Domb is best for the Northeast
After the April 11 mayoral debate, I saw that there are lots of undecided voters out there. If you’re one of them, I want to tell you why Allan Domb is the mayoral candidate for Northeast Philly.
First, while some candidates don’t have an office, or even a website, he has a campaign office on Academy Road. Really, how many of these candidates have even visited the Northeast? Meanwhile. Allan placed a campaign office near Holme Circle because he will unlock the Northeast’s full potential with his obvious business smarts and sharp leadership skills.
Next, unlike the other candidates, Allan Domb is all about action on crime. He’s been on tense, dangerous police ride-alongs in high-crime areas. He’s coordinated with federal, state and local law enforcement officials. He’s met with victims of Philadelphia’s gun violence crisis. He has a plan to attack the drug epidemic in Kensington and is getting solutions on the table to cure our gun violence crisis.
In addition, Allan served in City Council and is running for mayor because he believes in the city and that with his leadership, the city’s future is a bright one. And he is putting his money where his mouth is. To that point, did you know that there is a candidate who is funding their campaign with only $25 of their own money? Does that sound like someone who believes in their own campaign? That guy doesn’t. Allan Domb does.
In conclusion, it’s clear to me that Allan Domb has the experience, resources, work ethic and confidence to be the Northeast’s only choice for Philadelphia’s 100th mayor.
Jayson Massey
Nicetown
Sour grapes
I read Mr. Richard Iacoonelli’s letter titled Election was in the bag. It came across to me as sour grapes because more Democrats voted than Republicans.
He laments that the Democrats have been successful in their get-out-the-vote operations and the Founding Fathers wouldn’t approve. I’ll remind Mr. Iaconelli that the Founding Fathers only let property owners vote, but not if they were women. It makes me wonder that if they allowed slaves to vote back then, would it only count as 2/3rds of a vote? The Republicans want to raise the voting age back to 21 because during this last election cycle the youth showed up in droves. There is no way they can be competent to vote if the majority voted for Democrats is the impression I get from the author.
How dare those brutal unions suggest to their members who to vote for who represent labor’s positions. Except for those police unions who endorse Republicans, they are OK.
I hear the term that politics isn’t bean bag. So to help Mr. Iaconelli understand one of the successful techniques is not to debate someone who you are already way ahead of in the polls. You don’t let them get the chance to land a punch on purpose, or by mistake. You don’t like that, well, too bad. Run a candidate who has ideas that the majority of voters can support. Try that, you might win elections again.
As to Mr. Iaconelli’s claim that Shapiro sued the Little Sisters of the Poor, it is false. Attorney General Shapiro sued the federal government. I suggest Mr. Iaconelli try out that fact-checking technique before he reposts such stuff. My source is an article in the Washington Post who quotes one of those law professors from Princeton. Then again, there might be some upcoming job openings at Fox News after they go to trial.
I don’t vote on Election Day. Even former President Trump didn’t vote on Election Day. How I am employed never guarantees that I will be home on Election Day. Working people can’t get paid time off to vote. Missing a day’s pay can put a real financial bind on the working poor especially. Suggesting that people who vote via mail-in ballots are uninformed is plain ludicrous and elitist. I am in favor of mail-in voting like Colorado and Oregon. I want maximum participation.
TSgt Mark S. Chalupa
USAFRes, Retired
Pennypack East
Switch parties, Richard
In his March 29 letter, Richard Iaconelli urges Republicans to use the same political tactics Democrats do: find names to mail absentee ballots to and get as many folks to vote as possible, for example. Mr. Iaconelli, know that Republicans can’t be bothered with such trivial pursuits. They have bigger fish to fry.
Gerrymandering, for one. And how about getting election-deniers to run for statewide office, such as governor and attorney general – people who oversee and report election results. Then there are the “poll watchers” — who wear camouflage and brandish rifles – strategically positioned outside voting sites used primarily by people of color. Not to mention reducing significantly the numbers of such sites, so that voters have to travel much greater distances to vote than they had in the past. And while we’re at it, cutting back the hours polling places are open, reducing the number of days early voting is available and removing many drop boxes from the “wrong” areas. In other words, the fewer people who vote, the better. Democracy in action.
As a self-professed registered Democrat, Mr. Iaconelli may want to consider switching his registration to a different party. Republican, perhaps? After all, known far and wide for their integrity, it was 147 House of Representatives Republicans who voted immediately after the Jan. 6 “tourist visit” to the Capitol to overturn the 2020 election results.
The likes of Kevin McCarthy, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Matt Gaetz, Paul Gosar, Lauren Boebert and Jimmy Jordan would welcome you with open arms. Enjoy.
Dennis Sing
Somerton
