Thought i would bring this thread back up.Say what you will about
him hitching his wagon to the Viola triple dip train wreck but it worked.
Had he gone it alone or partnered up with Levin he would have lost.
So now what?
The county will put the screws to his wife who has a county job to get him to vote their way and he will have Steve Hyman calling in favors since he helped finance the campaign.

Be careful what you wish for.....................

I don't think Fulop is backing anyone in this race. I saw him at a Boggiano fundraiser a couple weeks back and it sounds like he's been at others. The vote on this one is going to be split so many ways its hard to tell who will win and I don't think he wants to risk putting his name behind someone who might lose because of the perception it would have going into the 2013 mayors election. I'm sure he has a handful of candidates he'd like to see win but doesn't have enough confidence in the outcome of the election to tie himself to any of them.

[quote]
denibleu wrote "quote

[Fulop's support probably would have meant a win for either Levin or Lavarro (or both). That should have been the dream team, certain to win. Instead he went with Mack and Perez. Go figure."quote]


Why do you say Fulop is backing the Mack ticket?I have seen no endorsement.I see Fulop people working for Imetez,Levin and Rolondo.
I was at a fundraiser for Lavvaro that steve was at,so what is your basis in fact.

denibleu:

1. Viola Richardson is not walking around ward F talking about Rolando Lavaro. She may get a bump from Rolando, but he will get nothing from her.

2. Expediency is fine, but if you are really a "reformer" it's kind of hard to justify sidling up to a triple-dipper.

JCMiles:

I'd like to know why he didn't bracket with Levin, too. But from what I've seen, Lavarro is a pragmatist. He's worked on projects with Steve Fulop, Dan Levin, Dave Donnelly, Bill O'Dea, Viola Richardson, etc. He works toward bringing people together to get things done. So maybe his thinking goes a little like this: in order to actually get things done in the council, you need to first get elected. In order to get elected, you need to have the votes, just as you need enough votes in the council to get anything passed (obvious enough).

Levin has most of his support downtown. This is the same downtown where Fulop is kingmaker...and Fulop is pushing hard for Sue Mack.

Remember this: Dan has already stated that even if he wins this at-large seat, he's going to run for the Ward E seat in 2013. This will put him in direct opposition to the candidate Fulop chooses to support (Shelley Skinner?)

With Fulop running for mayor in 2013, he'll put together a whole slate of candidates to run in every ward. The HCDO will do the same. They'll have all the money behind them. Independent candidates, meanwhile, will get trampled in the melee. This year and in 2013, Dan is going to have an extremely tough time getting elected.

Tangent aside, my other guess is that Lavarro chose to run with Richardson because the demographics in Ward A and F line up well. He did very well within the African-American community in 2009. Call him an opportunist (or selfish, whatever), but I call it reality, and pragmatism. You can effect far more change by winning a seat on the council than by losing.

And if you're going to fault Lavarro for political expediency, then you have to also take a look at Fulop's support of Sue Mack and Omar Perez. Mack was endorsed by Healy in the last School Board Election. Perez was on Healy's staff until he was passed over for Vega's vacant seat. Why is Fulop backing these two, instead of Levin, who he is much closer to ideologically? Is it because he thinks Mack will be a rubber stamp for him, and that Perez will give him some credibility within the Latino community? Hard to say, but they are certainly not "independent" candidates in any stretch of the word. Is Fulop aware that Mack's campaign manager was involved in one of the worst voter fraud cases in U.S. history, down in Houston, TX, less than two years ago?

Fulop's support probably would have meant a win for either Levin or Lavarro (or both). That should have been the dream team, certain to win. Instead he went with Mack and Perez. Go figure.

I do hope Dan wins a seat, because he's an honest, passionate individual with an excellent sense of right and wrong. But I'll be voting for Lavarro, because I've seen him actively trying to better his community for years. I'm not voting for Richardson, so Dan will probably get my other vote.

Again, I just hope that all this griping between camps and supporters of independent candidates doesn't result in the HCDO candidates winning. Because there is a great opportunity here to swing the balance of power here in JC and bring some accountability back to the council.

some interesting points denibleu.

But if "Levin and Lavarro find themselves on the same side of many issues" as you say, then why didn't Lovarro team up with Levin? Can you answer that? Because I would honestly like to know. If the only reason he didn't team up with the only other reformer running is because Levin doesn't have enough votes as you suggested, then I think the name of this discussion topic is RIGHT ON TARGET.

The fact of the matter is, that no one is really disappointed that Lavarro didn't team up with Levin, that would have been no big deal. The disappointing thing is that he DID team up with Richardson.

If Lavarro thinks that he will automatically get the votes of all Filipinos just because he is Filipino, he may be in for a surprise.

Jersey City elections are always entertaining.

Quote:

Lavarro showed his true colors when he bracketed with Viola Richardson. She is a triple-dipping county hack who has rubber stamped countless Healy initiatives. And as for Sandy Cunningham, she is a product of the same corrupt political systems which gave us Healy. Heaven help this City if she ever becomes Mayor.

It is clear that Lavarro is no reformer. Levin and Fulop are wise to steer clear of him.

A few points, if I may:

It's pretty obvious most of the people bashing Lavarro in this thread are supporters of either Levin or Fulop (or both). Maybe it's a downtown thing. Or maybe the fact that Lavarro decided not to run with Levin has struck a nerve in the latter's supporters. Levin himself posted thinly veiled attacks on Facebook, referring to "others [who] have already pushed aside their proclamations and values within days."

I can understand the disappointment: Levin and Lavarro find themselves on the same side of many issues. But as passionate as Dan's supporters may be, their numbers are limited; previous election results bear this out. Dan also has an issue, sometimes, playing nicely with others. This can be seen in his contentious relationship with Steve Fulop. Levin and Fulop seem like they should be natural allies, but as a previous poster said, they don't get along at all. Why? It's great to be idealistic; but in the council you need five votes to get anything done. One gets the sense that if Levin were elected to council, he'd spend the whole time introducing resolutions that would have no chance of passing, just to make a point.

Fulop, on the other hand, has different issues with Lavarro. Again, it seems like a natural alliance, and they've worked together on projects like the Book Bag giveaway...but Fulop thinks he has Sue Mack in his pocket, so he's going to do everything he can to make sure she gets on that council. Recent polls have Lavarro as one of the top three vote-getters...and that's too close for Fulop. (Never mind that Sue Mack was also backed by Mayor Healy in the school board election.)

I'm sure Lavarro would have loved Fulop's support. But Lavarro wasn't going to be a rubber stamp for anybody, whether it was HCDO or Steve Fulop. Sue Mack, on the other hand...

So Lavarro, who's always had a good relationship with the African-American community in Ward A (he beat Andre Richardson there in 2009), teams up with Viola, who happens to be close to Sandra Cunningham. There have been reports that Sandy is thinking about running for mayor in 2013. The idea of both the African-American and Filipino vote in this city allied behind Sandy Cunningham makes Fulop extremely nervous.

So now we have the supporters of Fulop and Levin doing a hatchet job on Lavarro in this thread. Never mind that they're pretty much on the same side of every issue, and would likely be allies on the council.

Meanwhile, the HCDO, Healy, Ahmad and Velazquez sit back and laugh at it all, as Levin and Fulop do for them what they probably couldn't have done on their own: make Lavarro look like an enemy of progressives here in Jersey City.

Pretty sad, watching independent candidates bash each other so the hand-picked establishment candidates win.

Maybe the deal has something to do with this:

https://docs.google.com/document/pub?i ... epzK1Lm01T8&embedded=true

and


https://docs.google.com/document/pub?i ... QFXRKLOzacY&embedded=true


The Gas Pipeline is being shoved down our throats I'm sure we'll see condo's on the Embankment soon too.

As a 20 year city employee, I can't think of a time I've ever been more disgusted with our city government than the past few years. I plan on voting for Richie Boggiano during this election. Richie actually lives in the city and has always worked to help everyday people with their problems. I can't think of a person who has done more to expose the cronyism and corruption that is a part of everyday life here either.

Quote:

Really? Let's hear more about that. Names. Details. Or is this just more of the the same anonymous trolling you usually post.

Word is that Councilman Fulop can not back council candidates in 2011 because of "stipulations " of a "hcdo deal".

Dan being a yes man is no reason to support him. Steve has fought against the yes council his entire career. He wouldn't want a bunch of people who just blindly follow him either, he wants people who will be elected to represent the people of Jersey City. If they agree, then great, but if they don't they are free people.

I don't think Steve wants to be a political boss, I can't imagine him forceing people to do or not do anything.

Does it really matter that Dan and Steve may not be best of buddies? Isn't the "buddy network" an example of what we DON'T need in the council right now?
I don't think Steve should endorse Dan because they're buddies, or because Dan will be a good "yes-man" for Steve, I think he should endorse him because he was a major force behind passing the pay-to-play reform. Dan is a proven reform advocate. Steve needs to find another like him out of the candidates available, and endorse them both for the at-large seats. If he can't find another reformer, then just endorse Dan. This should not be a personal matter. They don't even need to meet personally if they don't want to. I'd prefer they didn't actually. Just go by past and current accomplishments. Steve should endorse someone who will help reform JC, and what are the choices?
These men can honestly disagree on details, and that will lead to intelligent debate I hope, but they will both vote for what is right for JC I think.

Quote:

There is no love lost between these two. They are rivals for the same political base.

Quote:




Has Dan Levin reached out to Steve Fulop for his endorsement?
In private Dan Levin bashes Fulop every chance he gets.

I really don't know much about Rolando, but people had told me he was claiming to want to change the status quo. This just exposes him as a shallow opportunist as far as I'm concerned. Earlier actions before this hinted at this though, such as his refusal to even consider working with Dan in any way. What the hell was he scared of? Maybe this shows he was scared of missing his opportunity to get adopted by an insider like Richardson.

Are there any other reformers running except Dan Levin?

And I'll guess I'll be first to step on some toes here by stating that I think Steve Fulop should get off the fence, put aside whatever differences he has, and endorse Dan Levin now, not later. Otherwise it will only look to me like someone behind the scenes is preventing Steve from endorsing a real reformer.
And this is coming from someone who likes both of these guys, but I only respect honesty.

Quote:

You say "allowed". Does that mean required, or does that mean allowed? There is a big difference between the two. To me the question is not whether or not people technically have to vote for people in the same bracket or not, but rather whether or not a significant percentage of the population that votes thinks that they do. The usability of the election ballots is horrible and that is an understatement. They literally put NO user (i.e. voter) centered analysis or design into the ballots, or the wording on ballot measures.

Suprisingly enough the bracketing decision is actually just the clerk following the law. NJ Elections are dictated by Title 19 and Jersey City's elections also have some sections in Title 40 that need to be considered especially in the matters of filling vacancies.

Bracketing is allowed when there are two or more vacancies for the same position. It does not how ever mean you have to vote for both of the candidates bracketed together. You still have to press two buttons.

The only way to eliminate any bracketing would be to do what they did in California where they have an open primary system and only two candidates are running for the general.

Anyway, although Ray and Kalimah are bracketed, they sure aren't working together. Ray is sending out information only about himself and his website makes no mention of Kalimah.

These new candidates tend to label themselves as "Reformist" and "Independent", whatever happened to that? All I know from reading the papers is that the Healy administration put forth this concept of Bucketing to ensure that the absolute get the 2 vacant council@large seats but for all others I guess it's just politics.

"Velazquez and Ahmad, who have been endorsed by Mayor Jerramiah Healy, have chosen to bracket themselves together on the ballot, as have Sue Mack and Omar Perez, as well as Viola Richardson and Rolando Lavarro."

As far as I see Dan Levine and Imtiaz Syed are still holding out and kudos to them being truly reformist and independent.

Fedup is right. Rolando flip flops to whoever he thinks will help him and is loyal to know one. Hard to get anywhere when you are burning all your bridges. He's done.

Your rationale is flawed, you are basically saying we should wait and see with this scenario, if elected will he make these short sighted opportunistic decisions and we should just wait and see? No, the actions you do today should reflect your words.

Quote:

Nay.. people with talent, do make these kind of short-sighted opportunistic decisions, just because of peer pressure created by an experienced group, anticipating others to react for their own gains!

Is he going to get help or he is going to help, we need to wait & see how it works out?

That's because rolondo really has no core values.He wanted to
Bracket with Sue Mack but was rejected,than he tried Omar Perez but finally settled for the triple dipping,Healy backed,
County owned,Viola Richardson.

Why he did not bracket with Dan Leven is a mystery.
Rolondo is no reformer,he's a Transformer,changing his beliefs depending on who he is aligned with.

Some of the nineteen people running will still have a shelf life after nov.but I think rolondo has reach his experation date.
He must be getting advise from that goofy woman running his campaign.

I agree, and what a great quote you found. I just don't know how someone who is saying they are for reform can join up with someone who has no desire to change the status que.

Then again this he also had his first campaign and his run-off paid for by the FBI via Lou Manzo takeing cash from an informant.

http://www.justice.gov/usao/nj/Press/files/Manzo,%20Louis%20Second%20Superseding%20News%20Release.html

Politics makes strange bedfellows.

Prov. People who would normally dislike and avoid one another will work together if they think it is politically useful to do so. Jill: I never would have thought that genteel, aristocratic candidate would pick such a rabble-rousing, rough-mannered running mate. Jane: Politics makes strange bedfellows.
McGraw-Hill Dictionary of American Idioms and Phrasal Verbs. ? 2002

According to Rolando Lavaro's facebook page he is
"...happy to team up with Councilwoman Viola Richardson under the slate Committed to Service"

Why exactly is he happy? Viola, is a shining example of what is wrong with the city and the county. As another JC List poster Rorschach wrote: "In the time honored tradition of Hudson County, Viola Richardson is a triple-dipper : a police disability pension, a no-show job at the county jail and a City Council salary. http://jclist.com/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=24815"

Also with her as a runningmate what exactly is he committed to service, perhaps the service of his own interests? Or perhaps what he really found attractive was the $20k she had in her campaign account.

One thing is sure this race is going to be fun to watch.