[TempleGuy1000]

Originally Posted by mja

No, it means that it's not binary. It's not an either/or. Pro-development vs. anti-development, urban vs. anti-urban, pro-business vs. anti-business, etc., etc., etc. There aren't two distinct camps with completely distinct viewpoints, or worse, one noble camp out for the betterment of the city and another that's corrupt to its core. It's all far more complicated than that. There are multiple camps with sometimes overlapping and sometimes diametrically opposite points of view. Sorry if I'm sounding pedantic, but people seem to keep falling into this trap that because this or that councilperson isn't as pro-development as the members of this particular(ly pro-development) forum, that can only mean they are a corrupt machine politician.

If you thought Gauthier was going to be a laissez-faire pro-business / development councilperson, then you simply weren't paying attention. She's a progressive candidate with a focus on social justice and a secondary focus on good government, and that's going to drive her policy. I don't know how much time you spend with the progressive crowd, but generally developers rate somewhere around bankers, which is to say not particularly high, and gentrification (by which they mean most development in any predominantly middle or working class neighborhood that they fear could raise the median rent and/or change the character of the neighborhood) is a four-letter word. Gauthier's tenure on council has been completely unsurprising to me; she is as advertised, for better and for worse.

And yet, she's still very different than Blackwell. Blackwell was an unapologetic machine politician to her core with all of the negative connotations that entails, but she still advocated for what she deemed to be her specific community's best interest. Being from the Civil Rights era, she was overwhelmingly concerned with very narrow political objectives, namely building and maintaining black political power in the city and in the Democratic machine.

Gauthier's and Blackwell's positions on a given issue may align, but quite possibly for very different reasons and with very different objectives in mind. Blackwell would want her cut here, along with her community's cut. Gauthier is going to be more focused on pressuring the developer to make changes to carve out more affordable housing, etc. with the aim of achieving some small degree of social justice. Dismissing these contrary positions as corruption or conflating them with each other is reductive and unhelpful; we all have to try to either get on the same page or at the very least assume good intentions, and we can't do that when we purposefully misunderstand what those who disagree with us are saying.

Oh I couldn't disagree with this more. Gauthier is the physical embodiment of the Democratic Machine of 2023. Why do you think all the national fat cat organizations love her and Gym?

Gauthier is an unapologetic machine politician to her core with all of the negative connotations that entails, but she still advocated for what she deemed to be her specific community's best interest. Being from the SJW era, she was overwhelmingly concerned with very narrow political objectives, namely building and maintaining the status quo political power in the city and in the Democratic machine.

And to say her "secondary focus is on good government" is hilarious to me when the city services have spiraled into the toilet and the city can't complete even the most basic tasks anymore. Just like 5200 Warrington, she will play the corrupt game, and nothing positive will come about from it.