Democrat Jordan Hines has officially filed as a candidate for the Democratic nomination for the Third Senate District. At least I think that is what he did. Because if you read his announcement email, I think he might be confused about which primary election he is running in. Or he is confused about how our election system works. Check it out:
Yeah, if you are reading Blue Delaware, you know a thing or two about elections and politics, and you caught it too. For those who didn’t, this is what he said:
“….but since I have competition, there will be a primary election first, on September 6th. Praying we garner the votes needed in September, I will then move on to the November general election where I will run against the incumbent/current State Senator, Robert Marshall.”
That’s not how this works, Jordan. It is not how any of this works. First off, we don’t know yet if Marshall is running. He has not filed. But he has not retired yet either. So let’s assume he is running. Second, if Marshall is running, he will not be running as Republican (though this post may give him a new idea to hang on to his seat). He will be running as a Democrat. That means, Jordan, that the primary election on September 6th will feature you, Elizabeth Lockman, and Senator Marshall. As someone who holds himself out as a political expert and after having worked on dozens of campaigns, it is simply amazing that you did not know that.
And then third, whomever of you three wins the primary, they will then be the Democratic nominee on the November ballot, presumably ether facing a Republican, or Green or Libertarian candidate, or maybe running unopposed.
I am really trying to think about what Jordan is thinking here. Does he think that Marshall is a Republican? Is that it? That would be the simplest explanation. Or does he think that this is like the NFL Playoffs where the #1 seed is the incumbent and thus gets a bye into the general election, whereas the upstart challengers face off in the Wildcard Primary round? You know, that’s a thought.
But what I really do think it means is that Jordan doesn’t know what he is doing and he doesn’t grasp the gravity of why people have been telling him for the last six months that he is going to split the primary vote and reelect Marshall. Maybe now that he is humiliated by his lack of knowledge and understanding, he will listen anew to those concerns, bow out, and endorse Elizabeth Lockman.
Maybe he thinks we have a California-style top-two primary system. But even then, no guarantee Marshall finishes in the top two.
I believe he has since sent out a corrected email. Get off your high horse and act like a mistake has never been made on this, often times one-sided unproductive forum, when communicating. Jordan’s worked on campaigns and understands how the primary process works. Given that experience we can chalk this up to a late night and not enough sleep— perhaps because he’s actually hitting doors and doing the work.
This isn’t a typo or a poorly wondered sentence. This shows a complete lack of understanding of how elections work.
And of course I made a typo. Darn phones, worded.
And you said, “poorly wondered.”
As opposed to?
This is amazing dumbfuckery, like Republican-level stupid. Holy shit. This guy has no business running.
UD2015 What did you do there? You AND Hines are dumb AF!
I actually majored in political science. However, I do not take small understandable mistakes and blow them out of portion simply to oppose candidates I do not support politically. Everyone knows contributors on this site support his opponent. Using the logical on this post, your progressive champions that proposed legislation and then withdraw them, because of not doing their research are not capable of being elected either. Have you had a conversation with him? I have not, but I will let his work speak for him. I guarantee this is something that was produced from his team and it was something that one line was overlooked. He has been saying in his speeches across the city his is running against Lockman and Marshall in the primary. So, why would he say this unless it was a slip up. Joe, calm down and take a seat. The hypocrisy from you “progressives” is amazing. When former Democratic Party Chariman, Daniello sent a primary letter in 2016, you were all up in arms, screaming primaries are necessary and no one should be swayed from running. What happened to that?
Personally, I see it as a mistake that was then corrected. I get that you support one of his opponents, but jeez.
UD 2015 I will stand thank you, Congratulations for fitting Whataboutism, false equivalency, condescension and sheer stupidity in a short post. This is not a mistake that can be attributed to bad staff work, This is a disturbing and disqualifying lack of basic knowledge. Now go sit your dumb ass down:).
Joe, “false equivalency” I think not. Your argument is based on a premise of being ill-prepared, equipped, or knowledgeable about a process. What about collecting all the data before writing legislation and practicing due diligence. The lack of that is equivalent to your argument. And your progressive champions practice that more and more. What about he process of collecting all the facts before jumping to conclusions? Look across his page and you will see he has been consistently stating his race against Lockman and Marshall. Again, this shows a slip up! That’s my point, plain and simple.
“since the 1979” could be great t-shirt slogans for Bob Marshall
If someone has the corrected email and can post it in full, that would go a long way toward determining the cause of the fuckup – ie, was it a junior staffer who has no idea what they’re doing, or a late-night error by the candidate?
Here’s the web link for the email correction.
https://mailchi.mp/5635b198a57b/major-correction
The real reason for not supporting Jordan Hines and supporting Tizzy Lockman instead:
“His first run for office follows work on other candidates’ campaigns including Velda Jones-Potter for state treasurer, Ciro Poppiti for lieutenant governor and Hanifa Shabazz for City Council president.”
This Hines fellow has backed a lot of poor horses. Since his online issues statement is just a pile of boilerplate, I look at whom he’s connected with to gauge his real positions. When I see Velda Jones-Potter and Hanifa Shabazz, I see a guy more interested in gaining power for himself than helping others.
Potter and Shabazz are about as odious as Wilmington politicians get. Include me out.
That’s what I get for being polite:) Alby for the win!
Alby for the win? How?
Potter and Shabazz are a stain on Wilmington and I do not see Jordan cozying up to them. None of the candidates Lockman supported had their errors? Jordan’s website stated he left city council and seems he did so around the time Shabazz was diving head first into “crazy” and decided he wanted to help the residents in a more productive way.
I am still out on my support, but I am not using irrelevant baseline indicators. I judge them on positions (which when I examine Lockman’s he has a bit more concrete ideas) and not just broad statements. Look at the difference just on education alone– which Lockman is suppose to be an expert.
Lockman supports:
—Policies that ensure every student, particularly those with the highest needs, have the stability and supports to succeed
—A comprehensive approach to education: academic achievement is key, but schools also have a crucial role to play in developing healthy and engaged citizens
—Funding the arts and arts education, both in schools and communities at large
Jordan supports:
—Reconsider the weight of standardized tests
—Encourage stronger recruitment of minority teachers
—Adequately staff school psychologists and school counselors
—Invest in the arts and other creative school programs
—Expand career pathways
We know we need policies that ensure student are served. We know we need comprehensive support. All that is obvious. I see recommendations coming from Jordan not a rehashing of already understood ideas. I look forward to seeing what all three candidates do leading up to September 6th. But i am sure we can all agree Marshall has to go, as he represents a different time than the one we currently live in.
Yeah he “left” city council. I gotta wonder what sort of prize this grifter has coming to him on the other end of playing spoiler for Bobby Marshall?
“he did so around the time Shabazz was diving head first into “crazy” ”
Hanifa Shabazz has been who she’s been for decades. He could have asked around. And you left out Velda, who also has been who she’s been for a long time now. I get that he’s young, but who you approach to help you into politics says something about you. Ciro’s the only decent reference among the three he’s been involved with.
The rest of what you reference is what I called boilerplate. They both say they want the same things. That’s a wash.
As I said before, I know nothing about him, and don’t tell me I should get to know him. Sorry, I have a life and that’s not my district. I have met Ms. Lockman and find her more than acceptable for the position, so I wouldn’t be shopping for a candidate anyway.
I’m not going to characterize Mr. Hines as anything, because as I said I know nothing about him except what he himself has put forward. But those connections of his start him off with two strikes in my scorebook.
Also, too:
“I see recommendations coming from Jordan not a rehashing of already understood ideas.”
Shows how little you understand Delaware politics. No individual legislator is going to go to Dover and start dictating education policy. If education laws were easy to write and pass, don’t you think we would have fixed the problems already? Dozens of people have their hands in the dough before it ever gets to the oven, and the teacher’s unions will have a lot more to say about what the party backs than any individual legislator will. Lockman’s advantage on the issue is that she already knows the players and vice versa.
In the immortal words of playwright David Mamet, “Old age and treachery will always beat youth and exuberance.”