2012 Primary Election Predictions: Fullerton Recall
Posted by Former Blogger Chris Emami on April 19, 2012
Now to one of the more controversial items on the ballot for this June in the Fullerton recall election. This race has been extremely vicious by both camps, and a lot is at stake with the Council majority up for grabs.
This race unlike other in this election is for 6 different things:
3 recalls
3 races to replace the recalled Councilmember (If recall passes)
The 3 Councilmembers up for recall include Don Bankead, Dick Jones, and Pat McKinley. Much question exists as to the real reason for the recall.
One side claims that the recall is because the Council has done a horrible job over the Kelly Thomas killing incident among other failures such as an alleged illegal water tax. The other side claims that Tony Bushala is simply trying to undo the results of the 2010 election and gain control of the Fullerton City Council.
The major factor at play here is that recalls once on the ballot never fail. This my prediction on the recall side of these races is:
All 3 Councilmembers Ousted
Unlike my other predictions the post does not stop with just that. A replacement must be made for each of the recalled Councilmembers.
The candidates running for the Don Bankhead seat include:
Rick Alvarez a Businessowner/Planning Commissioner who is a Republican. His appointment to the commission was actually by Don Bankhead.
Jane Rands a Systems Engineer and Green Party activist. She has run for quite a few offices in this area which will give her some name ID.
Greg Sebourn a Businessman/Educator and candidate for the Fullerton City Council in 2010. He is a Republican and the one mostly closely in line with the pro-recall folks.
Paula Williams a Public Employee and the only Democrat on the ballot for this seat.
The recall will pass but the elections for a replacement will likely come down to name ID and ballot designation. Greg Sebourn and Jane Rands will split the vote based on highest name ID leaving this seat to the candidate with the best ballot designation.
Looking at all the factors at play in this district I believe that the winner will be:
Rick Alvarez
The candidates running for the Dick Jones seat include:
Dorothy A. Birsic a Republican running with no ballot designation.
Glenn P. Georgieff an IT Specialist anda former Fullerton Library Trustee. He is a registered Democrat.
Matthew Hakim a Musician/Artist and registered Democrat.
Travis Kiger a Fullerton Planning Commissioner and the most closely in line with the pro-recall folks. He is a registered Republican.
Roberta J. Reid a student that is a DTS voter.
Once again this will likely come down to name ID and ballot designation. Travis Kiger has the best ballot designation out of all candidates in any of the 3 seats and he also has the highest name ID and the most comprehensive campaign being run. Nobody else has been actively in the mail, walking precincts, or putting up signs.
Looking at all the factors at play in this district I believe that the winner will be:
Travis Kiger
The candidates running for the Pat McKinley seat include:
Doug Chafee a Business Attorney and 2010 candidate for City Council. He is a registered Democrat and also a Fullerton Planning Commissioner.
Barry Levinson an Auditor/Parks Commissioner who is probably one of the most passionate people about local issues that I have ever seen. He is a registered Republican.
Sean Paden a Construction Attorney and a registered Republican.
Matthew Rowe an Aerospace Project Manager and a DTS voter.
This will be the closest of all 3 races. Barry Levinson has the best ballot designation in this race, however, we have already witnessed him and Doug Chafee on the ballot in 2010. Chafee has the highest name ID of any candidate in this race yet he and Sean Paden split votes based on ballot designation.
Looking at all the factors at play in this district and mostly based on 2010 results I believe that the winner will be:
Doug Chafee
OC Political 
Rowe4Fullerton said
Check out Matt’s campaign video for a different perspective. More information to come soon.
Sylvia's Sister said
Obviously Chris Emami need to do more homework.
The Mighty Oak said
Chris, I think your predictions about who will win in the replacement races are on target, but on what basis do you claim that recalls always suceed if they qualify for the ballot?
There was a post on this blog recently by someone else concluding the recall had ust a 50-50 chance of succeeding.
Greg Diamond said
I think that McKinley is toast — Chaffee is very likely to win that seat and no one objects to him that much — but I think that there’s an argument regarding the others. Turnover of one seat alone takes away the “traditional Republican” (as opposed to “libertarian Republican”) majority. I’m wondering if voters would just be willing to live with an effective governing bloc of Quirk-Silva+Whitaker+Chafee bloc for half a year.
If traditional Republicans and Democrats don’t want Kiger, why wouldn’t they just live with Jones for six months? He’s not going to win in November even if he runs — which I doubt. As for Bankhead — well, if Kiger and Sebourn join Whitaker on the council, then that faction has total control. I don’t think that Bankhead deserves to stay, but I suspect that a lot of people will see his staying (and creating a stalemate) as better than full control for Whitaker and Co.
fullertonfirst said
What’s your take on Chaffee’s duplicitous stand on the recall? He refuses to endorse it, sign a petition, or denounce McKinley– yet he’s happy to run for his seat!? If that’s not carpet bagging, I don’t know what is.
Plenty of people object to Doug Chaffee. He won’t take a stand on the recall, but is happy to sit through to the election. That’s not someone who’s earning my vote. I understand he’s received an endorsement from Pat McKinley and stated so during a fundraising event.
You’re not backing this guy, are you?
Chris Emami said
If I had to choose I would back Levinson in that race.
Greg Diamond said
Fine — but he’s not going to win. Chaffee is, by a mile.
If Levinson were going to win, that would certainly make many people vote no on the recalls of Bankhead and Jones, because a 2-2-1 split on the Council (between traditional conservatives, libertarian conservatives, and one moderate-liberal) would not leave any faction able to run roughshod.
I’m surprised that people don’t think that people will take the overall composition of the Council into account when casting their votes. It seems obvious to me that lots of them will. Maybe FFFF is right and people just want to get out of the frying pan, so they don’t even want to check to see if they’re headed into a fire.
fullertonfirst said
Levinson isn’t going to win. Matt Rowe is. He’s independent and has the attitude necessary to fix what’s broken. We need more independence and less discussion on voting blocs.
Chris Emami said
I guarantee you that Matt Rowe will not win.
fullertonfirst said
Compelling.
Greg Diamond said
Putting aside your apparent misconception of what the term “carpet-bagging” means, what’s duplicitous about Chaffee’s action? As you know, there are two separate ballot questions for each seat:
(1) Should this Councilmember be recalled?
(2) If he is recalled, who should replace him?
You can vote no on the first question and still vote on the second one. Chaffee’s major concern is the second question. I see nothing wrong with leaving people to their own counsel regarding the recall. As opposed to something like the situation of Jim Righeimer in Costa Mesa, where someone is clearly off the rails and is needlessly costing his city over a million dollars in legal expenses alone, I think that reasonable people can disagree on whether to pursue the recall given the possible replacements who might control the Council.
The one true imperative is to recall McKinley — both because many of the hires that caused problems happened on his watch as Police Chief and simply because he’s the one who is opposed by a well-respected and almost-elected candidate like Chaffee, along with weak opposition — and that alone would suffice to take control of the Council away from the traditional conservatives and put it into the hands of a moderate-libertarian coalition of Whitaker, Quirk-Silva, and Chaffee. What voters do in the other races is their own call. They certainly have enough information to do it — for which I do largely credit your friends at FFFF, despite the chaff mixed with the wheat.
Yes, I would absolutely vote to recall McKinley and replace him with Chaffee — and the fact that he’s not twisting the knife on McKinley (who is apparently doomed) suggests that he’ll be in a better position to build bridges on the Council and help Fullerton to heal. The question is how to vote in the other races. If Jones announced his intention not to run in November, I might vote to let him serve out his last six months in the minority, where his vote would rarely if ever be decisive.
Bankhead is a harder call because he’d be there for 30 more months. He’d be somewhat neutered in the minority — presuming that he stays in the minority after November — but here the question is who would replace him. Given the possible split in the electorate, this is a hard race to call. Fullerton voters will have to decide whether they want to risk electing both Sebourn and Kiger in the election, to create a Whitaker-Sebourn-Kiger libertarian Republican majority that could conceivably go the way of Costa Mesa. Back on Orange Juice, I keep asking people from whether they would pledge that Fullerton would not seek bankruptcy (which they see as a way of abrogating union contracts and pension obligations) if they are elected — and I keep not getting any answer.
As I said, I agree that McKinley should be recalled. But, if you see this as a possible vote for a municipal bankruptcy, should Kiger and/or Sebourn get elected, then you can see why Chaffee might hesitate to say “yeah, just go ahead and recall them all.” Most voters don’t want to go from a frying pan into a fire. I know that FFFF people consider themselves to be above reproach as possible rulers of the city — but you aren’t.
fullertonfirst said
“Yes, I would absolutely vote to recall McKinley and replace him with Chaffee — and the fact that he’s not twisting the knife on McKinley (who is apparently doomed) suggests that he’ll be in a better position to build bridges on the Council and help Fullerton to heal.”
Really? I would think that an outright denouncement of a failed leader would be what’s needed to help the city heal. After all, McKinley’s toleration of abhorrent behavior is what got us into this mess in the first place. Why are you advocating for another politician who’s emulating the same bad behavior? Make a stand. Make it right.
Putting a (D) next to your name on the ballot shouldn’t earn an endorsement, Greg. It’s duplicitous to say I’m running to replace Pat McKinley yet I refuse to sign the recall petition. As the Recall-No campaign puts it, “This is an attempt to undo the results of the last election.” They’re absolutely right– that’s exactly what Doug Chaffee is trying to do.
The right thing to do is to pick a candidate who advocates the best direction for Fullerton to heal and grow. Playing both sides of an issue is not a leadership quality that leads to mended fences. You know that. I know you do. Carpet-bagging isn’t limited to geography. Predatory opportunism in any form is carpet-bagging. Running in a recall you don’t support is carpet bagging.
Greg Diamond said
As you are not Humpty-Dumpty and we are not in Wonderland, you don’t just get to define “carpet-bagging” however you want to. It has a meaning; that meaning is not the one you suggest.
Two questions for you:
– Do you think courtesy signifies weakness? (I ask because while Chaffee clearly thinks that he would have been and would now be a better Councilmember than McKinley, he doesn’t seem to want to humiliate him. Most people seem to think that McKinley will be recalled, no matter what Chaffee does or doesn’t do. Chaffee’s humilating McKinley in the strongest terms at this point would as likely provoke a backlash as promote the recall. (By the way, petitions are no longer circulating. From what I can tell, he decided to run after they were approved.)
People have, by an large, already made up their minds on the merits of recalling at least McKinley. As a supporter of one of his opponents, all you seem to be doing is trying to alienate Chaffee from many of the people — not politicians, but voters — that he will have to deal with in trying to bring people together after the election. You call his not baring his fangs and bloodying his teeth “predatory opportunism”; a better word for it, in a wounded community, might be “statesmanship.”
– Second question: should candidates rule out Fullerton declaring bankruptcy to escape its union contracts and pension obligations?
fullertonfirst said
Greg, can I get your word police badge number? While you’re add it, throw in your cute non-sequitur sloganeering spin generating badge number. Humpty dumpty . . . really? That’s your reply to a serious issue? Wow.
Courtesy in the face of incompetence is absolutely weak. When the petition was circulating, I understand Chaffee refused to sign it.
In case you missed that: If you’re not loudly, proudly, and often denouncing Pat McKinley and his absolute incompetence, embarrassment to Fullerton, and failure to steward this city in a remotely acceptable manner– then yes, that’s weak.
If you’re a liberal and you refuse to stand up, denounce wrong doers, and fight against injustice, you don’t deserve an opportunity to represent your neighbors on city council.
Statesmen destroy oppressors. Washington, Lincoln, TR, FDR, JFK, MLK Jr, Reagan– these are statesmen. When injustice showed up, they did do. The didn’t wait for someone else to win the fight, then step in afterwards to claim victory on the battle field.
I don’t think you’re advocating for Chaffee’s appeasement strategy as liberal statesmanship. I think you misspoke. I think Ted Kennedy and the other liberal lions of the past also think you misspoke. Neville Chamberlain? Maybe he thinks you didn’t misspeak. Here’s your chance to redeem yourself.
For your second question– ask someone who’s running in the election. I am not. I’m concerned with voting for a candidate that stands up for the community when its need is greatest; not one that benefits from a convenient opportunity. I will not vote for a carpet bagger, no matter how narrow minded your definition may be.
Harbor Boulevard said
Fullertonfirst sounds EXACTLY like Ryan Cantor, Matt Rowe’s campaign manager, because Ryan is saying exactly the same things on the FFFF blog.
Plus, what right do you have to say that only people who support the recall should run in the replacement candidate? That is so anti-democratic, not to mention stupid. You might as well say only voters who support the recall should be allowed to vote in the recall. Or that only voters who vote to recall the three councilmen should be allowed to vote in the replacement election.
Whether we want it or not, there is a recall on the ballot. Voters have the right to choose the replacement candidate who best reflects their values and priorities. Fullertonfirst should stop acting like such a fanatic.
fullertonfirst said
To be clear, voters absolutely have the right to choose the replacement candidate who best reflects their values and priorities. This includes voters who vote “NO” on the recall as well as “YES”.<– This is a fact. Some individuals will argue with you on this. I am not one of them.
Individuals who do not agree with the Notice of Intent to recall should not be benefiting from a successful recall. <– This is my opinion. It goes for Doug Chaffee and Chris Bustamante, too. There are times (again, my opinion) where politics take a back seat to principles. Recalls are one of them. You don't hedge your bet in a no-confidence vote. You pick a side.
I don't see how I chose to donate my time has any relevance to the arguments presented here. If you disagree, that's your right. That's a fact.
Greg Diamond said
I think that someone who lost the last election in a photo-finish recount can be excused for not wanting to look like he is trying to overturn that result by banging the drum for a recall. The notion that that means that he can’t run in the recall to serve the city — which is going to need a lot of experienced hands on deck if the recall succeeds, is sort of nutty, the sort of thing that I’d expect to hear only from a rival’s campaign manager. But if you were a rival’s campaign manager, you surely would have disclosed it before now, right?
fullertonfirst said
You’re kidding me, right?
Greg– again, here’s the issue. Doug Chaffee has done nothing to condemn the reprehensible behavior of the candidate he proposes to replace, either before or after the Notice of Intent to Recall Pat McKinley was filed.
This is not a quality of a liberal candidate that you should be encouraging. It’s antithetical to every great statesman EVER, and how I choose to volunteer my time is a red herring that you’re using to shift the goal posts from an argument where you’re weak. You’re out advocating for a candidate and so am I. How you choose to volunteer your time is up to you and I’m not faulting you for it.
Answer the question. Give me an example of a statesman who acts like Doug Chaffee: One who stands in the background while others fight the good fight. I gave you a great list of those who’ve done the opposite.
Greg Diamond said
Oh, please. “Appeasement”? “The good fight”? This isn’t WW2. Tony Bushala has gotten the publicity for the recall all covered, thanks, and from what I understand the recall itself is assured. However, if Chaffee started beating the drum in a way that seemed to advance his personal agenda, then that could lead to a backlash among voters who would see it as self-serving. Recognizing that is, yes, statesmanlike.
I care much more about what Chaffee would do about Kelly Thomas-type situations (and how he’d prevent them) than about whether he thinks that the Council’s pretty clear errors justify a recall. Voters have the access to the facts; they can be trusted to decide what to do with them.
The actual “good fight” is for the future of the City — and that war encompasses many battles, of which the City’s reaction to (and failure to prevent) the Kelly Thomas beating is an important one, but not the only one. Having people willing to listen to and work with all sides is not a stupid approach to moving forward.
fullertonfirst said
Again, question not answered. You seem to be missing it.
WHERE ARE MY EXAMPLES OF STATESMEN WHO DON’T STAND UP AND FIGHT FOR WHAT’S RIGHT?
I don’t think you’ll miss that.
Again, Doug Chaffee has done nothing to stand up against Pat McKinley and fight for what’s right in Fullerton between the 8 months between Kelly Thomas’s tragedy and the candidate filing date. He’s also done nothing in the weeks since then to condemn McKinley’s behavior or make it transparent that he’s McKinley’s pick.
This isn’t what Washington, Lincoln, TR, FDR, JFK, MLK Jr, or Reagan would have done. You think it’s so statesman like and diplomatic? Tell me which statesman this best emulates. I say it’s Neville Chamberlain.
You’re damn right it’s not WWII. If it were, I have no freakin’ clue what Doug Chaffee would be doing. I do know what Matt Rowe would be doing. He’d be fighting for the cause instead of being polite– as apparently you’d prefer.
fullertonfirst said
**Edit, 2nd p, Individuals . . . should not be benefiting from a successful recall as a candidate.**
Greg Diamond said
It’s a literary reference — an appropriate and not a particularly obscure one. Here you go: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humpty_Dumpty#In_Through_the_Looking-Glass
I think that under McKinley’s leadership, the FPD hired some people who should not have been hired. I think that McKinley and the others in the majority dealt poorly with the wake of the Kelly Thomas beating. I am not part of Chaffee’s campaign, but I think that Chaffee would agree with that.
I think that that justifies the extraordinary measure of a recall. Others don’t. Chaffee, as someone who might have been seen as trying to profit personally from whipping up a recall frenzy, chose to let things play out. That was probably wise — to the extent that any recall anywhere is called for, it should be clear that it is about performance issues and not about gaining political advantage. I don’t fault him for that.
Recall proponents, on the other hand, pushed the recall — which was justified, in my personal opinion — and are now trying to use it for their own political advantage. (Just imagine if FFFF had said “we want a recall — and to make people understand that it’s not being done out of political motives, we will not endorse or promote any candidates in the recall.” Yeah, I can’t really imagine it either, but it would then have been above reproach.)
Instead, they’re using the recall as a means of implementing an agenda that could include bankruptcy for the City of Fullerton. And you think that I’m weak or unethical for questioning that? I’ll take my moral guidance from someone writing under their own name, whose reputation can suffer for making such an argument.
fullertonfirst said
Here you go pal, Ryan Cantor. Enjoy. Calling me out for using a blogging alias is definitely weak. If that’s the best argument you have for defending yourself, well — it’s gone now.
Here’s another place you can take some moral guidance from: http://www.fullertonsfuture.org/2011/open-letter-to-my-fellow-fullerton-liberals-by-steve-baxter/
The author posted his identity as well. Maybe this time you’ll have something of substance– literary or otherwise.
You missed what I said. If you’re going to sit on this blog and advocate for a candidate who doesn’t play an activist role in remedying what’s right– that’s weak. If you want to make a stand on bankruptcy issues, that’s fine. That really ought to take a back seat to injustice and I think you know that. Stop twisting my words.
The recall is not a choice between a special interest group and Doug Chaffee. If Doug Chaffee has an opinion on Pat McKinley, his performance, or the recall— I’d love to see it. Show me a video of him speaking at a council meeting, show me a comment in a newspaper . . . I’ll even settle for a blog post. I can get all three of those from Matt Rowe, who has ZERO ties to Tony Bushala or any other special interest group. The only thing I’ve heard about Chaffee and McKinley is that Chaffee’s proud to have McKinley’s backing should the recall succeed. That’s disgusting.
If he has an excuse for not signing the recall petition for Pat McKinley, I’d love to see it, too. Maybe you think that’s smart. I call it opportunism.
Greg Diamond said
No, my best arguments were the substantive ones. I just wanted to make sure that you weren’t some interested party like the campaign manager for one of the other … HUH? YOU’RE MATT ROWE’S CAMPAIGN MANAGER? WHY DIDN’T YOU SAY SO BEFORE NOW?
Yes, Steve Baxter is currently FFFF’s favorite liberal. I like the opening, though I think that it was unfair to liberals:
If I’m going to argue the ethics of someone who would be pilloried for using the Kelly Thomas killing as a way to get into office if he had followed your advice and been a recall booster, it’s not going to be with the manager of one of his opponent’s campaigns. You really should have disclosed that before how. (By the way, the link between Rowe and FFFF appears to be, in part, you.)
P.S.: Here’s something of substance: when someone says that a commonly used term like “carpetbagger” has some meaning other than it’s actual and commonly accepted one, then it becomes the responsibility of those nearby to reply. Otherwise, civilization collapses! (Right, Chrises Emami and Nguyen?)
fullertonfirst said
Note: Question not answered, deflection continued. Give me your examples.
Fine Greg, how do you spend your volunteer time? Lets put that up for scrutiny, shall we? I’m a resident and a voter in Fullerton. Are you? What’s your stake in the game? Why are you piddling endorsements and opinions?
If Doug Chaffee wins, I get to pay the price. How I volunteer my time is an asset, not a liability that I need to be accused of not exposing. That’s deflection and goal-shifting. Don’t pretend you don’t know that it is.
Greg Diamond said
“Question not answered”? I looked through your entire comment to which I replied up above. It does not contain a question mark.
Nope, I live right over the border in Brea, but I do most of my commerce and political work in Fullerton, among other ties to the city. My stake is that I want to see its wounds healed (as much as they can be) and it governed well going forward.
I think that if one is formally associated with a campaign, one should disclose it. You don’t? OK, noted. I have no role in the Chaffee campaign (though I suppose I may end up carrying lit for him when campaigning generally.) I do advise and volunteer for Paula Williams, though I have no formal position in her campaign.
fullertonfirst said
Formally?
Distinguish between what you’re doing and what I’m dong.
Formally. Ridiculous.
Greg Diamond said
Uh — I’m not managing her campaign and I’ve been up front about advising her.
You are managing his campaign and until today were pseudonymous.
fullertonfirst said
Which includes what duties that you aren’t exercising? You were upfront when I asked . . . I don’t see you prefacing every blog header on it.
Greg Diamond said
Right. I had put up no disclaimer — because I wasn’t writing about her.
fullertonfirst said
Let me put it differently: Who are your model statesmen if not those I listed and when did they hide in the shadows when they were needed most? When did Washington say he was proud to have King George’s endorsement? Lincoln of Davis? Teddy of the trust lords, FDR of Hitler, JFK and MLK of Jim Crow, Reagan of Kruschev?
Rather than demand to know my name, Greg, how about you answer the freakin’ question and tell me why you think appeasement is a good idea?
fullertonfirst said
In case you’re still looking, here’s the question mark you missed.
Greg Diamond said
Yeah, silly me, looking in the comment to which you were replying rather than way down here.
Greg Diamond said
Actually, Lincoln is a pretty good example. He didn’t seek “total annihilation” and kept an eye on how we would have to govern once hostilities ceased. (Unfortunately, he didn’t get the chance to put his plans into practice.) Also, rather than ranting on the evil of his opponents, he recognized the seriousness of the problems at hand, recognized competing considerations as well as fundamental moral bottom line, and he kept his eye on solutions.
He didn’t act like a snarling pro wrestler, though, which may be what disappoints you about Chaffee.
fullertonfirst said
He totally annihilated slavery. He campaigned on it. He put his life on the line for the sake of the Union. He died for it. He didn’t sit around waiting for Jeff Davis’s endorsement and he sure didn’t sit around waiting for another politician to stake a claim on the issue.
Greg Diamond said
He campaigned to save the Union, not on “annihilating slavery.” Other politicians did lay claim to the idea of annihilating the South; he rejected it. He knew that he’d have to work with them to heal the country.
I’m sure that that sounded good to you when you wrote it, but that’s just not how history happened. Of course, the killing of Kelly Thomas, while tragic, was not exactly centuries of chattel slavery.
fullertonfirst said
“P.S.: Here’s something of substance: when someone says that a commonly used term like “carpetbagger” has some meaning other than it’s actual and commonly accepted one, then it becomes the responsibility of those nearby to reply. Otherwise, civilization collapses! (Right, Chrises Emami and Nguyen?)”– GD
You want to know why I’m on you like white on rice? It’s because of you running your mouth like this.
Several weeks ago in a completely unrelated blog, you commented that Matt’s background makes him more qualified to invade Brea than be seated as a councilman.
I took issue with that. That’s when I started volunteering for Matt– because ignorant mouth flappers like you have no business influencing an election. Matt’s independence and accomplishments at West Point, service in the Army– including Iraq, and everything he’s done since moving into the private sector make him the perfect candidate for council.
The fact that you turned that into a joke for the sake of endorsing a candidate who hasn’t lead, hasn’t made any statements on a major tragedy in Fullerton, but has a (D) next to his name as a party affiliation is the very reason why party politics are bad thing. That sucks Greg. You didn’t talk to the guy, look at his positions, or take him seriously for less than a nanosecond. You saw the (D) next to Chaffee and shot from the hip. You took legitimate service work, including Matt putting his life on the line, and made it a joke. You did it for kicks and to suit your own personal gain.
Carpet bagger: outsider; especially : a nonresident or new resident who seeks private gain from an area often by meddling in its business or politics.
Reside: a : to be present as an element or quality b : to be vested as a right
You don’t live here. You consult here and gain privately by meddling in business and politics. Chaffee sure hasn’t been present or demonstrated being vested in the community. If he had been present or felt vested, he’d have done something in a moment of tragedy rather than sitting at home.
You sir, and Mr. Chaffee, are carpetbaggers. I get absolutely nothing from the time and effort I put in. You sure can’t say the same. Put a disclosure statement on that.
Greg Diamond said
Can you find that exchange? I just searched FFFF, where I think it was, and I can’t find it.
Matt Rowe seems like a decent guy with two problems as a candidate for Council. First, working in the military is different from working in governance. Second, you. I recall having a nice exchange with Matt in those comments about, among other things, my light joke and I came away impressed and hoping that he has a future in helping to manage the city. My opinion has been heading southward the more you write, though.
The rest of your comment is just weird and baseless; calling Doug Chaffee a “carpetbagger” doesn’t really require refutation; it sinks on its own. I love that you use the word “meddling” for my volunteer activities, though. It’s so Scooby-Doo.
Matthew Rowe said
Wow, gentlemen, that was quite a spirited debate. There were even WW2 and Civil War references. I have to say that we should take a step back and realize that this Recall election, while important for Fullerton, pales on comparison to anything on that level. Ryan, I am grateful for your ardent passion and loyalty. Thanks for being a good friend. Greg, I admire your civic-mindedness and passion for local politics. I happen to think Doug Chaffee is a very nice man, and he is certainly involved in Fullerton. I don’t believe however, that he has the strength of character to reign in the police department and hold them accountable while putting the city on sound financial footing. He is too nice, in my opinion. Yeah, I have spent most of my professional life leading soldiers, but the Army is not so different from leading within a civilian organization, once you get past the guns and the salutes. People need to demonstrate the courage of their convictions and speak truth to power. I have done it all my life, and will continue to do so. As you can see, it has blessed me with some extremely loyal friends, who take time away from work and family to help with my campaign. Thanks Ryan.
Matt
Recalls in Retrospect « OC Political said
[…] chances of the Fullerton recalls passing in the press, on other blogs, and even a little here and here on this blog. (It is recalls, plural, by the way, since it’s technically three recalls in […]