• Why did financial entities that survived the Great Depression go belly up this week?
• What do the two campaigns really have to say about the economy?
• What's going to happen next?

If only there was some sort of site that took that sort of economic information from academic and industry experts and distilled it to the answers that you need… Wait a minute, I just happen to work for such a group…

This is my round about way of telling you all that Knowledge@Wharton (My current employer) has a special section this week on the Financial Crisis, and it's powered by ColdFusion and Flash Video.

I think the phrase "policy wonk, but no charisma." I think I absorbed it off a blog somewhere.

Actual Research

• Campaign Site
• Wikipedia
• City Paper Profile

"My name is Michael Nutter, and this is the saddest day of my life."

Or so my TV series based on Michael Nutter would start.

Leaving his perennial heart-broken appearance aside, Michael Nutter's got a lot going for him. He's a lifelong Philadelphia resident who went to Wharton and then stayed here. After a career in Investment Banking, he went into public service. He was a councilman the gaping maul that is the Philadelphia 4^th district. He quit to run for mayor.

He's been described as a "maverick." He's been at pretty strong odds with the Street administration for the past 8 years. He's got strong policy based ideas. He championed a bill to repeal the business privilege tax only to see Street veto it. He's pushed a lot of policy through, including the quixotic ethics reform package.

I don't agree with his martial law idea for the heavy crime areas. It does sound a little draconian. But I don't live in one of those areas. If the people that live in those neighborhoods vote for him, they'll be saying they're okay with it.

I also don't like that he's on the list of the DLC's 100 to watch for 2003. But let's face it; he's a Democrat who went to Wharton. He's automatically going to be loved by the DLC.

I came into this exercise liking Nutter the most. As of now he seems to me to be the most qualified candidate, who's in a distant second in even his own polls. (In others he's down by more)

He's an extremely qualified policy-wonk, lacking charisma, and trailing? That's just my kind of underdog.

I'm not going to say I'm voting for him just yet though. I haven't dismissed Brady or Fattah yet. I've got a sum-up post left to write.

This guy started TV commercials early and often. That says to me he's rich and a long shot.

Actual Research

• Campaign Site
• Wikipedia

Okay, there isn't he usually voting information to found on this guy, because, he's never held an elected office before. He did work in government before - he was a deputy mayor under Rendell who seemed to be charged with cutting costs. He did so by going after some low hanging fruit - office space costs. He also saved the city money on health care. That just smells a little fishy to me, since he sold his company to UnitedHealth Group at some point in there. It could be industry contacts and relationships allowed him to save the money. However knowing Philly, it was some sort of backroom deal that involved Knox and his friends making some money, and conversely there are a bunch of city workers who are getting the shaft.

Of course I have no evidence for this at all. I have no real idea about the quality of a city worker's health plan.

But I do know that Knox made his money from payday loans. If the above contained a slice of sketchiness, this contains the whole pie. I know people use this service, and there is a market for this sort of thing. But I don't have admire the people who make money off it.

Couple all this, with a lack of real ideas, I can't say that I'm going to vote for him.

Bad news for me: he's leading in the polls. Good news for me: He's be advertizing for a couple months now. Hopefully his lead will start wearing off.

Mostly the debate just reinforced my prejudices. Nutter impressed me. Knox didn't. However I did have my opinion altered slightly. Once again, Brady performed better than my previous belief about him. Fattah's stock also rose. Evans disappointed me.

Overall I think Nutter did the best. He didn't bobble anything; he was steady, coherent and measured throughout the entire debate. He had the most concrete plans and suggestions. They were concrete, but I didn't disagree with them complete. I'm not sure his martial law plan is a good one, but it was the most concrete plan put forward. I also like that he said the ballsy-est thing in the debate. The exact quote was :

"296 black men were killed in the city last year. If the Ku Klux Klan came in and killed 296 men we'd see a different kind of action going on in Philadelphia right now."

- Quote Taken from "The Next Mayor Blog"

It might have been practiced, but no one else said anything quite as bold.

On a side note, can someone get Nutter a puppy or something? He seems to constantly look like his dog was put to sleep earlier that day.

Fattah also did well. I saw him as having a higher delta between his highs and lows than the other candidates. His closing was incoherent. For the most of the rest of it, he was very good, but have the occasional vague bullshit answer. He had the second most impressive statement in my mind, and the most common sense to boot. He suggested that to help reduce gun related violence, we should encourage the D.A. to give out plea deals to people who give up illegal gun dealer information. It's simple, common sense, and completely doable.

Brady did a couple things I liked. His closing was at the first glance very emotional, but vague. But as I thought about it, he was pointing to a result of "a safer Philadelphia" instead of just saying how to get there. He also took the time to defend all of the other candidates from Knox's bashing of insiders, which might have been showmanship but if it was, then I bought it. On closer inspection, he seems to be a bit long on the emotional appeal, short on the concrete ideas.

Evans harped on two things:

1. Philadelphia should be one of the safest big cities in the country
2. All good things could be accomplished through leadership at the top.

I assume that he thinks this person should be him. He really didn't say that much to convince me of that.

Knox was incoherent throughout the debate. There was this whole question about him forgiving a "loan" that he lent to his campaign. It was a confusing, weird question. It resulted in a rambling confusing answer. His one bright moment was when he was asked about the airport leasing option and gave the answer that there was a limit of 5 airports that the federal government would allow to be leased; only one of them could be a hub, and Chicago has already petitioned. Additionally the proposed profits would have to be shared with the airlines. Great! For one moment Tom Knox woke up and answered a question. The rest of the time, he was pretty much a zombie.

If I had to go just on the debate; it would be Fattah or Nutter. My brain says Nutter, my heart says Fattah.

I'll add it to the rest of my information, and come up with a decision later. If you want to watch the debate it's available on the 3 CBS website.

Initial Impressions

Nothing bad to say, but I feel like he's really good at winning his (my district) but that's all I know about him. Oh and his wife is Renee Chenault-Fattah.

Actual Research

• Campaign Site
• Wikipedia
• On The Issues
• Open Secrets
• Project Vote Smart

Chaka Fattah is currently the US Representative for PA 2^nd district. He's been there since 1994. He got there from knocking out the incumbent representative, Lucien Blackwell, in the Democratic Primary. Knocking out an incumbent Democrat in Philadelphia, in a primary? I thought such feats were impossible. Blackwell was the mentor of the current mayor, John Street. I don't know this for sure, but I would think that would give him some enemies in the current administration. (Which is a good thing as far as I'm concerned.) But that's my inference; I've seen nothing to back that up. In fact, I've heard rumors that he and the current administration get along very well.

He's got good ratings from labor and other traditional Democratic base organizations. His positions seem to put him in the same exact ideological place as Bob Brady, although some seem to stand out a bit. He seems, looking at his Project Vote Smart questionnaire, to be unable to place any priorities on spending. Additionally he gets some flak from law enforcement types for openly calling for a new trial for Mumia Abu-Jamal. Personally, I don't care on which side of the case he takes. That he did at all is a big detraction as, for the most, part professional politicians that get involved in that case tend to be crass opportunists, whether you are calling for a new trial, or condemning St. Denis for naming at street Rue Mumia Abu-Jamal. (Or naming a street Rue Mumia Abu-Jamal for that matter.)

I have no idea how he would do as Mayor. I don't think that a legislative position in DC makes him a strong candidate for an executive position like mayor. And frankly, if I was going to vote for congressman, at this point I like Bob Brady slightly better. But having had this thought, I think I have to say that so far all of the candidates I've looked into are found wanting.

Initial Impressions

Who the hell is Dwight Evans?

Actual Research

• Campaign Site
• Project Vote Smart

Who the hell is Dwight Evans? Other than his campaign site, there is almost nothing about him floating out there in the Interether.

Okay, that's not quite fair. He's a state representative. He's been a candidate for mayor, Lieutenant Governor, and Governor before. I guess he doesn't his current office.

Project Vote Smart is the only site with any independent information about him. And even that doesn't have any position statements from him, just reports on his voting record and interest group ratings. From what I can tell, he's a moderate Democrat for Philadelphia. His campaign site does give voice to the crime wave. It also addresses education and other normal election time issues. No mistakes, but there's nothing that makes me want to vote for him.

Dwight Evans might be the best candidate out there but I have no idea. Other than his own efforts to publicize him, I hear nothing about him. He's got a decent blog, with the right tone (someone from the campaign is the voice instead of just churning out press releases.)

The lack of third party information about what he stands for, and his tendency to run for any office he can, makes me think that I'm not voting for him.

Initial Impressions

I associate him with the whole shady machine town Philly. I have no reason for doing so, it might be completely unfair, but there you have it.

Actual Research

• Wikipedia
• Project Vote Smart
• Open Secrets
• OntheIssues
• Campaign Site

From what I can tell, Bob Brady actually is a machine town operative, who came up from, and is still heavily involved with labor. He's extremely connected within the local Democratic Party. ABSCAM is mentioned in his Wikipedia entry. But he wasn't implicated in any of it from what I can tell. In fairness, I think if you lived in Philadelphia in the 70's, ABSCAM is mentioned in articles about you.

Open Secrets shows that his money comes first from individual donors, then from PAC's. It also shows that he gets more money from labor then business. Someone on his campaign bothered to fill out a Project Vote Smart questionnaire. (This is a good thing to me. His staff at least makes a nod towards transparency.) As listed in Project Vote Smart, his positions are pretty straight down the line what you would expect from a Philadelphia Democrat. On The Issues backs up that his reported positions match his votes. His campaign site starts on the crime issue, but also reaches into Education, and Housing and the Business Tax issues. (See that Scott?)

Researching Brady made me more favorable towards him. Not sure if it's enough to vote for him yet, but it's not impossible that I will.

I haven't seen a good breakdown of the candidates. I've read individual voices denigrate the candidates, but they tend to be strongly opinionated already. I have no strong opinions, just vague ones.

So, I'm looking at the candidates and trying to figure out for whom to cast my vote. I figured I would share my process with anyone who was interested. I'd also point out, that it's very likely that I'm an idiot. So feel free to point that out.

I started, where all intellectual endeavors of the late Noughts start, Wikipedia: 2007 Philadelphia Mayoral Election.

The candidates:

• Bob Brady
• Dwight Evans
• Chaka Fattah
• Tom Knox
• Michael Nutter

General Impressions

Bob Brady - Vaguely against - I associate him with the whole shady machine town Philly. I have no reason for doing so, it might be completely unfair, but there you have it.

Dwight Evans - Neutral - Who the hell is Dwight Evans?

Chaka Fattah - Neutral - Nothing bad to say, but I feel like he's really good at winning his (my district) but that's all I know about him. Oh and his wife is Renee Chenault-Fattah.

Tom Knox - Vaguely against - This guy started TV commercials early and often. That says to me he's rich and a long shot.

Michael Nutter - Vaguely for - I think the phrase "policy wonk, but no charisma." I don't know where I got it. I think I absorbed it off a blog somewhere.

Actual Research

I'm going to do each of these candidates in more detail. I will do so alphabetically and separately. Expect more later.

I got a call from a volunteer for Barack Obama. I listened respectfully, and then told them I was probably going to vote for John Edwards. They then asked for $150.

I know it works differently at big money level, people hedge their bets. But considering that I'm not looking for an ambassadorship, I'll save my money for a candidate I support.

Rick Santorum is no longer my Senator.

For those that don't understand Man-On-Dog-Sex thing.

Now, if you know me, you know it's an ad for a Democrat. But, even if you don't agree with the politics, I think you will agree that you've never seen an ad for a political campaign quite like it.

It's not generic, it's not cheesy. It's almost cool. Check it out.

If you're in Philadelphia, check out the Committee of Seventy, they can direct you to your polling center.

If you're a Democrat, I urge you to vote for Pennacchio for Senate.

If you're Republican, why do you vote for Santorum?

They central question of the book is "Why do the Democrats keep losing?" They do a very good job of answering that. Some of their answers you know. Some of their answers will surprise you.

They also do a decent job of answering the natural follow question: "What can Democrats do to start winning?" If I had to find any fault with the book, I would say that the book is light on things the average reader can do to fix the situation. I mean, I can't build a think tank in my back yard, nor am i in a position to stop hiring loser consultants.

However, there is an implicit directive in the book that the average Democratic voter can follow: at general election time, be partisan. If the candidate has a D after his or her name, he or she will do more for your holistic needs, even if they disagree with you on a singular important issue.

Now, primaries are a different issue all together. So I take this time to remind you, to vote for Pennacchio for the Democratic candidate for Senate in Pennsylvania in the upcoming primary election. Not because Casey is Pro-Life, (I am too) but because he doesn't believe in reasonable gun control, thinks Pro-Life only means "anti-abortion," supports the president's war in Iraq, and likes Bush's pro corporate welfare loving judicial nominees. That is... just to name a few singular issues.

[Introduction omitted]

Him: Do you think that the future would be better if Democrats gained more control of Congress in this year's election. Or would there be no change?

Me: I think the future would be much better if we gained control.

Him: Okay, well then you have a nice day.

<CLICK>

I have to say he was very pleasant, even after I told him I would prefer that his bosses would all get fired.

You don't have to give a lot to contribute, so if you have a mind to do something, but you don't want to work a phone bank or canvas, then drop a few bucks. It's pretty much the absolute least you can do, and they make it pretty easy.

Chuck Pennacchio for United States Senate 2006