Do you approve or disapprove of your Mayor and/or Council? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 14, 2024, 02:10:08 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Forum Community
  Forum Community (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, YE, KoopaDaQuick 🇵🇸)
  Do you approve or disapprove of your Mayor and/or Council? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Do you approve or disapprove of your Mayor and/or Council?  (Read 2009 times)
MaxQue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,653
Canada


« on: December 20, 2009, 06:05:58 AM »

Fernard Trahan, mayor

Strongly approve. I can't stand him, he is dictatorial and arrogant, but he is so good.

Robert Quesnel, councillor for 8th district

Neutral, since he was elected a month ago, but he seems better than his predecessor (a woman who what doing nothing because she spent half his term on maternity leave or being absent in council because she was with her kids and was incompetent the other half. When people in the 8th district had a problem, they were asking to the 7th district councillor. He got sick because he was working too much and had to give up running for the mayorship.)
Logged
MaxQue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,653
Canada


« Reply #1 on: December 20, 2009, 06:27:42 AM »

I hated both with a passion when I lived in Berkeley.  They would rather spend $500k suing the university on a legally questionable and stupid lawsuit over 13 trees on the university property than, say, spend that money repairing the awful transportation system present or the disgusting socioeconomic disparity present in that city.  Seriously, you'd have to convince me that George W. Bush wouldn't do a better job. 

I have no idea who anyone is where I live at the moment.  

Well, that wouldn't happen in my town. Suing people = inefficient, so the mayor refuse to sue if he is not sure to win.
Logged
MaxQue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,653
Canada


« Reply #2 on: December 20, 2009, 06:37:02 AM »

Well, if the city didn't join as a plaintiff with the hippie's pointless and doomed lawsuit, then the hippy's would have been required to have put up some sort of collateral in exchange for the damage that the lawsuit might cause by putting a basic, normal construction project on delay.  So anything but the city fully backing the stupid hippy lawsuit would have been tantamount to a rejection, because, as we all know, hippies lack money.  They do tend to make up their lack of money with lies about Indian burial grounds being under whatever building you'd like to build though, you have to give them that.

We don't have hippies here. Economy is based on forestry and mining industry, so hippies are hated, since they are bad for the economy. Real Indians are claiming some things about ancestral territory with new mines, but they usually shut up while giving them money.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.02 seconds with 12 queries.