Would you say the same thing about Peter Welch versus Martha Rainville? If the woman is a Republican does she get your "affirmative action"?

It really doesn't matter because Miller, Kiss, and Curley are not all equally qualified.

Shouldn't it alarm Miller's would-be supporters that the only reason she was opposed at the caucus was because Andy Montroll thought she would be bad for the city?

 

Good Morning! And thank you for writing! Good questions. If the woman were a Republican would she get 'my' "affirmative action"? The answer is yes.

If Rainville takes positions I agree with as much as Welch's, and can show me some things about herself that in my mind make her and Welch equally qualified, then I'd vote for her, just to get another woman in government.

Of course her choosing to align herself with a party that is currently making excuses for torture and murder makes me skeptical of Rainvile, but I'll keep an open mind. I've voted for Republicans before. I voted for Randy Brock for example, because as someone who didn't lie about his education, he had more merit than Ready, in my book.

I agree that Kiss, Curley and Miller are not equally qualified. I think miller is more qualified than the others.

And I disagree with the premise that Montroll opposed Miller because he thinks she'll be bad for the city. Did you hear him say that? If so, looks like BP has another scoop!

No seriously folks- Did Montroll run against Clavelle three years ago because he thought Miller would be bad for the city? Think hard. The answer is 'no' of course. He ran both times because of his own ambition and lost both times because of his lack of charisma. It isn't rocket science.

Thanks again for writing, and for reading BurlingtonPol.com. Check in often and tell your friends!

 

I'm writing this to Progressives, Democrats and alike. We should all take a serious look at what is going to happen with the Mayoral and City Council elections if we don't vote together. First, we need to spread the word to your family members, neighbors and close friends and have them talk to their friends and so on. Kiss and Miller are the top choices. Either you vote for Miller first and Kiss second, or Kiss first and Miller second, leaving Kevin Curley your very last vote. The Republicans love it when our parties don't come together. It helps them win. I would be happy with either of these two top candidates. We don't need to screw this up and end up letting Kevin Curley win. Then, the majority—that being the rest of
us—will lose in the end. This would be sad, if you think about. We, being the majority, have the most in common. This should be the same with the City Council candidates. We need to work together on this one. It is the first time we have had this IRV law. We have two, strong top Candidates here. Let's not screw this up, and instead, come together. If we let Kevin Curley win, it won't be long before he runs for a higher office because he has Burlington tucked under his belt. It is very important that we pass this school budget until we can get one of our own into the Mayor's office to take a good look at public concerns. We will have to hang on until then. Our children come first—they are our future. Please continue to spread the word on how important the order of our votes is going to be for us. We need to talk about this each and every day, until Election Day. Also, I would like to say that as a supporter of one of these candidates, we need to respect each others signage. They seem to be getting destroyed and I don't think it is either one of our parties doing it. So beware. Drive around at night and early morning and keep an eye on them if you have the time. Curley has full support of his party and now he's trying to win the support of the rest of us. We need to fight back and make a difference—a difference together—and in the end we can't lose. Our unity can send Curley a message and maybe even a one-way ticket to Texas!
Thanks
Moe

 

Headline: Wind blows down Cole's BIG SIGNS! Dark Horse Libertarian Candidate Ryan now Leads W7 Council Race!

 

You should try to be more concise, Moe. Your comments will have a greater impact.

 

As sign manager (and full-time volunteer) of Jeremy Ryan's City Council campaign, I personally go around the ward every other day (or as much as I can) to inspect our signs, make sure they're upright, not damaged, etc.

We have had damaged signs, to date, a total of 13, with 5 missing today alone already (I just got back in from a short run-down, and I may headed out again today due to the weather.

I also agree with Moe's comment about keeping an eye out for sign damage done by persons... if you see someone damaging a sign, please let the candidate's campaign know.

 

Sorry, Moe. I rejected your last comment. It was too long and I didn't appreciate the tone.

If you have a problem with that, read my disclaimer. Thanks for visiting BurlingtonPol.

 

Haik, this should be better:

How much more concise would you prefer that I be Haik? So let me make my point as clear as possible. This is a run-off vote. Regardless of who the Progressives and Democrats vote as their first choice—the person to vote for last should be Curley. I've had three lawn signs stolen or destroyed and I'm sure others have experienced the same thing. Yeah, it was a little bit windy last night, but this has been going on from the get-go. But, Curley will have to pray for a three foot blizzard in March to dunk this one!

Your Friend Moe

P.S. Thanks "Heavenly!"

 

I think it is sad that you feel like you have to accuse Kevin Curley of stealing signs. If you are so sure that he is so bad, why not - I don't know - stick to the issues??

 

Out of fairness to 'Moe', I'd like to point out that he or she did not accuse Curley of stealing signs.

He or she simply said Curley should be our last choice and then immediately followed up by saying her or his signs were stolen.

This type of non sequitur is often used as a tactic to conflate two unrelated things in the mind of the listener or reader. Possibly in this case, stealing and Curley.

So I think we owe 'Moe' an apology. Unlike the O'Riley Factor, BurlingtonPol actually is a "no-spin zone."

 

O.T., sorta. Can anyone here tell us why we can't bring up the legislative record for a member of the Vermont Senate?

We can bring up legislative activities for the House membership, bills and such, but NOT for the Vermont Senate. Bummer.

 

You probably ought to look a little closer at the candidates if you can't tell the difference...and you don't have to look very far. Hinda's record is pro-business and anti-worker. Her support of the minimum wage sounds great until you realize the increase was smaller than that passed during the last biennium, and this time the Dems controlled both houses. Her website says she won't close neighborhood schools while in debate she says the option is open. I'd beware of that particular woman.