Saturday, November 07, 2009

The local papers' take on Election 2009

I had been meaning to link to the articles of the four local papers. Here they are:

GOP wins in landslide fashion, Herald by Josh Morgan

GOP wins big in Cheshire, NHR by Luther Turmelle

Republicans take back Cheshire boards, WRA by Lauresha Xhihani

Republicans take control in Cheshire, MRJ by Jesse Buchanan

My favorite is the Herald. I kinda like the pic. haha...

This wasn't a referendum on President Obama. As with all elections, this was a referendum on the incumbent.

And my take on the election? I continue to ponder the results and think there were a number of factors - police, pool, personnel, turf, teachers' contract, good government, council decorum... to name a few.

Tim White


Anonymous said...

Tim; you're on the ball

Anonymous said...

Maybe most town voters - - Democrats, Republicans, and Independents - - were overwhelmed by the several council meetings that were packed with special interest non-residents and residents loudly lobbying for FAT teacher pay raises and artificial turf playing fields while one thousand high paying jobs in our industrial park were being eliminated? Maybe that display, brought to all of us by the previous local Democrat Council majority, resulted in their wholesale public firing last week?

Anonymous said...

The Dems say that this election downfall was about national issues. It wasn't and they know it, but it gives them an excuse. They have no one to blame but themselves for a lack of progress on issues that should have been resolved and pushing for projects that shouldn't have even been considered. The newspaper articles just before the election about other towns and their teacher contracts put the nail in the coffin.

Anonymous said...

Let's not forget all of the negative, silly cartoons the democrats published in the CH during the election....or the lies they told in their ads...or perhaps their actions during their tenure on the Town Council.

For me, personally, it was how annoying they were in front of CHS while my family was trying to get to the poll and vote. I recall Altieri, Aldinolfi, Esty and the whole lot of them in our faces as we made our way to the entrance. They were just rude, loud and obnoxious. Meanwhile, the Republican reps stayed out of the way and didn't bother us.

Humble's what for breakfast, for the dems, every morning for the next 2-4 years.

Anonymous said...

"Returning to the Town Council will be Republicans Tim Slocum and James Sima, as well as Democrat Michael Ecke."

This statement is typical of the Herald. It makes it look like Ecke was legitimately elected instead of filling a required minority slot that Nichold was forced to give up. Nichols was the rightfully elected person. Why do they have to shade the truth. This is the reason that this blog is so important, we get the real story here not what the special interest groups want us to hear. It's a shame that so many people that read the Herald article now belive thate Ecke was legitimately elected.

I am not faulting Josh as he is a great reported, but I feel his reports are editted inorder to make the Dems look good.

Anonymous said...

To Annon:5:56
I read the same Herald article that you did. It clearly said Ecke will remain on the council to abide by minority representation rules.
What's the big cover-up? Why would anyone at the newspapers cover up anything to make the Dems or Repubs look good? It's kind of laughable when you think about it.
The charter is the charter. Do something to change it if you feel this shouldn't happen in the future. It's happened before and it will happen again. Why kill the messenger?

Contoured Views said...

The Herald, unfortunately, is showing is bias towards the dems.
If they really want to be a paper for the people of this town, they should be doing unbiased reporting. I don't believe the owners of the paper even live in this town, let alone the reporters. Do they look and see what parties are advertising more first and then do their reporting based on that?

On a separate note. Someone has been leaving messages here about reporting a non-profit to the IRS for breaking the law in regards to this election. I am sure they are talking about the letter the CYB and CJF sent out the night before the election when they were endorsing thr Turf candidates.I had posted that in an earlier message. I looked up the rule and sure enough,they are correct.
The IRS has stipulated in press releases during each presidential election the following:

"Organizations described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code that are exempt from
federal income tax are prohibited from directly or indirectly participating or intervening in any
political campaign on behalf of, or in opposition to, any candidate for public office. Charities,
educational institutions and religious organizations, including churches, are among those that
are tax-exempt under this code section."

Now, I don't believe we should shut these groups down, they are good for the youth of the town. I do believe the town mamnager should speak with the head of these organizations and tell them they should speak with legal counsel regading their infrations. Since they are using town owned fields, this can become an issue.
I feel that the heads of these organizations should step down and be replaced.
We cannot have these groups becoming political activists.
Charities and non-profits should remain neutral. Each person can have their own political views, they just shouldn't be using their roles as heads of non-profits to tell the parents, who entrust their kids to them, who they are endorising.
It is just wrong.
I really feel it should be addressed.
To see the letter in its entirety that the IRS sends out, click here:
IRS Release Letter

mcjk said...


Nice piece of research. If the TM was to address this with CYB and CJF then that would mean that the town has acknowledged the breaking of the IRS law and is not reporting it. I wonder if that is breaking a law as well.

Anonymous said...

"talking about the letter the CYB and CJF sent out the night before the election"

We have some people continually complaining about anonymous blogers, but I don't hear anyone complaining about anonymous people of a non-proit organization putting out partisan political letters. They broke the law and it is the responsibility of the organizations to identify the individual or individuals who did this. Until the names are revealed and an opology is issued ,the town should not support these groups.

Anonymous said...


GOP HATER said...

cancel the crybabie cheshire police department and save millions

Anonymous said...

GOP hater, try being serious for a moment. Canceling the sports means we do not need a turf field, a new locker room, or even an all season pool. (Ed Aston and the swim teams were the biggest proponants of that)

"canceling the police department" would be worse than the opposite. Property values would plummet, Residents would leave town, taxes would go up for those that stay, and crime would run rampid. To prevent those things from happening, we would get resident state troopers and they are profile more people than any local cop ever would.