I have alluded to the candidacy of Carmen Robinson twice before, but now I've been moved to devote an entire post to her.
So far in the blogosphere, I can count the blog posts about Carmen Robinson on two hands.
They fall into 2 categories:
1) "Who is she?" (Back in December) From Matt H, Busman's Holiday, Burgher John, and Thoughts on Government.
2) "Hmm... There's another candidate. She seems cool." From Burgh Chair and Rauterkus & Running Mates
It appears Carmen is pretty busy. She may not be buttering up the blogosphere but she's attended the Pittsburgh Hip Hop Awards ("to a roaring crowd"), has thrown a fundraiser, and has a decent website with *gasp* information about herself and her candidacy. Yes, she has had a website with content up since at least December 27. As a note, Lukey and our-savior-thank-god-someone's-running-against-Lukey Dowd still do not have any content on their websites. On top of that, she has a judicial clerkship and is running her own law practice. But you should be reading about her yourself.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
We blogged about Carmen Robinson over at the now defunct Burgh Report back in Decmeber.
I do like what we are hearing out of Carmen Robinson, especially her quotes in last Sunday's post-gazette, but her agreeing to the mayor's proposal for only 3 debates is puzzling. The only thing I can think of is that she is not a great debater, but a relatively unknown candidate, a sane one at least, should have agreed to something closer to Dowd's proposal for 9 debates, since doing so would give them more exposure and more opportunities to tell their story to the voters.
She informs us over Twitter that she is working on a position paper.
You missed a few mentions over at 2 Political Junkies. (click here)
Heck, I even got some email from the P-G after I called them out for not mentioning her.
As to the debates. Eh. Either the debates will be on TV and they will reach a majority of the voters or they won't be. And if they're on TV, then the majority of voters (including myself) will get bored after 3 debates. If they're not, the debates will reach a very thin segment of the voters, and she's probably right that she'll get more traction at events like the Hip Hop Awards - appealing to all those voters who already registered Democrat so they could vote for Obama versus Hillary.
Is it possible Carmen is reaching a key demographic right under the noses of the blogosphere and the Post-Gazette?
And Bram, Lukey and Dowd tweet never. Maybe if she had more than 44 followers, she'd feel more inclined to tweet. Additionally I follow her, and I'd rather her tweet infrequently than annoyingly.
As to the debates. Eh. Either the debates will be on TV and they will reach a majority of the voters or they won't be.
what? Voters attend the debates and not all debates are televised. I liked the Dowd proposal. While 9 is probably too many debates his proposal aimed to bring the debates to the people. They wouldn't just be in downtown or in the east end, like they were in 2007. In '07 DeSantis and Ravenstahl had 4 debates. The first one was pretty bad but they got better as they went along. I expect the same this time around.
And Bram, Lukey and Dowd tweet never. Maybe if she had more than 44 followers, she'd feel more inclined to tweet. Additionally I follow her, and I'd rather her tweet infrequently than annoyingly.
Did I criticize her for not tweeting enough? I don't think anyone criticized her for not tweeting enough. I feel like we're ginning up that Hillary Clinton, "Everything is sexist" machine all over again.
Wow, Bram. Way to jump to conclusions there. I have no idea why Carmen has been so overlooked. I assume it's more because she's an unknown and not in the right circles. I definitely was not assuming it's a sexist or racist issue. She's more of a Nader than a Hillary.
Out of curiousity, what have I said that makes you think I'm leading up to a sexism argument? Because I used the "she" pronoun? Because I mentioned Hillary in passing? You can be worthy of criticism without being sexist.
By the way, what did you intend by the above comment? ("She informs us over Twitter that she is working on a position paper.") I just assumed from the terse nature of the comment that it wasn't positive. But that is one of the many pitfalls of online communication.
By the way, what did you intend by the above comment? ("She informs us over Twitter that she is working on a position paper.")
I remember I was tinkering on an additional sentence or two and gave up on them. They had something to with my as-yet unfavorable impression of Robinson's written communications output, and my hope that this paper would turn out better. Then I decided that was unnecessary, so I shortened it to a quick and informative, "She informs us over Twitter that she is working on a position paper."
Out of curiousity, what have I said that makes you think I'm leading up to a sexism argument?
I don't know. Sexism on my part, probably. You and Lady Elaine picking up her cause at the same time and claiming her website is very informative (it's not terribly) whereas Dowd remains some big lazy mystery just because his website isn't live yet got me to thinking.
Post a Comment