Did you get a voter guide from any of the 24 folks recently elected to serve on the City Council in 2018? (I got lists from three councilors-elect.) Can you forward them to me at sean<dot>roche< @t> gmail < dot>com?
I’ll pull together some analysis.
Voter guides
by Sean Roche | Nov 9, 2017 | Newton | 15 comments
I wish people would take the time to learn about the candidates to judge qualities of character and not rely on some metaphysical attribute assigned by some biased, vested ideological partisan in order to determine who gets their vote. A person’s vote is really too precious to give away like that. I hope there is no one here who would stoop to that. I admit i did tell a few friends who i was going to vote for…but with a reasonable explanation for each candidate as to why i made that choice. And i heard and watched all the competitors. That’s our job in order to keep tyrants at bay!
I think I have one from Amy Sangiolo if you want it.
@Sallee – many of us don’t use those guides blindly but instead as one more source of information. I ignore any that just say who they endorse, but find helpful those that give all candidates’ answers to various questions so I can more easily compare them.
The LWV Newton’s vote411.com was a very helpful guide. And short
I received a thoughtful seven page summary of the candidates from Amy Sangiolo because I asked her for it. I also received an unsolicited “cheat sheet” from a former Newton resident, whom I don’t know, who now lives in India. I have no idea how she got my name or why she thought I’d be interested in whom she’d vote for if she actually lived here. I asked her to remove my name from her email chain.
I did receive multiple recommendations on the neighborhood list serve. This email was also sent to list serves across the city. The post was from Kathleen Kouril Grieser, not someone who lives in my neighborhood. When I responded with a few thoughts of my own, my post was not allowed to go through.
It is time for a new list serve in our Newton Centre neighborhood. One that leaves political rants and recommendations aside, and serves the neighborhood with other important information.
@Alice Bowman, who manages the list serve and how does someone get on it? When you say “our Newton Centre neighborhood” how is that defined? Zip code? I’d like to be a part of that.
Their were tall stacks of LOWV guides in the Ward 3-2 senior center lounge area and the hallway leading to it from the parking lot. The guides led with the mayoral candidates and this page:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/17bfbAlt3rpiCmTBJ3m0I1ZFXFD8ZFHly/view?usp=sharing
which was followed by page after page for every candidate. Disproportionately, candidates on the one side of the issue tended to be the ones not filling out the LOWV questionaires and for some reason this question was seen as the most relevant one to start with for school committee candidates as well.
Was this isolated to senior center and is it considered acceptable?
Jack. I noticed this in the debates. The League kept asking candidates about the Charter, despite the fact that their position on the Charter had no bearing on the race. At the time, I thought that this question was asked to the “yes” Mayor candidates with the intention of promoting the Charter.
I might be wrong. It would be great if someone from the League could explain their thinking on this.
Interesting! Ward 3/2 went Yes (508) to No (322) for 60% and Fuller (591) to Lennon (268) for 69%. I don’t have all the data available at the moment (but I do have it), but this compares to citywide advantage of 53% No advantage and .5% advantage to Fuller . 3/2 was in the top three strongest performers for Yes and Fuller
Also 3/2 had the largest turnout in the city (52%) on the Mayoral campaign which is about 10% over the citywide turnout. I haven’t calculated that % of turnout on the Charter
Precinct 3-2 sported two charter commissioners, two YES campaign co-chairs, and Ruthanne’s campaign headquarters, so it was pretty rough terrain for NO.
This Newton LOWV handout was in place at the voting room entrance within about 25 feet of the voting booths, with page 2 reminding voters that both mayoral candidates supported YES along with their written rationale. It could just be these packets were there for seniors, and no one thought to remove them on election day. I don’t know if these printed guides were there in 2015 as well. I suppose I could have protested at the time, but I didn’t actually have time to peruse the packet that morning in the polling area and see the extent of advocacy in the packets.
As Andrea says above “The LWV Newton’s vote411.com was a very helpful guide. And short”. Just three questions for each set of candidates, all leading with essays on why they did or did not support the charter. Here is the e-copy of individual responses:
https://www.vote411.org/ballot?street=1000%20commonwealth%20ave&city=newton&state=Massachusetts&zip=02459
By a quick count, among candidates that answers this Yes ON Charter advocacy group’s survey, YES was favored 18-7 in this packet, including the mayor candidates. No YES advocate neglected to return a survey for this packet, the vast majority of NO’s did not.
The voter’s guide was not a significant advantage to sway anyone. What pundits agree upon is that the WGC, the CC, the sitting mayor, the final mayoral candidates, one state rep, the majority of City Council newbie candidates, etc. – all did not take into account the voter internet ease of intelligence gathering, the fake spin logic twist of YES, and relied upon the old model of voter ignorance and apathy.
– can we kiss and makeup Wed. nite? – or will YES continue in their obstinance, continuing to dig themselves deeper into chartergate?
– remember in 2005 I ran the single issue campaign for alderman at large ward 2. People mocked the effort, but my small world of intelligence gathering found the universal truth of wanting 8/8, eliminating 8 at large seats. Newton did not need or want a total brain transfusion, just a simple step single downsize.
Here we are 12 years later,
Simple, clean, and to the point on the threshold of positive change.
Correction – meant 2-3 above.
@ Jack Based on clarification, 2/3 went 52% Yes and 60% Fuller