Friday, April 8, 2011

Slated, Unslated At-Large Dems Working Hard for Votes


As the May Primary approaches quickly, the race on the Democratic side for City-County Council appears to be heating up.

Because alphabetical order is not the friend of the slate, the volunteers and slated D's on the ballot for City-County Council, At-Large are already out and canvassing in all nine townships with Melina Kennedy's camp. The MCDP is also phonebanking for their slate utilizing volunteers on behalf of and from the campaigns of Zach Adamson, John Barth, Leroy Robinson, and Joanne Sanders.

The problem for the slate is that if many Joe or Jane Democrats go to the polls and vote for the first four names on the ballot, you will end up with Zach Adamson, Pat Andrews, John Barth, and Sherron Franklin as the nominees instead of the four slated candidates mentioned earlier. Besides the alphabetical issue, I think there are a couple of other things working against the slate of four.




So, who's in the strongest position to make it through the primary? To me, that's Zach Adamson and John Barth. They are solid candidates with good resumes and have been working hard with active campaigns that have been out there for a long time visiting clubs and making lots of contacts. If either one of those two lose out in the primary, I'll be shocked.

Further down the ballot, the issues show up.

There seems to be an undercurrent of loyal Democrats that feel as if they don't quite know Leroy Robinson as well as some of the other candidates on the ballot. He only entered the race about a month or so before slating and some heavy-hitting allies came in to help push him through the slating process. From what I've seen from Leroy, he's a great guy, and he's going to make a solid Councillor. Also, I don't think he's ignoring the concerns of those Dems. On the contrary, I believe he has heard the concerns and is taking steps to get out there.

Councillor Joanne Sanders has not made too many appearances out on the campaign trail as of yet. Given her position as an incumbent on the Council, she's probably fine, but you never know. Stranger things have happened. The only time Ed Treacy has lost a member of his slate is in these types of elections where it is not a vote for one situation. On the At-Large ballot, you vote for four.

It's difficult to beat the slate. There will be slate cards in the hands and at the doors of nearly every polling site in Marion County. The unslated candidates have uphill climbs for sure.

Sherron Franklin has a lot of baggage from her previous term representing a district on the council from her votes against the police merger and the human rights ordinance. The latter is probably more damaging in Democrat circles. She has yet to make much of a play for votes that I have seen, and she still has yet to explain her vote on the Human Rights Ordinance to any satisfaction of this voter.

Pat Andrews, to me, is the strongest candidate of the two non-slated candidates, and I believe she's also a strong candidate period. Even her strongest critics agree as almost everyone does, that she would make a tremendous City-County Councillor. Andrews is also taking a tremendous risk. By signing the slating agreement and now running against the slate, Andrews cannot be slated for another Marion County office for a period of six years. I don't think that's a big deal to Pat, but it is a factor for her in the minds of the most loyal party Democrats.

Whichever four players emerge, it will be a campaign-tested group that will be ready to take back the Council in November.

Editor's Note
In the interest of full disclosure, I am an honorary co-chair of Zach Adamson's At-Large Council campaign. My opinions are mine, and they do not speak for the Adamson campaign.

16 comments:

Paul K. Ogden said...

Of all the candidates on either side, Pat Andrews is far and away most knowledgeable about the city finances. She would be an enormous asset for the Democrats on the Council. The only reason to not slate her is she won't always be controlled by party bosses in doing her job...she has a mind of her own and is willing to use it.

This is my complaint about Marion County party leaders...they are more interested in people they can control than people of talent who have leadership skills. On the Republican side will pay a heavy price for not having strong leadership on the council who might have pointed out the error of Ballard's ways. As a result, we'll be in a deep hole come November 7th on the Council...almost 2-1 Democrat majority.

Anonymous said...

Sherron Franklin was one of Greg Ballard's first appointments! He tapped her as his abandoned houses czar! She failed miserably. She's a turn-coat. No one should be fooled.

Anonymous said...

One of the 4 at large candidates voted in the Republican primary in 2010. Why would I vote for him? I will skip him and vote for the other 3 slated at large candidates and Pat Andrews.

Indy Student said...

I wonder who anonymous is referring to. Usually the "secret republican" rumors focus on Pat Andrews.

I think Zach Adamson and John Barth have been running solid campaigns and have no real need to worry. Joanne Sanders has the name recognition among the county Dem faithful.

That really leaves Robinson as the vulnerable candidate, as far as slating goes. And then Franklin and Andrews.

Franklin has no name recognition at all, and the little she does probably isn't good. While talk radio isn't a great judgement, there are constantly callers talking about Ron Gibson, Sam Carson Jr, and (when he was still running) Jose Evans. No one is talking about Franklin.

That really leaves just Andrews. She might not sit well with some Dem faithful due to slating shenanigans, but then again, no one knows who Robinson is.

Anonymous said...

WB says: Pat Andrews by far is one of the best candidates. I find it astonishing that she was not slated. having had the privilege of working around Pat for a number of years on various issues, you will not find a better qualified individual.

With all the smoke-n-mirrors and trickonometry used in our government today, Pat has the ability to plow right through the muddied mess and get to the real bottom dollar. She exposes many of these so-called "deals" for what they are.

Pat's my candidate.

Anonymous said...

She was not slated because she did too little, too late. By the time she decided to run, John Barth has been campaigning for months. He had been meeting with PCs and attending meetings. People had met him and liked him. That race was over before slating started. She does offer a great alternative for the primary where people can still vote for Barth and vote for her also. In fact, they can vote for 3 slated candidates and her.

Anonymous said...

Pat Andrews said she would abide by slating. She has not. Loyal Democrats across the county are aware of that, and will not forget when primary comes around.

THAT is the bottom line, and why she will fail. Understand the rules. Play be the rules. Abide by the rules.

Bye bye Pat(ricia). Notice she changed her name on her filing.

Anonymous said...

At the Warren Township meeting, John Barth gave his presentation, then sat down and constantly played with his crackberry while the other canidates gave their presentations. If he cant give them the attention they deserve, how will he give me concerns any attention? As an eastsider, I had never heard of him before that meeting. My money is on Pat Andrews.

Jon E. Easter said...

If you had not heard of John Barth before that Warren meeting (whenever that was), then you've been under a rock for about a year. He has been out and about for a while.

As far as Pat goes, her given name has always been Patricia. At least in the 10 years that I've known her. Now, I've always called her Pat, but her name is and has been Patricia. Not sure what you're trying to imply there, Anon.

As far as the "R" vote for one of the at-larges, you might want to talk to that person and ask him about his vote. I think he would be glad to explain it to you. Plus, I believe your facts are incorrect. It would have been impossible for that person to have been slated having voted as an R in 2010.

Anonymous said...

John Barth worked hard for over a year before slating. I agree that if a person was in the county, he/she would have heard from him and about him. Rules say that a person who voted R in the 2010 primary should NOT be able to run in the Dem primary. Rules are not always followed. For instance, there was an absolute deadline for a candidate to pay a slating fee. Two candidates were allowed to pay their fee after the deadline. So much for rules.

Anonymous said...

Pat Andrews announced and was attending meetings before one of the slated candidates decided to run. I did NOT vote for her in slating as I am very impressed with Barth but let's keep the record straight on who started when. Also one of the slated candidates ran against the slate when Cherish Pryor was the candidate. If we are going to have a standard then it must apply to all of the candidates.

Anonymous said...

Well, why didn't she slot herself against LeRoy, who you are undoubtedly referring to. Because John Barth is a white guy? Why did she change her name on the ballot from Pat to Patricia? Because that denotes a woman's name? So why did she sign the slating agreement, tell Democrats at township meetings that she would abide by slating (meaning if you've lost, you bow out and do not run against the slate)? It is no secret that minorities, especially African Americans do well in our primaries. There is no secret women do well in our primaries

I know why. Because this lady will do anything she can to get elected, regardless of the rules. Well, one thing she is overlooking, and that is the strong party leadership we have starting with Ed Treacy, and ending up with Ward Chairs and PCs who know how the process is set up. They will not support a rouge candidate. the slate willwin, I have no doubt.

Look, Pat(ricia) had her shot at slating. Her showing was weak. Her enthusiasm and public speaking skills are weak. Her presentation, from her dress to her delivery are weak.

So here's a message to Pat and her supporters: You are not going to win. What you should have done, if you listened to those people who have been in the game FAR longer than you all have is this: Run strong at slating. If you win, you advance. If you lost, then pack it up and work towards the next election cycle for whatever race you are interested in. Learn from your mistakes, hone your skills and climb back up the ladder. There are many office holders who did not make it on the first attempt. Look back into each local office holder's history.

but no Pat(ricia), you are smarter than all of that. The party faithful are stupid because they did not get your message. Huh?

Right now all you have done is paint a target on your back as a non-compliant, rule avoiding "do anything I can to win" candidate.

Like my dad used to tell me: "One stupid move can undo all the good you've done."

We shall see on May 3rd.

Anonymous said...

“Well, why didn't she slot herself against LeRoy, who you are undoubtedly referring to. Because John Barth is a white guy?”

If I’m not mistaken Pat slotted herself against John Barth before Leroy Robinson slotted against Annette Johnson. Let’s use some common sense here instead of dragging out the race card, Why would she slot herself against an Incumbent in Sanders, Next if there was a political event or activity going on in this city in 2009 or 2010 you knew you were going to see Adamson and Johnson there, they both got their names out there. John Barth was nowhere near the visibility as the other 3, so he would be the logical choice to slot against in slating.

“Why did she change her name on the ballot from Pat to Patricia? Because that denotes a woman's name? “

You just answered your own question below; to clarify that’s called good campaign strategy.

“So why did she sign the slating agreement, tell Democrats at township meetings that she would abide by slating (meaning if you've lost, you bow out and do not run against the slate)?”

I don’t know maybe she thought her support base would be bigger when she said that? That’s the problem with letting appointed PC and VPC have the ability the vote in slating; they can be appointed and dismissed at the discretion of the county chair and executive director. Personally I’d be leery of such a process like the way a Fox is leery of humans.

“I know why. Because this lady will do anything she can to get elected, regardless of the rules. Well, one thing she is overlooking, and that is the strong party leadership we have starting with Ed Treacy, and ending up with Ward Chairs and PCs who know how the process is set up. They will not support a rouge candidate. the slate willwin, I have no doubt.”

I know why you are so adamantly against the possibility of Pat Andrews getting elected to City Council because you have a strong vested interest. See we all have a vested interest in the political process, yours just runs deeper. Anyone that reads Pat’s Blog knows she is a truth seeker and that scares the hell of you doesn’t it? Pat on city council with a larger forum for the people to get firsthand knowledge of the closed door deals happening in this city makes you shake doesn’t it. You are obviously a political hack that who’s strong vested interest means if the people you are a lackey for are exposed that might mean you miss a mortgage or car payment when you lose your job when they go down.

Anonymous said...

John, the Warren meeting swas the first I ever attended, so yes I have been under a rock. But I have been involved with many neighborhoods. So political novice, but a neighborhood advocate here.
So explain to me why we need the brackets at all. Why not just the top 4 vote getters? Is it to protect someone?

Anonymous said...

Response to Anon 6:57

So you say Pat does not trust her own party's PCs and VPCs? And she doesn't like Chairman Treacy?


Good luck May 3rd. LOL.

Indy Student said...

This whole "well why did Andrews change her name" meme is just dumb.

Go to Indianavoters.com and you can see what her "name" is listed as.

It says "Patricia (Pat) Andrews"

This isn't the first time I've seen a format like that, listing the full first name of a candidate, with the shortened or nickname in parenthesis.