Voters who have settled on a Ward 6 candidate: Why are you supporting your chosen candidate?

[keithn.livejournal.com]

I'm just curious from people who are not the candidates or linked closely to any of them - how did you reach your decision? I have personally found that for the issues I care about, I can't see much of a reason to vote for one candidate as opposed to any of the others. So I'll probably end up voting based on some other reason I haven't decided on yet. They all seem like good people.

I'm wondering as to what is driving other voters. I'm probably not a typical municipal election voter (as a young and relatively recent renting resident of 4 years) but I'm willing to bet some more people like me are here on DSLJ.

Comments

[ron_newman]

I am disinclined to vote for Charlie Chisholm because he did not participate in the "Ask Me Anything" forum here and also declined to meet with the writers and editors of the Somerville Journal. I'm still quite undecided between the other three candidates.

[keithn.livejournal.com]

Is any of your disinclination due to the fact that he was endorsed by The Somerville Times, the paper that you perceive to be making anti-Semitic statements? Do you think he may be in cahoots with their editors?

I also wish he had participated here. I perceive his campaign to be more focused on helping individuals solve their individual issues with the city rather than higher level projects and policies than the other candidates (although I know they all very much are devoted to solving problems for Ward 6 residents) and it would have been interesting to have his take included here.

Anything to create more contrast between the candidates would be welcome, IMO. I feel like every candidate is playing it safe, taking what they perceive to be the most popular and uncontroversial positions, and likely splitting the vote of the people who decide it is even worth voting.

[ron_newman]

No, I don't hold any candidates responsible for the people who have endorsed them.

[laryu.livejournal.com]

I agree with your assessment and I'm also curious how others have landed. Candidate Chisholm seems to care about the day-to-day but he also has odd goals (make the T, free?). The other three seem more concerned about social justice than about the blocking and tackling of city services, like eradicating the rats of Davis Square, getting rid of the broken Big Belly garbage cans, and enforcing traffic rules on private delivery and garbage trucks. I'm pretty uninspired.

[jesseh.livejournal.com]

Yeah, make the T free is an odd stance, I think.

I appreciate Chisholm's emphasis on his work on LGBT issues -- not something I've heard from other candidates.

That said, I'm probably going with Lance Davis, because of his endorsements. Given the fairly similar positions of the candidates, I'm interested in the person who will be most able to work within the system to make things actually happen.

[dougo.livejournal.com]

I am not too worried about vote-splitting, since this is only a preliminary election and the top two vote getters will compete in the general election in November. I would prefer a preference voting process (like instant-runoff) rather than having two separate elections, but it's better than having a single four-way election where someone could win with 25% of the vote.

[prunesnprisms.livejournal.com]

He also showed up at our door more than once -- at least in one case, not taking 'sorry, don't have time for that right now' as an answer. Nope...

[jimmyfergus.livejournal.com]

I'm disinclined to vote for Charlie Chisholm because when he came to our door he was utterly ignorant of many significant issues in the area, though he was very fortunate that my wife clued him in on them. So anyone who got a visit from him after our house encountered a much better informed Charlie Chisholm. If he'd encountered me instead he would not have had such good tutoring.

He even asked my wife how she found out about some things, like the West Branch Library meetings and plans (that he was totally ignorant of), that are well publicised... It's not just that he wasn't informed, he wasn't even aware of what he should be informed about.

[prunesnprisms.livejournal.com]

I plan to vote for David Lieberman, as I know someone who knows him well personally, and thinks he's a standup guy. I agree that excluding Chisholm the platforms are pretty similar and they all seem bright and like they might do a fair job.

[dougo.livejournal.com]

I agree that there's not a whole lot of differences between the candidates' positions, and they all seem capable and good-hearted. I am currently leaning towards Chisholm for several reasons:
1. He has the most experience with government and leadership roles. (I was originally leaning against him because he seemed like an old-guard conservative candidate who might be too set in his ways, but I haven't seen any evidence of that. I particularly appreciated his explanation of why he's not a Democrat, due to a wave of conservative Democrats in state politics in the early '90s.)
2. He's lived his whole life in Somerville and seems familiar with the history of many local issues.
3. He has a principled stance against taking donations from developers, and seems to emphasize anti-corruption positions.
4. He's the only one who mentioned sidewalk snow removal, a pet peeve of mine.
5. In general he seems to have offered concrete actions (e.g. buying sidewalk snowplows like in North Reading) rather than just identifying problems to focus on.
6. He's a math teacher and I like math. :)

I am disappointed that he doesn't seem comfortable communicating on the Internet (didn't participate here and his answers in other online forums were often too brief) but for me that isn't quite enough to outweigh the other reasons.

[ron_newman]

I have some recollection of Chisholm running a really racist and anti-immigrant campaign against then-Ward 6 alderman Jack Connolly in the early 1990s*. Enough so that I campaigned for Jack that year. Maybe Charlie has changed since then, but it concerns me even today.

This was back when "Sanctuary City" was a major local political issue.

(He has run unsuccessfully for Ward 6 alderman four times -- three against Jack, once against Rebekah Gewirtz.)

*EDIT: I'm pretty sure this was in 1993, which was the last time Chisholm ran against Connolly. I moved from Ward 2 to Ward 6 in 1992, and I would not have campaigned for some other ward's alderman when I still lived in Ward 2.

[dougo.livejournal.com]

That is surprising given his involvement in the civil rights movement. Do you have any citations?

[ron_newman]

This was a really long time ago so I don't have any paper saved from then. But I may go look up old Somerville Journal articles in the library now. And maybe also drop by Jack Connolly's office and talk to him.

[keithn.livejournal.com]

In light of this, I'm now a little surprised that you initially said you were disinclined to vote for Chisholm due to his lack of participation in the "Ask Me Anything"/Somerville Journal interviews. If he ran a "really racist and anti-immigrant campaign" at some point then I wouldn't expect his participation in those forums to really make any difference in overcoming this issue.

[bosmagnolia.livejournal.com]

"He has a principled stance against taking donations from developers"

I never comment on this stuff but this annoys me. That's easy for him to say since he hasn't raised any money at all (from what I've heard, he has an entirely self-funded campaign). I don't think any of the other candidates have taken money from developers either. It's like Don Draper saying "it's toasted."

[dougo.livejournal.com]

According to a mailer I got from Chisholm today, Lance Davis "has accepted five $1,000 and seventeen $500 contributions from area businessmen, attorneys, and individuals living outside of Ward 6 and the City of Somerville". There is a list of donations at the Office of Campaign & Political Finance website (http://www.ocpf.us/Filers/Index?q=16087#filer-data), though it's not clear to me that these are developers. (You seem to be right that Chisholm has entirely self-funded (http://www.ocpf.us/Filers/Index?q=12419#filer-data). I don't see that as a negative; he's no Donald Trump.)

Another mailer from Chisholm has a quote from Bernie Sanders about "dirty money". Chisholm has also mentioned Citizens United (in the SCATV interview). I suspect most or all of the other candidates would agree with him about campaign finance and corruption in general, but so far he's the only one who has actually mentioned it.

[sarahx.livejournal.com]

As a disenfranchised green card holder, I'd love to have a say in choosing those who spend our property taxes. Or our state and federal taxes. No taxation without representation is a long-dead ideal, isn't it?

I'm supporting Lance Davis

[pekmez.livejournal.com]

I don't know that I have a whole lot more to contribute than the discussion I see here already, but I'll share my reasoning anyway.

I have decided to support Lance Davis, but feel that David Lieberman and Elizabeth Weinbloom are close runner-ups who I would not be disappointed to see elected either.

I ruled Chisholm out quickly, both due to bits and pieces from his other bids for office and because the set of things in his campaign materials that seemed to be either in left field or individual peoples issues and I didn't get a sense of understanding a big picture or a strategy for what Ward 6 needs.

Between the other three candidates, I mostly did not see a huge difference on paper. Lance's endorsements, fundraising and relationships with other leaders who think he's a reasonable guy to work with make me think he has an edge on being more successful both in campaigning and in working with the city if he's elected.

For better or for worse I do see that there is a little more focus"keeping families with kids happy in Somerville" in his perspective, reading between the lines. That both gives me a good feeling --- as a family with kids, nice to have a representative who personally gets some of my perspective -- and gives me a little pause because Somerville's great diversity is ALL OF families with kids, families without kids, one-person families, co-op households, grad students, Tufts undergrads with rich parents who can actually afford the rent, and families that aren't all 2.2 kids and a chicken in every pot, and "old Somerville" and "new Somerville" and having too much of any of those on the BoA could lead to skewed perspective. I think that Lance does appreciate all of that and is not going to be a one-issue or one-demographic representative, though.

Lance is the only one who happened to come to my door at a time when I happened to be home. (David left a card and a note, and Elizabeth either didn't come by or didn't spend as much on fliers to leave one behind.) I'm pretty sure that having a conversation with one smart, personable candidate who I was mostly in line with and felt would listen to my concerns and have experience and ideas about using tools available to the city made him stand out to me. I admit that if the other two had caught me before primary day I might have been more inclined to vote for them! I would be happy to see any of the three advance to the next round.

I have to admit I'm curious what moniker the Times would give Lance, Elizabeth, and David though, to top Princess Rebekah. ;-)

RE: I'm supporting Lance Davis

[teko.livejournal.com]

"I ruled Chisholm out quickly, both due to bits and pieces from his other bids for office and because the set of things in his campaign materials that seemed to be either in left field or individual peoples issues"

Those are very vague reasons to not vote for someone.

Re: I'm supporting Lance Davis

[pekmez.livejournal.com]

I saw several things I was uncomfortable with in his past unsuccesful bids for office, including having a different seeming story every time I encountered him. I did not agree with the priorities he set out in his campaign materials. I dislike the negative campaigning he is doing against Lance Davis, too. I think his reasoning about what issues are important seems like a strange set of priorities that looks more like a mishmash of individual constituents concerns than a big picture plan. With random things mixed in, like make the T free, and then weird reasoning that I can't quite make sense of.

RE: I'm supporting Lance Davis

[somertricky.livejournal.com]

"Princess Rebekah." This is like seeing the Bat-Signal from the glory days of Somerville political commentary. (Google "Gewirtz Wins" and "Charles Chisholm is Running Again"). You can bet if Chisholm advances there will be little to no mention of his opponent in November in the Times.

I am having a hard time seeing how Chisholm's experience as a one-term Alderman from 1975-1977 applies to current-day Somerville. Perhaps he's just trying to break Minnie Minoso's record and lose an election in six different decades (1968, 1969, 1973, 1977, 1989, 1991, 1993, 2007...) The guy's the Harold Stassen of Somerville. I admire (in a way) his determination, but...

RE: I'm supporting Lance Davis

[ron_newman]

What did he lose in 1968, 1969, 1973, and 1977?

Edit: never mind, I found the answer here. State Rep in 1968, Ward 1 School Committee in 1969, Mayor in 1973, Ward 1 Alderman 1977 (lost for re-election).

RE: I'm supporting Lance Davis

[pekmez.livejournal.com]

Ah, I meant that if any of the other three wins the Ward 6 seat, I am curious what moniker they get once sitting on the BOA. Doesn't the Times still call her Princess Rebekah? They certainly used to.

RE: I'm supporting Lance Davis

[keithn.livejournal.com]

I have decided on Lance Davis for similar reasons. At first I didn't like the fact that he was endorsed by Gewirtz, but he was also endorsed by Jack Connolly, Denise Provost, and Mayor Curtatone, so he has already proven that he can approach these people and convince them to do things. I'm not a huge fan of the company Lance works for but his pro bono work makes up for it.

To defend him a bit on the kids thing - anyone running for alderman has to disproportionately focus on families with kids because the city runs a K-12 school system. The city doesn't run Tufts. Lance has also been closely involved with a community group focused on improving the public school system.

I see a reasonable guy with a long history of community involvement. I haven't met him, but I know he's come by my place.

I have nothing against the other candidates, but a choice has to be made.

RE: I'm supporting Lance Davis

[lanze108.livejournal.com]

It seems to me more like those endorsements mean that he is part of the click rather than that he can convince them to do anything. Do we really need another career politician that is just going to bob their head and agree on every issue?

What pro bono work are you referring to?

Has he helped out the LGBT Asylum Support Task Force, which needs $10,000 a month to house asylum seekers by representing their cases pro bono? Because that is something that is desperately needed and is a group that he said he's happy the UCC supports, but I'm not sure he's done anything to lift a finger and help them. Chisholm isn't a part of the UCC and he's not a lawyer, but just look at OCPF: He has donated hundreds to the group from his own pockets. He even held a fundraiser for the group rather than for himself.

Besides: All most of these alderman do is talk. Charles did more in his one term as alderman than any of these alderman have done in their entire tenure. Did you know he secured a grant for 6 million dollars to fix 24 streets? That's a whole lot of money, especially when accounting for inflation.