"I agree with Mayor Bhalla’s concerns about the impact of voter fraud but this shouldn’t be used as an argument against run-off elections. Ending voter fraud and the abuse of Vote By Mail ballots should be a high priority for Mayor Bhalla and addressed immediately. Newly appointed New Jersey Attorney General Gurbir Grewal is a close friend of Mayor Bhalla’s and spoke at his inauguration. I expect that Mayor Bhalla will ensure the Attorney General will look into this issue."
-6th Ward Councilwoman Jen Giattino, Feb. 2, 2018 email
Ever play "Hot Potato"?
2 or more players toss an object to each other while music plays. The player who is holding the "hot potato" when the music stops is out.
Well, an email sent by Council VP Jen Giattino turns Hoboken election integrity into a game of "Hot Potato"; the "hot potato" are hundreds of bought-votes which determine the winner of low turnout run-off elections. In her email, Giattino writes that she "agrees Bhalla's concerns about the impact of voter fraud..."
...then throws the burning potato to Mayor Bhalla.
In fact, Giattino's stunning abdication of responsibility for insuring the integrity of Hoboken elections not only passes the "hot potato" to Bhalla but tells him he owns the whole potato.
She lectures that "ending voter fraud should be a high priority for Mayor Bhalla and addressed immediately."
Oh, but Mayor Bhalla has addressed the impact of voter fraud in runoff elections with his VETO, which Giattino, Fisher and Cunningham are about to undo.
Mayor Bhalla's VETO acknowledged that voter fraud coupled with LOW TURNOUT corrupt run-off elections.
Giattino's email OMITS the issue of low--turnout in mid-December runoffs, which pretty much hands the election to the vote-buyers.
And Giattino, Fisher and Cunningham are poised to hand Hoboken elections back to the vote-buyers. That is not "reform."
A BACKLASH COMETH
Look at the November machine results. Not only couldn't Fisher and Cunningham deliver their wards, they got walloped. And now, they're poised to turn their backs on their constituents by overturning Mayor Bhalla's veto; siding with the election-buyers who can overwhelm low-turnout elections with paid votes.
They'll show their 2nd, 5th and 6th Ward constituents they are with Ruben Ramos and Mike DeFusco.
THE COUNTER-OFFENSIVE
Al Sullivan's new column is a must-read!
Al, who is known to take dictation from a circle of Hoboken operatives, took a hilarious swipe at this blog; a counter-offensive against opinion expressed here. Check out this statement:
Bwaa-haw-haw! Yeah, right.
- What kind of Reformer would do a backroom deal with Ruben Ramos to purge pro-Zimmer appointees from our boards?
- What kind of reformer would block Team Bhalla colleagues from participating in the Council reorganization, and appoint Ruben Ramos (of 4th ward vote-farming fame) to Council President?
- What kind of reformers vote with the vote-farmers in favor of run-off elections in mid December?
- What kind of reformers don't work cooperatively with Team Bhalla council members?
Does GA need to tell you whose "instant runoffs" resolution Council President Ramos placed first on the agenda?
Instead of working cooperatively with Jabbour to achieve consensus on her instant runoffs resolution, Giattino made a deal with Ruben to grab the glory for the idea as cover for her anti-reform VETO.
Giattino's backroom political deal-making with Ruben Ramos to kneecap a Team Bhalla council member-- keep her from having a voice on the council is not going unnoticed.
Speaking of reform voices, hear them.
2012 REFORM PETITION TO ELIMINATE RUN-OFFS
I'll bet she isn't at all concerned about voter fraud. Her only priority right now is "screwing things up because she can".
ReplyDeleteBTW, Jen is as much a reformer as I am a ballerina.
Competing resolutions? Seriously? What is this - 3rd grade? I think Jen needs a new "braintrust." The one she has seems to be short on brains and has cost her the trust of an awful lot of voters.
ReplyDeleteWhat, you haven't figured out that they are acting like a bunch of petulant children because Zimmer had the gall to not anoint one of these twits as her successor? Every damn thing they have done since Zimmer picked Bhalla has shown me they are a bunch of spoiled little turds and that Zimmer made the right choice. I swear, it is like we have a handful of poor imitations of Beth Mason on the CC.
DeleteHave to agree, Giattino's competing resolution is a stunt of Beth Mason-esque pettiness and vanity. All the Al Sullivan fawning in the world can't mask this stink.
DeleteThe Giattino alternate resolution is actually very different than Jabbour's. Emily's resolution said in essence current law gives us two flawed choices, it objectively
ReplyDeletedescribes the flaws of each, says instant runoff would be better than either existing choice, and asks the state give us that better choice.
Giattino's resolution says having no runoff is bad because OMG we just had an election where Ravi won with only 1/3 of the vote, instant runoff "could" be a viable alternative so it wouldn't it be nice to have that choice to think about.
There is no discussion of the shortcomings of a December runoff, why instant runoff might be preferable to a December runoff. In fact the December runoff ootion isn't mentioned at all. Not a peep about it pro or con in Jen's resolution.
Pretty disinJenuous. Classic work from the "braintrust" described by Al Sullivan in this week's HR. Nothing but a dishonest attempt to undermine Emily and have an open honest and complete discussion of the issue.
SAD!
Oops. That's not have an open an honest discussion.
DeleteNot exactly, numbers but close. Jabbour says instant runoffs "would be preferable...", Giattino says instant runoffs "couldbe preferable."
Delete"would" vs "could"
Yeah, Jabbour's resolution lays out the perils of runoffs in the context of the 2012 referendum which eliminated them in Hoboken. Jen's omits the history, and downsides of runoff elections- walking back her own support for runoffs in 2012.
Jen is shows she cant work with the Bhalla Team council members. This stunt is dumb as hell, the optics are terrible.
In hindsight, Emily shouldn't have pulled her instant runoffs resolution, and forced them to vote. Emily was trying to work cooperatively with her council colleagues. Now she's learning they will play politics with everything-- she and Doyle are proxies to weaken Mayor Bhalla. Games.
I stand by my characterization GA. The December runoff Giattino is pushing for isn't even mentioned, but the horror of Ravi being elected is. This is what she says about instant run-off:
DeleteWHEREAS, “instant runoff” or “ranked voting” could address some of the issue of electing candidates who might otherwise be elected by a plurality while maintaining the enhanced voter turnout traditionally associated with voting on Election Day; and,
She says "Could" not 'would"with not a peep about the December option pro or con.
The more Jen and company keep digging this hole they are in, the more disgusting and dishonest they get.
DeleteI am surprised Peter hasn't figured out that his reputation is quickly turning to garbage because of the petulant children he has tied himself to politically.
HUGE job, Councilwoman Jen. You are building a beautiful wall around our enemies!
ReplyDeleteThis is the entirety of the historical context Jen and her braintrust thought fit to include:
ReplyDeleteWHEREAS, on November 7, 2017, Hoboken had a six person mayoral election with fourteen candidates vying for three available City Council seats; and,
WHEREAS, concerns have been raised by Hoboken City Council and residents about the current system creating voter confusion and resulting in a mayor elected with less than 33 percent of the overall vote; and,
Voter confusion? Seriously?
Jen WISHES she got "33%" of the vote. No "confusion" there.
DeleteI can understand why Jen might have been confused by the election result since she didn't poll and probably believed the imaginary "surge' was real. But its not clear what Jen thinks voters were "confused" about. Did voters accidentally vote for "Bhalla" meaning to vote for ''Giattino" because they were "confused"
ReplyDeleteAs far as I can tell, the only thing voters may have been confused about was whether Giattino was the candidate or Fisher was.
Giattino reminds me of Beth Mason. No interest in learning what the reality of the situation is, but completely certain in her own popularity.
DeleteAnd, unless Giattino was a ventriloquist to Fisher's dummy, it seems clear to me that Fisher fancied herself the marionettist to Giattino's marionette. Unfortunately, neither the puppetmaster nor the puppet had a clue what was really going on.
But, they both are sure that Giattino was wronged. Which brings me back to my assessment that Giattino has become Beth Mason.
Jen was wronged - by all the fools who suggested she should run for office. She was doomed to failure and everyone knew it from the get go but her.
DeleteI thought the Al Sullivan piece was really interesting in the way it viewed the political history of "reform" as being all about various power struggles revolving around the roles of Michael Lenz and Tony Soares. Beth Mason tried to cast them out so they supported Zimmer. Zimmer (and presumably Bhalla) wouldn't listen to them so they supported Giattino and DeFusco.
DeleteIt seems like every time "reform" splits a big part of the story is simply the desire of those two to be in charge.
If that's what the "reform movement" really was then we are better off without it.
Fortunately for most voters it really has been about good government. Perhaps that is why Ravi is Mayor and Giattino and DeFusco - according to Al the current vehicles of Lenz and Soares - are not.
Those two are opportunists - not reformers. I think most of us realized that years ago. And now that their true colors are known, only other opportunists will likely work with them going forward.
Delete#HobokenMeanGirls
ReplyDeletePage 33 Scene 13
MeanGirlTiff: OK #4thPlaceJen I stole the homework from that horrible new girl Emily, ewwww she is so grody to the max, anyway I copied it! Now all you have to do is hand it in-can you do that?
MeanGirlJen: Huh?
MeanGirlTiff: How about this - your driver Peter will pick you at 4:00 before ballet - all you have to do is hand the homework I give you to the horrible new principal Mr. Bhalla - ok?
MeanGirlJen: Huh? Wha? uh, ok....
(and scene!).
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHmm... lots of friends do not like run-offs... I have a good idea, let's steal Emily's resolution and take the credit for supporting instant run-offs.
ReplyDeleteYou girlfriends are losing your noogs.
I love your posts.
DeleteI found it hard to believe that Jen would have written that voter fraud is Ravi’s problem. It is EVERONE’S problem that cares one iota about good government in Hoboken. But then when I considered the “dueling resolutions”, I came to the inescapable conclusion that Jen lacks the emotional maturity to be Mayor. It is sad to see her devolve into a puddle of pettiness, bitterness, jealousy and anger. She is not being well served by the acolytes that surround her. She would be better served to step outside of the bubble of “I could have been a contender” losers that seem to be lost in the early days of “reform” and start to think for herself without the Greek chorus.
ReplyDeleteAll I know is this, if we get December runoffs, every election that gets stolen through the use of street workers I am going to 100% blame on the idiots that voted in favor od December runoffs. And we all know it will happen b/c this is exactly why we changed elections around in the first place - because it has happened in the past.
DeleteApparently you people didn’t read the article we fed to Al.
ReplyDeleteSomeone is commenting on Sullivan's latest drivel, calling that twitchy twerp, DeFiasco, the "real reformer". If farcical ideas, childish melt-downs, ELEC law violations and being backed by all the wrong people represents reform, we can just consider him to be another mess like Mason, reform doesn't come close to mind.
ReplyDelete