North Carolina Democratic leaders are again hoping they can mobilize opposition to the Wake County school board to revive the party.
As noted in today's article by Rob Christensen, the Wake school board was brought up at Saturday's Jefferson-Jackson Day events, which are the main annual fundraiser for state Democrats. It was part of a day of speeches in which Republicans were roundly criticized and Gov. Bev Perdue "received a hero's welcome," according to the article.
David Parker, chairman of the N.C. Democratic Party, said Saturday just as the Republican wave in the state with the Wake County school board elections in 2009, the Democratic revival would begin with the Wake school board races this fall.
A similar approach was used by state Democrats to rally the troops in the 2010 elections. During last year's Jefferson-Jackson events, Perdue and Parker's predecessor, David Young, both ripped into the GOP majority on the Wake school board for ending the diversity policy.
It didn't work out as the Republicans regained control of the General Assembly for the first time in more than a century.
But Democrats are still trying again this year.
You had Perdue and other party bigwigs sponsor the Wake school board candidate fundraiser last month.
The Wake County Democratic Party held a "take back our schools" training event at last month's party convention.
On Monday, Eastern Wake Democrats in state House District 39 will hold a "taking back our schools event" from 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. at the Wendell Community Center, 601 W. 3rd Street.
Organizers for Monday's event say they will discuss the fall school board elections and the November municipal elections and how to build teams to mobilize get out the vote efforts.
Since Eastern Wake, at least under the proposed redistricting map, stays in District 1 they won't vote this fall for school board.
Comments
Middle ground
Mon, 05/02/2011 - 12:35 — SDR256Maybe its just a function of an election year, but on an issue like education the strong pull to one political extreme or another sounds annoyingly shrill and hollow.
Yes, as it turned out the five candidates who BEST represented the middleground of voters during the last election happened to be Republican. But I don't believe they were voted in because they were Republican, regardless of what the Republican party would like everyone to believe. Be that as it may. Water under the bridge.
But at this date, any party who thinks a pull in their direction of extreme - conservative or liberal - will somehow get the same voters motivated for their party really doesn't get it.
The messages that resonated with the voters last election were not Red or Blue, they emphasized academics and de-emphasized politics. Parents want their kids educated and their lives stabilized. Voters are sick of politics in the schools. I don't care who runs - honestly - as long as they are thoughtful and articulate on how they will continue to promote academics, keep their eye on the ball and conduct the business of the board with dignity.
Remember all that talk about levels of grey? Yeah, it hit a nerve. Either party that goes around chest beating doesn't understand that thoughtful, active voters on this topic can no longer be scared into a party corral like sheep.
When the oppositon to change
Mon, 05/02/2011 - 12:45 — woodstockWhen the oppositon to change is so adamantly emcamped in the left -- extreme or otherwise -- and are hurling insults, threatening people's jobs, bringing about lawsuits and investigations and trying deperately to overrule an election, it is very difficult, if not impossible, to pretend politics are not at play.
You cannot deny that the Republicans have loyally supported the change voters asked for and the Democrats -- for whatever reason -- have taken sides against that change.
True
Tue, 05/03/2011 - 14:20 — SDR256I didn't say that politics are not at play or that they will not be at play in the upcoming elections, only that the way a newly attentive audience will receive them may have changed.
...
Mon, 05/02/2011 - 13:19 — SideburnsI agree, woodstock. One would be foolish to believe that politics will not play into this fall's election. The local Democrats have made it crystal clear what they want and what they will do to get. Heck, they've already had a really big fundraiser and no one has filed yet.
What is sad is that a Democrat could not run on a platform in support of the current changes in WCPSS and get the endorsement of the Wake Democratic party. Same for a Republican. Anne Sherron is a Republican. Do you think the Wake Republican party will endorse her? (I hope not.) IMO, that is the problem created with politics in this sort of race.
Agree.... but
Mon, 05/02/2011 - 13:11 — SDR256I agree Woodstock. The new board members have supported the change that the voters asked for. Is it because they are Republican? I don't think so. I believe its because as individuals they happen to have a set of beliefs that resonate with the middle ground voters, some of whom happen to be Independent (like me) and Democrat.
Similarly, its been very disheartening to have the mudslinging by the extreme liberal left to continue at the efforts of average citizens - who happen again to be a mix. Are they mudslinging because they are mainly Democrats? I don't think so. Like a venn diagram, those who called us racist for trying to push for data driven academics were simply not in that cross section of circles with us. The mudslingers had a different, stronger set of beliefs. However, it would be a misrepresentation to say that the data-driven beliefs were the creation or possession of the Republicans just these beliefs are not shared by the extreme liberal left. It is not an if/then statement or a black/white picture. The messages of the last election resonated with a level of grey that translated across party lines. You see what I'm trying to say?
My point was that in either case, if it is articulated that what happened was a result of 'Democrat' or 'Republican' efforts, and to thus categorize efforts with those labels going forward would be a mistake.
I agree completely that the
Mon, 05/02/2011 - 15:34 — woodstockI agree completely that the so-called majority members were not elected because they were Republicans, but they got a lot of support from the Republican Party and exactly zero support from the Democrat Party... beyond zero support there is an orchestrated effort to fight the current board in everything they try to do and have made it clear they will aggressively oppose BoE candidates that support neighborhood schools this fall. Will any Democrats run to in attempts to join the board majority and the new direction they are taking our schools? No, they won't. It won't be because they oppose the direction, but because they will get no political backing.
No, they won't. It won't be
Mon, 05/02/2011 - 15:50 — CaryCurmudgeonNo, they won't. It won't be because they oppose the direction, but because they will get no political backing.
If that were the case, then we'd never have more than two candidates on the ticket. History shows that not to be the case, sometimes we have four or more candidates competing in one district. Not having a party's backing did not stop several of the candidates in 2009, and it won't stop others in 2011.
....
Mon, 05/02/2011 - 15:53 — SideburnsWhich one of those not backed by a party won in 2009? It might not stop others but it would be silly to step in and possibly dilute the vote.
No candidate won without
Mon, 05/02/2011 - 18:39 — CaryCurmudgeonNo candidate won without party support (although four candidates did lose even with party support). Cathy Truitt ran as a Republican without the party endorsement, and was able to get into a runoff with Tedesco. Carlene Lucas and Debbie Vair also ran without party endorsements.
Where races are tea party conservatives against diversity-busing liberals, there is definitely room for a third, moderate candidate.
What was the total
Tue, 05/03/2011 - 08:30 — woodstockWhat was the total percentage of votes received by Truitt, Lucas, and Vair? They were essentially non-factors. Truitt got into a run-off, but that was only because she came in 2nd in a field of multiple candidates in that district, but she really had no chance. Tedesco was less than 1% away from defeating them all in the initial election and completely annihilated Truitt in the run-off with over 70% of the vote.
Your "moderate candidates" can give it a try I suppose, but it would be a supremely selfish effort Mansfield could be a legitimate candidate, but she will not get Democrat backing and Sinkez is just a political hound who wants to win elected office... since she lost in her bid for a seat on the Cary Town Council, she is looking for something else. Her motivation is not education, it is to be elected to something... anything. Plus Sinkez is in Margiotta's district and Ron is one of the primary catalysts for orchestrating the effort to bring about the needed change in Wake County schools. There is no reason to go up against him if education and family-friendly change is one's interest.
The fact of the matter is for some reason the Democrat Party has sided with the radical left and the race-hustlers when it comes to Wake County schools? It ties the hands of rational/reasonable Democrats in trying to put up their own candiates in attempts to bring bipartisan support for the needed change. Until the Democrats come to their senses and stop the race-hustling, Republicans will continue to be voted onto the school board. As a conservative I am all for it, but I can understand the frustration that the informed and intelligent Democrats must feel.
You insist you don't know
Tue, 05/03/2011 - 10:21 — CaryCurmudgeonYou insist you don't know me, so you couldn't possibly know any "moderate" candidates (if any) that I might have in mind. At any rate, you don't get to choose whether candidates run for school board.
Until the election districts are set, I see no point in debating the merits of potential candidates. The only non-incumbent who has announced so far is Heather Losurdo -- how does she even know she will be in Kevin Hill's district after the lines are redrawn? And I think it would be equally wrong to dismiss candidates because they don't get the backing of one of the parties.
Only a pompous ass would describe a person filing for office as "selfish." I know both of the people you degraded and can assure you they are not selfish. Any citizen who stands for election deserves our respect for having the courage to put themselves before the inevitable deluge of public scrutiny. Also, you used "race-hustling" twice in your post. As old and tired as you've made that term over the last few months, can you do all of us a favor and limit yourself to using it just once per post?
Hmm, a bit thin-skinned,
Tue, 05/03/2011 - 17:35 — woodstockHmm, a bit thin-skinned, don't you think? Maybe you were talking about completely different potential moderate condidates, but it is not exactly a secret that Mansfield and Sinkez might consider running. Mansfield would have a chance if the Democrat Party weren't so damn tone deaf and increasingly aligned with the extremely radical, race-hustling left. She knows what she is talking about and articulates it well on these blogs... and I doubt she is selfish; I did not mean to apply that in regard to her.
As for using "race-hustling" I will use as many times as is necessary as it is so fitting and this forum does not allow the more color language I may want to use instead of that term.
Why shouldn't the Republican
Tue, 05/03/2011 - 18:30 — virginiadareWhy shouldn't the Republican Party support Mansfield? She is registered as unaffiliated, as Prickett was, and the Republican Party supported her last election. Mansfield has never come out publicly supporting any Democratic candidate or position and has seemed more aligned with the Republican Party as far as local school issues go. It seems she could get more of the independent votes as well as Tea Party Republicans, and would have a better chance of winning than Lasurdo.
Maybe they would. Has
Tue, 05/03/2011 - 19:39 — woodstockMaybe they would. Has Mansfield asked for Republican Party support? Does she support them?
The Republican party will
Tue, 05/03/2011 - 19:53 — CaryCurmudgeonThe Republican party will never endorse an Independent if there is a registered Republican in the race, that is why they endorsed Jerry Ballan last year (unless you think Jerry Ballan was a better candidate than Deborah Prickett to begin with?).
Not sure what your point is.
Tue, 05/03/2011 - 20:16 — woodstockNot sure what your point is. Democrats will only endorse race-hustling status quo candidates.
Original point
Thu, 05/05/2011 - 00:18 — SDR256And so then, you have proven my original point. Those with the ideas that may resonate with the most people may not get the political money or the political backing of this party or that. So, what are the people to do?
So...
Tue, 05/03/2011 - 08:57 — Bob_SconceConsider this approach: R, I, D. R & I win 1st election. D voters have to choose to either not vote or vote for I. If D doesn't vote for I, then R wins. Ds hate Rs. So, Ds vote for I and I wins.
Alternatively, D & I win 1st election. R voters have to choose to either not vote or vote for I. If R doesn't vote for I, then D wins. Rs hate Ds. So, Rs vote for I and I wins.
Carlene & Debbie should have run as one
Mon, 05/02/2011 - 20:55 — FSandYOUKind of like a tag team event, then maybe between them they would've received 2% of the vote.
So...
Mon, 05/02/2011 - 16:09 — Bob_SconceWasn't it Goldman? There was one candidate who was originally backed by the GOP, but then backed out when it became obvious that he/she couldn't win. But, the name escapes me.
Because there's a run-off, diluting the vote is actually a sound strategy. Let's say, for example, that there were 3 candidates, an R-supported, a D-supported and an independent candidate. If the independent takes enough votes away from the D&R sides to get the second highest number of votes, that candidate would have the chance to pick up the votes that would have gone to the loser.
The mess comes in when there are 4+ candidates.
....
Mon, 05/02/2011 - 17:37 — SideburnsAll 4 were endorsed by the Republican party. Initially, the GOP supported Balan for D7 but he ended up having a very shady past.
I don't agree that diluting the vote is a sound strategy for this fall's election. It may have been for past elections when politics weren't so heavily involved. But, IMO, the backing of a political party is key to a win and an independent could skew things the wrong way.
Don't get me wrong. I would prefer that politics stay out of this race -- but that ain't gonna happen.
TKH's hero ???
Sun, 05/01/2011 - 21:29 — AgentPierceTKH: Were you foremost among the cheering throng for Bev The Hero?
As one who supports
Sun, 05/01/2011 - 17:08 — woodstockAs one who supports achievement-focused neighborhood schools and wants the BoE (occasional) majority to gain some seats on the board this fall, I think this is a fantastic strategy for the Democrats!
tone deaf
Sun, 05/01/2011 - 15:37 — CaryCurmudgeonThe Dems are being incredibly tone deaf about this. Their "school board referendum" strategy backfired on them in the 2010 commissioner elections, and it will backfire again in 2011. The citizens of Wake County have rejected race- or socio-economic-based busing, period. I know some very good Dems who are up for reelection in 2011, and I sincerely hope they are not impacted by a stupid and out of touch political strategy.
I Don't THink There's Any
Mon, 05/02/2011 - 21:06 — chaboardactual evidence that the "school board referendum" strategy backfired last time. It was a national election driven by national issues. Which made the "school board referendum" strategy seriously, irrevocably irrelevant ..... but that's a long way from backfiring. This year the races are ONLY about the school board so it's kind of hard NOT to position them as a school board referendum!
Which is a shame because the the Republican extremism has worn out its welcome nationally and this would be the fourth national wave election in a row if this were a year divisible by 2.
That said, trying to use the school board elections in 2011 to ignite 2012 is just silly. It's a full year too early to be of serious use and it's half a county in a state of 100 counties. The 2012 wave will be built nationally on the Republican votes to abolish Medicare and sheer unwillingness to seriously address jobs or deficits. And if there is a wave at the state level it will be built on the GOP plans to slash school funding to the bone to finance more tax cuts. Wake school board positions decided in 2011 will have ZERO effect on the 2012 elections.
Wake school board positions
Tue, 05/03/2011 - 09:38 — jenmanWake school board positions decided in 2011 will have ZERO effect on the 2012 elections.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree with you on that, chaboard. But I do think the strategy of making the WCC elections about the schools did backfire. The commissioners are local, not national, so even though it was a national election I don't think that people linked the commissioners to that. The Dem CC candidates focused on school issues that they had nothing to do with. Instead of talking about school funding, they made it about the diversity policy and Jack Nichols even tried to make it about magnet schools. (I think they all said they wouldn't raise taxes for more school $$. Steve Rao may be the exception, I can't remember right now).
True...
Sun, 05/01/2011 - 17:49 — Bob_SconceI would likely have voted for Steve Rao if not for the Dems trying to make the election a referendum on the School Board.
Personally, I'd be amused to see people campaignimg for Kevin Hill in my neighborhood -- they risk being tarred, feathered and run out on a rail.
(Lest somebody gets their knickers in a knot, I don't mean that literally. It's just a statement of Hill's popularity.)
Rao Wasn't Important to the Democrats
Sun, 05/01/2011 - 20:15 — MissVThe Democratic Party only had eyes, time, attention and money for former Chair, Jack Nichols in his run for Wake Co. Commissioner. As always, they rolled out deceased US Senator Jesse Helms to scare votes from Paul Coble. They trotted out all the former Wake Schools Superintendents (including Del Burns) to endorse 'Jack Nichols'. They re-define racism every way they can - and won't give up, because its all about 'them' and their weird connotation of 'healthy' and Great Schools. Venita Peyton
Run out on a rail
Sun, 05/01/2011 - 20:14 — Solon77Perhaps. We are in the same district and as unappealing Hill is, in my neighborhood, primarily republicans, there is a greater disdain for the BOE majority. Hill will find support with those who oppose JT if nothing else. I am hoping for an independent thinker to run.
LOL You don't even beleive
Mon, 05/02/2011 - 07:48 — woodstockLOL You don't even beleive that. The folks on this forum are far too aware to beleive that silliness. The new BoE has very broad and extensive support which will be demonstrated yet again later this year just like it was was on display in the recent county commissioner races. The only oposition is limited to extreme left-wingers and the race-hustlers. Which one are you?
Your mistake is thinking in
Mon, 05/02/2011 - 16:10 — Andrew95Your mistake is thinking in absolutes. Classic propaganda says "they're weak and stupid, but they are the greatest threat to your lifestyle we've ever seen, and so they must be defeated!"
Note that, if something can be classified as propaganda, it's wrong. I don't care who's touting it.
For instance, Debra Goldman is far from a left wing extremist. However, she might now have supporters who disagree with Tedesco. Not everything is sharp lines and sides on a battlefield.
So...
Sun, 05/01/2011 - 21:38 — Bob_SconceI mostly agree with you. IMO, independents tend to dislike outspoken politicians, and Tedesco's definitely the most outspoken one out there. Further, I'd have been happier if a less partisan candidate had run against Hill, but I'm afraid that now there just isn't enough space for anybody else -- Hill will get the Demoratic votes and money; Losurdo will get the Repulbican votes and money. You can't win the election without at least one of those.
Room in the middle
Mon, 05/02/2011 - 22:18 — Solon77I think there is room in the middle. Losurdo has aligned herself with JT and JT's approval rating is declining daily, all he has to do is keep opening his mouth and from what we have seen he can't help himself. People are tired of being embarrassed by JT. Moderate Republicans will not be loyal to extreme right wing tea party religious values candidate - the pendulum is swinging.
Hill - extreme left small demographic.
Losurdo - hard right, Hill - hard left - this leaves a lot of room in the middle for someone not wed to a party ideology.
RM knows this and thus his call for help. He should be worried as well. He is nothing without a clear majority - not much of a leader. Want to reelect someone who can't work across the lines to get things done. He has burned to many bridges. The longer it goes with him doing nothing the greater the argument he is ineffective.
Should be an interesting summer and fall.
...
Tue, 05/03/2011 - 06:55 — Sideburns"He is nothing without a clear majority...."
You couldn't be more wrong. Margiotta served for years as a party of one on this Board and was very effective. He is well-respected in his district for his hard work and dedication throughout the years. D8 is fortunate to have a Board member with so much tenacity and I am confident we will happily support him for another term.
You are often on the mark
Mon, 05/02/2011 - 07:46 — woodstockYou are often on the mark with so many of your comments, but you seem to have a glaring blind spot -- similar to Debra Goldman's -- where there is a alarming lack of political awareness and public perspctive.
Hill it toast.
Perhaps....
Mon, 05/02/2011 - 09:15 — Bob_SconceAt the national level, we all know pretty well how the President and Congress are doing in the eyes of the American people. And we have a somewhat fuzzier idea about how Bev. Purdue is doing in NC. But, at the local level, we really don't know -- the best indication was last year's commissioner's race, but that was tied up into the national elections.
Please try not to fly off
Mon, 05/02/2011 - 08:37 — CaryCurmudgeonPlease try not to fly off the deep end, but I think it is you that has the blind spot. You are so blindly loyal to the four Republicans that you can't step back and see how the general public perceives them. Bob is right on, independents don't want ultra-liberals running things, nor do they want ultra-conservatives. If I could, I wouldn't change the election result from 2009. But I talk to people and I think your view that so many people love our Republican school board members is just wrong. The "race-hustlers" as you like to call them have been effective in eroding some support. I've listened in on conversations where people are very worried about losing accreditation.
I think our board Republicans hurt themselves when they show up at Tea Party or Republican Party meetings and talk about "instilling conservative values" in our education systems. Independents down want conservative or liberal values in education, they just want education.
The vote in 2009 was not to instill conservative values in our schools, it was to remove liberal values from them.
This is exactly what I talk
Mon, 05/02/2011 - 16:04 — Andrew95This is exactly what I talk about with the tea party appearances, and I'm glad someone on the other side notices that kind of thing.
The Democrats are the ones
Mon, 05/02/2011 - 12:56 — woodstockThe Democrats are the ones clearly flying off the deep end in into la la land. When they remain silent as a party and as individuals (elected officials) when the gang of race-hustlers -- Barbar, Gatewood, Brannon, NC Fist, etc. -- spout off at board meetings and in the media, bring about investigations and lawsuits, disingenuously cry racism, conduct economic warfare by going ofter people's jobs, I find it very difficult to understand how you can continue to support them and ask the board members to tone it down.
I agree with you, all the
Mon, 05/02/2011 - 13:18 — CaryCurmudgeonI agree with you, all the race-baiting from the Dem politicos and their partners in the NAACP, Fist, GWIS, etc. are turning off people in the middle. My point is that those middle/independent people would be equally repulsed by messages about instilling "conservative values" in our school system.
Thinking Americans have embraced Republicanism would be a huge mistake. Many people I know are sick of both parties.
I think that this Fall, candidates who present themselves as moderate bridge-builders will be very well-received.
I find it very difficult to understand how you can continue to support them and ask the board members to tone it down.
I am hardly a supporter of those groups.