Swirling Rumors Of Democrat Division

[mark blazejewski]

This is an unverified, but credibly sourced, rumor:




On the "Parks labor hiring, clarification please" thread, some commentators, myself included, mused about the proliferation of rumors in this campaign.

Some rumors seem to have significant credibility, while others are far more questionable.


Today, I understand from what I consider to be a credible source, that the most recent Democrat Committee meeting was a rather ugly and contentious affair. As I understand narrative, significant negativity, or perhaps even open hostility, apparently stemming from the refusal of the Democrat Committee leadership to permit Town Clerk Terranova to address the Committee, punctuated the meeting.


In that connection, I further understand that a Democrat Committee member who rose in support of Ms. Terranova, was confronted in a most aggressive way, and his voice, along with Ms. Terranova's, was suppressed.


(This rumor or narrative seems even more credible if one considers it in light of some additional supporting "rumors" concerning the Lancaster Democrat leadership's seeming attitude towards the Democrat candidate for Town Clerk.)

But again, it is only a rumor at this point, so I strongly urge some informed comment(s) to confirm or deny this narrative, which may be based in large measure on the primary source's perception.

[gorja]

This is an unverified, but credibly sourced, rumor:




On the "Parks labor hiring, clarification please" thread, some commentators, myself included, mused about the proliferation of rumors in this campaign.

Some rumors seem to have significant credibility, while others are far more questionable.


Today, I understand from what I consider to be a credible source, that the most recent Democrat Committee meeting was a rather ugly and contentious affair. As I understand narrative, significant negativity, or perhaps even open hostility, apparently stemming from the refusal of the Democrat Committee leadership to permit Town Clerk Terranova to address the Committee, punctuated the meeting.


In that connection, I further understand that a Democrat Committee member who rose in support of Ms. Terranova, was confronted in a most aggressive way, and his voice, along with Ms. Terranova's, was suppressed.


(This rumor or narrative seems even more credible if one considers it in light of some additional supporting "rumors" concerning the Lancaster Democrat leadership's seeming attitude towards the Democrat candidate for Town Clerk.)

But again, it is only a rumor at this point, so I strongly urge some informed comment(s) to confirm or deny this narrative, which may be based in large measure on the primary source's perception.

It does sound credible from the local Dem's hierarchy's past non-endorsement of the most qualified candidate for town clerk. Apparently, the hierarchy can't separate their hard-on for the current supervisor from her close acquaintances. just my opinion

[mark blazejewski]

In that connection, I further understand that a Democrat Committee member who rose in support of Ms. Terranova, was confronted in a most aggressive way,

2. I have my connections out on Ron Giza.

Perhaps your "connections" can confirm or deny this rumor Shortstuff?

[gorja]

It does sound credible from the local Dem's hierarchy's past non-endorsement of the most qualified candidate for town clerk. Apparently, the hierarchy can't separate their hard-on for the current supervisor from her close acquaintances. just my opinion

After re-reading what I posted, I believe that I should replace the word 'credible' with 'plausible'

[shortstuff]

Perhaps your "connections" can confirm or deny this rumor Shortstuff?

Mark,

I muse over rumors, sometimes they are started for the purpose of deflection. To answer your question, that rumor is false. Ron Giza is not vying for Parks Boss. It was told to me that someone from the Republican Party (I won't name who that person is) started the two rumors to create a buzz. It worked, unfortunately these rumors are just that.

Regarding the meeting you posted (in question) it was told that it was not as spirited as stated within the scope of this rumor. I was told by a Democratic source, Terranova was going to be endorsed by the Democrats but what she did was play "both sides of the fence" which ultimately bite her in the arse. What Terranova is doing at this time, is trying to get Democratic support for November election.

What is going on at this time and will continue to occur until November, is fulfilling those promises made four years ago - which is the patronage hiring. Remember the promise to run for one term came at a cost.

[gorja]

Mark,

I muse over rumors, sometimes they are started for the purpose of deflection. To answer your question, that rumor is false. Ron Giza is not vying for Parks Boss. It was told to me that someone from the Republican Party (I won't name who that person is) started the two rumors to create a buzz. It worked, unfortunately these rumors are just that.

Regarding the meeting you posted (in question) it was told that it was not as spirited as stated within the scope of this rumor. I was told by a Democratic source, Terranova was going to be endorsed by the Democrats but what she did was play "both sides of the fence" which ultimately bite her in the arse. What Terranova is doing at this time, is trying to get Democratic support for November election.

What is going on at this time and will continue to occur until November, is fulfilling those promises made four years ago - which is the patronage hiring. Remember the promise to run for one term came at a cost.

Thank you shortie for explaining the occurrence in a different light

[mark blazejewski]

Thanx for responding Shortstuff. It is truly appreciated.

I muse over rumors, sometimes they are started for the purpose of deflection. To answer your question, that rumor is false. Ron Giza is not vying for Parks Boss.

As I said with a similar narrative about Melissia, in my opinion and experience, one simply does not publicly campaign for an appointed position which is subject to Council approval.

Regarding the meeting you posted (in question) it was told that it was not as spirited as stated within the scope of this rumor.

"...within the scope of this rumor."

Hmm, I must have missed something.

Do you mean to say that there is an additional present rumor or narrative which exceeds the characterizations of "significant negativity, "open hostility," "confrontation" and "aggressive?"

Yikes!

[shortstuff]

Thank you shortie for explaining the occurrence in a different light

You are welcome. What is that saying gorja, "there are three (3) sides to a story, yours, mine and God's."

[shortstuff]

Thanx for responding Shortstuff. It is truly appreciated.





As I said with a similar narrative about Melissia, in my opinion and experience, one simply does not publicly campaign for an appointed position which is subject to Council approval.





"...within the scope of this rumor."

Hmm, I must have missed something.

Do you mean to say that there is an additional present rumor or narrative which exceeds the characterizations of "significant negativity, "open hostility," "confrontation" and "aggressive?"

Yikes!

You are welcome.

LOL Mark, I believe that what a person perceives as "significant negativity," "open hostility," and "aggressive" is ones own perception. I wouldn't believe everything you hear

I wanted to comment on your one liner highlighted in red regarding what Supervisor Coleman stated in September 2018. I was present at that meeting, I heard Ron's opinion. IMO and I know it means less and less these days, it was the reversal.

[mark blazejewski]

I wanted to comment on your one liner highlighted in red regarding what Supervisor Coleman stated in September 2018. I was present at that meeting, I heard Ron's opinion. IMO and I know it means less and less these days, it was the reversal.

In your own words Shortstuff: "I believe that what a person perceives... is ones own perception."

[mark blazejewski]

What Terranova is doing at this time, is trying to get Democratic support for November election.

I may be losing it Shortstuff, but I thought that Terranova IS the Democrat candidate for Town Clerk.

Are you saying, Terranova's presence on the Democrat line notwithstanding, that the Democrat Party is not fully supporting her, and is therefore putting an unspoken thumb on the scale for Desiderio?

Ergo, are you saying that there exists a McCracken-Giza-Mohr axis?

Regarding McCraken and Giza, what about "The people have spoken?"

WOW!

[gorja]

I may be losing it Shortstuff, but I thought that Terranova IS the Democrat candidate for Town Clerk.

Are you saying, Terranova's presence on the Democrat line notwithstanding, that the Democrat Party is not fully supporting her, and is therefore putting an unspoken thumb on the scale for Desiderio?

Ergo, are you saying that there exists a McCracken-Giza-Mohr axis?

WOW!

It seems that the Conservatives aren't supporting all the candidates on the Conservative line.

Originally posted by gorja:
The Lancaster/Cheektowaga Conservative party Facebook page
stated, "The Conservative Party will continue to support Dawn" not the will of the voters

The post has since been removed from their Facebook page.



So, why is it okay for one and not the other. You don't see any supporting posts for Terranova from the Lancaster Republicans either.

I'm not saying that it is right or wrong.

Why is it okay when the other parties do it but not when the Dems do?

[mark blazejewski]

So, why is it okay for one and not the other. You don't see any supporting posts for Terranova from the Lancaster Republicans either.

I am responding to Shortstuff's observations Gorja, and only asked a simple question regarding the will of the voters.

Regarding the Republicans, I understand that the party and its leadership has fully accepted the will of the primary voters.

I also understand that, in light of Ms. Desiderio's decision not to respond to the party's previous public call for candidate application(s), and her apparent desire to avoid an interview earlier this year, the party in general, and highest levels of the current Republican Town leadership in particular, with an eye to the future, welcome an opportunity to speak with, and get to know, Ms. Desiderio.

That Republican temperament stands in direct contrast to the seeming Democrat posture. That Democrat leadership standpoint, as I understand it, has been one of repudiation of its own previously endorsed and vetted incumbent candidate for Town Clerk, and continues thematically as a subsequent defiance of the will of its own voters.



Just sayin'.

[gorja]

I am responding to Shortstuff's observations Gorja, and only asked a simple question regarding the will of the voters.

Regarding the Republicans, I understand that the party and its leadership has fully accepted the will of the primary voters.

I also understand that, in light of Ms. Desiderio's decision not to respond to the party's previous public call for candidate application(s), and her apparent desire to avoid an interview earlier this year, the party in general, and highest levels of the current Republican Town leadership in particular, with an eye to the future, welcome an opportunity to speak with, and get to know, Ms. Desiderio.

That Republican temperament stands in direct contrast to the seeming Democrat posture. That Democrat leadership standpoint, as I understand it, has been one of repudiation of its own previously endorsed and vetted incumbent candidate for Town Clerk, and continues thematically as a subsequent defiance of the will of its own voters.



Just sayin'.

As I said, I hadn't seen anything from the Republicans. Thank you for enlightening me. But the Conservatives had stated that they were NOT going to support the primary winners who were not endorsed by them.

[mark blazejewski]

It seems that the Conservatives aren't supporting all the candidates on the Conservative line.


The post has since been removed from their Facebook page.

The history of minor party mischief and manipulation by the Democrats is well known going back to 2003.

If one is truly concerned about good governance, you need to harmonize the machinations of 2019 with these Ruffino comments of 2017:

From day one I have promised that I am for the people and have refused to be controlled by party bosses.

The victory won by Ruffino with a, IMHO, suspicious write-in campaign, in a minor party race, can hardly be compared to the victory that Ms. Terranova enjoyed in a major party primary.

Ruffino's Conservative primary victory, when weighed against a longstanding pattern of what might be termed "concerning Democrat behavior," inclusive of Karen DelCarlo in the Independence Primary in 2017, just may be a justification for the Conservative Party's ambivalent attitude.