Here is an excerpt from some Dowd correspondence back to Ravenstahl:I do not, however, worry whether we are standing or seated when those conversations take place, nor is it acceptable that, nearly two months in advance, your admittedly busy schedule demands a near month-long gap (April 20th - May 19th) between the last proposed debate and the actual election. (Early Returns)
Mr. Ravenstahl is excellent on camera.
Here he is in 2007:
I bet we only see one debate.
ReplyDeleteBeing the incumbent with a massive edge at the start Ravenstahl should not allow Dowd to dictate the debate schedule.
ReplyDeleteThis is gamesmanship at it's best.
The fewer the number of debates the better for Ravenstahl.
Hmm. One, big, Town Hall-style debate at Soldiers and Sailors or Local #5, perhaps? Or have a few smaller debates within the council districts - like the "road show" council put on this past summer.
ReplyDeleteIf we don't get at least three formal debates plus an unconventional forum or two, Pittsburgh is not getting the conversation it deserves. Matt, no doubt just one debate would be good for the incumbent, but as a citizen would that satisfy you?
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure debates would favor Dowd. If he comes of as arrogant, out of touch and too academic he could alienate anyone who is undecided.
ReplyDeleteAbout Dowd, I can't shake the feeling that he wants to be the next Lincoln. He wants to be remembered for his great speeches and well-written word. Is this because he is an ex-educator? I might just think this because I wish I was as fast on my feet as he is with the right words.
ReplyDeleteMatt, no doubt just one debate would be good for the incumbent, but as a citizen would that satisfy you?
ReplyDeleteDude, Are you serious? If it was his way there would be no election and King Steelerstahl would rule forever.
I'm still in favor of Thunderdome, for what it's worth.
ReplyDeleteOverwriting:
ReplyDeleteI do not, however, worry whether we are standing or seated when those conversations take place, nor is it acceptable that, nearly two months in advance, your admittedly busy schedule demands a near month-long gap (April 20th - May 19th) between the last proposed debate and the actual election. (1 sentence, 49 words)
Writing:
It doesn't matter if we stand or sit during the debates, but we should have the second debate closer to the election. (1 sentence, 22 words)
Dowd doesn't have a snowball's chance, and yes, the debates will hurt him.
Me fail English? That's unpossible.
ReplyDeleteHere's the thing, how are the debates going to play to the average voter? I think that Ravenstahl's earnestness comes across well in the debates. Mark DeSantis came across a bit professorial (using business jargon) while Ravenstahl seemed like a real guy. It ended up not mattering that Ravenstahl did not answer some questions directly because DeSantis did not challenge him on it, nor did the reporters asking the questions. As long as Ravenstahl is allowed to play to his strengths, he will do well in the debates. Now, Pat Dowd is used to correcting students who get answers wrong, so he may challenge Ravenstahl to back up an answer. But, they may make Dowd look like a bully (a la Al Gore sighing at George Bush). So I don’t think it matters whether there is one debate or several, even though more debates gives Dowd more free publicity.
ReplyDeleteLincoln's Ghostwriter:
ReplyDeleteText:
"Dowd doesn't have a snowball's chance."
Subtext:
"PLEEEEEASE, business, nonprofit, university and foundation communities! PLEEEASE don't turn away from our boy all at once just because he's a terrifyingly ineffectual spaz!"
It's one big meeting away from happening.
NOTE: Comment above appears out of its original order because I edited "ineffectual sack of lard" to read "ineffectual spaz". Now I am having second thoughts again. Ideas? "Sack of protoplasm"? I live to serve.
ReplyDeleteThe debates are not for the candidates. Rather, they are for the ideas and for the sake of democracy.
ReplyDeleteIf you don't use it -- you loose it. Our shared democracy and process of electing people hangs by a thread. When and if that system tumbles, then there is blood (more blood) on the streets.
The steal, take, bully mentality of entitlement is expressed in the deeds of hosting and participating in candidate debates. Is Pittsburgh the place where the gulf grows or shrinks between those that have and others that have not. That is what is at stake. Grow the gap or shrink it. Be fair, or be flip. Be accountable -- or be a king of a less human, less American, dying burgh.
I think Luke, Carmen and Patrick -- and Mr. Aklin too, will do plenty of debates and appearances if the public demands it and sets the stage. None have a monopoly on ideas. Each will contribute. We all will prosper if the system is robust.
Bram who are u supporting in the election. I really never knew what to think about Ravenstahl. Then i saw he was a dipshit and ordered those trash cans so now i think im going to support Dowd. Ravenstahl was merely in the right place at the right time. I think we can get someone else who can demonstrate more competence and executive management.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 4:33 asked, "Bram who are u supporting in the election."
ReplyDeleteRight now it's best to say I'm strongly leaning towards Patrick Dowd, but my ear is still open to Carmen Robinson. After what happened here though she sort of has her work cut out for her.
Thanks for stopping over.
So does Dowd just forward his emails straight to you Bram?
ReplyDeleteHahahaha! No, no not anymore. Actually, I haven't been able to get a hold of him for about two months. Even at the office.
ReplyDeleteBram,
ReplyDeleteu guys struck out bigtime with O'Donnell, but you are dead right on on this one... Luke Ravenstahl is an embarrassment and is not the guy needed to move the city forward. I dont live in downtown pittsburgh, but as an independent observer last time, Mark DeSantis was much more knowledgable in the last debates and I am expecting the mayor to be a man and agree to three debates instead of hiding in one of his trash cans. Go Dowd for mayor!