Bing to run for 2nd term?

[Fnemecek]

At the rate he's going, Charles Pugh won't have the legal residence needed to run for office. Seriously, the public has already seen that Pugh got into politics in order to have a Kwame style Civic Fund. You also have to take into consideration that if the public is going to hold Bing accountable, they're going to hold Council accountable as well.

The Council has already held hearings on DTE/Fire Dept. as well as EMS. They've allocated the funding that these departments need. In short, they've done everything that the Charter allows them to do in terms of the issues that most Detroiters care about.

If both Mayor Bing and the City Council are held accountable, the Council will fair much better.

If you seriously look at recent history, you'll see that Pugh isn't as popular as Hill was when he ran and lost against a non-incumbent. So Pugh's chances don't look that good. Besides, will Pugh risk giving up his Council seat to run against Bing? I don't think so.

Pugh and/or Brown can run for mayor under the argument that they've done everything for Detroiters that the Charter allows them to do. Bing will not be able to say that, unless he turns things around in the next 2 1/2 years. That's a huge difference from the Hill vs. Kilpatrick race of 2001.

[mwilbert]

Two and a half years is a long time, but incumbent mayors are hard to dislodge. I seem to recall a couple of really bad mayors that Detroit has had recently but who were still re-elected.

Miriani was the last elected mayor to be defeated for re-election, and that was almost 50 years ago. Before that Van Antwerp beat Jeffries [[after 4 2-year terms) in 1947. So if Bing runs again, I'd expect him to win.

[Hypestyles]

whoever it is that "eventually" becomes mayor after Bing, I hope that they are a genuine progressive and not a regressive force.. someone who is uninterested in old-line politics, uninterested in uplifting the grudges of the past, etc.

[kraig]

The Council has already held hearings on DTE/Fire Dept. as well as EMS. They've allocated the funding that these departments need. In short, they've done everything that the Charter allows them to do in terms of the issues that most Detroiters care about.

If both Mayor Bing and the City Council are held accountable, the Council will fair much better.



Pugh and/or Brown can run for mayor under the argument that they've done everything for Detroiters that the Charter allows them to do. Bing will not be able to say that, unless he turns things around in the next 2 1/2 years. That's a huge difference from the Hill vs. Kilpatrick race of 2001.

Anyone can run on an argument. Hendrix ran on an argument, Barrow ran on an argument, Vaughn ran on an argument. Arguments are a dime a dozen. What would be Pugh or Browns winning platform?

[NorthEndere]

Pugh and/or Brown can run for mayor under the argument that they've done everything for Detroiters that the Charter allows them to do. Bing will not be able to say that, unless he turns things around in the next 2 1/2 years. That's a huge difference from the Hill vs. Kilpatrick race of 2001.

Actually, the huge difference is that Pugh is a political neophyte, elected in a time of unusual political crisis and scandal, with a very rudimentary support organization. Gil had been in council for a decade, was well respected and connected. That's the only thing that even gave him a chance to begin with. He got beat with Kilpatrick money and Kilpatrick charm. Bing is also a political neophyte with an organizational support that leaves much to be desired if he were running in conventional times of the past. But, he's got money, and if he plays his cards right, he'll get funding from the suburbs about time re-election runs its way around. At this moment, Bing isn't an underdog in any of the scenarios you paint [[i.e. Brown and Pugh). Somebody else better come out quickly to raise the amount of money needed to topple Bing, or Brown or Pugh better land some kind of major economic or social development coups they'll be able to run on, because to topple and incumbent mayor, you need something HUGE, not simply that you did your current job as one among equals on a city council.

[gdogslim]

He moved into the Manoogian...

He's not a crook, and he wants to shrink the bloated inefficient bureaucracy, he's got 99% of my vote.

[Fnemecek]

Anyone can run on an argument. Hendrix ran on an argument, Barrow ran on an argument, Vaughn ran on an argument. Arguments are a dime a dozen. What would be Pugh or Browns winning platform?

Please. Dave Bing's entire campaign during the special election consisted of nothing more than repeating the word "change" as often as he could.

When Cockrel didn't deliver results, and Bing promised change, voters elected Bing simply because he promised change. Since then, he hasn't changed much.

The primary is still 2 1/2 years away. There's still time for Mayor Bing to start delivering. However, if he doesn't producing results, then same voter discontent that swept him into office can easily sweep him back out.

[Fnemecek]

At this moment, Bing isn't an underdog in any of the scenarios you paint [[i.e. Brown and Pugh). Somebody else better come out quickly to raise the amount of money needed to topple Bing, or Brown or Pugh better land some kind of major economic or social development coups they'll be able to run on, because to topple and incumbent mayor, you need something HUGE, not simply that you did your current job as one among equals on a city council.

I don't think you appreciate the level of dissatisfaction with city services in the neighborhoods. Show up at any community meeting, or just talk to ordinary people, and you'll hear a tremendous amount of frustration with Mayor Bing.

If anything, the downtown development deal and suburban campaign contributions will work against his re-election because it reminds people that the neighborhoods aren't a priority for him. There's still time for him to turn things around, but he needs to get serious.

[Fnemecek]

He moved into the Manoogian...

He's not a crook, and he wants to shrink the bloated inefficient bureaucracy, he's got 99% of my vote.

He's talked about shrinking the bloated inefficient bureaucracy. However, after almost two years in office, he hasn't made any progress doing so.

No one in their right mind would expect Mayor Bing to change everything in two years. However, by this point in time, we should be able to see some kind of progress.

[Brian1979]

I'm happy with what Dave Bing is trying to do in Detroit. He seems like he cares about the city and it's rebirth. I said the same thing about Dennis Archer when he was in office but I like Bing more than Archer now. I hope he does run for a second term and wins, I can't vote for him since I don't live in the city of Detroit but I support him 100%.

[kraig]

Please. Dave Bing's entire campaign during the special election consisted of nothing more than repeating the word "change" as often as he could.

When Cockrel didn't deliver results, and Bing promised change, voters elected Bing simply because he promised change. Since then, he hasn't changed much.

The primary is still 2 1/2 years away. There's still time for Mayor Bing to start delivering. However, if he doesn't producing results, then same voter discontent that swept him into office can easily sweep him back out.

I'm in full agreement with you that Bing hasn't done much. I think were we differ is that you believe that not doing much is enough to get someone else elected. Whereas, the majority of us posting on this thread know better. If you're half as politically astute as you claim to be, you would have recognized the fact that incumbents, hardly ever lose. How good of a job they are or aren't doing rarely factors into votes against them. It's not right, but, that's the reality of it. And if you had the ability to recognize a viable candidate, you wouldn't have backed Barrow so much. A multiple count convicted felon whose claim to fame is that he's ran and lost for Mayor as many times as Sharon McPhail and he's an accountant that got caught cheating on his taxes.

By the way, that election was a blowout. Get it right.

[Fnemecek]

I'm in full agreement with you that Bing hasn't done much. I think were we differ is that you believe that not doing much is enough to get someone else elected.

Whether or not it's enough to move someone else into office depends entire on how pissed off the electorate is over a given politician's inaction. Exhibit A in this argument is Ken Cockrel.

Ken Cockrel didn't accomplish anything worth mentioning in his brief tenure. Bing promised change. Voters decided to give him a chance.

If you're half as politically astute as you claim to be, you would have recognized the fact that incumbents, hardly ever lose.

The reason that incumbents hardly ever lose is because - by the time they've gotten into office - they've figured out how to make their constituents happy. it would appear that Mayor Bing hasn't learned how to do this yet.

If he doesn't learn within the next 2 1/2 years, he'll likely be out of job.

And if you had the ability to recognize a viable candidate, you wouldn't have backed Barrow so much.

I had two options in that race. Option 1: A candidate, where even if I supported him and he won, there was no reasonable chance of him accomplishing any of the things that I want my mayor to do. Option 2: Take a chance on a long shot who has a litany of problems.

Guaranteed failure vs. a long shot chance at success. It was pretty much a no-brainer.

By the way, that election was a blowout. Get it right.

Define "blowout". There was a 15 point gap between winner and loser in the official results, with 60,000 ballots that could not be verified [[out of 121,000 ballots cast).

[kraig]

Whether or not it's enough to move someone else into office depends entire on how pissed off the electorate is over a given politician's inaction. Exhibit A in this argument is Ken Cockrel.

Ken Cockrel didn't accomplish anything worth mentioning in his brief tenure. Bing promised change. Voters decided to give him a chance.



The reason that incumbents hardly ever lose is because - by the time they've gotten into office - they've figured out how to make their constituents happy. it would appear that Mayor Bing hasn't learned how to do this yet.

If he doesn't learn within the next 2 1/2 years, he'll likely be out of job.



I had two options in that race. Option 1: A candidate, where even if I supported him and he won, there was no reasonable chance of him accomplishing any of the things that I want my mayor to do. Option 2: Take a chance on a long shot who has a litany of problems.

Guaranteed failure vs. a long shot chance at success. It was pretty much a no-brainer.



Define "blowout". There was a 15 point gap between winner and loser in the official results, with 60,000 ballots that could not be verified [[out of 121,000 ballots cast).

15 points, by any measure, is a blowout. I noticed that you didn't respond to the statement that points out that Barrow is nothing but extremely damaged goods. For a City that hadn't turned in an on-time CAFR in 14 fourteen years, your answer was a multiple-count felony convicted accountant? Wow, that's amazing.

So your idea of a guaranteed failure is the successful businessman who has a documented history of performing charitable acts in the City of Detroit, respect of the local business community and positive nationwide name recognition? And your idea of a long shot at success is the felony convict?

Ladies and gentlemen, I give to you, a Typical Detroit Voter!!!!!!!!

Man, you just answered a whole lot of questions that aren't even worth asking.

[Fnemecek]

So your idea of a guaranteed failure is the successful businessman who has a documented history of performing charitable acts in the City of Detroit, respect of the local business community and positive nationwide name recognition?

No, my idea of a guaranteed failure is someone who does not appear to have any interest in dealing with the problems that this community is facing. The fact of the matter is that no one has ever won a game by sitting on a bench.

Mayor Bing has all of the attributes that you mentioned. However, he appears to have no interest in reforming the City of Detroit's massive bureaucracy, reforming its tax structure, or otherwise dealing with the problems that Detroiters face every day.

Tom Barrow has a multitude of problems, which you mentioned above. However, he appeared to be willing to step into the ring and deal with those problems to the best of his abilities. Dave Bing, in contrast, has not demonstrated any such willingness.

Who has a better chance of winning? The world's greatest athlete who refuses to try or a really crappy competitor who is willing to give it his all?

Man, you just answered a whole lot of questions that aren't even worth asking.

No, it's just that you lack the intellect required to engage in an actual conversation. You jump to conclusions, ignore evidence, and resort to name calling.

But thank you for playing.

[erikd]

Whether or not it's enough to move someone else into office depends entire on how pissed off the electorate is over a given politician's inaction. Exhibit A in this argument is Ken Cockrel.

Ken Cockrel didn't accomplish anything worth mentioning in his brief tenure. Bing promised change. Voters decided to give him a chance.

I must defend Ken Cockrel on this point. You can't criticize him for failing to accomplish anything during his brief tenure as interim mayor. He was a short-term placeholder until an emergency election was held, and he never had the time or political clout to implement any significant changes to city government. When Ken Cockrel took office, Detroit government was in a state of chaos, with KK heading to jail, Monica Conyers under indictment, disgraceful council behavior which had become national media fodder, and an obstructionist element in city council that had just rejected the Cobo regionalization plan.

Throughout this awful time of corruption and disgrace in Detroit, Ken Cockrel stood out as a true professional leader, and acted with unwavering class, poise, and dignity. When Kwame called him out in the state of the city speech, I was appalled, but Ken Cockrel stayed professional and didn't engage in the mudslinging. When Monica Conyers publicly called him names, he did not respond with counter-insults like many politicians would.

When Ken Cockrel took over as mayor, the first thing he did was try to get the Cobo plan back on track, and then he followed that up with a very bold support of a DDOT/SMART merger.

I have always thought that our bus systems should be merged, but it is not politically popular, and I have never heard any other major political leader champion, or even publicly support, this idea. In the mayoral debates, Cockrel supported a DDOT/SMART merger, and Bing said "regional cooperation is working".

http://detnews.com/article/20090424/...ebate-heats-up

I like Dave Bing. I think that he is an honest person and a good guy, but I am waiting for him to take a stand and make some tough decisions to move the city forward. I don't see Dave Bing supporting real change or a real plan to address the poor city services in Detroit. I don't see Dave Bing doing anything to make the core city services better. I don't want to see annual 10% cuts across the board to balance the city budget. I want to see elimination of redundant departments, regional mergers, and real changes that will allow the city to properly fund core services and eliminate structural deficits.

[Lowell]

I concur with EricD. Ken Cockerel has always "acted with unwavering class, poise, and dignity." I would add intelligence and sincerity to those raves. He did not have a chance to do anything amid the KK, Monica chaos. He unfairly got mud splashed on him by being on council filled with clowns which gave an outsider like Bing an advantage.

Bing is the best person for the moment. His quiet confidence and intelligence is just what the city needs at this time. He doesn't need money and he doesn't need fame; he has far more of both than any other mayor in recent memory.

However, when he declines to continue, I think Ken Cockerel will be elected as his successor should he choose to run.

[Fnemecek]

I must defend Ken Cockrel on this point. You can't criticize him for failing to accomplish anything during his brief tenure as interim mayor. He was a short-term placeholder until an emergency election was held, and he never had the time or political clout to implement any significant changes to city government.

That is absolute nonsense.

If I show up at my job, my employer expects me to work; to produce results in exchange for my paycheck. It doesn't matter whether I'm only there for a few days, a few weeks, or a few months. The same thing applies when the job in question is Mayor of the City of Detroit.

Whoever holds that position must be expected to produce results. A failure to do so, should be met with outcries from the citizenry. It's our tax dollars that are being wasted and our safety that is jeopardized by said inaction.

When Ken Cockrel took over as mayor, the first thing he did was try to get the Cobo plan back on track, and then he followed that up with a very bold support of a DDOT/SMART merger.

And neither of those things were actually accomplished.

[Fnemecek]

I concur with EricD. Ken Cockerel has always "acted with unwavering class, poise, and dignity." I would add intelligence and sincerity to those raves.

Please explain how not doing anything during a time of crisis can properly be defined as class, pose, or dignity.

Bing is the best person for the moment. His quiet confidence and intelligence is just what the city needs at this time.

Please explain how not doing anything is "what the city at this time".

We have a police department with one of the largest budgets of any law enforcement agency in the country on a per resident basis. In spite of this, calls for service to 9-1-1 routinely go without a response.

We have people who are literally dying in our streets because the EMS doesn't show up in time. We have the money to improve the situation, but Mayor Bing and his administration chose not to do so.

How is this "exactly what the city needs at this time"?

[Lowell]

Please explain how not doing anything during a time of crisis can properly be defined as class, pose, or dignity.

Please explain how not doing anything is "what the city at this time".

What could he have done taking over the reigns of power of a corrupt regime in such a short time, facing re-elections challenge and chaos surrounding KK? Do you expect a miracle? What would you have done under those circumstances? Absolutely nothing. But you could make it worse by continuing the antics of those times and grandstanding. Instead of pouring gas on the fire he acted with class, pose, or dignity.

We have a police department with one of the largest budgets of any law enforcement agency in the country on a per resident basis. In spite of this, calls for service to 9-1-1 routinely go without a response.

We have people who are literally dying in our streets because the EMS doesn't show up in time. We have the money to improve the situation, but Mayor Bing and his administration chose not to do so.

How is this "exactly what the city needs at this time"?

Simply put he is the best person for the situation. Maybe there is someone better. Maybe you would be better. But you would never be elected. "Politics is the art of the possible." Bing is the best person Detroit could have who could, in the real world, also get elected. His presence has already done great damage control. He is dignified and has the respect of other metropolitan leaders and the citizens of his city.

Is he perfect? Of course not. But considering the alternatives, the possible alternatives not some dream world scenario, Detroit is very fortunate to have his service. But he has an immense hole to dig out of. No one can expect a sudden reversal of the mess he inherited and a bureaucracy lined with cronies of the former criminal administration.

In the meantime, he has to run a city with declining revenues, increasing social problems, a severely damaged reputation AND fix issues like 911, police response and so much more - all without a diamond in his ear. Good and god bless to him.

[smogboy]

I don't care if a given leader grandstands or is "emotional". I want results. In business, if you don't produce results, you get fired. In politics, it's similar but one has to wait until the next election.

As for your assertion that Mayor Bing must be doing something right, I invite you discuss that question with anyone who has had to call Detroit Police, Fire or EMS in the past 2 years.

It makes me wonder that regardless of who we had in office, whether it be Mayor or City Council- could those services be improved that much in lieu of the financial difficulties this city is facing. I want it to be crazy impressive with response times and in time it hopefully will be in due time, but unfortunately we just have to weather the storm a little longer.

[Fnemecek]

It makes me wonder that regardless of who we had in office, whether it be Mayor or City Council- could those services be improved that much in lieu of the financial difficulties this city is facing. I want it to be crazy impressive with response times and in time it hopefully will be in due time, but unfortunately we just have to weather the storm a little longer.

How is having more money per resident an impediment to getting things done?

And if it is an impediment, as you seem to believe, why not just give some of it back to the taxpayers?

[Fnemecek]

What could he have done taking over the reigns of power of a corrupt regime in such a short time, facing re-elections challenge and chaos surrounding KK? Do you expect a miracle? What would you have done under those circumstances? Absolutely nothing.

Absolutely nothing???

The City Council gave him the money to operate an EMS service. How about hiring the people needed to do the job?

The Detroit Police Department has one of the largest budgets of any police agency in the country on a per resident basis. How about if you hold DPD's leadership accountable for delivering result?

Or hire a police chief based on his or her ability to do the job and not on how often he is willing to praise you in press releases?

And how exactly does sitting on your ass all day make someone "dignified"?

[Fnemecek]

"Detroit needs change. Change with a sense of urgency."
- Dave Bing, candidate for mayor of Detroit, April 2009

"Change isn't possible. It's not reasonable to expect it within two years."
- Most of Dave Bing's supporters, February 2011

[Fnemecek]

BTW - I'm still waiting for someone to explain how not doing anything makes one "dignified".

[erikd]

Absolutely nothing???

The City Council gave him the money to operate an EMS service. How about hiring the people needed to do the job?

The Detroit Police Department has one of the largest budgets of any police agency in the country on a per resident basis. How about if you hold DPD's leadership accountable for delivering result?

Or hire a police chief based on his or her ability to do the job and not on how often he is willing to praise you in press releases?

And how exactly does sitting on your ass all day make someone "dignified"?

Are you criticizing Bing or Cockrel?

The lack of EMS drivers and maintained vehicles falls on Bing. Bing has been in office for almost two years, which is enough time to figure out how to allocate EMS funding properly.

The same goes with appointing a new police chief and reforming a poorly performing police department. It takes more than a few months to identify the problems, create a plan of action, implement the plan, and see dramatic change in a system as large as the DPD.

Ken Cockrel was an interim mayor for 7 months. Seven months is not enough time to sort through the mess left by Kwame, figure out solutions, implement them, and see the results. Especially when you are a short-term lame duck without any support from City Council [[which was lead by his nemesis and soon-to-be incarcerated felon Monica Conyers), state government officials, or local business leaders, all who expect you to be out of office in a few months.