequality on the national and local level....that is if he really cares about uplifting people in the first place.
How is Jim a "conventional thinker"?
Stan-
How exactly can you place Councilman Kenney with "a lot of conventional thinkers", and what exactly do you mean by that term? I cannot fathom what would place Jim in such a category in your mind, but it speaks more to your own mental world than it does to Kenney.
And I swear- last time I checked there are more issues at work here than the damn BPT tax cuts.
I work for Damon K. Roberts in his run for City Council. Unless otherwise stated this and every comment by myself is the opinion of myself, and not of Damon or any other candidate, organization, committee, etc.
Sure there are more issues
but that particular one leaks over into virtually everything else. Most of what needs to be done in this town depends on money. And one of the key items on the agenda of three of the mayoral candidates has to do with giving away the pile of money that's the BPT. I'm not the one who invented the issue, it came from the "conventional thinkers" who have made it into received wisdom in this town that BPT cuts are the key to everything. Once the key to everything was building a commuter tunnel. (You're too young to remember that one.) Then it was building the Convention Center. Then it was building two new stadiums. There's always been something on the agenda of the power elite that's been touted as absolutely essential to saving the city, and these things have always fallen well short of what was promised. And now it's cutting or eliminating the BPT. And those who promote those things are the ones I meant by the inexact phrase "conventional thinker." And that's what I was referring to when I used the phrase in connection with Jim. Whatever his other merits, and they're considerable, Jim is, and long has been, a cheerleader in the BPT cutting camp from the time the issue came up. That's all I meant, but it is a big deal to me, and it ought to be to everyone. No matter how damned boring and annoying the issue is, and how much I wish too that it would go away.
Conventional thinkers?
Stan, last I looked you were employed by City Council as head of the tech staff for decades. Hardly an outsider
Only two decades and three years
and no one who knew me at Council would ever think I was more of a conventional thinker than, oh, say Dave Cohen. If you think he was, then I plead guilty.
He cannot sell this city to
But can we lease it? ;)
--------------------------------------------------
Staff member of Longacre for 5th Council District.
Longacre Website
Knox is wrong
for continuing to try to deny guys like Jim the right to have their candidate, Bob Brady, on the ballot.
VERY few things in public life should be treated as sacrosanct (said the carrying-member of ACLU), but Democracy is one. The poll shows a sizable number of voters who support Brady (though not nearly enough to win). Out of deference to them, and the Democratic right to vote for whomever you choose (this IS Philadelphia after all), Knox should drop his lawsuit.
Of course, that's exactly what Frank DiCicco should have done in the First District four years ago.
It may be a cruel irony that Brady is suffering for the sin of one of the more mediocre people he supports (said the Vern Anastasio supporter). Because any defense of Knox's lawsuit is likely to cite DiCicco's undemocratic decision of 2003.
(What comes around goes around? I hate cliches!)
I'm kind of surprised Brady hasn't gone after Knox with payday lending commercials. But Brady's people probably figure such commercials would end up benefitting some other candidate more. Probably right about that, too. Oh well.
As Kurt Vonnegut might have said, So it goes.
Still a month left.
What Sam really means
I think we all know.
<<-------
Dan, you ignorant slut
(Dated TV reference, I haven't had reception in over 5 years)
Instead of playing whiny Puck, why don't you say who you'd vote for, if the election were held today?
Proudly supporting the BEAUTIFUL Philly For Change Council Slate and MICHAEL NUTTER for Mayor
Fattah
Given the polls, Fattah.
My order of preference is currently:
Fattah/Evans
Nutter
.
.
.
.
The other guys.
Considering that today I found out Nutter has at least one paid staffer on YPP without disclosing it, he is dropping for me. Maybe that is petty? But, I think it is a flat out disrespectful thing, and, I take a lot of things about this site personally, as you know. The Knox, Evans, and Fattah campaigns have seemingly been pretty up front when it comes to these things. So, he goes down for me.
I like Brady a lot on a personal level. OK, well, I have never actually met him. But, he seems like a nice guy, who has helped make a once lily white party racially inclusive. And I think he earnestly, genuinely cares deeply about the City.
But given his campaign, given the ballot challenge "do as I say, not as I do...or say," and given his make believe that he is going to eliminate the BPT, I cannot see it. Plus, structurally, with important lieutenants like Carol Campbell, I don't see how any structural reforms get done.
Knox, well... we know how I feel about Knox. But, let me break it down again: to me, in a City with entrenched poverty, I have a litmus test that you shouldn't have screwed poor people. And, as a progressive who believes in the power of government to do good, I am permanently biased against someone who complains about bank regulators doing their job, and defending those poor people.
for whatever it's worth
this is the first time I have ever heard Dan say he was for Fattah. Ever.
Cool. I mean...
I don't see why you think Fattah or Evans would make a better mayor than Michael.
And allowing one bad decision by one staffer to affect whom you choose for mayor of this whole big city for four years...that's probably not so cool, in my opinion. But it provides insight into your decision-making for those who converse (and sometimes argue) with you. Glad you said it...
But regarding Knox and our earlier argument, Dan, your thinking always seemed to me understandable, just different than my own.
I am not supporting Knox, but for different reasons. I am an ex-Catholic (beautiful religion, btw, I just wouldn't join a group or work for an organization where women's voices are officially not as important as men's...so I couldn't in good conscience stay in a church like that) and your reasons always sounded kind of like my old Sunday School teachers' rationale for avoiding things.
Sin is a big thing with such people, and Knox definitely sinned when he owned the payday lending bank for two years. I don't deny that. On top of that, he failed to be properly penitent in his answers about it. So: you disqualify him from getting your vote. Cool, that's the way you think.
Myself, I'm a boss (and now a Unitarian). Voting for an executive office to me is akin to hiring someone to do a job, in this case a very, very, very important job.
I choose Michael Nutter because he seems to me most likely to do a beautiful job. In fact, I think Michael likely would be the greatest mayor of my lifetime, the best since Dilworth. We'll soon hear how you think Chaka would perform. 'Cause I'm gonna ask...
***
I just always heard in your litmus-test reasoning something that rubs me the wrong way. For decades, people on the Left, especially academics, used Vietnam and the sin of American imperialism, to justify their NOT participating in American elections and even their "supporting" the Soviet Union in the Cold War. You're fortunate to have missed that era. I ran the local office of SANE/FREEZE (now Peace Action) while I was in college, and my frequent encounters with left-wing Boomers who used some version of the "sin society" argument to opt out of Democratic advocacy and Democratic participation was an ongoing frustration to me. Led to more than a few busted Grateful Dead and CSNY records too, I can tell you. (Reviving hippie-culture circa late 80's/early 90's: so, so ugly.)
That's probably why I'm so adamant about people advocating when they criticize.
Richard Rorty's book Achieving Our Country makes the best case I know against "sin" mentality regarding American politics.
By the way, you ALWAYS could have called ME elitist-sounding, for all the friggin' philosophical name-dropping and the pretentious language choices I make like "Manichean" and "sacrosanct." I definitely have been around English professors too long.
***
Alex makes the case that, with so little record, Knox's past payday lending sin is one of the few indicators we have of his future performance as mayor. I don't know how much I buy 2 years out of 40 in business being the best assessment, but that seems more compelling to me.
I think Lou Agre makes the best case contra-Knox, the most practical: if he does what he says he says he'll do, he'll likely cause a huge strike among City Workers.
I'd add to that: with no experience dealing with City Council, a Mayor Knox might be far more subject to letting Council get its way. Imagine our current City Council RUNNING the city. That's a potentially very scary scenario.
Kind of makes you want to run out and volunteer for a good Council candidate, doesn't it?
You know what I'm going to say:
Check out the Philly For Change website for volunteer opportunities with the most beautiful slate of Council candidates ever:
http://www.phillyforchange.com/
Dan, you're supporting the wrong alternative on my scorecard...and now you're vulnerable to having to defend and justify a candidate (start researching the airport deal, dude, SOMEBODY'S got to).
But at least you're supporting somebody now.
Proudly supporting the BEAUTIFUL Philly For Change Council Slate and MICHAEL NUTTER for Mayor
Eh. You asked me if I was
Eh. You asked me if I was voting today, and I answered. I am still not supporting anyone, and am distinctly ambivalent. If you want me to be passionate about someone, ask me about Maria or my dad. Or about the guy who is going to be DA in 2009. I cannot fake that I am supporting anyone, when I am not.
But, why could Dwight Evans be a better Mayor than Mike Nutter? Because I think he has done more than Nutter has, and is one smart SOB.
Why could Chaka Fattah be a good Mayor? Because I think his instincts are, more than anyone else's, to do whatever he can to bring people out of poverty. (Evans too, though he has also done stuff in Harrisburg that I don't like.)
As for Nutter, I once asked people whether the Nutter campaign was sending out talking points to people on YPP. People said I was paranoid, and being insulting. Then, in the Weekly, the Nutter campaign basically said they were emailing people on YPP, providing assistance for them if they needed it. That sort of annoyed me. Then, today, we find out they have paid staffers on the blog. That makes it hard for a place like this to function, and, is a basic sign of disrespect to me.
Maybe that is simplistic, and maybe I will change my mind. But, if someone came to a PfC meeting, and one of his or her staffers took a whiz on your leg, I think you might be annoyed. And when I am really up in the air about my choice, well, little things matter.
And, for Nutter, there are people besides Stan who have seen him up close on Council who I very much trust, who echo a lot of the concerns that Stan talks about(except not in a way to make everyone mad). Because I trust their judgment, and because they are seriously concerned about him, I listen.
Nutter does have some great things going for him, too. But, anyway, you want to know why I don't think he is this hero everyone wants to make him out to be... so there you have it.
And, Sam, the thing is, as black and white as you want to make my Knox thing seem, you never responded to the much longer post I wrote that day. And, you are now instead crediting my brother for being "compelling," when, he is apparently saying exactly what I did in my long post that day.
But, I will say it one more time, this is not about simply whether Knox made payday loans, as much as you want to make it black and white- it is that he not only did what he did, and then did not care, it was that he showed to me what he thinks the function of government should be. We don't know much about him, so, that is important.
But, also, and you still never addressed this either- that, to this day, he is still lying about it.
Easy...we're not even arguing, really
I'll wait to pull the trigger on why your "he has done more" argument, and treating elections like awards ceremonies rather than search committees can lead to mediocre governance and a hell of a lot of lo-o-o-ong incumbencies (ie: I might give Anna Verna a gold watch for 36 years of service--she's "done" a lot for some people--but there's no way in hell I'd hire her over Damon Roberts to represent the city's most violent district).
You used the term litmus test, not me. Alex's explanation never sounds like a litmus test, yours does.
If I possibly can, I just try to avoid limus tests, like prohibitions--an argument you and I should have offline (seriously, I have a working phone again: 267 307 8821). But I admit, until Casey Jr, Choice was close to being one for me.
I read your earlier post and complimented it then for summarizing reasons to fear Knox.
RE: Michael. Pissing on your leg? I think maybe that's a tad, um, overstated. I wasn't posting apparently at the time of the brouhaha, but I can tell you I got some email from other Nutter supporters, and it didn't sound like talking points. What I read was mostly people complimenting each other on good posts, but again I didn't read much then.
But hey, if that affected your choice, cool. That's how you choose. Myself, I try not to let the behavior of a few supporters affect my choice for who should be mayor of the whole city for four years. ANYWAY...
I am NOT arguing Dwight's intellect or Chaka's good intentions re: fighting poverty.
I just don't think what they're saying they would do, or what they've done, suggests they'd make nearly as effective a mayor as Michael. Not just for people affected by the gross receipts tax. For everyone.
Michael's unshrinking support of fair elections, his tough (and I admit controversial) stand on the city's most pressing problem (gun violence), his practical approach to the root causes of poverty (inadequate education, lack of good jobs, lack of affordable housing) AND his history of rejecting pay-to-play culture and enacting what I'd call reform, these seem to me more compelling than the worries of Stan.
I am sorry you really DON'T sound enthusiastic, Dan. That's sad. Myself, I think this is easily the best set of mayoral candidates I've ever had to choose from.
Have to work on convincing you re: Michael sometime soon.
Til then, I still thinks it cool you advocated a bit. No Chan Marshall fan, I.
I'll investigate the lying again too.
Proudly supporting the BEAUTIFUL Philly For Change Council Slate and MICHAEL NUTTER for Mayor
I'll investigate the lying
OK. Cool, go for it. As a reminder, Tom Knox still says two things, from the Inquirer:
1)He got into the payday lending biz after consulting Advance America about it.
2)He didn't get that people taking out payday loans would have to keep rolling them into new ones (which leads to the 415% APR)
However, (and you can trust me on this, or talk to some other people who know), the business model and profit scheme of Advance America heavily involved... rolling people into multiple loans.
In other words, statement one and statement two don't mix. Knox is lying.
I don't generally tell the media what to ask, but, you know, maybe someone with access could follow up with him on that.
Looking Ahead To November
What are the odds that one of the candidates (preferably Nutter or Evans) runs as an Independent?
merits longer discussion
This is an more abstract question, but is this the solution to our monolithic Democratic party? Random, independent runs? Or would we better off to try to form a party or parties?
Mayor's race aside. there are 2 plum at-large Council seats to be taken from the Republicans if there was an organized effort.
At large
You cannot take these seats from the Republicans. The minority party is guaranteed two at large seats by the City Charter
A different party could take
A different party could take them.
This is one of my favorite
This is one of my favorite ideas that never gets seriously discussed. Why not get together and organize a Philadelphia branch of the Working Families Party? They've made some real gains in New York by building an independent political force. There is no reason those seats should belong to Republicans.
---
Check out my blog!
I am currently working for Marc Stier and Ellen Green-Ceisler.
I have been saying this for
I have been saying this for a long time (not necessarily that party, but a third).
If Repubs are now fighting for their gimmies, it might also motivate them to be more into the political process, which will help foster more debate and voter turnout.
--------------------------------------------------
Staff member of Longacre for 5th Council District.
Longacre Website
Term-Limits
I know it's populist and reactionary - and we'd lose a few good people - but we've got to stir things up on a more regular basis. Twelve years should be enough for all elected officials. The good ones will have other opportunities to serve the public.
Illegal. PA has a "sore
Illegal. PA has a "sore loser" law. If you lose a primary, you can't run again.
--------------------------------------------------
Staff member of Longacre for 5th Council District.
Longacre Website
Maybe. Or, maybe the law
Maybe.
Or, maybe the law has a loophole, and someone should be romancing the Green Party as we speak.
Here's some info on PA's
Here's some info on PA's "sore loser" law. http://www.ballot-access.org/2003/1001.html. It seems that it wouldn't prohibit a candidate who loses the Democratic primary from getting on the ballot through a 'minor' third party, like the Reform Party. I'm not sure how active the Reform Party is in Philly, but Nutter might be better suited for a third party run than he is in the Democratic machine.
Grasping
Jill,
That's grasping for straws. If Knox believes a candidate has to be taken out, he has a war chest of money to throw $1 Million of negative on anyone and take them out. He has money for people on the street. Money to buy food and drink for voters. Money to give cash to political operatives.
Money, money, money.
And for a vast part of the city, who work hard, aren't on the blogs, and just watch TV, Knox looks pretty good.
The *only* thing that can slow him down is negative TV (and whoever does it, will get a barage of negative back from Knox). OR, a MEDIA that actually covers this guy for who he is. And so far, until today, the media has outright failed on this front.
He has been given a free pass, which let everyone assume his spin and ads are true. The campaign finance law is partially to blame for this, but I actually think bigger blame goes to our press -- the Inquirer and Daily News -- for allowing his a free-ride to the top. Who knows, maybe he's an investor in that too?!?
This looks like an unstoppable train, unless everyone starts doing something to stop it. And if you don't think he'll use his power and wealth to intimidate, think again. Just remember these words: "Fish Fry". What went on with Michael Youngblood at the NAACP yesterday was downright scary.
agreed for different reasons
I am one of the few people left on this blog who was here before the Mayor's race (and probably one of the few who will be left after the race..). In the halcyon days before candidate affiliation trumped all else, we'd have discussed whether or not it was a good thing for our party--the Democratic party--to have a primary loser go off and run as an Independent.
The idea of running a third party for at-large seats, and now I suppose for Mayor, is fine in its own right. However, I don't like the idea of forming a party as a vehicle for one (or even two or three) candidates. A party should be routed in ideas and shared values and there should be a process to create a party that is open and accessible to those who share those ideas.
Finally, forming a third party, is a strange thing to do in a one-party town in a state where fusion voting is illegal.
Ben's point about the Working Families Party is well taken, but it can't happen unless we commit to organizing to change the fusion voting law. IF not, I am way more comfortable working outside the Democratic party to change it than working for another party altogether.
I don't get
why the criterion used should be what's "good for our party." Although the Party can't exist without support, the Democratic Party is there to serve our interests, not the other way around. I think a huge part of the problems is that much of the existing Party structure seems to be confused on that point.
I'm not sure that forming a party around ideas and shared values is mutually exclusive with running candidates from a reform party.
Could you explain the "fusion" law?
In New York, candidates can
In New York, candidates can run under more than one ticket. So, if I supported the mission of the Working Families PArty, and Fattah or whoever was on their ballot (as well as on the Democrat's) in the general election, I could vote under the WFP version. It is a good way to build and show support for a third party.
In Pennsylvania, however, except for some Philly judicial races, it is illegal.
so, is that the same law
that would prevent a loser in a primary from running under the banner of another party in the general election?
I mean, they are both likely
I mean, they are both likely part of the PA election code. So, in a sense. But, not really- fusion voting is a whole different topic.
Yes
there is a "sore loser" statute, as someone else noted. Once in a party primary, you can't run in the general if you lose the primary.
And, like I said, there is a
And, like I said, there is a loophole.
do you want to dump the party?
Sorry, I was not clear.
What I am saying is this: if you identify as a Democrat, as all of us must in the May 15th primary to vote, and your candidate loses, is it the right thing to do to run your person as an independent?
In statewide and national elections, none of us can afford to NOT be Democrats. So like the party or not, in local elections we have to continue to be a part of it and make reforming it or changing it or owning it a priority.
You can do this outside of the party structure as Lib City, PFC, NN, NW Alliance, the Fattah camp, a growing Latino community, SEIU, and others do.
OR
you could form a Working Families Party and get fusion voting to be legal.
However, if you start running people as independents, based on affiliation with a candidate, not the party, you are creating personality-centric rather than people (read: party)-centric political movement which I think is a bad thing.
The problem is this, Ray
as you well know: when the City Party actively resists reform, and capitalizes on and demands unquestioning loyalty, and cultivates loyalty not by improving the City as a whole, but by serving very specific constituencies.
So the question becomes whether or not you can actually overcome that resistance and affect change/reform - and at what point do you determine that the only way to affect real change is to create another, viable alternative.
Running third party candidates is not likely to be successful short term, in the sense of getting someone elected, but conceivably, it might create an environment where the City Dem Party doesn't take our trust in them as leaders for granted. I think you know I'm not one for personality-centric politics, but I don't think that having substantial alternatives in this City is going to cause people to vote for a Bush instead of a Kerry, or a Santorum instead of a Casey.
two questions DE
there are two questions at hand though Josh:
one is about a third party in the abstract and there is just simply no one who is putting real time into thinking and acting upon that now.
two is a question about Nutter (or presumably anyone who might lose in May) running as an independent.
I asked if that was a good idea to do, if that actually improved or reformed the Democratic party or just made the situation worse. I suggested that a party be formed, but as I said, realized I don't want a party to form around one person. That's not reflective of what's been going on in in this city since 04--no one person has aked us where we are today in terms of being engaged in local politics00-it's been the product of a lot of collective action.
Specific to Nutter running as an independent
I don't think it's good idea because I'm not sure that he's clearly enough indentified as a "reformer" as opposed to an "insider." So in that sense, for him to do so would be personality-centric. Maybe my perspective is distorted because of Stan's relentless efforts to raise questions about Nutter's economic framework, but I'm not really getting that "progressives" are uniformly united behind Nutter, and the demographics of his support certainly suggest that he's not viewed by folks in neighborhoods as an alternative to the status quo. In a sense, maybe Knox represents a "third party" in the mayoral race.
But what about the idea of running Council candidates from a third party?
exactly
I agree with your analysis above. At the national level, the NAACP, La Council de La Raza, ACORN, SEIU, AFSCME, Citizen Action, enviros, LGBT, choice groups, DFA, MoveOn, People For, some faith groups, etc.--they all form the nucleus of "progressive" power. Yet those groups here are either absent from municipal races or are split (though not that split...).
These groups represent members--who are the people who have worked and will work to do things in the party differently. Until we can get these groups and the individuals they represent to come together and form a local party with a platform (even if the platform is small because it's all we can get agreement on), there's no point in forming a 3rd party.
Unless it's personality-centric which seems counterintuitive to a people-based movement which I assume is what we all want.
Fauklty premise
"the City Party actively resists reform"
How do you explain Ed Schwartz, Angel Ortiz and David Cohen.
"demands unquestioning loyalty"
Why are Northwest Ward leaders supporting Dwight Evans. Why do non endorsed candidates win with Ward leader supoport.
"cultivates loyalty not by improving the City as a whole",
What has the Party done that is antithetical to the interests of the "City as a whole"
You may not agree with what it has done, but your premise is not based on facts.
"but by serving very specific constituencies."
Like Labor, Community groups and LBGT (just ask Marc Segal)
It is obvious that you have a distaste for the Party that is not totally based on fact. I am a Ward leader and like most ward leaders am extremely active in my community. I go any place in my neighborhood and am constantly spoken to about community concerns, which I try to address.
Your facts are faulty and seem to be driven solely by your dislike of the Party.
I look at my City
and given that the Dem Party has been in power for decades, and I draw certain conclusions. Certainly, the Party can't be held singularly responsible for the problems of urban poverty and the like, but they do own some of the the responsibility for why this City hasn't done many things better than it has.
Lou, you know more about the Party than I do, but I hear stories over an over about how the Party resists change and reform and protects certain specific constituencies for political expediency. I have personally been treated very inappropriately by Dem Party politicians, not because they bothered to hear what I had to say, but simply because they thought that I represented an alternative to their political power. What do you have to say in response to Damon's post about getting kicked out of a meeting? You might say that he was being a provocateur - but the way he was treated is telling.
And consistantly, you express outrage that anyone would question the Party, and that you consider it to be whining like "upper-class women," or something like that. Sometimes, you respond to legitimate questions not with information, but with a sense that how could anyone question an organization that is, admittedly, ethnically and gender diverse and supportive of labor.
Well, I look at situations like the stadiums, or the casinos, and I say that obviously, something is wrong. Where is the process by which the Party ensures that stakeholders, beyond a limited group of powerful constituents, have real power in decision-making processes? That's a problem in my book, and who else is responsible if not the Dem Party?
I'm sure that my distaste for the Party is not completely "based in fact" (part of it is probably an extension of my distaste for the Dem Party at the national level) - so I appreciate you informing me about the ways that my viewpoint is inaccurate, but I would suggest that on the other hand, you are not willing to look at how, in aggregate, there are real and signficant problems with the Dem Party in this City. And from what I've seen, that kind of defensiveness is fairly characteristic of the Party as a whole.
Dem Party
Your view of the Party seems to think it is a monolithic entity rather than a group of competing interests. The casinos and stadiums were Rendellian, never a big friend of City Committee. Take that up with him.
I do not know why yiou were treated "innapropriately" by politicians, but most politicians listen to everybody who can vote. I do not have any idea what happened to Damon Roberts. Why should one guy in Roxborough know or be responsible for every slight, real or imagined, that ever occurred in the Party.
And that's the real difference in our perspectives
you work daily with good people that are a part of the Party. I don't. And I look at the big picture and see how, as a system, the Party fails to deliver in some respects.
The Party as a whole has some responsibility for what happened with the stadiums and the casinos, for the prevalence of pay-to-play, among other issues. That doesn't make everyone in the Party a crook or a bad person.
But honestly, Lou, at times you don't seem to want to engage in dialogue along those lines to break down misconceptions - and you consistantly deride criticisms as being unrealistic, or not Alinsky-enough, or "womanish." Admittedly, I didn't start you off on the right foot in that regard - but I had good reason for my initial comments to you - although I apologize for the form they took.
I think that this forum is an incredible opportunity for Party folks to engage in real dialogue, and to educate.
"Womanish"?
Are you kidding me? He really says that?
Press secretary, Knox campaign. Blogger on hiatus, former award-winning journalist.
Susan, I really don't want to exacerbate the divide
it wasn't a direct quote, although I put it in quotes. But the gist of what he said is that complaining about the party was acting like an upper-class woman - and he's said I need to "man up" by posting under my real name.
I undestand and respect his larger point: If you want to change the Party get involved. And I think it has a lot of legitimacy. So, I don't want to belabor the point - I only brought it up as to be illustrative of the other side of the problem as I see it.
So if I tell someone to "grow a pair..."
That's okay? Noted.
Press secretary, Knox campaign. Blogger on hiatus, former award-winning journalist.
You're refering to breasts?
You're refering to breasts?
Check the facts
It seems that people need to get out more
The reference is to an old joke where a bunch of upper crust women are out eating and the waiter asks "Is anything all right' This is a reference to some posters who find fault with everything.
As to the phrase "man up" this needs no explanation.
We wouldn't have to change
We wouldn't have to change the fusion laws. The party would only run candidates for city council at large and the city commissioners. Those are the only two bodies (that I know of) that have minority representation built into the office. Essentially, it would be a fight between the Republicans and the new party. Given how weak the local Republican Party is, a entity funded by labor unions and community groups could make a real stab for power.
---
Check out my blog!
I am currently working for Marc Stier and Ellen Green-Ceisler.
Different scenario. He won
Different scenario. He won one of the primaries, therefore he wasn't a "sore loser".
--------------------------------------------------
Staff member of Longacre for 5th Council District.
Longacre Website
Cant do it
In Pennsylvania, if you lose in a party primary, you cannot run as an Independent. The only way they could run independent, is if they had withdrawn from the Democratic Primary.
Nutter could win
running as an Independent alternative to Knox and Taubenberger in November, if he were allowed. COULD.
Evans and Fattah would not likely leave cozy Committee seats for a run outside the party.
And Brady, I think, would lose in three-way.
But as has been noted earlier, since Michael's running as a Reform candidate (WITH a record), he's best positioned to benefit, if and when the Knox snowball gets knocked off track.
It's still early. He's got money and Neil Oxman. He can still win the primary.
Proudly supporting the BEAUTIFUL Philly For Change Council Slate and MICHAEL NUTTER for Mayor
Sam, come on
Like I said earlier, before candidate preference became the be-all, end-all on YPP, we actually talked about the impact of stuff. Are you really willing to claim that it would be good for Philly for Change and other progressive groups to support anyone as an independent for the Mayor's race or Council without putting together a real platform that defines who "we" are?
Well...
I don't know that the Always-Issues-First way is the only way to support a third party candidate.
Sounds maybe overly-bureaucratic to me (and I've been outted as the bureaucracy-hatin' son of a former City Controller's Office Auditor). It might be that some day a viable third party candidate emerges and lots of people in the city's progressive community want to support him/her for a variety of reasons.
But, hey, this is crazy-speculative. I have thus far always been a Party Guy, and I plan to continue to be.
Proudly supporting the BEAUTIFUL Philly For Change Council Slate and MICHAEL NUTTER for Mayor
exactly
So Sam, you and I are on the same team (well, you know what I mean): we're part of PFC, we've phoned together, worked on Anne's race together, etc. (I don't think we have ever canvassed together) and we totally disagree about the Mayor's race.
If Nutter ran as an independent just to win, that would be one thing. I think it would be disloyal to the party you and I have both tried to be a part of (even if only by changing it), but it would make some sense.
However, if a new party formed for this purpose, and it was candidate centric, that would be a real problem.
Fixing the local Democratic party
Oddly enough, the best thing which could happen to the local Democratic party- which is, let's face it, about as close to an old-fashioned political machine as you'll see in today's US- would be for a Dem to lose a Mayoral election. That might be the only thing which could shake the party enough to really clean up its own act.
The GOP came close in 1999, but really has no shot this year. An independent run from the likes of Nutter- who seems more likely to run as an independent than Evans- would probably have a better shot than a Republican, considering this city's strong anti-GOP bias.
Then again, a Democratic machine is not without its benefits. The main reason that Kerry won PA in 2004 was the insane 80-20 ass-whooping that he put on Bush in Philly. And that wouldn't have been possible w/o a local Democratic party chair like Bob Brady. If Columbus, Cleveland, or Cincinnati had a local party organization like Philly and a chair like Brady, we'd be discussing John Kerry's re-election run today.
-Z
SurveyUSA has low undecideds
The SurveyUSA poll has had much lower undecideds than the other polls, even back in February. This may be to due to the automated responses. In any event, I don't think you can conclude that the percentage of undecideds has shrunk to under 10%.
Percent of undecided voters:
SurveyUSA - Feb 2007: 9%
SurveyUSA - Mar 2007: 8%
SurveyUSA - Apr 2007: 7%
Keystone - April 2007: 21%
Susquehanna - March 2007: 22%
Nutter internal - April 2007: 23%
---------
I support Michael Nutter for Mayor
Thats a good point. But,
Thats a good point.
But, still, this is bad.
Knox's advantage
Knox is clearly in first at this point with at least 25%. Last three April polls (Keystone, Nutter internal, SurveyUSA) show him between 24% and 32%. Last two polls (Nutter internal and SurveyUSA) show Knox 10 points clear of the field.
2nd place is close between Brady, Fattah, and Nutter, all who appear to have between 14% and 18% of support at this point (I don't think the exact order is discernible or even matters a great deal).
Evans is lagging slightly but still probably has around 10%
To me, there are several questions outstanding at this point:
1. What is the true percentage of undecided voters? Is it under 10%, as shown in the SurveyUSA polls, or over 20%, as shown in all other polls?
2. How much of Knox's support is soft? Which candidate will be able to peel off Knox supporters closer to the election? How will they be able to do so?
***
I support Michael Nutter for Mayor
My faith is wrecked
My faith is just being destroyed by this. wow.
Faith? In the political process?
Surely, you jest.
A few observations...
* I'm sure you've heard the old saying about how someone who likes sausage or the law should never watch either being made.
* Pointed debate over issues during a primary campaign is a very good thing.
* The winner of this primary is almost certainly going to be the candidate w/the best get-out-the-vote operation on election day. That suggests that Brady will win, no matter what polls say today.
* Again- there's a month before people vote. A lot can change during that time. People could decide that, contrary to the image he's putting forth in his ads, Tom Knox is as much of an outsider as John Street. People could decide that Dwight Evans could do for the city as a whole what he's done for West Oak Lane. People could decide that a good government wonk like Mike Nutter is precisely what the city needs. And so forth.
Having faith in the political process is foolish. But hope's a different matter. I have had no faith in the US political process since I saw george bush (lower-case intended) selected President in 2000. I became even more dismayed when I heard the President of Diebold promise Ohio's votes in '04 to bush, and then deliver them. I became even more dismayed when I saw that every state where the exit polls + the final results didn't match was using Diebold machines w/o a paper trail.
But, y'know what? Screw faith- I didn't give up hope. I hope that we can save our democracy on a nationwide level, which is why I started the Mount Airy chapter of Drinking Liberally. I hope that we can improve our local government by getting people involved, which is why I have invited Mayoral and City Council candidates to have proxies speak at meetings of DL. I hope that I can make a difference individually, which is why I'm trying to get other people to think so as well.
Screw faith,
-Z
1. Undecideds tend not to
1. Undecideds tend not to vote. My personal view of this is that it increases pro-rata everyone's support. So Knox could have a stronger percentage of likely voters. (Just a guess, don't know much about the undecideds.)
2. A vote for Knox seems like a vote against the current direction of the City. So even if the supporter of Knox is soft, my sense is that the only other place for Knox supporters to go is Nutter or Brady. Given how well known both are, I don't think that the intesity of support will matter for Knox.
3. If people think that Knox is going to win, he will, b/c of the momentum. People like to vote for winners and don't like to vote for those who they don't think can win. (I think Dwight is going to get 10% of the vote, no matter what. I think that Nutter supporters are very intense. People love Brady and Fattah has a strong base.) All of that said, I think only negative/comparison ads will start to move voters.
4. Which would mean that you would have to go negative on Knox. He has more money than anyone, so when he returns fire it will pummel a campaign. I don't see anyone leaping out there on faith to attack. Aside from that, I don't think that with the new limits anyone has that kind of money.
5. Knox will not have the tested field team of Brady or Fattah. (Nutter will not either.) That's going to mean a couple of points for both of them.
6. The VA Tech thing is going to take voters' attention off of the Mayoral Race for weeks. Which means that no one is going to be able to break through on message alone.
So, for someone other than Knox to win:
1. Nutter. Catch fire by pulling support of Northwest Voters from Fattah/Brady/Evans. Position as second place candidate and only alternative to Knox. Pull progressives from Knox. Point out Knox's insider status. Pray Bob Brady goes negative on Knox.
2. Brady. Position as second place candidate. Point out in African American community strong credentials and position Knox as having less of a record of service in the African American community. (Don't know Knox's record of service.) Broadcast to committeepeople that a Knox victory could cost their jobs. Get close in polls by going negative to lower overall turnout, relying on strong election day to get out vote.
3. Fattah. Raise a lot more money. Spend it to get on TV. When poll numbers increase, position as only viable African American candidate to win. Get stronger committeepeople support. Ensure strong e-day turnout in African American neighborhoods. Pray it does not rain or that Knox/Brady get into negative campaign.
4. Evans. Divine intervention. I really like Dwight, but for reasons I cannot understand, he comes across as angry. He is a bright legislator with a great record of service and a good neighborhood credentials, but he cannot catch fire. There are a lot of good candidates in this race, so its a tough one for him.
___________________________________________________
I do not work for/support any candidate for any office in Philadelphia.
Excellent analysis
Truthtold -- excellent analysis! I will post more on the SurveyUSA crosstabs later, but I just wanted to say that I agree with most of what you said and appreciate your contributions to this forum.
Some quick points from the crosstabs:
a) Voters over 50 are putting Knox in front - he has 36% of the vote for 50-64 year olds, and 44% of the vote for voters 65+. I will check the other polls to see if this consistent. According to SurveyUSA's model, voters over 50 will constitute 40% of the electorate on May 15.
b) Knox has 19% of the black vote, second only to Fattah (35%) and ahead of Evans and Nutter. Is this a plausible outcome?
---
I support Michael Nutter for Mayor
Are the racial stats from
Are the racial stats from this poll only? Didn't the Tribune poll have a much different outcome?
Supporting Dwight Evans - A Safer Philadelphia - Block by Block
Re; racial stats
Yes, the stats I cited were from this poll only. I believe this most recent SurveyUSA poll is the first to show Knox ahead of Evans among black voters. I will look into the other polls more later this evening when I'm not at work.
---
I support Michael Nutter for Mayor
The 19% is plausible, but
The 19% is plausible, but you have to wonder about the reverse Rizzo effect (i.e., African American voters saying on a poll that they will vote for Knox and then finding themselves not able to do it.) However, my sense is that some African American voters are connecting with Knox's stance on crime and growing up in Abbottsford.
While there are many who like to disparage the candidacy -- which I don't offer any comment on one way or the other -- his media message is excellent and is getting out there. (Money talks.)
I am sure that he has polled and found out that Philadelphians want change, something done about crime, something done to make schools safe and want jobs in low income neighborhoods. (Every poll for about 30 years says the same thing.) Then, I'd be willing to be he tested each message for each of his 15 commercials for maximum effect.
But the short answer is that Knox's message is getting out there. That's a problem with the other campaigns -- and the benefit of having a lot of money.
Voters know this about Knox (b/c his commercials have told them so), he is going to stop selling City Hall, he is going to put 1000 cops on the street, and he is a businessman not a politician. About Brady, he's been in congress, he is the son of a police officer, and he negotiates a lot, he cares a lot and Lynn Abraham likes him. Fattah, he's in Congress and his wife is a really good t.v. anchor. Nutter, he hates John Street and would run the City differently. Evans, doesn't like crime.
The point is the Knox campaign -- through an airways war -- has gotten his 30 second message out there that he is going to stop crime by putting cops on the street and he can fix the City. The other candidates have not yet distinguished themselves enough to prevent voters from going to Knox and expanding their natural base of support. That's a huge problem for them, b/c in a five way race it is going to be hard to get voters, b/c there are a lot of good choices for different constituencies. Overbrook, to use one neighborhood, is a good example. Bob Brady's the Congressman, ward leader and almost life long resident (I am including Overbrook Farms, even though I know it really is a different neighborhood.) Fattah is very popular in that area. Nutter was a popular City Councilman and Knox is on TV alot. To move voters to your campaign in that area, you have to convince people who like you and your opponents.
That's the issue that most campaigns face. They are running out of undecided voters to move to propel their campaigns. They are all tightly bunched together, so its not like they think their guy can't win yet. Plus, the news media (and voters) will stop focusing on the campaign for a couple of weeks. That's going to hurt that movement.
______________________________________________________________________
I do not work for/support any candidate for any office in Philadelphia.
city hall on the auction block
fattah made a comment about the rise in knox's numbers after his massive ad campaign, implying that it was a sad statement about philly voters, that their votes could be bought.
the underlying problem is that anyone who is buying their votes is not earning them.
in the case of knox, it seems that buying votes is the alpha and omega of his campaign and earning them is simply off the menu.
im waiting for the knox ad that announces that he is out to buy the biggest slice of philly that his credit will provide and everything that relies on a government budget will be forsaken in the name of his neo-feudalistic vision.
reducing the tax base and balancing the budget is a recipe for disaster in philly. there is no private captial interest which will compensate for the schools we have, the law enforcement we have, and so on. whatever quality you think they have now, you can be assured that services will go from imperfect to intolerable.
two things i find morally repugnant are 'no child left behind' and the privatization of our police, fire and rescue services, all of which ride shortly behind knox's self-financed facade.
knox is a republican trying to run as a democrat.
he has no sense of the importance of community in philly. in fact, as a low-life payday loan shark, he has demonstrated nothing but contempt for communities in philly.
i can go on complaining about knox all day but that is to no end. what philly needs is not more complaining but a reply to the attacks on our own institutions, however imperfect they may be.
there is one candidate who can preserve philly from furhter ghettoization. he is the one who always stood up for the working man and has negotiated labor issues to everyone's satisfaction.
fattah is a good man, but looking into the future, i dont see that he has the clout to make the big thngs happen for philly.
brady is a real philadelphian and makes no pretense of being an outsider. knox just wants a fiefdom for himself, the would-be primary shareholder.
by contrast, brady is a stakeholder, a member of the community.
its only right that the best candidate for mayor of philadelphia is part of the discussion.
In regards to Fattah and
In regards to Fattah and Knox ...
The other way it can be looked at is ... You have someone who has been in public office for 20+ years. He is known in Philadelphia. He started out with a huge lead because of that.
But all it took was a bunch of commercials from a guy with no significant public services to lay him low.
Did Knox "buy" the election or did it merely show how tenuous Fattah's relationship with Philadelphia is?
To put it into perspective, if Rendell had come back to run or Mayor, do you believe Knox's money would have cut half of Rendell's supporters in a matter of months?
For someone with 20+ years of elected experience, I would wonder why it was so easy to lose so much support to someone that only has a message that boils down to "I'm not as political as the other guys"? I think the money is getting too much credit.
--------------------------------------------------
Staff member of Longacre for 5th Council District.
Longacre Website
check your political science, longacre
the reason that candidates seek to outspend eachother is that it produces votes.
Didn't dispute that.
Didn't dispute that.
But As soon as the first ad hit, Fattah started nose diving, if I recall.
It really didn't seem to take all that much.
--------------------------------------------------
Staff member of Longacre for 5th Council District.
Longacre Website
this blog deserves our attention
http://tomtheloanshark.blogspot.com/