That wasn't bad. It wasn't great either. Most points made by each candidate I, and I assume most others who read this blog, already knew. Two very similar candidates on most issues with a couple very different views on some key issues, particularly crime. I will say neither particularly stood out to me. Although, it's very obvious one is more comfortable in front of the camera than the other.Molly seemed to have legit reasons for contributioins coming in from outside the ward and her contribution from Berrios, but it's still rather frightening if what James said is true about 90% of her money is from outside the ward. Of course, I'd like to get myself a comparison of actual dollar amounts, not percentages, because it is possible(albeit highly unlikely) that her dollar amount inside the ward is still close to James, but not so when looking at percentages.James also had what seemed like a lot more personal experience in the ward, which we all already knew. Seemed a lot easier for him to share a story of something he has already accomplished(ie Maryville) among many other things. One thing I'd like to see from James is to be a little tougher, I can only put up with "mediators" so much, sometimes you just gotta lay down the hammer.Molly's actions with FWY shows laying down the hammer so to speak, but I'd also like to see/hear some examples of how she has worked as a so called "mediator" too.My opinion, two good candidates, almost equally qualified for the actual job as Alderman, I'd be happy with either.(Que the screaming of "You wont hear anything about Molly working with the community because she hasn't!" crowd)-that was a joke, sorta.
Yes, two good candidates for sure.Molly seemed less 'camera ready' (but that's not necessarily a bad thing)What sticks in my mind, is that James has gone up against (and nearly beat) Shiller. I think his priorities are on track.
I believe that the 90% figure of contributions to Molly, although this figure obviously changes as more contributions come in, refers to the $ amount of her contributions, not the percentage of contributors from outside of the ward. Molly's contributions from outside the ward are huge in comparison to only a small number and dollar amount going to Cappleman. And Molly has, comparatively, very few small and medium or large $ amount contributors from within the ward. Rob Ross has a helpful map on his web site: http://thegeorgist.blogspot.com/I didn't catch the part of the CLTV "debate" where Molly defended her connections to Berrios, but I may have missed it somehow -- explaining that connection would be difficult to do in light of fairly negative image in the 46th Ward for Berrios, based on the primary vote at least.By the way, the latest vote tally from the Chicago Board of Elections (today) is Cappleman - 2,732 votes to Phelan - 2,727 votes. I heard Molly say at several interviews (and I personally corrected her misinformation to the Emily's List blog) about "winning the most votes"... don't count your chickens..., I guess.
Capstone...Such unbiased insight. Refreshing and rich
How can you say Phelan did anything but fail? She gave no concrete examples of good works she's done, while Cappleman gave several; she out-and-out lied about several things; and she barely answered any questions directly. Anyone on the fence about who to vote for had to be swayed by her alarming performance, and by Cappleman's thoughtful responses.