Two months ago I wrote about the changes that have been going on in my life this year. Needless to say, it’s been interesting so far, and signs point to more interesting developments over the coming months. My recent absence from this blog and the twitter are partially the result of a wacky work schedule and a concerted effort to start down the path of many of the changes I talked about in that August post.

Aside from working my ass off, I’ve also been preparing to sell my house. This is by necessity more than anything else. While my original plan was to continue working and traveling through my first part-time semester back in college, the outlook on the work front isn’t that promising, so I’ve been looking at other avenues.

This is how life goes, and while it’s frustrating and challenging, I feel very hopeful and positive about what has happened so far, and what will inevitably be coming down the pike.

Through all of this, I’ve had little time to devote to the reading necessary to write. Longtime readers of this blog know that while I write a lot of opinion pieces, I usually make a concerted effort to source my material with as many supporting links as possible. I feel this is necessary because opinions ARE like assholes, everyone has one, but opinions pieces backed up by sources don’t necessarily suffer the problems that plague the typical opinionated blog post. This may sound a little arrogant, but I like to back up my opinions because I feel it not only makes them stronger to you the reader, but it also allows me the time to better formulate and hopefully strengthen my argument.

The downside of this is that it takes a REALLY LONG TIME to write…well, anything. Between work and work on my house, I really haven’t had the time. To be honest, even though the work I’ve been doing on the house has largely been of the manual labor sort, there’s a lot of thought that goes into the process, as well as a lot of Advil. I hope that I can get back to writing at the beginning of November, but I’m not making any promises.

In the course of all of this, I’ve also been re-evaluating just what I want this blog to be. For me Vibinc has been about advocacy, policy and politics from a decidedly liberal perspective. I don’t see that changing anytime soon, though I am looking at ways to better focus my attentions and perspectives to things that effect not only the way we live here in Memphis and Tennessee, but also the way we perceive the political environment in our community. I’m not really sure how this will manifest itself, or where it will take me, but I think it’s an interesting path to pursue.

Even though I’m re-evaluating the blog, that doesn’t mean I don’t have some things to say about the election Thursday. I know I promised some people, including @ MphsBlckPolitcs to write about it in the run-up to the election, but for the reasons listed above I never quite made it past the incubation stage. So, consider this a Post-Mortem of the election if you will…

_

If you didn’t see the complete and total landslide that was Thursday’s election coming, then you aren’t really paying that much attention to local politics. Back at the beginning of the campaign I said that someone (presumably Wharton) could win with only 30% of the vote considering the large field. Under normal circumstances this could have been the case, but the abbreviated nature of the campaign and the strength exhibited by the Wharton camp made that circumstance highly unlikely.

As Mayor Pro Tem Myron Lowery said election night, AC Wharton has been running since the 2007 Mayoral election, had more money than anyone, and a better organization. This is neither “interesting” nor “odd” nor any other descriptor that would cast doubt on the election results. AC’s campaign organization was ready, and no one else’s was. As a result, EVERYONE that got into the race after the retirement announcement of Mayor Herenton was stuck in a situation that made winning a virtually impossible task.

There were some surprises…

Myron Lowery’s strong showing, despite a late start and a small war chest showed that, given more time, he could have made a run at Wharton. I like much of what Lowery has done so far and hope that Wharton will take note of some of the changes that have taken place at City Hall over the past two months and maintain them through his administration. On the flip side, I’m glad that Lowery will be returning to the City Council. For all his faults, Lowery can be a calming voice on a body that can be quite contentious from time to time.

Carol Chumney’s third place finish should be a wake-up call for the former City Council member and State Legislator. Any rumors of her exit from future runs are not only premature, but also ignore her resolve. Carol wants to be a part of making Memphis better. Through her work in the state legislature and City Council this should be more than evident. However, Chumney suffers from a multi-faceted public perception problem. Part of this comes from what I called her ”cold and combative” posture at the first Mayoral debate. While Chumney did herself no favors in this first performance, media accounts, including my analysis of the first debate, perpetuated many of the long-held stereotypes of women seeking positions of power in the political realm.

As Mary Cashiola reported in the Memphis Flyer, “Women are twice as likely to be described emotionally in the media,” according to Erika Falk, author of Women for President: Media Bias in Eight Campaigns.

Folks, this has to stop. We need women and men of all races and socio-economic backgrounds to engage in the political process. The manner in which women, particularly strong, passionate women, are covered in the media is shameful, dismissive and downright ugly. As consumers of media, we deserve better. As candidates, women deserve to be treated with the same level of respect as their male counterparts. Snippets like this are simply dismissive and disrespectful. Not only is the quote used in the piece not bitter, it is a relevant critique of her political opponent that should have been researched rather than used as a blunt object to further a stereotype.

All that said, Chumney did commit some serious tactical errors that likely led to her weak showing at the polls. First and foremost, the early lack of any clear messaging from her campaign, despite a run less than two years before, allowed her opponents to get a jump on her in an area where she could have shown early strength. Considering her strong showing in the 2007 race, the meme of the campaign should have been “Chumney vs. Wharton”. By allowing so much time to pass before any clear message emerged, Chumney ceded a great deal of ground to Wharton early, and Lowery late. Campaigns are about momentum, and unfortunately for the Chumney campaign, this early lack of momentum made the difficult task of overcoming a well-funded candidate even more difficult.

Charles Carpenter was the fourth place finisher, and while he only received 5% of the vote, there is little doubt that he will use this as a springboard for a future run. Carpenter brought some interesting ideas to the campaign, and even though I disagree with him on many of his campaign positions, I hope he continues to engage in local politics. We need all kinds of voices in the mix, even ones I disagree with.

While the rest of the field accounted for less than 7.5% of the total vote, their impact on the race shouldn’t be ignored, particularly from Lawler and Whalum. Both had potent messaging operations, though Whalum seemed to show more late momentum than Lawler. In the end, all the messaging in the world can’t overcome a strong, well run, and well-funded campaign.

Running for any office requires a level of intentional preparation that cannot be thrown together in three months. With the next Mayoral election just two years away, anyone considering a run should start making preparations now. Memphis is best served by a strong and diverse field of candidates competing to lead us forward, not the dominant dynasties of the far and recent past. It is through this competition of ideas that we can grow as a community. Without competition, comes stagnation like what we saw in the final years of the Herenton Administration. Regardless of the intentions of any elected official, it is critical that we foster this kind of competition going forward, lest we fall back into the patterns of the past, and allow the future to slip by us.

Tonight marked the first debate for the office of Mayor of Memphis. This was, quite simply 90 minutes of some of the most bizarre TV ever. The candidates present were required to have filed their petitions, which cut the field to nine. The candidates present were; Charles Carpenter, Carol Chumney, Wanda Halbert, Robert “Mongo” Hodges, Jerry Lawler, Myron Lowery, Kenneth Whalum, AC Wharton, and Sharon Webb.

Like I said, this was highly entertaining, if you take some time to suspend the reality that there is a possibility of a very strange outcome in the Mayoral race. There were some winners, and losers, and people that really had no business being there, or in public life for that matter. Here’s my rundown.

Winners

Myron Lowery – Myron totally exceeded my expectations earning him the top spot in my “Winners” column. There was nothing flashy about Myron’s presentation. His answers, for the most part, were concise and to the point. He tooted his own horn, but more to show that even as a “Mayor Pro Tem” he was taking the job seriously. Myron’s answers served to dispel some of the criticism levied on him by former Mayor Willie Herenton. He was sharp, that’s all there is to it.

AC Wharton – AC was polished and had it totally together, but that just earns him a second place finish in my mind. I’m being a little unfair because as the frontrunner expectations are higher than they probably should be. Still, expectations are part of the game and as the front-runner, AC is in a position of defending his frontrunner status. I think he defended his position tonight, but I don’t feel that he gained any ground. This is AC’s challenge as the frontrunner, gaining ground to reach a mandate, and that didn’t happen tonight.

Charles Carpenter – Carpenter comes in a distant third. He’s a winner because he did something to distinguish himself both from the field and from the shadow of his former candidate. I don’t agree with some of his positions, but his ability to articulate them coherently, puts him in the top three.

Losers

Jerry Lawler – The candidate with the most name recognition in the race, Lawler’s answers were short on substance. He started out clumsily, as if he was not comfortable with the format, and then relied on right wing talking points to further his cause. I respect Lawler’s commitment to Memphis, and his desire to make things better, but it might behoove him to spend some time working IN the city, through non-profits, etc. before he tries this again.

Carol Chumney – As the second place finisher in the 2007 Mayoral election, Chumney’s expectations were high. Unfortunately, she came off as cold and combative early on, and continued that trend throughout the debate, including an exchange with County Mayor AC Wharton involving the performance of City and County employees after the last big storm. Chumney had the opportunity to shine in this thing, with a polite, but firm, “I told ya so” message, that she never got to. Between that, her virtual absence from the campaign in the past month, and her lightly populated, but nicely designed site that she pimped in the debate, she’s got a big hill to climb to win this thing.

Kenneth Whalum Jr. – The best of the losers, Whalum also started off combative, and then relied on initiatives that he’s led to prop up his platform. Really, his message wasn’t horrible, but the way he delivered it was reminiscent of our most recent former Mayor, which was a turn-off. Also, his unwillingness to clear the air about the incident at his church this weekend raises questions that CANNOT be answered until he addresses them.

Not Worth Mentioning

Halbert, Hodges and Webb were the sideshow. Halbert came closest to being a real candidate, but just about every time she spoke, I found myself wondering what the hell she just said.

Hodges (Mongo) had several lines of the night, including arming people with Uzi’s, flushing the political class down the toilet like turds, and putting comic books and video games in Libraries.

Webb was disjointed and confused, and at one point, couldn’t answer a question because she couldn’t stop laughing, which I can understand considering the dumb shit that was probably said right before her answer. Still, that’s no excuse, and she never really said much anyway.

Conclusion

The debate wasn’t a success or a failure, it was a sideshow. The inclusion of people that weren’t serious casts serious doubts on this part of the process. Still, it happened, and we have to live with it.

You can watch the debate here.

By now just about everyone has head about twitter, even if you don’t know what it is. The best evidence of this widespread knowledge is the fact that at least 5 of the potential candidates for Mayor (County Mayor AC Wharton, Mayor Pro Tem Myron Lowery, Charles Carpenter, Jerry Lawler, and Rev. Kenneth Whalum Jr) are not only using twitter, but using it fairly effectively, to get message out and build campaign funds/volunteers.

Yesterday, after the revelation that a certain former Mayor had pulled a petition to run for his old job broke on twitter nearly all of these candidates sprung into action on the social networking service.

(Not Necessarily in chronological order)



And the tweet that is my personal favorite…

These were followed by event announcements and ways to get involved with the campaigns. As weird of a day as it was, I think it’s of the good, regardless of what the former Mayor does. The evolution of media and message is FINALLY starting to filter down to local races here in Memphis. It’s a huge opportunity, and an even bigger responsibility for the people of the city.

They’re talking to us. They’re talking DIRECTLY TO US and listening to us as well. You would do well to listen, learn, and make your voice heard. It won’t stay like this forever if we don’t take advantage of it now.

The date’s been set, and even though the filing deadline is over a month away, some 10 candidates have declared their interest to run.

Due to the abbreviated nature of the campaign, learning about the candidates for Mayor of Memphis is probably going to be a cram fest. In an effort to help people find information on the candidates I’ll be posting fairly regularly about ways candidates are reaching out to voters. Most of this will deal with the ways they are using the internet to attract support, but as time goes on other things may be covered also.

Because it’s so early in the campaign, not everyone is up to speed. The inclusion of candidates who aren’t “up to speed” on this list is not an attempt to besmirch them, but to keep the list as comprehensive as possible. As always, candidates are welcome to contact me with new information and resources as their campaigns ramp up.

Without further ado, here are your candidates so far:

Candidates are listed in the order of their internet presence strength first, then by electoral strength when there’s a tie

County Mayor AC Wharton – Wharton’s decision to jump in the race should come as no surprise. Since his early consideration back in the 2007 election, his name has consistently come up as the heir apparent. That his campaign also mobilized far more quickly than anyone else should also come as no surprise as he has been raising money for this run since just after the 2007 election.

His website is clean and professional looking, with shades of the Obama campaign website apparent. My only complaint about the website is the manner in which issues are discussed. Currently, this page is just a list of editorials and news clippings. Still, this is far and away more comprehensive than most announced candidates. The priorities page is less comprehensive, but gives a good overview of his positions.

Wharton has also been using social media very effectively. His twitter feed is by far the best use of the medium I’ve seen in a local election, and he also has a Facebook fan page is impressive. It’s interesting that his site currently doesn’t mention either. Oversight perhaps?

Charles Carpenter – Carpenter, the former campaign manager for several Herenton campaigns, jumped out of the gate fast with his site. The design is relatively simple, but has plenty of meat to it. The issues page is hardly comprehensive, but gives the reader a good idea of his positions. I find it interesting that he worked with Herenton all those years, but opposes a metro government, for instance.

Carpenter also has a twitter feed, which I coincidentally found on his front page, as well as a link to facebook that actually takes you to his personal friend page.

Jerry Lawler – Lawler’s site is sparse, though it has some potential. His Letter to the People of Memphis is the closest thing I’ve found to an issues page. I’m sure some of this will change over time. He also is using twitter and facebook though I hate the way the facebook link works on the page.

Mayor Pro Tem Myron Lowery – Lowery’s internet presence is far less impressive. He lacks a campaign website, though you can find him both at his city page and on twitter.

Lowery’s use of twitter, so far, has been sparse but instructive. He consistently posts interesting things about what’s going on in the city. That’s great and all, but if he expects to win the election he’s going to have to mobilize to a far greater extent.

Former City Councilwoman Carol Chumney – Chumney, who placed second in the 2007 Mayoral election, currently has no internet presence aside from a twitter page that has but one entry. I have it on good authority that a web page is in the works, though it will not appear at her former site due to a cyber squatter. Once the page is live I’ll be sure to link it either here, or in a future post.

School Board Member Rev. Kenneth Whalum Jr. – Whalum, a member of the Memphis City School Board and pastor at The New Olivet Baptist Church is perhaps one of the most colorful characters in the race, besides Prince Mongo. Outspoken and often controversial (his church once had a sign out front that used the word ass), he has his own ideas, as evidenced by this video. Whalum also has a twitter feed that’s just getting started.

City Councilwoman Wanda Halbert – Halber, who just announced her intention to run on Monday is also a little behind the curve. This is to be expected considering how recently she announced. She does have a twitter account though this may be a personal one, and is currently protected. Perhaps in the future she will have something more campaign oriented.

Commisioner James Harvey – To the best of my knowledge, Harvey has no real internet presence, with the exception of his page on the Shelby Co. Government site. You may remember this nifty sign I saw at the Chism Picnic. Other than that, not much else has been seen or heard from Commissioner Harvey.

Sharon Webb – A former member of the Memphis Charter Commision, Webb has also been pretty quiet in the mix. We’ll see.

Prince Mongo – Newscoma’s favorite candidate. He hasn’t been able to ride the space beanie to victory yet, and aside from news articles and a very old website, there’s not much out there…but him.

I probably shouldn’t gloat, but apparently I was right about at least one thing. From the Memphis Daily News:

But Halbert told reporters Thursday that it was an inquiry on whether or not Lowery could vote to set a special election date in July since Lowery stood to become acting mayor. She and several other council members said it might be a conflict of interest.

“While I personally may not have classified my inquiry as an investigation, I noted, it very well may have been just that to the legal department,” Halbert wrote in an email the day after Jefferson made his claim in court. Jefferson refused to say what his investigation is about on the advice of his attorney, Ricky E. Wilkins.

Halbert may have a “bugaboo about ethical conduct” as Bob suggests in the comments of yesterday’s post, but she wouldn’t know an ethical dilemma if it stood beside her and offered to buy her lunch.

Lowery’s right in the MDN article, it was his “responsibility” to vote on the matter. That Lowery and Halbert were on opposing sides of the issue has NOTHING to do with the ethical nature of his vote, or ability to vote. That we’re still debating his prior ability to vote on a Council matter says a lot about the people who are working to undermine him.

In the meantime, City Attorney Elbert Jefferson, as the “chief ethical officer” of the city, is asserting his “privilege” over the very Executive he serves. That’s an interesting proposition. Of course, there’s a lot about this whole business with Jefferson that’s interesting.

First of all, in the lawsuit against Lowery, Jefferson sued Lowery personally, not in his capacity as Mayor. Why? Because Ricky Wilkins, Jefferson’s Attorney, works for the city too, and could not sue the executive he serves. That’s a conflict of interest. Also, Jefferson probably wanted to delegitimize Lowery, the Mayor, in the process. Personally, I think the judge should have thrown the damn thing out saying that Lowery, the man, hadn’t done ANYTHING to Jefferson, and that if Jefferson had a gripe, he needed to sue the City.

That’s not what happened. The judge ruled that the Mayor could not dismiss a Director without Council approval, which he conceded at the City Council meeting on Tuesday. We knew this. Why didn’t Lowery just concede defeat and move on? Because Jefferson is also seeking monetary damages against Lowery, the man, not the office of Mayor.

Then there’s the whole ethics thing. The article talks about the Ethics Commission, which DOES NOT EXIST in any tangible way. From the article

But the city’s ethics commission has never been established. Its members have yet to be selected because city council members have had difficulty finding one member who is a retired jurist, one of the requirements for the commission.

So in the absence of an “Ethics Commission”, how does the “Chief Ethical Officer” address ethical concerns independently? Does he even address them independently, or can he use his position as a personal political witch-hunt for whatever purpose he deems necessary? One would think an independent council that required City Council approval would be the least biased way to address concerns, in the absence of a Commision. Who knows?

Nobody does. Not one single freakin’ person I’ve talked to knows shit about anything. The Ethics rules adopted are a start, but without the Commission, what does it matter? If the City Attorney is the “Chief Ethical Officer”, who does he report to? A mythical commission? Leprechauns? Unicorns? Ed. Note: This Morning’s CA reports that Jefferson is sending the ethics matters to outside legal Counsel.

The charter is vague on a lot of things, but one thing that is crystal clear is that the Mayor, whomever that is, appoints division heads with the consent of the City Council as affirmed by Judge Evans’ decision.

Sec. 35. Chief executive officer; appointment and supervision of all divisions, boards, employees and city officers; to devote entire time to office.
The Chief Executive Officer of the City of Memphis shall be the mayor, who shall be vested with and exercise the executive and administrative power of the City, shall be authorized to administer, supervise and control all divisions, boards, agencies, offices and employees of the City and shall see that the ordinances and provisions of the Charter are observed, except as otherwise specifically provided. Such administration shall be conducted by and through divisional directors under the supervision and control of the mayor, as provided herein. He shall devote his entire time and attention to the duties of his office.

Subject to provisions of the Charter including civil service regulations thereof, and ordinances, the Mayor shall appoint and when he deems it necessary for the good of the people, may suspend or remove any employees of the City of Memphis, including any appointive officers or department heads provided for by or under the Charter. The Mayor may delegate to any appointive administrative officer the power to appoint, suspend or remove subordinates in that officer’s division, department, office or agency subject to such conditions and limitations as he may prescribe.

The Mayor shall appoint the members of all boards and commissions, said appointments to be made with the approval of a majority of the Council; the removal of all members of boards and commissions shall be effected in the same manner and subject to the same procedures provided for directors. Members of Boards and Commissions shall continue in office until their successors have been appointed and approved.

That said, some reports have noted that Evans instructed the Lowery, the man (because remember, neither the Mayor NOR the City was being sued) that Jefferson couldn’t be suspended without “a serious infraction or incident.”, which is clearly contrary to the section listed above (though the CA report says state law has supremacy here).

So what’s the solution? Lowery has to get enough votes on the Council to get rid of Jefferson, which is about as likely as me winning the lottery and moving to a tropical island with a bunch of hot models or something. Or he can drop it, and let the next Mayor deal with it. If he does that, he needs to be ready to do nothing more than cut ribbons, because there’s no way in hell he’ll bridge the gap to win the election.

So what’s this all about? Money probably, power likely, but I can’t prove either. Money starts wars and fights and lawsuits, so it stands to reason that it would be, at the very least, part of the reason. Power is one of those things that everyone wants, or thinks they have until they find out they don’t.

In short, this shit is dirty, one way or the other, and Myron Lowery isn’t the one suffering (though he might disagree on that point), but the citizens of Memphis and the office of Mayor, who Jefferson is SUPPOSED to serve. What is his agenda? How many more agendas will emerge?

We’ve got 70 days before the election to find out.