Friday, October 05, 2007

Rant, Part 2.

While we're on the subject of the mayoral election, may I just add one more vicious, well-deserved attack on that "newspaper you can smell from your doorstep", as the late Henry Loeb used to say?

To Chris Peck, Wendi Thomas, and Otis Sanford, you Boojees, thanks for helping re-elect Herenton!  You are sinking the Commercial Appeal faster than Geoff Calkins can save it, and now your idiotic (AND INACCURATE) poll convinced enough people in error that Only Herman Could Win!  How's that working for you now? YOU HELPED HERENTON WIN. ARE YOU HAPPY?

I would tell you to stick to reporting the news, but the only real reporters you have left in the newsroom are Marc Perrusquia and Jacinthia Jones, and I expect them to leave for a major daily any day now.  You are failures, and if you had any decency, you would resign en masse.

Wendi, you in particular pissed me off. You were showing signs of being a good columnist, and had gotten away from that boojee AUNT ESTHER persona you had shown toward Three 6 Mafia.  Since this election started, though, you lost your mind. After what just happened, why don't YOU "take one for the team" and leave town, and take Peck with you.

I'm going to bed, but I might have more invective tomorrow.  You should all be happy I left town for a few days before this election, or it would be a hell of a lot worse.


polar donkey said...

I had an interesting discussion with a friend last night. Where were sitting around watching the election results with his girlfriend. She didn't understand why Herenton won.When he and I saw the results, we realized that 7% undecided were not white folks, they were black folks. A year ago, I wrote that no black folks are going to vote for Chumney. I was right then and I guess I should not have gotten taken away by the moment. Chumney was hoping that the two black guys would split the black vote, once that poll came out showing that Morris couldn't win, those undecided black voters went back to Herenton. Chumney ended up splitting the white vote. If Morris hadn't had picked Ryder and Chumney wouldn't have entered the race he would have beaten Herenton. One on one, I don't think Chumney could have beaten Herenton.

It is hard for myself to wrap my head around this, Herenton supporters are like Bush supporters. You can tell Bushies that he is an autocrat undermining the constitution and incompetent but they just don't see it that way. You could cite chapter and verse supporting evidence but it just will not matter. Same with Herenton supporters, except it is with corruption and cronyism. They just don't see those things. You are wasting your time talking about cronyism and corruption.

Also, Memphis truely is a wierd place and Herenton really does understand his target audience. He talks to that audience in a way that repells the supporters of Morris and Chumney. The gulf between the way those two groups see and communicate politics is so large, I don't know how you bridge it. But really, in city as physically polarized as Memphis should we expect any different. There are at the least two very different Memphis'. The only person that could bridge this gulf is AC. The question now is, will there be much left of the Morris/Chumney supporters still in the city/county if or when that happens.

B said...

Seriously ... you are blaming a poll? And a newspaper? God knows folks can have a beef with the morning monopoly but ... some reality.

Didn't that poll come out AFTER early voting? And didn't Chumney lose the early vote by like 7,500? And wasn't the only poll available BEFORE early voting The Flyer poll that favored Chumney and that triggered an avalanche of votes the last few days of early voting? And didn't most anyone engaged enough to vote know of the Ch 24 poll that came out on Tuesday and essentially void the meaningless CA findings? (meaningless because someone trying to pick the best horse got nothing of value from CA poll)

Anyway ... yesterday, Chumney got 66 percent of the nonHerenton votes! 66 percent! 2/3 had figured out CC was the only one who could beat WWH. To get 15,000 more votes -- what she needed to win decisively enough to avoid ridiculousness -- would have meant receiving 95 percent of the nonHerenton votes. If you think the CA has or ever had that kind of influence ...

And let's take out Morris ... let's go WWH v. CC ... Morris got 35,000 votes. That means, Morris votes would have had to go 75 percent to Chumney. Likely ... maybe. But it also would've been an even more racially divisive contest and lots more ammunition unloaded by WWH and company.

Anonymous said...

The sad thing is there will be no firings or resignations at the CA for its unprecedented partisanship in this contest.

LeftWingCracker said...

I really believe that Carol thought she could pull a good percentage of the black vote...

Formerly Considered Moderate said...

LWC, the rants don't help. We are stuck with a corrupt a--hole of a mayor who continued his racist, divisive campaign rhetoric on election night instead of trying to move forward. What's more - he gets to claim he pulled it off without any Ford help. I guess he'll claim his own divine intervention.

When you do see the precinct breakdown, you will find high white turnout which reached nearly 60% in the Poplar corridor.

On the other hand, a big portion of the AA community exercised their choice by staying home - incredibly so. Carol got a miniscule amount of that actual vote. Regardless of dislike for Herenton, the time has unfortunately not come when the AA community will replace a black mayor with a white one. (Gender seemed irrelevant.)

When Carol claimed it was a two person race, the AA voting community went running to Herenton - expectedly so (unfortunately). That is why Herenton made the claim to start with. Carol hurt herself by echoing it. In a one-on-one race between Carol and Herenton, the AA community would not have stayed home - they would have been at the polls in full force and Herenton would have won.

The dynamics of each situation and candidate choice are not static, and even turnout is changeable. She never had a chance to win - particularly after Steve's election.

We need to move on. Let's work FOR something for this city before everybody moves out.

LeftWingCracker said...

FCM, you know I respect you and you have always been upfront, and I appreciate that.

I do want to see those breakdowns, because my impression has been all along that Herman took far more white votes from Carol than he did AA votes from the Mayor. Until I see them, I am of the opinion that his presence prevented a Chumney victory, not vice versa.

That having been said, the rants WERE a good thing, because look at the conversation that is taking place, with good ideas coming forth all around.

Besides, we'll all be on the same side again very quickly, as Steve Cohen will need our help!

LeftWingCracker said...

PD, you need to turn your comment into a post before I do!


Formerly Considered Moderate said...

Thanks LWC. Tired today but 'just trying to keep the conversation lively'.

At least everybody's thinking. See ya soon.

polar donkey said...

Hey FCM,
Is there a way you could forward me those turnout numbers. I'd like to map them and show everyone what happened. You could forward them to Cracker if you like. Thanks for considering it.

bob said...

I wonder what the dynamics will be nationally, when HRC runs against Guliani.

Save This MG said...

Ok folks, instead of hammering the CA's coverage and endorsement to death and instead of focusing on what areas voted for whom, how about we move forward and decide how we are going to hold this mayor's and the new city council's feet to the fire? What are OUR visions of this city and how are WE going to make those visions a reality?

We need term limits which is apparent now more than ever. Yes, we have fresh faces on the council but only because members were indicted or chose not to run. Not because an incumbent was successfully challenged. And obviously, we need a new mayor. How in the world can you get fresh ideas if you keep electing the same old faces? With limits, I believe the politicians would be more willing to take on controversial topics because they weren't continually running for office. The average voter is lazy and uninformed. They'll vote name recognition because it's easy. Really studying the candidate and the issues takes effort and most of the folks around here can't come up from the bucket of chicken long enough to educate themselves.

We need activism. Refer to my chicken statement as to why we see so little political activism. The citizens of this city MUST get and stay involved. Write the city council. Go to the meetings when you can. As Goldie Hawn said in "Private Benjamin", "I'm going to be watching you LIKE
HAWK." You betcha, that's what we must do.

The mayor didn't get this city in the state it's in by himself. We did. We turned a blind eye. We stopped taking part. We closed our mouths. This is OUR fault people and it's up to US to fix it. And we can but we have to move. We have to get up off the couch. We have to pick up the phone or write a letter. We have to do something besides just blink and breathe and bitch.

This is OUR city. It's not Herenton's or Belz's or the gangs. It's ours. The average Joe and Jane blow who want safe streets, good schools and regular garbage pick up. The rest is gravy. We have to make it attractive to live here so that people will move back in. We have to figure that out then TELL the politicians what WE want and not the other way around. They serve us, we don't serve them but most have forgotten that.

It's a new day, ladies and gentlemen. Let's control it.

mnortyreport said...

I peruse this blog, infrequently, mainly to read inside political information so I'm not a political insider like most that have commented. I must comment on the view submitted since the mayoral election. I'm surprised that you honestly thought CC could win. I live in Midtown and most of the people that would admit to following the mayoral race stated overwhemingly that they planned to vote for HM. Out of 10 midtowners 2 would admit to planning to vote for Chumney. The CC voters were not turned on by CC but simply wanted change in the direction of the city. I do not know much about running for political office but this was not a good sign to me. The premise stood in the final tally of the votes, not many, showed to vote against Herenton. The obvious validation evidenced in the results is: most Memphians did not show to vote for Morris or Chumney. Herenton won with about the same number of votes as 2004 election with only him and Willingham, in the race. Willingham, I believe garnered 30K votes: does anyone believe he could beat Herenton in a one-on-one? CC and HM garnered anti-Herenton votes which is never going to be enough to win any city-wide election. Most people I know do not like CC because she has done nothing while on the council. CC would not have been a good mayor, she is good at complaining but lacks creative thought and definitely lacks management experience, which is one of the largest day to day activities of the mayor. She reminds me of a woman I worked with, she constantly complained about how the company was ran and how she would do things differently. She got her shot, amazingly since noone on her team actually thought she was competent. With her shot she could not fix any of the problems she so readily identified. Like CC she was good at yelling out "FIRE" but cannot create a plan of action and execute it. I think most people saw right through CC. The CC and HM campaign had flaws that were amplified because they were running against a political veteran. You cannot blaim the CA, HM voters or "Shake the Hater's off" campaign for these flaws.
One-on-one Herenton would only lose to AC and anyone that cannot see that may not be as astute politically as this blog sets out to be.
Voters did not embrace CC not because of gender or race but CC herself. She is an abrasive, grandstander that had more to say about what the mayor was not doing (debate etc.) than her solutions and vision for the city.