Friday, October 05, 2012

Why Jordan Is Demanding a Debate with Tarleton

There's really only one possible explanation when an incumbent office-holder demands a debate with his challenger, as NC House member Jonathan Jordan recently did: he's losing, and he knows it.

While it's very common for a newcomer to challenge an office-holder -- Ron Zerban demands a debate with Paul Ryan, and Joe Rooney demands a debate with Allyson Schwartz, for just two of dozens of examples -- it's not common at all -- not at all -- for an incumbent to demand a debate. It's a glaring sign of weakness.

Challengers are usually not well known. A debate with the incumbent can get them better known in a hurry. In fact, just demanding the debate raises a challenger's profile, and the demand is often released to the press for that reason alone. Conversely, incumbents generally resist debates because they don't want their opponents to be better known. Simple math.

But for a well financed incumbent like Jonathan Jordan to be agitating in the public press for a debate sends a dog whistle: somebody needs to notice me and right now!

And speaking of how Jonathan Jordan has treated public education during his two years in Raleigh, which I believe we were, there's this.


Anonymous said...

Jordan has been a disaster. He tries to prevent Boone from building a new water intake!? I thought Republicans supported growth. Just as we see on a national level, Republicans have no patriotism. They place political interests and their lust for power ahead of the economic wellness of the nation every time. Jordan fits in very well. He puts his personal political interests ahead of the well being of the people. Any resident of Watauga County who votes for this carpetbagging fool is a sheep.

Anonymous said...

Jordan has other constituents than just those that live in the Town Of Boone. He chose to represent the majority of them (as did the Ashe County Commissioners).

Anonymous said...

Jordon pulled his bill when the rich repugs in Blowing called and told him they were getting the water as well.
So, I guess he represents the towns that have his best financial interests in mine.

Anonymous said...

The state needed money the past two years to meet obligations. Jordan voted to give tax breaks to millionaires instead.

brotherdoc said...

Meanwhile his people are out taking down Cullie's roadside signs....They didn't play fair in 2010 and it's sure not likely they will this time around either. Who has ever gotten even ONE piece of imformative mail, email, or other info from this guy? Has he ever asked what you think about the issues facing our region and state? If it were not for the local press running the occasional piece about him the average Joe would not even know he exists. BTW that's also true for his henchman in skullduggery, Dan Soucek. They obviously talk only to their little crew of donors and likeminded TP types.

Anonymous said...

Has he ever asked what you think about the issues facing our region and state?

Many times. He will talk with any of his constituents at any function he attends. Maybe you do not care to approach him because you are afraid hw would change your mind.

Skeezix said...

In a face-to-face conversation at a local charity's fund raiser, I asked Mr. Jordan to tell me how he felt about the low pay for state employees working in the university system, but not on the "academic side of the house."

I gave as an example someone I know who's worked on the maintenance staff whose 2012 raise amounts to fourteen cents an hour. That person has worked for the UNC system for 13 years.

When I told Jordan this story, he assured me that the University of North Carolina system was the one who determined the 'non-faculty' employees' salaries--and that they were working hard to pay those employees better.

I told him that he was incorrect, that non-faculty employees' salaries are not determined nor in any way handled by the university UNC but rather by the State's office of personel through each agency's human resource service offices.

Mr. Jordan then told me that he wasn't aware of that but went on to sincerely assure me that there was a UNC committee looking into it.

How uninformed can Mr. Jordan get?

It's pretty clear to me that he cares very little, if at all, for a huge number of his constituents in Watauga who happen to work for ASU.

Anonymous said...

Do you expect a politician to be cognoscente of every issue relevant to every person to the same degree person bringing up the issue is? What Democrat do you know can come close.

Also, was Jordan correct and you wrong? I do know that the ranking of a person's job as to grade level is handled by the university. This is the major item effecting their pay.

Skeezix said...

In reply to your remark about not knowing everything about everything--but shouldn't we assume that Mr. Jordan ought to know some "stuff" about the university system since education is one of his big concerns. And since he is, after all, supposedly representing his constituents' needs and issues . . . including those folks to whom I have referred.

Wouldn't you think that Mr. Jordan certainly ought to know what pools of money state employees' salaries come from. And that the UNC system is a system unto itself, w/ the exception of determining non-faculty/administrative salaries.

He's in the NC House--expectations about knowing what amounts to the basics about how people are paid isn't expecting too much.

Yes, there are pay grades, and yes, you're absolutely correct: supervisors evaluate supervisees . . . but the grade levels are in no way, shape or form determined by anyone at any university (or anywhere else, for that matter). The pay grades and increases in them are not controlled nor set by any human resource unit in any state agency, including those for non-faculty/administrative "staff" at ASU. Check out the Office of State Personnel.

Each pay grade also has its set upper salary limit--no matter how well evaluated someone is . . . there are all sorts of "ceilings" that keep people from moving on up and into a higher grade.

And, yes, I absolutely do know what I'm talking about . . . and I am not in error . . . I worked directly with these issues for many years in the UNC system.

Opoib said...

I actually would like to see them debate. It can only help the voter decide with more information on who to vote for.

If Jordons campaign was guilty of deceit in mailers last time then he would have to answer for it. If Tarletons is sending out mailers that are not true this time the same standard would apply to him.

What do voters have to lose by being better informed?

Opoib said...

Good news