Great Expectations

At yesterday morning's debate on KYW radio, Tom Knox said he planned to cap his campaign spending, believed to be at the $7 million level.
By yesterday afternoon, that statement was inoperative.
The Knox camp made a major buy of TV time -- estimated at $400,000 -- to counter what the Democratic mayoral candidate's campaign manager said was a barrage of anti-Knox ads coming from 527 groups.
As Josh Morrow, Knox's campaign manager told Larry Eichel of the Inquirer: "We have to combat these illegal 527s smearing Tom's name all over town." He was referring to to ads aired this past weekend by political committees formed under Section 527 of the tax code.
The Knox campaign may also be trying to seal the deal with supporters and those leaning to his candidacy by making him an ever-present figure on their TV screens. Knox is taking his advantage -- his personal fortune, which is paying for all these ads -- and playing it to the hilt.
The new $400,000 buy comes on top of a "regular" $348,000 buy Knox had already booked. Add it up and it comes close to $750,000 -- more than double his nearest rival in TV buys, Bob Brady, who's up with a $300,000 buy this week.
If Knox keeps this pace up, he will spend $1.5 million on TV ads in the final two weeks of the campaign,more than most of his opponents spent during the entire campaign.
The question is: Who does it benefit? Knox for one. He is trying to innoculate himself against his rivals by deflecting the attacks back on them. To wit: They are trying to tear him down because they are afraid of his reform agenda.
But, it also could benefit whichever candidate is closest to Knox. Each point Knox slips, each dent his takes in his image, could benefit the No. 2 in the race, as voters search for an alternative to the frontrunner.

This mayoral election - serious, but politically scattered - may not have made for the best TV.

Its results are, by definition, sure to disappoint some people who really care about the city - because each candidate is backed by people who sincerely care.

But on the grassroots level, it's been a pretty impressive display of citizen ferment.

Another case in point: The Cross City Coalition, a joint effort of seven civic associations in Center City and adjacent neighborhoods, put in an extraordinary amount of effort going back to last fall to survey a thousand of their members about which issues mattered most to them in the race.

The coalition then tried to distill those issues into a series of very specific, stand-and-deliver type questions to the mayoral candidates. (Coalition leaders' belief that you can pin down experienced politicians to yes/no commitments that you can then hold them to struck me as bit idealistic, but, hey, it's worth a try.)

The results are now posted on a blog -- www.crosstowncoalition.blogspot.com - which invites citizens to write in their reactions to candidates in action.

Gov. Rendell has weighed in on the mayor's race and given his views on each of the five candidates. He won't endorse any one of them, but that doesn't stop him from talkin'.
Never did, never will
In an interview with Amy Worden in the Inquirer, Rendell gives verbal hugs to each of the Democrats running for the job he once held.
To fully understand where he stands, though, you have to be conversant in Rendellian, the governor's native language.
Fortunately I have a RTM, a Rendell Translation Machine (pat. pending), which takes Rendellian and converts it into plain English. Let me fire it up and see what it says:

Dwight Evans: A great guy, but what a lousy campaigner. He couldn't give away snowmobiles to Eskimos. I'll probably end up voting for him, but it's a waste.
Tom Knox: A good head for figures, but what a jerk. He makes Street look like Mr. Personality.
Michael Nutter: A bright guy, but arrogant. He wouldn't even listen to me and David, if you can image the nerve of him.
Chaka Fattah: Lots of ideas, but he's run the worst campaign I've seen in 20 years. What could he be thinking? A stone loser.
Bob Brady: A nice guy, but what a dinosaur. And Brady as a reformer? Don't make me laugh.

Over at the City Paper, the editors gave their rundown of the candidates - and decided to endorse Michael Nutter:

Knox says he'll be a reformer, but Nutter has actually made reforms.

Brady says he'll make things happen, but over their careers, with much less influence, Nutter has accomplished more than Brady has proposed.

Evans wants to be a public advocate for the city, but Nutter is, simply, a better spokesman.

And Fattah wants to create opportunity, but Nutter has a more feasible plan for doing so.

The Deliberation Days program got off to a rousing start last night (Wed.) in Mount Airy.
About 80 citizens gathered at Brossman Hall at the Lutheran Theological Seminary (what a great room and host) to discuss city issues, take straw polls on the mayor's race and casino question, and listen to the four Democratic candidates in the Eighth District - Donna Reed Miller, Cindy Bass, Greg Paulmier and Irv Ackelsberg - debate the issues by answering questions generated by the audience.
Each candidate said it was the best attended forum of their campaign.
I had the pleasure of moderating.
You can listen to a podcast of the debate here on the site.
Here are the straw poll results.
It was a Nutter room and an anti-casino room.
A total of 67 straw ballots for mayor were collected (some folks arrived for the debate after the ballots were collected). Michael Nutter got 42 votes (63 percent). The other candidates' totals were: Dwight Evans - 9 (13 percent); Chaka Fattah 8 (12 percent); Tom Knox - 5 (7 percent) and Bob Brady - 3 (4 percent)
On the casino question, 73 ballots were turned in. Of those, 53 voted "yes," that is to limit casinos. 20 voted no.
Tonight, we're in the Northeast and West Philadelphia, at the Klein JCC and Enterprise Center.
More results here tomorrow.
Friday's debate, which should be well-attended, is the First District debate between Vern Anastasio and Frank DiCicco at the Independence Visitors Center.
-- Chris Satullo

Darn that gorgeous weather.

Turnout was light at two Deliberations Days events Thursday; four Democratic candidates for at large seats on City Council held a substantive, civil debate at The Enterprise Center in West Philly. A small gathering listened to the five GOP at-large candidates answer issues questions, and everyone listened to candidate Phil Kerwick accuse Inquirer journalists of being every bad thing of short of shock troopers for Satan.

The Dems' forum included some very smart talk about how to fund and protect Fairmount Park, how to improve SEPTA and how to make sure that if Ray Nagin comes to town again - if we ever let the rascal come back - the New Orleans mayor will have less cause to call our city dirty.

Podcasts of both forums can be found right now on this site.

As for the straw poll on the mayor's race , some folks either didn't vote or their ballots got lost in the shuffle somehow. The combined tally we have from Thursday was: Nutter 13, Knox 8, Evans 2, Brady 2 and Fattah 1. Congressman Fattah actually tied with fringe candidates Queena Bass and Jesus White.

On the casino question, 26 people voted to limit casinos, 5 to let them go where the state wants.

Tonight, it's the lively District 1 race, with candidates Vern Anastasio and Frank DiCicco, at the Independence Visitors Center.

-- Chris Satullo

With lively Council candidates forums in the Fifth District and Ninth District, Great Expectations' Deliberation Days wrapped up Sunday on a strong note.

From Wednesday through Sunday, citizen dialogues and candidates debates were held in all 10 Council districts, attended by about 450 residents of Philadelphia.

Participants discussed the casino issue and mayoral race, took straw polls on both, then framed the questions that were asked of Council candidates in debates moderated by Inquirer and Daily News journalists.

Full results on the straw polls will be tabulated and revealed Monday, but it was clear that Michael Nutter won the straw poll by a considerable margin, and that participants wanted to approve the ballot question putting limits on casinos by at least a 4-1 margin.

Of course, such a straw poll of a self-selected population is not a valid random sample producing statistically valid results. But it does give you a sense of how the piece of the population that is strongly engaged by this election and these issues views the May 15 choices. In other words, only folks who really care and really follow the issues would turn out for events on the gorgeous spring nights and days we've had this week.

Speaking of showing up, every candidate for district council showed up except one, incumbent Carol Campbell in the Fourth District. Most of the Democratic candidates for at-large seats, and all the Republican ones, took part in debates.

The events with at-large candidates were far more sparsely attended than the district council debates, which drew crowds ranging from 40 people to 110 (the First District event on Friday night).

Audio tape of all the debates will be posted as podcasts on this site, so that voters who didn't make it to the events can listen in and hear the questions and answers that could inform their choices on Election Day.

In every debate, candidates addresses issues of substance from taxes to jobs to guns to zoning reform to affordable housing to schools to trash in the streets.

You'll hear questions about genies from magic lamps, about who really rides SEPTA and even one about "post-coital virginity."

The weekend's events culminated in the mayoral debate and town meeting on WHYY TV Sunday night, co-sponsored by Great Expectations with many G.E. participants in the audience.

Chris Satullo

An online debate between First District Council candidates Vern Anastasio and Frank DiCicco, with comments by voters invited, has begun on the Great Expectations site. On the Web site home page, click on the link marked "Electronic Town Hall."

-- Chris Satullo

Watching this town meeting (co-sponsored by Great Expectations), with various advocates parading to the microphone to comment, reminds you of a good thing about this city - how many smart people care passionately about issues that contribute to quality of life in Philadelphia.

But it also reminds of something that's maddening: the degree to which all these advocates tend to zero in on their pet issues, and lose focus on the bigger picture.

During the debate, the moderator, plucky Marty Moss-Coane, struggled to get the candidates _ five men of large ego and increasing desperation to make a splash -- to share the mike and actually answer her questions. She actually managed to cover a decent amount of ground.

Despite that, person after person rose to comment not on what was said, but to complain that their pet issue did not get what they deemed due consideration. Their issues were valid, but, I mean, get real. It was one hour, and it was mostly spent appropriately on the big stuff.

A moment ago, my wife got up in exasperation at the commenters and walked out, saying sarcastically, "I'm left-handed. I'm disappointed the candidates didn't propose more programs for left-handers."

You can see why I don't cross my wife. But you can also see why Philadelphia is a city full of well-meaning activity that rarely seems to cohere into sufficient solutions.

Oh, and about the debate, no new thoughts emerged except a nice discussion on why Philadelphians resist change. To do the scorecard, I thought Chaka Fattah gave one of his stronger and more focused performances. Nothing like dropping like a strone in the polls to motivate a guy. Dwight Evans showed again how an inability to finish off a sentence can prevent a really bright thinker from coming across as a really bright thinker. Bob Brady was Bob Brady, the life of the party. Michael Nutter was rigorously calm, like a man who suddenly realized he might win and was scared to death of making a mistake. I don't agree with his stop and frisk idea, but I thought he did decently defending it. Tom Knox got out his usual points with some vigor, but was extremely peevish when criticized by Brady and Evans.

-- Chris Satullo

Who is the blackest black candidate in the race for mayor?

I ask because Chaka Fattah raised the issue last night (Monday) in the final mayoral debate. He accused Michael Nutter of being, um, unblack in his proposal to use police stop-and-frisk searches for illegal guns in neighborhoods hit hardest by homicides. Fattah elicited ooohs from the crowd by saying that with ideas like that Nutter must have to "remind himself he is an African-American."

Fattah was employing a practice common in hardball politics: accusing your opponent of engaging in a tactic you are using. It's effective form of self-innoculation, though it requires a high degree of brazenness (which Chaka possesses in abundance).

Some examples of the practice:

You run horrid negative ads, then when your opponent responds, you accuse him of being horribly negative.

You take money hand-over-fist from special interests, then accuse your opponent of kowtowing to special interests.

You play the race card, then you accuse your opponent of raising the issue of race.
Last night, Fattah picked Door No. 3. His goal was purely tactical.

The former front-runner is slipping in the public polls. Nutter seems poised to grab a bigger share of the black vote, which had been trending to Fattah.

Fattah is trying to stop defection of his African-American support by accusing Nutter of being unblack or insufficiently black.

My May 1 column on stereotypes, which noted that Democratic mayoral candidate Michael Nutter is considered an “Oreo” by some African Americans, drew responses from white readers who felt personally offended by my use of that term.

One reader said it was as wrong for me to use the word “Oreo,” as it would be for a white writer to use the word “wigger” to describe a Caucasian person who aspires to act like an African American.

First of all, I didn’t call Nutter an Oreo. I said his poor polling among African American voters might in part be due to stereotyping of him as an Oreo — that is, black on the outside, white on the inside.

I further suggested that the stereotype was given new energy by Nutter’s calling for stop-and-frisk police powers in crime-prone neighborhoods where many blacks simply don’t trust the police.

A couple of white readers grieved that the term Oreo implied there is something “bad” about being white.

I disagreed, suggesting the word is merely an acknowledgment of a reality: Black and white are different, neither one being all good or all bad.

Oreo is a derogatory term, certainly. But it isn’t meant to have the venom of hate speech. It’s a cookie, after all.

Users of the word typically believe the person they are describing as an Oreo is only misguided and will “come home.”

Several white readers also suggested that blacks who use the word Oreo are proponents of Ebonics and are disdainful of learning and Western culture.

Not true. Successful African Americans in varied cultural and economic endeavors and who are careful grammarians might call someone an Oreo.

You see, the word’s not as much about what a person attaches himself to as it is about what he no longer embraces — his roots.

This is an imperfect analogy, but it’s like baseball allegiances: If a longtime fan of one team starts wearing the other team’s gear, his former friends will have much harsher feelings for that individual than for his new favorite team.

In an ideal world, there would be no such distinctions — no thinking white or thinking black. But although African Americans and white Americans are closer in thought than ever before, we have not reached that ideal.

Oreo is a newer term, but the categorizing of African Americans goes back to slave days when the white masters decided some blacks were more deserving of working near them than others — thus, the house slaves and the field slaves.

That African Americans are still being categorized — perhaps mostly by themselves — shows that the vestiges of slavery still do damage. Blacks have to work as hard as whites to move beyond their hurtful past.

When all the vestiges of slavery are finally gone, when people genuinely acknowledge each other as equals, blacks won’t feel threatened or betrayed by any individual’s perceived rejection of his race.

No Oreos then. No one acting white, or black. Just one big marble cake. Well, at least that’s the dream. And it sounds delicious.

Somebody from the vaunted Fattah Organization should take a look at the candidate's own apparent support for the stop-and-frisk tactics for which he seared Michael Nutter Monday night.

On page 3 of the Gun Safe Philadelphia plan, there's a paragraph subtitled "Designate Patrol Officers to Go After Illegal Guns."

The policy statement points to the success of "targeted patrols" in both Kansas City, Missouri and Indianapolis.

And what were among the the tactics used in those cities? As the following 1995 account from The Commercial Appeal of Memphis details, it was none other than stop-and-frisk.

Gun patrols in Indianapolis, like those earlier in Kansas City, Mo., seem to work: When police seize guns from people carrying them illegally and scare criminals away from where gun patrols operate, crime rates drop.

Under the Indianapolis plan, two officers in a certain precinct are released from answering radio calls for two hours each night. When they spot any suspicious activity or anything that looks out of place, they stop and frisk the people involved. If a car is also involved, they ask for permission to search the car.

Here are the results of straw ballots taken on the mayor's race and the casino question during the 10 Deliberations Days events held last Wednesday through Sunday.

Better Nutter numbers. I dare you to say that quickly three times.

But that's the most accurate headline off today's (Wed., May 9) Keystone Poll.

The poll, done by Terry Madonna & Co. at Franklin and Marshall College, shows Michael Nutter surging into the lead in the Democratic race for mayor.
Nutter was third in the last Madonna poll. Today, he is first, getting 31% of the vote of the 385 Democrats polled. Tom Knox (No. 1 in the last month's poll) is at 21%. Chaka Fattah (the leader in earlier polls) has slipped to No. 3, at 14%. Bob Brady (11%) and Dwight Evans (3%) complete the field.

To: My Diary
From: John Street
Re: My Week

This cannot be, dear diary! The polls show that Mr. Na-Na Smarty Pants Michael Nutter is in the lead in the race for mayor? Excuse me, while I emit a primal scream.
AAARRRRGGGGHHHH.

Nutter cannot succeed me at mayor. He cannot sit in this chair, in this office, with my title and govern my city. What will become of me, me, me?

But, this is not the time to get mad, dear diary. This is the time to get even.

I call up Chaka Fattah and pose a pointed question:

I say: Chaka, what's happened to your campaign? You were in the lead now you are No. 3 and sinking fast! Nutter is one step closer to becoming mayor. What can you do to stop him?

He replies: It's not like I haven’t been trying, Mr. Mayor. I've been out there 4 to 5 hours nearly every weekday making my case. I'm against poverty. What else do they want from me? Besides, Nutter's a darling of the media. They won’t stop spreading hosannas. It's not fair!

I respond: Well, you might not be a darling of the media, Chaka, but at least you are married to a media darling.

(And they say I don't have a sense of humor.)

If you haven't made up your mind yet about who your pick for mayor is - and if you haven't, there are apparently a lot of you out there still - today's Currents section in the Sunday Inquirer is the mother load of information about what the candidates think and promise to to do.

Over the last week, we've asked the five candidates to respond to seven issues questions that built upon what we heard and learned at Great Expectations forums this year.

In today's Currents, they all respond to a question about the underdiscussed X-factor - leadership. You'll also see excerpts of the five candidates' answers to the other issues questions posed during the week on the Inquirer commentary page - on ethics and corruption, zoning and planning, gentrification, violent crime and ending the brain drain. A question on the public schools will be answered tomorrow.

The full answers to all the questions are available on the G.E. Web site, too.

-- Chris Satullo

The Great Expectations project is all about leadership and citizenship in Philadelphia. Election Day is one of those days when it's easy to see how those two ideas intersect.

The floor is open for you to tell us about what you saw at the polls. Give us a feeling for what it's like for you to do your civic duty. What was your voting experience like? What election-related events or activities are you seeing in your neighborhood?

If you'd like your comment to published in the printed paper, please leave your name and hometown or neighborhood.

Micheal Nutter takes the Democratic nomination with a large chunk of the vote. Challengers are leading against the party-designated City Council reps in the Fourth and Seventh District. Are voters fighting back against the party machine? Thoughts?

Michael Nutter won a resounding victory in the Democratic primary for mayor, defeating his nearest rival, Tom Knox, by 11 percentage points. It was a blowout by Philly standard -- it certainly was a far more convncing win than anyone (including me) expected two weeks ago.
Everyone said this race was abotu crime, but the Nutter victory shows it also was very much about reform. Combined, the two "reform" candidates -- Knox and Nutter -- won 64% of the Democratic electorate. Bob Brady, Chaka Fattah and Dwight Evans split the remainintg 36%.
It also was very much a post-racial election. Two numbers stand out: Nutter, the black candidate, got anywhere from 25% to 33% of the vote in the white wards in Northeast Philadelphia. Previous black candidates had trouble breaking out of the teens on that turf.
Knox came thisclose to meeting his goal of getting 20% of the black vote. My cursory check of the ward-by-ward totals, showed the white businessman getting 15% to 20% of the vote in black wards throghout the city.
All in all, a good night for the reformers who sought to cross racial lines in their appeal to Philadelphia's 750,000 Democratic voters.
-- Tom Ferrick

In case you missed it on philly.com, The Inquirer photographers put together a nice slideshow of the major Democratic mayoral candidates going about their Election Day. My favorite shot is Number 12, of Michael Nutter and his family. Ever since her commercial appearance, daughter Olivia has been stealing some of the spotlight from her dad. Plus, even if it's part of the spin, I always like to see the candidates interacting with their families. Reminds me that no matter what candidates might say about one another, or one another's ideas, etc., throughout the race, they've all got a soft side.

Winners:

Michael Nutter, obviously. He did not simply win, he blew out the field. He bested his nearest rival, Tom Knox, by 11 percentage points.

To: My Diary
From: John Street
Re: My Week

I am sitting at my desk in City Hall on election night, dear diary, minding my own business and playing Donkey Kong on my Blackberry when I hear a tap, tap tapping on my chamber door.

I say: Who is it?

The voice replies: It's Joe Grace, Mr. Mayor, could you let me in? I have something to tell you.

I reply, gently: I'm sorry, Joe, I can't. I am too busy. Go away and come back some other time. Maybe next month.

A few more thoughts on Michael Nutter and pre-election stereotypes of him:

First of all, I never called Nutter an Oreo (black on the outside, white on the inside). I said Oreo was a stereotype others were using to describe him and that he would have to overcome the label to win the Democratic mayoral primary. He did, and he did, gaining more than a third of the African American vote in a race with two other African American candidates. The two white candidates got black votes, too.

I have received emails from readers who believe Oreo is a term used by anti-intellectual blacks to denigrate fellow African Americans who are better educated and speak proper English. That's sometimes true, but not necessarily. Black intellectuals Cornel West, Henry Louis Gates Jr. and Michael Eric Dyson are very well educated and individually (ahem) articulate, but I've never heard of either of them being called an Oreo.

The people - some of them, anyway - have spoken. And they don't want casinos near homes, schools or places of worship in Philadelphia.

By a margin of roughly 17-1, voters in the unofficial ballot on casinos rejected the two riverfront locations proposed in the city.

Sure, it was a piddling sample of public opinion, and hardly scientific. But the pro-casino forces could have turned out in droves, and they chose not to do so.

In the increasing likelihood that casinos do wind up in Philadelphia, they're unlikely to dazzle visitors - if the Harrah's experience in Chester is any guide.

Check out the uninviting reality of a slots barn, as depicted in Inquirer architecture Inga Saffron's recent column. Her Saturday night visit to Harrah's provided a glimpse of the ambiance - if that's the right word - of the slots barns being built under Gov. Rendell's slots-gambling effort.

It ain't a pretty sight. As Saffron wrote:

Here's your opportunity to help Great Expectations craft a civic to-do list for Philadelphia's next mayor - likely Democratic primary winner Michael Nutter - and City Council.

Imagine that Michael Nutter has shown up at your home and is sitting across the kitchen table from you. You have his undivided attention.

So, complete the following sentence: "Yo, Mike, the one thing I really need you to do is ..."

You've only got a few minutes to make your pitch, so narrow it down to the one thing that you feel most passionate about when it comes to this city or region.

Once you've decided how you'd finish that sentence, post 150 words or so to the comments section of this thread. (Please include your name and hometown or neighborhood.)

Nutter has agreed to read these citizen messages and to respond to as many of them as he can.

We've got seven months until our new leaders take office. Let's get started.

(Read the full Inquirer editorial on the Yo, Mike! project here.)

The good news: Early response to the Yo, Mike invitation (see the original Yo, Mike! post below) is strong.
The bad news: People have a lot to say to Mr. Nutter, so that comment string is approaching James Michener length.
So I'm starting a second string for more comments ... HERE.

Try to write your comment so as to complete the unfinished sentence in the prompt:

Yo, Mike! The one thing I really need you to do is ...

Thanks. - Chris Satullo

The primary season saw the beginning of a new kind of politics in Philadelphia, one that must be carefully nurtured if it is to grow.

One facet of this new kind of politics is evident in the number and variety of mayoral and city council candidate forums held in virtually every neighborhood across the city and sponsored by a wide range of groups.

Great Expectations sponsored by the University of Pennsylvania and the Philadelphia Inquirer was joined by the Next Great City sponsored by Philadelphia Future and the Next Mayor project sponsored by The Daily News, WHYY and the Committee of 70. Some others included two forums on education sponsored by Cross County Collaborative sponsored two forums on education and the 2007 Future Leaders Mayoral Forum sponsored by the Philadelphia Youth Network and the Greater Philadelphia Urban Affairs Coalition.

In the midst of all this candidate talk, it is easy to miss something what is perhaps a more important kind of talk: citizen talk.