Nuts for Nutter
So I'm back where I started. Actually, I'm not sure I ever really left. But, I can say that I did consider the options before I made my final decision. And apparently, I did it just in time -- when the wave was with him.
I believe that Spin Dentist from All Spin Zone expresses my views perfectly (saving me the time & trouble of writing it myself):
Yet, I haven't seen any other reasonable alternatives to address the problem from the other candidates either -- other than a response like that of Fattah, which was dismissive of Nutter's platform with a racially polarizing rant, Outraged reaction at race's inclusion in the race. The other candidates propose more police on the street. Without more, what will that do? I'm old enough to remember the reign of Rizzo. Absent proper oversight, it will just result in more stop & frisks, or worse, right? Of course, this is Pennsylvania, so forget "gun control" laws as a potential alternative pro-life policy that has any chance of passage in my lifetime, at least while there is a human left standing (or a gun to be sold to that human).
On the other hand, I've never been a "litmus test" voter. I can accept someone who does not agree with all of my positions -- even important ones. For example, I supported Bob Casey for Senate, even though I knew that he was not pro choice, see e.g., Ricky's Gotta Go. Likewise, I may strenuously disagree with the stop & frisk policy (police abuse is police abuse, even for the best of motives), yet I still think that overall, Nutter is the best choice for our city. As Dave Davies of the Daily News said, in How would Nutter stack up as a leader?:
As Dave Davies said in another piece, this has been A really different Philly primary. Unlike the last mayoral race, when we were dealing with wiretaps in the mayor's office, the focus has been more on the issues and the platforms of the candidates than on race or negative campaigning. No wonder John Street (the subject -- and beneficiary of -- the wiretaps) labeled this election "boring." See Street wants some buttons, darnit.
Give me quality boring any day over John Street. As with the end of the Bush time, I'm counting the days.
UPDATE (5/12): More on why Nutter from Phawker.
I believe that Spin Dentist from All Spin Zone expresses my views perfectly (saving me the time & trouble of writing it myself):
I had narrowed my support down to two candidates for a very long time. Bob Brady is the Democratic Machine personified here in Philly, and that way leads to corruption in my view. Brady’s got the unions endorsing him, but that means the union bosses here in Philly, and not a real sign of who the working man likes. Dwight Evans is a good man, and he might be able to provide fine linkages to the PA Statehouse, but Dwight is a career guy in the Statehouse, and I’m wondering how he relates to me, a simple city resident. Same with Chaka Fattah, I suppose. Boy he’s been a US Congressman for a long time, and I’ve little quarrel with the work he does. Sure, there are people in his District that love him, but I’m unconvinced that he’s as focused on Philly as he is on his political career. . . . Good man, but not the best for the job.My biggest concern with Nutter has been his "stop & frisk" proposal, Nutter's 'stop & frisk' emerges as flash point. I'm not quarreling with the fact that a crisis situation exists in Philly, which needs to be dealt with, based upon the gun violence that has made Philly the Baghdad of the United States. I'm just not crazy about any infringement of our constitutional rights, whether it originates from the left or the right.
That’s what has been the wonderful thing this primary season. We had four good candidates, Nutter, Fattah, Evans and Knox. Tom Knox impressed me because of his work with the Rendell administration. . . . He’s a businessman who promises to make Philly run more like a business, and if he finances his campaign with his own wealth that tells me he is committed, not that he’s somehow “buying” the office. But I wonder how he gets anything done. City Council is a big stumbling block in this city. Sure, one can have goals of increasing police on the streets, of cutting waste and making the city itself more productive. All good ideas. But Knox would have to work with City Council to get that done, and he hasn’t the experience.* * * *That leaves Michael Nutter.* * * *
Michael Nutter, as the Philadelphia Daily News notes, is strong against corruption, strong for dealing with the onerous city wage tax, and strong on ethics. He’s a policy wonk concerning the budgeting process, and Michael Nutter is genuinely concerned that the crime rate in this city is an emergency. As they say in the Daily News, he’s got “smarts and integrity.” I’m buying it. The Philadelphia Inquirer sold me when they noted that the people of Philly want someone with “emotional intelligence.” It may be a cliche someday, but it’s what I see in Michael Nutter on a personal basis. He’ll remember me and my concerns, and he’s got the smarts to connect those concerns to the big picture of budgets, crime, job creation, etc.
Yet, I haven't seen any other reasonable alternatives to address the problem from the other candidates either -- other than a response like that of Fattah, which was dismissive of Nutter's platform with a racially polarizing rant, Outraged reaction at race's inclusion in the race. The other candidates propose more police on the street. Without more, what will that do? I'm old enough to remember the reign of Rizzo. Absent proper oversight, it will just result in more stop & frisks, or worse, right? Of course, this is Pennsylvania, so forget "gun control" laws as a potential alternative pro-life policy that has any chance of passage in my lifetime, at least while there is a human left standing (or a gun to be sold to that human).
On the other hand, I've never been a "litmus test" voter. I can accept someone who does not agree with all of my positions -- even important ones. For example, I supported Bob Casey for Senate, even though I knew that he was not pro choice, see e.g., Ricky's Gotta Go. Likewise, I may strenuously disagree with the stop & frisk policy (police abuse is police abuse, even for the best of motives), yet I still think that overall, Nutter is the best choice for our city. As Dave Davies of the Daily News said, in How would Nutter stack up as a leader?:
In 15 years on City Council, Nutter has amassed an impressive record of legislative accomplishment, including a smoking ban and some of the most far-reaching ethics reforms in the nation.Ultimately, that's what counts. I'm a believer, like Bill Maher, that "elite" should not be a bad word when it comes to politicians. I want an "elite" doctor to help me when I'm sick and an elite politician to make my city better.
He's known for long hours and hard work. He has a reputation for intelligence, honesty and persistence, and has long been a favorite of good-government policy wonks.
As Dave Davies said in another piece, this has been A really different Philly primary. Unlike the last mayoral race, when we were dealing with wiretaps in the mayor's office, the focus has been more on the issues and the platforms of the candidates than on race or negative campaigning. No wonder John Street (the subject -- and beneficiary of -- the wiretaps) labeled this election "boring." See Street wants some buttons, darnit.
Give me quality boring any day over John Street. As with the end of the Bush time, I'm counting the days.
UPDATE (5/12): More on why Nutter from Phawker.
Tags:
2 comments:
I love that you think my analysis helped you make a decision. But why aren't we on your blogroll, man?
Seriously, thanks for the lengthy quoting of me.
My bad. I thought that you were. It's all fixed now.
Thanks for the insights. Enjoy your blog.
Post a Comment