2015 mayoral race public opinion polling has started

[fieldmarshaldj]

I play for no party team. I judge only for right and wrong, truth and lie. It's a popular refrain about Democrat mismanagement, because it's a correct conclusion. It is astonishing any intellectually honest person knowing the facts and history can claim the opposite, and I've been studying and following this subject for 3 decades now. BNA, living in Chicago, that is one of the premier examples of uncontested one-party run urban corruption for most of the past century without equal. To the point, it is an example of what NOT to do or follow.

I can understand why someone on the left would want such statements "eliminated from our discourse" because it exposes the truth of the matter, and leftism has exposed itself time and time again as the enemy of truth. If it wasn't, they'd have nothing to fear from close scrutiny of their ideology and their methods, and their end results, but as we see, shutting down discussion to prevent that from happening makes my point, and is done in order to preserve their power.

**I'll add we probably should stick to the discussion of the thread title, since no one is going to likely be swayed as to the correctness or wrongness of their ideological beliefs here.

[tragenvol]

The problem with politics is that there is no longer a middle....it's win at all costs, if you show any moderation at all, you're branded a leftist.  I hope Nashville remains "party-less" in local elections, e.g. the last local elections in Cookeville:  if you entered a race with a D attached to your name, you effectively abandoned all hope for office.

The basic principle of government is to protect those it governs, some believe in a more narrow view of that ideal; whereas, others believe in a wider view....enough about politics of the parties please; I gave up political science when I changed my major to accounting.

Who is going to win this thing?  Barry has indeed come on strong of late.

 

[UTgrad09]

The problem with politics is that there is no longer a middle....it's win at all costs, if you show any moderation at all, you're branded a leftist.  I hope Nashville remains "party-less" in local elections, e.g. the last local elections in Cookeville:  if you entered a race with a D attached to your name, you effectively abandoned all hope for office.

The basic principle of government is to protect those it governs, some believe in a more narrow view of that ideal; whereas, others believe in a wider view....enough about politics of the parties please; I gave up political science when I changed my major to accounting.

Who is going to win this thing?  Barry has indeed come on strong of late.

 

I agree that there is no longer a middle. These days, it seems, you can't have ideals that blend between the parties. It seems now more than ever that if you pick a party, you must adopt all of their principles. And forget being "soft" on certain issues. That's a surefire way to be branded a RINO or DINO (depending on who is dominant in your area). The new age of politics makes you take a litmus test to decide whether you are a "true" conservative or a "true" liberal. 

As someone with some fiscally conservative tendencies and socially liberal tendencies, this makes elections very, very tough. In the end, I try to pick candidates that I feel are strong-minded and pragmatic. I'd rather vote for someone who will compromise when that is the best course of action for the public, rather than stick to the party line and allow nothing to get done.

[samsonh]

I agree that there is no longer a middle. These days, it seems, you can't have ideals that blend between the parties. It seems now more than ever that if you pick a party, you must adopt all of their principles. And forget being "soft" on certain issues. That's a surefire way to be branded a RINO or DINO (depending on who is dominant in your area). The new age of politics makes you take a litmus test to decide whether you are a "true" conservative or a "true" liberal. 

As someone with some fiscally conservative tendencies and socially liberal tendencies, this makes elections very, very tough. In the end, I try to pick candidates that I feel are strong-minded and pragmatic. I'd rather vote for someone who will compromise when that is the best course of action for the public, rather than stick to the party line and allow nothing to get done.

Quite true. But these local elections are a bit different. There is no huge difference between any of the candidates. I've read that Freeman and Barry are liberal and will run up debt and raise taxes, which really seems like it would be difficult to do both. Fox has a plan for fiscal restraint, he just hasn't laid it out. When I look at the city I do not see much wasteful spending. I see a pretty well oiled machine that has been improving drastically over the past 10-15 years. I want to keep us on that path. It is sustainable financially.

 

I would like to see schools focused on however. Right now many young people live in the city until they are 30-35 and married and move to Williamson for the schools. It would be good to keep these residents.

[fieldmarshaldj]

I agree that there is no longer a middle. These days, it seems, you can't have ideals that blend between the parties. It seems now more than ever that if you pick a party, you must adopt all of their principles. And forget being "soft" on certain issues. That's a surefire way to be branded a RINO or DINO (depending on who is dominant in your area). The new age of politics makes you take a litmus test to decide whether you are a "true" conservative or a "true" liberal. 

As someone with some fiscally conservative tendencies and socially liberal tendencies, this makes elections very, very tough. In the end, I try to pick candidates that I feel are strong-minded and pragmatic. I'd rather vote for someone who will compromise when that is the best course of action for the public, rather than stick to the party line and allow nothing to get done.

It's because it's a contradiction in terms. You cannot be a social leftist and a fiscal rightist. "Social liberalism" is enormously expensive (both in monetary and cultural terms) and cannot be reconciled with restraint in spending. I tend to see it utilized by people to want to claim how "tolerant" they are, but don't recognize you have to "liberally" apply the word "no" when it comes to enacting or funding said policies (and once you say "no", you're no longer that "tolerant liberal" you claim to be).

Curiously, you can meld fiscal liberalism and social conservatism, however that doesn't tend to last long as the former's recklessness tends to break down the latter with time.

[UTgrad09]

Quite true. But these local elections are a bit different. There is no huge difference between any of the candidates. I've read that Freeman and Barry are liberal and will run up debt and raise taxes, which really seems like it would be difficult to do both. Fox has a plan for fiscal restraint, he just hasn't laid it out. When I look at the city I do not see much wasteful spending. I see a pretty well oiled machine that has been improving drastically over the past 10-15 years. I want to keep us on that path. It is sustainable financially.

 

I would like to see schools focused on however. Right now many young people live in the city until they are 30-35 and married and move to Williamson for the schools. It would be good to keep these residents.

I agree that there's no huge difference between candidates. I think it's more along the lines of them picking different focuses.

Since I no longer live in Davidson County, I don't feel any pressure to support a particular candidate, but I do hope that the next mayor, whomever it may be, will do a solid job leading the city forward. What is beneficial for Nashville is also beneficial to the entire region, and the state.

For me, it's not so much 'wasteful' spending as it is concerning at the rate it is happening. I don't oppose large public projects at all. I have expressed my concerns about Dean trying to cram too much into a single term, though. Many mayors are champions of multiple large public projects, but it seemed that Dean may take the cake there. With Dean, everything had to be done RIGHT NOW. There was no time for public (or council) debate. It had to happen. I don't like that. I think it is healthy for the community to debate and discuss the merits of each individual plan, in a thoughtful and non-rushed manner. That's not to say necessarily 'taking it slow', but being more prudent and deliberate with actions.

I do think that the city has improved a lot of functions over the years, and I think the goal should always be to increase efficiency. I think the "one stop shop" permitting process is a great example of that, because it is less of a hindrance to development, and doesn't encourage developers to locate outside of county borders simply because of ease.

I agree that schools should be a focus -- but let's face it, they have been for a while. Metro schools receive a huge portion of the overall budget -- over $700 million. But I don't think that is entirely a mayoral thing (aside from general policy). That's where our school board needs to step up.

My main issue is infrastructure and transportation. With the large influx of residents, and now hotels and businesses in our core, we need to make sure that traffic doesn't slow down development. We don't just need a transportation plan...we need implementation. Some of that may have to come with compromises. But something absolutely needs to be done before we end up with Austin-like traffic issues.

[UTgrad09]

 

It's because it's a contradiction in terms. You cannot be a social leftist and a fiscal rightist. "Social liberalism" is enormously expensive (both in monetary and cultural terms) and cannot be reconciled with restraint in spending. I tend to see it utilized by people to want to claim how "tolerant" they are, but don't recognize you have to "liberally" apply the word "no" when it comes to enacting or funding said policies (and once you say "no", you're no longer that "tolerant liberal" you claim to be).

Curiously, you can meld fiscal liberalism and social conservatism, however that doesn't tend to last long as the former's recklessness tends to break down the latter with time.

It's not a contradiction of terms. Maybe you can't grasp the concept of having social and fiscal freedom, but that does not mean it is not a political philosophy.

[fieldmarshaldj]

It's not a contradiction of terms. Maybe you can't grasp the concept of having social and fiscal freedom, but that does not mean it is not a political philosophy.

Nope, it's entirely a contradiction in terms. It's like the phrase "having your cake and eating it, too." It sounds like a "feel good" political philosophy that is entirely lacking in coherent logic and absolutely at loggerheads in practice (why you can't find politicians who practice it - because it can't be). If you favor fiscal responsibility, you cannot favor social leftism, because you must favor the spending and government expansiveness to cover its neverending consumption of money. If you say "no" to it, you're no longer a "tolerant social liberal." Calling social leftism "freedom" is also utterly ludicrous. In practice for decades, it's become the textbook definition of decay and tyranny, along with its twin sister fiscal leftism, which it cannot live without.

[UTgrad09]

Nope, it's entirely a contradiction in terms. It's like the phrase "having your cake and eating it, too." It sounds like a "feel good" political philosophy that is entirely lacking in coherent logic and absolutely at loggerheads in practice (why you can't find politicians who practice it - because it can't be). If you favor fiscal responsibility, you cannot favor social leftism, because you must favor the spending and government expansiveness to cover its neverending consumption of money. If you say "no" to it, you're no longer a "tolerant social liberal." Calling social leftism "freedom" is also utterly ludicrous. In practice for decades, it's become the textbook definition of decay and tyranny, along with its twin sister fiscal leftism, which it cannot live without.

You have a very limited world view, my friend. You can't attempt to pigeonhole everyone into a couple of neat little political philosophies. 

Speaking of textbooks, perhaps you should pick one up. Look up the term libertarian.

[fieldmarshaldj]

You have a very limited world view, my friend. You can't attempt to pigeonhole everyone into a couple of neat little political philosophies. 

Speaking of textbooks, perhaps you should pick one up. Look up the term libertarian.

Nope, been chin-deep in studying politics for over 3 decades. In fact, was studying about world politics/geography, et al, since I was a kid in the '70s (before Kindergarten). I've got quite an expansive view of the issues, you just don't like my conclusions. "Libertarian" is a broad topic, and as I said above, it also is filled with inconsistencies. I get pigeonholed as one (to a degree) because I favor drastic reductions in government's size and scope (from federal on down), but I consider it to be simply Constitutional Conservatism. However, there are many that would prefer no government and be free to get blasted 24/7, which is anarchy and unworkable as a philosophy.

 

[UTgrad09]

Davy, I strongly disagree with your assertions, but we have to get back on topic. This really isn't about you or me, but the 2015 mayoral race. Let's get back to that.

[fieldmarshaldj]

That's the problem we've had from the get-go when we discuss politics here (or anywhere, for that matter), things get political.

[UTgrad09]

It's fine (in this thread) if things get political in relation to the mayoral race.

I'm sorry on my part for steering things off topic.

[UTgrad09]

Barry vs. Fox for the runoff. Should be interesting! Two very different candidates.

 

Also, not mayoral, but congratulations goes out to our own Brett Withers, who won the council seat in district 6!

[fieldmarshaldj]

Probably the most stark runoff choice Nashville has faced for Mayor in the modern era. Congrats to our fellow UPer, Councilman-elect Withers, on his election. Unfortunately and disturbingly for my district (Upper Antioch's 28th), an extremely-low turnout elected a racist and corrupt fraud to succeed one of the bright stars on the Council, Duane Dominy. Too bad we can't launch a recall before Vercher takes office.

[CenterHill]

Yes, congratulations, Brett!  

[Guest]

Barry definitely has the edge in the run-off. Fox is very close to Bredesen philosophically so it will be interesting to see if that message is communicated clearly to the electorate and how much love Nashville has for that legacy. Barry will need to pivot for the social agenda and focus on how she will keep Nashville's economy and the 'Brand' growing. 

Fox has the money (he will needs lots more), but Berry has (and has had) all the free exposure necessary from the fish wrap Tennesseean. 

I believe that if Berry had been mayor the last 2 terms we would have no MCC nor Bridgestone  Corp relocation... but fast food workers would probably be on their way to making $15 /hour and the tax payers would be coughing up big for (yet more) money for a failed school system and to house more people downtown via subsidies...

[fieldmarshaldj]

One thing is clear, if Barry wins and tries to implement that destructive agenda, it will almost certainly invite close scrutiny by the legislature to put a stop to it (starting with that ludicrous minimum wage hike). If she makes that a centerpiece of her runoff campaign, Fox would do well to educate people what it causes (job losses and an increase in costs of goods and services).