To Our San Diego Memebers!

Would appreciate any thoughts, suggestions, as to who would be the best next Mayor for San Diego to vote for.

I am not going to vote for Roberts, because one of the most disgusting local radio talk show hosts has endorsed him.  This talk show host tends  to lie, I could never vote for someone he would embrace.

Thanks.

Someone who has a real vision for all San Diegans and the world we live in, not just a mouthpiece for Con Vis.

-- Modified on 10/25/2004 9:58:32 AM

Frye is a total whack job. She "appears" to be legit, but if you examine her record, you see she generally opposes everything unless it aligns with her "surfer" attitude.

She's a quasi-environmentalist type, but not a true tree-hugger.

She does have a couple good ideas, but she has no way of implementing anything. Notice how she got into this election that was SUPPOSED to be a true runoff between Roberts and Murph. If she had tried to run in the general election, she would have been obliterated (vote wise).

Some have put forward the theory that she is supposed to be a diversion to draw votes away from Murph, which would bolster Ronbo's possibilities. But THAT idea is backfiring now.

In the end, she probably won't do that well, since she's a write-in candidate and most people probably won't write her in.

To be honest, NONE of the candidates are worth a crap, Murph is a bumbler and a judge, not mayor material--Ya gotta wonder why Ronbo has been trying to get the mayorship of Sandy Eggo.......he's been trying forever and he's always blowing smoke--and Donna needs to tker her board and go splash around in PB, or go lead a Starbuck's boycott.

Donna hasn't "implemented anything" because she is usually on the losing end of 8-1 council votes.  Given the record of the SD council, I look at that as a compliment. I say we need more "whack jobs" in SD these days.

She didn't "get into" this election...she was pursued by the people who support her, because they were tired of "career SD politicians".  Sort of a Schwarzenegger scenario, wouldn't you say?

New blood is needed in this town, bigtime.  Murphy and Roberts are more of the same (although at this point, I would choose Roberts over Murphy).  You have three candidates...the guy asked for a recommendation...make a choice.  The lesser of evils is a choice.  However, just saying they are all losers is ostriching.  Your "statement" ends up blowin' in the wind.

If she got her votes, this city would be worse off than it is currently.

I've talked woth other council members and the most positive thing I've heard about her from them is that she adheres to the speaker time limits and doesn't allow the silliness from the floor as others have in the past.

Murph is just out of his element, but people looked upon him as better than the alternatives in 2000.

I think Roberts is trying to use the mayor's position as a stepping stone to either the Governor's seat or the US Senate (not that he stands a chance in either case). I think he truly believes that he is another Pete Wilson.

Frye will get NOTHING accomplished IF she's elected. The 8-1 votes you mentioend obviously mean she's consistently on the wrong side of the issues. Generally, she votes against most things on the agenda.

The safest vote is to re-elect Murph and DO NOT pass the strong mayor initiative. Then start pushing for change on the council and try and get a real mayoral candidate in 2008.

Which in some cases may be a good thing.  In this case it isn't.  One of the reasons why there are so many 8-1 votes is that Frye won't vote for anything she doesn't understand.  She also won't study up on issues before the council meetings or have a staffer brief her.  She then asks silly questions, still doesn't understand  and votes no.  My personaly opinion is that she's too uninformed to be mayor.

Roberts has done many of the things he claims to despise.  He's voted to underfund the cities retirement system.  He's voted to increase his own benefits.  He's currently running a retirement system with a huge deficit.  And that's with just one issue, the city's retirement system.  He's a career politician and not in the good sense.  In my opinion he's too in line with the developers, etc.  Whoever said that Roberts thinks he's the next Pete Wilson is on the money.

Murphy isn't the strongest leader ever, but he is methodical and carefully studies issues.  While that can bind him up I believe he can steer the city in a recovery course without destroying city government as Roberts wants to do.  My vote's on Murphy.

Don't worry, my gilled friend...it is unlikely she will get enough votes, and "Ronzo" (thanks, JBird) is our current Peter Navarro (vote wise, not ideology wise), so you will most likely get your wish.