Search Results for: what is the best day to buy cheap airline tickets phone number 1-800-299-7264

For a laundry list of reasons, local elections are really great at getting people incensed about what’s going on in their communities. Electing a president may be the most personal vote electors cast, but when people do hold feelings about something as esoteric as paid sick leave, for example, they hold really strong feelings.

So strong, in fact, that you may even demand an apology from…an attack puppet?

From the No on 300 Campaign:

Local Denver businesses demand apology from out-of-state group for “Rick” the small-business-attack puppet

‘Shameful’ campaign tactic tries to scare customers away from Denver small businesses in latest stunt

DENVER: Local businesses demanded an apology from the out-of-state special interest group behind Initiative 300 Sunday after the group actively tried to scare customers away from shops and restaurants using a puppet they created to attack small businesses.

The group used “Rick,” the proponents’ small-business-attack puppet, to try to harm the reputation of shops and restaurants by actively scaring away customers.

“It is shameful that some group from out of state thinks it’s ok to try to scare customers away from our local businesses and actively hurt our local economy,” said Tami Door, President and CEO of the Downtown Denver Partnership. “It has never been more clear: if you support Denver’s local economy, you cannot support Initiative 300 and their unbelievably tone-deaf tactics.”

This is ridiculous. We’re sure that the No On 300 team could easily find some other way to label the “Yes” effort as dirty. But to attack a puppet? What is this press release trying to accomplish? First of all, we’ve never seen a puppet attack anything, let alone a small business. But if we give the press release the benefit of the doubt and there really is some sort of dastardly puppet haranguing small businesses, is it really the best political strategy to point it out in a lengthy press release?

Folks, it’s hard to make people get angry about a puppet. Sure, groups like Focus on the Family might oppose Bert and Ernie’s lifestyle choices, but nobody can attack a puppet without looking sophomoric.

How are people supposed to react to this press release? “Oh, that dirty sick leave campaign is up to its no-good tricks again! Someone has to put a stop to their perversion of puppets! Jim Henson must be rolling around in his grave!”

Fine, we get it. The Yes on 300 campaign shouldn’t be using an attack puppet to harass small businesses, or whatever. But the No on 300 campaign shouldn’t ask for an apology over a puppet and expect that voters or the media are going to take them seriously.

If the only criticism you can make against moving forward with paid sick leave for Denver workers is that its proponents are misusing a puppet, we gotta say, it makes your case look pretty weak indeed.  

We’ve previously written about Denver Mayor MIchael Hancock’s endorsement of Happy Haynes in her race to fill the at-large seat on the Denver School Board. Haynes and Hancock go way back: she was a vocal advocate of his campaign for mayor and he’s just returning the favor. It’s not surprising, or risky, really, for Hancock to endorse someone who’s already so closely associated with him and his administration.

Hancock won’t stop there, it seems. From an e-mail we received from him on Friday:

Dear Friends,

These are challenging times. Far too many of our children are dropping out of school. Far too many of our children are hungry. Far too many of our children are growing up without an opportunity to grow and thrive.

I truly believe that in the years ahead, whether it is 10, 20, or 50 years from now, people will look back and judge us on our courage, on our wisdom, and on our leadership.

People will not care what side of an issue we were on and they will not care about the labels we assign. They will only care that we did our best – our very best – to live up to our civic duty to create a better future for our children.

I believe Anne Rowe shares the same dedication that I do to building a world-class education system right here in Denver. That is why I am proud to endorse her candidacy for the District 1 Denver School Board.

We understand why Hancock endorsed Haynes in her at-large race. She took a risk early on in endorsing his Mayoral bid, and his subsequent endorsement is really the least he can do. It’s not like he’s taking a risk in that race either; Happy is the frontrunner by leaps and bounds over her four competitors. Hancock’s not really taking a chance in burning any bridges because that race has so many candidates; it’s not a grudge match.

It is curious, however, that Hancock is endorsing in the District 1 race between Rowe and her opponent Emily Sirota. Sirota, wife of politico, columnist, and drive-time talk radio host David Sirota is definitely going to give Rowe a run for her money. Sirota might even beat Rowe. Unlike Haynes’ race, where Hancock is more or less endorsing the candidate most likely to win, there’s a chance that Hancock could be endorsing the loser. That’s embarrassing for any Mayor, but critically embarrassing for someone inaugurated only four months ago. Hancock’s acting like he has all the sway that John Hickenlooper had after years on the job. He doesn’t, and one guaranteed way to lose a lot of political clout is to endorse candidates who end up losing.  

We’ve previously written about Denver Mayor MIchael Hancock’s endorsement of Happy Haynes in her race to fill the at-large seat on the Denver School Board. Haynes and Hancock go way back: she was a vocal advocate of his campaign for mayor and he’s just returning the favor. It’s not surprising, or risky, really, for Hancock to endorse someone who’s already so closely associated with him and his administration.

Hancock won’t stop there, it seems. From an e-mail we received on Friday:

Dear Friends,

These are challenging times.  Far too many of our children are dropping out of school. Far too many of our children are hungry. Far too many of our children are growing up without an opportunity to grow and thrive.

I truly believe that in the years ahead, whether it is 10, 20 or 50 years from now, people will look back and judge us on our courage, on our wisdom, and on our leadership.

People will not care what side of an issue we were on and they will not care about the labels we assign. They will only care that we did our best – our very best – to live up to our civic duty to create a better future for our children.

I believe Anne Rowe shares the same dedication that I do to building a world-class education system right here in Denver. That is why I am proud to endorse her candidacy for the District 1 Denver School Board.

We understand why Hancock endorsed Haynes in her at-large race. She took a risk early on in endorsing his Mayoral bid, and his subsequent endorsement is really the least he can do. It’s not like it’s a risky endorsement, either; Happy is the frontrunner by leaps and bounds over her four competitors. Hancock’s not really taking a chance in burning any bridges because that race has so many candidates; it’s not a grudge match.

It is curious, however, that Hancock is endorsing in the District 1 race between Rowe and her opponent Emily Sirota. Sirota, wife of politico, columnist, and drive-time talk radio host David Sirota, is definitely going to give Rowe a run for her money. Sirota might even beat Rowe. Unlike Haynes’ race, where Hancock is more or less endorsing the candidate most likely to win, the Hancock-endorsed candidate could lose. Imagine if Rowe did lose. That’s embarrassing for any Mayor, but critically embarrassing for someone inaugurated four months ago. Hancock’s acting like he has all the sway that John Hickenlooper had after years on the job. He doesn’t, and one guaranteed way to lose a lot of political clout is to endorse candidates who don’t win. Hancock just gave himself an even greater incentive to campaign for Haynes and Rowe; it’s going to look really bad if either end up in second place on election day.