Quote:
Originally Posted by Parallex
This is basically how I see it... except that I don't think there's a big difference between Gondek and Davison, I think the perceived difference is mostly performative.
But yeah, Davison is mostly a naked Corporatist shill who'll run on a pro-business platform and the pool of voters he'll draw from would probably land more in the Farkas camp then the Gondek camp.
Frankly I'd probably rather have Farkas as Mayor then Davison. Farkas isn't suited for the job, he doesn't convince people to vote his way as counselor and I don't see how he would be that much better at doing it as Mayor. Davison... he probably could. They'd both do a bad job but I think Davison could probably be more effective at doing a bad job.
|
Agree with this except the last part. I would much rather have Davison than Farkas.
I agree with your opinions on Gondek and Davison though. While I would be fine with Davison winning, I don't think he is the right choice and would generally be a status quo style of candidate. I would like to see his "vision" for the city beyond "new arena, new businesses!"
I guess that is why we have campagins - to see what the candidates actually want to accomplish.
My worry, which is somewhat similar to your last comment, is that Davison turns into a Bronco 2.0. Where the focus on downtown is merely attracting business and corporate offices back while failing to offer any more benefits to living in the inner city.