What do President Barack Obama and the Wake County school board have in common?
Evidently some Obama supporters want to take out school board chairman Ron Margiotta to help restore a Democratic majority on the school board. Next year's Presidential election will mix with this fall's school board races at tonight's Obama For America Southern Wake Grassroots Planning Session.
"This is an opportunity for all supporters who are 'In' for President Obama's re-election to meet, find out what we are doing now and see where our road map leads for 2012," according to a listing for the event. "It is also an opportunity for supporters to provide feedback for what they would like to see in our campaign as this is a grassroots movement.
We will also take this opportunity to address our precinct organization and our plans for the very important 2011 School Board and municipal races. Did you know that 4 seats for the minority members are up for re-election as well as Margiotta's seat? This is a crucial election for the future of our children in Wake and NC as well as our economy."
Comments
WakeEd
Thu, 06/23/2011 - 20:45 — wilson37The Democratic party will not roll over and play dead this year. As Republicans, we cannot "rest on our laurels" and take NOTHING for granted. We have control now but then we did on a National level in 2004 and blew it................we need both Ron Margiotta and Heather Losurdo BOTH and let's not forget it!!
Obama!
Thu, 06/23/2011 - 16:42 — cmalone1Can this be viewed by us as their version of the tea party (using their logic of course)?
Back of the Bus
Thu, 06/23/2011 - 14:34 — MontcalmLet's tell Obama for America to get to the back of the bus, and stay out of Wake School elections
?
Thu, 06/23/2011 - 17:04 — Bob_SconceTrying to be offensive? Troll?
Oh, yeah! I love it and
Thu, 06/23/2011 - 12:17 — woodstockOh, yeah! I love it and support it. Let's tie Margiotta's opponent (if there even is one) to Obama and the stellar job he has done with the nation's economy. Fantastic idea!!
Lets get Ready to rumble!
Thu, 06/23/2011 - 14:25 — Jeff_morseAnd many on this Blog have said the Republicans are the only ones who think that the Candidates Ideology is important to how that they will vote on issues like the Assignment plan ect....
Lets get Ready to rumble!
Thu, 06/23/2011 - 14:25 — Jeff_morseAnd many on this Blog have said the Republicans are the only ones who think that the Candidates Ideology is important to how that they will vote on issues like the Assignment plan ect....
The Dems' whole "referendum
Thu, 06/23/2011 - 12:09 — CaryCurmudgeonThe Dems' whole "referendum on the school board" strategy fell on its face in 2010. Obama is sporting a 47% approval rating right now, and District 8 is (I believe) the most republican school board district. What's the thinking?
I'm Not Sure
Fri, 06/24/2011 - 08:11 — chaboardabout the wisdom of the strategy. If the school board elections were in Novembr 2012 I could see it but I have a hard time seeing how you connect an Oct '11 electon with a Nov '12 one.
On the other hand though.....it can't really hurt. Obama is the most popular politician (by far) in the country, is currently eading all the Republican candidates in polling in NC and -more to the point for this excercise - has approval ratings over 60% among non-Republicans. If you figure the election will be won or lost by turnout among DEms and Independents (as 2010 was) then it's hard to see how tieing your candidate to a guy who is pretty popular among those groups can hurt you.
"Obama is the most popular
Fri, 06/24/2011 - 17:08 — woodstock"Obama is the most popular politician (by far) in the country..."
Huh? Not true.
"...23% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president. Thirty-nine percent (39%) Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -16
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
Shrug
Sat, 06/25/2011 - 08:46 — chaboardRasmussen and a bucket of spit are worth .......a bucket of spit.
I believe - going from memory - it was Gallup that pointed out a month or two back that Obama has (so far) the highest average first term approval of any President since Eisenhower (excluding LBJ's 13-month "term")......primarily because everyone else dipped into the very low 40's or 30's for at least one extended period while Obama's floor has steadily been in the 44-46 range.
There will always be the hardcore 35% like you who would not approve even if he walked on water and turned water into wine (just as you don't care that he saved the nation from economic catastrophe and got Bin Laden) .... but among everyone else Obama is a fairly popular and reasonably well-liked President. Particlarly given the depth of the mess you guys left for him to clean up.
And even if he wasn't....my claim was that he was MORE popular than anyone else you can name of any significance. Boehner? McConnell? Reid? Pelosi? Any of the seven dwarves running for the GOP nomination? Christie, Scott, Walker and the host of other really, really unpopular new GOP governors? You got nobody to falsify my claim.....
LOL Okay, you keep believing
Sat, 06/25/2011 - 09:08 — woodstockLOL Okay, you keep believing in Obama's popularity among actual voters.... and the Tooth Fairly and Santa Claus and Leprechauns and...
Correction
Sat, 06/25/2011 - 08:52 — chaboardScratch the first term thing....found what I was thinking of and wasn't what I remembered it to be.
Obama is the most popular
Fri, 06/24/2011 - 13:14 — CaryCurmudgeonObama is the most popular politician (by far) in the country
Depends what poll, but I'll give you that he might be one of the least unpopular politicians in the country.
currently leading all the Republican candidates in polling in NC
That says more for the fact that the Republicans don't have a credible candidate than for the likeability of Obama.
If you figure the election will be won or lost by turnout among DEms and Independents (as 2010 was).
We'll see, but I'll bet you a box of rice-a-roni that there will be a good deal less turnout for the five school board districts at stake this year than for the four up for election in 2009.
Well
Sat, 06/25/2011 - 08:34 — chaboardIf you figure the election will be won or lost by turnout among DEms and Independents (as 2010 was).
We'll see, but I'll bet you a box of rice-a-roni that there will be a good deal less turnout for the five school board districts at stake this year than for the four up for election in 2009.
We'll see (I haven't thought about it much), but if turnout is lower then my comment is even MORE valid, isn't it? The lower the turnout the more important to turn out your supporters at higher marginal rates.
So just out of curiousity - why do you think turnout will be lower this time around despite the fact that there is much more attention, heat and controversy around the school board than there was when you guys flew mostly under the media radar last time?
Hmm...
Thu, 06/23/2011 - 12:55 — Bob_SconceThis is organizing for the party faithful. I suspect the faithful are more attracted by the possibility of getting Margiotta out of office than of keeping Obama in office.
Say What?
Fri, 06/24/2011 - 07:45 — chaboard....
Like free Pizza to draw people to a college meeting
Fri, 06/24/2011 - 10:49 — Bob_Sconce"Hey we know you don't really want to talk about Obama, but we've got something to draw you: we're going to scheme about Margiotta."
It Would Have To Go The Other Way
Sat, 06/25/2011 - 08:27 — chaboardFor every one Dem in the county who feels strongly enough about Margiotta to be motivated by it to action there are probably close to a thousand who would be motivated to action for Obama.
That's the part of your comment I didn't understand....you don't use free anchovies to get people to support pepperoni.
Perhaps...
Sat, 06/25/2011 - 09:14 — Bob_SconceI'm not a Democrat, so I don't know. I was just pointing out an inference from the press release. If you're excited about Obama, then make it be about Obama. If you're not excited about Obama, then make it about something else.
Seriously, you are not a
Sat, 06/25/2011 - 09:55 — woodstockSeriously, you are not a Democrat? Don't tell me you are one of those mushy unaffiliated voters.
Heh....
Sat, 06/25/2011 - 10:57 — Bob_SconceI'm a Republican, but I don't adhere to the idea that I'd be obliged to vote for a green-skinned troll if it was endorsed by the GOP. However, I recognize that party affiliation is really important in Congress and the GA.
"Green-skinned troll?" Does
Sat, 06/25/2011 - 11:07 — woodstock"Green-skinned troll?" Does this have special meaning to you?
As history has shown beyond any shadow of a doubt, party affiliation has a lot to do with getting elected. Those not attached to a major party rarely win elections. Yes, I know there are exceptions... that is why I said "rarely" and not never. When it does happen, it is headline news. So, if your goal is to make headline news, just remember it will because of the rarity of the situation.
Hmm...
Sat, 06/25/2011 - 12:37 — Bob_SconceNo, no special meaning. I was trying to come up with a description that wouldn't be taken as a slight on any particular group of people. I think I'm safe from the wrath of elves and vulcans.
As to your second paragraph, I think that's a lot more true in some races than in others. Case in point: I'm opposed to identifying judges' parties on ballots, because I've found that the qualities that make for good judges are generally unrelated to politics. Judge Manning, for example, held against mandatory year-round schools, yet is conducting hearings into the effect of the budget on state education. But, he has a clear regard for separation of powers. I don't know what party he is; I don't care -- he's an excellent judge and will get my vote the next time he runs.
On the other side, a GOP congressional candidate would, truly, have to be a green-haired troll to make me vote for the Dem. After all, that vote is more about which party controls Congress than it is about the individual.
In my view, school board is more similar to the judicial race than it is to the congressional one.
In my view, school board is
Sat, 06/25/2011 - 13:07 — woodstockIn my view, school board is more similar to the judicial race than it is to the congressional one.
So that view is not at all altered considering Republicans have led the fight at the elected official-level and Party-level for the change you seek in Wake County schools and only Democrats -- individually and collectively as groups and organizations -- have adamantly opposed this change?
Nope....
Sat, 06/25/2011 - 16:40 — Bob_SconcePatti Head was a Republican also. Horace Tart was a Republican-- heck, Nelson Dollar was his campaign chairman against Tedesco. And, IIRC, the GOP didn't support Mrs. Prickett originally either.
Frankly, the victory in '09 came almost entirely from WSCA; the Wake GOP has been trying to weasel credit for it ever since -- claiming they "led the fight" is like declaring George McClellan the victor at Appomatox.
Frankly, if the GOP wants to prove its relevance, it could find somebody (*not* a magnet parent) to run in districts 5 and 6. Fiinding somebody to run against Kevin Hill was no feat -- they could have set up a booth at Triangle Town Center and had a 30-page sign-up sheet.
I already conceded that WSCA
Sat, 06/25/2011 - 17:01 — woodstockI already conceded that WSCA played a role last time. But, not nearly as much as the leadership there have convinced themsleves they did and like to claim to the uninformed. The GOP pumped a lot more time, money and effort into the campaigns than WSCA... but don't tell them that becuase they like to live a fantasy. Plus, the GOP remains loyal to those they hepled get elected. WSCA... not so much. They've been silent or worse -- nit pickingly critical -- as the board fought and continues to fight agaisnt the outrageous race-hustling forces hell-bent on returning to the failed policies of the status quo. Their Monday-morning quarterbacking is pointless and weak.
BUT, here is the deal, WSCA is not the organizartion it once was; far from it, in fact. They've lost their focus and a lot of their support. Arrogance , egos and partisanship has taken over. A lot of the drivers to their initial success -- people and dedication to issues -- have vanished. What is left is a mere shell of what it once was and could have been.
WEll, Ok...
Sat, 06/25/2011 - 20:18 — Bob_SconceGive me some details. How much money? How was it spent? What work did the GOP do?
Because I know who held a series of community meetings to develop support, identified a slate of candidates, organized neighborhood canvassing, prepared mailings, & organized volunteers.
As to "the GOP remails loyal to those they helped get elected," I'll remind you of a certain meeting of the N. Wake Republicans which invited only 3 of the 4 they "helped" elect.
I find it odd that you're worried that WSCA is, somehow, partisan, while you're pushing fealty to the GOP. Have you looked up the word 'partisan' recently?
Uh, yeah, the GOP is
Sun, 06/26/2011 - 08:01 — woodstockUh, yeah, the GOP is partisan. I doubt that is a shocker to anyone and the Party would readily admit it. But, the current weaker and fractured version of the WSCA is partisan as well, but they like to claim they are not.
As for identifying a slate of candidates, it was my understanding that Margiotta led that effort... and Margiotta is apparently no longer associated with WSCA (there has been a mass exodus by many others as well) as they have not endorsed him eventhough he has announced his candidacy. This is odd as Margiotta has been a tireless workhorse in the effort to bring about the change WSCA claims to seek and that the citizens of Wake County voted for.
Again, all Republican members on the board have pushed for positive change (some more than others) and ALL Democrats on the board have pushed for a return to the failed status quo policies. Additionally, ALL of the opposition to positive change and neighborhood schools -- not to mention lawsuits -- is coming from the left. Yet, WSCA still insists on endorsing non-Republicans this campaign season. Weak and fractured, that is what has become of WSCA. Fueled by arrogance and ego, it is sad to watch this alarming decline of a once meaningful and relevant organization.
Deborah Prickett was
Sat, 06/25/2011 - 10:00 — CaryCurmudgeonDeborah Prickett was Unaffiliated until after her election, do you think she was mushy?
She sure as hell does
Sat, 06/25/2011 - 10:10 — woodstockShe sure as hell does not appear to be mushy.
BTW, are you BobSconces' PR person? LOL!
No...
Sat, 06/25/2011 - 11:03 — Bob_SconceHowever, I am in the market for a new PR person. The last one quit because Charlie Sheen offered him an easier position.
Now that is Funny
Mon, 06/27/2011 - 09:59 — Jeff_morseNow that is funny.
LOL
Sat, 06/25/2011 - 13:26 — EBDarcyNow that's funny!
LOL I am not sure you need a
Sat, 06/25/2011 - 11:14 — woodstockLOL I am not sure you need a PR person. You seem perfectly capable of stating your own views and supporting your own positions... as mushy as they may be at times... :)
As for Sheen, being his PR person has to rank as one of the most difficult and frustrating jobs imaginable. Success would have to measured by how many people you prevented from stuffing a sock in his mouth.
On the other hand, there are
Thu, 06/23/2011 - 12:58 — CaryCurmudgeonOn the other hand, there are lots of Obama supporters, or at least former Obama supporters, who are very much for neighborhood schools.
Wait....You *Have* Heard
Fri, 06/24/2011 - 07:59 — chaboard...that the Republican majority is poised to adopt a no-base-assignments plan, right? You do understand that the defining characteristic of a neighborhood school - the idea that people in neighborhood A have the shared experience of going to school A - is about to be killed deader than a doornail by YOUR side?
I kind of like a lot of things about the Blue Plan....but let's not pretend it is compatible with the idea of "neighborhood schools". This board does NOT support neighborhood schools in any way, shape or form.
I personally do not like the
Fri, 06/24/2011 - 09:59 — CaryCurmudgeonI personally do not like the blue plan, probably for the same reasons that you do like it. In the wrong hands, a blue plan model could make a perfect platform for even more busing than we had before. But by positioning the choice as blue versus green (green closely resembling the old Dulaney assignment methodology), they'll keep support from the neighborhood schools fans.
Yup...
Fri, 06/24/2011 - 14:59 — Bob_SconceYou've identified a big problem with the Blue Plan -- transparancy. Previously, the board would toss a bunch of data over a wall, where Chuck Dulaney, Diana Bader and others would chew on it, then spit out assignments. The Blue plan imagines tossing a bunch of data over a wall, where a computer program chews on it, and then spits out assignments.
Until you can see the details of how the computer works, it suffers from the same problem as Dulaney's version did -- nobody can see and understand what's going on.
You're right, though -- between the blue and green plans, I prefer the blue. I suspect that 99% of the people will choose the nearest schools and the result will end up being very similar to what would happen in a neighborhood schools model. However, I'm still worried about what happens when people start tweaking the computer program -- that tweaking would be hard to detect, but could, over time, push people back out of their neighborhood schools.
Unless people are smart
Fri, 06/24/2011 - 14:22 — DrActualFactualUnless people are smart enough to see thru it. In Wake we always seem to wind up choosing between the lesser of two evils or bailing out on the system altogether. The controlled-choice plan is something Kahlenberg would probably love (that should tell you right there it will be problematic.) Instead of bringing both sides together RM bailed on the neighborhood plan and gave the works back to Supt. Tata. He didn't hold back the push from WEP and Raleigh Chamber of Commerce, nor could he convince Tata that neighborhood schools was the way to go. RM made a big mistake giving the assignment task to JT and we will all pay for Ron's shortsightedness and weak leadership skills. I have to wonder how deeply RM (or frankly any of the BOE members) have researched controlled-choice school systems and their success or lack thereof. I truly hope I'm wrong, but I'm afraid implementing controlled-choice will wind up being a larger debacle than MYR was. The guiding assumptions driving this plan should be discussed openly to see if there is parent buy-in. It is good to see RM raising some questions on the set-aside issue.
Raising Questions
Sat, 06/25/2011 - 14:24 — Solon77It is good to see RM raising some questions on the set-aside issue.
So his venue for raising questions about the assignment plan is a radio show ? Another sign of weak leadership.
Controlled choice has proved problematic in many districts due to lack of transparency. We are headed down the same path.
...
Fri, 06/24/2011 - 16:48 — SideburnsInstead of bringing both sides together RM bailed on the neighborhood plan and gave the works back to Supt. Tata.
Bailed? Are you kidding me? The only reason Tata is involved in student assignment is because of Goldman. We could be so much further into this process if not for her.
Exactly. She owes an
Fri, 06/24/2011 - 17:15 — woodstockExactly. She owes an explanation for what the hell her antics were all about. She shut the process down, publically stabbed her follow Republicans in the back, and offered NOTHING in the way of and explanation or an alternate approach.
Only one true to neighborhood schools
Sat, 06/25/2011 - 14:17 — Solon77Goldman was the only one supporting the true neighborhood school concept. RM and JT did bail on the neighborhood schools with the choice model. As far as Goldman stabbing RM/JT in the back - she was upfront with JT/RM on her concerns - they refused to consider her points of view and she held to her position - good for her. If anything she stabbed them in the front and unlike the cowardly actions of JT and RM.
With the choice plan - true neighborhood schools are effectively dead.
Your convoluted logic aside,
Sat, 06/25/2011 - 16:28 — woodstockYour convoluted logic aside, what Goldman did by shutting down a very transparent and inclusive process in which she had influence (with no alternate solution in hand by they way), was to hand the process over to others and relinquish any semblance of influence. It made no sense then and makes no sense now months later.
But, why are YOU defending Goldman? Since you are supporter of the failed status quo approach to student assignment, I find your defense of her odd.
Supporter of failed status quo
Sat, 06/25/2011 - 17:43 — Solon77Where did you ever get that idea. I long ago accepted we will not have true neighborhood schools and have accepted the choice model. My position is to make every school a good school to provide for the education of all of the students who go to that school. The board has no plan to address this, outside of the attempt a Renaissance schools due the the funding of the left wing of the federal government. I didn't see any Republicans leading the charge.
So why defend Goldman ? Because she is the only one to be honest.
You make no sense.
Sat, 06/25/2011 - 22:42 — woodstockYou make no sense. Apparently there is some organized effort to claim that we are not headed toward neighborhood schools as I am noticing some common language being used by multiple people regarding that. Yet, with proximity as the primary factor, by definition we will indeed have neighborhood schools.
As for Goldman, I think you have her wrong. She has never been for "neighborhood schools." In fact, she has stated emphatically that she is NOT for neighborhood school, but rather "community schools" with base assignments. However, base assignments do not mean proximity is used as a primary factor. It is all very confusing.
One dimension
Sun, 06/26/2011 - 11:34 — Solon77You are assuming everyone in the neighborhood will choose the closest school as their first choice - thereby leading towards a true neighborhood school. And yet in the test drive 91% of the respondents said choice was important.
In my small neighborhood we are served by 5 ES, 4 MS and 4 HS. This does not include Home school. While some families have opted for the most proximate school, others have opted for YR, magnets, charters, and private schools. With the introduction of the choice model, I can see some parents currently in the traditional ES and MS, opting for an achievement school or a school that is perceived as a better school than the base school they currently attend.
88% said it was important to go to a school that was close as possible. This could be a magnet choice 12 miles away, an achievement choice 5 miles away, a calendar choice 4 miles away, or simply a perceived better school 4 miles away - all the while their most proximate school is 1-2 miles away.
True Neighborhood school supporters would not find the choice plan as complimentary to their cause.
...
Sun, 06/26/2011 - 09:18 — SideburnsShe also believes people don't want to cross municipality borders to attend school. And...that all 9 Board members support community based schools.
I can understand why people
Sun, 06/26/2011 - 12:23 — DrActualFactualI can understand why people are confused on this issue. In an effort to slow down JT's plan she believed Hill/Sutton et al only to find that quite some time later Ms. McLaurin indicated that there wasn't support for community schools--they double-crossed Goldman to stall the entire process so that they could buy time to garner support for Alves WEP plan or reinstate the former diversity plan. The question for some is whether WSCA and Goldman shared support for neighborhood schools in the first place. Ms. Goldman's voter material states "sensible school assignments" which most would decipher as proximity-based assignments. JT's shift for support in assignment plans has gone from neighborhood to controlled-choice (quotas would be a deal breaker) to anything goes as long as it falls under "reform" goals. I find him as difficult to follow as Ms. Goldman even though one is speaking and one is not.