urbanMSP

Agreed, especially since party endorsement has nothing to do with ballot access or even "party or principle" under your name in municipal races. If anything, it would be far more appropriate to have multiple endorsements in a sort of "past the post" process. Better yet, just have a variety of constituencies and issue advocacy groups that endorse rather than a monolithic party organization.

I just got back from a "coffee caucus" with streets.mn's own Janne Flisrand. I'm sure that most of you don't need me to tell you how awesome she is, or for that matter how much help she'll need to unseat a powerful incumbent. The more participation and the more excitement, the better. Future events include the campaign kickoff Jan. 4 and more coffee caucuses on 1/12, 1/26, and 2/8. See http://www.janneformpls.org/events for details. Go Janne!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissis ... ifferences

I know you're being snarky, but do you really believe this? Without Lisa Goodman's personal intervention, we'd have a protected bikeway on 9th Street and a much higher-quality one on Third Avenue, among many other things.

I'm not a particular backer of Lisa Goodman (I don't live in her district, for starters), but I do believe that she's broadly supportive of good urban design and passionate about city living. I'm sure that we could make a list of some decisions that she's made that we disagree with, but to my original point, they're going to be pretty minor differences in the grand scheme of things.

She's trying to balance the demands of her various constituents. Probably Flisrand would stick by a more ideologically pure vision of Urbanism in her decision making, regardless of the will of her constituents, and if that's your thing then you should by all means support her. Goodman's been around for a long time, so maybe that's reason enough to get somebody else in that seat.

But just remember, the decision isn't between Flisrand and Tom Emmer, or even Barb Johnson. Goodman is not the enemy.

As far as Urbanism goes I'm honestly not sure about Goodman. She'll give fiery speeches at Z&P about how nonsense a dumb appeal of some silly little decision by CPC or ZBA, but in that same speech she'll say how she agrees with intent of the petition, which is to stop everything that isn't a single family home in places outside of downtown and CenHen. She loves to point out how she's following the rules of development but won't hesitate to also say how much she hates those same rules.

Then there's minimum wage, policing, the general kowtowing to the interests of home owners.

I'm not a particular backer of Lisa Goodman (I don't live in her district, for starters), but I do believe that she's broadly supportive of good urban design and passionate about city living. I'm sure that we could make a list of some decisions that she's made that we disagree with, but to my original point, they're going to be pretty minor differences in the grand scheme of things.

She's trying to balance the demands of her various constituents. Probably Flisrand would stick by a more ideologically pure vision of Urbanism in her decision making, regardless of the will of her constituents, and if that's your thing then you should by all means support her. Goodman's been around for a long time, so maybe that's reason enough to get somebody else in that seat.

But just remember, the decision isn't between Flisrand and Tom Emmer, or even Barb Johnson. Goodman is not the enemy.

The decision is between Goodman and Flisrand. Many here are saying that Flisrand is better, even if the differences are small. Your argument is that even though we think Flisrand is better, that we should just always vote for the incumbent unless the differences are massive?

No, that's not what my point is, as my earlier post that you just quoted makes clear.

That article annoys me. This isn't "left vs. more left." The issues that mark the differences here (aside from perhaps minimum wage) don't fall neatly on a left/right continuum.

Goodman, for example, is probably sufficiently left for me (although I no longer live in her ward), but I'm not sure she's sufficiently urbanist. And would you really label Cano and Bender as both "more left" as though that's a meaningful grouping?

I would be interested in what issues that have a left/right parallel CM Goodman has voted along left lines. As a person who follows Ch79/14, here are the things off the top of my head that fit the more general left/right narratives... She's not only a minimum wage skeptic, she voted against the city even paying for a study to model the impacts/costs/benefits. She voted against furthering work on fair scheduling. She voted against pushing the city to divest from fossil fuels (back in 2015). Heck, even though some people/orgs are pushing to make bike lanes a conservative talking point, it's still very clearly viewed as a "liberal thing" and I can think of a few projects she voted against (or voted for a worse design than the alternatives on the table). What issues is she actually left or even progressive on?

I know some very smart and very left-leaning people (I wouldn't claim to be either myself) who think that a stand-alone $15 minimum wage for Minneapolis is a terrible policy idea. There's definitely a particular Progressive doctrine that seems to be coalescing, and it's apparently all about purity tests as opposed to critical thinking.

Well I haven't seen a whole lot of critical thinking from Goodman on minimum wage. It's not critical thinking to not even study the impact. It's not critical thinking to assume the report is biased with no other evidence than it comes to a conclusion you disagree with, then go on an unhinged rant about $7 ice cream cones.

I think there's plenty of room for Goodman and the progressive zeitgeist to both be wrong.

I know some very smart and very left-leaning people (I wouldn't claim to be either myself) who think that a stand-alone $15 minimum wage for Minneapolis is a terrible policy idea.

Present.

There's definitely a particular Progressive doctrine that seems to be coalescing, and it's apparently all about purity tests as opposed to critical thinking.

Seconded.

I'd rather see a Minneapolis UBI than a Minneapolis $15 min wage.

The clearer view is that voters throughout the world are rejecting the lethal combination of austerity, free trade, predatory debt, and precarious, ill-paid work that characterize financialized capitalism today. You can call that a purity test or whatever.

I guess I would say that opposing the city even study a minimum wage hike to understand how good or terrible of an idea it is shows a lack of an open mind or critical thinking skills. I was fairly skeptical of a city-only minimum wage for the same reasons Mayor Hodges was. Her policy shift on the matter is clearly motivated by her opponents pushing the issue for 2017 elections, but it's also not necessarily wrong. Minneapolis alone may be a smaller share of our region's population and workforce than other peer cities, many of which have implemented or are implementing higher minimum wages and other progressive policies. In light of that, what exactly is anyone who wants movement on these issues supposed to do given the national and even state-level political climate? Moreover Minneapolis AND St Paul combined make for a much better corollary to those peer regions. I'm quite confident that, like paid sick time, St Paul would likely follow with a very similar policy, which would put pressure on the region (or at least the 2 core counties) to adopt something - and this would likely never happen without movement from Minneapolis first.

I'll maybe agree there's a purity test going on in certain circles, but that doesn't mean that many policies being pushed, even standalone ones, are bad. Regardless, my question was broader while speaking of CM Goodman specifically. I'm legitimately asking what would make someone say she's not similar to CM Barb Johnson in terms of record for voting on given issues because, as far as I can tell, she aligns with Barb nearly every time.

I'd rather see a Minneapolis UBI than a Minneapolis $15 min wage.

what is a ubi

Universal Basic Income. Definitely not something a municipality could administer. But the thought is there.