Scoring The 1st Danville City Council Forum (Part #2)

After the introductions and the first question of Monday night’s Danville City Council candidates forum, we had to take a break so that our scoring system and MUTE button could recover.

Here’s the recap of how the scoring system works:

• Good answers get two points.
• Great answers get three points.
• Worthless answers get the MUTE button and lose a point.
• It’s my damned scoring system, so I reserve the right to add or subtract points when I feel like it when the contestants deserve it.

Here’s the scoreboard as we left off in Part #1:

We’ve got seven questions to go and 90 minutes of audio to replay. Let’s make it happen.

Question #2: Can you tell us two reasons why the citizens should vote for you and not your opponents on May 3rd?

Great. Let’s see if any of the candidates fall for that trolling trap and talk bad about somebody else. Ugh. We’re going right to left this time, starting with Madison Whittle.

• Madison Whittle: 30 years of business experience. (+3) Wants to put together a program to get small businesses through hurdles. (+2) Let Tobacco Commission work with large businesses (+3). Rather have 10 small businesses than one large business. (+2)
• Thomas Motley: Invest in programs to ensure minorities have the skills needed for the workforce. (Last time I checked, minorities weren’t being discriminated in any workforce programs. MUTE). Instead of investing money in restoring tobacco warehouses, start investing in our youth. (Um. Most of the tobacco warehouse restorations have been private developments MUTE. And another MUTE for bringing up a false either/or scenario.) Invest in community centers in depressed neighborhoods like Camp Grove, Westmoreland Heights, Almagro. Have direct hands-on the children before gang leaders get hold of them (+3 for the idea, but this can and should already be done with the numerous churches in the area.)
• Sheila Baynes: Really cares about the community, been active. (+2) Attended many council meetings. (+2) Learned a lot about governmental duties (+3). Education system needs to be improved. Thinks we possibly have the right school superintendent in place to do what’s needed to be done (+3 because Stan Jones is the right person. MUTE for the weasel word “possibly”)
• Trina McLaughlin: Her job doesn’t put her in the community, she goes where she is needed. (+3) She gets calls from youth late at night and is engaged in the community (+2). Believes in inclusion. Need to bridge the gap between rich & poor, educated & uneducated. (+2 for the thought, but a MUTE because how is she going to make that happen?)
• Philip Haley: Everyone at the table has a unique set of skills. (+2) His skill is business experience (+2) and the city is a big business. (+3) Big believer in education & workforce development. Have to stress the value of both of those. (+3)
• Jim Lindley: Dealt with people for over 20 years. People person, trained counselor. Treats people fairly. Good listener. (+2 & +2 for all of those combined) Not a politician (+3).
• Larry Campbell: Continue to pursue good quality of life, including safety (+3). Continue to invest in education and training, especially precision machining training to bring industry to the area (+3 and gee, does he know something that a lot of people don’t know yet? Heh. +2 for that as a bonus).
• Robin Dabney: Not a politician, but a voter and concerned citizen. (+2) Active advocate for youth. (+2) Youth don’t have resources to transition to higher education. (What?) Lack of resources for minority & small business owners. Incumbents have failed to do the job of protecting our community (What more could they have done? Horsecrap. MUTE). Incumbents have also failed to provide resources to the community. (Again, like what? MUTE) Robin Dabney doesn’t impress me when she’s Angry Robin Dabney. She’s great when she’s being Regular Robin Dabney.
• Lee Vogler: Not against any of the other candidates (+3). Only millennial on council and in this race. Youthful ideas and energy. Accessible to citizens and community at all times, not just election times (+3). His website lists accomplishments and initiatives (+2 because he’s unique on that).
• Sherman Saunders: Lifetime of public service. Goes over his PCCA work (+2). Working with regional cooperation (+3). 18 years of city council experience. City is making progress as shown by Main Street USA announcement Monday morning (+3).

That question is done and nobody really took the bait to badmouth another candidate. I’m quite happy for that.

Let’s take a look at the scoreboard after the second question:

At this early point, I’d say that a difference of 10 points really isn’t significant. Unlike “Around The Horn”, we’re not going to eliminate candidates along the way. But that would make it a lot more fun if that was possible…

Side note: These articles take a long time to listen to the audio, transcribe the discussion points and score the arguments (like two hours long for this one). I’m already at 750 words right now so I’m going to stop before the article gets way too long. More coming up in Part #3.