I’m asking because I was somewhat surprised at how easily Moe Baddourah won the runoff yesterday. Nothing against Moe — I wish him all the best, and hope he’s a very successful council member — but that’s not the way I thought it would end up. I thought Daniel Coble would win, although not run away with it. I saw a Baddourah win as possible, but again, I figured it would be close.
My reasoning was as follows. I thought:
- Moe had pretty much received all of his potential support in the first go-round. I had seen him as the pro-business, suspicious-of-government candidate in the race, and that he got all of those voters on April 3.
- All voters who were attracted to Jenny Isgett’s theme that since the district had been represented by a woman for 30 years, it should go for her, seemed more likely to go for Coble in the runoff.
- Coble’s support was more visible, and seemed more enthusiastic. I really felt for Moe at that neighborhood association meeting where Brett shot the video. At one point he mentioned that the small crowd seemed to be 90 percent for Coble, and I think he was right.
- Everybody who I knew had declared for a candidate had declared for Coble. I can’t think of anybody who publicly endorsed Moe in the last couple of weeks. That doesn’t mean no one did, but the news didn’t get to me. (Yes, someone will inevitably say that personal endorsements are meaningless, as someone always does but they’ll be wrong. In fact, in an election with no reported polling, they’re about all you have to go by. And even if they didn’t mean much individually, they ALL seemed to go to Coble, which had to be indicative of something.)
But all that reasoning added up to nothing, which leaves me speculating as to the reason it went the other way:
- Moe and Jenny were actually the anti-establishment vote, or the anti-Coble (as in Bob) vote, if you will. Jenny voters only had one non-Coble candidate left, and so they went for him.
- Voters reacted against Coble’s youth.
- Every one of those public endorsements — Belinda Gergel, James Smith, Steve Morrison, Kit Smith and to a lesser extent Mike Miller — counted against Coble with an electorate that was in an anti-establishment mood. Coble was definitely the Shandonista candidate, and maybe voters in other areas (and perhaps in Shandon itself) reacted against that.
- One of the few issues on which there was a noticeable difference between the candidates — the water/sewer money, funding the bus system — meant more to voters in those neighborhoods than I could tell as an outsider. (But this explanation seems unlikely, because the differences between them were mere matters of degree, not fundamental values.)
- There’s more dissatisfaction with the current city council than I had thought (and voting for Baddourah was more of a vote for “change”). I had heard a lot less general grumbling since Benjamin, Plaugh, Gergel and Newman had been elected, but maybe the honeymoon is truly over.
- Moe had told me he had learned a lot from losing to Seth Rose two years ago. And remember, Seth was an anti-establishment candidate, because he also beat Kit Smith’s chosen successor (a fellow Bennettsville boy). Part of that was a lot of knocking on doors. Of course, Coble did that, too. But maybe there were some organizational things I couldn’t see that really helped Moe turn out his identified supporters — which is everything in such a tiny-turnout election. (But I knew Moe didn’t do everything that Seth did, because Seth advertised on this blog. Ahem.)
As far as tactics are concerned, I could just ask Moe. And I will when I see him. But I’m more interested in why the tactics worked — that is to say, I’m more curious about what the voters themselves were thinking. And since there was no exit polling, I’m asking now.
So how about it, District 3 voters? Whether you backed Baddourah or Coble, why did you do so? Your answers may bear significantly on the future course of Columbia.
Related Posts
First let me say I do live in district 3. I also interviewed both Moe and Daniel Coble for my blog. I was at Andys yesterday so I heard a little bit from the campaign yesterday.
“All voters who were attracted to Jenny Isgett’s theme that since the district had been represented by a woman for 30 years, it should go for her, seemed more likely to go for Coble in the runoff.”
I thought this as well. I thought for the first election that Coble was splitting the same pool of votes.
“Everybody who I knew had declared for a candidate had declared for Coble.”
Last night a few people thought that maybe too many people declared for Coble. Black Helicopter voter maybe thought that the Cola political machine was trying to shove a candidate down their throat.
Coble never got the KEY endorsement though. Jenny Isgett sat out the run off. If she had kissed either ring it would have been a huge help.
“Voters reacted against Coble’s youth.”
He is really young. I do think that was a factor. From talking to him the limited amount he was GREAT on his talking points. Get him off a little bit and he flustered a bit.
“There’s more dissatisfaction with the current city council than I had thought (and voting for Baddourah was more of a vote for “change”). I had heard a lot less general grumbling since Benjamin, Plaugh, Gergel and Newman had been elected, but maybe the honeymoon is truly over.”
Here is what I heard over and over again. “I bet Steve is pissed right now.”
I chatted with RJ Shealy a little bit (full disclosure I knew him since I was 6. We lived only a street apart in West Cola). He pointed to what he thought was a couple of errors.
He said the mudslinging accusations came back against Coble. He said he got a lot of good response from the Mud flier they put out. (loved it BTW. It got a LOL).
I also asked him what they did different in the run off. RJ pointed to the fact that they keyed in on 2000 voters that voted Republican. They focused on them with their message. He said Coble centered around 500 shandon voters.
In the end they were able to get out their supporters better.
From being a fly on the wall of the campaign I think that the conservative/republicans/anti establishments were backed in the corner. If Coble would have won it would have been a clean sweep of the council for progressives.
It wasn’t as much anti Coble as it was voters wanted diversity on the council. They wanted at least 1 devil’s advocate in the room to try to pump the brakes if necessary.
BTW everyone there was very respectful of Daniel Coble last night. I share the opinion that he is an extremely bright guy that has a long future ahead of him in SC politics. Just today wasn’t his day.
“Moe had told me he had learned a lot from losing to Seth Rose two years ago. And remember, Seth was an anti-establishment candidate, because he also beat Kit Smith’s chosen successor”
Sorry missed this one earlier.
The Kit Smith endorsement was the one big endorsement that people questioned.
Also one of the first things RJ pointed out was how much Moe learned from the Richland County election.
1. People are tired of the name Coble in city government.
2. What has Coble done politically up to this point?
3. People didn’t want to see their taxes and fees skyrocket to pay for all the “feel good” agendas.
I backed Daniel for many reasons, chiefly because he understands the challenges we face in urban neighborhoods and that the role of the District member is to look out for us, not shill for “business.” He met with me early on and impressed me with his listening skills, his depth, and his decency. He is extremely intelligent, too. He has plenty of valuable vicarious experience. I also really liked his dad, while seeing his limitations.
I think the old District 3 would have gone strongly for Daniel, but we picked up a bunch of District 4 voters, who are of the rich conservative bent–think Kirkman–and Moe is far more Kirkman in his style.
While not a district voter, it seems clear that all of your speculations were proven true – except the dissatisfaction with the current council point. I would guess that the voters who went with Mo were generally more supportive of council now that Cromartie, etc. isn’t mucking up the place.
I think your first two points were probably the deciding factors for many people. Some people in the district probably relished the opportunity to vote “no” to a Coble – kind of in a “bless his heart” Southern kind of way; something they didn’t feel they could actually do when Mayor Bob was smiling along through the chaos. But now that it seems to be mostly over; maybe now complaints can be revealed?
“If Coble would have won it would have been a clean sweep of the council for progressives.
It wasn’t as much anti Coble as it was voters wanted diversity on the council. They wanted at least 1 devil’s advocate in the room to try to pump the brakes if necessary.” – Tavis
– I wonder if this wasn’t the key issue on a lot of people’s minds.
I’m also not a D3 voter, because D1 is where it’s at.
Norf region, represent!
“but we picked up a bunch of District 4 voters, who are of the rich conservative bent”
Damned them… damn them to Hell!!!
There’s always Asheville…
I think Mark has it nailed. Mayor Bob the person was liked far more than Mayor Bob the mayor, especially when all the corruption and inept financial management issues came out.
Daniel’s weak resume combined with his father’s shaky resume was too difficult to overcome.
And it’s just as interesting how The State has been on such a lousy streak of endorsements lately. Probably points to just how out of touch the editorial board is with mainstream Columbia (i.e. its potential subscribers). Not a good sign from a business perspective.
@Kathryn
I would imagine property values depend more on rich conservatives than poor liberals.
Then there’s the Zeitgeist explanation… The last couple of years, voters have been on a tear, and it’s much harder to predict what they’ll do. The usual criteria for understanding voter behavior seems to have gone out the window.
Such as… South Carolina, which has always valued its reputation for picking the eventual GOP nominee, going for Newt Gingrich — a guy who is now little more than a footnote.
But we at least have some clues as to why they went for Gingrich. And I wouldn’t think those sorts of factors would be in play in the vicinity of Shandon.
Of course, Tavis raises a good point. We’re used to interpreting that district in terms of how liberal Democrats think (and that district has to contain about 90 percent of the voters you could actually call “liberal” in South Carolina), and it’s easy to forget the district isn’t a monolith. Apparently, Moe ran a bunch of Republican plays from Coach Shealy’s playbook, and the locals just had no defense against it…
@ Doug – You are right about the State’s endorsement record being lousy. It’s worse than mine 😉 I do think that they’ve turned off a lot of potential subscribers with their liberal (for around here) politics.
Oh, and the crummy reporting lately. Whomever’s supposed to be reporting city politics has been asleep at the wheel, if they didn’t already sell the wheel off.
I’m definitely in the black helicopter crowd, but I’ve wondered if moving Adam Beam to the statehouse wasn’t intended to give Mayor Benjamin some privacy and breathing room….
I’ll never cease to be surprised at the conspiracies folks think newspapers are capable of. Look, John O’Connor left a vacancy, and Adam had earned the promotion. And yeah, going from Metro to the State House is a promotion (in my book, anyway).
I don’t think The State has done enough endorsements since I left to tell whether it’s a real losing streak or not.
Of course, Cindi and Warren don’t think in those terms. An endorsement isn’t about who WILL win, but about who SHOULD win. But in my day, I got sick enough of people claiming that our candidates always lost that I started keeping track. And during the years that I was on the board, about 75 percent of the people we endorsed in general elections (I never went back to count primaries) won.
I have a sense that number has been pulled down a bit since then, but The State does so few endorsements now that I don’t think there are enough to draw a conclusion.
I’ll say this, though: The underlying assumptions and preferences that they are stating in the endorsement are of long-standing. Generally, the same principles are being applied as in my day (although some of the actual endorsements, in terms of the “who,” have been different from what I would pick).
Which leads me to think that if a gap HAS opened up between The State’s preferences and the voters’, then it’s the voters who have changed.
And indeed, that HAS happened in the last few years. The choices voters made in 2010, and so far in 2012, have indicated significant shifts in the way they make decisions.
@Brad
I wasn’t commenting on “winning percentage” for endorsement as much as I was commenting on the fact that The State’s view certainly doesn’t represent the majority opinion in this area. I would think from the business perspective of trying to at a minimum to maintain existing subscriber levels it doesn’t help to be out of sync with the readers.
Endorsing Huntsman was the biggest recent indicator. That was an endorsement with little hope of resonating (especially when he dropped out a day later). Maybe Cindi and Warren need to get out and talk with people a little more to get a feel for what the community really thinks.
So it’s my fault now? I get enough of that garbage at home.
@ Doug – I think Pippi Wrongstockings (Cindi Ross-Scope)has lost the key to her ivory tower and can’t get out.
But as I said, Doug, it’s not about “what the community really thinks.”
In general, yes, a good editorial board is in touch with fundamental values of the community. And actually, I think it was more “in touch” during the years I was there than it had been in years before. Whether it is now… the cruel truth is, by the last couple of years I was there, there was precious little time to interact with the community at all, we were so undermanned and overworked. Now, it’s significantly worse. That’s the major reason the paper just doesn’t do as many endorsements as before — they simply don’t have the time to interview or study the candidates, and that’s a sad fact.
To put it another way… if a paper never agrees with its community on candidates, I would worry about the makeup of the editorial board. But I would never, ever expect a board to make a particular decision because they think that’s the way the local electorate will go. Either the agreement happens naturally, or it doesn’t happen.
Doug,
I hate to say this, but if one wants to look at neighborhood revitalization and residential property appreciation, look to where the liberals are trending.
“Rich” conservative areas generally don’t hold their values through the decades, they decline in desirability as their populations age and later generations seek to build their own castles – often springboarding off of the pioneering liberals.
And Silence — this is Warren’s beat. Cindi would have a strong say in the decision, but this is Warren’s beat. That would make his opinion count for more, and would also mean he would do the writing.
Actually… you know, I don’t know HOW they make decisions now. It’s a little hard to imagine how, since Cindi and Warren don’t have a supervisor who is intimately involved in what they do.
As a result, something I see, as an informed outside observer, is decisions simply not getting made. You see standing positions reiterated, but not that many new positions taken. (Consequently, when Kit Smith told me a couple of weeks ago that she had trouble understanding the Isgett endorsement, I was able to explain it to her in some detail, being familiar with all the arguments. Not that I would have chosen to endorse Jenny, but I fully understood Cindi’s and Warren’s decision, based upon their brief explanation and my intimate knowledge of the precedents.) And there are far fewer editorials, so less need to make decisions as an institution.
Column-writing is a solitary pursuit. What you say is what YOU want to say. There’s no need for a ratifying factor, no need to make the decision of what WE are going to say. Which fits the current personnel situation.
By the way, I just added Tavis’ blog, “ColumbiaCents,” to the blogroll at right.
One factor may be the Dems vs Republicans issue, with Coble receiving beaucoups endorsement from establishment Dems — while Moe was being carried by RJ Shealy, son of the late Rod Shealy, and obviously inheritor of his political genes.
Central to it all is the fact that Jenny sat out — which will endear her to neither candidate, and has engendered bad feelings on the part of the victor.
Throughout it all was the refrain from my neighbors of “just wait til Moe gets in” in terms of dealing with Five Points in particular and the city’s complacency in general.
There is also the perspective of editorial expression as a leadership bully pulpit.
If any paper in the country simply regurgitated the then-common perspective of the general citizenry/readership, we would as a society tend toward isolationism and fragmentation.
If someone has a forum to say something meaningful, I would hope that they would seize that opportunity to foster a dialogue and advocate for change where change appears beneficial for the greater longterm good. That is the very heart of leadership. The State has been a worthy editorial mouthpiece in this respect.
Conservatives can be progressives, and even Liberals (in the class sense). Unfortunately too many people don’t understand that society is constantly evolving and changing. There is no future in the idea that the status quo must continue. That is one of the things that most amazes me about some of the most reactionary strains of conservatism around here. Things are always changing; our central need is to shape and improve the flow of history, not to blindly fight the inevitable. Time rolls forward, there is no going back.
… in the classic sense – “class” is misleading.
Spoken like an EPE.
Yes, there is little point in writing an editorial if you think everyone is going to agree with it. The point should be to challenge people. Whether they agree or not, their decisions will be better for having been through the exercise of THINKING about it through another perspective.
The State hasn’t had a decent editor since Narciso Gonzales was shot by James Tillman.
Just kidding Brad!
I should start a local news daily and compete with them.
What’s an EPE?
@Doug-I think the liberals of Wales Garden and the finer parts of Shandon have houses worth a lot more than the conservatives of whatever it’s called behind the VA, for the record. I think the property values are as high as they are there, rather than the disposable homes of the NE and NW, because the liberals take the time to fix up the homes and the neighborhoods….
@Tavis– If the “mudslinging” flyer hit a nerve, it sure beats me why–I mean the allegations that Daniel had called Moe a “regular businessman”?!? When Moe put “Businessman” on his signs?
Compared to the landslide for the mudslinger from the previous election, Runyan? I just don’t get it…
I miss Adam’s city politics coverage. Noelle and John do a great job on what they cover, but I miss Adam.
At the end of the day, The State has to sell papers (and advertising based on the number of papers it sells). How many people will buy papers to read editorials that don’t generally reflect their views (assuming they read the editorials at all)?
In cities with two papers, I doubt that people subscribe to the one that reflects the “other” point of view. A NY Times subscriber probably wouldn’t touch the NY Post and vice versa.
As for not having the time to walk around, I’m not convinced. Besides a laptop, what other tools does an editorial writer need? Seems like it might be worthwhile to write a few columns while sitting in various places around the city…. asking people what they think. I get the sense that Warren may do that a lot more than Cindi does. I could be wrong.
Doug,
Everyone who reads the NYT in the city also reads the Post. But maybe only on the subway or in a cab. The prime reason people should buy a paper is to learn something new.
Alternate viewpoints spark innovation. That’s one of the things that culturally holds the South back – everyone is hanging on to the same’ol, same’ol. Even in Shandon.
“We’re used to interpreting that district in terms of how liberal Democrats think (and that district has to contain about 90 percent of the voters you could actually call “liberal” in South Carolina), and it’s easy to forget the district isn’t a monolith. Apparently, Moe ran a bunch of Republican plays from Coach Shealy’s playbook, and the locals just had no defense against it…”
I live in district 3 rosewood. Granted i’m very new to the area but I have absolutely fell in love with living in city limits.
I know i’m on the wrong side of the street (rosewood) but I don’t feel ashamed of falling farther to the right on most issues than on the left.
“tired old man says:
April 18, 2012 at 3:05 pm
One factor may be the Dems vs Republicans issue, with Coble receiving beaucoups endorsement from establishment Dems — while Moe was being carried by RJ Shealy, son of the late Rod Shealy, and obviously inheritor of his political genes.”
Moe did A LOT of work on this campaign. He ran on what he believed in. I don’t think it was a case of smoke an mirrors from an evil genius that won it for him.
He put in the effort and in the end a few more people agreed with him than didn’t.
The Shealys are good at delivering their candidates message. This really wasn’t a traditional Shealy campaign though. The most contentious moment was the debate fiasco.
BTW its funny as anything hearing RJ Shealy named whispered as an evil mastermind or brilliant handler. To me hes still Rodney Shealy the guy that I use to huck fireworks at and play sega with.
“Brad says:
April 18, 2012 at 2:58 pm
By the way, I just added Tavis’ blog, “ColumbiaCents,” to the blogroll at right.”
Thanks. Its nice to be noticed and to know real people look at my blog. I’m on twitter as well as @columbiacents if anyone wants to follow there as well. End self aggrandizing.
“rather than the disposable homes of the NE and NW, because the liberals take the time to fix up the homes and the neighborhoods….”
What is the racial make-up of the NE vs. Shandon?
Some of us prefer a yard more than a 1/16th acre, garage bigger than one that will house a Model T, non-1935 electrical and plumbing for under $300,000. I’ve lived in Shandon, and for me to get the house and property in Lexington, I would have had to spend 3x the price, and lets not even get started on the difference in taxes and fees I don’t have to pay. Oh yeah, schools… we have better schools.
Take a drive around Shandon, not every street (especially the blocks just north of Rosewood) is a jewel of Columbia. Many look like a cross between overgrown jungle and downtown Detroit.
“`Kathryn Fenner says:
April 18, 2012 at 3:46 pm
@Tavis– If the “mudslinging” flyer hit a nerve, it sure beats me why–I mean the allegations that Daniel had called Moe a “regular businessman”?!? When Moe put “Businessman” on his signs? ”
Didn’t hit a nerve with me. I was mearly reporting what I heard. I thought the mailer was funny though. Just for the mud splatter.
I like Daniel as a candidate. I wrote 2 articles on him. He was very free with his time and believed in what he said.
http://www.columbiacents.com/home/2012/3/19/daniel-coble-interview.html
http://www.columbiacents.com/home/2012/4/11/follow-up-with-daniel-coble.html
Those are the 2 articles I wrote on Daniel Coble. I thought both were very fair pieces (one was basically a mailer with no editorializing).
Only reason I was at Andys was to report for the blog. Honestly I though Daniel was going to win before yesterday.
I agree I never saw the entire businessman thing. That was just background noise.
“I think the liberals of Wales Garden and the finer parts of Shandon have houses worth a lot more than the conservatives of whatever it’s called behind the VA, for the record.”
Great, give bud another group of people to hate.
@ Silence Editorial Page Editor, like our host used to be. Keep up!
Columbia has several left-wing papers: The Free Times, The State, the City Paper (if that’s still published). Probably the Black News as well (if it’s still printed.) It also has The Star. Temple Ligon does a better job covering City Council than whomever the junior reporter at The State is these days.
I also miss Beam’s coverage. He did a really good job covering the Metro Desk.
@Mark
“Everyone who reads the NYT in the city also reads the Post.”
Really? I find that very hard to believe. I would think it would be more like 10% overlap at best. Simply on cost alone, one would have to have a strong reason to purchase two papers these days nevermind one. And you assume that people read either paper to discover alternative viewpoints. That percentage is probably in single digits.
Which is why I have tended to like the editorial page in USA Today – they present their view and an opposing view. One stop shopping.
“I’ll never cease to be surprised at the conspiracies folks think newspapers are capable of.” – Brad Warthen
Messrs. Hearst and Pulitzer would like a word with you….
“Remember The Maine, to Hell with Spain!”
Doug,
Now this was 10 yrs ago, but yeah, those plus the WSJ, the FT, the Observer (for the juicy dreck), and Crain’s NY. At least 2 or more every day. Knowledge is power.
The other great loss of the demise of newspapers is the probable demise of the NY fold; the way to manage reading the paper in crowded transit conditions. It’s probably a lost art.
Sorry, but I find it hard to imagine life without divergent opinions and spirited debate. USA Today is not that world. You should try the Economist when you travel.
Yes, there is little point in writing an editorial if you think everyone is going to agree with it. The point should be to challenge people. Whether they agree or not, their decisions will be better for having been through the exercise of THINKING about it through another perspective.
Exactly
Columbia has several left-wing papers: The Free Times, The State, …
-Silence
The State has endorsed the conservative, Republican candidate for POTUS for at least the last 3 elections (and probably more but I can’t remember whether they endorsed Dole in 1996 or not). How does that make them liberal?
@ bud – I said “left-wing” not “liberal”
I think the point of writing an editorial is to write what your knowledgeable analysis leads you to conclude–no more, no less.
Daniel has learned a valuable (expensive) political life lesson: You can be a good person, a viable candidate, work hard, raise enough money, campaign smart, in other words DO EVERYTHING RIGHT and still lose. Sometimes its just luck and timing.
I’m sure Daniel will finish law school and get a good job and return to politics in future a lot wiser and older. It is brave to put yourself up for office and ask for votes. Losing is a painful teacher but it makes you wise. It’s called experience. Obama lost early and so did Bill Clinton.
@Mark
I get my diverse opinions for free from the web. I read more now than I ever did — and I was a two paper a day guy for a long time (USA Today and whatever local paper was available in the city I was in at the time). There are still great papers out there. The State is not one of them.
And since his gamble paid off, he’ll now be able to pay it off easily… no, wait; he won’t. There is no payoff. Just blood, sweat and tears.
You have to really want to serve, and I guess Moe really wants to.
Now, instead of going around beating on all those doors, the constituents will all be beating on his — and calling on the phone, and expecting him at every meeting, and taking every problem and complaint they have to him.
I don’t know if I could ever handle being a city councilman.
But then you would have the opportunity to vote for a strong mayor system.
Brad, I keep hearing “sour grapes” on this blog. Your last comment is nothing but that.
Now let’s all sit around and play a copy of Danny Boy and weep because Coble lost.
“Lynn says:
April 19, 2012 at 11:20 am
Daniel has learned a valuable (expensive) political life lesson: You can be a good person, a viable candidate, work hard, raise enough money, campaign smart, in other words DO EVERYTHING RIGHT and still lose. Sometimes its just luck and timing.”
Would have been a lot more expensive for Moe. Of all the candidates this cycle he is the only one to take out a 10k loan to kick off his campaign.
I think you misunderstand. I’d say the same about Daniel had he won. You really have to be a glutton for punishment to want to serve in local government.
Frankly, when I think about running for office on any level, the main thing that makes me hesitate (aside form the fund-raising, the lack of organization and support if you aren’t in a party, etc.) is the 24/7 headaches. Constituents do NOT expect you to have a life, and basically don’t allow it.
People tend to scoff at politicos who say they’re quitting “to spend more time with their families.” I believe them, because I see how all-consuming public office can be.
Although speaking of Daniel… I do remember remarking to him that, if elected, he was lucky that he was a young, single guy (my way of saying that he didn’t have much of a personal life to give up, truth be told).
He protested that he had a girlfriend. I explained that that still made him single…
except, Brad, wives are more tolerant of being ignored than girlfriends, in my experience….something about a cow not having been bought yet…
I don’t know. I can’t imagine having a “girlfriend” as an adult. I’ve been married my whole adult life.
It sounds like it would be complicated. In a bad way.
Anyway, the way I actually responded to him was by snorting and saying, “Compared to me — with five kids and soon to be 5 grandchildren — you’re single.”
That fifth grandchild, by the way, is due on May 18. He will be the first boy born into my family in 31 years.
We’ve had 8 girls in a row in that time. My younger son was born late in 1980. After that, we had two more wonderful daughters. My brother has two very young daughters (he started much later). I have four precious granddaughters.
So we’re all excited, and at the same time like, “A boy? What are we going to do? He can’t wear any of the hand-me-downs!”
I’ll tell y’all about it when he gets here… or maybe I won’t have to, what with the heralds all crying the arrival of an heir in the streets of the city…
‘Kathryn – “wives are more tolerant of being ignored than girlfriends” – LMAO
“I don’t know. I can’t imagine having a “girlfriend” as an adult. I’ve been married my whole adult life.”
If you work it right, you can have both.
“Brad says:
I think you misunderstand. I’d say the same about Daniel had he won. You really have to be a glutton for punishment to want to serve in local government.”
I read a book a bit ago where it said they average political life as an alderman was 4 yrs.
A lot of the decisions they make are very monotonous. Speed bumps here, stop signs there.
Councilwoman (yea I used Councilwoman)Gergel at a recent work meeting was about ready to shank the SCE&G tree cutters.
She was very frustrated with the fact that they hack the trees in a less than desirable way and spin up the public. Her phone apparently was ringing off the hook when they did trimming in district 3.
This is a problem she doesn’t have much control over but gets a huge amount of flack from.
(Full disclosure I work for a promenent local nuclear plant but I have absolutely nothing to do with transmission. Im in Generation)
Thats why every time you deal with city hall staff and council it pays to be respectful. If your nice you get stuff so much easier.
Look, Brad: after a gazillion offspring and oceans of water under the bridge, Miz Dubs is not likely to bugger off because you are out late at a council meeting–she’s obvi become inured to it, but most unattached young twentysomethings have more options, far fewer ties and less patience….
@ Brad – Congrats on the forthcoming grandchild!
@Brad & Tavis – Glutton for punishment is correct.