Low Approval of Incumbent of District III Calls for Challenger Around Town, posted by East County Watch, a resident of another community, on Feb 25, 2012 at 1:12 pm
Nomination and filing time remains for a District III challenger. The approval rating for the incumbent is so low, success for a challenger is high. It is time for District III to get it's house back in order.
Posted by So much for Gentler?, a resident of another community, on Feb 26, 2012 at 7:55 am
It was a nice break over the past 2-3 weeks, don't you think? Commentators were providing positions and information, as is your purpose, in participating in the news process. The efforts of commentators were focused on content and not attack with positions and not insults.
It was a nice break!
Let's suggest a role for you early in this exchange so your readers do not suffer further disregard of your ability to provide " a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion."
Through your media resources available, you can access polling data from news services, political parties, and various regional PACs that publish such information to their subscribers and participants. You can verify current and potential candidates' approval ratings with voters via a composite of these services. You can interview various political organizations' leaders and the candidates' campaign organizations to better portray how polling will impact 1) emergence of competitive candidates, 2) potential of candidates in contests, and 3) expected actions by candidates, if elected, in their chosen office.
Posted by My Opinion, a resident of the Blackhawk neighborhood, on Feb 26, 2012 at 11:01 am
I too would like to see more competition on all Supervisorial campaigns. I read the newspaper every day. I see so many problems that the Supervisors could avoid by voting with common sense rather than the obvious influenced voting we see. Until the public actually gets back involved with government , debt, corruption, favoritism, and waste will continue. I would like to see some new faces on the board.
Posted by [removed], a resident of another community, on Feb 28, 2012 at 5:10 pm
As you have been informed, I am ending my role on the conference board of local allied news services. In conclusion, it is fair to explain the draft efforts of neighborhoods in district 3 and 5 to find competitive candidates to bring a new majority to the CCC-BOS along with the winner of the district 2 election. A list of eleven candidates were tested by news service polling in districts 3 and 5 with positive results among a majority sample of voters.
At issue is the willingness of one in each district to step forward and represent the majority of voters in each district and serve such voters' will and interests. We are all still waiting for those candidates to step forward as ballot candidates or certified write-in candidates. The majority of voters are available to elect them if they choose to run.
A fair concern by such potential candidates is the opportunity to make a difference from the current status quo of political service to a minority of supporters by CCC-BOS. Such potential candidates see a questionable opportunity to be part of an effective majority and the greater reality they would be drawn into summary disservice to the voters that would elect them.
Very talented, experienced, educated and capable candidates are asking such questions of the job of supervisor. It must be the role of voters to convince district 2, 3 and 5 potential and current candidates that their independent representation of the majority of Contra Costans is achievable.
As a result, voters get what they deserve, and the only question is "do you deserve more service to your will and interests" as voters?
Posted by Informed Resident, a resident of another community, on Feb 28, 2012 at 7:53 pm
Not quite sure what to make of your latest post. It appears to be just another example of acting out due to more of your infatuation and a lot of frustration.
Perhaps we should be celebrating your role “coming to an end” on that super-secret board we have never heard of. Maybe you should consider filling the rest of us in by posting the names of those eleven mystery candidates (or the results of your “testing and polling”) under your ‘renegade republican’ role. Short of doing so, you have demonstrate zero credibility.
• You agree not to post comments under multiple names. Postings within a single topic from the same IP address made under different names will be deleted.
Case in point and the most recent example;
Post #2 above “Posted by So much for Gentler?, a resident of another community, on Feb 26, 2012 at 7:55 am”
Post #4 above; “Posted by [removed], a resident of another community, 2 hours ago”
Posted by East County Watch, a resident of another community, on Feb 28, 2012 at 9:14 pm
Informed, Why is it that all you can do on these blogs is childishly attack other commenter's opinions? You either are related to the subject referred to here or hording toilet paper for the queen. We are looking for a challenger in the District III race. Maybe the District is so corrupt that no one wants to clean up the mess. It would take a disciplined, un intimidated, educated, and sincere individual to regain respect for East County.
Is this District so far gone to the dumps that there is no return?
Posted by Informed Resident, a resident of another community, on Feb 29, 2012 at 11:59 am
@ East County Watch,
Once again you post the same old deflection, whining, and then end with hypocrisy. This is a forum for opinions. I could ask you, if my factual responses to your accusation point to flaws in your presentations, arguments or positions why would you characterize them as childish “attacks”? It is simple; don’t blame me-blame yourself! Your position constantly screams hypocrisy. The only crime is that you are so deep in denial that you can’t even see it. No bother, the rest of us can-and it is crystal clear.
Let’s review the facts shall we?
YOU started this thread by INSINUATING a low approval rating for the Supervisor of district 3 with no factual presentation to back up your statement. (In case you missed the obvious that is an attack on my representative who I happen to support). Obviously I am not alone since that supervisor has won 2 elections for that office by a majority which directly counters your insinuation.
Since you have displayed quite a history of negative insinuations and infatuation, I countered; “So tell us, where are you getting your polling on approval ratings these days?”
So now I must rhetorically ask;
Why is it that you can’t or won’t answer my direct question? “So tell us, where are you getting your polling on approval ratings these days?” <deflection & denial>.
Why is it all you can do is attack me but never address the facts? <deflection>.
Why is it that when I point out the rules that are cut and dry, you attempted to classify that as childish and attacking? <hypocrisy>
Why is it so important to you to attack me, instead of my facts when all you can do is post false innuendos? <hypocrisy, deflection and denial>.
With all that being said, perhaps you might find this helpful, it is known as the “Dunning-Kruger Effect”
Posted by [removed], a resident of another community, on Feb 29, 2012 at 3:54 pm
AS you will note in my commentary of February 21, the gentler town square forum has taken a rude departure once again in sponsored attacks on commentators that offer contribution to a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. You were invited multiple times since your arrival in Fall 2010 to step forward and manage contributions to the news process by your readers. The result has been the opposite as EMCEB simply sponsors attacks, abuse, defamation and disrespect by direct or sponsored commentators.
Posted by East County Watch, a resident of another community, on Feb 29, 2012 at 3:55 pm
It was simple to find low approval of Piepho. The example below is one of several. Would you like me to post each one?
Tuesday Feb 14 | Posted by: roboblogger
Contra Costa District III has had enough of Mary Piepho
Full story: Halfway To Concord
While District III decides if anyone will take on the unenviable task of running against Mary Nejedly Piepho we should remember that Piepho's years on the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors have been highlighted by ongoing issues of corruption that are far beyond the norm for a machine politician.
2) Contra Costa Auditor report implicates Supervisors Mary Piepho and Federal Glover in misuse of $634,000 from Keller Canyon Mitigation Fund
etc. Yaawnnn....... No more corruption and nepotisim !!!
Posted by Informed Resident, a resident of another community, on Feb 29, 2012 at 5:06 pm
@ Hal- Please stop whining. Your hypocrisy appears to know no bounds.
I asked you a simple question regarding your violation of the rules and yet you don’t answer that, but insist on the editor answering your wild interpretations? Now you want the editor to ‘manage contributions’ (aka; censor) on a forum, in regard to your desires?
I imagine the editor is about as eager to answer your demands as you are to answer mine. You of all people Hal, have a lot of explaining to do. Do you even know what defamation is?
@ East County Watch- I’ll have to admit you had me laughing out loud with your response. You really want me or anyone to take you seriously with your comeback citing Halfway to Concord? That is just out and out laughable! I have had no doubt that you and your 3 or 4 cohorts troll there often by the same or similar pseudonyms. I guess that is why you have landed here trying to sling mud at the Supervisors outside of the district. I know at least one East County editor that finds your behavior a complete waste of time. I am sure that reputable news resources, the Supervisors themselves, their respective campaign consultants and most readers alike would find your desperate attempts at justifying “polling” or approval ratings just short of pathetic! For the record; You just made yourself look worse than I ever could have.
Any serious candidate or challenger for any race would do some real polling. Do you think Mr. Keller or Ms. Stepper decided not to run from reading comments in the National Enquirer errrrr, I mean Halfway to Concord? I think you did us all a favor by exposing where you get your insight into the issues.
…As for your #2 allegation that is really reaching-even for someone of your unique caliber. Have you even read the document? I have, and I bet you are banking that no one else would waste their time-but here I will make it easy; Web Link . Not only was the document not a “report” (it was a summary “letter” to 4 individuals that you may just keep company with) but more importantly did not implicate anyone in anything. As usual you read into it as you had hoped it would read. Nowhere in the summary-report is Supervisor Mary Piepho identified in “findings”, as the responsible party or supervisor to the accusations. Allegations and responses can be found on page 21. In most cases the Auditor Controller was opining on issues beyond authority of his office (Board of Supervisors/LAFCO; formation of districts and advisory councils).
So we see that once again you just failed at another attempt to discredit others with bad information. You want to keep going? I could go all day-I find great satisfaction at ferreting out the truth. You should try looking for it yourself once in a while.
Posted by [removed], a resident of another community, on Feb 29, 2012 at 9:40 pm
Do you really believe sponsorship of political attacks are going to attract campaigns to your publication? Do you really think any candidate will actually trust an out-of-control forum to invite support? Do you really believe your editors and writers can turn-around the damage done by rude, arrogant brutality in attacks sponsored on your forum pages?
Posted by Informed Resident, a resident of another community, on Mar 13, 2012 at 12:09 pm
Seriously Hal do you really think campaigns are won or lost on blogs? Do you really think any serious candidate would base any decision to run (or not) by what we all post here? Seriously.
Do you really believe that your postings increase credibility or deserve a place above all others here in cyberspace? In a place where anyone can post anything, (any opinion) without any semblance of responsibility? Seriously?
I will continue to back up my ‘opinions’ with facts, even if it pains you to read them. At some point, I hope you can get past that.
If the approval rates were as low as the original poster suggested, you would have thought District 3 would have been full of challengers. Hmmmmmm. I think possibly the real low approval rate may have been found in District 2, and had been there for a little while now. This will be the race to follow.