An element of conflict in any discussion is a very good thing, it shows that everybody's taking part and nobody's being left out. I like that. -Jimmy Stewart as Elwood P. Dowd in Harvey
This has been one of the most interesting discussions on this list in awhile. And while I don't agree with everyone, most of the discussion is civil and honest, and that's a good thing in my opinion. The most entertaining of which have been Jim Graham's campaigning for Peter disguised as anecdotal parables and Charlie Murphy True Hollywood Stories type yarns. I especially like the "tales of a foolish Somali Leader". Me, I was surrounded mostly by Europe descended White folks so I don't think my stories are as entertaining. But the real point, (and ribbing of Jim aside), I think we have a tendency to get lost in partisanship, candidate bias and campaign rhetoric rather than viewing this as an opportunity for democracry to be in action. Here we have two qualified candidates with great support and rather than spending countless hours making unsubstantiated claims of how bad one or another candidate is, it would be refreshing to have all of the campaigns talk about why they're person is the best one for the job rather than why they think they're just better than one of the others. If you're candidate is really just over the top, incredible whip cream with a cherry on top, you should not even need to mention the other candidate to talk about how good yours is. There is, however, a dark underside, and that's opinion presented as fact. To be clear, I think Peter's folks deserve a lot of credit and respect for the organization and support they brought to the convention on Saturday. It definitely dealt a blow, and they should take pride in that. But at the same time you can't call it victory if your goal was endorsement, and you didn't get it. You can't call it winning by being ahead on every ballot, because you weren't able to close the loop and reach your goal of endorsement. And you can't call RT's supporters disrespectful for leaving (especially considering Dyna's points that Peter's people would not let those getting refreshment back in; and I've heard this from more than one person), they did what they had to to support their candidate, just as I'm sure Peter's would have done what they had to. And were the positions reversed, I'd be saying the same thing about Peter's campaign. With apologies to Public Enemy, don't believe the hype! RT hasn't lost neighborhood leaders, there are many across the city that not only support, but worked the convention floor for him on Saturday. RT hasn't tried to crush the neighborhoods and dismantle NRP, he doesn't hate Police and Fire Departments, and look for every chance to cut their funding, and he definitely hasn't squandered the City's funding. Truth be told, he's done an incredible job with a horrible budget and drastic cuts and it's very easy to take potshots when you're outside the job, not easy to be sitting in the chair and have to decide between essential services which one you're going to have to cut because of low funding resources. Bottom line, if you support Peter, good for you, go with the person you believe in, but support him because you think he's the best person for the job, not because you're mad at or dislike RT. Me, I like RT, I think he's done a good job. No public official is perfect, but I also haven't seen one try as hard as him. I believe in him and what he does and will support him all the way through November. Jonathan Palmer Victory REMINDERS: 1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If you think a member is in violation, contact the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
