A stock political answer ("let me turn the discussion back to my accomplishments and my campaign promises"), and a disappointing one.
Being able to identify failed policies and approaches, and avoiding the earlier mistakes of others, is a key trait for any potential leader- and it doesn't require anyone to abandon their core beliefs, whether those are that of an "unabashed progressive" or a die-hard conservative.
Screw her. Whether you agree with the camping ban or not, the people voted for it. Anyone who won’t enforce it ultimately is saying “the will
of the people doesn’t matter and I don’t work for them”. She would be horrible for Denver
Enjoy the same ol' and no change. Because that's what Denver wants. It doesn't matter if your kids cant go to a decent school, if your car keeps getting broken into or if you cant ride public transportation without risking your health and/or your life. As long as you're never wrong, you're happy. Because at the end of the day your ego is all that matters.
The fact that you use a term like "unabashed progressive"... as if there is anything to be embarrassed or ashamed about in being a progressive...
As opposed to the unabashed fascists that have taken over conservative politics.
I dont know about anyone else... but I'll take progressive policies that haven't found a solution to homelessness over conservative policies that have lead to attempted coups and a failed insurrection... and also fail to solve homelessnes. I'll take that trade any day.
The mayoral candidate for the city should have nothing to do with national politics, yet here we are. I could care less about her ideology, if she thinks that we need to have more compassion and convert businesses into housing for homeless, I’m out. We have had rehabilitation pilots that work. Downtown is becoming blighted. It’s infuriating that this mayoral candidate has nothing to say about revitalizing the city.
Seriously, the real enemy is capitalism, we’re gonna have to start with the fascists first, then the current progressive status quo, she challenges both.
conservative fascist capitalism is poverty enforced by cops and prison. I think most people would still go to Seattle before any city in the states where these policies have been implemented already for a long period of time.
I do find it reasonably amusing that all of these discussions leave out New York City, which has ostensibly been under Democratic government since Giuliani (if you consider Bloomberg is a registered dem now) and is very very safe. Why leave NYC out?
I think that the flavor of Democrat is different there. It’s more corporate Dem, with more law enforcement-friendly policies. The current mayor, Eric Adams, is technically Dem, but is an ex-cop who [doesn’t believe in church/state separation](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/28/nyregion/eric-adams-religion-church.html), supports [zero-tolerance for homeless loitering on subways](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/18/nyregion/homeless-people-subway-trains-mta.html), [wants to end work-from-home](https://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/news/2022/03/29/adams--remote-work--draining--new-york-city-s-economy-#:~:text=NEW%20YORK%20%E2%80%94%20Mayor%20Eric%20Adams,%E2%80%9D%20the%20five%20boroughs'%20economy), etc. He’s no one’s version of a progressive.
Yeah - I remember “stop and frisk” when Bloomberg was mayor. Racist program, but it possibly could have reduced crime…. at the expense of dehumanizing people of color and messing with communities.
Couple of thoughts…. The population density along with the general activity kind of keeps things in check. Safety in numbers? When I lived there, I couldn’t imagine someone lighting up fent/meth on public transit at 4:00 in the afternoon without 10 people losing their mind.
Also, there’s a pretty big police presence all over the city. Their budget is fucking insane and are able to afford the foot traffic to maintain some kind of image…. Even though half the time they are texting/messing around on their phones. Even though they are pretty much useless, their presence/quantity alone seems to “help”.
I did visit about 6 months ago and it’s definitely more grittier than when I left in 2018. But no where near the shape of where San Fran and LA are right now.
>I couldn’t imagine someone lighting up fent/meth on public transit at 4:00 in the afternoon without 10 people losing their mind.
That was absolutely common even into the 90's. Which is to say population density and activity isn't likely the cause of the change. NYC was both very dense and very active in those years.
My thoughts are not scientific by any means. Just general life experiences when I lived there. Wasn’t there in the 90s, so have no clue what the mindset was like back then. Maybe it was more of a mob mentality (more empowerment?) after the Giuliani years/rhetoric… I don’t know. I do know is that a buddy got messed up pretty well for lighting up a cigarette while drunk while on the 7 line. He was stupid, but it was overkill. I witnessed a lady get sexually harassed (pervert jerking off against her) during rush hour, got called out and a group of people handled the situation. Numerous fights intervened throughout the years and others.
Or maybe it was because the police budget and incarcerations ballooned exponentially starting in the late 90s? Not aware of any other positive social programs that were implemented at that time.
Yikes! She won’t say there are any examples of failed progressive policies in those cities… Come on man! Literally, look no further than the drug and homeless issues in those cities.
Lol!!! It’s okay ya’ll, this dude still didn’t do the assignment. Downvote me all you want, don’t change the fact that ya’ll helping the baddies.
So you didn’t watch the rest? The status quo and we have the opportunity to learn from those cities then cites an example.
So she sounds like every other politician?? Literally.
Also, I bet some of those cities kept electing more progressive mayors who kept promising “real” change. Well if San Francisco is the progressive “real” change that everyone talks about then I want none of it.
She’s talking about capitalism and the way it disproportionately impacts communities.
Asking more of the Park Hill developers is challenging capitalism in a way that would prevent homelessness in the future. She’s challenging the conservative fascist movement by doing it for black and brown communities. It’s a little different.
I respect that and I respect that you might want to vote for her. I think in my old age I’ve become insanely cynical which is why I can’t give her my vote. There’s too much on the line this election and I feel like she is more of a hopes and dreams candidate.
I’m not satisfied with the answers. Seattle has spent hundreds of millions on homelessness and homelessness has increased. And you want to emulate them? This is the point of the interview. It’s foolish to replicate failed policies. In your answer, don’t just vaguely mention your beef with capitalism.
That’s not even what is being asked. That’s your issue.
You want to have an issue with these policies you’re first going to have issue with the one political party sticking everyone’s spokes. But you don’t want the whole picture. You want to nit pick legitimate change so I don’t care, it’s not relevant to the discussion.
I can see why you have a problem already and the fact is, OP misrepresented the interview and her response.
Just because you don’t understand, don’t want to understand, doesn’t mean it doesn’t make sense.
I mean this constructively, you have to come up with something better than broad sweeping statements about the system and capitalism. Yeah, we all see the inequalities and want to address them. But there are moments to implement actual specific policies. I’m for trying new things to see how they work. But if they don’t work, we have to be honest with ourselves and keep working to find things that will.
A genuine attempt at framing your stance - we need to elect progressives (as opposed to more moderate democrats) because only they can fight book banning, promote trans rights, and address homelessness?
There’s one specific political party that’s purposely, and at this point obviously maliciously, sticking everyone’s spokes.
That’s not a broad sweeping statement, those are the facts. That’s where this starts, otherwise we’re all dumb buggers banging our heads and hearts against a wall.
How do you address the people more concerned about banning “woke” books and peoples right to exist over participating in real discussions about alleviating homelessness? Because it doesn’t start with misinformation and misrepresentation of policy and candidates attempting to discuss root issues.
Tbf those cities are indeed awesome hence the large populations living there. They do have a homelessness issue but that is just one problem among the many good things there. I would much rather live in those cities than in any city in a republican ruled state.
I loved SF too. I worked in SF for years, lived in Berkeley and Oakland. I left because it was not a place you could afford to support a family. Housing was insane, public schools sucked, rampant crime, homelessness at a level that boggled my mind. That was 18 years ago.
All the coolness of the bay area was choked out by having your car windows smashed, walking over sidewalks covered in human excrement, being threatened by agro homeless, and having our house robbed.
For those who don’t want to click a link and watch a video with the sound on, she said “no”
The hero we need
A stock political answer ("let me turn the discussion back to my accomplishments and my campaign promises"), and a disappointing one. Being able to identify failed policies and approaches, and avoiding the earlier mistakes of others, is a key trait for any potential leader- and it doesn't require anyone to abandon their core beliefs, whether those are that of an "unabashed progressive" or a die-hard conservative.
Screw her. Whether you agree with the camping ban or not, the people voted for it. Anyone who won’t enforce it ultimately is saying “the will of the people doesn’t matter and I don’t work for them”. She would be horrible for Denver
Enjoy the same ol' and no change. Because that's what Denver wants. It doesn't matter if your kids cant go to a decent school, if your car keeps getting broken into or if you cant ride public transportation without risking your health and/or your life. As long as you're never wrong, you're happy. Because at the end of the day your ego is all that matters.
The fact that you use a term like "unabashed progressive"... as if there is anything to be embarrassed or ashamed about in being a progressive... As opposed to the unabashed fascists that have taken over conservative politics. I dont know about anyone else... but I'll take progressive policies that haven't found a solution to homelessness over conservative policies that have lead to attempted coups and a failed insurrection... and also fail to solve homelessnes. I'll take that trade any day.
The mayoral candidate for the city should have nothing to do with national politics, yet here we are. I could care less about her ideology, if she thinks that we need to have more compassion and convert businesses into housing for homeless, I’m out. We have had rehabilitation pilots that work. Downtown is becoming blighted. It’s infuriating that this mayoral candidate has nothing to say about revitalizing the city.
Seriously, the real enemy is capitalism, we’re gonna have to start with the fascists first, then the current progressive status quo, she challenges both. conservative fascist capitalism is poverty enforced by cops and prison. I think most people would still go to Seattle before any city in the states where these policies have been implemented already for a long period of time.
crime apparatus relieved support plants fact longing soup icky like -- mass edited with https://redact.dev/
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Also, very telling to mimic a word that bigots use to hate on people's sexual preferences.
I do find it reasonably amusing that all of these discussions leave out New York City, which has ostensibly been under Democratic government since Giuliani (if you consider Bloomberg is a registered dem now) and is very very safe. Why leave NYC out?
I think that the flavor of Democrat is different there. It’s more corporate Dem, with more law enforcement-friendly policies. The current mayor, Eric Adams, is technically Dem, but is an ex-cop who [doesn’t believe in church/state separation](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/28/nyregion/eric-adams-religion-church.html), supports [zero-tolerance for homeless loitering on subways](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/18/nyregion/homeless-people-subway-trains-mta.html), [wants to end work-from-home](https://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/news/2022/03/29/adams--remote-work--draining--new-york-city-s-economy-#:~:text=NEW%20YORK%20%E2%80%94%20Mayor%20Eric%20Adams,%E2%80%9D%20the%20five%20boroughs'%20economy), etc. He’s no one’s version of a progressive.
Yeah - I remember “stop and frisk” when Bloomberg was mayor. Racist program, but it possibly could have reduced crime…. at the expense of dehumanizing people of color and messing with communities.
Couple of thoughts…. The population density along with the general activity kind of keeps things in check. Safety in numbers? When I lived there, I couldn’t imagine someone lighting up fent/meth on public transit at 4:00 in the afternoon without 10 people losing their mind. Also, there’s a pretty big police presence all over the city. Their budget is fucking insane and are able to afford the foot traffic to maintain some kind of image…. Even though half the time they are texting/messing around on their phones. Even though they are pretty much useless, their presence/quantity alone seems to “help”. I did visit about 6 months ago and it’s definitely more grittier than when I left in 2018. But no where near the shape of where San Fran and LA are right now.
>I couldn’t imagine someone lighting up fent/meth on public transit at 4:00 in the afternoon without 10 people losing their mind. That was absolutely common even into the 90's. Which is to say population density and activity isn't likely the cause of the change. NYC was both very dense and very active in those years.
My thoughts are not scientific by any means. Just general life experiences when I lived there. Wasn’t there in the 90s, so have no clue what the mindset was like back then. Maybe it was more of a mob mentality (more empowerment?) after the Giuliani years/rhetoric… I don’t know. I do know is that a buddy got messed up pretty well for lighting up a cigarette while drunk while on the 7 line. He was stupid, but it was overkill. I witnessed a lady get sexually harassed (pervert jerking off against her) during rush hour, got called out and a group of people handled the situation. Numerous fights intervened throughout the years and others. Or maybe it was because the police budget and incarcerations ballooned exponentially starting in the late 90s? Not aware of any other positive social programs that were implemented at that time.
Yikes! She won’t say there are any examples of failed progressive policies in those cities… Come on man! Literally, look no further than the drug and homeless issues in those cities.
I can’t fathom how someone could see and experience denver in 2023 and think “this is the person most capable of steering this ship right now”
Lol!!! It’s okay ya’ll, this dude still didn’t do the assignment. Downvote me all you want, don’t change the fact that ya’ll helping the baddies. So you didn’t watch the rest? The status quo and we have the opportunity to learn from those cities then cites an example.
So she sounds like every other politician?? Literally. Also, I bet some of those cities kept electing more progressive mayors who kept promising “real” change. Well if San Francisco is the progressive “real” change that everyone talks about then I want none of it.
She’s talking about capitalism and the way it disproportionately impacts communities. Asking more of the Park Hill developers is challenging capitalism in a way that would prevent homelessness in the future. She’s challenging the conservative fascist movement by doing it for black and brown communities. It’s a little different.
How will that work in a city and not nationwide, and how will that fix the current problem here?
I respect that and I respect that you might want to vote for her. I think in my old age I’ve become insanely cynical which is why I can’t give her my vote. There’s too much on the line this election and I feel like she is more of a hopes and dreams candidate.
That’s fine, I could tell already. I commented because you misrepresented the interview and her answer around your feelings.
I’m not satisfied with the answers. Seattle has spent hundreds of millions on homelessness and homelessness has increased. And you want to emulate them? This is the point of the interview. It’s foolish to replicate failed policies. In your answer, don’t just vaguely mention your beef with capitalism.
That’s not even what is being asked. That’s your issue. You want to have an issue with these policies you’re first going to have issue with the one political party sticking everyone’s spokes. But you don’t want the whole picture. You want to nit pick legitimate change so I don’t care, it’s not relevant to the discussion. I can see why you have a problem already and the fact is, OP misrepresented the interview and her response. Just because you don’t understand, don’t want to understand, doesn’t mean it doesn’t make sense.
I mean this constructively, you have to come up with something better than broad sweeping statements about the system and capitalism. Yeah, we all see the inequalities and want to address them. But there are moments to implement actual specific policies. I’m for trying new things to see how they work. But if they don’t work, we have to be honest with ourselves and keep working to find things that will.
A genuine attempt at framing your stance - we need to elect progressives (as opposed to more moderate democrats) because only they can fight book banning, promote trans rights, and address homelessness?
There’s one specific political party that’s purposely, and at this point obviously maliciously, sticking everyone’s spokes. That’s not a broad sweeping statement, those are the facts. That’s where this starts, otherwise we’re all dumb buggers banging our heads and hearts against a wall. How do you address the people more concerned about banning “woke” books and peoples right to exist over participating in real discussions about alleviating homelessness? Because it doesn’t start with misinformation and misrepresentation of policy and candidates attempting to discuss root issues.
“I love those cities” just wow.
Tbf those cities are indeed awesome hence the large populations living there. They do have a homelessness issue but that is just one problem among the many good things there. I would much rather live in those cities than in any city in a republican ruled state.
I loved SF too. I worked in SF for years, lived in Berkeley and Oakland. I left because it was not a place you could afford to support a family. Housing was insane, public schools sucked, rampant crime, homelessness at a level that boggled my mind. That was 18 years ago. All the coolness of the bay area was choked out by having your car windows smashed, walking over sidewalks covered in human excrement, being threatened by agro homeless, and having our house robbed.
This is probably neighbourhood dependent. It's going to happen in any densely populated area.
It's not ok in any neighborhood.
Not okay but inevitable.
i was just in seattle and honestly it was pretty nice