Jump to content



Photo

I'm Confused


  • Please log in to reply
71 replies to this topic

#41 Russell Brooksbank

Russell Brooksbank

    Commissioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,412 posts

Posted 31 October 2015 - 10:45 AM

Here's my cliff notes version: Government should be of, by, and for the people. It's role is to secure our rights. As a Town Councilman I will work to protect our rights, not violate them. I believe that government should be the servant of the people, not the other way around. If elected, I will work hard to govern our government.

Edited by Russell Brooksbank, 31 October 2015 - 10:46 AM.


#42 Savile Row

Savile Row

    Key Club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,922 posts

Posted 31 October 2015 - 10:50 AM

I just got a text from a sage observer.

He says to remind the candidates that:

"The only thing that you can take to to your grave, is yout honor."



#43 Savile Row

Savile Row

    Key Club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,922 posts

Posted 31 October 2015 - 10:59 AM

It would really be interesting  if Russell and the Libertarian Party won their races.

However, the Republicans under Mr. Noel's leadership

are very well organized in Clark County .

Mr.King's signs are nice and fresh.....

Those political signs cost a lot of money....

Putting "yard signs" in medians

at the last minute

does not seem a very smart way

to gather wide scale voter support.

A text that I received asked 

"If you are going to get those nice looking signs,

why would you not put them up earlier and  in people's yards

so that voters could see them for a longer period of time?

Wouldn't it be much more beneficial.....?"

 

It seems that it would be more prudent to try to get some benefit from the nice,

expensive signs  by putting them out long before now.


Edited by Savile Row, 31 October 2015 - 11:20 AM.


#44 Savile Row

Savile Row

    Key Club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,922 posts

Posted 31 October 2015 - 11:08 AM

Sorry, Kelley, about the quick mistake over the Libertarian  vs Independent parties.

Typing too fast, thinking way too slow. Must git to that thar noon lunch thing

to check on the sages :bug: at the Lighthouse....


Edited by Savile Row, 31 October 2015 - 11:09 AM.

  • Russell Brooksbank likes this

#45 Clarksville Voter

Clarksville Voter

    Resident

  • Account Closed
  • PipPip
  • 86 posts

Posted 31 October 2015 - 11:11 AM

 

Mr.King's signs are nice and fresh.

Those political signs cost a lot of money....

Putting "yard signs" in medians does not seem a very sage way to gather wide scale voter support.

A text that I received asked  "If you are going to get those nice looking signs,

why would you not put them up earlier

so that people could see them for a longer period of time?

Wouldn't it be much more beneficial.....?"

It is an act of desperation, SR. The Contract was so important for the citizens of Clarksville just a few weeks ago. Now they have gutted it and about all that is left of their NEW ideas, are stormwater issues. Which are already being done or are done. Pump station at Brown's Station and Lewis & Clark, Pump station at Lakeshore Condos, Maple Court storm lines and Ray Lawrence Park collection system. There are some I left out or don't know of, but there have been many improvements in the past few years. There are still some improvements that are needed, but there is work being done. Their only point left on the contract is already a newer focus of the old board. VISION, yes. But theirs?


Edited by Clarksville Voter, 31 October 2015 - 11:25 AM.


#46 kelley

kelley

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,119 posts

Posted 31 October 2015 - 11:17 AM

2015
Clarksville General Elections

I noticed that that Charles King has emerged
and has both a town wide mailer and a lot of fresh new signs.
Also, Bob McEwen has really been working hard
and has a lot of support. I saw him going door to door several times.
Are these New Democrats going to win?
What is anyone hearing?
How close will the races be on Tuesday?
What are the Republican, Democrat, and Independent organizations
doing with their respective "turn out the vote" strategies?
Jamey and Tom are the R and D party chairs.
I think Kelley is the Libertarian chair.
Has anyone gotten any feedback from them this past week on how they feel things are going?
They should all have a lot of knowledge about how things are shaping up for their teams.


My prediction: my team will meet or exceed our goals.
  • Russell Brooksbank likes this

#47 Savile Row

Savile Row

    Key Club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,922 posts

Posted 31 October 2015 - 11:28 AM

"Wherever you go, there you are."


  • kelley likes this

#48 GrumpyGranny

GrumpyGranny

    Local Legend

  • Administrators
  • 5,166 posts

Posted 31 October 2015 - 04:08 PM

Well, since Sleepy wants us to go read what McEwen said in the voters guide rather than tell us in her words...I did go read what he had to say about district voting.

 

1. He questions whether district voting would serve the people better...then repeats the same question, don't ask me why.

 

2. A person elected for one district can look inept in his/her efforts to help the district if they aren't educated, lack leadership skills and community involvement. 

 

3. The folks he's talked to want a say in the district voting question and if elected he'll insure they let the people decide.

 

My take:

 

1. If he has to question it twice, he doesn't think district voting would serve the people better.

 

2. He believes that the voters in my district, or any other, are too inept to vote in a council person that will serve our district best. 

 

3. He does not mention a survey; is he going to pull a Polston and make his decision after he talks to enough people?


  • kelley, Donna and Clarksville Voter like this

#49 grayarea

grayarea

    Councilman

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 835 posts

Posted 31 October 2015 - 07:14 PM

THEY HAVE LIED TO US

 

Mr. King?

 

Nothing new about Charlie King. Nothing honorable about being on a past Clarksville council in which numerous problems existed. Shoot, you think we'll see Culpepper Cooper reappear if Charlie's elected again. As always, I'm sure Charlie will say a bunch of good, timely, things about him. Nice to see that Mr. King decided to throw some signs up in front of Target. I'm sure they, or the management company that runs the strip mall, approved it. There is one thing Charlie can't, nor can any democrat running for council in Clarksville, ignore in their arrogance. It is simple, it's in print and it has, more than likely, been delivered to your home. As a democrat it pains me to say it, but:

 

THE "NEW DEMOCRATS" HAVE LIED TO YOU

 

The "Contract with Clarksville" they preached upon when sending out their first mailer has now been made a shambles. In an over-sized post card sent to the voters in Clarksville titled "Help Clarksville move forward" they very plainly state that there will not being any consideration of a Town Manager. Nor, that there will be "No district voting". Just more Gang of Four style politics shoved down our throats. You gotta love people of this high moral aptitude that lie and flip-flop on their positions BEFORE they get elected! I'm sure the candidates are loving the idiocy of the Clarksville Democratic PAC. I actually do hate to say this will be the first time I vote a STRAIGHT REPUBLICAN TICKET in a Town race since I moved here in 1977.

 

IT IS TIME THAT TAKE THESE PEOPLE DOWN AND SEND THEM PACKING

 

THEY HAVE  LIED TO US!

And the only evidence you need of it is delivered to your mailbox.

These people want to govern you. Pay attention people. This is crazy!!!

 

Do the right thing Tuesday, send any candidate listed as a "New Democrat" home for four years. Let's have some positive change for once.

 

THEY HAVE LIED TO US


  • GrumpyGranny, TomD, Russell Brooksbank and 2 others like this

#50 Russell Brooksbank

Russell Brooksbank

    Commissioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,412 posts

Posted 31 October 2015 - 08:21 PM

Guess it's time to vote for some Libertarians then, huh? :smile:

#51 TomD

TomD

    Commissioner

  • Moderators
  • 1,076 posts

Posted 31 October 2015 - 08:30 PM

Sleepy, 

I don't need to 'beat a man down' as you say.  Some of our politicians do a good enough job of making themselves look like fools, liars, or flip-floppers without any help from me or anyone else. 

 

When a politician says one thing in the 'Contract with Clarksville', and then something different in the N&T Voters Guide or a political mailer, he exposes himself as dishonest...no help needed. 

 

I don't care how well educated a candidate is or how many boards or committees he (she) has been on.  Without honesty, integrity and a functioning moral compass, he (she) is unfit to hold public office.


  • GrumpyGranny, Donna, Russell Brooksbank and 1 other like this

#52 Russell Brooksbank

Russell Brooksbank

    Commissioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,412 posts

Posted 31 October 2015 - 09:03 PM

It would really be interesting  if Russell and the Libertarian Party won their races.


And it is entirely possible for this to happen. People need to vote for who they believe is best for the job. Both of the "major" parties like to play the "wasted vote" game. No vote is wasted if you are voting for the person you believe is the best one. I would rather vote for someone instead of against someone. In my race the people have a wonderful opportunity. If you don't like the Democrat candidate you don't have to vote for the Republican candidate. The same goes for not liking the Republican candidate. You don't have to vote for the Democrat candidate. The Libertarian Party offers voters the opportunity to vote for someone they can agree with. We just need to get rid of the idea that any party, or candidate, owns our votes.
  • GrumpyGranny and Quasar like this

#53 Sleepy

Sleepy

    Commissioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,359 posts

Posted 01 November 2015 - 09:50 AM

What exactly is the Republicans platform...

 

Anyone reading knows Clarksville Voter and TomD are going all in on the Republicans

And Sleepy is all in on McEwen.

 

I just looked back over numerous posts and I see nothing save for District voting and Town Manager.

 

Town Manager is another Bureaucrat that does not answer to the people.

 

I have always believed you vote for the best candidate over party.  Neither team has a 7-0 sweep in this 

department if you ask me.

 

And if we are talking about desperate and telling lies...The latest Republican piece is a winner hands down.

 

Anyone who uses Negative campaigning in my book is no good.  Tell us what is good about you not what is bad 

about the other team.

 

Recent history will prove that Negative Campaigns do not win:

 

1. Mike Moore..Last time he ran they  put out nasty nasty things against him and Mike Won

2. Ken Pierce.   Last time he ran they put out nasty nasty things  about him and he won.

 

My experience as a sideline quarterback shows that negative campaigning does not win.

 

GO VOTE   GO VOTE

And Have a Great Sunday.


Edited by Sleepy, 01 November 2015 - 09:51 AM.


#54 TomD

TomD

    Commissioner

  • Moderators
  • 1,076 posts

Posted 01 November 2015 - 10:47 AM

And if we are talking about desperate and telling lies...The latest Republican piece is a winner hands down.
 

 

Can you be more specific?  I did not receive the Republican piece in my mail.  What specifically is on the piece that you feel is a lie?

 

 

Anyone who uses Negative campaigning in my book is no good.

 

 

Isn't your candidate's name and photo on the recent negative mail piece from the Clarksville Democrats?  Oops.


  • GrumpyGranny, Donna and Clarksville Voter like this

#55 Clarksville Voter

Clarksville Voter

    Resident

  • Account Closed
  • PipPip
  • 86 posts

Posted 01 November 2015 - 10:50 AM

What exactly is the Republicans platform...

 

Anyone reading knows Clarksville Voter and TomD are going all in on the Republicans

And Sleepy is all in on McEwen.

 

I just looked back over numerous posts and I see nothing save for District voting and Town Manager.

 

 

 

 

 

That's because other than the 2 important issues, they may have different opinions on other issues. The Republicans did not sign on to a catch-all "Contract" to sway public opinion and then break it when it wasn't working. Did any "NEW Dems" stick with the contract promises or have they all decided to break their promises to the citizens of Clarksville.  

 

The Democrats started Negative Campaigning with the Privatization rumors, so they could have an issue to attack the Republicans. Start a false rumor and then step in to be the Hero that we didn't need in the first place. Great Vision.


  • GrumpyGranny likes this

#56 grayarea

grayarea

    Councilman

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 835 posts

Posted 01 November 2015 - 12:37 PM

What exactly is the Republicans platform...

 

Anyone reading knows Clarksville Voter and TomD are going all in on the Republicans

And Sleepy is all in on McEwen.

 

I just looked back over numerous posts and I see nothing save for District voting and Town Manager.

 

Town Manager is another Bureaucrat that does not answer to the people.

 

I have always believed you vote for the best candidate over party.  Neither team has a 7-0 sweep in this 

department if you ask me.

 

And if we are talking about desperate and telling lies...The latest Republican piece is a winner hands down.

 

Anyone who uses Negative campaigning in my book is no good.  Tell us what is good about you not what is bad 

about the other team.

 

Recent history will prove that Negative Campaigns do not win:

 

1. Mike Moore..Last time he ran they  put out nasty nasty things against him and Mike Won

2. Ken Pierce.   Last time he ran they put out nasty nasty things  about him and he won.

 

My experience as a sideline quarterback shows that negative campaigning does not win.

 

GO VOTE   GO VOTE

And Have a Great Sunday

 

Sleepy,

 

You've drank the kool-aid. The "New Democrats" have said they were not going to run on the same issues and agendas as those in office now. Hence, I suppose that's why they said they're "new." However, in just the past couple of days what they termed their "Contract with Clarksville" has proved worthless. Their words have no integrity to any voter. The Clarksville Democtratic Pac (with the pictures of all seven of those running for council...including Mr. McEwen) has sent us a nice post card saying:

 

*Town Manager - a $250,000 dollar gamble the town can't afford to take. An irresponsible risk with no guaranteed results.

 

*No district voting. Let your voice and vote be heard.

 

Earlier this year, in "The Clarksville Democrat" Vol. 1, No. 1 at the bottom of the page where he state "Our 'Contrct with Clarskville'" it says:

 

1) We will hire an independent research firm to conduct a survey of town residents on the issue of district voting and act in accordane with the results of that survey. We believ such an important decision affecting every voting resident of Clarksville needs to be made by the community, not simply by the town council

 

Pardon me Sleepy, but it sounds as though there has been an intentional misstatement. All potential democratic council member's pictures are on the recent flier. There is no way to escape it Sleepy....THIS IS A LIE...THE DEMOCRATS HAVE LIED, FLIP-FLOPPED, AND HAVE GONE BACK ON THEIR WORD...There is no integriy, trust, or morals on how this has been done. Don't be POLSTONED again! The survey was an ignorant idea to start with. What this proves is that if you can't lead, why even run?

 

2) We will take up the matter of hiring a town manager and come to a final decision based upon input from a community study committee. The best interests of the town, considering costs and effective operations, will be basis for our final decision.

 

Sleepy, surely you remember this from a couple of years ago. A blue-ribbon panel of area business folks and others were to decide on whether the town should seek city status. The committee said no, but recommended a Town Manager. At that time, the council told them to move forward with their finding. Shortly thereafter, the Gang of Four squashed the effort before letting the committee do their job claiming, without proof, it was too costly. In the process, this upset many area business owners and probably killed any such future cooperation. So, why do we need a second study? Gonna keep running that play until you get the results you want? Again, THE DEMOCRATS LIED!!!]

 

Shoot, they must be so sure of themselves that they have already acted, and breached their contract with Clarksville before they have even won the election.

 

KICK THEM ALL OUT. STOP THE LYING IN TOWN GOVERNMENT111


  • GrumpyGranny, Mr. Gray, TomD and 2 others like this

#57 TomD

TomD

    Commissioner

  • Moderators
  • 1,076 posts

Posted 01 November 2015 - 06:24 PM

:goodpost: :goodpost:


  • Mr. Gray likes this

#58 Mr. Gray

Mr. Gray

    Councilman

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 688 posts

Posted 01 November 2015 - 06:37 PM

  I have read all the issues the old guard says they will be working on and it's the same old issues the town had when the former councilman running had when in office.  Tom you say you are confused, you shouldn't be.  It's the same old garbage by the same OLD people.

   One concern we should all have is their determination and goal to replace the Chief of Police and the Fire Chief with one candidate's relatives currently employed by the town.  This candidate and former Police Officer battled and complained about the old guard for years and now he has teamed up with them to seek revenge.  Care to comment Mr. Johnson or Mr. Fisher on that ?  I'm sure you won't since we are not at a bar or gambling joint.

 

Carry on folks I now return you to your regular scheduled programming 


  • GrumpyGranny, Clarksville Voter and Wanderer like this

#59 Russell Brooksbank

Russell Brooksbank

    Commissioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,412 posts

Posted 01 November 2015 - 07:01 PM


KICK THEM ALL OUT. STOP THE LYING IN TOWN GOVERNMENT111


I agree. Time to get rid of the two party Duocracy and vote Libertarian.

#60 Clarksville Voter

Clarksville Voter

    Resident

  • Account Closed
  • PipPip
  • 86 posts

Posted 01 November 2015 - 07:14 PM

 

 

Anyone who uses Negative campaigning in my book is no good.  Tell us what is good about you not what is bad 

about the other team.

 

Recent history will prove that Negative Campaigns do not win:

 

1. Mike Moore..Last time he ran they  put out nasty nasty things against him and Mike Won

2. Ken Pierce.   Last time he ran they put out nasty nasty things  about him and he won.

 

My experience as a sideline quarterback shows that negative campaigning does not win.

 

 

 

Did you giggle as you wrote those first 2 sentences? I looked back at posts also. You have stated false information in several posts, you have called others nicknames and you have whined about people posting things you claimed were false on Facebook when you do it yourself. You did this all after saying your man said he wanted to run a clean race? Exactly what is "my book"? It must be a Gang Classic.

 

But the "bait and switch' is always a winner in your mind.


Edited by Clarksville Voter, 01 November 2015 - 07:36 PM.

  • GrumpyGranny likes this




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users