Comment by Johnny_Mango on January 7, 2013 at 10:12am

The multitude of candidates running make changing the election rules absolutely imperative.  It never made any sense in a "nonpartisan" election to set the threshold at 40%.  We now have a mayor supported by a minority of the voters because two other candidates split the progressive vote.  There are several alternatives that are more democratic.

Tonight the City Council will take up how to have a special election to change those rules:  in-person voting or a mail-in only election.  You might want to be there.

Comment by shotsie on January 7, 2013 at 10:18am

"If you can guess how much Chopper weighed at his Friday weigh-in (without going over) you win a 48 oz. package of ice cream from Creamland."  What - don't they even have 64 oz packages anymore?  I'd think about it for 64 oz....  (psst - manufacturers have been subtly decreasing size to increase price..) 

Comment by Hunter on January 7, 2013 at 11:02am

"We now have a mayor supported by a minority. . ."  Seems to me we've had a "minority" Mayor since at least 1997.  (County Clerk's data only goes back that far.)  Progressives carried the day in 1997 when they elected Jim Baca with 28.6%.  Then they abandoned him four years later.  Yes, it is an non-partisan election but "progressives" aren't a party and maybe should consider uniting behind a single candidate.  Of course, that might require some comprimise which seems to be out of favor these days.

Comment by Johnny_Mango on January 7, 2013 at 12:42pm

The current system hurts everybody.  I see a pastor from Legacy church is also considering running.  The 40% rule hurts others as well.  There are no primaries in "nonpartisan" elections.  The sorting out process begins in the general election.  That is why 50% should be necessary to avoid a runoff.

Comment by RunLikeADog on January 7, 2013 at 2:55pm

What's wrong with the pastor of a church running for mayor? I thought it was open to anyone? What does that have to do with anything?

Comment by Phil_0 on January 7, 2013 at 3:44pm

I think you're (willfully?) misinterpreting Mr. Mango, RLAD. His point is that Legacy church is well-known as a very conservative congregation so if Pastor Smothermon runs he will almost certainly pull votes from Berry, diluting the conservative vote the way Romero and Chavez diluted the progressive vote back in 2009.

Comment by RunLikeADog on January 7, 2013 at 4:12pm

Thanks Phil_0, but I hardly think that Mr Mango is worried that Mayor Berry's chances of being re-elected may be dashed because another conservative split the vote with him. Rather I believe Mr. mango is worried that a conservative pastor could be our next mayor if two progressives split the vote again.

Comment by Lahjik on January 7, 2013 at 6:51pm

While I'm not going to look a gift horse, er-rhino, in the mouth, wouldn't it make more sense to give away ice cream equal to Chopper's weight?  Then the winner could throw a party.  Or two, depending on how big Chopper is, anyways. 

Comment by Lahjik on January 7, 2013 at 6:54pm

Also, I like how the PD gives themselves an easy out to bust people for participating in legal behavior:
Martinez said police officers do not arrest a person using his freedom of expression, unless it crosses the line.

That seems to me to be an insertion of "unless the officer decides that he wants to mess with you in which case, your behavior will be arrestable.

Comment by Phil_0 on January 8, 2013 at 12:36pm

RLAD: his point was that this is a problem for Albuquerque residents of all political stripes. I think you're letting his and your politics infect your reading comprehension abilities.

Comment