Bill Bishop makes "No" endorsement for Mayor!

[I-10east]

^^^Can we just end the conversation dude? I've never saw someone so persistently argumentative like you. I replied like that because I'm not impressed with your condescending attitude (All this from my experience and knowledge) among other things, okay your highness. I was hoping that you would've followed your sentence #16, but you didn't. You can think that 'you won the argument' or whatever, but I'm so over this back & forth with you LOL.

[MEGATRON]

See?  That's the difference in me and them.  I DID NOT get in a "tizzy".  Stating facts that disagree w/ your 'opinion" is NOT a tizzy.  It's just stating facts. I am not antagonistic.  I am prepared to continue to comment when I feel necessary.  W2hen I continue seeing baseless arguments just to be negative, I'm calling out for some facts.  Or some links.  The idea that someone challenges your life long beliefs may be confusing to you, but not to me.  I like giving facts with many of my comments, unless I preface it with 'my opinion".

I challenge you to literally give me facts about Cleveland Arms shooting by JSO, where you can state without you backtracking that I'm in a "tizzy".  I'm unsure what uncivil disagreements we have had, only my facts seem to be not what you want to hear.  My comments are not for your pleasure.  Just mine.

I made this simple comment below.

I'm not gonna lie, I was very underwhelmed with the lack of a 'surprising announcement' that it was rumored to be.

Then you turned that into a controversy, but you're aren't in a tizzy. You thought that I was attacking you with the Cleveland Arm thing just because I said 'Sadly many liberals side with the victims' when that wasn't the case. Why are you so freaking interested in protecting that dude in Cleveland Arms? You don't know him from Adam from Steve, but you insist on his innocence. There is no denying that he beaten his girlfriend; I guess that you're gonna deny that he kicked a neighbors door down, and he didn't resist arrest either.

Last thing; Are you the poster 'JaxNative68'? It seems like it, because that person also don't know how to brush stuff off his shoulders. I got too much of a short memory to continuously bicker with someone over an opinion. We all don't have to agree politically, contrary to popular belief.   

I'm taking one at a time so you don't get confused;
1. Your "simple comment" what you feel benign is a simple comment.  I then commented I thought your underwhelm feelings were underwhelming to me.  Cool on this?  YOu thought Bill Bishop's statement was underwhelming, while I thought your comment was underwhelming. Problem?  Okay cool,  lets go to
2. What kind of controversy did I turn this in?  Seriously, I've looked back at thread and have no idea what you are saying or implying.   Okay, just for you I'm posting the exact wording I used. "I'm not gonna lie,, I was very underwhelmed with the lack of an "interesting comment" that you took time & energy to write.  We both; not impressed."  What part was so controversial?  Where did I get into the "tizzy", not "tizzy' format?
3.You come back with the ole....well you took the time, so you are bad too attitude. 
4.Your exact comment QUOTE "I rarely 'call anyone out' I normally just say my opinion telling it like it is non-politically, and then people like you or StephenDare usually attack it because it doesn't fit the liberal agenda; Just like the whole Cleveland Arms issue that you got all in a tizzy over. Jax native, you're starting to make even StephenDare look reasonable, being so antagonistic and all. Me and Lakelander don't see eye to eye on some issues, but I NEVER had an uncivil disagreement with him; That's the difference between him, and many others on MJ."
5. How on God's green earth did I become so antagonistic with you or anyone?? How did this turn in to ME not being able to have an "uncivil conversation"'?   
6. I personally, feel you do not have a entirely realistic,  way to articulate facts and in turn take to criticizing anyone who disagrees. 
7. Again, as I have Stated previously, I have no horse in this race on Cleveland Arms shooting by JSO.  I have the legal background to view this as illegal and JSO had no probably cause, except JSO Hackney's multiple interviews.  I don't know the suspect, victim, shooter, or person who was shot.  BUT, I do have concern about the average citizen in Jacksonville, Fl and surrounding areas the right given to us by the USA Constitution. It's not hard, it's clear. There is a giant question about whether JSO had probable cause to shoot this UNARMED (because the taser gig is wrong) man for running from them.  They could arrest him for resisting arrest, but thats a misdemeanor and JSO has no right to shoot to kill a person committing an misdemeanor.
8. JSO has the duty to stop the irrational hysterical conflict happening at the apartments, where they started the battle.  JSO escalated the situation about one million times by their erratic and adrenaline filled reactions. 
9. JSO has the order, law and pledge to not do what they did.  JSO ordered the guy to stop, but then told him, he was being arrested.  JSO had no right.  JSO can not arrest a person accused of misdemeanor and can not arrest unless they witnessed crime.  This is where JSO's story takes a dive.  NOT one person will back up the story of the ONE jSO who pleads he saw the "strangling" of which was not strangling.  The desire for JSO to immediately put this myth out was too much. 
10. JSO was the "tho who protested too much".
11. All this from my experience and knowledge.
12. I don't respond to comments by only making a snarky comments as is obvious many do, so when I see BS, I usually call it out.
13. I saw BS, so i asked you back up comments which you couldn't and you could only reply by calling me names.
14. I'm NOT jaxnative....  I had no idea there was another jaxnative when I chose my name, but I Do Not log in on different names to just agree with myself.
15. I do apologize for other jaxnative... for getting them involved with my comments, becausewe are not one in thesaqme.
16. Any substantive comments will be welcomed.  Any other comments with no knowledge & full of snarky words probably will not be answered.
17. Hopefully this will clear up any misinformation you have or invalid thoughts you have about me. 
18. Again, Thoughtful questions will be answered.

[I-10east]

Put your little stupid 'funny' gif video, all that mumbo jumbo gibberish did nothing for me. Most men stay out of other men's business, but nevermind that...

[Cheshire Cat]

Ask yourself, are these two candidates for mayor talking to Bill Bishop over nothing or perhaps over something "very" important? 

I want to offer some thoughts on the commentary about money and non endorsement in the Bill Bishop race in this thread.  Lets look at some facts and revisit the comments.  In the last election cycle there were 24 races with 67 various candidates for office that ran unopposed or who had qualified.  Every candidate in every race was in the business of funding that race save one in District 14.  Raising funds to run a campaign is simply part of the process.  It is folly to imagine that of the 67 candidates for the various 24 open seats, the 43 who will not end up winning their seats were using the public and local business as their personal ATM.  A candidate does not coerce supporters into giving them money.  The choice is that of the supporter.  People fund candidates willingly for a variety of reasons that range from liking their platform, to their party designation or lack there of, to hoping to secure a seat at the political table where all things Jacksonville are decided if their candidate wins.  While the comment was to one candidate who ran for mayor the truth is that of the two remaining candidates in that race, just one will win, so then are we to imagine that the 2 million plus either of them raised was simply a waste?  No, we can't because the nature of politics is that many will be funded and only a few will be chosen.

Now to the statement about a former candidate declaring their intent or non intent to endorse as "nothing" is simply wrong thinking.  In any race with multiple candidates, those who do not make the runoff but pulled a considerable number of votes are often sought out for the endorsement.  Here is why.  Firstly they understand that the candidate doing the endorsement won the votes of thousands and those thousands were impressed by that candidate.  If they were impressed enough by the candidate to vote for them, they may also be impressed enough to follow the lead of their candidate with an endorsement.  It goes beyond that though to dollars and cents.  Let's use Curry as an example.  In the last race he spent $8.64 per vote that he received putting him in the runoff.  Bill Bishop had 30,944 votes cast in support of him, that equals a whopping $267,356.16 of banked voter equity.  That is over a quarter of a million that Curry or Brown for that matter would not have to spend campaigning for those voters if they got them all.  That is no where near a situation that can be described as "nothing"!  The same benefit would go to Brown who spent $6.80 for every vote he garnered in March.  For Brown that would be over $210,418.20 in banked votes.  The fact that Bishop decided not to endorse meant plenty to the two candidates left in the race and it also sent a message which was mult-layered.  First to the REC who burned Bill by playing games with their endorsement process and secondly to the two remaining candidates who are proposing all manner of solutions to our existing issues, like pension, dredging, more police officers on the stree improvements downtown etc and not telling the people how those things would be paid for.  The secondary message is that if you are running for office and want the support of the people you need to answer their questions straight up without spin as opposed to worn out sound bites which make promises with no explanation as to how our city can pay for those ideas as well as keep itself afloat.  These are the facts and truths behind the campaign process, it's funding and endorsements. 

[I-10east]

^^^I apologize for what this thread has became. You can look back at the comments, and clearly see who the antagonist was.   

[Cheshire Cat]

^Well,  lets just get back on track. 

[I-10east]

^^^I was talking to Diane....Do you always have to butt in everything? Could you be more professional, instead of the continuing the tit for tat crap?

[mtraininjax]

I'll give Bishop credit, at least he would show up and debate and talk about raising taxes. Brown won't even show up for a debate.

http://www.news4jax.com/politics/alvin-brown-declines-debate-with-lenny-curry/32174830

The man has more waffles than Ihop! Where are his supporters? How can you clearly support a man who can't step up to the camera and face his challenger......face to face?