One year ago the Leucadia Blog released its 2009 city council guide (check it out here), which provides a sharp introduction to the council. To understand the dynamics of our city you have to understand the individual characters.
We've been thinking about doing an update and this time we're looking for the followers of the the LB to formulate a retread or a full blown update to the council guide. A lot has happened in the last year.One thing I've been wondering about is why people vote for our council members? I still don't understand how people could vote for both Jerome and Maggie on the same ballot? I couldn't image any of Maggie's campaign workers walking the streets for both Jerome and Maggie. No way, and vice versa, no way (Although, I'm not sure Jerome has a crew of people walking the streets for his candidacy).
Over at one of my favorite blogs a recent post really started me thinking about the reasons people vote for candidates. Here is an excerpt:
As a political scientist, it's always good for me to be reminded that party ID and the economy aren't the only things out there. Nugent's discussion also reminded me of the distinction between voting for someone whom you think they agree with you on most issues, and voting for someone whom you think will make good decisions. Two different ideas of representation.Which council members are getting votes because the voters think they agree with them on most issues? Which are getting votes because the voters think they make good decisions? Which are getting votes because they have name recognition?On the other hand, the so-called fundamentals must strongly interact with attitudes on other issues. If you're already inclined not to support a candidate, there are often lots of reasons to vote against him or her. And, in a campaign, these issues are often evaluated comparatively. For example, maybe one reason it was hard for the corruption claim to stick to Barack Obama's (regarding his Chicago mansion), given that John McCain owned seven or so big houses himself. Another example that comes to mind is the battle-of-the-infidelity-rumors during the 1992 presidential election.
Which get votes because of the biggest signs?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThe comment has been moved to a front blog post position.
ReplyDeleteAll you need to do is look at the facts.
ReplyDelete1. Who voted them self a 40% increase in pension payments and the same for every city employee and council member?
2. Who discourages people from attending our holiday parade by ostracizing entire groups?
3. Who is in favor of building a county regional sports complex all with Encinitas Tax Payer dollars?
4. Who has been in office for two terms already and is running for a third?
The answer to all- Dalager
Just one if the above reasons why you should never vote for Dalager.
I will be voting for Teresa and one other person who really cares about Encinitas. Why would anyone vote for Dalager?
Dalager rode the Bush-League ticket....but as the world turnuth, so now his "folksy" brand of humor aka his acumen, is sadly out of style. Citizens are more sophisticated after the Bush debacle, we are not happy with flapping lips that can't pronounce simple words, like, well....Like, or Truth, or conflict of interest. Roseanne Rosannadanna said it best, Dalablabber is that little bit of sweat dangling from the tip of the nose, swaying and glisten'n, bobbing from there to here, like a yo-yo perpetually stuck in a cat's cradle.
ReplyDeleteAgain…..Dalager will pay someone to produce a nice glossy photo of him in sandals at the beach with an awesome sunset photo with words like beach, parks, and family......
ReplyDeletethe dumb ass unaware public will vote for dufffffess and we will have gomer again for a council member.
anyone trying to beat Dalager will have to expose him for Self interest in voting for his own 40 percent increase in pension for himself and every one else on the tax payer payroll.
Its somewhat easy....Dalager is a sell out. Can someone expose him for his sorry weakness?
Dan Dalager is going to be on the Encinitas city council for decades to come.
ReplyDeleteWhat happen to the term limits idea?
ReplyDeleteAccording to Registrar of Voters
in order to get something on the Nov. ballot for Encinitas we would need 3,784 signatures.
The deadline date is Aug. 6 HOWEVER, they tell
people to have their petition completed by late May because the
Reg. of Voters needs 30 dates to verify signatures plus the City
Council must act on the petition.....which they could either pass or send to the Reg. of Voters for the Nov. ballot.
How about a hybrid term limit policy like some other cities have...two consecutive terms then a person would have to sit out one election cycle (two years) before running again for a max of two more terms.
If the person was a great councilmember they would get re-elected. If not it would get rid of the deadwood that have the incumbent name recognition advantage.
Well let's get the term limit thing going. What's the hold up.
ReplyDeleteIt will take two dozen people to donate their time to gather signatures. Any anons willing to work to help their city?
ReplyDeleteGet you and your kids to do it. I've got a life!
ReplyDeleteForget term limits and any volunteer efforts to get it in motion. Just rename Encinitas "Slitherin" and be done with it.
ReplyDeleteGo wax your Hummers.