Nov 9, 2011 12:09 PM
Incumbent Bridget Fleming kept her seat on the town board. DANA SHAW
A nail-biting race for one of two open seats on the Southampton Town Board ended on Tuesday night with Republican Christine Preston Scalera as the apparent winner, but only by a photo-finish 85-vote lead over Independence Party challenger Brad Bender, according to unofficial results from the Suffolk County Board of Elections.
Party officials from both sides of the aisle cautioned that the outcome could change pending the tally of 791 absentee ballots that haven’t yet been counted.
According to the BOE’s unofficial results, Ms. Fleming garnered the most votes of the four candidates vying for two seats on the Town Board, with a count of 5,828 votes, or nearly 27 percent of votes cast. Ms. Scalera brought in 5,342 votes, or 24.7 percent; Mr. Bender received 5,257 votes, or 24.3 percent; and... more
Party officials from both sides of the aisle cautioned that the outcome could change pending the tally of 791 absentee ballots that haven’t yet been counted.
According to the BOE’s unofficial results, Ms. Fleming garnered the most votes of the four candidates vying for two seats on the Town Board, with a count of 5,828 votes, or nearly 27 percent of votes cast. Ms. Scalera brought in 5,342 votes, or 24.7 percent; Mr. Bender received 5,257 votes, or 24.3 percent; and... more
Good riddance, Ms ...more Kabot. The voters have twice rejected you and your petty politics and your unwillingness to take responsibility for your own actions and the hand you played in downgrading the town's rating.
Nonsense, Peoplefirst. Linda was a very late write in candidate (while Anna was fundraising over a year ago) and they almost always don't win unless they have a lot of money to match incumbents. She was not even on the Republican Line due to a deal Anna made with Wruck to keep the Republican line blank in exchange for Anna's dumping Bridget on the Independence line for Scalera.
And as for your narrative that Linda caused the ratings downgrade, your ignorance is breathtaking as it is ...more something you can never defend. All the audits are clear that the problems and fund deficits and increases happened totally in Heaney's time in 2002-2007. And I challenge you to refute that with facts.
That is typical Anna Throne-Royalty who will never live down the Court proven confirmation of her being a liar in the DUI PBA conspiracy, complete with subpoenaed phone records of the 1:00am conversation between PBA Pay Aube and Anna.
Next time, Throne-Royalty will face a real Republican challenge on the Republican line.The disgracefully incompetent Wruck and Heaney are no longer so powerful as the Party has finally come to its senses.
Linda did a poor job? She spent two years fixing the mess which netted the Town the credit upgrade six weeks after she left office. Towns get into huge holes like Southampton did over years of abuse and out of control spending like Heaney did from 2002- 2007.
http://www.27east.com/news/article.cfm/news/237891/Southampton-Town-personnel-grew-while-revenues-were-abundant
In Linda's first year 2008, she instituted a hiring and spending freeze after Heaney's wild spending, and ...more in 2009 had an audit completed that documented these Heaney fical abominations. Furthermore she produced a budget with a $5 million cut in spending inspite of escalating healthcare and pension costs which today is still in force, including her hiring freeze policy, except Anna had proposed to increase it (public information) until she was thwarted last year, albeit in a poor fashion.
Six weeks after Linda left, her two year labor to right the finances was rewarded by the rating upgrade, No idiot that Anna would have us believe, would think that a problem 6 years in the making would miraculously get solved in six weeks after she assumes office. It will take years as well to return the Town to where it was before. Anna is the crowing rooster taking credit for the sun rising in the morning.
And this year Anna adopted Linda's 2009 budget cornestones of Police retirements and $5Million cuts in spending, policies she vigorously opposed when presented in 2009 which is obviously an acknowledgement of Linda's correct policies and Anna's total lack of creative solutions!
As for fair and square, even Anna admitted to her friends that without that timely and phoney DUI charge that was so absurd the jury quickly threw it out, that she would probably have not won it the first time.
Now on to the Republican Committee. I am seriously considering changing my political affiliation to a Blank because of the ineptitude of the Republican Party. The leadership is a joke. The fact that they went after the Southampton Project film only made the Democratic ticket stronger. We have become the weaker party because we don't work together. I don't see that changing much as long as some of the old timers still bully the new Chairman. If we want to get stronger, let's remove some committee people that have outlived their usefulness. Some of them have openly stabbed their own candidates in the back while others send out e-mails about subjects that make the Republican Party look like Boss Tweed and Tamany Hall. Everyone should just shut their mouths and work to make the party stronger, instead of sitting on your a**es and doing nothing positive. That's how I feel about Election Day 2011.
Bender has a great chance to win on absentee ballots.
We will see what happens when they count the absentee ballots but #'s usually follow the way people voted at the polls. If Scalers wins tell me peoplefirst what did Anna gain besides more of your hilarious empty posts. Anna not fast breathing a huge sigh of relief because Scalera may just be taking Nancy Graboski seat. When Scalera does take her seat on Jan 1 all we will have for the next 2 years is Anna complaining about the majority. Well I guess Linda will have to come back in ...more 2013 and finally kick your lying butt out of office.
Progressnow your comments are killing me if you really love sweeping victories, just wait until until 2012 when the republicans take the whitehouse and the senate, we already have the majority in congress.
Enjoy your victory, and remember get over yourself!
It is not uncommon for people to equate the House of Representatives with "Congress", but that is simply not correct.
On another note, just which ...more party will control the Senate and House after next year's elections is a far cry from being a slam dunk for either side. So remember that old political adage, what comes around, goes around or as my grandmother used to say, don't count your chickens before they are hatched.
What a scoup?
Dodger: "She once said that Skip had taught her every dirty trick in the book and that she was going to use themDodger: "
Anna campaign operatives are so brimming with unsupported loose slander that are so irrational and illogical which when challenged, they never, ever back up with facts. They just throw them up against the wall and hope some stick with the innocents.
You talk as if Heaney was a mentor which is so laughable because everyone knows Cannuscio who despised Heaney, ...more was her mentor and taught her about public service. The fact is that she protested (with Graboski) against Heaney's dirty tricks and even ran a Primary against him - AND WON!
And you slime Linda with the accusation that she said she was going to use every dirty trick in the book WHEN IT IS ANNA WHO IS A COURT PROVEN LIAR AND CONSPIRATOR IN HER DUI ARREST AND JAILING WHICH THE JURY SAW RIGHT THROUGH AND THREW OUT!
And it is also Anna who threw Bridget and Sally Pope under the bus in 2009 when no Democrat won any seat in the Town Council with Anna's dirty deal with Heaney that everyone in the Republican committee knows!
And it was also Anna who made a deal with the deposed Republican Party head Wruck to keep the Republican line Blank IN EXCHANGE FOR REMOVING BRIDGET FROM THE INDEPENDENCE LINE WHICH SHE HAD THE LAST TIME, THROWING BRIDGET UNDER THE BUS YET AGAIN AND SHE KNOWS IT!
You Anna political operatives are so stupid with your accusations that you are self contradictory and can never support. High school campaign managers will not stoop to the idiocy of your amateurish claims. Instead of falsely accusing Linda with charges that have been repeatedly challenged and you all can't back up, you should face up to the stunning weaknesses of your client who has been exposed in the last two elections as follows:
1)She is despised by a large portion of voters and HAS NO COATAILS. She couldn't bring up Bridget or Pope in 2009. She couldn't get fellow Independence partymate Bender in. Bridget, the Democratic shining star won INSPITE OF ANNA RUNNING INTERFERENCE!
2)She caused Brad's defeat: By putting Scalera in the Independence Line, she stole votes that would have gone to Bridget and instead went to Scalera, pumping up her vote count against Brad. In razor thin ending, a few votes here and there can decide the election. So Brad, you an thank Annafor your troubles, because she doesn't really care about you just her own victory however she can secure it.
3)She is making a mockery of the infirm Democratic Party that has lost its own self respect that it can only field one Democrat in this election cycle. If you're a Dem, SHAME ON YOU!
4)THIS IS REALLY A STUNNING VICTORY FOR LINDA AND A HUMILIATING ELECTION FOR ANNA! As weeks ago with virtually nan unopposed candidate on the ballot, Linda, a very late write in candidate just 6 weeks ago with no money with no Party backing thanks to Wruck and Heaney, and virtually no fundraising and no campaign funds, should have received no more than 5 or 10% of the votes. Instead, she blows through with more than 50% of Anna's votes, who had been campaigning and fundraising with big contributors (illegally as it turns out, talk about dirty tricks) for well over a year.
The three or four of you Anna campaign operatives should really be worried about Anna's future plans to run for US Congress, state office, or higher County office. as they say in Texas, "YOUR DOG DON'T HUNT"!
Their signs say it all: People, NOT politics.
She won...Move on.
...All in all, a little competition always makes things more interesting and as such i'm glad Linda at least made an attempt. That said, ATH has now twice beaten Linda handily. As someone said earlier, this board has become little more than a place for right-winged venting, but when it actually has mattered the people of this town have spoken and acted in support of our supervisor.
I would be curious to know how many of Linda's votes were actually from supporters of hers and how many were simply voting as close to along party lines as possible.
I don't think that obbservant's post was awful. She is stating facts, facts that you just don't get or refuse to admit are correct. I just love the way you spin the truth into lies. Let me explain the facts, Anna lied when asked about receiving a call the night of Linda's DWI. Remember Say What? It was not about the phone call it was about Anna being a LIAR. Now your other spin of the truth is your statement about Linda Kabot putting herself in a compromising position. Now your ...more trying to say Linda was drunk and she put herself in that position.
Now SayWhat you forgot Kabot was found not guilty. Now who looks like a liar & ignorant?
It was not Linda's attenpt to bring Anna down, Anna is very successful at doing that herself by lying about the phone call, trying to cover up the reason why the town attorney was appointed in 2010, and taking to much in donations. Are you trying to say that Anna did not take more than she was allowed to by law? Also, Say What, was that appointment done as a favor to Tom Suizzi and the NYS leader of the democrat party for political reasons? By the way, it was NOT Linda who made the complaint to the ethics board. Try and keep your comments honest and truthful please or I'll have to start calling you Anna.
Anna has won twice, first due to a pending DWI charge on the part of her opponent and 2nd wiith a write in candidate. So your bragging holds very little weight. Lets remember SayWhat Kabot got into the race in late September, she raised a fraction of what Anna raised (Linda did not taking more than she was allowed to).
Your statement about this blog becoming a right-wing venting place, is a joke. Tell me what are you doing blogging here and re-read some your comments. They don't come anymore left-wing then you and some of your left-wing clowns above.
BTW all of Linda votes were from supporters. I know it hard for someone like you to understand that. I'm talking about the honest, hard working class of people in the town of southampton .
Can you tell me why Anna received less votes yesterday than in 2009. Total votes in 2009 7,1137 yesterdays #'s 6249. Over 850 less in democrat votes for Anna. Who did these democrats vote for Linda?
A true grassroots campaign by a group of true independents interested ...more in the welfare of the town rather than their own inflated egos would sweep the polls and herald the beginning of progress and effective economic government. Meanwhile the red and blue hats will continue their pointless, childish bickering.
What I don't understand, though, is this: Linda says "I'm a Republican and I'm proud to be a Republican and I'm proud of this ...more team" And indeed, they did let her in the room at Villa Tuscano, and she did win the endorsement of Marietta Seaman and that great Republican elder statesman, Neil Tiger, so why didn't she just go for the GOP nomination in the first place? The party was looking for a candidate, and she would have done far better on their ballot line, so what's the story? Too much poison in the system then, but now someone's drunk the antidote? I don't get it.
BTW, Ms, Kabot's going around accusing others of being me, i.e., posting as fidelis, but she's wrong. She is apparently so upset at my telling the facts about her that it has affected her judgment, never terribly sound anyway. Sorry, Linda, you haven't found me.
Beyond the normal partisan bluster that expectedly accompanies big political events, these Press blogs have an awesome democratizing impact Thank you very much Joe Shaw for letting these blogs be free flowing and informative.
There can be no real democracy without having an informed electorate. In a small town, the ability of the Published Press to shine the light of day on often secret, murky, backroom deals that affect the very fabric of our lives for years and decades to come is ...more sketchy at best and too reliant on advertising from many of the players engaged in these backroom deals.
I have found many of the blogs in the Press very informative, perhaps due to the anonymity of the posters who can be more forthcoming with their views in the best interests of the community, which otherwise can become socially awkward, embarrassing or not business friendly precisely because it is a small town. In contrast, look at the lame, hyper-sanitized, uber innocuous blogs at Patch.com which they should totally do away with for their lack of any socially redeeming value.
Again, thank you Southampton Press.
To those who say the anonymity leads to abuses, I say the site is self-policing. On one level, garbage is garbage and everyone knows what garbage looks and smells like. On another level, we have Joe Shaw and his helpers, who are very good about taking down what is a "duplicate, off-topic or contains inappropriate content." As a backstop to them, we can flag inappropriate posts ourselves, and it works -- I flagged Lewis & Lewis's 9:11 AM filth in this thread a couple of hours ago and it was down within 30 minutes.
Fidelis, I’d love to hear you views on anonymity by that subset of bloggers, assuming, of course, that you do not belong to it.
Believe me when I say that in my heart of hearts, I am deeply attracted to your position, but we're not there yet and until we are, we must stick together. But for you and your misguided ilk -- thankfully small but possibly crucial -- we might already have won a majority on the Town Board, instead of scrabbling about among the absentee ballots for a chance of picking up that third seat.
As for the anonymity thing, my answer is simple: I don't believe that by taking public or party office, a person should forfeit any rights or privileges enjoyed by all,including the protection afforded by a screen name.
All that money spent on lavish internet productions, slick mailings, three ballot lines and yet you find yourself scrabbling among the absentee ballots. Might there just be a message for you there. Southampton voters were wise enough to bullet vote for Fleming, one-third of the electorate apparently have gone beyond the realm of expectation and written in Linda Kabot. Anna has been taken down a step or two by those who understand these things. As for Mr. Bender, he never asked for my support, and should not now be heard complaining that he didn't have it. (As he did at the Democratic Club breakfast). He would have been wiser to ask if he could retain my services in the recanvass. You, Mr. Fidelis, anonymous member of the Southampton Town Democratic Committee, made your bed and apparently as with humpty dumpty after his fall, you couldn't put a majority back together again after the fall. Score one for my and my misguided ilk, the First Amendment and the wisdom of the voters of Southampton. You know, it is just possible they didn't want Anna's slate to have a majority. Give a good study to the election results and see the drop-off from Anna to Brad. Especially note the vote differential on the Democratic line between Bridget and Brad. Seems to me the ilk may be considerably larger than you express. Might just be time in Southampton to elect a true fusion ticket, once again, next time around. One with no cross-endorsements with any party lines. Think about that ilk, Fidelis. Sweet dreams are made of this,,,,,
If the political parties won't reform themselves, then, just maybe, the people will take matters into their own ilkish hands.
As for your specious argument concerning anonymity, public and party officers do forfeit certain rights and privileges. For instance certain party officers are required to file financial disclosure statements. But given the manner in which this years Democrat ticket campaigned, Committee officers and members hiding behind screen names is par for the course. There is no fear of retribution for that subset of bloggers, they are, to my way of thinking, just another special interest group, hiding in the shadows, afraid of letting the sunlight cast itself on them. Next thing you know, you'll be running stealth candidates. A great Democratic President said it best - "We have nothing to fear, but fear itself". Evidently you and your ilk (turn about is fair play) must have plenty of fear. The fear of being identified and associated with your own comments and beliefs.
See you at the recanvass Fidelis. You will be there, won't you?
I have nothing but pride in the position I took in this election cycle. You can throw all the scurrilous remarks about me you wish. For as my grade school friends used to say "stick and stones can break my bones, but names can never harm me". I can't think of a more appropriate quote to leave you with. Now go on take your ball and go home.
You have a hard time limiting the length of your posts. (I bet you don't tweet; 140 characters would be just clearing the throat for you.)
You have a hard time dealing with criticism.
You have a hard time reading English -- I didn't "publicly criticize voters, or impugn their integrity," as you say. I merely expressed disagreement, referring to "you and your misguided ilk." One doesn't apologize ...more for disagreeing.
You have a hard time remembering how things were under your regime, back when the Dems were eating their young, compared with now, when we have a little something resembling unity and civility. Of course, I don't know how long that will last, as you seem to be bending every effort to bring back the bad old days.
This is all ironic, because as I said before, a lot of your stuff is on target, but you want it all yesterday, and that's not the real world. We're getting there. Let the process play out.
In fact, I offer you the following challenge, let us debate publicly all those issues we do not agree upon. Let us do so before the editorial board of the Press. You can come with a ...more hood over your head and one of those voice altering devices to protect your identity from disclosure. I promise I won’t run out to see what car you are driving. Let us debate the issues before that impartial panel. Let us come prepared with facts and let the members of the Editorial Board question us as well as our questioning each other. Now that would be fun and perhaps something newsworthy might come of it.
Now, I can certainly understand your wishing to back track and reverse on your disparaging remarks. I am certain you understood the pejorative leaning of the phrase you used. As an adjective “misguided” is defined as deluded. The pronoun “ilk” has a connotation of the group being of bad or questionable character. My English comprehension ability aside, Fidelis, your choice of words was far from a mere “expression of disagreement”. They were and remain an insult to those who voted contrary to your desires. My challenge for you to apologize to them remains valid and viable. You owe it to those voters and the Democratic Committee which you admittedly represent to admit, if not apologize, for a very poor choice of words.
I am certain you understood the pejorative leaning of the phrase you used. As an adjective “misguided” is defined as deluded. The pronoun “ilk” has a connotation of the typed group being of bad or questionable character. My English comprehension ability aside, Fidelis, your choice of words was far from a mere “expression of disagreement”.
As for your declaration of the Democratic Committee having "a little something resembling unity and civility", does that unity and civility come after vigorous debate and discussion or does it flow like a river of sycophants? Does it flow from the bottom up or is it dictated from the top down? I know for the last few years I attended Committee meetings very few other than myself would voice an alternative viewpoint. Especially a viewpoint that was in disagreement with the Councilperson now Supervisor Throne-Holst. Remember the meeting when she sought to have the Committee endorse Dan Russo (Republican Dan Russo) for the Special Election. All those nodding heads until I spoke against it. Thank you, Grania, for bringing Sally Pope into our lives. So is it unity and civility or just the lack of any vocal dissenters?
As for your attempt to follow Clam Pies rewriting of the history of my tenure as Town Chair, can you tell me the years I served in that position? Can you name the Democratic young I supposedly ate? In fact, Fidelis, why don't you ask the Republicans who were active then what they thought of my tenure. Why don't you read the Press Editorials among them one praising my leadership in bringing back to life what the editorial called a "moribund" party in Town? Why don't you ask an impartial observer of Southampton Town politics like Dean Spear about the history of my tenure. I am proud of my accomplishments in the Chair and of those who served on the Committee in those days. Each of them a proud Democrat in a heavily Republican Town where even the blanks outnumbered the Democrats. We might not have always have unity and civility but we fought for the Town on issues and principles and we campaigned on a party platform, not a cult of personality, not lending our line out to members of other political parties. (In fact, for the most part when we ran a non-Democrat we requiring them to effect a change of enrollment and become a Democrat)
So there's another challenge for you Fidelis, document with supported facts your characterization of my tenure as Town Chair. And please do so before my aging memory does begin to fail me.
A political party exists to promote and elect from its membership, not to endorse and give credibility to another political party. Especially a political party some argue exists solely as a conduit for patronage. With candidates who enrolled in the party for the political expediency of not needing the Independence Party Executive Committee's approval to run on that line. What have we left to proclaim when we leave our honor in the gutter?
I offer the same criticism to the Republicans for running Conservative Jim Malone and not getting a cross-endorsement for their Republican Supervisor. By the way wasn’t it Mr. Malone who promised that he would not keep his other full-time job if he was elected to the Council. How’s that working out Mr. Malone?
If you truly agree with my concerns about cross-endorsements, don't tell me it can't be done today. It can for every office save Judicial Offices. There is good case law in this state that a political party can prohibit its member candidates from accepting the cross-endorsement of other political parties. And that Fidelis was acknowledged case law in New York many many many yesterdays ago.
As for me, you still don't get it. I am no longer a member of the Democratic Committee. I am free agent who has a good insiders understanding of politics and an expertise in election law. For people like you that makes me a valuable ally or an adversary to be feared. So me and my ilk will continue to speak out supported by fact, not spin, not propaganda, and the next step may well be the formation of a truly independent fusion party slate in 2013.
Come on Fidelis, you know in your heart of heart's I am correct. (There now you can accuse me of being a Goldwater supporter and I can come back at you with a wonderful Reaganism - Oh Fidelis there you go again).
Sure hope to see you as we debate these and other issues before the Press Editorial Board.
I thought you might actually have some facts to back up your words. Obviously not and your opinions will be accorded their just weight now. Sorry Charlie.
By the way here is the Urban Dictionary definition of ILK
Urban Dictionary definition = ilk
Pronoun. Represents ...more a group of items of the same type. Has a connotation of the typed group being of bad or questionable character.
Don't get involved with those of that ilk.
Randy outsource what’s his name better take heed that the mad as hell as we ain’t gonna take it any more crowd (the new not so silent majority-witness the fortitude of Occupy Wall Streeters) has had it with his parties obstructionism, anti-worker, pro-big business, pro-one percenters.
Talking about Occupy Wall Street, wouldn’t it have been a far more beneficial use of $30 grand on a YouTube production seen by about 1700 people to have donated at least a tenth of that, a mere $3,000, to the Occupy Wall Street Movement. Used to be that’s what we Democrats did, support good causes on behalf of the 99 percent. Those days when we declined corporate contributions and supported the labor movement and protests against the corporate power elite have apparently succumbed to the politics of personality cult rather than traditional Democratic Party ideals.
So congratulations to Tim Bishop and to the voters of Southampton, both those who came out to vote and those who chose to stay home and boycott their chosen parties selections, lack of selections or other behaviors, local and national, and congratulations to those 3,000 some voters who took the time to express their rage by writing in for a Supervisor candidate. A special thank you to those of all political persuasions who recognized the unique qualities and expertise of Democrat Bridget Fleming.
Oh yes, lest we forgot, congratulations to the Press editorial board, who at least at this unofficial results conjure, supported the three likely Supervisor and Town Board victors.
Mr. Horowitz still was a team player although I can't really say the same for the other 2 candidates that were running with him. Mr. Horowitz funded all of the Republican Trustee signs with the money that he raised. At the last minute, Mr. Warner and Mr. Semlear received donations, which they gave to the Party. They should have repaid Mr. Horowitz instead. But they were afraid that Mr. Horowitz would unseat one of them. Mr. Horowitz is the only candidate with the credentials to be a Trustee. He has the Degree in Environmental Studies from Southampton College. He has also helped to raise over one million dollars for the Big Brothers Big Sisters of Long Island. What have the elected Trustees ever done outside of their position on the Board? In 2 years, it will be time to clean up the waters and take out the trash, aka, the current Trustees. Good riddence to bad rubbish. I am looking forward to that.
So let me ask you another question what did you think about Judge Burke going out with petitions to obtain the Democratic line for his Justice of the Peace race? Was that okay? Was that immoral and unscrupulous? Or do those terms only apply to Trustee candidates when the move negatively affects another Trustee candidate whom you are personally supporting? Just some food for thought. What do you think bobalooey? Both bad or just the one? Haven't you heard there is no such thing as party loyalty anymore - not by the candidates, not even by the two major parties themselves in town. Five on the Town Board, 2 Reps(assuming Ms. Scalara's lead holds up), 1 Independence (on the Dem line), 1 Dem and 1 Conservative (on the Rep line).
It is my belief that the cure you are seeking would be most effectively reached by banning cross-endorsements. Take the minor party machinations out of the two major party candidate selection process, let the Conservative, Working Families and Independence Parties run their own candidates on their own lines.
And, of course, encourage enrollees of all parties to seek positions on their parties county and town committees. It is, afterall, those committee people, on their own or with the gentle guiding pressure of their leaders, who decide what candidates will have the imprimatur of their party organization.
Finally the primary system in New York allows any party member who collects sufficient petition signatures to challenge the selection of their local political party committee. Any individual with true support can put together a successful petition drive to create a primary, Relaxation and liberalization of petitioning rules make it much more difficult to successfully challenge petition drives by insurgents.
If you are not already a committee person, assuming you are enrolled in a political party and not a ‘blank’, find out when your parties next county committee petition drive is scheduled. The NYS Board of Elections site has sample petitions and petitioning guidelines for you to download. If you wish to change the system, understand the system, become a part of the system, change the system.
Fred and Eric have set a dangerous precedence. In two years, they may find themselves with no political party to back them. The majority of of the elected Democratic candidates won't really want to be in bed with Fred and Eric (difference in ideals). Fred has also lost credibility with the Conservative Party. And there is a chance that Fred won't get the Independence Line again. Maybe they will have a chance to run on the Working Families Line together. I hope that happens, because what goes around, comes around. Go around Town Hall and ask people how they feel about working with Eric and you won't find many people that like him. Eric likes to bully both people in Town Hall and the constituents that he is supposed to serve. That doesn't make for a popular candidate. Eric, you and Fred should start putting out your resumes, because I have a feeling that you will both be "Men without a Country" in 2 years. And goldenrod, maybe you should get a life. Three hundred and thirty comments? When is the last time that you saw the light of day?
I am done talking to you about this subject. I can see by the number of comments that you have posted, that you haven't done much other than sit in front of your computer and give your diatribes. It is you that has become very boring to me. I'll toss about the comment ball in 2 years when the Trustees are up for reelection.
TTFN
To those who have expressed the opinion that Linda Kabot is now politically dead and that Anna Throne-Holst has scored a stunning victory let me share some political realities. Using for now only the unofficial and incomplete vote totals, I submit for your consideration the following analysis. Yes Anna was re-elected and Linda was not. That is an uncontested fact. However, it is also an incontrovertible political ...more fact that an incumbent (especially one with aspirations for higher political elective or appointive office) is expected to receive more than just 65% of the vote when running against only a write-in candidate.
(POSSIBLE SPIN ALERT) Some would argue that less than 90% is embarrassing, less than 80% disheartening and less than 70% a catastrophe).
Most political pundits would tell you that to have roughly one third of the electorate cast ballots for a write-in candidate is a rather significant event.
Now to put Linda’s vote total in perspective in 2009 she received 5202 votes on the Republican line (her total in 2007 was 4361 but Skip Heaney received 4041 votes on the Conservative line so that result is rather skewed). For Linda to now receive some 3600 votes as a write-in is truly remarkable. (Consider the fact that Hughes thus far has 3844 votes on that line and Scalera 3662) Just think about it, in 2011 as a write-in candidate (easier though it may be to write-in on paper ballots than on the old lever machines) to accrue some 1200 votes fewer than as a listed major party candidate in 2009 (with a DWI sword of Damocles over her head) and vote totals almost equally those of candidates on the Republican ballot line itself. It is not spin to say Linda remains immensely popularity with Republican voters in Town and clearly is not reflective of a DOA candidate. One should not consider it an anomaly when approximately one-third of the voters in the Supervisor's race took the time and effort to write-in Linda Kabot’s name. So like it or not, spin it as you may, in real harsh political terms Anna may have won this battle but Linda remains a viable candidate in the on-going war.
First and foremost despite her best efforts Anna, at least from unofficial returns, has failed in her most important goal of obtaining a Board majority. Recall her emotional language (SPIN/OPINION - with a Rick Perry style momentary pause, lapse of thought, inability to come up with a phrase acceptable for family audiences?) about ending the nightmare of the last two years. So what will the Supervisor do, will she persevere as ...more Supervisor or flee to the comfort of an appointive position in the Bellone administration or elsewhere?
(OPINION) Second and almost as foremost Bridget’s stunning first place victory should once and for all dispel the notion that a Democrat can’t win a general election without the Independence Party line. Her numbers on the Democratic line prove quality candidates win. Period, end of story.
(OPINION) Isn’t time for the Democratic and Republican Town Leaders to sit down and discuss the banning of cross-endorsements? Isn’t it time to stop letting the tail(s) wag the dog?
How much does Anna really care about the Town? How much does Anna really care about growing the Democratic Party (or Independence Party since she chose to enroll there) in Southampton?
For those who like to reflect on numbers. Anna has thus far received 4774 votes on the Democratic line (compared to 5665 in 2009), Bridget received 5154 votes on that line. (compared to 5105 in 2009). On the Working Families line Anna received 516 votes (287 in 2009), Bridget received 674 on the line (368 in 2009). On the Independence line Anna received 959 votes (1185 in 2009). Now those vote totals will increase as absentee and affidavit ballots are added to the totals. The relevant fact is Anna trails Bridget in votes on both the Democratic and Working Families lines. Since in her previous elections Anna was always the top vote getter on the Dem (in 2007 some 630 votes more than running mate Sandra Dunn) and Working Families(some 141 more than Dunn) lines. In 2009 Anna received 5665 votes on the Dem line (Fleming had 5105 and Sally Pope 5210) and 287 on the Working Families line (compared to 371 for Pope and 368 for Fleming). It is unusual for an incumbent Supervisor to trail an incumbent Council member on the same party lines. What it means or augers for in the future I leave to you to discern. Go spinmeisters, spin your webs of deceit.
Bridget, you are now the leading vote getter on Dem/WF lines, that makes you to lead elected Democratic Party spokesperson in Town, please start to assert your independence and take charge.
If I were to put a spin on it I’d remark about Anna’s decision to go from a Blank (not enrolled in any party) to an Independence Party enrollee. Democratic voters prefer to vote for Democratic enrollees. Bridget is a Democrat, ...more Anna is not.
Anna’s inability to attract more votes resulted in Scalera finishing ahead of Bender, depriving Anna of the much needed goal of acquiring a Board majority.
Sophisticated Southampton voters wanted to give Anna another two years, but didn’t want her to have a majority on the Town Board, desiring instead some form of checks and balances, but not stalemate or stagnation. Elected officials of all four political party enrollments represented on the Board take heed.
The dynamic between Fleming and Scalera could very well set the tone for the manner by which the Town is governed over the next two years. Please take your responsibilities seriously. Please understand that America is built on compromise and consensus building, not bullying or stonewalling. We look to the two of you to assume roles of leadership. One true Democrat, one true Republican. Prove to us all that the two party system works.
Something needs to be done about the Town’s ethics code when it comes to campaign related activities. If the elected officials won’t do it, then perhaps the major and minor party leaders in Town ought to hold some public forums to effect change by the parties themselves if government doesn’t act. The use of Town Hall offices (on taxpayer time or not, whether the Town is compensated for such private use or not) as a backdrop for campaign purposes should not be allowed to continue.
By the way Say What makes comments with no facts to back them up.
And for the record, my comments very rarely claim to be fact. I generally respond to the posts of others and offer my take on an issue when it appears ...more to be different from a previous poster.
You say to be fair it's important to realize that there was much less of a need to bring out the vote for the supervisor race this year than in 2009. Oh really, I don't know how you could say that. Anna Throne-Holst spent a HUGH amount of money on campaign mailouts, newspaper ad's, radio time, TV time (Channel 26), Southamptn Project video $30,000 etc. So if the need was less this year than in 2009 why all the spending? It appears that both Anna & the democrat party did think a ...more need existed.
I believe you have no idea what your talking about so no need to state that your comments don't claim to be fact. I think that is clear you never stated any facts.
When facts are stated, and many have responded to your post providing facts, you just ignore them.
I don't know how you can claim to respond to posts of others because all your comments are full of spin.
Now either pour yourself a drink or put down the one in your hand and relax a little bit. Don't be so quick to respond angrily that you end up missing the entire point of the comment you were responding to :)
BTW it is you who ignores facts when presented.
Tell us what makes you think Bridget has her eys on the big chair as you stated above.
Did you ever consider that Ms Anna only really cares about Anna. Have you ever commented about Anna being a liar? Have you ever commented on Anna hiring a town attorney in 2010 for political reasons? Does it matter to you that Anna took over $10,000 in illegal donations? Its time for you to think about who is missing the point and keep your bs comments in check.
Anyway, I must admit that I am not all knowing (SHOCKER) and would in all sincerity like to know more about the deal you believe that Anna made to keep Bridget off of the independence line before forming my own opinion on it.
In general Reg Rep I think you make some good points but can ...more at times mistake personal beliefs (which is all I would ever claim to offer on this site unless stated otherwise) with unchecked facts. I understand the need to keep each other honest but I don't believe that I have ever claimed anything to be fact (rather than opinion) in my posts when it was not. Please feel free to correct if I am wrong here.
As for Ms11932, I certainly understand that each of the issues you bring up are legitimate issues that should concern anyone when analyzing a politician. On that note, I will say this. As far as being a liar, I believe that if Anna's intention was to say that she did not receive any phone calls re the DUI then she did in fact lie. I believe that IF she was consciously choosing her words carefully enough to say "no I did not receive a call saying "we got her"" (without actually saying "no I didn't receive any call at all) then she was making a political move which you may call sneaky or dishonest but do so with the understanding that this is a common occurence in politics and it is certainly not one that is exclusive to ATH, Independents, Democrats, anyone other then Republicans, etc.
With regards to the donation issue, I think it would be foolish to question the supervisor's popularity and ability to fundraise in general (maybe not on this board) and as such I do not contribute this in any way to her reelection. (Back to Reg Rep for a second, you mentioned ATH's major reelection campaign, you may have noticed that she did not put out any lawn signs this time around, which goes back to my point about a clear emphasis on the town board elections.)
Now if you're going to call me out for making baseless comments that are not backed by factual evidence, don't go starting your post by suggesting that all this woman cares about is herself. Not only is that incredibly hypocritical coming from someone who I highly doubt knows the woman personally, it is simply ridiculous considering she works one of the most thankless jobs imaginable.
Finally Ms, as I have said to Reg Rep in the past, I certainly wouldn't condone any controversial activity on the part of the supervisor. But, when the major complaints about you have absolutely nothing to do with your policy making and actual body of work, you must be doing something right.
I seem to remember you complained once about a comment being to long. Factual comments are hard to take especially if someone doesn't agree. This long post of yours as interesting as it was to read, leads me to believe that you have some free time. Maybe it would do you well to ...more get to know the supervisor, get involved with our community, attend the town board meetings, listen to the exchange of comments between the members of the board, follow the TB agenda's and work sessions. Learn for yourself so that maybe your comments can be based on facts not opinion.
Oh well.
FACT CHECK #2 - The winning individual, who chose to enroll in the Independence Party ran on the major party Democratic line. She did not accrue sufficient votes on the Independence Party line alone to defeat a write-in candidate.
FACT CHECK #3 - Neither Republicans nor Democrats alone have a majority of voters. Those voters who do not enroll in a political party have for many years, in Southampton, as elsewhere been ...more the determiners of which major party line candidates are elected.
FORGOTTEN FACT #1 - This small town did in fact at one point elect a candidate who ran only with the line of an independent body - that would have been then registered Republican, now registered Independence Party, Assemblyman Thiele.
Opinion - Cross-endorsement and candidates receiving more than one ballot line need to be eliminated in New York State. We are one of the few that allow cross-endorsements at all and when last I looked the only state to allow a candidate more than one ballot line. It would be far more interesting to see the results in Southampton and throughout New York were each party required to designate their own candidate. One Democratic, One Republican, One Conservative, One Working Families and One Independence Party candidate. Unfortunately, that is not likely to happen as the major party State Senators and State Assemblypersons are wed by party affiliation to either the Conservative or Working Families Parties and both battle for the endorsement of the Independence Party. At least here in Southampton for this election cycle Bridget Fleming offers proof that a Democrat can win without the Independence Party line.
Opinion - While Ms. Scalera may be employed in the Town of Brookhaven, she is a transplanted Oyster Bay Republican (you can decide whether that is a better or worse predicate) now residing in the Town of Southampton. How she behaves and whether or not she is able to strike an independent stance as an "unofficial" second place finisher and successor to Nancy G. remains to be seen, if she is still the second place finisher when the official results are certified.
Opinion - those of us who were dismayed by the tea party candidate victories this year are heartened by the reversal of their fortunes this election cycle and hope it is a harbinger of next year's federal election results.
ATH may be labeled over another label, true; But even this gives the citizenry hope that an alternative is possible. Good statwegy nonetheless.
SayWhat: "On that note, I will say this. As far as being a liar, I believe that if Anna's intention was to say that she did not receive any phone calls re the DUI then she did in fact lie. I believe that IF she was consciously choosing her words carefully enough to say "no I did not receive a call saying "we got her"" (without actually saying "no I didn't receive any call at all) then she was making a political move which you may call sneaky or dishonest but do so with the understanding that ...more this is a common occurence in politics and it is certainly not one that is exclusive to ATH, Independents, Democrats, anyone other then Republicans, etc."
Don't you have anything better to do than spew your laughable ninnyhammer
rationalizations of Anna's court exposed lies? It's so beyond retarded it's got me rolling in stitches!