Friday, May 18, 2007

Lou's List: Primary roundup, part 1: A New Day for Pittsburgh

Lou's List: Primary roundup, part 1: A New Day for PittsburghNone of these candidates seem likely to face any threat in November.
This could not be further from the truth.

All of these candidates are sure to face opposition in the fall.


lou said...

Do these fine candidates have names and for what reason should we believe that any more than the most miniscule percentage of voters will even become aware of them much less vote for them?

I'm not one to write off long shot candidates and I support them when they are the best alternative. But I can separate the reality of a situation from what I would like it to be.

And furthermore, qualified reformers were elected on Tuesday and I am excited to see them perform in office. I see little reason to entertain the idea of long shot minor party or independent candidates when this caliber of candidate is the clear frontrunner.

Mark Rauterkus said...

Yes, there are names. I always use my name and name names.

David Powell in Dist 7.

David Adams in Dist 9.

David S (ran before) in Dist 1. (Not Libertarian)

Myself in Dist 3.

Furthermore, getting known in such a small city is not so hard. What is hard -- is being at odds with the truth. Or, putting out info that is suspect.

On Tuesday, nobody was elected except for a primary nomination. And, I'm sure that some of what you think were qualified reformers were simply guys who are fresh faces. More like guys who tossed the bumbs out -- and the voters did that.

Granted, I'll put Patrick D. in the area of qualified reformer -- if you overlook what he did on school board -- and that's mostly go with the flow established by the superintendent.

If you see little reason to entertain the idea of a general election -- then you are not progressive. That's narrow mindedness.

The caliber of what emerged is more to a statement of what was there in office -- and more of a statement of what emerged from the ranks of the Ds in the past decades.

lou said...

You didn't name names. Thanks for doing so after the fact. I was interested. I respect everyone who runs for anything because they believe it is the right thing to do.

I did not write that no one else was running. I wrote that no one would be a "threat" to the nominees. And I meant that from a completely objective standpoint.
Maybe I'll be surprised. Hell, I'll be surprised if all the people you name manage to get on to the ballot. I hope they do. It would be good for city. And I hope there are debates in every race. And for once we have major party candidates who I think would be happy to debate.

That said, supporting who I believe to be best qualified (or whoever I want for any reason) is certainly not narrow mindedness.

Tom said...

Lou makes some VERY good points. Sorry, but David S. is not a name. Conversely, I have no idea who any of these people are. Perhaps we'll get some sort of idea some time.

I agree that anyone who runs should be hailed as someone who cares about his/her area; however, as reality goes, unless they have recognizable names--or recognizable sums of money to spend of advertising and "name branding," the last thing they will be is a "threat."

Decades of political, one-party machinery won't be displaced any time soon. Perhaps in any of our lifetimes.

Mark Rauterkus said...

I need to get David's last name into my spelling checker I guess.

People in City Council District 1 -- that of Dan Onorato, Luke Ravenstahl, Barbara Burns, and D. Harris -- know who David is. He was a Canadian. Now he's an American citizen.

David ran in the past.

David Powell is and has been the chairman of the Allegheny County Libertarian Party. He is an I.T. guy, among other things.

David Adams was at a debate in District 9. He was a R but went to no party before the deadline. Getting the write in and staying a R was a very long shot. Going 3rd party was better.

David Adams has done a lot of work on crime issues in the past years. He also has a job in Oakland.

David S is a 911 operator.

None of us are not lightwights. Our efforts are sure to help the city in many positive ways. I can visualize a few of us winning and most -- if not all -- being better than the competition when it comes to serving on city council.

Time will tell.

Mark Rauterkus said...

Timing doesn't matter much as to when I named name. But about a month ago the nomination papers were posted to the web.

It is safe to say I'm not 'after the fact.' When I hear after the fact -- I think of folks doing a last minute write in. For us -- third party candidates -- we are in advance of the wave. We're ready.

The 'done deal mentality' is not progressive. When the stage isn't set -- it is hard to already predict a winner or say there is not anyone who can make a challenge that is viable.

Plus, I don't really want to be a 'threat.' That's all about playing defense. Those that won the primary need to be open, responsive, issue-driven.