I'm more apt to agree with Lee's statement from November 9, 2017, as Ruffino's opponent since her election to the town board has repeatedly voted to be fiscally liberal.
and Lee's other statement from November 9, 2017Hey, Mark:
Regarding your analogy; “the Supervisor instructed her two "sons," Ruffino and Abraham, to travel to the proverbial fork-in-the-road, and to each embark on the other's opposite.” I offer a different perspective on Ruffino.
Ruffino was thrown under the bus by his own party and board. As of late, the supervisor was making phone calls and supporting her favorite son (Abraham) alone.
Like me, Ruffino had to believe the board make up took a turn two years ago when the Democratic Party, bankrupt in viable candidates, endorsed a registered Conservative and a blank to run, and they won. It just so happens that that Conservative and blank were not as independent as one had hoped for and as time passed became more entrenched in supporting the supervisor and Abraham.
Ruffino became the outsider and was rebuffed in presenting resolutions, was the major player in fiscal accountability and the only one to see the budget for what it was and vote ‘no’; and presented valid reasons for doing so. He was the only one who voted ‘no’ two years ago and this year as well to override the tax cap. He has walked the talk on fiscal responsibility.
It is unfortunate that he and Leary are involved in this contest to determine the second board seat. INHO, they were the most qualified candidates.
And this post from lee on November 10, 2017As I have repeatedly posted, Mark, I have little respect for either the Lancaster Democrat or Republican Party Committees – a ship of fools detracting from candidate qualifications and strengths.
As a 'blank' if I choose to base my opinion on fact and then opine as to the candidate that I think best serves the community’s best interest, than it matters not to me that I’m considered a fool – I have been true to myself; I owe no allegiance to any party.
The mailer in question was plain disingenuous horse**** regardless if it served a purpose in getting a candidate elected.
As I posted earlier, it is disappointing to me that the second seat will go to only one of the two candidates I thought was best qualified. And what I especially liked is that they both come from the private sector and are not (hopefully) union conflicted.
But I believe Ruffino would be the stronger player if he holds to his new found convictions and does not sell out to Johanna and the Party to be endorsed for Supervisor in two years. He will not be Johanna’s chosen successor if he waffles and does not do the bidding of the Party.
Ruffino and Leary were my voting choices. I would rather that Ruffino would be elected. If he stays committed to his current governing policies he will be running for Supervisor in 2019. What a kick in the ass that would be to Coleman and the party. With Abraham gone will she now favor Walter as her new heir apparent, or try to smooze Ruffino to turn for the good of the Democratic Party?