urbanSTL

If Coatar received 54% it would be over.

As far as I can tell after a few lagers there was no polling station from Delmar to Sidney and all way the west to Grand. The entire core of the city had no polling station. Very strange.

Green doing so well among black voters is a clear sign to me that she has a good chance in November. She got 53% among an electorate that was probably 70% white, that probably falls to 60% or lower in November.

Cardinals jump in the local political action with a $50,000 donation to Jack Coatars PAC

^^Isn't a little early for them to be shopping for a new stadium?

I mean Busch is already 16 years old, both the Braves and Rangers moved after 25

On a serious note, I think their main concern is the ability to keep drawing 3.3-3.5m with bad headlines about downtown

Seems the product on the field was compelling enough to overcome the bad headlines. Not likely to repeat what was going on with the team this year, of course. The worst headline was the fan being shot during a mugging that left him paralyzed. That was 2015. Back then we had a different mayor, BOA prez, and circuit attorney.

symphonicpoet wrote: ↑

Oct 11, 2022

^^Isn't a little early for them to be shopping for a new stadium?

They do have BPV phase III to worry about.

-RBB

^, ^^, ^^^, . . . 

Fair points. Never to early to make sure the proper palms are greased. I would love to see better public financing of campaigns, even at the local level. Maybe especially at the local level.

Perspective on Coatar from the StL American: https://www.stlamerican.com/news/politi ... e0b52.html

SB in BH wrote:More interesting reporting on Coatar in StLA, starts about halfway down: board-of-aldermen-t9765-s1100.html#p369382

Of course, the StLA editorial board has endorsed Green, so I guess take the above with a grain of salt, although it appears the reported transparency and conflict of interest issues are legit.

There’s a lot of bullsh*t in that article. Namely, why do they think Lux has high vacancy? They didn’t quote any evidence for that. Again, Lux is sh*t. I know and agree, but at least back your claims up.

I’m also not sure how and why they expect the Alderman representing Downtown to not represent business interests. Doing so is not necessarily corrupt, rather, they are some of his biggest stakeholders. You can also support a business, and their workers, even if they’re in dispute with one another.

As Db posted above, not everything is all clear with Green’s fundraising either. Both should do better. But, it is discouraging to see such one sided reporting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

^Yeah I rolled my eyes quite a bit reading that. Especially at the numerous times they refer to 40 year old Coatar as the "young alderman" 

Baltimore Jack wrote:^Yeah I rolled my eyes quite a bit reading that. Especially at the numerous times they refer to 40 year old Coatar as the "young alderman" 

That’s right - super condescending to refer to him that way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

brianadler6545 wrote: ↑

Oct 19, 2022

SB in BH wrote:More interesting reporting on Coatar in StLA, starts about halfway down: board-of-aldermen-t9765-s1100.html#p369382

Of course, the StLA editorial board has endorsed Green, so I guess take the above with a grain of salt, although it appears the reported transparency and conflict of interest issues are legit.

There’s a lot of bullsh*t in that article. Namely, why do they think Lux has high vacancy? They didn’t quote any evidence for that. Again, Lux is sh*t. I know and agree, but at least back your claims up.

I’m also not sure how and why they expect the Alderman representing Downtown to not represent business interests. Doing so is not necessarily corrupt, rather, they are some of his biggest stakeholders. You can also support a business, and their workers, even if they’re in dispute with one another.

As Db posted above, not everything is all clear with Green’s fundraising either. Both should do better. But, it is discouraging to see such one sided reporting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I too am shocked, SHOCKED!, to learn that there's gambling in Casablanca...

Using your office to advance the interests of your donors is *merely* the "soft corruption" that's baked into privately funded elections for public office. Both candidates are doing it, just on behalf of different interests. Not sure whether Jack is performing client services for donors more or less than Green, and I'm not sure it matters, with one big exception:

Coatar was very much aligned with Reed, who we now know for a fact was also doing "hard" corruption. I'm not accusing Coatar of anything, just stating what should be an obvious reason for an extra dose of skepticism about him. I suspect that, at the very least, and by virtue of being an attorney, he would be more deft at keeping it legal.

I suppose you could make the case that it doesn't matter either way; All development is good development if it grows the tax base, employs people, etc., even if it involves greasing a few palms at the BOA. I would disagree with that position, but totally understand why some would take it.

I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest they're both qualified and that they're probably both fairly normal humans with good days and bad, good qualities and selfish moments, so you should vote for the one whose positions make more sense to you; the one who will vote on board bills in the way you think the city should go. There's probably more similarity than difference, but there are at least a few important distinctions. The two have disagreed about public funding of some high-profile projects. (Most famously the stadium proposal, which Coatar supported and Green opposed, as memory serves and as is reported in this thread.) I believe Green has also favored reexamination of the tax incentive process generally, while Coatar seems to mostly support the status quo. There's plenty of mud slinging going on, which is a shame, but . . . campaigners are going to campaign. So go and see how they've voted and what they say about their own policies in particular. And ignore all the personal crap. (And above all, look it up. Don't take my word for it. You can see what bills they've sponsored on the BoA's website. You should also be able to look up their votes. Find bills you care about and see how they voted.)

The ‘natural’: Can Jack Coatar stem the progressive tide in St. Louis?

https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/gov ... -top-story

Going into this after the faux primary I put coatar at 60/40 chance, right now it’s a 50/50. The endorsement from Jones and Bush has made her a slight favorite, it’s tough to beat a black+ progressive vote combo and the Jones/Bush endorsement gives her a lot of sway in north city