Times-Union endorses Lenny Curry

[vicupstate]

I can't help but face palm every time I hear, "vote for Brown and it's only 4 years and vote for Curry and we will get eight".  It is a self-fulfilling prophecy proving that the incumbent can't be beat.  Anyone voting for or advocating for voting Brown for that reason, are proving themselves right and I believe at the city's expense.  We know what the next four years will bring us with Brown.  We do not know what the next four years will bring with Curry.  And if we don't like what he brings, we can vote him out. Change is often good and most often better than mediocre status-quot.

Hey, think Brown is the best choice?  Then vote for him.  But do not vote for him only because it is "only four more years".  Vote for who you think is the best choice at this point based on something real. No matter, what remember that in four years, we get to try again.

Two words: John Peyton.

He had a terrible first term, and despite weak polling he didn't even get a significant opponent, much less a tough race.  Curry brings even less to the table than he did. If elected, he would have to do a terrible job to not be re-elected, and even then he would still have a fighting chance.

There is no education in the second kick of the mule.    Sometimes the lesser of two evils is the best you can do.

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

^^^Wow digging up a post from  6 years ago when I was still basically a teenager to demean me and make my views today somehow less credible.

-1000 because

a) that's super stalkerish (and you seriously keep tabs)

b) you discount growth people go through in their 20s and throughout their lives

c) you're discounting the fact that I'm at least openly gay, which is not something a lot of people in Jax are able to grapple with at any point in their lives

d) you're discounting that the gay community itself can have a diversity of people and a diversity of views at least as great as any other group of people.


This is frankly the most despicable thing I've seen directed at me on this site, ever.  I have no qualms and no regrets about anything I've done in my life, or any view I've held.  But continue to save away my posts for whenever you feel like trying to use them against me

I had a small chuckle reading this.  And I only say this because your online persona is that of a... to put it mildly, a pompous, silver-spoon fed ********, but maybe away from the keyboard you're a swell human being.

But after reading the quote that finehoe pulled up, I'm truly glad you're in a better place now with your views.  Because frankly, it read as though you despised not only your peergroup, but yourself as well.  That is unhealthy.
 

[Cheshire Cat]

Life is much too short to accept mediocre results.

Better four years of mediocrity than eight.

The difference is that mediocrity is the worst case scenario for Curry, but it's the best case scenario for Brown. He'd have to step up to reach mediocrity considering how the last 4 years have gone.

No, eight years of austerity, a return to the corrupt developer driven planning schemes of the previous administration and missed opportunities are worse than mediocrity. Combine that with a man in a very powerful office known for vengeance, petty reprisals and deeply divisive policies and you have the makings of a real witches cauldron.

I don't know how any "austerity" measures may be implemented that would be perceptibly different or worse than what we're dealing with now. The budget is a nightmare, we can't maintain our infrastructure, and we can't fund basic services.

I can't help but face palm every time I hear, "vote for Brown and it's only 4 years and vote for Curry and we will get eight".  It is a self-fulfilling prophecy proving that the incumbent can't be beat.  Anyone voting for or advocating for voting Brown for that reason, are proving themselves right and I believe at the city's expense.  We know what the next four years will bring us with Brown.  We do not know what the next four years will bring with Curry.  And if we don't like what he brings, we can vote him out. Change is often good and most often better than mediocre status-quot.

Hey, think Brown is the best choice?  Then vote for him.  But do not vote for him only because it is "only four more years".  Vote for who you think is the best choice at this point based on something real. No matter, what remember that in four years, we get to try again.

Maybe you can stop doing the face palm if you factor in all of the aspects to consider when folks say four more years of Brown is better than eight years of Curry.  We do now know Browns weaknesses so he is a known factor.  We also know that we will be retaining some of our most solid and competent council members with several new members.  A decent council can counterbalance Brown's weaknesses along with the potential realization that Brown himself now understands that his weaknesses have put him in this hotly contested race right now.  That had to have made an impact at some level. We also will hopefully see a sound and informed individual replace Chris Hand. I would love to see that person be Bill Bishop.  I believe you are mistaken if you believe that were Curry elected we would have the chance at a do over in four years.  If Curry gets in, the GOP will pull out all of the stops to keep him in office.  Anyone challenging Curry as an incumbent would need more than a couple of million to do that.  I don't see the local Dems coming up with a candidate that could challenge him and his support in four years.

It's all a calculation and goes deep into the future political landscape. 

[Tacachale]

I can't help but face palm every time I hear, "vote for Brown and it's only 4 years and vote for Curry and we will get eight".  It is a self-fulfilling prophecy proving that the incumbent can't be beat.  Anyone voting for or advocating for voting Brown for that reason, are proving themselves right and I believe at the city's expense.  We know what the next four years will bring us with Brown.  We do not know what the next four years will bring with Curry.  And if we don't like what he brings, we can vote him out. Change is often good and most often better than mediocre status-quot.

Hey, think Brown is the best choice?  Then vote for him.  But do not vote for him only because it is "only four more years".  Vote for who you think is the best choice at this point based on something real. No matter, what remember that in four years, we get to try again.

Two words: John Peyton.

He had a terrible first term, and despite weak polling he didn't even get a significant opponent, much less a tough race.  Curry brings even less to the table than he did. If elected, he would have to do a terrible job to not be re-elected, and even then he would still have a fighting chance.

There is no education in the second kick of the mule.    Sometimes the lesser of two evils is the best you can do.

If Curry is anywhere close to the level of John Peyton, it will be a monumental improvement over what we've got. As you say, sometimes the lesser of two evils is the best you can do.

[Cheshire Cat]

I can't help but face palm every time I hear, "vote for Brown and it's only 4 years and vote for Curry and we will get eight".  It is a self-fulfilling prophecy proving that the incumbent can't be beat.  Anyone voting for or advocating for voting Brown for that reason, are proving themselves right and I believe at the city's expense.  We know what the next four years will bring us with Brown.  We do not know what the next four years will bring with Curry.  And if we don't like what he brings, we can vote him out. Change is often good and most often better than mediocre status-quot.

Hey, think Brown is the best choice?  Then vote for him.  But do not vote for him only because it is "only four more years".  Vote for who you think is the best choice at this point based on something real. No matter, what remember that in four years, we get to try again.

Two words: John Peyton.

He had a terrible first term, and despite weak polling he didn't even get a significant opponent, much less a tough race.  Curry brings even less to the table than he did. If elected, he would have to do a terrible job to not be re-elected, and even then he would still have a fighting chance.

There is no education in the second kick of the mule.    Sometimes the lesser of two evils is the best you can do.

If Curry is anywhere close to the level of John Peyton, it will be a monumental improvement over what we've got. As you say, sometimes the lesser of two evils is the best you can do.

Not so.  Peyton did a lot of harm during his days in office and some of his missteps ended in a Grand Jury investigation.  Short memories forget that. 

[tufsu1]

It is how it is out here par for the course. I would look back and see if Hogan was ahead at this juncture 4 years ago,

the answer is yes

[Tacachale]

I can't help but face palm every time I hear, "vote for Brown and it's only 4 years and vote for Curry and we will get eight".  It is a self-fulfilling prophecy proving that the incumbent can't be beat.  Anyone voting for or advocating for voting Brown for that reason, are proving themselves right and I believe at the city's expense.  We know what the next four years will bring us with Brown.  We do not know what the next four years will bring with Curry.  And if we don't like what he brings, we can vote him out. Change is often good and most often better than mediocre status-quot.

Hey, think Brown is the best choice?  Then vote for him.  But do not vote for him only because it is "only four more years".  Vote for who you think is the best choice at this point based on something real. No matter, what remember that in four years, we get to try again.

Two words: John Peyton.

He had a terrible first term, and despite weak polling he didn't even get a significant opponent, much less a tough race.  Curry brings even less to the table than he did. If elected, he would have to do a terrible job to not be re-elected, and even then he would still have a fighting chance.

There is no education in the second kick of the mule.    Sometimes the lesser of two evils is the best you can do.

If Curry is anywhere close to the level of John Peyton, it will be a monumental improvement over what we've got. As you say, sometimes the lesser of two evils is the best you can do.

Not so.  Peyton did a lot of harm during his days in office and some of his missteps ended in a Grand Jury investigation.  Short memories forget that. 

In the catalogue of my various failings, a short memory is not featured. I'm not defending Peyton but his faults pale in comparison to Brown's. I'm not sure there's ever been a mayor who handled the budget so poorly that the council had to take it from them in the entire history of Jacksonville, for instance.

[edjax]

I can't help but face palm every time I hear, "vote for Brown and it's only 4 years and vote for Curry and we will get eight".  It is a self-fulfilling prophecy proving that the incumbent can't be beat.  Anyone voting for or advocating for voting Brown for that reason, are proving themselves right and I believe at the city's expense.  We know what the next four years will bring us with Brown.  We do not know what the next four years will bring with Curry.  And if we don't like what he brings, we can vote him out. Change is often good and most often better than mediocre status-quot.

Hey, think Brown is the best choice?  Then vote for him.  But do not vote for him only because it is "only four more years".  Vote for who you think is the best choice at this point based on something real. No matter, what remember that in four years, we get to try again.

Two words: John Peyton.

He had a terrible first term, and despite weak polling he didn't even get a significant opponent, much less a tough race.  Curry brings even less to the table than he did. If elected, he would have to do a terrible job to not be re-elected, and even then he would still have a fighting chance.

There is no education in the second kick of the mule.    Sometimes the lesser of two evils is the best you can do.

So does the fact that Brown is in a major dogfight to get re elected mean he has done a terrible job ??  Since you state if Curry was elected the only way he would not get re-elected is to have been terrible in his first term.  Seems the same would be applicable to Brown.  So since so close, perhaps Brown has been terrible and does not get elected again. Perhaps then not a real problem if Curry elected.

[vicupstate]

I can't help but face palm every time I hear, "vote for Brown and it's only 4 years and vote for Curry and we will get eight".  It is a self-fulfilling prophecy proving that the incumbent can't be beat.  Anyone voting for or advocating for voting Brown for that reason, are proving themselves right and I believe at the city's expense.  We know what the next four years will bring us with Brown.  We do not know what the next four years will bring with Curry.  And if we don't like what he brings, we can vote him out. Change is often good and most often better than mediocre status-quot.

Hey, think Brown is the best choice?  Then vote for him.  But do not vote for him only because it is "only four more years".  Vote for who you think is the best choice at this point based on something real. No matter, what remember that in four years, we get to try again.

Two words: John Peyton.

He had a terrible first term, and despite weak polling he didn't even get a significant opponent, much less a tough race.  Curry brings even less to the table than he did. If elected, he would have to do a terrible job to not be re-elected, and even then he would still have a fighting chance.

There is no education in the second kick of the mule.    Sometimes the lesser of two evils is the best you can do.

So does the fact that Brown is in a major dogfight to get re elected mean he has done a terrible job ??  Since you state if Curry was elected the only way he would not get re-elected is to have been terrible in his first term.  Seems the same would be applicable to Brown.  So since so close, perhaps Brown has been terrible and does not get elected again. Perhaps then not a real problem if Curry elected.

Jacksonville is an overwhelmingly GOP city, all other things being equal, that puts the GOP candidate at a significant advantage. Just ask Nat Glover.   Incumbency helps tilt the scales more towards a balance, but not enough to get it to even when the incumbent's record is less than sterling. A Democrat will always have to work harder to win.  Mike Hogan thought the Republican could just phone it in and win, and he was almost right.   

[edjax]

I can't help but face palm every time I hear, "vote for Brown and it's only 4 years and vote for Curry and we will get eight".  It is a self-fulfilling prophecy proving that the incumbent can't be beat.  Anyone voting for or advocating for voting Brown for that reason, are proving themselves right and I believe at the city's expense.  We know what the next four years will bring us with Brown.  We do not know what the next four years will bring with Curry.  And if we don't like what he brings, we can vote him out. Change is often good and most often better than mediocre status-quot.

Hey, think Brown is the best choice?  Then vote for him.  But do not vote for him only because it is "only four more years".  Vote for who you think is the best choice at this point based on something real. No matter, what remember that in four years, we get to try again.

Two words: John Peyton.

He had a terrible first term, and despite weak polling he didn't even get a significant opponent, much less a tough race.  Curry brings even less to the table than he did. If elected, he would have to do a terrible job to not be re-elected, and even then he would still have a fighting chance.

There is no education in the second kick of the mule.    Sometimes the lesser of two evils is the best you can do.

So does the fact that Brown is in a major dogfight to get re elected mean he has done a terrible job ??  Since you state if Curry was elected the only way he would not get re-elected is to have been terrible in his first term.  Seems the same would be applicable to Brown.  So since so close, perhaps Brown has been terrible and does not get elected again. Perhaps then not a real problem if Curry elected.

Jacksonville is an overwhelmingly GOP city, all other things being equal, that puts the GOP candidate at a significant advantage. Just ask Nat Glover.   Incumbency helps tilt the scales more towards a balance, but not enough to get it to even when the incumbent's record is less than sterling. A Democrat will always have to work harder to win.  Mike Hogan thought the Republican could just phone it in and win, and he was almost right.   

There are 26,000 more democrats registered in Duval County than Republicans. So no it is not an overwhelmingly GOP city.  Perhaps just that the Republicans make it more of an issue to get involved in the city politics on a consistent basis.

[strider]

When I factor in all the aspects of having Brown for four more years, I see time stopping right here.  I see that this is the best we can expect.  I do not see hope.  I do not see change.  Is it all bad?  No, but I do not see the good as anything but accidental to this administration and those powerful money people behind it.

With both candidates receiving millions to spend trying to get elected to what is essentially a poorly paid, high stress CEO position, how can anyone think that aspect will change with either candidate?  So I looked for some small place to find hope. 

I found it with the fact that a new Mayor can bring in new appointees who may improve how some of the departments are run. If just one or two departments end up doing a better job at serving the public, then the change was worth it.  Just some small reason to help make a decision between bad and bad.

Frankly, voting for Brown because "it is just four more years" is not looking to the future, it is looking to the past and repeating the same old mistakes. It is basically the same as if you were saying you must always vote Democrat or Republican.  Find something you think one candidate or the other will DO better and make your decision on that. Just this average Joe's opinion, of course.

[Cheshire Cat]

^Except you are not factoring the known political entity of Lenny Curry and who drives him.    As I said earlier on another thread, I was really conflicted about this vote for mayor.  I can imagine others are struggling with their decision as well.  We are now down to talking about who is the lesser of two evils as opposed to who has a real plan to move this city in a more positive direction.  Frankly, I can see the arguments from both sides.  We all just have to make our own best decision.  I think discussion about our own processes is helpful because it gives another perspective about the candidates and choices, which is much better than pick a party label and vote according to that.   IMO

[strider]

Except you are not factoring the known political entity of Lenny Curry  Alvin Brown and who drives him.

The real problem is that it does indeed work both ways.

For me, and yes, just my opinion, when I do take all the known factors in, I still see no chance of change except the possibility of new appointees regardless of who gets elected.  We know what Brown's people can do.  That leaves Curry as an opportunity for change and  makes me think Curry is worth a shot.

[Cheshire Cat]

Except you are not factoring the known political entity of Lenny Curry  Alvin Brown and who drives him.

The real problem is that it does indeed work both ways.

For me, and yes, just my opinion, when I do take all the known factors in, I still see no chance of change except the possibility of new appointees regardless of who gets elected.  We know what Brown's people can do.  That leaves Curry as an opportunity for change and  makes me think Curry is worth a shot.

You did read my statements about this being a very conflicting choice but we have to make one or not vote?  I always vote so I made my choice using my own insights.  You of course can make your own but please understand that depending on ones focus there is plenty of fault to be found with both.  I have said that repeatedly. 

[strider]

Diane, you are the one who said: "^Except you are not factoring the known political entity of Lenny Curry and who drives him."  to me.  That means you are telling me I am not doing it right and implies my opinion is flawed.  Frankly, it may be but certainly no more than yours. I am reading your statements.  That's why I posted. Because BOTH opinions matter to some degree and do so equally, in my opinion. Which means they mean a lot, a bit or not at all to everyone else. But that is the purpose of this forum, an exchange of ideas, for better or worse.