Report Inappropriate Comments

Hello again WwkVoter:

After having watched the fake "mayor's" antics for more than two years now, there are a few possible explanations for his behavior -- but none of them hold up under scrutiny.

Some candidates want to show that they could have a positive impact on the community, or correct some kind of issue; the fake "mayor" has proven that he has no substantive ideas on how to accomplish anything, and has repeatedly bashed the school committee for no apparent reason, since he's running for mayor.

Some candidates try to prove that the current office-holder is not doing a good job and show that they could do better; the fake "mayor" has a record of tax delinquencies and questionable campaign finance activities, proving that he can't manage his own money properly.

Some candidates make an effort to show that they have a better grasp on government operations than their opponent; the fake "mayor" can't even truthfully explain how the city budget gets passed, or factually explain the condition of the city's business sector.

And some candidates want voters to see them in terms of personal qualities, that they're more conscientious than the other candidate; the fake "mayor" can't even write a check for a political ad without getting it wrong.

In spite of all this, the fake "mayor" thinks he'll get the benefit of the doubt because somehow, voters will see Mayor Avedisian as the poorer choice -- but as you rightly point out, an honest assessment of the comparison shows nothing of the kind.