Great reporting on the collection of Gramsci-type socialists infiltrating local government. The reason--beyond narcissism--is obvious: entities such as the PPS Board spend gobs of money (school bonds, anyone?). And the city's careless, clueless voters routinely vote to sell bonds and jack up property taxes, while they bitch about "affordability."
Meanwhile, mopes such as Chloe Eudaly tell us that "rent is theft."
The final bills will come due long after the city has evolved into a playground for the young and mindless, the gate-guarded bucolic rich, and the feral clients of Homelessness Inc.™
When mortgage interest rates come down, apres moi, le deluge!
The clueless 18 year old will win but for once there is actually a decent candidate running against the PAT endorsed stooge…her name is Virginia LaForte.
Max, I have concerns about your dismissiveness of the 4 School Board Candidates you looked at. It seems like guilt by association. That there is an endorsement by WFP obviates the need to look any further at the other endorsements, much less what the candidate actually has to say for themselves about what their qualifications are for the position and what they intend to do if elected.
I don’t think it’s intellectually honest to bunch these 4 together. The four candidates are pretty different from each other. I think it’s obvious in the case of 18 year old Sanchez- Bautista that there is answer to the questions of qualification and goal specificity are none and none. (And I hope to goodness when you said his race is lost cause that you mean he has no chance of getting elected as opposed to his election is guaranteed so let’s move on to races that can be affected! You need to be clearer!). But I clicked on the link to the endorsements for Stephanie Engelsman, and damn if I haven’t known and been friendly with a number of these people for many many years. These are thoughtful people in my community and if they vouch for her to this degree, she’s getting my vote unless someone running against her blows me out of the water with a compelling reason to believe that they are even better for the job. (Galanakis has some well argued analysis on his web site, but he’s also endorsed by Mitch Green, so I’m guessing you aren’t gonna back him either. Which leaves Simone Crowe. Is she your choice? No endorsements at all in her blurb in the Voter Pamphlet, no website listed, and the resume looks like the thinnest of the three by a large amount.
Looking forward to reading your endorsements. I only get to vote for Zone 6, so I haven’t much to say about Splitt and Chase Miller. Also looking forward to your analysis of the bond issue. Very concerned about the lack of an organized opposition. I think we need a plan for a reworking of the bond by the board for the fall election. The Willamette Week piece you linked to was very informative. A great job by that young journalist.
On Sanchez Bautista, enough said. Yes, by race I am referring to his running for school board. I have no sweeping feelings about his ethnicity. I would hope a young latino immigration activist would know more about communism but he is a teenager.
On Engelsman: the red flags are PAT, Latino Network, Working Families, APANO, Bernie PDX (not real), and Michelle DePass. Her friendship with Tiffany Koyama Lane is the killer. Is that guilt by association? Yes, to a degree, but I have plenty of evidence here to suggest that she will be a rubber stamp for the Superintendent (DePass’s strategy) and ignore the toxicity of PAT. I like Julia Brim-Edwards, Olivia Clark, and Patte Sullivan, but she has more negatives than positives in my book.
Chase Miller: all the same bad endorsements, even fewer good ones. She has the entire DSA behind her. I don’t see anyone I actually like on that list other than maybe Isadore? Honestly, the closer I look at her list, the less I like her. I’m just not seeing any evidence she can (or will want to) stand up to PAT.
Splitt is my favorite of the bunch but she has all the same flaws. Red flags in the endorsements, silly “progressive” educational theories that no one seems to believe but you’re supposed to say you do, etc.
Honestly it’s Portland. We’re going to get nutty educational theory for years. I’m an optimist on the city, but I’m very skeptical about PPS. We’re bleeding students as parents figure out ways to make private school work. We fucked up so badly that we are changing people’s minds on public education.
We would probably be fine with the two candidates who got the Stand for Children endorsements (Steph and Christy). Choosing Jorge or Rashelle is beyond silly, especially because they are running against better choices.
Thanks for such a quick response. To be clear, I wasn’t asking about Bautista’s ethnic race, I was asking to clarify about the state of his run for office. Were you saying “lost cause” about this political race because he’s definitely going to win or because he’s definitely going to lose? Not clear from your essay.
As to Stephanie Englesman, the link you posted including multiple testimonial endorsements of individuals who I’ve known well for many years. Many of them are teachers at Abernethy ES, where all 3 of my kids went between 2007-2018. Others are fellow former Abernethy parents, who I continue to be friends with, and current parents who I know from the community and professionally. No crazy leftists among them. I don’t know Stephanie, but it’s obvious she’s an Abernethy parent who followed me and has left a strong impression on many people I know and respect. So yeah, my tendency would be to trust them and vote for her. And I don’t really put much weight into whether the count of annoying organizational and political endorsements out numbers the strong ones such as Stand For Children, Julia Brim Edwards, Rob Nosse, Olivia Clarke. Sorry she looks so happy posing with Teacher Tiffany. Kind of guilt by association though, don’t you think. I don’t think it makes her a card carrier, you know?
Again, I point out that it’s a 3 person race for Zone 6 Director, and I’m gonna guess you don’t support the guy who is all over his endorsement from Mitch Green. So if you’re in favor of Simone Crowe, I’d like to understand what you like about her, and I’ll take it under consideration when I make my choice on my ballot.
Gotcha. I think it's extremely unlikely Jorge will win. I would be very disappointed in Portland if that happened. I misread your question.
I'll be writing up my endorsements soon but I'll give you the spoiler:
Englesman is the only race I'm not positive there's a better alternative. I think surging antisemitism in PPS and BPS has scared the shit out of me and I don't trust Steph to do anything about that. I'm not going to fault anyone for voting for her but I guess I'll be reaching out to prod her about "Teaching Palestine." I don't think she is a card carrying communist. Maybe I'm just seeing red because Tiffany won't stop sneaking watermelons and Palestinian flags into her posts in tiny subtle ways. Maybe I just want to scream at anyone caught in her general vicinity. I do think the Stand for Children endorsement is a positive sign.
I'm rambling... okay let me put it this way: Steph Engelman is my Elana Pirtle-Guiney in this race. I didn't trust EPG either and she has surprised.
The Mitch Green surrogate is eh and Simone Crowe has a lot of the bumper sticker "Equity but no explanation for what I mean by that word" stuff. I'll reach out to Steph and see if I hear back. I'll drill down on Crowe. This one is a stumper for me.
The idea doesn't even horrify me. It's just the total lack of suspicious or curiosity. Why is only one group pushing for this?
Example: if Donald Trump called for the voting age to be lowered to 16 tomorrow, it would be met with suspicion. "Seems kinda out of nowhere. No one else is supporting this. What's his game?" type of thinking.
But if only far left groups are proposing it, at the same time they are getting involved in the only races it would affect... why doesn't that throw up red flags for people?
Many parents have told me they trust their kids to vote, but when I ask them "Okay, so you're fine with teachers endorsing candidates?" they get a bit more thoughtful.
Great reporting on the collection of Gramsci-type socialists infiltrating local government. The reason--beyond narcissism--is obvious: entities such as the PPS Board spend gobs of money (school bonds, anyone?). And the city's careless, clueless voters routinely vote to sell bonds and jack up property taxes, while they bitch about "affordability."
Meanwhile, mopes such as Chloe Eudaly tell us that "rent is theft."
The final bills will come due long after the city has evolved into a playground for the young and mindless, the gate-guarded bucolic rich, and the feral clients of Homelessness Inc.™
When mortgage interest rates come down, apres moi, le deluge!
The clueless 18 year old will win but for once there is actually a decent candidate running against the PAT endorsed stooge…her name is Virginia LaForte.
https://www.virginiaforpps.com/
Your observations and insights are exceptional as well as frightening.
Thanks for shining a light on the out of market funding maneuvers.
Well done!
Working Class
Working Families
LOL
WINOS
working in name only
Max, I have concerns about your dismissiveness of the 4 School Board Candidates you looked at. It seems like guilt by association. That there is an endorsement by WFP obviates the need to look any further at the other endorsements, much less what the candidate actually has to say for themselves about what their qualifications are for the position and what they intend to do if elected.
I don’t think it’s intellectually honest to bunch these 4 together. The four candidates are pretty different from each other. I think it’s obvious in the case of 18 year old Sanchez- Bautista that there is answer to the questions of qualification and goal specificity are none and none. (And I hope to goodness when you said his race is lost cause that you mean he has no chance of getting elected as opposed to his election is guaranteed so let’s move on to races that can be affected! You need to be clearer!). But I clicked on the link to the endorsements for Stephanie Engelsman, and damn if I haven’t known and been friendly with a number of these people for many many years. These are thoughtful people in my community and if they vouch for her to this degree, she’s getting my vote unless someone running against her blows me out of the water with a compelling reason to believe that they are even better for the job. (Galanakis has some well argued analysis on his web site, but he’s also endorsed by Mitch Green, so I’m guessing you aren’t gonna back him either. Which leaves Simone Crowe. Is she your choice? No endorsements at all in her blurb in the Voter Pamphlet, no website listed, and the resume looks like the thinnest of the three by a large amount.
Looking forward to reading your endorsements. I only get to vote for Zone 6, so I haven’t much to say about Splitt and Chase Miller. Also looking forward to your analysis of the bond issue. Very concerned about the lack of an organized opposition. I think we need a plan for a reworking of the bond by the board for the fall election. The Willamette Week piece you linked to was very informative. A great job by that young journalist.
Notes taken.
On Sanchez Bautista, enough said. Yes, by race I am referring to his running for school board. I have no sweeping feelings about his ethnicity. I would hope a young latino immigration activist would know more about communism but he is a teenager.
On Engelsman: the red flags are PAT, Latino Network, Working Families, APANO, Bernie PDX (not real), and Michelle DePass. Her friendship with Tiffany Koyama Lane is the killer. Is that guilt by association? Yes, to a degree, but I have plenty of evidence here to suggest that she will be a rubber stamp for the Superintendent (DePass’s strategy) and ignore the toxicity of PAT. I like Julia Brim-Edwards, Olivia Clark, and Patte Sullivan, but she has more negatives than positives in my book.
Chase Miller: all the same bad endorsements, even fewer good ones. She has the entire DSA behind her. I don’t see anyone I actually like on that list other than maybe Isadore? Honestly, the closer I look at her list, the less I like her. I’m just not seeing any evidence she can (or will want to) stand up to PAT.
Splitt is my favorite of the bunch but she has all the same flaws. Red flags in the endorsements, silly “progressive” educational theories that no one seems to believe but you’re supposed to say you do, etc.
Honestly it’s Portland. We’re going to get nutty educational theory for years. I’m an optimist on the city, but I’m very skeptical about PPS. We’re bleeding students as parents figure out ways to make private school work. We fucked up so badly that we are changing people’s minds on public education.
We would probably be fine with the two candidates who got the Stand for Children endorsements (Steph and Christy). Choosing Jorge or Rashelle is beyond silly, especially because they are running against better choices.
Thanks for such a quick response. To be clear, I wasn’t asking about Bautista’s ethnic race, I was asking to clarify about the state of his run for office. Were you saying “lost cause” about this political race because he’s definitely going to win or because he’s definitely going to lose? Not clear from your essay.
As to Stephanie Englesman, the link you posted including multiple testimonial endorsements of individuals who I’ve known well for many years. Many of them are teachers at Abernethy ES, where all 3 of my kids went between 2007-2018. Others are fellow former Abernethy parents, who I continue to be friends with, and current parents who I know from the community and professionally. No crazy leftists among them. I don’t know Stephanie, but it’s obvious she’s an Abernethy parent who followed me and has left a strong impression on many people I know and respect. So yeah, my tendency would be to trust them and vote for her. And I don’t really put much weight into whether the count of annoying organizational and political endorsements out numbers the strong ones such as Stand For Children, Julia Brim Edwards, Rob Nosse, Olivia Clarke. Sorry she looks so happy posing with Teacher Tiffany. Kind of guilt by association though, don’t you think. I don’t think it makes her a card carrier, you know?
Again, I point out that it’s a 3 person race for Zone 6 Director, and I’m gonna guess you don’t support the guy who is all over his endorsement from Mitch Green. So if you’re in favor of Simone Crowe, I’d like to understand what you like about her, and I’ll take it under consideration when I make my choice on my ballot.
Gotcha. I think it's extremely unlikely Jorge will win. I would be very disappointed in Portland if that happened. I misread your question.
I'll be writing up my endorsements soon but I'll give you the spoiler:
Englesman is the only race I'm not positive there's a better alternative. I think surging antisemitism in PPS and BPS has scared the shit out of me and I don't trust Steph to do anything about that. I'm not going to fault anyone for voting for her but I guess I'll be reaching out to prod her about "Teaching Palestine." I don't think she is a card carrying communist. Maybe I'm just seeing red because Tiffany won't stop sneaking watermelons and Palestinian flags into her posts in tiny subtle ways. Maybe I just want to scream at anyone caught in her general vicinity. I do think the Stand for Children endorsement is a positive sign.
I'm rambling... okay let me put it this way: Steph Engelman is my Elana Pirtle-Guiney in this race. I didn't trust EPG either and she has surprised.
The Mitch Green surrogate is eh and Simone Crowe has a lot of the bumper sticker "Equity but no explanation for what I mean by that word" stuff. I'll reach out to Steph and see if I hear back. I'll drill down on Crowe. This one is a stumper for me.
Where the fuck are the adults who used to run this town? Mildred Schwab? The pre-pedo Neil Goldschmidt? Vera Katz? Help!
So the commies want to lower the voting age? Here's my suggestion: Raise the voting and driving ages to 25 and lower the drinking age to 16.
The idea doesn't even horrify me. It's just the total lack of suspicious or curiosity. Why is only one group pushing for this?
Example: if Donald Trump called for the voting age to be lowered to 16 tomorrow, it would be met with suspicion. "Seems kinda out of nowhere. No one else is supporting this. What's his game?" type of thinking.
But if only far left groups are proposing it, at the same time they are getting involved in the only races it would affect... why doesn't that throw up red flags for people?
Many parents have told me they trust their kids to vote, but when I ask them "Okay, so you're fine with teachers endorsing candidates?" they get a bit more thoughtful.