We’re Holding Out for the Candidate Who Grinds His Own Soybeans
At the Democratic primary forum, candidates illustrated what it takes to get elected in A2: “selling points such as ‘I don’t own a car’ or ‘If it helps, I’ve never been inside a Wal-Mart.’” We would have more to say, but this sounds like something you’d have needed a television to watch.
Which must be why I missed it. My question is what can the ANN ARBOR CITY COUNCIL do about such issues as a woman’s right to choose, universal health care, and affirmative action? These are certainly important issues, but wouldn’t it be more useful for candidates to debate policies that they might actually have a say about, such as increasing the density of development downtown and attracting new businesses such as Google?
posted by Emily on July 17th, 2006 at 4:24 pmI remember when Tobi Hannah-Davies would put up proposals having to do with beach erosion in Micronesia in council. Classic Ann Arbor.
posted by OFWinsurgent on July 17th, 2006 at 5:54 pmEmily, they will do the same thing for universal health care, affirmative action, and abortion they do every year: nothing. Like most orginzations in Ann Arbor and UM, they think they can dictate federal and world politics. I really wish there was another party besides the democrats. Libertarian, Green Party, hell, I would vote Republican if I liked the candidate.
posted by Mark on July 17th, 2006 at 7:36 pmThe candidates only answered the questions. The audience asked them.
posted by Dustin on July 17th, 2006 at 11:11 pmDid any of them tell us what they will do about the war in Iraq? How about global warming and nukes in Iran and North Korea? I’ll bet some of them will really put their foot down about that stuff. Thank god, eh?
posted by OFWinsurgent on July 18th, 2006 at 12:24 amYeah, if the things that make them all Democrats are the federal issues of universal health care and opposition to the war in Iraq, it’s as if the label has lost all meaning. Wait a minute…
I think it would be healthy for the party if there were a moderate Republican or two running and/or winning a council seat. At the very least, it would take some of the focus off the petty and largely inappropriate issues like greenwashing the downtown.
posted by Dale on July 18th, 2006 at 12:46 amThe pathetic thing is that many of the democrats in this town use progressive issues from the state or national scene to cover the fact that the from a local standpoint, they are not progressive.
posted by OFWinsurgent on July 18th, 2006 at 12:49 amDo I sound too sarcastic? (the result of living in the OFW for low, these many years).
posted by OFWinsurgent on July 18th, 2006 at 12:52 amNo way, politicians pandering to their audience? Lemme guess. Someone’s religious and voted for Bush.
posted by Obvious Man on July 18th, 2006 at 1:09 amTry getting the average American interested in local politics. It’s incredibly difficult b/c it’s perceived as not exciting. If we could harness the rage some Ann Arbor people feel about Bush and use that energy to focus on local issues, it’d be unreal. Take it from someone who’s trying to organize a precinct–local issues tend not to get people exercised.
posted by Young OWSider on July 18th, 2006 at 6:24 amIf there were a set of media that kept these issues front and center, I think people would be more engaged. We’re told in any number of ways every day that the nation is going to hell in a handbasket, but the News and Arbor Update are only a small part of informing what the local political scene could be and there really is no partisan media (I’m bracketing the News as just “mediocre” and not “partisan”), which is of course what motivates people.
posted by Dale on July 18th, 2006 at 9:05 am“I think it would be healthy for the party if there were a moderate Republican or two running and/or winning a council seat.”
I believe there already are. A couple on council, and my guess is elsewhere in town, have changed to democrat in order to be elected. Let’s say there was someone in town here who was really in tune with the local issues, had something meaningful to say about them, and took a moderate approach. Then let’s say they ran as republican. Not a chance they are elected.
The reality in this town is that its lowsy with demo-lemmings who would vote for a one-armed monkey if it was democrat. No real stand on local issues is necessary to get elected as a big D! That’s why the forum turns into a liberal clusterfuck of national issues.
“Oh! I just can’t stand that Bush.” “Yeah, yeah…me too!”
posted by Robert Moses on July 18th, 2006 at 12:20 pmLiberals in Chicago traditionally ran as Republicans, and traditionally lost, but they lost because they were too liberal (and because of the Daley Machine), not because voters saw the “R” and assumed they must be conservatives.
posted by ann arbor is overrated on July 18th, 2006 at 12:32 pmRight, but this isn’t Chicago, and the dynamics are very different.
For one thing, we don’t have millions of immigrants and the children of immigrants living in tight-knit communities, who instinctively vote for candidates of their own ethnic group. We don’t have thousands of city employees who owe their jobs to doing political work in their precincts for the dominant party machine.
Ann Arbor city employees are unionized civil service workers who don’t need to worry about politics, and most of them live outside the city. There’s hardly any precinct level organization here at all. And “tight-knit” hardly describes a town full of people who grew up elsewhere. People from Maryland and California and Illinois and New York only have national politics in common.
Ann Arbor, like most places (probably even Chicago) is affected by the intensifying national political schism. Events and personalities in Washington DC have sharply defined what it means to be a Republican and what it means to be a Democrat. No surprise that Ann Arborites aren’t interested in candidates willing to be labeled with the other side’s values.\
What’s not as clear is what “progressive” means when applied to local issues. Both pro- and anti-development folks see themselves as motivated by their liberal political views.
posted by Larry Kestenbaum on July 18th, 2006 at 12:46 pmIs it really that unclear, though? A lot of people we consider conservative on national issues would say that they are actually classical liberals, but we still label them conservative. These kinds of labels never capture all the nuances of politics, but I don’t see how it’s harder to apply them to local issues.
posted by ann arbor is overrated on July 18th, 2006 at 1:12 pmSee OFWI’s comment above about city officials who “use” national issues to “cover” their non-progressiveness on local issues. Pretty much that exact same comment can (and does) come from (1) people who mean “the city council isn’t green enough” (i.e., too easy on developers) and (2) people who mean “the city council isn’t pro-housing enough” (i.e., too hard on developers).
I know it seems obvious to each side that the other is betraying progressivism and/or are right-wing Republicans in disguise, but neither one can claim that view as consensus reality.
posted by Larry Kestenbaum on July 18th, 2006 at 2:34 pm“The City Council isn’t green or pro-housing enough. But some of the folks running against them are even worse.”
posted by Brandon on July 18th, 2006 at 2:50 pm“Events and personalities in Washington DC have sharply defined what it means to be a Republican and what it means to be a Democrat.”
That’s funny, because I can’t remember a time when it ever seemed more apparent that there is no real difference between both wings of the Party of Gargantuan Government.
posted by Dave on July 18th, 2006 at 3:41 pmThere is not a greener city in the state and except for Chicago, the whole midwest. At least this city council is way more pro-housing than those in the past.
posted by Dustin on July 18th, 2006 at 11:32 pmSo, Wisconsin isn’t in the midwest anymore? You are totally writing off Madison, Dustin?
posted by Chris on July 19th, 2006 at 12:13 pmOooooooooh, Dustin! Now you’ve gone and done it. The last time someone wrote off Madison, well, let’s just say that it was the LAST thing he wrote off.
posted by Parking Structure Dude! on July 19th, 2006 at 1:23 pmDamn skippy!
posted by Chris on July 19th, 2006 at 2:12 pmHas anyone mentioned the Chicago foie gras ban here yet? Is it still legal to sell foie gras in Ann Arbor?
posted by A Different Jon on July 19th, 2006 at 11:15 pmOk, Madison is OK too. But, do they have a green energy program to top A2’s, 30% by 2010 for city government? Do they run on landfill gas & bio-diesel? Do they recycle more than 50% of their waste stream? Do they have a greenbelt. Do they spend insanely on parks?
posted by Dustin on July 20th, 2006 at 12:04 am