Richardson Coalition PAC's Endorsements Sweep
Richardson City Council election results are in and according to Ian McCann of The Dallas Morning News Richardson blog, "the results are pretty clear: If you were endorsed by the Richardson Coalition, you'll be sleeping well tonight."
There were no hot issues in Richardson this election. Instead, some tried to make the Richardson Coalition PAC itself an issue. It looks like that campaign strategy backfired.
That there were no hot issues in Richardson this election is good news. All the candidates had similar views on virtually every issue raised during their series of candidate forums. No matter who won, the next Richardson City Council was going to be focused on neighborhood revitalization, attracting new business and retail, promoting regional transit, and even streaming council meetings on the Internet. And that's as it should be.
19 comments:
Ed, as you can imagine, it has been a very long day, well, a long 6-8 weeks (or whatever, I don't even remember). I hope I don't regret waking up tomorrow with the sunburn that I picked up today from standing in front of Mohawk Elementary (my home precinct) for 10+ continuous hours today.
And while I can't speak for other races, I can tell you that the John Murphy campaign won a three-way race outright because of sheer hard work.
Yes, I am sure that the naysayers are already muttering about the election being bought by the Richardson Coalition, but the fact is the Coalition is not some monolithic monster that rules Richardson - the Murphy campaign actually didn't have much to do with the Coalition because we were running our own race. Things like the Coalition's Voter's Guide were not even run by us beforehand - we saw it when the rest of Richardson saw it - and as I said 2 weeks ago in your blog, we would have wished that they had done some things differently.
No, John Murphy won because we just went out and hustled in targeted mailings, door-to-door visits, constant monitoring of the Internet, and finally having people spend the entire day at the polls today looking for the last possible votes.
It paid off. John got the plurality (and often the majority) of votes in every single precinct but two (well, three, if you count a precinct that had 2, count'em two, voters). And the two precincts that he lost to his major opponent were scattered, one on the west side and one on the east side.
In my home precinct of 1703 - typically the largest voting precinct in Richardson - John took 66.5% of the votes, out of a field of three.
And our main competitor was not a pushover candidate, since Chris Davis came with plenty of connections and good will thanks to her work on the Richardson Plan Commission as well as to her extensive work in the Republican Party, neighborhood association, and church.
No, we took nothing for granted, we scrounged for every vote, and it paid off!
In truth, we are feeling good...and in a week or two, the Council will canvass the votes, and then the work for the next two years begins!
Thanks, Ed, for providing a reasonable place where we have been able to talk about the issues!
Bill
William J. 'Bill' McCalpin, thanks for the report from one candidate's campaign. Congratulations to John Murphy and all who worked for his re-election.
Unfortunately, McCalpin is not entirely honest here. I've been told that he attended coalition planning meetings, and was a part of the process. Sure, his "campaign" may not have been a part of the RC media blitz, but they knew. To his credit, they did work very hard, and Chris Davis was a tough opponent. What he doesn't seem to understand is that he has been used by the coalition. Or, maybe he does - who knows? Either way, McCalpin, I hope that you are looking forward to having Slagel back as your mayor. I would have expected better from you.
You say "No matter who won, the next Richardson City Council was going to be focused on neighborhood revitalization, attracting new business and retail, promoting regional transit, and even streaming council meetings on the Internet. And that's as it should be."
Nice words to read, but the reality is that Mayor Slagle will go straight back to his well-established ways of feeding at the taxpayer trough. And if you claim that's not correct, you have not been paying attention the last 22 years.
Streaming City Council meetings on the Internet? Examine Slagel's website more closely to read specifically:
"I have openly supported making council meetings available through some form of video medium. Staff reports revealed that this project would require a significant amount of both audio and video equipment as well as additional staff positions due to the logistics involved in the production from both the Council Chambers, and the work sessions. I certainly plan on making this happen; however, as our constituents told us when we recently surveyed you on this item, the advantages are not worth the cost.
We will leverage technology to cost effectively accomplish this as quickly as possible. However, it is my preference during this tough economic time, to insure we keep our operating fund priorities in police, fire, and other services expected by the entire community."
Half truths ~ but it's obvious that the majority of Richardson does not care to research facts. You and the Coalition won.
I do not believe the vast majority of Richardson residents were uncaring, misinformed, bought, sold, coerced or tricked by anybody. I think they simply voted in who they wanted to. And they did a good job.
Personally, I wish the new council the best of luck and great success.
Will, I guess we'll have to see whether the new council provides video streaming of council meetings. You and I are on the same side of wanting that.
SteveG, I agree that the majority of voters got who they wanted. If we all thought alike, there'd be no need for elections.
Quite by accident I learned information that has me feeling deceived and mislead by the richardson coalition mail piece and e-mailings. I would take back two of my votes if not more.
Kim
Kim, you are not being fair with us. You say you learned deceiving and misleading information but don't tell us what that information is.
"Unfortunately, McCalpin is not entirely honest here."
This is extremely sad...first of all because you don't have the courage to tell us who you are, whereas I have always put my name on the line.
Second, you say "I've been told that he attended coalition planning meetings..." "I've been told"??? Isn't this the exact same kind of rumor and innuendo that we spent this whole campaign fighting against? You can't even come up with any real evidence?
No, I have not attended any "coalition planning meetings"; I don't know who takes part in them or where they are held.
Do I know supporters of the Coalition? Well, of course I do! I've lived here off and on since 1965, and my parents are lived in Canyon Creek this entire time, so it would be impossible for me not to know the Coalition's supporters and to meet them here or there. But part of their planning? Nonsense!
It's exactly this sort of tin-foil-hat-wearing conspiracy theory that is causing communications to break down in Richardson. We are ALL neighbors, and whether or not we disagree on issues, we'd better get used to the fact that we're still going to be living next to each other after the dust from the election settles.
I wasn't used by anyone, and I did exactly what I intended to do: help get John Murphy re-elected, which I would have done whether or not Gary Slagel even ran for re-election this time, much less wanted to be mayor again.
Questioning someone's honesty while disguising your own identity and quoting rumor as evidence is in itself inherently dishonest...
Bill
Place 5.
Someone explain to me how that happened?
I would be willing to believe this was not an election won solely by the RC if Pris still had that seat. Unfortunately, though, she does not and and the only answer I can come up with is we had a bunch of mindless sheep voting with their coalition flyer in hand.
She was such a breath of fresh air to the council, and had so many cutting edge ideas for this city, not to mention she and Dennis worked harder for that $50 a week than any other council member.
How is Bob Macy better for Richardson? Did ANY of these voter's attend a forum????
Sweet guy, don't get me wrong, but Richardson lost a real asset by not re-electing Pris.
(And by the way, I was not being sarcastic, I really would like an answer or any other thoughts on why Macy is the better Man for the job? I have complete RC tunnel vision because of this one seat, so please educate me.)
Destiny, I think you've seen that even the authors of the Coalition's Voter's Guide didn't really have a good explanation for preferring Bob over Pris, judging by what was printed therein. Pris is certainly the only person the panel "regret[ted]" not endorsing, which says a lot.
They are both swell people, and I am really sorry that it came to an either/or in this election.
I hope Pris' work on things like the Environmental Advisory Commission continues to prosper (full disclosure: my wife serves on that commission)...
Bill
William J. 'Bill' McCalpin, I agree that "I've been told" is nothing more than rumor. Thank you for refuting such unsupported attacks on you and John Murphy.
Destiny, I conclude that the Richardson Coalition PAC's endorsement of Bob Macy was decisive. I suspect they endorsed Macy because his vote in favor of the PAC's interests is more reliably secure. But that's speculation on my part.
"They are both swell people, and I am really sorry that it came to an either/or in this election."
To Bill McCalpin - I've been following your posts. Your comments about councilwoman Hayes are disappointing. Any thoughts on why you would support her to her face, yet you make these kinds of statements. And, honestly, I've witnessed you doing this not just to her, but others including the current mayor. Sadly, many folks believe that you are just positioning yourself to be John Murphy's heir apparent. You might want to rethink that: he probably will run another six terms. And, good luck with getting any support other than the RC...remember, from an age perspective, time isn't on their side! "Disappointed in you"
It's interesting how McCalpin seems to imply that anyone other than the Chuck Eisemann/Gary Slagel coalition are people who wear "tin foil hat conspiracists". Actually, we are just average folks who may not be as smart as Bill, but we do vote. Unfortunately, a number of us didn't do so this election cycle, but, hopefully, after this trainwreck, more will. I can gaurantee that Bill McCalpin will be one person I DON'T vote for if he is ever on the ballot
"Anonymous" 4:36 PM, it seemed to me that people who were anti-Coalition were more apt to accuse the Richardson Coalition PAC and candidates endorsed by the PAC of colluding, strategizing, conspiring, if you will, to get the RC slate elected and Gary Slagel reinstalled as mayor. It was almost taken for granted; no evidence needed. Some might call that "tin foil hat" thinking.
I don't recall much pro-Coalition talk at all. In fact, if there was one thing I think the RC PAC was deficient in, it was an online presence. A Web site and a few emails, that was about it.
Anonymous #1,
I have no idea what you are talking about. Just what do you think I said in those few sentences that were disappointing comments about Councilwoman Hayes?
And please explain to me what "[a]ny thoughts on why you would support her to her face, yet you make these kinds of statements" means. I said absolutely nothing here that contradicted what I have said to Ms. Hayes' or anyone else's face.
Unless you can provide specifics instead of vague statements, no one can take your statements seriously.
Bill
Anonymous #2 (or, perhaps, Anonymous #1, part deux),
"It's interesting how McCalpin seems to imply that anyone other than the Chuck Eisemann/Gary Slagel coalition are people who wear "tin foil hat conspiracists"." This statement is factually incorrect on its face - I did not imply this, whether or not you inferred it.
Indeed, my opprobrium was clearly reserved for the one person who made false statements and accused me of dishonesty. Trying to stretch this to a general condemnation of anyone who didn't vote for the Coalition's "candidates" clearly exceeds what I said to the point of being dishonest on its face.
One way to try to win an argument that you are losing is to try to recast your opponent's statements in an unfavorable light - lawyers do this all the time. It won't work here, because any adult reading what I wrote can see plainly what I said and intended to say.
Bill
No explanation is necessary. You know what you have said about these folks who considered you a "friend", and, yes, plenty DO take it seriously. I hope that you and the coalition are happy.
BTW, what is "opprobrium"? Us common folks don't understand them kind of big words.
(Sorry about taking up space in your blog for this, ED. After this, I'm done)
-"Disappointed in you"
"Disappointed in you", you are welcome to take up space. All I ask is that you be specific. It's impossible for anyone to answer charges that don't include the details of who, what, and when.
Post a Comment