All Articles Tagged "elections"
It’s not really that much of a surprise: wealthier Americans, mostly whites, donated much more to the presidential campaigns than minorities. According to a new study by AP, Americans living in predominantly wealthy, white neighborhoods account for nearly all the sizable campaign contributions in this year’s presidential election, as reported by the Huffington Post.
Latinos donated the least. The study found that while 16 percent of the U.S. population is Hispanic, “not even 4 percent of the more than $1.3 billion in 3 million-plus itemized contributions came from mostly Hispanic neighborhoods this year… More than 90 percent came from majority white neighborhoods,” writes HuffPo.
Large donations come into play because there is actually more of them. About 65 percent of donors supporting Obama gave more than $200, compared with 85 percent for Romney. “These donors, including ‘bundlers’ who raise hundreds of thousands of dollars, are most likely to receive invitations to lavish donor parties, state dinners at the White House or policy briefings with senior advisers,” says the article.
For sure income disparity played some part in these findings. According to the 2010 Census, the median household income for Hispanics was $37,759; for non-Hispanic whites it was $54,620. Add to this the high unemployment rate for minorities, about 8 percent.
While it makes sense that minorities, who on a whole have lower incomes than their white counterparts, would donate less because they basically have less money, it’s not so, found the AP report. “Even among the poorest neighborhoods, non-Hispanics contributed far more regularly to the campaigns and the political groups that supported them. The trend similarly holds true for campaign contributions from mostly black, Asian or Native American neighborhoods,” states the article.
Still, the AP is talking about big-dollar donations. The news organization did not take into account the sources of contributions of $200 or less per person because, under federal law, political groups are not required to disclose any identifying information about such donors.
Perhaps more jarring is the amount of money spent, on a whole, on this election — $6 billion — and the amount that came from outside groups like super PACs — $526 million. Mother Jones has some of these money stats.
From The Grio
Anti-Obama text messages from an anonymous source hit hundreds of voters’ phones Tuesday night.
Politico reports one message read, “Voting for Obama means voting for same-sex marriage.” Others include “Obama stole $716 Billion in Medicare. We cant [sic] trust Obama to protect our seniors,” “Obama is using your tax dollars to fund Planned Parenthood and abortions. Is that right?” and “VP Biden mocks a fallen Navy Seal during memorial. Our military deserves better.”
Many of the recipients tweeted screenshots of their messages. Jim Spellman, a reporter for CNN, tweeted, “A new low for these political campaigns: text messages? Please give us a break!”
Read the rest at The Grio
By T. Hall
It has become clear from this election cycle’s first two debates that winning the “optics game” – how you are perceived – can be just as important as the presenting the facts. Take, for example, Mitt Romney’s first debate performance: though he was criticized for telling 27 lies in 38 minutes, he survived the next round because he showed an unexpected fervor and zest. These face-offs then become about displaying passion, grace under fire, and an understanding of how to play to the emotions of the American public. In a way, this political pageantry is more “RuPaul’s Drag Race” than “Meet the Press.” President Obama, Governor Romney, Vice President Biden, and Congressman Ryan are just as catty and dramatic as RuPaul’s ‘squirrelfriends,’ except they are fighting to run the country.
Make up, suits, and flag pins
Like any good drag competition, costumes matter. The candidates must meticulously adorn their bodies to present themselves in the most convincing light. Just as queens strive for “fishiness” (or womanliness), the candidates must give off the air of capability and confidence. The use of makeup (to take off the shine) or tiny flag pins (to display their patriotism) or carefully sculpted hair (Paul Ryan’s shaped up widow’s peak) is no different than the queens of RPDR skillfully beating their faces or selecting their elegant gowns. The candidates must lip-sync for their political lives, and can’t allow dissonant visuals to disrupt their flow. Nobody wants to be the Nixon or DiDa Ritz of the debate – ashy and sad looking. In pageants as in politics, appearance is paramount.
Reading is Fundamental
In a game where no edges are safe, the candidate that snatches the wig fastest wins the fight. That was clear from the first debate, when Romney came out of the gate with lies and wild gesticulations, earning him a post-debate bounce that threw Democrats into a tizzy. Joe Biden’s incredulous laughs and quick take downs of Paul Ryan (“malarkey,” “my friend,” “stop talking about how you care about people”) was nothing but pure, unadulterated shade. Debate zingers are key, not only because they cut to the white meat of one’s opponent, but because they frame the other guy in an unflattering light publicly and can be used as sound bites for the campaign. Reading is fundamental and these guys have been in the library.
You Be the Judge
If the candidates are the queens, then the moderators are the judges – each one plays an important role in shaping the competition. In the first debate Jim Lehrer showed himself to be an inadequate moderator, and allowed the candidates to run roughshod over him like a Drag Race guest judge that doesn’t hold any weight. Martha Raddatz, on the other hand, was the Michelle Visage of the vice-presidential debate, firm and authoritative enough to pull the queens back together when the conversation got off track. “So will both of you level with the American people: Can you get unemployment to under 6 percent and how long will it take?” Raddatz asked bluntly. Even though it was easy to assume her political leanings, Raddatz asked incisive, insightful questions of both candidates. A moderator (or Drag Race judge, for that matter) that can regulate and get to the meat of the issues that are extremely valuable.
Ultimately the American public will play the role of RuPaul, determining which candidates must sashay away and which will become the leaders of America. The road to the White House is a long and arduous one, and these candidates must prove that they have what it takes to rule the political runway.
T. Hall is a intellignorant writer based in northern Virginia. She tries not to take herself too seriously, and blogs about original fiction, books and life at DopeReads.com.
Guitarist and “activist” Ted Nugent is another popular figure in hot water for his comments about the Obama administration during an NRA convention in St.Louis. According to the Associated Press, during the convention last week, Nugent toted the Obama administration as the “evil, America-hating administration.” While that’s not the worst insult I’m sure you’ve heard about, the rocker took things up a notch by comparing the administration to coyotes who needed to be shot, and urged NRA members to “to ride into that battlefield and chop their heads off in November.” And the icing on the cake was when he told the crowd what he would do if the president was re-elected: “If Barack Obama becomes the president in November, again, I will either be dead or in jail by this time next year.” Word Ted? WORD?
I’m guessing the secret service wasn’t feeling this, because Ted is slated to meet with them on Thursday to explain his comments. He told his buddy Glenn Beck (your other favorite person) that after he talks with the secret service, it will be pretty clear that he wasn’t threatening the president whatsoever. But despite what he says, a lot of people are still calling the comments threatening, and for those who have guns but don’t have sense, it might be the words they need to hear to act a fool this fall. And yes, Nugent is endorsing Mitt Romney with all his might.
It’s funny how just last week people were getting in Hilary Rosen’s behind because she made comments about Mitt Romney’s wife being a stay-at-home mother who really hadn’t worked a day in her life after Romney said he looked to her as a guide to women’s economic struggles. Yet this fool gets in front of the gun-toting NRA, talking about the President and his administration and calling them evil, comparing the November elections to a battlefield, even saying he’ll be dead or in jail if President Obama is re-elected, and folks are on the hush this time around.
Writer Leslie Marshall at US News World & Report said that despite people’s views on the President’s record or positions, folks still need to have and show a lot more respect to him. Why? Because he’s the damn president! Hello!!!!
“Although I’m not that old a broad yet, I am seeing a growing number of Americans disrespect not only the man in the Oval Office, but the office of the president. It seems the older I get, the less respect Americans have for our commander in chief.
Some will say this is just Nugent being a loudmouth, he isn’t really threatening the president. Perhaps that is true, but what about the idiot who will follow Nugent’s words and make a true threat or attempt to carry out such violent rhetoric? Have we learned nothing from the shooting of Rep. Gabby Giffords?! When will the use of such language stop?! And the disrespect!”
AMEN! People throw the worst forms of shade and disrespect at our president as though everything he’s dealing with and trying to work on during his presidency is something he created alone. From immature governor’s pointing their fingers in his face, to folks calling him boy, sending rude emails about his wife, and now this big dummy (*in Fred Sanford voice*) encouraging trigger happy individuals to take matters in their own hands when it comes to dealing with the president and his administration in the fall, this stuff has to stop. He might not really be telling people to hurt the president, but as Marshall said, after the shooting of Gabrielle Giffords, he should have known better. Sure, President Bush had a few shoes thrown at him during trips to Iraq, but the disrespect President Obama gets from his own people here at home, GROWN PEOPLE who should know better, is despicable. If President Obama were a Republican, trust, the outcry would be immense (with Bill O’Reilly at the helm). Just as Rosen was held fully accountable for her words, so should this man. I’m telling you, if incidents like this don’t make you want to swarm the voting booths in November, I really don’t know what will…
More on Madame Noire!
- Nicki Who? 7 Female MCs Who Could Be Coming For Nicki Minaj’s Spot
- Does Cohabitation Set A Bad Example?
- Think Like A Man Cast Tells Madame Noire Why Folks Need To See This Film
- Please, Baby Baby Baby, Please: 6 Things Men Say and Do When They Want You Back
- Tuesday Talk: Lamman Rucker Discusses Forplai, For Play And Foreplay
- NEW EPISODE: “Ask A Black Man” Episode 4: The Marriage Episode
- Just Like His Big Bro: Usher’s Little Brother Has Custody Drama
- The Pros And Cons Of Dating A Male Virgin
Probably, like most of you, I’ve been watching the republican primaries with the peripheral interest of a circus sideshow. As Gingrich, Santorum and Romney duke it out, I’ve heard such alienating phrases as, “I want African American people to demand paychecks, not food stamps,” (Gingrich), ”I don’t want to make black people’s lives better by giving them somebody else’s money,” (Santorum), and Romney’s flub about not caring about the unemployed–never mind that blacks make up 12 percent of that group. And to put icing on the cake, a recent report indicated that 29 percent of republicans from the Deep South think interracial marriage should be illegal, and it appears none of the presidential hopefuls have chosen to disabuse them of this notion. Surprise, surprise.
All this pandering to the extreme right wing of the party has backfired because the ignorant comments, Freudian slips, and allusions to swipe at women’s hard-won reproductive rights impacts not only blacks, but other minorities and white soccer moms. Rick Santorum’s recent comments about how Puerto Ricans should speak better English is just another on a long list of buffoonish remarks aimed at minorities. Santorum single-handedly managed to offend both Hispanics and black people part of the African diaspora.
But it looks like republicans don’t too much like it when “off color” remarks are thrown in the other direction. At a recent fundraiser for President Obama, Robert DeNiro joked about America not being “ready for a white First Lady.” Newt Gingrinch was outraged, OUTRAGED!! He said DeNiro’s comments were inexcusable, and wanted the president to apologize for DeNiro; I guess because an apology from the mega-star wasn’t sufficient for Mr. Gingrinch.
Republicans have essentially given up trying to win “the black vote,” so there seems to be little self-editing happening. Lenny McAllister, senior contributor at Politic365.com and radio host of “Get Right with Lenny McAllister” (www.LMGILIVE.com), and frequent guest on CNN, says that the recent antics in the republican party aree less about alienation, and more about a failure to connect. “There hasn’t been a concerted effort to reach minorities [in the republican party] for 40 years.”
McAllister, who is a member of the group, Hip Hop Republicans, worries that this continued failure to connect will prevent republicans from leading a more diverse America, and the country continues to “brown.”
But there’s good news for Obama fans: Although McAllister thinks the president should get a “C-” for his first term, he still predicts a narrow win against Mitt Romney, whom he believes will be the single man standing after the republican primary. Who do you think will win the republican primary?
Christelyn D. Karazin is the co-author of “Swirling: How to Date, Mate and Relate Mixing Race, Culture and Creed” (to be released May 2012), and runs a blog, www.beyondblackwhite.com, dedicated to women of color who are interested and or involved in interracial and intercultural relationships. She is also the founder and organizer of “No Wedding, No Womb,” an initiative to find solutions to the 72 percent out-of-wedlock rate in the black community.
More on Madame Noire!
- Shawty Swing My Way! Baseball Cuties We Love
- Brighten Up Your Day! Pops Of Color To Add To Your Wardrobe!
- Keep Rising To The Top: Supporting Actresses Who Became Leading Ladies
- I’m Not Saying She’s A Gold Digger But She’s Not Messing With…
- Ladies, Has It Been Awhile? 6 Ways to Take the ‘Edge’ Off
- Love Without A Limit: Why Women Stay In Bad Relationships
- Are They Related? Black Celebs (And Non-Black Celebs) Who Look Like They Could Be Siblings
- Where Are They Now? The Cast of “Living Single”
About “Socially Responsible Kids”
Election Day is coming up and this is the perfect opportunity to teach your kids how to be model citizens. In this episode, our Mommy In Chief and featured guest will offer some recommendations for raising socially responsible children.
Featured Guest: Dr. Marcella Runell Hall
Dr. Runell Hall is a social justice scholar and author. She has co-edited three award-winning books: The Hip-Hop Education Guidebook; Conscious Women Rock the Page: Using Hip-Hop Fiction to Incite Social Change; and Love, Race & Liberation: ‘Til the White Day is Done. Hall has also written for Scholastic Books, The New York Times Learning Network, VIBE, and various academic journals including Equity and Excellence in Education.
In May ’11, Hall earned her doctorate in Social Justice Education from UMASS, Amherst. Her dissertation is entitled Education in a Hip-Hop Nation: Our Identity, Politics & Pedagogy.
Currently, Hall is the Interim Director of the Center for Multicultural Education and Programs/Center for Spiritual Life at New York University (NYU). There she also serves as adjunct faculty in the Steinhardt School of Education and the Gallatin School of Individualized Study.
Marcella was born in Washington DC and raised in NJ & NY. She currently resides in Brooklyn with her husband, David Hall (aka DJ Trends) and their daughter Aaliyah.
Episode Links & Resources
- LINK: Sweet Blackberry
- SUGGESTED BOOK: The Skin You Live In by Michael Tyler, Illustrated by David Lee Csicko
- SUGGESTED BOOK: Love, Race & Liberation by JLove Calderon & Marcella Runell Hall (Recommendation for older kids, parents and educators)
- LINK: Children’s books that promote social justice and civic engagement
- TIP: Use web based 360 tours or You Tube clips if you can’t travel abroad. Example: Abu Dhabi Virtual Tour
- SOCIAL MEDIA BRIEF: Facebook Q & A – Do you vote when it’s a non-presidential election year?
- LINK: Here There Everywhere News for Kids
- LINK: PBSKids Zoom Election 101
- LINK: Volunteer Match
Want More Mommy In Chief? Watch these episodes:
- Episode 1: Are You A Good Enough Mother?
- Episode 2: New Motherhood and Balancing A Bust Work Life
- Episode 3: How to Decorate an Eco-Friendly Baby Nursery
- Episode 4: Foodie, Nicole Friday on Kids and Career
- Episode 5: Melissa Beck, From Hollywood to Stay At Home Mom
- Episode 6: Single Mom in The City
- Episode 7: Mommy Mogul and Marketing Wiz Monique Jackson at Home With Her Boys
- Episode 8: Beauty Maven Jodie Patterson Talks Four-Day Work Week for Moms
- Episode 9: Tonya Lewis Lee on Motherhood and the Importance of Women’s Health
- Episode 1: Back 2 School
- Episode 2: Happy Halloween
- Episode 3: Socially Responsible Kids
- Episode 4: Money Talks
- Episode 5: Keeping Families Healthy
- Episode 6: Thanksgiving Madness
- Episode 7: Highlights and Best Moments
- Episode 8: Stylish Moms
- Episode 9: Best Apps for Moms
- Episode 10: Socialite Kids
- Episode 11: Hair Talk with AfroBella
- Episode 12: Happy New Year!
It’s over. The ‘Big Texas’ wolf in sheep’s clothing has been revealed. Thanks to a report in the Washington Post, the world is now cognizant of the infamous “Niggerhead” rock entrance at the hunting grounds of Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry’s family.
How insane? Now picture the Perry family discharging firearms near a large rock with the racially-insensitive, derogatory term “Niggerhead” painted on it, and you have a PR nightmare for the ages. As expected, the Perry campaign is scrambling like cockroaches to alleviate the damages.
“A number of claims made in the story are incorrect, inconsistent and anonymous, including the implication that Rick Perry brought groups to the lease when the word on the rock was still visible,” said communications director Ray Sullivan who insists Perry’s family never owned the property.
“The one consistent fact in the story is that the word on a rock was painted over and obscured many years ago.” According to Perry, as soon as his family began leasing the property, his father showed his disgust by painting over the word nearly thirty years ago.
However, several witnesses claim the racial slur was highly visible throughout the 1980s and as recently as this summer. Presidential candidate Herman Cain, whose arguably Perry’s stiffest competition for the Republican nomination, blasted his fellow party member by calling him “insensitive” for failing to step up to handle the matter.
“There isn’t a more vile, negative word than the ‘n word,’ and for him to leave it there as long as they did is just plain insensitive to a lot of black people in this country,” said Cain during an interview on “Fox News Sunday.” As far as I’m concerned, Perry should drop out the race. During a time when black unemployment has eclipsed 16 percent, the last thing we need is a prejudiced bigot occupying the White House.
Yes, Perry has appointed minorities to the upper reaches of government. Just keep in mind, good crooks often have alibis. Meaning? It’s certainly not uncommon for bigots to surround themselves with people of opposite color as a measure of racial insurance.
So Ralph Nader and Cornel West have teamed up yet again to sabotage the Democratic Party. They’re currently canvassing the country for Democratic opponents to challenge Obama in the primaries. According to Nader, “Without debates by challengers inside the Democratic Party’s presidential primaries, the liberal/majoritarian agenda will be muted and ignored.” And he goes on to say, “The one-man Democratic primaries will be dull, repetitive, and draining of both voter enthusiasm and real bright lines between the two parties that excite voters.”
If my grandfather was still around he’d say, “These two fools have more nerve than a brass-A$$ monkey.” And he would be right. I’m shocked that either of them have the nerve to even open their mouths, because the last time they teamed up during the 2000 election to “excite the voters,” they excited the Democratic Party right out of office. I used to joking tell friends that after Bush was sworn in, his very first act as president was to take down a picture of George Washington and replace it with a picture of Ralph Nader in the Oval Office.
Admittedly, many of us are frustrated by President Obama’s lack of assertiveness toward the GOP, but the point of an election is to vote your interest, not your frustration. If you were Jewish in pre-Nazi Germany and frustrated with the administration in office, would you squander your vote to vent your frustration at the sitting administration, or would you vote to make damn sure that Hitler didn’t win the election? That’s the situation that we’re currently in here in the United States.
I’ve written several articles criticizing of Barack Obama, but I’ve always tried to remain constructive, and I’ve limited my criticism to specific issues instead of launching unsubstantiated attacks on his overall character. As I see it, that’s the difference between attempting to have a positive impact on policy, as oppose to engaging in the destructive practice of pursuing a personal agenda.
Obama has caused me tremendous frustration on several issues, but simple common sense dictates that my being frustrated is far preferable to allowing the GOP to come into power and turn the United States into a nation of corporate fuedalism. That’s a level of common sense that Ralph Nader, Tavis Smiley and Cornel West seems to be lacking. Tavis seems to be keeping a low profile in this effort, by the way, but somehow I still visualize West sitting on his knee with Tavis’ hand in his back.
Isn’t it curious how all of their criticism is directed at Obama while, this point, it has become abundantly clear that the GOP has turned into a group of radical lunatics with absolutely no sense of limits, or any respect for the United States Constitution?
The GOP literally stole the 2000 election, invalidating the votes of literally millions of Americans; they invaded an innocent country, killing over a million Iraqi citizens – the majority of whom were innocent women and children; they’ve thrown away the lives of thousands of our troops in pursuit of corporate greed; they ravaged our economy and are using it as a pretext to abolish Social Security and all other elements of the social safety net; their radical Supreme Court has given multinational corporations more control over our electoral system than American citizens, and they’ve effectively turned the state of Michigan into Michighanistan by taking away the citizens’ right to self-determination. Yet, Nader and West would risk turning the nation over to these people, yet again, because they’re personally irritated with Barack Obama?
Anyone – and I do mean ANYONE – who would do that is either stupid, insane, think they’ll benefit from a GOP victory in some way, or are so blinded by an oversized ego that they’ve lost all connection with reality. It is clear to most thinking people that President Obama, flaws and all, is our best defense against turning the nation over to a GOP who want’s to drag us back into the Middle Ages. If that wasn’t the case, Nader and West wouldn’t have to mount a talent search. Thus, it’s one thing to have individual principles, but placing the entire nation in jeopardy to indulge those principles suggests an egomania that, at the very least, borders on psychosis.
It’s time for Nader and West supporters to realize that neither of these two individuals are grounded in reality. They both have a proven track record of being politically naive, at best, and delusional at worst. They both fail to recognize that while it’s an admirable ideal to want to vote one’s conscience, that’s all it is – an ideal. Politics is about being practical, and the inescapable fact is, their consciences can’t hold political office – and even if they could, I wouldn’t want to rely on the consciences of men with such poor judgment in the first place. So while they might want to fall on their swords in the name of political purity, the rest of us would rather settle for a functional democracy.
Again, this is not the first time that Nader and West have engaged in this failed strategy. West supported Nader in his self-serving and childishly petulant campaign during the 2000 election that led to the appointment of George W. Bush. So while West is running around claiming to be so outraged over the economy and lack of jobs for the poor and middle class in this country, he’s partially responsible for it. In a previous article,
The Tavis/West Poverty Pimp Tour, I point out the following:
“Those of us who are students of political history have seen this Tavis/West demagoguery before. They’re following directly in the footsteps of Ralph Nader, one of the worst turncoats in American history.
“Nader should have pushed his agenda during the Democratic primaries, then if his position was rejected, he should have fallen in line and supported the Democratic candidate, if for no other reason than to support the public good. But instead, when his position was rejected, he took it as a personal rejection and acted like a petulant child. He ignored the greater good and purposely sabotaged the Democratic agenda – along with all of the causes that he was supposed to be so passionate about all of his life – and took his ball (and votes) and went home.
“By doing so, Nader negated everything that he ever accomplished in his life. He also betrayed the fact that everything he ever accomplished was done purely for self-promotion and not for the public good, as we had previously assumed. His miserable act of treachery during the 2000 election was purposely designed to help George Bush to win that election in order to deny the Democrats after rejecting him as a candidate. That makes him just as culpable as Bush and Cheney for the death of over a million Iraqi citizens, the maiming and death of thousands of American troops, and even the nations current economic condition, which is a direct result of the Bush administration’s purposeful plundering of the United States treasury. Nader supporters would say that he stood on principles, but his “principles” have led to the death and misery of literally millions of innocent people. Thus, Ralph Nader should be remembered as one of the most miserable and self-serving snakes in all of U. S. History.
“Tavis and West are engaged in the very same sort of treachery as Nader, and it may very well lead to the same result, or worse. Because you see, this time we’re going to be left with a fascist state.”
But if you confront members of the Nader/West coalition with these facts, they’ll immediately begin to obfuscate and engage in intellectual gymnastics in an attempt to avoid responsibility for the horrific fate that they brought upon the country. They’ll say things like, “It’s not our fault that Gore lost. He just didn’t fight hard enough for a recount.” But by using such arguments what they’re actually saying is, “Gore just didn’t work hard enough to undo the damage that we’d done.” But the bottom line is this – Gore lost the 2000 election to Bush in Florida by 537 votes, and the Nader/West coalition peeled off 97,488 votes from Gore in Florida alone. So don’t take my word for it – you do the myth.
Eric L. Wattree is a writer, poet, and musician, born in Los Angeles. He’s a columnist for The Los Angeles Sentinel, Black Star News, The Atlanta Post, and several other publications. He’s also a staff writer for Veterans Today and the author of “A Message From the Hood.”
(ProPublica) — Their names suggest selfless dedication to democracy. Fair Districts Mass. Protect Your Vote. The Center for a Better New Jersey. And their stated goals are unarguable: In the partisan fight to redraw congressional districts, states should stick to the principle of one person, one vote. But a ProPublica investigation has found that these groups and others are being quietly bankrolled by corporations, unions and other special interests. Their main interest in the once-a-decade political fight over redistricting is not to help voters in the communities they claim to represent but mainly to improve the prospects of their political allies or to harm their enemies. The number of these purportedly independent redistricting groups is rising, but their ties remain murky. Contributions to such groups are not limited by campaign finance laws, and most states allow them to take unlimited amounts of money without disclosing the source.
(Washington Informer) — Michael Shuler could hardly wait to participate in the Ward 8 Democrats Biennial Convention, which took place at Savoy Elementary School in Southeast on Sat., Sept. 17. A 2011 graduate of Ballou High School in Southeast, he wanted to make sure that his vote counted when it came to who should run the Ward 8 Democrats for the next two years. ”I am here to vote for Joyce Scott, Sandy Allen and Darryl Ross,” Schuler, 19, said. “I believe that they can make things happen. I really want Markus Batchelor to win because he has good qualities and I like the fact that he put himself out there to be a candidate.” Shuler got his wish. The slate led by Scott won all of their races in a higher than expected turnout. Scott, a long time resident of Ward 8 and the first vice president of the Ward 8 Democrats, defeated ward newcomer Natalie Williams for the presidency, 203-130, with a handful of votes going to a minor candidate. Batchelor won his position, first vice president, with a commanding 206 votes and former D.C. Council member Sandy Allen, a candidate for second vice president, received 250.