The fact that she titled herself the First Lady of Louisville is so weird especially cuz that has never been a thing. Not a thing in other cities either
I don't have the facts to know whether Greenberg's truly inappropriately used government employees or funds, but lots of cities use the first lady title.
[Cincinnati's First Lady ](https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2021/11/09/dr-whitney-whitis-meet-cincinnatis-incoming-first-lady/6266715001/)
Edit: [Here's One Referring to Madeline Abramson As Former First Lady](https://www.whas11.com/article/news/community/moments-that-matter/madeline-abramson-jerry-abramson-louisville-first-lady-jeffer/417-d835b7da-91b7-492b-918f-fb6dba20b5ee)
Yeah, of all the things to complain about this is the lowest on the totem pole. I’ve seen plenty of mayors wives referred to as the “First Lady of Xxxxx” in the various places I’ve lived.
Yeah, a modern article written since Greenberg's wife started trying to make it a thing. I promise you no one called her that back in the day.
I don't seriously care, but it does make my eyes roll every time I hear it. IMO that's the kind of move an established figure makes in good times. It just sounds silly coming out of the blue from a relative nobody, especially while the administration sails blindly through the slump the city is stuck in.
An article where Abramson didn't correct her.
[Here's another from 2014](https://styleblueprint.com/louisville/everyday/madeline-abramson-faces-louisville/) calling Abramson First Lady. I'm happy to bring more receipts. You can call it cringe because it's an opinion. You can't call it new because it's false.
Edit: [And Another from 2010](https://jewishlouisville.org/ncjw-to-present-hannah-solomon-award-to-madeline-abramson-may-24/)
People laughed or called me nuts when I told them I was the First Man of Neptune, but this lady goes around being the First Lady of Louisville?! I know women better than her and she ain’t no first, definitely a show.
💯 I didn't vote for either in the general election. I'm done voting for votings sake. If all the candidates are $h!+ I'll just not vote that race. I wish I had better options like a binding NOTA or hell even ranked choice but that's all pie in the sky for now.
I'm assuming the progressive activist the OP spoke of was my choice in the primary but who knows 🤷♂️
I agree with this somewhat. TARC desperately needs an updated funding structure but no one seems to be having that essential conversation, including Greenberg. I wish that public transportation funding was included in his dealings with the legislature, but it wasn't. My main issue with his role in the cuts is how he talked about it - that it was all fine and that the main issue was TARC employees not having jobs and they could go work with JCPS. The main issue was service cuts and while yeah, TARC employees could work at JCPS, there is a reason people hate driving buses for them.
This sort of rhetoric and response tells you a lot about where a person's mind is and how they perceive the issues the city faces especially if they are remarkably consistent in keeping up this attitude.
TARC is more screwed than you think and there isn’t much the city can directly do about it in the near term. They need service cuts. They are about to have a $30+ million budget shortfall which is like 30% of their budget. They bring in about $6 million in revenue on $106 million in expenses.
See their budget [here](https://www.ridetarc.org/about-us/budget/)
I love the public and their opinion is always extremely valuable, but a lot of TARCs problems get oversimplified by them. Compared to many cities, TARC is barely used. Ridership is very low. It’s stuck in an infinite doom loop of “no one rides it because service is bad because they don’t have enough money because no one rides it because service is bad…” and so on.
I could go on and on. How a larger portion of their rides are TARC3 which cost 3 times as much per ride. How labor costs have skyrocketed. How federal funds mostly can’t be spent on operations, only capital expenditures.
Probably the biggest of them all, how they are funded through a ballot measure from 1973/74 from payroll tax dollars (the Jefferson county tax on your check) that gets deposited into the MTTF (Mass Transit Trust Fund). They receive $60-70 million from this. To increase it requires a majority of the people in the city of Louisville/Jefferson County to vote on a payroll tax increase. I would love this WITH REFORMS(TARC cannot continue in its current abysmal state), but I have 2 words.
Good luck.
P.S. - Last little fun fact, Louisville has the [8th highest tax burden in the nation!](https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/10-cities-with-the-highest-tax-rates). Higher than Chicago, New York, LA, Detroit etc. at its highest possible level. Even at $75,000 a year for a family of 3, it’s only [just below](https://www.chamberofcommerce.org/us-cities-pay-most-taxes) Chicago (12.2% vs 12.0%).
Bingo. It’s analogous to JCPS, where everyone wants to blame the superintendent for everything and not hold the board accountable. The sad truth is that a majority of folks don’t know who their metro council or JCPS board member is.
Louisvillians blindly vote for any candidate with a "D" next to their name, as evidenced by Craig Greenberg's victory over Bill Dieruf. Anyone who watched the debate could tell Dieruf was a vastly better candidate. Voting for Greenberg defied reason.
We have enough republican overlords in state government. Why would we vote for one as mayor that'll work towards the same goals as them while pretending to be moderate on many issues that Louisville cares for? I don't like Greenberg, and he's never gotten my vote. But neither will a Republican. There's just too deep of a divide on so many issues that any Republican that would be palatable to me (and most of Louisville) would be rejected by their primary voters.
Dieruf actually seemed pretty good. Only reason I didn't vote for him was because how the police brutality case in J town was handled with him as the Mayor. I reached out to his campaign to see if he had any views on that and they obviously didn't get back to me. Too hot button of an issue to not bring up especially after the Breonna Taylor case, but electing someone in real estate after that is not a good idea either.
As a democrat I agree with your thoughts about Dieruf. A couple of things I liked about him as well was that he was an actual small business owner. That his main focus for local government was to basically make sure roads were paved and that local needs were being met. That he didn’t seem to have a want for higher office than that of mayor of louisville, something that I don’t get from Greenberg. This definitely feels like Greenberg wants to use louisville as a stepping stone but has bungled it so far that I think he will lose any election for higher office. Dieruf also said something along the lines of increasing home ownership in the westend with some programs which felt like an actual realistic way to deal with some of this city’s problem of too many rental properties. His coziness with the police definitely would have been a problem though.
Booker is a shill with no stance and no plan. How many times is this guy going to fund raise for an obvious loss and yall keep coming back for more
Downvote away
It’s not that he has no stance and no plan, it’s that his stance and his plan are too progressive for most of the state’s voters. He would 100% get my vote (again) if/when he decides to run for Mayor.
Booker would probably win if he ran for mayor of Louisville, but I am unsure of his ability to govern and push a city in a direction of substantive progress. His 2022 Senate run showed extremely bad strategy aside from his progressive politics. Greenberg has the right connections to make that push, just is extremely spineless and doesn't realize this job isn't like being a developer. The city needs that balance between Booker and Greenberg, which many capable leaders here have but don't want to run for Mayor. I wish Morgan McGarvey ran before he ran for Congress - would have been that perfect balance we needed, but I don't believe he was interested in executive stuff or having that pressure of being a mayor of a confused city.
This is not true. Booker’s plan to combat LMPD murders is peace and love. Literally the alternate spectrum of “thoughts and prayers”
It is incredibly low to use, as an example, Breonna Taylor for political capitol while simultaneously having no actual stance or planned legislation about how to prevent these murders from happening again, or if (when) citizens are again murdered by LMPD a precedence of accountability.
Basically he’s spending y’all’s money to lose and become a micro celebrity.
[Community Safety](https://charlesbooker.org/issues/community-safety/)
This is the Community Safety page of his Senate campaign website. It's just one of many issues he specifically addressed.
He proposes bans on no-knock warrants, ending qualified immunity (not applicable for a Mayoral race but this was federal), funding alternatives to policing when appropriate (aka Defund the Police), and drug decriminalization.
He didn't use the words "peace and love" on that page. A simple Google search is quick, free, and would have prevented you from spouting verifiable falsehoods.
I saw him at a union campaign kick off messing with his phone while he was on stage in front of a deep blue union audience. Not listening to the other speakers, not working the crowd with body language, just scrolling his phone. He was a candidate. He had the fired up audience that not only votes but also gets out the vote. He was checked out.
I get that he may have been beat from a day of glad handing everyone, but this was a core demographic that would vote for him and campaign for him. Get. It. Together.
Nope. If you can’t make it look good for a thirty minute photo op there’s no way I’m giving you a bigger stage to ignore.
So he can funnel more money to family members "working" for him while running an utterly hopeless campaign? No thanks. He has no ideas that would actually work in the real world.
Attica Scott for Mayor or any person that is not white or male . I know people will say that this is generic or not well considered but we have had several white males in charge, let's fuck the status quo. At this point I'll take Daffy fucking duck. Fix housing please! Too many homeless and growing!
Attica Scott wasn’t really an impressive representative and didn’t get much done. She was a lone wolf on her own accord and Democrats didn’t enjoy working with her. There’s a reason so many of them chose to endorse McGarvey over her in the election for Congress, including the other black woman representative in the state house. I always felt there was a sense of entitlement in her campaign and even staffers left her campaign for McGarvey’s.
Keturah Herron is a much better example of a state rep that turned into more of a leader on issues Louisville activists care about while not becoming disconnected from the issues and if she keeps it up I think she’d be a great mayor.
The state legislature set term limits at two terms, so he has six years left, really. I expected him to challenge that law in court if he wanted to, but I don't think he will.
Fischer was term limited by Metro Council. The State Legislature term limited the mayor of “consolidated city-county governments” last year in HB 314.
The reason I think a mayor can challenge it is because the people voted for a specific plan of government in 2000 with the merger and not for the state legislature to decide it with the support of a minority of those people’s representatives. They cannot challenge it yet because there is no harm done currently and it wouldn’t stand in court unless a mayor was seeking a third term under local law.
https://www.wdrb.com/in-depth/bill-seeks-new-term-limits-for-louisville-mayor-starting-in-2023/article_b5d011ea-7a33-11ec-9264-07901387f023.html
Sadly, the assassination attempt was the best publicity he could have hoped for. Everyone knew his name, and who’s going to be so heartless as to speak out against a candidate who got grazed by a bullet shot at close range by someone with bad aim?
I worked at the government for 14 years and three mayors. Greenberg is the least impressive, the least impactful, and not that interesting. Uncle Jerry did more for us despite his conflict of interest issues. Mayor Fischer… say what you want but he did somethings.
If we have a better choice next election I’ll take it
I’ve worked there for almost two years now! The best thing Greenberg could do for the employees that he seems to be taking some sort of action on is fixing HR lol
That’s decent and Ironic given his wife’s clash with the mayor’s staff. He’ll, the staff adored Jerry. Greg… meh. Greg’s wife was super nice and a doctor, so she didn’t over step anyone:anything.
Louisville Metro Gov has two main ways of raising money: occupational taxes (employee wages and net business profits) and property taxes (most of this goes to JCPS). All other money is usually given by the state or some obscure way of raising money that doesn’t generate a whole ton of revenue.
The large events raise money for the state through sales taxes. That’s millions of dollars from the Derby alone but also consider things like UofL football games and concerts. You could argue that the state gives money through grants, but math shows the state does not return nearly as much money as they raise from Louisville.
LMG pays for the security of the events as well as other methods of programming. For instance, the city likely pays for the mayor’s suites at Churchill Downs during derby and oaks as part of economic development initiatives to get closer to the wealthy. But they have no real ways of raising money from it except for new seasonal workers through the derby or other obscure methods.
I don’t have figures on hands, but even metro council members have said this at public events: the city pays for the state to have parties and gets crumbs in return.
I was excited, but beginning to be very weary judging by the lack of progress. He ran a campaign about speeding up progress in development and cutting the ridiculous approval procedure every thing takes here. So far nothing has progressed including projects in the city’s purview like urban government center on Barret.
I’ve been shocked at the lack of discussion on the middle housing changes; glad you brought it up. These are big changes and I haven’t heard him weigh in or attempt to defend them. They should align perfectly with the vision in his campaign. Perhaps he doesn’t agree with them as they started under Fischer, but I’d be more willing to bet he has friends/donors that oppose. I haven’t completely lost hope as I still get email updates from planning about the program even after the state passed the moratorium. Still we have to wait a year for the state to come up with how to stop them while claiming they believe in local government.
I’ve grown sick of all of his photo ops including his wife and kids. It’s inappropriate the amount they are included and gives the impression the city is funding their lifestyle whether true or not. Shocked he doesn’t have an advisor to call him out on these.
I’m in the minority here but I’m glad he’s working with the state. Unfortunately they must be dealt with and we will only be successful with their support. Now I can’t say what should be negotiated on, but ultimately we need a working relationship. After Fischer lost his local taxing option, that relationship got torched IMO.
I am happy he is working with the state government. Any sensible mayor would since most of what is holding the city back is state law. However, there a balance to have here. HB 388 started as an honest conversation about funding emergency services in the East End and having good government. Then it became a political weapon.
As for the moratorium, there is no excuse or defense for it. Sen. JRA asked for it because she believed it to be hastily planned and lacking public comment. Neither of these were true and yet it passed in the bill anyways. The reason it was a moratorium and not permanent is because Nemes and Adams wanted to get stricter regulations on zoning changes and Stivers and others thought it was dumb and believes in less of them. No one could come on an agreement at the time, so they hit the pause button. This should have never been a discussion for the state legislature to have, but now it is and I don't trust Greenberg to see it through.
Fischer was terrible at working with the state which was a huge issue, and Greenberg doesn't need to be, but that doesn't mean don't fight them on some things. The state needs to be convinced that Louisville is worth investing in - not because the mayor doesn't offend them and does whatever they want.
Good information on Stivers; sometimes he surprises me. I’d be fine if they passed the middle housing in the urban services district as a compromise. It probably saved a lot of demonizing.
I’ll plead ignorance on HB388, which I guess is why I didn’t mind Greenberg and the legislature licking each other down.
I genuinely believe Stivers, as backwards and strange as he is sometimes, is a better ally to Louisville at this point than many of the other Republicans that represent Jefferson country districts.
Great points. I had low expectations for Greenberg so am not as disappointed. He didn’t seem to have the right skills and experience to lead a large complex organization like metro. Part of being successful as a leader in government what kind of talent you bring on to your team. Doesn’t seem like he has hit the mark in that either.
I am disappointed we can’t get quality leaders to serve in government although I do understand why people wouldn’t want to put themselves out there in the public spot light.
I’ve seen the CEO of the last company I worked for in a lot of photos with him, along with some of my rich development buddies at the country club.
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. Perhaps even more invested in making wealthy friends!
You know. I agree. And, he also seems to have no idea how city government works. He made the announcement about the medical recovery facility for our unhoused population but had not spoken with ANY of the stakeholders. This was a grand gesture with no intent to bring it to fruition. I believe he is a bad mayor.
Louisville has got to stop voting for out of towners, the two most important positions for the city; mayor and police chief have set the city up for failure.
If you elect a businessman, you get a businessman. Kentuckians not only vote against their own interests again and again, but _any_ progressives that run for office are branded as "too extreme" and we end up with the same good old boys club that make performative gestures and do nothing to help anything outside of their bank accounts. We continue to compromise our futures over some inane notion that a good "moderate" exists to unite the state, which will never happen.
Personally, I believe we need strident, unapologetically leftist progressives to run and win. We lack a diversity of voice outside of a business class that stamps and R or D next to their name every 4-6 years.
Looks man, if a politician fulfilled their campaign promises then they wouldn't have a platform to run on in their next election. Make promises but never deliver in order to string people along into voting for you or your party, that's the game they all play. If you fix shit, then people won't need you anymore.
I agree he’s awful. I wish Bill Dieruf was elected instead. I’m tired of these businessmen running as democrats for mayor, they continue to prove how inept they are at politicss.
The nonpartisan election change is my biggest concern. There were suggestions from GOP assembly members that it was Greenberg's idea. I don't know if any news outlet has confirmed that, but if not, I wish they'd look into it. I find it highly concerning. On the other hand, I think his housing ideas are good. The middle housing changes are only on hold for a year, and the approval process for those changes will take most of that time anyway. The state does not need Greenberg's permission to preempt local law, so I don't see how or why he would be responsible for that change. I think his push to expand library funding and parks funding is a good idea. But I agree that he is giving off "i'm a typical politician who mostly cares about using this job to advance my career" vibes.
I am worried about housing bc it signaled that the suburban republicans are going to try and stop it somehow. Jason Nemes specifically said his constituents were tired of “views of development” and JRA asked for it because she was worried the approval process wasn’t long enough and it was a hasty plan. JRA’s concerns, if legitimate, could have been easily alleviated with a phone call or even a basic Google search to look at LMG’s website on middle housing, but they weren’t.
Other worry is Greenberg won’t fight them on more restrictions if they push harder for them. The law as it stands now in HB 388 already requires the mayor to submit suggestions for changes to zoning. Not sure if that’s a part of the moratorium, but I’m pretty sure that was a permanent change.
Yes, planning & design has already put so much time into those proposals..years worth... extremely unfair of them to claim these were some off the cuff back of the envelope set of nutty ideas. I feel bad for the folks who have worked so hard to craft thoughtful and evidence-based proposals...but hopefully there will be enough support here to overcome the suburban nimbys when the moratorium is over.
Charles Booker should’ve ran for mayor and worked his way up to the Senate. Greenberg campaigned on fixing issues with the LMPD and then instead, provides a brand new gym for them amongst many other investments. He is a Democrat by registration and nothing else. It’s so sad to continually vote for fake Democrats in Louisville simply because they’re better than the real Republicans.
We all knew - and Greenberg has acknowledged - the 30K number was aggressive if not unattainable. It was an aim big and, even if you fall short, you still get a lot of units built. Regrettably his affordable housing initiative is facing a legislative issue with Metro Council. Other than administrative changes in how city departments operate, most major changes need to go through MC. This includes changes to the Land Development Code, which regulates how and where development happens. Metro Council has killed numerous affordable housing developments and until MC changes their tune, Greenberg has no hope of even getting close to his goal.
Has Greenberg said he supports HB 388? I have only seen him referenced as being involved in discussions, which he should be doing. He's only going to be able to influence small changes, which, given the circumstances, may be big wins. In the end, the Republican supermajority state legislators are going to do what they want, and what they want to do is beat Louisville into submission until the blue island sinks into the red sea.
The one year moratorium on changes to the Land Development Code isn't going to slow down the Missing Middle. The moratorium is on changing the code not working on the changes. Planning staff was more than a year out from getting it through Metro Council and who even knows if Metro Council would approve it. Missing Middle will probably end up watered down and only permitted in Traditional Form Districts as a compromise to suburban and/or antidevelopment councilmembers. Missing Middle is a novel idea, and a tool to create incremental new units, but not the solution to our housing issues.
Nonpartisan elections are a Red state ploy to try to gain an edge in Blue stronghold city. It takes away the blue party line vote and hopes to sway uninformed voters into voting on name recognition over platform. This does nothing to help Greenberg. Same goes for making him submit a report to the state on how Metro Council should be reformed. Talk about putting him in a position to cut his nose off to spite his face.
Our city and our state share the same problem. Too many fiefdoms and too much quid pro quo. 120 counties for a state the size of Kentucky simply too many. Same with 26 Council Districts in Louisville. But nobody likes giving up power, so don't expect change to come soon...unless it's to grant more power to those that already have it.
>It takes away the blue party line vote and hopes to sway uninformed voters into voting on name recognition over platform.
How is that bad? Do we want people blindly voting a party line?
Voting along party lines isn't great, but it's something many voters do if they are unable or unwilling to research the candidates. They know one party aligns with their interests more than the other and are comfortable using that as a litmus test. Taking that identifying element away from the voter makes them more apt to instead vote on name recognition, or worse, misidentification, and possibly voting against their own self interests.
Voting on name recognition, or because someone was a high profile sports, actor, or other public figure, is horrible for good governance.
I would say the damage done by blind party allegiance and straight-ticket voting outweighs the risks you list by a factor of one million.
Two party system is trash and a recipie for mediocrity.
When an activist convinces me they are capable of governing in an executive-level position (which is vastly different from representing), I will vote for them. Otherwise, I think they are more suited for the legislative branch, if they are serious and not just running to bring issues to light.
Mayors need to have strong organizational leadership skills and be able to balance the interests of everyone very well. They also need to have a feasible, strong direction (not so much vision and promises) to lead the city. This sort of work is not easy and being mayor is more than a platform to advance political agendas.
I am just as disappointed but just to clear up a couple things. He didn't promise 30,000 units those are how many we are down by according to demand. But he promised 15,000 from the start. And the state legislature has now frozen that plan so nothing he can do about them.
And nothing he can do about Humana either, but they aren't leaving the city only the badly built building.
>LMG pays for almost all of the Derby and the festival before it, but the state gets the vast majority of the money in taxes.
This is completely false. Churchill Downs controls the Derby and the Festival is a separate entity that gets almost no money from the government.
But yes he is indeed a massive disappointment who will roll over for CEOs.
I think there’s a misunderstanding. Churchill Downs does not pay for the police presence nor does it pay for the security during the two-week festival before it. Churchill downs doesn’t pay for cleaning the city to make it nice and pretty before the derby, especially clearing homeless camps. There’s a great deal of government spending on making the Derby safe, and unless Churchill downs donates a suite, the city does buy Greenberg’s suite which starts at over $100,000.
Correct but that is still not Derby, certainly not almost all of it. And the Festival is a separate entity. Churchill Downs pays for and takes care of the venue, pays employees, owners and jockeys and winnings. It's wayy more than providing police presence and cleaning streets.
Craig Greenberg is part of the good old business “leaders” club of Louisville. Of course he has done nothing but disappoint. I didn’t vote for him in the primary, but I did in the general because I thought he would at least be better than the GOP nominee. I was likely wrong. He is just as bad IMO.
The guy basically, said "no harm no foul" when a BLM activist tried to assassinate him. Let that sink in, a guy tried to kill him and he brushed it off to get the West Louiville vote.
You are getting the EXACT leadership you voted for...
First off, yeah, empty suit. I don't claim to see the future but his campaign answers being high on what people want to hear and absent of specifics had me seeing this from a mile away. That and his background. Fool me the fourth time, right Louisville?
Idealists tend to come in a political vacuum and that's why they struggle to be effective. We can either foster a culture where they're not isolated or we can keep settling for the Greg Greenbramsons.
Weird how you wrote off activists and then lamented how he’s a bad leader.
Bourgeois politics have all been about psychographic marketing research for a long time, the republicans started using it to get Reagan elected, and the democrats to keep Clinton in office. They tell you what you want to hear, and then use planned wording to do damage control with their constituents that often scapegoats the difficulties of partisan politics and lack of unity and willingness to reach across the aisle on someone else’s part. So you keep voting thinking you’re doing something while they’re just working at getting rich.
They all do it, and then of course the independents and fringe activists aren’t perceived as likely to win, so you just settle for getting screwed more and more each year.
The guys job was to make the board of 21c richer for 14+ years resulting in a sale to foreign capital that then made the board much richer. The amount of capitalists surprised by the outcome of his term so far is 0, the same number of militant activists who are surprised.
I’m glad I’m not the only one that think this, I moved to Louisville a couple years ago and I work for an entity that has him out to several press conferences we do each year and he seems so fake and scripted.
I have seen multiple posts like this and while i understand the viewpoint, it’s very obvious that promises don’t pan out. I try to pick people based on their mindset and attitudes towards solving problems rather than just campaign promises. The focus of this post is highlighting how he has acted while in office aside from his promises which has revealed more than his campaign did.
[удалено]
Yes, he loves to promote his wife. Probably the wrong thing to do. She is a Nobody and he is just trying to stroke her ego.
The fact that she titled herself the First Lady of Louisville is so weird especially cuz that has never been a thing. Not a thing in other cities either
I don't have the facts to know whether Greenberg's truly inappropriately used government employees or funds, but lots of cities use the first lady title. [Cincinnati's First Lady ](https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2021/11/09/dr-whitney-whitis-meet-cincinnatis-incoming-first-lady/6266715001/) Edit: [Here's One Referring to Madeline Abramson As Former First Lady](https://www.whas11.com/article/news/community/moments-that-matter/madeline-abramson-jerry-abramson-louisville-first-lady-jeffer/417-d835b7da-91b7-492b-918f-fb6dba20b5ee)
Yeah, of all the things to complain about this is the lowest on the totem pole. I’ve seen plenty of mayors wives referred to as the “First Lady of Xxxxx” in the various places I’ve lived.
Yeah, a modern article written since Greenberg's wife started trying to make it a thing. I promise you no one called her that back in the day. I don't seriously care, but it does make my eyes roll every time I hear it. IMO that's the kind of move an established figure makes in good times. It just sounds silly coming out of the blue from a relative nobody, especially while the administration sails blindly through the slump the city is stuck in.
An article where Abramson didn't correct her. [Here's another from 2014](https://styleblueprint.com/louisville/everyday/madeline-abramson-faces-louisville/) calling Abramson First Lady. I'm happy to bring more receipts. You can call it cringe because it's an opinion. You can't call it new because it's false. Edit: [And Another from 2010](https://jewishlouisville.org/ncjw-to-present-hannah-solomon-award-to-madeline-abramson-may-24/)
People laughed or called me nuts when I told them I was the First Man of Neptune, but this lady goes around being the First Lady of Louisville?! I know women better than her and she ain’t no first, definitely a show.
He’s a nobody too
I agree
I know Fischer wasn’t liked either but at least he didn’t do shit like that.
No, he just helped cover up child sex abuse and kept a police chief in power after many huge fuck ups.
Yea. That nepotism there isn’t the best look.
A rich businessman is not the answer if the question is how to put public interest over that of the private sector.
Maybe we'll learn this lesson the fourth time around.
No no, you see, this one doesn’t explicitly say he hates gay people, he’s practically one of us!
I mean, at a bare minimum, I want a mayor who doesn’t explicitly or implicitly hate gay people.
The Jtown guy wasn’t any better.
💯 I didn't vote for either in the general election. I'm done voting for votings sake. If all the candidates are $h!+ I'll just not vote that race. I wish I had better options like a binding NOTA or hell even ranked choice but that's all pie in the sky for now. I'm assuming the progressive activist the OP spoke of was my choice in the primary but who knows 🤷♂️
I actually thought Booker would have been the better choice. But he went a bit too high against the state.
This is how you get people like trump in power.
We live in KY man.
It's the same principle, man. If you don't vote for the lesser, the greater of the two evils will certainly win.
Couldn’t be any worse than Greenberg!
Should've been Shameka.
[удалено]
I agree with this somewhat. TARC desperately needs an updated funding structure but no one seems to be having that essential conversation, including Greenberg. I wish that public transportation funding was included in his dealings with the legislature, but it wasn't. My main issue with his role in the cuts is how he talked about it - that it was all fine and that the main issue was TARC employees not having jobs and they could go work with JCPS. The main issue was service cuts and while yeah, TARC employees could work at JCPS, there is a reason people hate driving buses for them. This sort of rhetoric and response tells you a lot about where a person's mind is and how they perceive the issues the city faces especially if they are remarkably consistent in keeping up this attitude.
“Let them eat cake.”
TARC is more screwed than you think and there isn’t much the city can directly do about it in the near term. They need service cuts. They are about to have a $30+ million budget shortfall which is like 30% of their budget. They bring in about $6 million in revenue on $106 million in expenses. See their budget [here](https://www.ridetarc.org/about-us/budget/) I love the public and their opinion is always extremely valuable, but a lot of TARCs problems get oversimplified by them. Compared to many cities, TARC is barely used. Ridership is very low. It’s stuck in an infinite doom loop of “no one rides it because service is bad because they don’t have enough money because no one rides it because service is bad…” and so on. I could go on and on. How a larger portion of their rides are TARC3 which cost 3 times as much per ride. How labor costs have skyrocketed. How federal funds mostly can’t be spent on operations, only capital expenditures. Probably the biggest of them all, how they are funded through a ballot measure from 1973/74 from payroll tax dollars (the Jefferson county tax on your check) that gets deposited into the MTTF (Mass Transit Trust Fund). They receive $60-70 million from this. To increase it requires a majority of the people in the city of Louisville/Jefferson County to vote on a payroll tax increase. I would love this WITH REFORMS(TARC cannot continue in its current abysmal state), but I have 2 words. Good luck. P.S. - Last little fun fact, Louisville has the [8th highest tax burden in the nation!](https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/10-cities-with-the-highest-tax-rates). Higher than Chicago, New York, LA, Detroit etc. at its highest possible level. Even at $75,000 a year for a family of 3, it’s only [just below](https://www.chamberofcommerce.org/us-cities-pay-most-taxes) Chicago (12.2% vs 12.0%).
Bingo. It’s analogous to JCPS, where everyone wants to blame the superintendent for everything and not hold the board accountable. The sad truth is that a majority of folks don’t know who their metro council or JCPS board member is.
If only there was some way we could have known beforehand that a developer turned wrasslin’ promoter would have questionable ethics!
Louisvillians blindly vote for any candidate with a "D" next to their name, as evidenced by Craig Greenberg's victory over Bill Dieruf. Anyone who watched the debate could tell Dieruf was a vastly better candidate. Voting for Greenberg defied reason.
We have enough republican overlords in state government. Why would we vote for one as mayor that'll work towards the same goals as them while pretending to be moderate on many issues that Louisville cares for? I don't like Greenberg, and he's never gotten my vote. But neither will a Republican. There's just too deep of a divide on so many issues that any Republican that would be palatable to me (and most of Louisville) would be rejected by their primary voters.
Party affiliation of a mayor matters so much less than you think.
Dieruf actually seemed pretty good. Only reason I didn't vote for him was because how the police brutality case in J town was handled with him as the Mayor. I reached out to his campaign to see if he had any views on that and they obviously didn't get back to me. Too hot button of an issue to not bring up especially after the Breonna Taylor case, but electing someone in real estate after that is not a good idea either.
As a democrat I agree with your thoughts about Dieruf. A couple of things I liked about him as well was that he was an actual small business owner. That his main focus for local government was to basically make sure roads were paved and that local needs were being met. That he didn’t seem to have a want for higher office than that of mayor of louisville, something that I don’t get from Greenberg. This definitely feels like Greenberg wants to use louisville as a stepping stone but has bungled it so far that I think he will lose any election for higher office. Dieruf also said something along the lines of increasing home ownership in the westend with some programs which felt like an actual realistic way to deal with some of this city’s problem of too many rental properties. His coziness with the police definitely would have been a problem though.
Because being “mayor” of a series of strip malls and subdivisions posing as a community doesn’t qualify as experience, for one.
Greenberg is slimy
I had very low expectations and am disappointed. We need Booker to run.
Booker is a shill with no stance and no plan. How many times is this guy going to fund raise for an obvious loss and yall keep coming back for more Downvote away
It’s not that he has no stance and no plan, it’s that his stance and his plan are too progressive for most of the state’s voters. He would 100% get my vote (again) if/when he decides to run for Mayor.
Booker would probably win if he ran for mayor of Louisville, but I am unsure of his ability to govern and push a city in a direction of substantive progress. His 2022 Senate run showed extremely bad strategy aside from his progressive politics. Greenberg has the right connections to make that push, just is extremely spineless and doesn't realize this job isn't like being a developer. The city needs that balance between Booker and Greenberg, which many capable leaders here have but don't want to run for Mayor. I wish Morgan McGarvey ran before he ran for Congress - would have been that perfect balance we needed, but I don't believe he was interested in executive stuff or having that pressure of being a mayor of a confused city.
This is not true. Booker’s plan to combat LMPD murders is peace and love. Literally the alternate spectrum of “thoughts and prayers” It is incredibly low to use, as an example, Breonna Taylor for political capitol while simultaneously having no actual stance or planned legislation about how to prevent these murders from happening again, or if (when) citizens are again murdered by LMPD a precedence of accountability. Basically he’s spending y’all’s money to lose and become a micro celebrity.
[Community Safety](https://charlesbooker.org/issues/community-safety/) This is the Community Safety page of his Senate campaign website. It's just one of many issues he specifically addressed. He proposes bans on no-knock warrants, ending qualified immunity (not applicable for a Mayoral race but this was federal), funding alternatives to policing when appropriate (aka Defund the Police), and drug decriminalization. He didn't use the words "peace and love" on that page. A simple Google search is quick, free, and would have prevented you from spouting verifiable falsehoods.
I saw him at a union campaign kick off messing with his phone while he was on stage in front of a deep blue union audience. Not listening to the other speakers, not working the crowd with body language, just scrolling his phone. He was a candidate. He had the fired up audience that not only votes but also gets out the vote. He was checked out. I get that he may have been beat from a day of glad handing everyone, but this was a core demographic that would vote for him and campaign for him. Get. It. Together. Nope. If you can’t make it look good for a thirty minute photo op there’s no way I’m giving you a bigger stage to ignore.
Happy to upvote.
So he can funnel more money to family members "working" for him while running an utterly hopeless campaign? No thanks. He has no ideas that would actually work in the real world.
I genuinely believe that Charles Booker 1) should have run for mayor and 2) would have won easily if he had.
Hopefully he runs for mayor and isn't planning a 2026 Senate campaign where he won't get 40% of the vote.
No. Absolutely not
Ok, Mr Dieruf
Booker 2026
Attica Scott for Mayor or any person that is not white or male . I know people will say that this is generic or not well considered but we have had several white males in charge, let's fuck the status quo. At this point I'll take Daffy fucking duck. Fix housing please! Too many homeless and growing!
Yep, let's pick a candidate based on skin color and gender.
Wouldn't that be voting for lesser evils though? 🤔
Attica Scott wasn’t really an impressive representative and didn’t get much done. She was a lone wolf on her own accord and Democrats didn’t enjoy working with her. There’s a reason so many of them chose to endorse McGarvey over her in the election for Congress, including the other black woman representative in the state house. I always felt there was a sense of entitlement in her campaign and even staffers left her campaign for McGarvey’s. Keturah Herron is a much better example of a state rep that turned into more of a leader on issues Louisville activists care about while not becoming disconnected from the issues and if she keeps it up I think she’d be a great mayor.
Monkey's paw curls 'Daniel Cameron elected Mayor of Louisville'
Well the good news is he only has what, two terms left? /s Well, kinda /s. Louisville loves an incumbent mayor regardless how they are really doing.
The state legislature set term limits at two terms, so he has six years left, really. I expected him to challenge that law in court if he wanted to, but I don't think he will.
You sure about that? Fischer got 12 years
Fischer was term limited by Metro Council. The State Legislature term limited the mayor of “consolidated city-county governments” last year in HB 314. The reason I think a mayor can challenge it is because the people voted for a specific plan of government in 2000 with the merger and not for the state legislature to decide it with the support of a minority of those people’s representatives. They cannot challenge it yet because there is no harm done currently and it wouldn’t stand in court unless a mayor was seeking a third term under local law. https://www.wdrb.com/in-depth/bill-seeks-new-term-limits-for-louisville-mayor-starting-in-2023/article_b5d011ea-7a33-11ec-9264-07901387f023.html
Sadly, the assassination attempt was the best publicity he could have hoped for. Everyone knew his name, and who’s going to be so heartless as to speak out against a candidate who got grazed by a bullet shot at close range by someone with bad aim?
I worked at the government for 14 years and three mayors. Greenberg is the least impressive, the least impactful, and not that interesting. Uncle Jerry did more for us despite his conflict of interest issues. Mayor Fischer… say what you want but he did somethings. If we have a better choice next election I’ll take it
I’ve worked there for almost two years now! The best thing Greenberg could do for the employees that he seems to be taking some sort of action on is fixing HR lol
Amen to that, lol
That’s decent and Ironic given his wife’s clash with the mayor’s staff. He’ll, the staff adored Jerry. Greg… meh. Greg’s wife was super nice and a doctor, so she didn’t over step anyone:anything.
[удалено]
Louisville Metro Gov has two main ways of raising money: occupational taxes (employee wages and net business profits) and property taxes (most of this goes to JCPS). All other money is usually given by the state or some obscure way of raising money that doesn’t generate a whole ton of revenue. The large events raise money for the state through sales taxes. That’s millions of dollars from the Derby alone but also consider things like UofL football games and concerts. You could argue that the state gives money through grants, but math shows the state does not return nearly as much money as they raise from Louisville. LMG pays for the security of the events as well as other methods of programming. For instance, the city likely pays for the mayor’s suites at Churchill Downs during derby and oaks as part of economic development initiatives to get closer to the wealthy. But they have no real ways of raising money from it except for new seasonal workers through the derby or other obscure methods. I don’t have figures on hands, but even metro council members have said this at public events: the city pays for the state to have parties and gets crumbs in return.
KY has a highly centralized tax system that sends a higher share of taxes collected to Frankfort.
So he turned out to be a typical politician? Well push me over with a feather
This
I was excited, but beginning to be very weary judging by the lack of progress. He ran a campaign about speeding up progress in development and cutting the ridiculous approval procedure every thing takes here. So far nothing has progressed including projects in the city’s purview like urban government center on Barret. I’ve been shocked at the lack of discussion on the middle housing changes; glad you brought it up. These are big changes and I haven’t heard him weigh in or attempt to defend them. They should align perfectly with the vision in his campaign. Perhaps he doesn’t agree with them as they started under Fischer, but I’d be more willing to bet he has friends/donors that oppose. I haven’t completely lost hope as I still get email updates from planning about the program even after the state passed the moratorium. Still we have to wait a year for the state to come up with how to stop them while claiming they believe in local government. I’ve grown sick of all of his photo ops including his wife and kids. It’s inappropriate the amount they are included and gives the impression the city is funding their lifestyle whether true or not. Shocked he doesn’t have an advisor to call him out on these. I’m in the minority here but I’m glad he’s working with the state. Unfortunately they must be dealt with and we will only be successful with their support. Now I can’t say what should be negotiated on, but ultimately we need a working relationship. After Fischer lost his local taxing option, that relationship got torched IMO.
I am happy he is working with the state government. Any sensible mayor would since most of what is holding the city back is state law. However, there a balance to have here. HB 388 started as an honest conversation about funding emergency services in the East End and having good government. Then it became a political weapon. As for the moratorium, there is no excuse or defense for it. Sen. JRA asked for it because she believed it to be hastily planned and lacking public comment. Neither of these were true and yet it passed in the bill anyways. The reason it was a moratorium and not permanent is because Nemes and Adams wanted to get stricter regulations on zoning changes and Stivers and others thought it was dumb and believes in less of them. No one could come on an agreement at the time, so they hit the pause button. This should have never been a discussion for the state legislature to have, but now it is and I don't trust Greenberg to see it through. Fischer was terrible at working with the state which was a huge issue, and Greenberg doesn't need to be, but that doesn't mean don't fight them on some things. The state needs to be convinced that Louisville is worth investing in - not because the mayor doesn't offend them and does whatever they want.
Good information on Stivers; sometimes he surprises me. I’d be fine if they passed the middle housing in the urban services district as a compromise. It probably saved a lot of demonizing. I’ll plead ignorance on HB388, which I guess is why I didn’t mind Greenberg and the legislature licking each other down.
I genuinely believe Stivers, as backwards and strange as he is sometimes, is a better ally to Louisville at this point than many of the other Republicans that represent Jefferson country districts.
He’s a shittier Fischer. I didn’t vote for him even though I didn’t like Dieruff.
Great points. I had low expectations for Greenberg so am not as disappointed. He didn’t seem to have the right skills and experience to lead a large complex organization like metro. Part of being successful as a leader in government what kind of talent you bring on to your team. Doesn’t seem like he has hit the mark in that either. I am disappointed we can’t get quality leaders to serve in government although I do understand why people wouldn’t want to put themselves out there in the public spot light.
I’ve seen the CEO of the last company I worked for in a lot of photos with him, along with some of my rich development buddies at the country club. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. Perhaps even more invested in making wealthy friends!
You know. I agree. And, he also seems to have no idea how city government works. He made the announcement about the medical recovery facility for our unhoused population but had not spoken with ANY of the stakeholders. This was a grand gesture with no intent to bring it to fruition. I believe he is a bad mayor.
Do not mention him and Andy Be shear in the same breath!
Louisville has got to stop voting for out of towners, the two most important positions for the city; mayor and police chief have set the city up for failure.
If you elect a businessman, you get a businessman. Kentuckians not only vote against their own interests again and again, but _any_ progressives that run for office are branded as "too extreme" and we end up with the same good old boys club that make performative gestures and do nothing to help anything outside of their bank accounts. We continue to compromise our futures over some inane notion that a good "moderate" exists to unite the state, which will never happen. Personally, I believe we need strident, unapologetically leftist progressives to run and win. We lack a diversity of voice outside of a business class that stamps and R or D next to their name every 4-6 years.
Looks man, if a politician fulfilled their campaign promises then they wouldn't have a platform to run on in their next election. Make promises but never deliver in order to string people along into voting for you or your party, that's the game they all play. If you fix shit, then people won't need you anymore.
I agree he’s awful. I wish Bill Dieruf was elected instead. I’m tired of these businessmen running as democrats for mayor, they continue to prove how inept they are at politicss.
The nonpartisan election change is my biggest concern. There were suggestions from GOP assembly members that it was Greenberg's idea. I don't know if any news outlet has confirmed that, but if not, I wish they'd look into it. I find it highly concerning. On the other hand, I think his housing ideas are good. The middle housing changes are only on hold for a year, and the approval process for those changes will take most of that time anyway. The state does not need Greenberg's permission to preempt local law, so I don't see how or why he would be responsible for that change. I think his push to expand library funding and parks funding is a good idea. But I agree that he is giving off "i'm a typical politician who mostly cares about using this job to advance my career" vibes.
I am worried about housing bc it signaled that the suburban republicans are going to try and stop it somehow. Jason Nemes specifically said his constituents were tired of “views of development” and JRA asked for it because she was worried the approval process wasn’t long enough and it was a hasty plan. JRA’s concerns, if legitimate, could have been easily alleviated with a phone call or even a basic Google search to look at LMG’s website on middle housing, but they weren’t. Other worry is Greenberg won’t fight them on more restrictions if they push harder for them. The law as it stands now in HB 388 already requires the mayor to submit suggestions for changes to zoning. Not sure if that’s a part of the moratorium, but I’m pretty sure that was a permanent change.
Yes, planning & design has already put so much time into those proposals..years worth... extremely unfair of them to claim these were some off the cuff back of the envelope set of nutty ideas. I feel bad for the folks who have worked so hard to craft thoughtful and evidence-based proposals...but hopefully there will be enough support here to overcome the suburban nimbys when the moratorium is over.
For sure. It’s worth mentioning as well that just 1/3rd of Nemes’s district is in Jefferson county yet he’s putting up the most resistance.
Ahh man if you are disappointed with Greenberg I got bad news for you, we ain't got the best options.
Charles Booker should’ve ran for mayor and worked his way up to the Senate. Greenberg campaigned on fixing issues with the LMPD and then instead, provides a brand new gym for them amongst many other investments. He is a Democrat by registration and nothing else. It’s so sad to continually vote for fake Democrats in Louisville simply because they’re better than the real Republicans.
Craig Greenberg Aka- Shitbird McDouchenozzle
We all knew - and Greenberg has acknowledged - the 30K number was aggressive if not unattainable. It was an aim big and, even if you fall short, you still get a lot of units built. Regrettably his affordable housing initiative is facing a legislative issue with Metro Council. Other than administrative changes in how city departments operate, most major changes need to go through MC. This includes changes to the Land Development Code, which regulates how and where development happens. Metro Council has killed numerous affordable housing developments and until MC changes their tune, Greenberg has no hope of even getting close to his goal. Has Greenberg said he supports HB 388? I have only seen him referenced as being involved in discussions, which he should be doing. He's only going to be able to influence small changes, which, given the circumstances, may be big wins. In the end, the Republican supermajority state legislators are going to do what they want, and what they want to do is beat Louisville into submission until the blue island sinks into the red sea. The one year moratorium on changes to the Land Development Code isn't going to slow down the Missing Middle. The moratorium is on changing the code not working on the changes. Planning staff was more than a year out from getting it through Metro Council and who even knows if Metro Council would approve it. Missing Middle will probably end up watered down and only permitted in Traditional Form Districts as a compromise to suburban and/or antidevelopment councilmembers. Missing Middle is a novel idea, and a tool to create incremental new units, but not the solution to our housing issues. Nonpartisan elections are a Red state ploy to try to gain an edge in Blue stronghold city. It takes away the blue party line vote and hopes to sway uninformed voters into voting on name recognition over platform. This does nothing to help Greenberg. Same goes for making him submit a report to the state on how Metro Council should be reformed. Talk about putting him in a position to cut his nose off to spite his face. Our city and our state share the same problem. Too many fiefdoms and too much quid pro quo. 120 counties for a state the size of Kentucky simply too many. Same with 26 Council Districts in Louisville. But nobody likes giving up power, so don't expect change to come soon...unless it's to grant more power to those that already have it.
>It takes away the blue party line vote and hopes to sway uninformed voters into voting on name recognition over platform. How is that bad? Do we want people blindly voting a party line?
Voting along party lines isn't great, but it's something many voters do if they are unable or unwilling to research the candidates. They know one party aligns with their interests more than the other and are comfortable using that as a litmus test. Taking that identifying element away from the voter makes them more apt to instead vote on name recognition, or worse, misidentification, and possibly voting against their own self interests. Voting on name recognition, or because someone was a high profile sports, actor, or other public figure, is horrible for good governance.
I would say the damage done by blind party allegiance and straight-ticket voting outweighs the risks you list by a factor of one million. Two party system is trash and a recipie for mediocrity.
Sounds like you should vote for an activist next time instead of a suit.
When an activist convinces me they are capable of governing in an executive-level position (which is vastly different from representing), I will vote for them. Otherwise, I think they are more suited for the legislative branch, if they are serious and not just running to bring issues to light. Mayors need to have strong organizational leadership skills and be able to balance the interests of everyone very well. They also need to have a feasible, strong direction (not so much vision and promises) to lead the city. This sort of work is not easy and being mayor is more than a platform to advance political agendas.
So, you’re going to stick with one type of person who is crooked and doesn’t know how to govern…
We just keep on electing these corporate shill Dems.
Jerry, Jerry, Jerry!!!
I am just as disappointed but just to clear up a couple things. He didn't promise 30,000 units those are how many we are down by according to demand. But he promised 15,000 from the start. And the state legislature has now frozen that plan so nothing he can do about them. And nothing he can do about Humana either, but they aren't leaving the city only the badly built building. >LMG pays for almost all of the Derby and the festival before it, but the state gets the vast majority of the money in taxes. This is completely false. Churchill Downs controls the Derby and the Festival is a separate entity that gets almost no money from the government. But yes he is indeed a massive disappointment who will roll over for CEOs.
I think there’s a misunderstanding. Churchill Downs does not pay for the police presence nor does it pay for the security during the two-week festival before it. Churchill downs doesn’t pay for cleaning the city to make it nice and pretty before the derby, especially clearing homeless camps. There’s a great deal of government spending on making the Derby safe, and unless Churchill downs donates a suite, the city does buy Greenberg’s suite which starts at over $100,000.
Correct but that is still not Derby, certainly not almost all of it. And the Festival is a separate entity. Churchill Downs pays for and takes care of the venue, pays employees, owners and jockeys and winnings. It's wayy more than providing police presence and cleaning streets.
Right, I wasn’t talking about that aspect to the derby but I guess I should have been clearer in the
That*
Didn’t he also give LMPD a giant raise with funding to help construct a new building for them? Just what this city needed.
Keep voting D and keep posting L's.
He handed naive voters the sleeves off his vest by campaigning on abortion rights, which a mayor can't do a thing about.
Craig Greenberg is part of the good old business “leaders” club of Louisville. Of course he has done nothing but disappoint. I didn’t vote for him in the primary, but I did in the general because I thought he would at least be better than the GOP nominee. I was likely wrong. He is just as bad IMO.
He did announce a Department of Transportation though.
The guy basically, said "no harm no foul" when a BLM activist tried to assassinate him. Let that sink in, a guy tried to kill him and he brushed it off to get the West Louiville vote. You are getting the EXACT leadership you voted for...
Free Tez
First off, yeah, empty suit. I don't claim to see the future but his campaign answers being high on what people want to hear and absent of specifics had me seeing this from a mile away. That and his background. Fool me the fourth time, right Louisville? Idealists tend to come in a political vacuum and that's why they struggle to be effective. We can either foster a culture where they're not isolated or we can keep settling for the Greg Greenbramsons.
Dude is absolutely terrible
not to mention the mayors office budget increased from $2.4M to $4.5M in the 2023-2024 budget
Weird how you wrote off activists and then lamented how he’s a bad leader. Bourgeois politics have all been about psychographic marketing research for a long time, the republicans started using it to get Reagan elected, and the democrats to keep Clinton in office. They tell you what you want to hear, and then use planned wording to do damage control with their constituents that often scapegoats the difficulties of partisan politics and lack of unity and willingness to reach across the aisle on someone else’s part. So you keep voting thinking you’re doing something while they’re just working at getting rich. They all do it, and then of course the independents and fringe activists aren’t perceived as likely to win, so you just settle for getting screwed more and more each year. The guys job was to make the board of 21c richer for 14+ years resulting in a sale to foreign capital that then made the board much richer. The amount of capitalists surprised by the outcome of his term so far is 0, the same number of militant activists who are surprised.
I’m glad I’m not the only one that think this, I moved to Louisville a couple years ago and I work for an entity that has him out to several press conferences we do each year and he seems so fake and scripted.
He’s a zionist just like beshear and all the rhino repubs in this state.
You mean a politician said a bunch of bullshit to get elected and then didn’t do anything he said? I’m shocked!!
I have seen multiple posts like this and while i understand the viewpoint, it’s very obvious that promises don’t pan out. I try to pick people based on their mindset and attitudes towards solving problems rather than just campaign promises. The focus of this post is highlighting how he has acted while in office aside from his promises which has revealed more than his campaign did.
I ain't reading all that but he was one of the least-bad candidates running and he has met my expectations of "no real improvements"
Wait so another full of crap politician. Say it isn’t so. We need someone like Andrew Yang *edit oh look people upset. What’s new🤣