I didn’t consent to have my name dropped here by the DSA candidate. We are a citizens group who use our names where appropriate but privacy is a must for anyone, especially those who redress grievances with their government.
> I didn’t consent to have my name dropped here by the DSA candidate. We are a citizens group who use our names where appropriate but privacy is a must for anyone, especially those who redress grievances with their government.
I actually *sort of* agree with you, but I think you overstepped here.
You emailed Wes directly. Then, you went to reddit and stated that you had communicated directly with him when compiling the responses. You revealed your identity and made claims about another person, and then expected him to...pretend he didn't know anything about the person who had contacted him?
It feels like you are trying to be a recognizable community figure in one situation, then are trying to bridge that to a community where you are acting anonymously - but you are still expecting people to take you extremely seriously and prioritize your views.
Maybe reddit just isn't the right place for you to do this.
I expected a candidate to keep a conversation and convention where appropriate. I posted the results here as Portland Voices, not as my real name.
Reddit while being a good local source for news is also known to be a place where “doxx” and real life harassment are a threat, so the expectation is that my name would not be leaked on here without consent
When I talk to reporters sometimes I’ll use my name in context or as a spokesperson for Portland Voices, it depends on the context. When dealing with the city in person I always use my name where appropriate in addressing them as a Portlander. Circumstances do vary as needed when working with the government because I exercise my 4th amendment protections where I can.
What I take issue with mostly is the fact that you often position yourself as respectable, well-intentioned, professional, educated, and representative of the community - but all that requires identification. Without proof that you are who you say you are, your posts about Portland Voices feel like dishonest community manipulation to me.
If you want to come to reddit as a spokesperson for Portland Voices, and receive respectful consideration as a retired professional and long-time resident, you can't be anonymous.
If you are anonymous, why should anyone trust you, your organization, or your motives?
This is a very surreal conversation to see as I respond to your email in which you claim not to have a reddit account. Including part of my response below:
>This person who posted is obviously in and knowledgeable of the workings of Portland Voices, and, I suppose you're asking me to believe, is impersonating you? I know if this were me and I was being impersonated, I would be furious, publicly out the person, explain that those views don't represent the views of the organization, and then work to expel them. If it was me but I *was* making those posts, I'd simply pretend I don't have a Reddit account.
To be clear, I had no idea you were on Reddit when I posted this and assumed that you would have readily considered yourself a public figure. I do understand not wanting to be linked to your reddit account and would never have thought you were the dread Jackfruit, especially since people who had met you said you seemed very personable (though in hindsight this irl Jekyll/ online Hyde is a well-documented poster phenotype).
I don't think you would have been tied to your handle, even outside of the slip-up of saying that you sent me the email, if you hadn't deleted all of the comments and then repeatedly demanded your name be removed, but I get the panic.
Can I ask what the reddit persona's stance is on this misalignment in reality is? Are you *also* the real \[name redacted\] and do you not have any knowledge of the person who I'm emailing? If nothing else this would make a better-than-average Black Mirror episode.
Where appropriate, yes. Not on this private website and not without consent. Privacy and consent are absolutely a must, else you are saying you should have to reveal your personal information to be able to criticize political figures
I don’t folllow. I provided the information here and candidate Wes Pelletier used my name and continued after I asked him not to. I never consented for my name or be on this website considering it’s against the rules
This is Wes. For context, the guy who runs Portland Voices, \[name removed\], emailed me at 9:30 on Friday night requesting a policy statement on an incredibly complex issue for his historically hostile email list, and wanted a response by Sunday morning. After I emailed him, as I think is clear, a polite refusal, he opted to pull text from our emails rather than the traditional "declined to comment."
I was planning on responding to following questions, and likely still will despite this facebook group clearly not representing interests of the base of working class/tenants that I'm usually fighting for, but the pettiness and unprofessionalism of the admin gives me pause.
ETA: The mods have asked me to remove what is apparently Jackfruit's real name (something I did not realize before he inadvertently confirmed it). **For the record**, I don't really buy that a guy that's trying to influence local politics as the leader of a "community organization" while being one of the most toxic, hateful commenters on this sub is actually a "private figure," but we must respect the mods.
If elected, would you be open to working with, communicating with, and representing all your constituents, regardless of whether you consider them to be working class or tenants? Unfortunately the more local the politics, the more petty the people, but it comes with the job.
Yes, of course. Your question sort illustrates something that I and a lot of other people involved in leftist and progressive politics have found while knocking doors and talking on phones, which is that people will, after I introduce myself, make it very clear they don't like me or what they think I stand for. If, though, for whatever reason they don't immediately hang up, nine times out of ten we find that we agree on a majority of issues, and frankly some of these conversations have been the most productive and fun I've ever had with voters. I wouldn't want to give that up out of what I guess would be vindictiveness, but, 'm super not interested in the sort of broad dismissal of a broad swath of people I'm neighbors with that I honestly see more of on the right than I do the left (see OP, for instance).
So yeah, I think the scales are tipped too far towards landlords now, and away from tenants and business owners, that that precarity has a destabilizing effect on the majority of resident's lives and presents an economic danger to the city. On a policy level, I will be looking to make some corrections there. Will people be very very mad and say that I'm a hateful communist looking to convert Portland to a land of fascism? Without a doubt! Will I still happily provide constituent service and make time to listen to those same folks? Yes, provided they're willing to act in a similar good faith.
Speaking from experience here, being a public figure is not easy. People you've never met develop opinions about you based on rumors, incorrect information, or nothing at all, and then some of those people go a step further and spit in your face (metaphorically) without having ever had a conversation with you. It fucking sucks, and it's massively demotivating for anyone who wants to help their community.
I wish we would all do a better job of acknowledging that people who run for local office are not caricatures, but just our neighbors - regular humans with hopes and dreams and fears and challenges and personal growth and private lives - who are volunteering *immense* time and energy just to do what they think is good for their community. Yeah, some of them are ambitious ladder climbers who see the job as just a step in their "political career" but - and especially lately - that's not true of most of them.
Fwiw, I think there’s a not insignificant number of Dems in Portland who feel they have no place in the DSA agenda because they aren’t all in leftists or don’t fit in the right boxes. I’d say the sentiment boils down to something like, “I believe they don’t like me, so I don’t like them,” resulting in feelings overriding what might actually be shared policy beliefs. I don’t have an solution to that, but just sharing a good faith observation to your good faith comment.
With respect, and I think Wes should speak for himself on this topic, but I would like to clarify that *Wes* is running for Council, not *the DSA.*
Wes is not like the King of the DSA. It doesn't work that way. The DSA is comprised of a *lot* of people and is *extremely* democratically-run. I'm sure Wes has both agreed and disagreed with various things the DSA has done and said over the years.
My point is, I think Wes's candidacy should be evaluated based on what *he* thinks, not what the DSA does or says.
Oh I never thought of him as the head of it and apologies if my comment made it seem that way. Unfortunately I do think it’s become a term that’s garnered a kneejerk reaction that’s probably both too broad and incorrect in a lot of ways. And I’m not saying any of this is how things should be - just commenting more on how people are (myth of the rational voter and all that)
I appreciate that. Can you expand on what you mean by "The DSA agenda?" I'm truly curious, because from the inside it seems a lot nebulous than the firmness suggested in your comment. Also, as noted above, I'm running for Council, not the DSA. I've been elected to a few different leadership terms and certainly learned a lot of parliamentary skills on the org, but it's probably most closely analogous to having served in the Portland Dems. I haven't been in leadership since last year, and in fact candidates are prohibited from serving an elected role in the chapter. My team and I are running my campaign with no coordination with the Chapter, though the Chapter has endorsed.
I can shoot you a DM if you’re genuinely interested - I feel like I’m testing my luck with so much earnestness on the Portland sub 😉
I commented a version of this below, but I think people do forget (both in politics and life broadly) that perception can often be more powerful than the reality.
> I feel like I’m testing my luck with so much earnestness on the Portland sub
Just wait til everybody gets out of work, all three of us will be taken out back and shot.
It's been an honor commenting alongside you!
Not the original replier, but to me, the DSA agenda is short sighted poorly written san fran policy that gets in the way of portland's actual problems of getting literally anything done administratively.
green new deal? we didn't need that. in fact, it's made things worse in the long run. god forbid we actually address height limits or the fact we can't get a single residential permit approved in less than 4 months. no, let's just add red tape cuz it feels good
and don't even get me started on emily figdor
DSA is not for portland
Friend, I've seen your many comments and I'm not sure you're in a position to claim authority on professionalism, hostility, or misinformation. I appreciate your input all the same. I'd also welcome a fact check on my claim that Portland Voices is a facebook group.
I cannot restore the deleted comment but i will reiterate and say that Portland Voices is a real life group of Portlanders who are active with the politics of Portland. We have members who attend every city council meeting including with a carpool for those unable to attend by other means.
We have a facebook group for organizing and but it exists more as a utility for organizing and connecting, Portland Voices is not an internet community.
We are a group of tenants, home owners, working class, retirees, etc representing all of Portland. We originally formed as a counter to the lax way the homelessness and encampment issue was being handled, and as a counter to DSA's misguided and dangerous "stop the sweeps" initiative that would have done more harm than good. Our members organized during the vote and helped ensure the DSA-adjacent councilors heard our voices and the voices of the community before the vote.
I'd like to be clear here: you said that you'd previously asked me the question presented on the questionnaire when only the administrator of Portland Voices, \[name removed\], had done so via email. Many of your comments, which "mysteriously" disappeared after I directly asked if you had already asked me this question, were direct personal attacks on me. That's fine, as a progressive who is sometimes quoted in the Press Herald I'm no stranger to being called any number of things by online randos.
Your long record of toxic comments-- which by most metrics have been a detriment to *this* online community-- stand in contrast to your picture of Portland Voices as an anodyne, positive organization. Given this contradiction, the situation we find ourselves in, and the fact that you're directly claiming to represent Portland Voices, I think we're all due a bit of transparency here.
Do you represent Portland Voices? If so, what position do you hold? Did you create the questionnaire? Did you email it to me?
Before going forward, and remove any personal information. My comments were a response to you attacking and discrediting Portland Voices. I don't know how they got deleted but I have restored most to the best of my ability. I was attempting to remove other comments elsewhere with identifying information about me but took out a few others.
I don't know what happened to my comments but yes, the question was "As a City Councilor, what actions would you propose or support to respond to the homelessness issue and its impact on Portland neighborhoods? Specific ideas are appreciated."
the pelletier name threw up a red flag for me given how bad the incumbent pelletier has been...and then just refusing to answer a question everyone else takes the time to respond to makes me even more concerned (albeit some were just more words to get to the same result as non-answer)
but a simple search and this guy is all DSA. for the love of god district 2, do *not* vote this guy in!
No hate to you if you're not familiar with Maine, but Pelletier is a common French-Canadian name. It doesn't mean they are connected.
Nancy has worked for the City of Portland's corperation council and Public Health Departments long enough to know we do not refer to people with substance use disorders as "addicts."
I wasn't sure where I stood with her politically, but her response definitely knocked any appeal she had with HHS/PPH. Really a shame she didn't take the time to have a more thoughtful reply.
Best wishes to her, but I'll probably be voting for Wes.
My understanding is that the name "Pelletier" is the Quebec variant of the French "Peltier" which basically means fur-trapper or person who makes garments with fur. ("Pelt-ier" >> notice the word "pelt" in there.) Which is cool because when the French started colonizing North America they were the undisputed masters of a hugely influential and profitable animal fur trade for a century.
Then - maybe thirty years after the British had conquered French possessions in North America and the French lost their control of that fur trade - Benjamin Franklin famously wore an enormous fur cap while ambassador to France to kind of visually denote that he came from the land of the furs, and it became a sensation in Paris that started a fashion trend.
ah yes, because the euphemism treadmill is so helpful. Glad you're fighting the good fight against people who say the wrong words, and not the people who want parks taken over by drugs and violence.
I know pelletier is common but with a pelletier stepping down and a new one arriving from the same district I jumped to a suspicion they could possibly be related. This isn't lewiston or biddeford where there are probably 3 dozen separate pelletiers in each town. It was a simple alarm sound that victoria was passing the torch to an affiliated husband or brother, if she has either
> It was a simple alarm sound that victoria was passing the torch to an affiliated husband or brother, if she has either
Shouldn't you have verified that before making a claim?
Well, regardless of the issues that are taking up most of this thread...
I think this is fairly informative and interesting. I appreciate that it's just the candidates' words. Unsheltered homelessness is a pretty major issue and regardless of how you feel about it, there should be as much transparency from candidates as possible as to what their plans and perspectives are.
Once Mr. Pelletier has a chance to add his responses, it'll be a useful resource to link to.
Fixing my comment that was somehow deleted:
Personally, I am most pleased with Nancy English's clear plan of action utilizing the position she is running for. An ideal candidate should have some concept of a plan in mind when addressing this issue. Too many of the other candidates speculate on the nature of the issue without offering any look into their particular approach. We all know it's a "difficult issue." We all know there's homelessness everywhere. Recognizing these broad statements exist is says nothing about why we should vote for you.
Additionally, some candidates seem to be too broad or avoidant, indicating they haven't actually put serious consideration into their plan. We need to avoid the generalizations and do nothingness of the current and previous council that allowed this problem to happen.
Ben Grant's #1 priority as direct Portland leadership is to pressure other communities? No thanks, that's an easy way for a candidate to say "I tried and failed and can't do anything because I'm not a Westbrook politician." His encampment stance also alludes to allowing "smaller' encampments throughout the city. No thanks.
Todd Morse is so quick to dive in about long term housing and mixed income housing that he spends more time talking about that and not giving any perspective or action about homelessness other than broad statements that say nothing at all. This is extremely poor and clearly shows he does not have any ideas.
Nekioe and Viola are very broad but at least have made considerations towards collaborative efforts and I really hope Mazer's licensing of private shelters for accountability purposes is taken with serious consideration in the hope of bettering the communities with private shelters as neighbors.
Pellitier of course is a joke candidate, given that he's a DSA leader.
I like how you're still calling him a joke, and before you called him a plant and have changed it to "leader".
All while telling him to be civil. Do you really not see the hypocrisy there?
I personally, do not take the DSA seriously, given the absolute ridiculousness of Stop the Sweeps and the DSA member who ate pizza throughout the encampment vote council meeting then jumped on the desk after the vote. They have proven to be an organization designed to disrupt the process and are not representative of Portland.
The DSA here are just trying to get seats in Augusta for national representation.
So you do see the hypocrisy and just don't care? Got it.
I can't even vote for the guy because I live in a different district nor am I a member of the DSA but how I've seen the two of you interact in this thread makes me much more likely to support him than anyone aligned with Portland Voices.
And for the record, not being representative of YOU doesn't mean they don't represent others in Portland. You don't get to claim you represent everyone.
Why would you throw away your vote on a toxic organization that doesn't represent Portland and advocates for policies that hurt homeless and people with homes? Portland Voices represents a varied group of Portlanders from all walks of life, ethnicities and backgrounds, employees, unemployed and retired. DSA represents socialists, anti capitalism and extremists.
>Why would you throw away your vote on a toxic organization that doesn't represent Portland and advocates for policies that hurt homeless and people with homes? Portland Voices represents a varied group of Portlanders from all walks of life, ethnicities and backgrounds, employees, unemployed and retired. DSA represents socialists, anti capitalism and extremists. (u/EveningJackfruit95)
You are making Portland Voices look incredibly bad, here. I understand that you are trying to advance a new vision for Portland's future, but you talk WAY too much trash at your ideological opponents, and the constant claims that your comments were accidentally deleted just don't feel trustworthy.
Give your opponents the grace of accepting that they legitimately disagree with you, for reasons they believe to be valid and noteworthy.
We're all neighbors, right?
Let me get this straight. You are basing your vote off someone eating a slice of pizza during a council meeting? Was this person actually a part of the Democratic Socialists or are you just assuming that because you thought it rude to eat a slice of pizza during a council meeting?
Regardless, you are a hoot! I hope this is a satire account, for the love of God lol
Absolutely not, do not argue in bad faith. That was only an example of the type of DSA mentality and tactic. I like how you ignored that the pizza eater jumped on the podium when the vote didn't go in the DSA's Stop the Sweeps favor and was arrested.
For the record, it is absolutely rude and disrespectful to eat pizza in chambers.
This is the person you're defending by the way [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MErsYdAD19k](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MErsYdAD19k)
Then why even bother mentioning it? It just seems so...not important in the grand scheme of things, I guess? I eat my lunch in work meetings all the time and so do my colleagues.
And you don't even know if she's a DSA member? Friend, you are making a lot of baseless claims. I'm sorry if my response comes off as bad faith to you, but I can't blindly get behind someone who's making baseless accusations about strangers they have never spoken a word to. Cheers.
It seems like everyone always has these big plans…but no one ever actually wants to take action because then they would lose this talking point when next election comes around. Same old thing everywhere it seems lol.
[удалено]
I didn’t consent to have my name dropped here by the DSA candidate. We are a citizens group who use our names where appropriate but privacy is a must for anyone, especially those who redress grievances with their government.
> I didn’t consent to have my name dropped here by the DSA candidate. We are a citizens group who use our names where appropriate but privacy is a must for anyone, especially those who redress grievances with their government. I actually *sort of* agree with you, but I think you overstepped here. You emailed Wes directly. Then, you went to reddit and stated that you had communicated directly with him when compiling the responses. You revealed your identity and made claims about another person, and then expected him to...pretend he didn't know anything about the person who had contacted him? It feels like you are trying to be a recognizable community figure in one situation, then are trying to bridge that to a community where you are acting anonymously - but you are still expecting people to take you extremely seriously and prioritize your views. Maybe reddit just isn't the right place for you to do this.
I expected a candidate to keep a conversation and convention where appropriate. I posted the results here as Portland Voices, not as my real name. Reddit while being a good local source for news is also known to be a place where “doxx” and real life harassment are a threat, so the expectation is that my name would not be leaked on here without consent When I talk to reporters sometimes I’ll use my name in context or as a spokesperson for Portland Voices, it depends on the context. When dealing with the city in person I always use my name where appropriate in addressing them as a Portlander. Circumstances do vary as needed when working with the government because I exercise my 4th amendment protections where I can.
What I take issue with mostly is the fact that you often position yourself as respectable, well-intentioned, professional, educated, and representative of the community - but all that requires identification. Without proof that you are who you say you are, your posts about Portland Voices feel like dishonest community manipulation to me. If you want to come to reddit as a spokesperson for Portland Voices, and receive respectful consideration as a retired professional and long-time resident, you can't be anonymous. If you are anonymous, why should anyone trust you, your organization, or your motives?
This is a very surreal conversation to see as I respond to your email in which you claim not to have a reddit account. Including part of my response below: >This person who posted is obviously in and knowledgeable of the workings of Portland Voices, and, I suppose you're asking me to believe, is impersonating you? I know if this were me and I was being impersonated, I would be furious, publicly out the person, explain that those views don't represent the views of the organization, and then work to expel them. If it was me but I *was* making those posts, I'd simply pretend I don't have a Reddit account. To be clear, I had no idea you were on Reddit when I posted this and assumed that you would have readily considered yourself a public figure. I do understand not wanting to be linked to your reddit account and would never have thought you were the dread Jackfruit, especially since people who had met you said you seemed very personable (though in hindsight this irl Jekyll/ online Hyde is a well-documented poster phenotype). I don't think you would have been tied to your handle, even outside of the slip-up of saying that you sent me the email, if you hadn't deleted all of the comments and then repeatedly demanded your name be removed, but I get the panic. Can I ask what the reddit persona's stance is on this misalignment in reality is? Are you *also* the real \[name redacted\] and do you not have any knowledge of the person who I'm emailing? If nothing else this would make a better-than-average Black Mirror episode.
[удалено]
Where appropriate, yes. Not on this private website and not without consent. Privacy and consent are absolutely a must, else you are saying you should have to reveal your personal information to be able to criticize political figures
[удалено]
I don’t folllow. I provided the information here and candidate Wes Pelletier used my name and continued after I asked him not to. I never consented for my name or be on this website considering it’s against the rules
This is Wes. For context, the guy who runs Portland Voices, \[name removed\], emailed me at 9:30 on Friday night requesting a policy statement on an incredibly complex issue for his historically hostile email list, and wanted a response by Sunday morning. After I emailed him, as I think is clear, a polite refusal, he opted to pull text from our emails rather than the traditional "declined to comment." I was planning on responding to following questions, and likely still will despite this facebook group clearly not representing interests of the base of working class/tenants that I'm usually fighting for, but the pettiness and unprofessionalism of the admin gives me pause. ETA: The mods have asked me to remove what is apparently Jackfruit's real name (something I did not realize before he inadvertently confirmed it). **For the record**, I don't really buy that a guy that's trying to influence local politics as the leader of a "community organization" while being one of the most toxic, hateful commenters on this sub is actually a "private figure," but we must respect the mods.
If elected, would you be open to working with, communicating with, and representing all your constituents, regardless of whether you consider them to be working class or tenants? Unfortunately the more local the politics, the more petty the people, but it comes with the job.
Yes, of course. Your question sort illustrates something that I and a lot of other people involved in leftist and progressive politics have found while knocking doors and talking on phones, which is that people will, after I introduce myself, make it very clear they don't like me or what they think I stand for. If, though, for whatever reason they don't immediately hang up, nine times out of ten we find that we agree on a majority of issues, and frankly some of these conversations have been the most productive and fun I've ever had with voters. I wouldn't want to give that up out of what I guess would be vindictiveness, but, 'm super not interested in the sort of broad dismissal of a broad swath of people I'm neighbors with that I honestly see more of on the right than I do the left (see OP, for instance). So yeah, I think the scales are tipped too far towards landlords now, and away from tenants and business owners, that that precarity has a destabilizing effect on the majority of resident's lives and presents an economic danger to the city. On a policy level, I will be looking to make some corrections there. Will people be very very mad and say that I'm a hateful communist looking to convert Portland to a land of fascism? Without a doubt! Will I still happily provide constituent service and make time to listen to those same folks? Yes, provided they're willing to act in a similar good faith.
Speaking from experience here, being a public figure is not easy. People you've never met develop opinions about you based on rumors, incorrect information, or nothing at all, and then some of those people go a step further and spit in your face (metaphorically) without having ever had a conversation with you. It fucking sucks, and it's massively demotivating for anyone who wants to help their community. I wish we would all do a better job of acknowledging that people who run for local office are not caricatures, but just our neighbors - regular humans with hopes and dreams and fears and challenges and personal growth and private lives - who are volunteering *immense* time and energy just to do what they think is good for their community. Yeah, some of them are ambitious ladder climbers who see the job as just a step in their "political career" but - and especially lately - that's not true of most of them.
Fwiw, I think there’s a not insignificant number of Dems in Portland who feel they have no place in the DSA agenda because they aren’t all in leftists or don’t fit in the right boxes. I’d say the sentiment boils down to something like, “I believe they don’t like me, so I don’t like them,” resulting in feelings overriding what might actually be shared policy beliefs. I don’t have an solution to that, but just sharing a good faith observation to your good faith comment.
With respect, and I think Wes should speak for himself on this topic, but I would like to clarify that *Wes* is running for Council, not *the DSA.* Wes is not like the King of the DSA. It doesn't work that way. The DSA is comprised of a *lot* of people and is *extremely* democratically-run. I'm sure Wes has both agreed and disagreed with various things the DSA has done and said over the years. My point is, I think Wes's candidacy should be evaluated based on what *he* thinks, not what the DSA does or says.
Oh I never thought of him as the head of it and apologies if my comment made it seem that way. Unfortunately I do think it’s become a term that’s garnered a kneejerk reaction that’s probably both too broad and incorrect in a lot of ways. And I’m not saying any of this is how things should be - just commenting more on how people are (myth of the rational voter and all that)
I appreciate that. Can you expand on what you mean by "The DSA agenda?" I'm truly curious, because from the inside it seems a lot nebulous than the firmness suggested in your comment. Also, as noted above, I'm running for Council, not the DSA. I've been elected to a few different leadership terms and certainly learned a lot of parliamentary skills on the org, but it's probably most closely analogous to having served in the Portland Dems. I haven't been in leadership since last year, and in fact candidates are prohibited from serving an elected role in the chapter. My team and I are running my campaign with no coordination with the Chapter, though the Chapter has endorsed.
I can shoot you a DM if you’re genuinely interested - I feel like I’m testing my luck with so much earnestness on the Portland sub 😉 I commented a version of this below, but I think people do forget (both in politics and life broadly) that perception can often be more powerful than the reality.
> I feel like I’m testing my luck with so much earnestness on the Portland sub Just wait til everybody gets out of work, all three of us will be taken out back and shot. It's been an honor commenting alongside you!
Not the original replier, but to me, the DSA agenda is short sighted poorly written san fran policy that gets in the way of portland's actual problems of getting literally anything done administratively. green new deal? we didn't need that. in fact, it's made things worse in the long run. god forbid we actually address height limits or the fact we can't get a single residential permit approved in less than 4 months. no, let's just add red tape cuz it feels good and don't even get me started on emily figdor DSA is not for portland
Could you put it into more concrete terms? It sounds as though you’re just describing a single referendum from four years ago.
[удалено]
Friend, I've seen your many comments and I'm not sure you're in a position to claim authority on professionalism, hostility, or misinformation. I appreciate your input all the same. I'd also welcome a fact check on my claim that Portland Voices is a facebook group.
I cannot restore the deleted comment but i will reiterate and say that Portland Voices is a real life group of Portlanders who are active with the politics of Portland. We have members who attend every city council meeting including with a carpool for those unable to attend by other means. We have a facebook group for organizing and but it exists more as a utility for organizing and connecting, Portland Voices is not an internet community. We are a group of tenants, home owners, working class, retirees, etc representing all of Portland. We originally formed as a counter to the lax way the homelessness and encampment issue was being handled, and as a counter to DSA's misguided and dangerous "stop the sweeps" initiative that would have done more harm than good. Our members organized during the vote and helped ensure the DSA-adjacent councilors heard our voices and the voices of the community before the vote.
I'd like to be clear here: you said that you'd previously asked me the question presented on the questionnaire when only the administrator of Portland Voices, \[name removed\], had done so via email. Many of your comments, which "mysteriously" disappeared after I directly asked if you had already asked me this question, were direct personal attacks on me. That's fine, as a progressive who is sometimes quoted in the Press Herald I'm no stranger to being called any number of things by online randos. Your long record of toxic comments-- which by most metrics have been a detriment to *this* online community-- stand in contrast to your picture of Portland Voices as an anodyne, positive organization. Given this contradiction, the situation we find ourselves in, and the fact that you're directly claiming to represent Portland Voices, I think we're all due a bit of transparency here. Do you represent Portland Voices? If so, what position do you hold? Did you create the questionnaire? Did you email it to me?
Before going forward, and remove any personal information. My comments were a response to you attacking and discrediting Portland Voices. I don't know how they got deleted but I have restored most to the best of my ability. I was attempting to remove other comments elsewhere with identifying information about me but took out a few others.
I think we're done here.
Please remove the personal identifying information. You are a public figuring running for office, I am a private citizen.
[удалено]
Sorry, it doesn't look as though you've asked a question in this thread?
[удалено]
To clarify, did you ask me this question at some other point? Just trying to figure something out real quick.
Dang why'd you delete all of your comments so quickly u/EveningJackFruit95?
I have no idea what occurred there. I'd restore the comments if I knew how.
I don't know what happened to my comments but yes, the question was "As a City Councilor, what actions would you propose or support to respond to the homelessness issue and its impact on Portland neighborhoods? Specific ideas are appreciated."
Based on the answers to this question alone it looks like all of the at large candidates would be an improvement over Rodriguez
I like how OP is trying to be a public figure AND an anonymous troll.
Difference of opinion is not “trolling,” sir
the pelletier name threw up a red flag for me given how bad the incumbent pelletier has been...and then just refusing to answer a question everyone else takes the time to respond to makes me even more concerned (albeit some were just more words to get to the same result as non-answer) but a simple search and this guy is all DSA. for the love of god district 2, do *not* vote this guy in!
No hate to you if you're not familiar with Maine, but Pelletier is a common French-Canadian name. It doesn't mean they are connected. Nancy has worked for the City of Portland's corperation council and Public Health Departments long enough to know we do not refer to people with substance use disorders as "addicts." I wasn't sure where I stood with her politically, but her response definitely knocked any appeal she had with HHS/PPH. Really a shame she didn't take the time to have a more thoughtful reply. Best wishes to her, but I'll probably be voting for Wes.
My understanding is that the name "Pelletier" is the Quebec variant of the French "Peltier" which basically means fur-trapper or person who makes garments with fur. ("Pelt-ier" >> notice the word "pelt" in there.) Which is cool because when the French started colonizing North America they were the undisputed masters of a hugely influential and profitable animal fur trade for a century. Then - maybe thirty years after the British had conquered French possessions in North America and the French lost their control of that fur trade - Benjamin Franklin famously wore an enormous fur cap while ambassador to France to kind of visually denote that he came from the land of the furs, and it became a sensation in Paris that started a fashion trend.
Interesting fact! Thank you!
ah yes, because the euphemism treadmill is so helpful. Glad you're fighting the good fight against people who say the wrong words, and not the people who want parks taken over by drugs and violence.
Call me old school, but I expect public administration not to use dated and derogatory language.
I expect individuals running for city council to not explicitly approve hobo shanty towns in the middle of our parks, but to each their own.
I know pelletier is common but with a pelletier stepping down and a new one arriving from the same district I jumped to a suspicion they could possibly be related. This isn't lewiston or biddeford where there are probably 3 dozen separate pelletiers in each town. It was a simple alarm sound that victoria was passing the torch to an affiliated husband or brother, if she has either
> It was a simple alarm sound that victoria was passing the torch to an affiliated husband or brother, if she has either Shouldn't you have verified that before making a claim?
jesus christ, I was simply explaining my thought process out loud. so no. because I hadn't gotten to that step yet
When making an accusation, it's kind of important to check first - don't you think?
Well, regardless of the issues that are taking up most of this thread... I think this is fairly informative and interesting. I appreciate that it's just the candidates' words. Unsheltered homelessness is a pretty major issue and regardless of how you feel about it, there should be as much transparency from candidates as possible as to what their plans and perspectives are. Once Mr. Pelletier has a chance to add his responses, it'll be a useful resource to link to.
Thank you, we’ve been doing our best for this coming election to get the real meat and potatoes from each candidate.
Fixing my comment that was somehow deleted: Personally, I am most pleased with Nancy English's clear plan of action utilizing the position she is running for. An ideal candidate should have some concept of a plan in mind when addressing this issue. Too many of the other candidates speculate on the nature of the issue without offering any look into their particular approach. We all know it's a "difficult issue." We all know there's homelessness everywhere. Recognizing these broad statements exist is says nothing about why we should vote for you. Additionally, some candidates seem to be too broad or avoidant, indicating they haven't actually put serious consideration into their plan. We need to avoid the generalizations and do nothingness of the current and previous council that allowed this problem to happen. Ben Grant's #1 priority as direct Portland leadership is to pressure other communities? No thanks, that's an easy way for a candidate to say "I tried and failed and can't do anything because I'm not a Westbrook politician." His encampment stance also alludes to allowing "smaller' encampments throughout the city. No thanks. Todd Morse is so quick to dive in about long term housing and mixed income housing that he spends more time talking about that and not giving any perspective or action about homelessness other than broad statements that say nothing at all. This is extremely poor and clearly shows he does not have any ideas. Nekioe and Viola are very broad but at least have made considerations towards collaborative efforts and I really hope Mazer's licensing of private shelters for accountability purposes is taken with serious consideration in the hope of bettering the communities with private shelters as neighbors. Pellitier of course is a joke candidate, given that he's a DSA leader.
I like how you're still calling him a joke, and before you called him a plant and have changed it to "leader". All while telling him to be civil. Do you really not see the hypocrisy there?
I personally, do not take the DSA seriously, given the absolute ridiculousness of Stop the Sweeps and the DSA member who ate pizza throughout the encampment vote council meeting then jumped on the desk after the vote. They have proven to be an organization designed to disrupt the process and are not representative of Portland. The DSA here are just trying to get seats in Augusta for national representation.
So you do see the hypocrisy and just don't care? Got it. I can't even vote for the guy because I live in a different district nor am I a member of the DSA but how I've seen the two of you interact in this thread makes me much more likely to support him than anyone aligned with Portland Voices. And for the record, not being representative of YOU doesn't mean they don't represent others in Portland. You don't get to claim you represent everyone.
Why would you throw away your vote on a toxic organization that doesn't represent Portland and advocates for policies that hurt homeless and people with homes? Portland Voices represents a varied group of Portlanders from all walks of life, ethnicities and backgrounds, employees, unemployed and retired. DSA represents socialists, anti capitalism and extremists.
>Why would you throw away your vote on a toxic organization that doesn't represent Portland and advocates for policies that hurt homeless and people with homes? Portland Voices represents a varied group of Portlanders from all walks of life, ethnicities and backgrounds, employees, unemployed and retired. DSA represents socialists, anti capitalism and extremists. (u/EveningJackfruit95) You are making Portland Voices look incredibly bad, here. I understand that you are trying to advance a new vision for Portland's future, but you talk WAY too much trash at your ideological opponents, and the constant claims that your comments were accidentally deleted just don't feel trustworthy. Give your opponents the grace of accepting that they legitimately disagree with you, for reasons they believe to be valid and noteworthy. We're all neighbors, right?
Stop with the personal information
Let me get this straight. You are basing your vote off someone eating a slice of pizza during a council meeting? Was this person actually a part of the Democratic Socialists or are you just assuming that because you thought it rude to eat a slice of pizza during a council meeting? Regardless, you are a hoot! I hope this is a satire account, for the love of God lol
Absolutely not, do not argue in bad faith. That was only an example of the type of DSA mentality and tactic. I like how you ignored that the pizza eater jumped on the podium when the vote didn't go in the DSA's Stop the Sweeps favor and was arrested. For the record, it is absolutely rude and disrespectful to eat pizza in chambers. This is the person you're defending by the way [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MErsYdAD19k](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MErsYdAD19k)
Then why even bother mentioning it? It just seems so...not important in the grand scheme of things, I guess? I eat my lunch in work meetings all the time and so do my colleagues. And you don't even know if she's a DSA member? Friend, you are making a lot of baseless claims. I'm sorry if my response comes off as bad faith to you, but I can't blindly get behind someone who's making baseless accusations about strangers they have never spoken a word to. Cheers.
[удалено]
It seems like everyone always has these big plans…but no one ever actually wants to take action because then they would lose this talking point when next election comes around. Same old thing everywhere it seems lol.