Write in GERARD W RYAN - Not a PO Thread

joan_crystal said:
Those of us planning on writing in Gerard W Ryan for TC are doing so because we firmly believe that he has done an exceptionally fine job on the TC and would be an asset to the town going forward.

I cast one of my votes for in the primary for Jerry, but he lost. Unless he is actively waging a campaign and/or encouraging people to write him in, I would not consider doing so in November. I agree that Jerry has done a good job and will be an asset to Maplewood going forward (regardless of whether he is on the TC), but he lost by a considerable margin in June when his name was on the Democratic party line. Each person obviously can use their votes however they choose, but to vote for him now when his name is not even on the ballot and he is not running seems disrespectful to both him and the process. I doubt Jerry wants to lose this election twice. I find it funny that many of the same people who are criticizing folks on another thread for not respecting the result of a valid public process and urging them to give up their opposition and move on are in this thread promoting a write-in candidacy for someone who already lost this year's election and is no longer even running.


He lost the Primary which is generally a low turnout affair. Many think he was unfairly targeted. Write-Ins have a long tradition in the country, as does a candidate losing a Primary running in the General. That's why I referenced Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) I could have referenced Sen, Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn)


tjohn said:
So, if there are two seats, we could write-in one candidate and vote for one on this list, right?


Yes.


LOST said:
He lost the Primary which is generally a low turnout affair. Many think he was unfairly targeted. Write-Ins have a long tradition in the country, as does a candidate losing a Primary running in the General. That's why I referenced Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) I could have referenced Sen, Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn)

This. Write-in votes are a perfectly legitimate part of the election process.


LOST said:
He lost the Primary which is generally a low turnout affair. Many think he was unfairly targeted. Write-Ins have a long tradition in the country, as does a candidate losing a Primary running in the General. That's why I referenced Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) I could have referenced Sen, Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn)

Lieberman was not a write-in candidate; he ran as an independent party candidate and his name was on the ballot. Both Murkowski and Lieberman waged aggressive, well-funded campaigns in pursuit of their candidacies. Also, I read that the Maplewood Democratic primary this year had one of the highest turnouts (by percentage) in the entire state, so I'm not sure turnout explains much about the result. A write-in campaign for a candidate that already lost by a wide margin and is not running an independent campaign seems at least as desperate an attempt to not accept results as anything the P.O. opponents have pulled.


But it isn't quite so expensive as suing the town.


tomdevon said:


LOST said:
He lost the Primary which is generally a low turnout affair. Many think he was unfairly targeted. Write-Ins have a long tradition in the country, as does a candidate losing a Primary running in the General. That's why I referenced Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) I could have referenced Sen, Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn)
Lieberman was not a write-in candidate; he ran as an independent party candidate and his name was on the ballot. Both Murkowski and Lieberman waged aggressive, well-funded campaigns in pursuit of their candidacies. Also, I read that the Maplewood Democratic primary this year had one of the highest turnouts (by percentage) in the entire state, so I'm not sure turnout explains much about the result. A write-in campaign for a candidate that already lost by a wide margin and is not running an independent campaign seems at least as desperate an attempt to not accept results as anything the P.O. opponents have pulled.

There's value, IMHO, in registering a protest vote.


tomdevon said:


LOST said:
He lost the Primary which is generally a low turnout affair. Many think he was unfairly targeted. Write-Ins have a long tradition in the country, as does a candidate losing a Primary running in the General. That's why I referenced Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) I could have referenced Sen, Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn)
Lieberman was not a write-in candidate; he ran as an independent party candidate and his name was on the ballot. Both Murkowski and Lieberman waged aggressive, well-funded campaigns in pursuit of their candidacies. Also, I read that the Maplewood Democratic primary this year had one of the highest turnouts (by percentage) in the entire state, so I'm not sure turnout explains much about the result. A write-in campaign for a candidate that already lost by a wide margin and is not running an independent campaign seems at least as desperate an attempt to not accept results as anything the P.O. opponents have pulled.

Except that casting a write-in ballot has no dilatory effect, nor does it attempt to change the process by which folks are elected. The EMVKOhNo troika is only interested in delaying that which has been proposed, to the point of total obstruction. A write-in obstructs nothing, and may produce a more legitimate result than Fred and the Bandits had hoped for.


tomdevon said:


LOST said:
He lost the Primary which is generally a low turnout affair. Many think he was unfairly targeted. Write-Ins have a long tradition in the country, as does a candidate losing a Primary running in the General. That's why I referenced Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) I could have referenced Sen, Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn)
Lieberman was not a write-in candidate; he ran as an independent party candidate and his name was on the ballot. Both Murkowski and Lieberman waged aggressive, well-funded campaigns in pursuit of their candidacies. Also, I read that the Maplewood Democratic primary this year had one of the highest turnouts (by percentage) in the entire state, so I'm not sure turnout explains much about the result. A write-in campaign for a candidate that already lost by a wide margin and is not running an independent campaign seems at least as desperate an attempt to not accept results as anything the P.O. opponents have pulled.

I don't see the issue here. Write-in votes are allowed. If you would prefer to vote for somebody on the ballot, go for it. If somebody else wants to write in Jerry Ryan or Jerry Springer or Ryan Seacrest or, I dunno, Larry the Cable Guy then that's their business. If Jerry is somehow elected (which he won't be) and doesn't want to serve then he can decline. But that's his problem, not yours our ours.


Steve said:
You could probably order some business cards with Jerry's name printed on them to hand to voters on the way into the poll site. Just maintain the proper distance.

Does this tactic ever work? Any empirical proof of it moving the voting needle? It always feels so slapdash and pathetic to be approached for support on election day five feet out of the no go zone. It reminds me of once walking around Brussels trying to find a good restaurant having done no homework. We knew our choice was a crapshoot but we certainly were not going to go inside places where the maitre'd stood in the street flagging down couples.

Of course, this is a little different, a name on a card is useful to anyone feeling disenfranchised looking to lodge a protest vote but not knowing how.


I understand that these situations are not exactly apples and apples, but I was pointing out the intellectual irony that I see. "There was a fair process, your side lost, move on" works both ways. I also think that someone should ask Jerry for his permission or blessing before undertaking a campaign on his behalf. If he doesn't want to run, respect that. Seems like common courtesy to me. The groupthink here is truly fascinating. I trust almost nothing that many of you say, but I enjoy getting this insight into how the fringe of my community thinks.


It was only a suggestion to help ensure that people think about Jerry on election day and are able to spell his name correctly. And, yes, it can work. Just last month, in Staten Island, there was a primary election for the Conservative Party nomination for District Attorney. Michael McMahon, the Democratic Party nominee was listed on the ballot and the Joan Illuzi, the Republican Party nominee, forced a write-in opportunity (she successfully submitted an "opportunity to ballot" petition) and ultimately won with approximately 59% of the vote. I've been told that her campaign posted people outside of the electioneering zone at poll sites with rubber stamps bearing her name that people would borrow, use, and then return (NY uses paper ballots that are then scanned as opposed to the Direct Recording Electronic (DRE) equipment that we use) for use by subsequent voters.

As for the comments concerning people who support the Post Office process and now allegedly not supporting the public process of the primary election, I think that there is a basic misunderstanding of positions. While I suspect the "supporters of the Post Office process" are bothered by the last minute opposition to the project, I think that what most take offense to is the apparent pattern of deception employed by the VK, etc., to try and block the process and get Jerry off of the TC.

N.B. I am not a Maplewood resident and have no direct stake in the election/Post Office project.


yahooyahoo said:
So why are we "saving" Gerard W Ryan? Why should we write his name on the ballot?

I haven't asked Jerry what he thinks of people writing him in. The reason I am going to write him in isn't to "save" him, since I think he neither wants nor needs it. But if we want to cast protest votes and send Greg Lembrich a message, all the write-ins need to have one name on them. And the one name I've heard mentioned who has high enough recognition is Jerry. If I thought 500 people would vote for me, I'd put my name out there as a write-in candidate. But I wouldn't even get 5. I think Jerry could get a couple hundred write-ins, which would be quite a statement, given that the typical number in a municipal election is about 20.


tomdevon-

It's a protest vote. No one is doing this to actually change the election. And no one is suing the township because the primary didn't turn out the way they wanted it or accusing the vote counters of collusion. This is completely different than the EMOHNOVK tactics.


tomdevon said:
I understand that these situations are not exactly apples and apples, but I was pointing out the intellectual irony that I see. "There was a fair process, your side lost, move on" works both ways. I also think that someone should ask Jerry for his permission or blessing before undertaking a campaign on his behalf. If he doesn't want to run, respect that. Seems like common courtesy to me. The groupthink here is truly fascinating. I trust almost nothing that many of you say, but I enjoy getting this insight into how the fringe of my community thinks.

Where the irony? The write-in vote is a standard part of the process and is not the least bit disruptive or inconvenient except, I suppose, to the people who have to count votes. I actually don't really care what is built or not built on the P.O. site, but I find the predatory political opportunism of Fred Profeta to be pretty offensive and the architectural snobbery of the Creepers to be rather off-putting - as if they are somehow the arbiters of good taste.


tomdevon said:
I understand that these situations are not exactly apples and apples, but I was pointing out the intellectual irony that I see. "There was a fair process, your side lost, move on" works both ways. I also think that someone should ask Jerry for his permission or blessing before undertaking a campaign on his behalf. If he doesn't want to run, respect that. Seems like common courtesy to me. The groupthink here is truly fascinating. I trust almost nothing that many of you say, but I enjoy getting this insight into how the fringe of my community thinks.

it's not working "both ways." It has nothing to do with intellectual irony. It's not about "not accepting" the result. We ALL accept the results of the primary. But it doesn't mean we now MUST vote for the winners in the general election.

And as I wrote above, it's not about Jerry personally. He's just the person who has the name recognition. If I could get 500 Maplewoodians to vote for Mickey Mouse or Carrot Top as a show of dissatisfaction with Greg Lembrich's campaign, that would be sufficient too.

Those of us who don't want to vote for Greg Lembrich are not lying or obfuscating about motives, and we're not misleading anyone. We're being very clear about what we disagree with him about. And unfortunately in Maplewood, we don't have a real two-party general election. Our choices are either to resignedly vote for the Democratic primary winners or cast votes in protest if we don't want the Democrats. I plan to vote for Nancy Adams, and write in whosever name I think a few hundred people could coalesce around.

And in November when Lembrich is elected, unlike the ohno/VK/EM axis, I will indeed accept the result. And I won't spend all my time trying to get people to obstruct and hinder his efforts as a TC member. I will hope that he's a terrific TC member and does good things for the community. And if I don't think he is a good TC member, I'll follow the accepted procedures and vote for his opponent when he's up for reelection. And maybe even work for an opponent.


tjohn said:


Where the irony? The write-in vote is a standard part of the process and is not the least bit disruptive or inconvenient except, I suppose, to the people who have to count votes. I actually don't really care what is built or not built on the P.O. site, but I find the predatory political opportunism of Fred Profeta to be pretty offensive and the architectural snobbery of the Creepers to be rather off-putting - as if they are somehow the arbiters of good taste.

I could respect a write-in campaign if Jerry Ryan was actually running in the general election and encouraging people to vote for him, but otherwise it just seems like sour grapes from people who don't like the primary results. Also, aren't appeals and public comments part of the town's development approval process? Maybe these two situations are not as similar as I proposed, but neither are they as totally different as some on this board seem to want to make them. Then again, after seeing a suggestion in another thread that the election results would have been dramatically different if Village Facts had existed before the primary, no amount of hubris should surprise me. I personally think that it disrespects Jerry Ryan and his long legacy of dedicated service to Maplewood to (a) suggest that someone as smart and experienced as him was incapable of confronting and correcting misinformation in a political campaign, and he lost an election as a result and (b) use his name for a protest write-in campaign that apparently he has not endorsed. He's a man and our neighbor, not a symbol. Just my opinions, but hopefully someone who knows Jerry better than me will solicit his views on this subject. If he supports the write-in campaign, that's a very different story, but if not then his wishes should be respected. Will your views be different if he endorses Lembrich and Adams? I don't know that he will, but it wouldn't surprise me since Jerry has always been loyal to the local Democratic Party.


Why is it "sour grapes" not to vote for the nominated candidate? And I'll repeat what I wrote yesterday regarding why I don't support him. It's not that I don't think appeals or protests aren't important. But there is a point when the lawful process should be respected, and more importantly contracts should be honored. Why would I vote for a guy who IMHO has such disdain for the process of governing by building consensus?

ml1 said:
I'm writing in for Jerry. Not that I think he'll win, but even 300-400 write ins would send Lembrich a message that at least a few hundred people have been turned off by his campaign thus far and will have their eyes on him. My beef with him now is that he is still opposing the Post House, and from what I can gather from his statement, it's because of the notion that it's a "McBuilding" that doesn't fit. I don't expect Lembrich to like the look of the building. But at this point, given that we've gone through a long process of public meetings, plans, volunteer input, review by the MVA and PB, I would have hoped a candidate for public office would stop opposing the project now. Even if that person didn't personally like the proposed building, I would have hoped that he respects the lawful process that got us there.

It's a vote to express displeasure with the VK and fellow travelers. I haven't heard anybody suggest that it will alter the outcome.


I will write in Jerry. In my opinion, keeping the village a village by suing the town and forcing the indefinite retention of legal fees and a worthless building a week after the election was disingenuous. If the truth were known before the election about the lawsuit, Ryan never would have lost.


Jasmo said:
I will write in Jerry. In my opinion, keeping the village a village by suing the town and forcing the indefinite retention of legal fees and a worthless building a week after the election was disingenuous. If the truth were known before the election about the lawsuit, Ryan never would have lost.

Well, to be fair, the Lembrich campaign was full of energy and that, I think, is why he won.


I don't think Jerry would want to openly oppose a Democratic line candidate. He's too much of a team player and all-round nice guy. Unlike, for example, Fred.


^^^ Assuming that were true, would he mind others opposing the line candidate on his behalf?


I'm guessing he would never interfere with a voter's rights.


tomdevon said:

I could respect a write-in campaign if Jerry Ryan was actually running in the general election and encouraging people to vote for him, but otherwise it just seems like sour grapes from people who don't like the primary results. Also, aren't appeals and public comments part of the town's development approval process? Maybe these two situations are not as similar as I proposed, but neither are they as totally different as some on this board seem to want to make them.

As usual, I admire your point, but I think a closer comparison would be voters who, after their candidate lost a primary, staged a write-in campaign, then demanded a recount, then requested a state election investigation, then sued in court, then showed up at the swearing-in to question the winner for five hours.

Me, I'd be OK with that (maybe put a clock on the questions). I seem to have an above-average tolerance for messiness in public affairs. But I respect that issues of motive and timing tend to mean more to others than they do to me, and if Jerry Ryan write-in voters see those factors as distinctions between their effort and the other side's, it doesn't strike me as hypocritical.


DaveSchmidt said:

As usual, I admire your point, but I think a closer comparison would be voters who, after their candidate lost a primary, staged a write-in campaign, then demanded a recount, then requested a state election investigation, then sued in court, then showed up at the swearing-in to question the winner for five hours.

That's pretty on the mark. And yes, that is an enormous difference between ohno60/VK/EM and a few dozen people who are going to write Jerry Ryan's name on their ballots.

It's such an enormous difference, it's not even remotely analogous.

But my questions for those who think writing in Jerry Ryan is such an affront to decency:

Would it be ok if all those who are turned off by Greg Lembrich campaigned for Phyllis Scalera? Even if those folks are registered Democrats? or should Democrats who don't agree with Lembrich just vote for him anyway? Or just not vote? The problem with doing any of those things is that it sends absolutely no message. No one could interpret what a vote for Scalera means. Does it mean the person really likes what she stands for? Doesn't like what Adams or Lembrich stand for? But a vote for Ryan is pretty clear -- it's Democrats who are dissenting from the Lembrich/VK message.


dave said:
I don't think Jerry would want to openly oppose a Democratic line candidate. He's too much of a team player and all-round nice guy. Unlike, for example, Fred.

I agree. And whether it's Jerry or any other Democrat, openly opposing the officially and legally nominated candidate would likely wipe out any future possibility of getting the MDC endorsement to run in the future.


joan_crystal said:
Those of us planning on writing in Gerard W Ryan for TC are doing so because we firmly believe that he has done an exceptionally fine job on the TC and would be an asset to the town going forward.

If MOL had a "like" button, I would click that for Ms. Crystal's post.


+10

nohero said:


joan_crystal said:
Those of us planning on writing in Gerard W Ryan for TC are doing so because we firmly believe that he has done an exceptionally fine job on the TC and would be an asset to the town going forward.
If MOL had a "like" button, I would click that for Ms. Crystal's post.


In order to add a comment – you must Join this community – Click here to do so.

Advertisement

Advertise here!

Sponsored Business

Find Business

Featured Events