Indy Week | Comment Archives | Stories | Elections

Narrow Search

Comment Archives: Stories: Elections

Re: “Your Participation is Mandatory: The INDY’s 2016 Primary Endorsements

Reading your Dem presidential editorial it could have just as well suggested that voters mark the "no preference" ballot line

19 likes, 6 dislikes
Posted by gercohen1 on 03/02/2016 at 11:30 AM

Re: “Your Participation is Mandatory: The INDY’s 2016 Primary Endorsements

Your clear vision to endorse Mark Marcoplos is right on and makes your other selections more credible as well. Marcoplos deserves a win after a lifetime of community service and we need his leadership now more than ever.

6 likes, 7 dislikes
Posted by miriam.lieberman.942 on 03/02/2016 at 9:21 AM

Re: “Your Participation is Mandatory: The INDY’s 2016 Primary Endorsements

Technically speaking Republicsn Jim Carson was AG in 1974

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by gercohen1 on 03/02/2016 at 8:04 AM

Re: “Bev Perdue

Thoughtful comments . I loved the analysis , Does anyone know if my assistant might be able to find a fillable a form version to complete ?

Posted by alaineolivo on 02/29/2016 at 9:17 PM

Re: “Doretta L. Walker

If only Ms. Walker would conduct her language in a court room as well written in this article...her views are highly suspect, but they are her views. It's a shame someone holding the seat of judge should be allowed to conduct herself in a court of law with disregards for respect of the position with slang and speech that is of a less educated individual. The court system should be a place of professionalism and pride...not a place of a reality TV personality "wanna be", (excuse the slang phrase, but seemed necessary to exhibit her vocabulary limits) to fill her ego . Hopefully next election cycle will change the downward spiralling display, a mockery to judges everywhere, and Durham will receive a respectful servant "up in here"... I hate phrases like that!

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by RespectTheBench on 10/08/2015 at 10:19 AM

Re: “Why Wake County Judge Abe Jones lost

Judge Donald Stephens treated me as though he had some kind of personal vindictive against me in an appeals to a higher court when I lost in a lower court, the Legal Guardianship of my son which was initiated in a motion filed by a Nurse Practitioner. This was filed because I exercised the rights given me under the NC Guardianship statute, Chapter 35 in asking the N.P. to wean my off of dangerous psychotropic drugs. The N.P said "o.k. in a phone conversation but in a couple of days, handed me a motion to remove the Guardianship. This person in the motion had written that my son and I was once homeless. I explained that the side effects of psy. drugs is what lead to the homelessness. I showed a housing lease in the court where I lost the Guardianship but since my son was excluded from housing based on his disability by another division of WCHS(My alleged complaint of discrimination/violations of the FHAA) I had to say that I had no housing in which to take my beloved son. I finally appealed to a higher court where JUDGE DONALD STEPHENS presided. HE TREATED ME THE WORST THAT I HAVE EVER BEEN TREATED IN MY ENTIRE LIFE OF 60 YEARS. HE YELLED AT ME, MAKING ME FEEL AS THOUGH I WAS BEING RAN THROUGH A MEAT CHEWING MACHINE. I AM A 60 YEAR OLD CHRISTIAN WOMAN WITH MORALS WHO WAS REARED BY TWO OF THE BEST TO TREAT OTHERS IN THE GOOD WAY THAT I WANT TO BE TREATED. IN MY FEEL, THIS JUDGE STEPHENS VIOLATED CANON 3 OF THE JUDICIAL CODE OF CONDUCT. IT WAS HORRIBLE. MY DAD TAUGHT THAT WHAT A MAN SOWETH, THISHE SHALL ALSO REAP".

9 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by fitzpitz on 08/12/2015 at 12:45 PM

Re: “In Durham and Orange, these legislative contests are no contests

" Well, “our people” would be hired first if they had the education and training for those jobs. "

^ this is blatantly untrue.

Posted by Edward Teach on 11/18/2014 at 10:06 AM

Re: “N.C. Constitutional Amendment

You mentioned, "provided that they aren't pressured by their lawyers to waive their jury trial rights." And how would you enforce that?? And how much pressure will public defenders be under to 'encourage' defendants to waive a their right to trial by jury in order to save the state the expense of a jury trial? This is just another opportunity for the judicial system to fall short on the proper representation of those who cannot afford an attorney. Time for a reality check, Indy!

Posted by BetsyRogers on 11/06/2014 at 3:34 PM

Re: “N.C. Constitutional Amendment

Your endorsement of the amendment "allowing" defendants to waive their basic right to trial by jury was a disappointment, and it taught me that I cannot rely on "Indy" endorsements as I did on the old "Independent" weekly. The amendment increases the chances that poorly-represented minorities will be forced to waive their right to a jury trial - primarily to save this state some money. This is an important justice issue, and I suspect that you did not do your homework. ~Carol Prokop

3 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by camp88 on 11/05/2014 at 8:41 AM

Re: “Tricia Shields

Tricia Shields has years of experience in North Carolina trial and appellate courts and is by far one of the most qualified for this seat on the NC Court of Appeals. She is also smart, fair-minded, and would be an incredible asset to the Court and to the State of North Carolina. An overwhelming number of candidates are running for this seat, but please take the time to read about Tricia and give her your vote.

Posted by Jennifer Mouchet Hall on 11/03/2014 at 11:20 AM

Re: “Add Democrats to U.S. House, Senate

RE: Endorsement of Kay Hagan

Kudos to IndyWeek for carefully and loyally maintaining leftist integrity and silence when it counted. It has been so important to conceal anything harmful to Kay Hagan from the people in these finals days of the election. Not all media has done this-- look what the Charlotte Observer did! Those flunkies ran a story over the weekend that was critical of our Kay and then, after finally seeing the light, pulled it down. Heads need to roll for this traitorous act against the people's interests.…

0 likes, 3 dislikes
Posted by ProudlyUnaffiliated on 11/02/2014 at 4:47 PM

Re: “Local judge, clerk and district attorney races

Your endorsements rely on contradictory treatment of the results of the State Bar Association's Judicial Performance Evaluation for judges. You set aside the results for Nancy Gordon but not for Pat Evans, though you cite courtroom behavior for both. Challenger Storch posted a YouTube clip of Evans that was clearly taken out of context, but I know this only because I did the requisite digging. I urge the IndyWeek to provide links to questionnaire responses within every endorsement - and urge the NC Bar to provide opportunity to Bar members with the ability to make written suggestions to judges for qualitative improvements, and not just a numerical rating. A numerical rating for a 360 style evaluation is insufficient. Most of all, voters need to do due diligence. Dig for information on the web. Scott Holmes of Brock, Payne & Meece wrote of a defendant who was charged for essentially being crippled, indigent, and addicted in a blog post entitled "Guilty of Neglect" on the firm's website. Judge Evans is mentioned. Read the post and find out why. For whom should you vote? Pursue the answer for yourself. As the Oracle in the Matrix told Lawrence Fishburne: "make up your own damn mind!"

7 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Jeffrey Martin Bergman on 11/01/2014 at 3:37 PM

Re: “N.C. Constitutional Amendment

What concerns me about the amendment is that wealthy criminals (with assistance from their counsel) may be able to forum shop the judge and avoid a trial by their peers.

4 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by mitten96 on 11/01/2014 at 10:31 AM

Re: “Brenda L. Cleary

Love this woman!

Posted by butcept on 11/01/2014 at 8:02 AM

Re: “Lori Christian

I like her LGBT and family social economical dissadvantage family issues.

1 like, 2 dislikes
Posted by Yvonne Sullivan on 10/31/2014 at 11:21 PM

Re: “Our endorsements for the 2014 general election

Voting for Hagan? Consider this.

Kay Hagan seems to want to make the US Senate race all about NC State Politics. I'm OK with that, and I'd ask anyone who supports her to consider the following. Prior to 2010, the Democrats had almost complete control of NC State Government for 100 years. But I'd like to focus on recent times. I moved to NC in 1995. From 1995 - 2010, the Democrats had 100% control of NC State Government, with majority's in the Legislature and Senate, and the Governorship. Kay Hagan was a NC State Senator from 1999 - 2009. During that time there was nothing Republicans could have done to stop them. Consider this:

1. Why didn't they raise the minimum wage in NC? Many other states have done that.

2. Teacher pay was consistently at the bottom of nationwide rankings, at around 48th. Why didn't they raise teacher's pay?

3. If Universal Health Care Coverage is so important to them, why didn't they pass
a state law and implement universal coverage for the citizens of NC? They did it in

4. Why did they allow Duke Energy to build all those coal ash plants along all the NC waterways? All of them have been there for decades.

I can understand why Hagan wants to shy away from talking about national issues during her campaign because there is not much to say, but I believe I illustrated her and the Democrats record in state government is even worse. I also illustrated that she's had 16 years in public office and has done nothing for the constituents she claims to represent.

8 likes, 5 dislikes
Posted by Ed Bernal on 10/30/2014 at 1:19 PM

Re: “Our endorsements for the 2014 general election

I've found that if you support big business loving, statist, control freaks that want to run your life, the Indy is as reliable as the national Democrat party for excellent recommendations.
On the other hand, if you support Liberty, local businesses and organizations, and decreased government and big business control over your lives, you can do what I do and vote against everyone the Indy recommends. I thought the endorsement of the amendment was a nice touch, and noted with amusement the quandary the Martin/Lewis race put them in (fortunately they supported the solid establishment candidate that will do the bidding of the elites).
Thank you for again standing up for your "liberal" ideals by supporting all those who have no understanding of liberty or traditional liberalism.
In all seriousness - thanks for the discussion of the sheriffs race. While you were using phrases meant to ameliorate your endorsement of Mr. Rowe, all of your qualifiers are the reason I may vote for him, as he sounds like he has some understanding of liberty and the dangers of an over politicized/militarized police force.

6 likes, 6 dislikes
Posted by windskisong on 10/29/2014 at 5:14 PM

Re: “In Durham and Orange, these legislative contests are no contests

Thanks for the link to the text; I wish I were in that district so I could vote for him! He clearly gets how white people often have internalized racism in ways that they don't know because it is so heavily ingrained in our society and daily interactions. It's truly hard work.

It was thanks to reading this… years ago that I came to understood why "colorblind" and "I don't see skin color" is a major problem, particularly when white people say it.

0 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by AgentDani on 10/29/2014 at 3:44 PM

Re: “Our endorsements for the 2014 general election

Tom, "Vote straight Democratic ticket" is now illegal in N.C. You should try to read the Indy more often and you might know these things.

2 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by wian on 10/29/2014 at 3:33 PM

Re: “Local judge, clerk and district attorney races

Reading these endorsements demonstrates that this paper is and will continue to be a joke. Who would endorse a judge who has violated the law and tramples on the victim's right? Why in the world would we elect a judge who believes that because a statute is from "18 f--king 85" is somehow not important? There is a reason that Judge Evans received so many endorsements and Steve Storch none.. Storch is not and will not be good for Durham, he broke the law in front of the Durham County Courthouse! Again common sense tells you that a judge who breaks the law, pleads guilty and uses his political connections to receive a deferred prosecution can not be fair!

8 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by Justice4Durham on 10/28/2014 at 8:48 PM

Our Guides

© 2016 Indy Week • 201 W. Main St., Suite 101, Durham, NC 27701 • phone 919-286-1972 • fax 919-286-4274
RSS Feeds | Powered by Foundation