I keep thinking - and hearing - about this write-in deal. You know, candidates running for mayor being written in as at-large candidates on ballots.
Now that I am done with all the candidate interviews, I can see that this scheme, if there is a scheme (or two), might work - except that -
The at-large candidates, even the ones not currently in office, all did pretty well in their interviews. Of course, Michael Ferrick did not participate so I have no clue about him.
There are 5 at-large seats and 7 candidates, right? That means 2 of the announced candidates won't get in. Add in a failed candidate for mayor and it gets interesting (not necessarily in a good way).
I'm betting that somewhere, someone figured Ari Herzog and Fran Sullivan haven't got a chance and that Ferrick only has a slim chance.
Fran's got a lot of friends, folks - and every single one of them wants that senior citizens center built NOW. If she does in fact win a seat, I want to be the first to step up and make a movie out of it.
I would say if you're going to write someone in, write in someone like a Gary Roberts. I won't say write in Gary Roberts specifically, because last time I spoke with him, he was reluctant (but not totally dismissive).
Don't write in someone who is running for mayor. It would be setting a bad precedent.
"I won't run for mayor unless John Moak doesn't, but if he doesn't and I do, I'll also mount a write-in campaign so if I lose I won't be off the City Council."
I mean, I thought the first bit was wimpy enough to last us for at least 2 years ...which is mostly why I'm not endorsing anyone.
6 comments:
Clearly I'm on the wrong email lists...
am I also supposed to write James in for Ward 3 councillor as well ? You know, just in case.
Makes perfect sense. Only write in names of people who have expressed little or no interest in running for public office.
I love Gary, don't get me wrong. I wish he ran.
But how is writing his name or my name or your name any more or less fair to the current crop of councilor-at-large candidates?
How is that more (italicized) right?
Tom, that was more tongue-in-cheek than anything. It's basically a wasted vote if it's not a coordinated effort to a perceptible goal. Or a statement.
Whoever gets the most votes will win, even if it's 11-10, I believe.
And Bubba - I originally had something about Ward 3 in there, but I took it out.
I was thinking I should probably write James/Donna in for Charter Commission as well - one can't be too careful.
I welcome the challenge, and I freely admit given their experience they'd bring more to the table than I do.
That might be my campaign slogan.
Oh no Tom, I'm Teddy Roosevelt-ing you onto the Charter Commission.
Post a Comment