I know that when I write D2 some of you get excited and are hoping for an Emilio Estevez cameo.
Okay, you don't. Except maybe Ali Razavi who probably gets wood when he thinks of Estevez taking him out on the ice and showing him his own special Flying V.
So whenever city council candidates run for office you have three types of candidates that run for office. You have Tier 1, Tier 2, and What-The-Fuck-Are-You-Thinking.
The top tier candidates are the candidates that most importantly, understand how city government is run and what they can, and cannot do in their capacity. They are typically well-funded and have a decent campaign mechanism.
The second-tier candidates are the people that have a good heart and the best of intentions, but seriously lack a basic understanding of what the job entails. And trust me, there are a lot of these types of candidates. They mean well, but they don't understand the basic tenants of the job description.
The other group are the fruits and nuts that decided to run. These people need no explanation or introduction. You know who they are.
The difference between the first tier and second tier might be a mile wide in terms of qualifications but only an inch deep in terms of support. But trust me - inches matter.
Okay, I didn't mean that they way it sounds, but hell it hold true that was as well.
If top tier candidates are defined by what they know of the office, then second tier candidates are defined by what they DON"T know of the office.
Here's what I mean.
When you base your candidacy on things you can't do as a city representative. This happened a while back with Hector H. Lopez ran for mayor. He had a lot of soaring rhetoric because he was pretty weak on policy.
So he said he was going to do stuff like focus city council on education. And that is the same thing happening in this election. Other than some small tangental elements of economic incentive agreements that almost never get included in the agreements for a reason, the city doesn't have a damn thing to do with education.
The city doesn't fund education. The city doesn't have anything to do with education. Hell, the city isn't even supposed to fund traffic control signs in front of schools. That is how little they have to do with education.
You want to shape education?
Run for state representative or state board of education. They have a lot to do with education.
This type of rhetoric is certainly rooted in the best of intentions, but sadly is more of an indicator of a lack of knowledge of the functions of the office.
But just for the sake of argument, say there was actually a role that city council did play in education. There isn't, but just for shits and giggles lets say their was. Has any city rep ever been elected on all the great things they are going to do for education?
Especially given the current climate of council any candidate that isn't dialed in to what is going on with council now, the issues they are facing, and public sentiment, candidates that focus on anything other than that demonstrate they are tone deaf to what is going on.
Is that someone you want to vote for? That is entirely up to you but it seems like you'd be better off voting for someone who knows the important stuff like city manager oversight, completion of the quality of life bond projects, being in touch with constituent services, and oh, I don't know...not paving allies of political donors in lieu of needed street repairs.
But hell, maybe thats just me.
Also, fun fact - in the Latino community, women are more likely to have achieved higher education and out earn their male counterparts. That is the only demographic where that statement is true on both accounts.