"The city elections officer dropped a note to the Dozono campaign this afternoon, noting the incongruence of appealing the judge's decision from last week, and soliciting contributions": Jesus, this guy's determined to work in the grey areas of the law.

OK, we got the trust-fund scandal, the "pre-candidacy" poll, and now the donations-vs.-appeal question. To paraphrase Ian Fleming: One time is happenstance, two times is coincidence, and the third time is either chronic incompetence or intentional gaming of the system....

Dozono, like Potter, either has no idea what he's doing, which is bad enough, or he knows precisely what he's doing, which might be worse. Again, Sho makes Sam look pretty good, at least by comparison.

So, Guffman, what would you do if you were in Sho's shoes? Not collect a dime while you wait for people who are part of Sam's/Vera's/Goldschmidt's Good ol' boy network to decide on the appeal?

I wouldn't be in Sho's shoes. I'd have had competent advisors up-front; they would have told me, "Hey, this poll might fall under the in-kind thing. Let's think about this." Sho couldn't hire competent help. I don't like that trait in a mayor.

Sam to Vera to Goldschmidt is a serious stretch, BTW.

I would choose to take contributions rather than to appeal, obviously. Amy does point out an interesting fact, that he hasn't limited his donations to the $500 maximum he was considering (and that Adams is pledging to stick to).

And as an aside, when did the Good Ol' Boy Network become run by the gays and the jews? I didn't know they were even allowed into the junior management positions. Was there some merger with the Velvet Mafia and the Zionist Cabal? It's getting hard to keep track of who secretly runs the world these days.

In a remarkable leap forward as far as equal opportunity good ol' boy networks go, Goldschmidt's post-gubernatorial setting up of shop here in town as a 'consultant of all trades' was the watershed moment. No longer did you have to be a WASP to get in on the action, you just had to play along.
Which Sam and Vera did quite well with Neil.

Oh, he was a consultant. I thought we were making him the bogeyman because he was a child molester.

But it is scary to think how many consultants might be lurking in my neighborhood! You think these people are decent folks, but then one day you find out they're actually providing professional services!

"If your total donations are $100 or more, state law requires that you provide this information."

Two corrections (one major, one minor)
Actually, you are required to get information no matter how small the contribution. You don't have to report it unless it is OVER $100.

The guy's gotta have money to campaign. Ballots go out in about six weeks.

Guffman, you must be pretty new to town to think Neil-Vera-Sam is a "stretch". It's a straight and clear line that anyone in this town for more than 5 years knows by heart.

The corruption goes a lot further back than Neil, of course, and it's unlikely that any mayor- even a true outsider like Chris Rich- will be able to stay outside of the grasp of the ol' money and the police union that truly run City Hall.

Ever wonder we have such high city taxes, yet such deplorable infrastructure?

Ever wonder why a guy like Sten can steal $150K for a public campaign, then renege on his responsibilities, leave town with the revenue from a million dollar home, and open the door for more his cronies to do the same?

What about the $25 million for the water bureau billing system?

All roads go straight back to Neil, my friend. Those who don't learn history are doomed to repeat it.

-MVK

Adams to Goldschmidt is guilt by association, which is fun during elections, although it's still bullshit. We should judge Sam on his own record, not Neil's (or Vera's).

Sten's missteps are completely off topic. The water bureau billing system is worth examining in depth, as is the tram budget, as part of Sam's record. The problem for me is that the Sam-haters and Sho-hos tend to fling these things the way a chimp in a zoo-cage flings turds.

And, MVK, I'm curious to get your analysis of Sho's record, as outlined in my #1 above. Do these issues bother you, as part of the resume of a potential mayor of Portland? Do you care that Sho gambled with a minor's future, that he's diligently tinkering with the shadowy areas of the law? If not, why not?