Recent Comments
- Mandel: Public’s frustration w/Dems will have more impact in states with “bigger Jewish populations” (4)
- Jill Zimon: Steve – thanks for the comment – I agree. Voters need to be allowed to...
- Jill Zimon: Anastasia – what you said.
- 10 Worst Places for Women to Work (4)
- Jill Zimon: @Dick thanks for commenting, no question – she is an expert in that regard.
- Jill Zimon: @Westwood – thanks for the comment – I apologize for the delay in...
- Zimon to Run as Coffee Party Candidate for County Exec and Synagogue, AJC, Ohio Bar & NASW President (10)
- Jill Zimon: Hi Steve – have a good Pesach and great to know you are reading this still.
... - steve goldberg: I almost choked on my hamentashen!
- Jill Zimon: Hi Steve – have a good Pesach and great to know you are reading this still.
- Attn ODP: Step Away From the Pre-Primary Endorsement in Brunner, Fisher matchup (3)
- Jill Zimon: Adrienne – thanks for sharing that. I guess we’ll wait and see!
- Adrienne Deckman: Here is what I wrote to the ODP, for what it is worth: I am appalled at the...
- Mandel: Public’s frustration w/Dems will have more impact in states with “bigger Jewish populations” (4)
Print This Post
Feb
7
Two Plain Dealer online pieces (also both in the print version) today discuss the race for Cuyahoga County Executive. I’m quoted in this one and this link takes you to a rundown of 20 individuals whose names, the PD reporters say, come up the most often in conversation about the position.
Observations: 17 men, three women. Two people of color (one male, one female).
That cannot, cannot, cannot be the sum total of what 1.3 million people have to offer up as possible leaders.
Wait. Let me restate that:
That must not, must not, must not be the sum total of what 1.3 million people have to offer up as possible leaders.
Last word: Do not be fooled by Martin Zanotti, who claims that the “what” of the transition to the new structure is more important right now than the “who.” It was the “who” in the old structure that, allegedly, is what compelled people to put Issue 6 over the top to create a new “what.” If not “right now,” then when, exactly?
I really get the feeling sometimes that politicians in NE Ohio, if not in general, have real phobias about planning in advance, or at least defining what “planning” and “advance” mean, in regard to nearly everything.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 3:25 pm February 7th, 2010 in Campaigning, Cleveland+, Elections, Government, Media, Ohio, Politics, Transparency, Women, democracy, leadership
Comments
6 Responses to “Cuyahoga County Executive coverage”
Leave a Reply
2010 WE Magazine 101 Women Bloggers to Watch
Category Specific RSS
Pepper Pike Cleveland+ Politics Women Ohio Elections Law Jewish
by Tips and TricksNews Now
Good points. I like what you said earlier, too, about the politics of entering politics.
Do we, in the age of the lateral connection, the network, the wired community, do we really need the layer of political parties? I think they keep us at odds and keep talent from emerging as quickly as it should be able to. Parties seem to limit access and to perpetuate mediocrity.
I agree, Tim, especially from my somewhat Democratic point of view. It’s not like electing Democrats per se (at the national level) gets us any particular policy or program–it’s not a parliamentary system in which the party as a whole is held responsible for delivering on its promises.
Shalom Jill,
While:
it is very easily the tightly controlled group of acceptable puppets allowed for consideration by those who wield wealth and power in Cuyahoga County.
B’shalom,
Jeff
[...] 0731: Cuyahoga County Executive coverage [...]
It’s not just the gender and skin colour; the backgrounds are very narrow too. Considering that the ideal person – who doesn’t exist — should equally balance experience in politics, government, human services and business, there is a grotesque tilt toward business here. It’s absurd that names like Joe Roman’s should even be in the mix, or someone like Tom Chema, who helped perpetuate the public-money grab that was Gateway.
Also, they’ve included a bunch of names of people who have categorically said they aren’t running. Why? Do they know something these people aren’t saying? When someone like David Abbott says, “I am not a candidate,” I believe him.
I also think there’s a glaring problem with their mention that Nina Turner would have to step down from the transition team if she opted to run – but they make no such mention with Marty Zanotti, who has managed to self-appoint himself to HEAD the transition team. In fact, it would be the most flagrant and egregious breach of trust if there were any HINT that he was running. Among the many things he needs to do to build even a shred of trust in his involvement in the process is to make an unequivocal statement that he will have NO involvement in any future county government — that he will never run for any county job. Since he has arbitrarily decided to exclude both candidates for those jobs AND current officeholders — who have no conflict of interest since their jobs will no longer exist but can provide the single most valuable pool of information on how the county runs — he needs to do this, pronto. He’s been deceptive throughout the whole process, so i see no reason to trust him at all. His statement in the PD this morning about keeping politics out of the transition was a sidesplitter — this coming from a man who has been quoted repeatedly as saying no one who was against Issue 6 should have a role in the new government? That’s not only the most extreme partisanship — it’s revenge politics.
[...] Anastasia writes: I also think there’s a glaring problem with their mention that Nina Turner would have to step down from the transition team if she opted to run – but they make no such mention with Marty Zanotti, who has managed to self-appoint himself to HEAD the transition team. [...]