Huja, Galvin, and Smith Nominated for Council

Democrats nominated incumbent Satyendra Huja and newcomers Kathleen Galvin and Dede Smith for City Council yesterday, Charlottesville Tomorrow reports, and ousted three-term clerk of court incumbent Paul Garrett in favor of challenger Llezelle Dugger. A record 2,524 Democrats voted in the all-day firehouse primary. Huja and Galvin were both clear preferences of a majority of voters—winning on the first ballot—but it took five rounds of counting via instant-runoff voting before Smith finally emerged as the third-most-popular candidate, narrowly beating Paul Beyer by 31 votes.

The three Democrats nominated for Council will now run against the five independent candidates (Republicans have yet again failed to put forth challengers) for the November election. Nobody else is running for clerk, making Dugger the presumptive winner.

6:30 PM Update: The unofficial tallies have been released. These are the numbers for council, and these are the numbers for clerk. What stands out here is that Dugger trounced Garrett and fellow challenger Pam Melampy, with 1,534 votes to Garrett’s 656 and Melampy’s 294. The numbers from the council race show that all three nominees were also the top three vote-getters in the first round of voting, indicating that the results may not have been different with a traditional balloting system.

70 Responses to “Huja, Galvin, and Smith Nominated for Council”


  • There are some interesting numbers from the internals of the council data (if I’m interpreting these data correctly). Paul Beyer was apparently most voters’ second choice (excepting Galvin and Huja, for whom no second-round numbers were provided). His support stayed strong throughout rounds, while Blount and Cannon’s support dropped, indicating that those two—while garnering plenty of votes in the first round—were a lot of voters’ least-favorite choices. Beyer’s apparent problem was being broadly likable by a bunch of people, but not being liked enough by a large enough group.

  • What would it have taken for Beyer to win on the second ballot? He seemed to have better numbers than smith in subsequent rounds.

  • I hope that Charlottesville Democrats release a full tally of all ballots, rather than ceasing to count after a candidate receives enough votes to win or be dropped. That would be awfully interesting data.

  • Waldo, I think they counted up the top three spots in the first round, so those totals that got galvin and Huja elected in the first round represent how many voters had them listed in one of the top three spots. Beyer would have been people’s fourth choice in round 2. I suspect there were a lot of attempts at strategic voting with people ranking the folks they were voting against in the bottom two slots, but you had to put names in all slots in order for your votes at the bottom to count. No skipping slot 3 and then continuing your rankings.

  • Beyer’s showing was quite impressive for someone many gave little to no chance- he ran a smart campaign and probably might have won if he got the Szako’s endorsement. The old guard held back the Norris gambit and happily (one hopes) Charlottesville can move forward.

    The top 2 votes and the closeness of 3rd shows that the people have finally spoken.
    What they seem to say was “Build – the dam and the parkway “.

    One wonders what the loss of Blount and Garrett means for turnout in the fall. I don’t think any of the independents will amount to a serious challenge but this has been an interesting year, so far.

  • I think this shows the process works . The popular vote matches the choice of the nominees. So hopefully civility can return and the ugly personal attacks that have marred this campaign will end and we can get back to addressing the challenges for our community and the economic hardships that so many of our less fortunate citizens are facing.

  • And it is unfair to the citizens of Charlottesville to call this the election, even though the democratic establishment has a tight grip on the loyalty of the voters in this town. Looks to me like a lot of people vote in November for whoever is a democrat, or based on who they know personally and who they socialize with, not the issues.

    The journalists in town could assist the process of more a issue oriented voting process, if they would fact check the candidates statements. All I saw were quotes and podcasts of their actual claims, but no analysis.

    I think it would great for the community if an independent were elected in November. And there are several excellent choices who would represent the citizens of the city and not the special interests.

  • Wow. So Beyer was ahead in Rounds 2 through 4, and Smith eked it out in the 5th, when Cannon and Blount were dropped. I agree with both Waldo and perlogik, this shows that while Beyer was liked, he wasn’t liked quite enough, and that the majority of voters think we need to build and move on. Not as mixed a public opinion as one might think from the final ticket or the quotes in the DP article.

  • IRV voting methods are varied and can be mathematically complex. In close races the algorithm chosen can make a lot of difference. It would be fun to get ahold of the raw ballot data and run it through a program like OpenSTV.

  • As @Citizen said above: “So hopefully civility can return and the ugly personal attacks that have marred this campaign will end and we can get back to addressing the challenges for our community and the economic hardships that so many of our less fortunate citizens are facing.”

    I too thought that this was a clear mandate and a sign of moving on from a particularly ugly campaign. Until I saw the quotes in the DP from Mayor Norris today who, from what it looks like in quotes about the democratic party and Huja and Galvin, seems to be playing the race card now, much like Schilling did in his blog this week. In particular I find the following two quotes to be troubling from someone who said he could work with any of the candidates who were elected, these don’t augur well for that. In the DP article it states:

    “Norris said the result will likely have a big impact on the issue of public-housing redevelopment, which he said will be “flashpoint” over the next few years in light of the primary results.” “The last several years have been very successful in sort of charting a course for addressing the issues of poverty and housing redevelopment in our community that was sort of coming from the grassroots up,” Norris said. “I think what you’re going to see now, given what happened last night, is a much more top-down approach … I think it’s going to be a different mentality about how to go about addressing the issues of poverty in our community.”

    This is horse hockey, he’s not the only one who cares about poverty in our community and I resent the implications. Galvin will do a great job at working through the culturally sensitive issues related to redevelopment and public housing, as long as Mayor Norris works as a team with her. Kinda up to him at this point. He can use his contacts in the community to set the tone for moving forward.

    and…

    “That’s huge,” Norris said. “I think you’re going to see … even more disaffection from the African-American community given the fact that the party establishment heavily pushed a slate that would have stripped the black community of any representation on City Council. We already have a Planning Commission now that is all white.”

    So are we moving on from water conflict hyperbole to racial conflict? Who picked and pressed Blount anyway? If it wasn’t the democratic party and it wasn’t the AA community, then who selected her for the ticket? Maybe Norris’ selection of Blount and her vote tally was a sign of the AA community’s disaffection with the shrinking Norris faction in the Democratic party? Maybe they didn’t like who he picked to run any more than not liking the democratic party picking. It seems everything the party had a hand in it, there was a successful election of a AA democrat to Council.

    These quotes have me wondering what in the world is going through his mind? These are not the kind of quotes that indicate settling down after a primary for party unity. He’s really losing me and its bumming me out. Let’s try different tactics now that we have learned from the water debate and the primary about what works and what doesn’t

  • I find the Mayor’s comments completely civil, one cannot expect, nor would one want, all councilors to think the same. I appreciate hearing his point of view, and I do agree not having any African Americans represented on City Council is a problem. I was not in favor of a ward system, but now I am changing my mind.

  • I would guess with a ward system we would also have a greater diversity of candidates and getting elected would not cost as much money. In this election just to get nominated the candidates raised several thousand, or in the case of several over 10 thousand dollars. My guess is that would prevent some from running.

    Mr. Schilling has an interesting blog post on this topic

    http://www.schillingshow.com/2011/08/22/game-over-whites-2-blacks-0-in-charlottesville-democrat-firehouse-primary/

  • I would be curious about the current demographics in each precinct. I doubt Schilling is concerned about racial dynamics or racial fairness in the current system. I seem to remember him arguing pretty soundly that he wanted a ward system because he thought Walker precinct would go Republican.

    His latching on to the racial history is almost as bad as Norris using race to lament the loss of his candidates.

    The really sad thing is that apparently many people in Charlottesville think that tokenism equals equal opportunity and involvement.

  • That blog entry is hilarious unrelated to reality. The Bilderberg Group and the Trilateral Commission will surely be coming into the picture shortly.

  • @former teacher: couldn’t agree more, schilling is using the fight in the deem party to his advantage. Nonpartisan elections and wards are about getting more republicans in. To use the race issue in the party conflict is disingenuous and a little on the sleazy side. The fact that norris is doing the same thing is really disappointing. I wish there was a strong aa caucus that could pick it’s own candidates and not let a few people do the choosing. I hope in the next election there are three really strong aa candidates who realize they don’t need norris or the party to run.

  • Waldo- I trust you are referring to Schilling’s blog and not mine? Please clarify.

  • Am Your Neighbor Too

    @ citizen

    With a ward system, not only will the make-up of the city council be affected additionally towards diversity…….. the effectiveness of communal neighborhoods and individual culdesac stands to witness a “one on one” representation increase.

    Yes, I agree thet possibility exists, where either party or non-affiliate running a campaign (under a ward system) might not require indulging excessive fund raising and expenditure. It is not preventing (THIS TIME) those candidates who are least focused on or that have an aversion to be in this for electioneering money.

    By the way, my understanding was to participate in the Democrat Primary, an up front party inclusion fee of $250 would’ve gotten a citizen (pun unintentional) a seat at the table with the seven who did vie to be one of the party’s three designates.

    Some folks also consider the campaign spending of candidates, a future indicator of how each candidate will treat expenditure once he or she is elected. If that be the case, no wonder there is a sense of fear, loathing and unsettlement among the local electorate.

    @truthtopower
    forgive my ignorance but the use of initials and shorthand isn’t necessarily an engrained self trait of some. By “aa,” where you refering to alcholics anonymous (which by that group isn’t sanctionable) or perhaps something else. Please, who or what were you intending to refer to there?

  • It is a shame that the democratic establishment was so ideologically driven by the water issue, even while they were the ones chastiszing the others for their one sided campaign. Their single focus caused them to fail to see the value of a diverse council and instead they turned against the one African American candidate in the process. Ms. Blount would have made an excellent councilor and voice for those who often are not heard above the din of special moneyed interests.

    Instead they sided with the Nature Conservancy and Monticello Business PAC, who both sent out expensive water plan mailers of disinformation
    ( dirty tricks never before seen in Charlottesville elections ) to swing the election to their dam building candidates Galvin, Huja, and Beyer.

    Funny, the Business PAC water disinformation mailer arrived yesterday – 2 days late . But everyone knows who now represents these special interests –Galvin, Huja and almost Beyer ( who would have been elected after almost no service to the community ), if the democratic establishment had gotten their way.

  • I trust you are referring to Schilling’s blog and not mine?

    Not yours. :) Your comment wasn’t yet there when I opened this page and wrote my own comment.

  • If you missed the Nature Conservancy disinformation water plan mailer -sent 3 days before the election, here it is in this article. Any one reading this believe Mr. Kittrell’s statement to the press ?

    “This is not an attempt to influence a city council election.”

    By the way Kittrell was appointed by Ms. Maleck to sit on the Albemarle County Service Authority Board. He votes for water rates being used to pay for the Nature Conservancy Water Plan.

    http://www2.dailyprogress.com/news/2011/aug/16/opponents-bristle-numbers-pro-water-plan-mailer-ar-1242842/

    If you didn’t catch why the Nature Conservancy was desperate to elect their pro dam building candidates ( who also have to come up with $60 million for a pipeline – whoops they failed to mention that )

    here’s the story :

    http://www.readthehook.com/99648/flaws-tripled-rates-spun-numbers-and-conservancy-conflicts-why-war-dredging-slogs

  • I agree with John Pfaltz. This was an outright lie, right before the election, meant to influence voters.

    ” John Pfaltz, a retired professor and former City Council candidate, accused the pamphlet’s publishers of lying about the costs. Since the City Council-backed water plan included more than just dam replacement, Pfaltz said, it was disingenuous to ignore those costs.
    “Clearly, the council-approved plan is not $25 million,” Pfaltz said. “It’s probably closer to $140 million … This is an outright lie. The council-approved plan does not cost $25 million. Period. The council-approved plan includes a pipeline and two pumping stations and a lot of land acquisitions.”

    http://www2.dailyprogress.com/news/2011/aug/19/primary-perspectives-cville-ar-1247771/

    Why didn’t the Daily Progress fact check this flier.
    Maybe this is why ..

    Our recommendations:

    Satyendra Huja

    Kathy Galvin

    Paul Beyer

    http://www2.dailyprogress.com/news/2011/aug/19/primary-perspectives-cville-ar-1247771/

    Waldo, do you or anyone else know if the Daily Progress ever endorsed candidates in a democratic nominating process before ?

  • And why are all the other media in town silent about this –where are our journalists ?

  • I do wonder if the push for an African American councilor is less urgent to some now that the city manager is African American. If the community is voting simply for visual representation, and not basing their votes on beliefs and priorities–as some are asserting–then they have accomplished it through the hiring of our current city manager.

  • The environmental-development complex is alive and well in Charlottesville ( Nature Conservancy/Chamber of Commerce ).

    Who needs a Republican ticket for city council when we have the democratic establishment endorsing the same candidates as the Daily Progress, Nature Conservancy, and Monticello Business PAC ?

    Move over ratepayers the big boys are in control.

  • Here’s a copy of the Monticello Business Alliance PAC disinformation water plan mailer.

    And Ms. Galvin held a press conference to complain about the low point we had come to in Charlottesville politics. And that we had a bunker mentality to keep discussing the water issue, and behind the scene her supporters were sending our these mailers. Have to agree with her, this is a new low for our town.

    http://george.loper.org/archives/2011/Aug/994.html

  • Clearly their intent was for it to arrive on Friday or Saturday so the opposition had no time to respond to their lies –I agree gutter politics !

  • The people have spoken. Why are we still stuck on the water supply issue? There will be no bloc on Council to over turn the water supply decision. That’s what the voters wanted. That’s democracy. I found the Nature Conservancy mailer no less offensive than all the CSWP misinformation in the Hook article. So it was just two sides with different perspectives. What hurt the dredgers was when their people were calling everyone who didn’t agree with them liars and dupes and in the pockets of the special interests with innuendo of corruption, etc. That’s what dragged the election into the gutter in my opinion. And yes let’s not forget the attack on Mr. Huja-gross. Those were gutter politics to me.

    The democratic party didn’t turn the election into a referendum and Norris chose Blount and she signed on. All these accusations along race lines are just silly. The democratic party has helped Holly Edwards, K. Hamilton, and other African Americans get elected. The voters did the voting. Blount would have probably won as an independent. For those who want to continue to harp on the democratic party, you have a choice, get out and start your own party if you don’t like the Dem. party. Schilling is for ward elections and non-partisan elections.

    The best thing now would be for Norris and supporters to acknowledge a hard fight, the loss, and move to working with the other councilors to move Charlottesville forward.

    To everything there is a season… time to turn turn turn and move on.

  • I doubt this issue will go away. This type of PAC money coming into a democratic nominating process is unprecedented, and we need an investigation by the media to get to the bottom of this.

  • Waldo, you haven’t answered my question – please.

    Do you, or does anyone know if the Daily Progress ever endorsed candidates in a democratic nominating process before ?

  • I’ve kind of got a lot going on here, Jenny—it’s an open forum here, and anybody can answer your question. My memory of such things consists of what I’ve written here. Search through cvillenews.com for blog entries on the topic. That could possibly answer your question in the affirmative, though it wouldn’t help prove a negative.

  • Email, the Editors at the DP and ask them. I bet they have, not unusual. Sometimes there just is no conspiracy. The voters had ample time to sort out the issues and the candidates and they voted.

    So now what are we going to do about equity and getting ex-felons their rights back in this town?

    How about putting all that water supply energy to work on other important issues facing the City?

  • There are no new city councilors. The election is in November. I heard Bob Fenwick on WINA and he set a record for his application to run with only 125 registered votes required. He collected 1,080 signatures and he said the main frustration he heard was why 3 city councilors would waste citizen money on a huge expensive infrastructure project that will raise their rates. He said they are clueless why the council doesn’t dredge first.

  • “The people have spoken. Why are we still stuck on the water supply issue?” Very few people have spoken if you’re referring to the recent primary. Only a handful of voters at best.

    I plan to vote for Fenwick, and I know a diverse group of people who say the same. I also plan to vote for Smith. I’m hoping that this is the election that finally dispels the idea that the election is decided by the Democratic primary. I certainly hope so, since I think many of Charlottesville’s ills are a direct result of that situation.

    I’ve spoken to people about the water issue for years and I can only recall one, maybe two at the most who weren’t for dredging first. Maybe the people I meet aren’t politically active, but honestly, I just don’t run into anyone who thinks building a dam first is a good idea.

  • I’m with you Boss, such arrogance to think the election is over. The real referendum on many issues will happen in November.
    1. Do you want to be represented or do you want to be ruled
    2. Do you want leaders who dictate what you can and cannot talk about
    http://cvillenews.com/2011/08/02/galvin-election-tone/
    3. Do you want leaders that represent city folks first and then co-operate when it is in the city’s interest to do so ?
    4.Do you want to elect leaders that care about city issues first, or one who has her sights set on higher office

    Lots more folks voting in November and we’ll just have to see if they vote lock step for only democrats, or actually take the time to vote in their own interest.

  • Fenwick pretends as most do that the dam is what this is all about. The cost of the dam is less than 20% of the project. Ratepayers are mostly paying for new water quality rules from the EPA and DEQ. He has yet to have any else agree that dredging alone will yield enough water. If there is a study that proves otherwise I’d like to see it

  • I think the mayor is right on this all the independents running will split the vote up and the independents have a long row to hoe.

    But who do you think all of the Beyer supporters will vote for?

    And we can only hope that Mayor Norris and Ms. Smith stick to the democratic party pledge and don’t support any independents despite their desire to have a third hearing on the water supply decision.

  • Sounds like the democrats can’t count on the black vote in the November election. Sherman White clearly states on the Schilling Show that he and his friends will be looking at the Independents they will be supporting. It’s not just the dam that will turn people off, but the arrogant attitude of those who rejected Ms.Blount, well liked for her service to the community and school board tenure, in favor of a wealthy developers son, with no known ties to the democratic party. Just because he supported the Special Interest ( PAC) Wing of the Democratic Party. Was Beyer even a democrat ? I’ve been around awhile and I never saw him at any democratic function until this year when he decided to run.

    http://www.wina.com/play_window.php?audioType=Episode&audioId=5439580

  • Let’s see how the NAACP weighs in on the general election. Remember what Mr. Turner said: Ms Blount didn’t get the necessary endorsements. Is this what is behind all of Mayor Norris’ recent news diatribes about race against the party and Huja and Galvin? Is it an indirect way of telling Black voters in town to vote independent so he can have another bite at the dam apple? If so, the voters saw through the tactics the first time and the mayor has, in my opinion, lost some political capital, and such a strategy will fail again.

    Comments like this that reference the dredgers and the Schiiling show lead right back to the question: are there Schilling democrats now?

    I think its a bit weird to assume that black voters might not support white candidates just because of race. People vote on issues over race all the time, e.g., Black republicans voting against Obama.

    It wasn’t any arrogant attitude that rejected Ms. Blount, read Dr. Turner’s comments on the issue in the Hook article. Don’t assume too much.

  • I’d advise you to listen to Mr. White’s comments his interest in Independents in November has nothing to do with Norris and more to do with the Szakos wing of the democratic party.

  • @tp ” are there Schilling democrats now? ” no but the November election is not about who the democrats want to see on city council, it’s about who the people want to represent them, all the people, remember.

  • @city democrat. I hear ya but I am having a hard time understanding what is a democrat in this town. I understand there are people who want nonpartisan elections in this town and I don’t whole-heartedly reject the idea but as long as we have a partisan system, I would like to know what it means to be a Democrat. If you sign the pledge in their primary there is a trust of one’s word issue about voting in the next election.

    Like I might not agree with everything Obama has done in the past 4 years but should I, if I am a Democrat,just switch because he didn’t deliver on the one issue I was all about but he did deliver on other issues that were Democratic Issues but not high on my priority list. And if I am a Democrat, what’s my alternative if I am upset with him? Not vote? Vote for the Rep. candidate? If I am so mad about him, for instance because he didn’t show up in Wisconsin, should I just bail on him even though he did some great revamping of the student loan and consumer protection laws?

    By the same token, if I signed the Dem Party pledge for the primary and my candidate didn’t win, should I violate that pledge and vote for an independent just because I am a dredging fan? What’s my word and signature worth then? If independents who didn’t vote in the Dem. primary want to vote for their candidates I say excellent and if Republicans want to vote for their candidates great. I do have a problem with people who voted in the dem. primary, signed the pledge, and now intend to vote for non-dem candidates.

    I think in other states I have lived you had to be a registered member of a party to vote in a primary. Maybe we should institute that here in Cville to make it clear.

    And anybody you are going to hear on the Schilling Show about the Szakos wing of the party is going to be preselected to give an extremist narrative or else they would not have gotten onto the show, come on now. So now there is the Norris wing, the Szakos wing, the Brown/Huja wing and since Schilling is with Norris on dredging and killing the dam, we know that Mr. White’s comments are going to be an attack on the democratic party itself (The szakos wing the Brown/Huja wing, if such nonsense exists), a constant Schilling theme, so I would not put too much credence in Mr. Schilling’s guests, unless you are a Schilling Republican or a Schilling Democrat. I think there is a democratic party and Norris and Smith who are pissed at them for their stance on the water and are throwing a tantrum about it. I would be happy if they just left and started their own party with or without Schilling and let the Democratic party in town do its own thing. They are spending way too much time on negativity and not what they are for, other than the water that distinguishes the from the Democratic party, they seem to despise.

  • I don’t understand how all you dam people are so blind. You keep accusing those who don’t agree with you of a single focus. And yet you are the ones with the single focus. The three nominees selected last Saturday are not all cut from the same cloth. They will agree on some issues and disagree on others, housing, neighborhood development, transportation, education spending, sewer and stormwater infrastructure, staff ect. You are the one who keeps bringing up the water issue I haven’t even mentioned it.

  • So will Democratic candidate Dede Smith support independent Bob Fenwick’s city council candidacy, as I understand she did in the last election?

  • I certainly hope so Karl.

  • Mr. Norris and Ms. Smith and everybody else who voted in the primary signed the Democratic pledge to only support Democrats in the next (upcoming general) election.

    The question is Who do Mr. Norris and Ms. Smith support in the General Election?

    Do they support Huja-Galvin and Smith or do they support any independent candidates. I challenge them to state publicly and now who they support in the upcoming election.

  • you radical…

  • City Dem: He said, she said, blah blah blah, but agree with you the three are not cut from the same cloth and they will disagree thank God the voters saw through the Norris ticket otherwise we would be able to say that. Hey look we have moved on from the water supply issue, yay!

    Very Good question Mr. Ackerman. We have heard some weird things from the Mayor since the primary that bring into question his support for democrats but nothing from Ms. Smith since the election. It sure would be great if she would state she is not going to do that again ad that she will follow the pledge and not support independents.

  • I think the candidates that support a ward system will get my vote. I’m sick of the grip of the insiders club ( and no that is not the Norris crowd ) that is the Szakos/Nix crowd – controlling the party . The only way I see to get more representation from a diverse group is to go to nonpartisan ward based elections.
    Time for a change

  • I cannot understand the idea of “nonpartisan” city elections. Everybody’s going to know who the Democrats are. They’re still going to endorse candidates. This country started as “nonpartisan”—the Constitution doesn’t say a thing about political parties—with parties forming by necessity, despite the objections of some of the founding fathers. We don’t put a candidate’s race on the ballot, yet somehow people figure that out, and that appears to be a pretty big deal, too.

    Anybody who thinks that pretending that our elections are nonpartisan will make them so is deluding themselves.

  • I completely disagree Waldo. Parties are truly meaningless when it comes to city politics. This time we had democrats running who sided with business interests ( aligned with county interests) over citizen interests ( city owned assets and parks) not aligned with county growth/development interests. What letter would you put next to their names if the election was nonpartisan ?

  • City democrat I truly don’t think you have any idea what your talking about. With rare exception the primary is the election in city

  • But this year all bets are off – tis the season of discontent.

  • I completely disagree Waldo. Parties are truly meaningless when it comes to city politics.

    I agree—parties are largely meaningless when it comes to city politics. Yet the fact remains that parties exist, and politics are driven by them. A race as high-profile as council isn’t going to be nonpartisan, no matter what it might be deemed officially. The bulk of voters in Charlottesville will not vote for a Republican, and whether or not you put “(R)” after their name on the ballot will not prevent them from learning who is a Democrat and who is a Republican and voting accordingly. That’s just being realistic.

  • Do you believe that voters in Charlottesville don’t care who is a Democrat and who is a Republican? If you don’t think they care, then perhaps you could suggest why Republicans have—for the second consecutive election—failed to put forth a single candidate? And if you do think that they care, then why would we stop putting this information in front of them when they walk into the voting booth?

  • I am sure that not only Democrats voted in the primary. Two plumbers told me last week that their employer told the staff that if they wanted work they needed to support Huja, Galvin and Beyer. I suspect other people in construction were among the additional 700 participants when compared to 2009. The Monticello Business Alliance PAC is certainly trying to get the word out.

  • @city democrat: if parties are meaningless in city politics then I guess we’ll see Dede Smith step up and support Bob Fenwick over her two fellow democrats. Do you really think she would win the general election if she were not on the ticket, and part of the team? (Note: Alexandra Searls lost to Rob Schilling for that very reason.)

  • I still think journalist in this town should be asking Mr. Norris and Ms. Smith:

    “Do you support the Democratic Primary winners in the genera election?” and…

    “Will you be telling your supporters to vote for any independents in the General Election?”

    They need to be on the record now rather than later about these issues?

  • I think journalists in this town ought to pay attention to real issues.

    It might be amusing and informative if a journalist were to say watch this truly inspiring video outlining Mr. Huja’s plans/dreams for the future and then investigate whether he has actually done anything while he has been in office to make those dreams a reality. I don’t think he has, but maybe I missed something.
    http://www.youtube.com/user/cvilledems#p/u/5/Re6T_tHlZOc

  • Antoinette W. Roades

    Anyone asserting that “the people have spoken” vis-a-vis dam and parkway — or, as Kathleen Galvin apparently told C-VILLE, that “the voting population” had been clear on those subjects — should take note of the relevant numbers.

    Charlottesville’s “voting population” currently comprises at least 27,516 individual registered voters. The people who chose to speak via the Democratic Primary numbered only 2524. Of those,fewer than 1550 ranked Huja or Galvin first, second, or third.

    So given the roar they’re entitled to, the people have so far barely squeaked.

  • builditandtheywillwhine

    Democracy is about those who show up not how many are registered. If turnout is 40% then about a quarter of those voters may have already voted in the primary. It is history that leads many to assert that the primary is the election. With no republican in the race and weak independents it a safe to assume that the race in the fall may be a formality.

    You could make a case for a write in bid or convince me that one of these independents could surge forward but I have my doubts.

  • @ Antoinette W. Roades: Maybe you are right but take a look at the numbers the full on dredging candidate Smith pulled in. Barely beat Beyer who had no previous name recognition and who had not been beating the dredging drum for 2 years. Comparatively, I would say its over for the dredgers. Also check out how independents have traditionally done in Cville general elections. But you are entitled to your dreams.

    builditandtheywillwhine, your screen name stands as a true testament to our reality.

  • Antoinette W. Roades

    I am a Charlottesville native who has watched local politics closely for more than 50 years. I am also a professional researcher who has closely studied Charlottesville’s political history over the last 250 years. I neither hold nor described any dreams or illusions. I simply relayed numbers. To those I would add only that those numbers describe vast opportunity should voters choose to sieze it.

  • Studying Cville political history for over the last 250 years? You are not that old.

    Anyone can recognize an opportunity but Its the seizing tha counts. If you have been watching that closely, In the last general election how many votes did each independent get? How many did Fenwick get? Willliams?

  • truthtopower, don’t be silly. “…over the last 250 years” is not the equivalant of “…for over the last 250 years”.

    You added the word and professed yourself shocked — shocked! — that gambling was going on in this establishment!

    (quickly, now, go watch a copy of “Casablanca”, so you can add a word to the refence and discover that you are shocked — shocked! — at anyone pointing that out to you. )

    You’re not telling the truth to yourself or the other blog readers & posters, let alone to power.

  • What’s absurd is the notion that anyone here has a clue as to how the election would have turned out had EVERY voter in Charlottesville voted. Smith, Blount, and Cannon triumph! Beyer tops Huja and Galvin in Round 1 vote total! Halfday Landslide! Quien sabe?

    To borrow (and adapt) a quote from one of our preeminent word slingers, Donald Rumsfeld: “As you know, you go to the polls with the voters you have. They are not the voters you might want or wish to have at a later date.”

  • Still waiting for the last general election Independent tallies….and Babs, I was not professing any truth just challenging a poster to give me some evidence that in a Cville election Independents have much of a chance in the general election given the notion that it was clear the voters are done with the water supply issue and that seems to be a cornerstone of the Independents’ platforms.

    And in a previous post I said:

    I still think journalist in this town should be asking Mr. Norris and Ms. Smith:
    “Do you support the Democratic Primary winners in the genera election?” and…
    “Will you be telling your supporters to vote for any independents in the General Election?”
    They need to be on the record now rather than later about these issues?

    That is about truth and power, so Babs I beg to differ with you about your characterization of me. But I did enjoy the Casablanca ref., got a good chuckle going.

  • Antoinette W. Roades

    No, I am not 250 years old. But I sometimes feel as tired as if I were. And little is more wearying than the relentless twisting of appropriately chosen words and/or their frantic extrapolation into something they did not say.

  • If the Democratic primary is the de facto election, then it certainly seems fair to me for anyone who wishes to have a shot at winning the general election to show up there, sign whatever pledge is presented to them, to seek that party’s nomination, and then support whoever or whatever they choose once that part of the process is over.

    I’m still think journalists in this town should be listening to what Huja says he will do for us if reelected and comparing it to his record as a sitting councilor. I don’t think he has actually done much good with the opportunity he has been given and I’d like him to explain why that qualifies him to continue.

Comments are currently closed.

Sideblog