You must log in or register to comment.

uptown_gargoyle t1_j9jvcji wrote

I'd prefer for the Inquirer to spend fewer words describing how aggressive or confrontational they perceive Nutter to be in these series and more words on the actual substance of the exchanges themselves.


PHL852 t1_j9khdqs wrote

Agree. Inquirer’s mayoral election coverage has been a joke.


internet_friends t1_j9l3ib2 wrote

I was just reading their page earlier today on all the mayoral candidates. They have a paragraph or so for each candidate, and a full sentence of the paragraph is about the vibe that candidate gives off. I'm gen z but this doesn't appeal to me, please give me a better breakdown of what the candidates have and haven't accomplished in their previous roles and what policies they're interested in putting in place if they become mayor


ADFC t1_j9lcqug wrote

Philadelphia citizen has done some solid coverage for the mayoral race if you haven’t had the chance to check out their page.


Barmelo_Xanthony t1_j9l7jai wrote

It seems like they went downhill drastically very recently. I was a paying subscriber to them for a long time and thought they were by far the best coverage of the city but just recently cancelled.


Ng3me t1_j9jw0gr wrote

I agree with your critique of the way politics is covered generally but I also think Nutter is obscuring the issues by being overly aggressive. He isn’t running for mayor. He shouldn’t be there to debate the candidates. But he is sucking up the headlines and attention after almost all of these events. He’s performing on a stage too much at these events. When candidates for mayor speak to the public, the former mayor shouldn’t be up there trying to steal the headlines. It’s a difficult task but they need someone who can challenge candidates without making it about themselves.


flamehead2k1 t1_j9jy1t0 wrote

He's grabbing headlines because asking tough questions to candidates is newsworthy these days.

After Kenney, we need to be asking tough questions. Nutter seems to be the most willing and able to do so.


14FunctionImp t1_j9jyd9m wrote

Which explains why I didn't even know he interviewed Rhynhart.


flamehead2k1 t1_j9kgv1h wrote

I didn't see it and can believe he was easy on her but I suspect it was just a boring conversation because she's an accountant focused on boring details.

While I think that's something we need in city hall, it unfortunately doesn't grab headlines which are needed to win elections.


ConfiaEnElProceso t1_j9kj1gs wrote

I mean, all of the interviews including that one are available online. Ignorance isn't really an excuse here.


I was there. He asked one remotely tough question of Rhynhart, which was more sexist than anything else, about what she would say to people who think she isn't tough enough. I thought it was offensive and sexist, but she reacted like she expected it, to the point that my friend suggested that they had agreed on it ahead of time. The rest was all softballs.

He was clearly more aggressive with Domb, trying to reign him in and cut him off. Then last night was next level as he really got under Parker's skin, digging into the residency requirement stuff, and then everything that happened with Gym.


flamehead2k1 t1_j9km854 wrote

I'm not claiming to watch every video. Explicitly stated as such and even said I believe he was easy on her.

Are you suggesting people need to watch every video to comment?


ConfiaEnElProceso t1_j9kn9gt wrote

How can you take issue with a characterization of an interview if you don't watch the interview? That seems basic.


flamehead2k1 t1_j9koc17 wrote

I wasn't taking issue with it. I was simply responding to a comment that was directed at me using the information I had available.

I qualified my statement by saying I didn't watch it. And I wasn't using my lack of watching it as an "excuse" in any way.

Not sure what your problem is but I've said all that I have to say on the issue. Enjoy your day


bukkakedebeppo t1_j9lovfd wrote

The Gym video is not on that youtube page.


ConfiaEnElProceso t1_j9lppk3 wrote

We are literally talking about the rhynhart interview, not Gym.

It will be up shortly, I'm sure. It sometimes takes them a day or two. I see the Parker video was recently uploaded.


bukkakedebeppo t1_j9lu4jk wrote

You said "all of the videos are there" and called the person asking about it ignorant for not bothering to look. So, not wanting to be an ignoramus, I looked. You don't need to be hostile to everyone.

It's fine if these things take time.


ConfiaEnElProceso t1_j9lv704 wrote

Huh? He opined without bothering to watch the video, and i provided a link to very video he didn't watch.


jmajek t1_j9kpglv wrote

This right here. I'm all for it Nutter. Kept asking tough questions and hold them to answers.


uptown_gargoyle t1_j9jxb5j wrote

I think he shouldn't have let Gym dodge his question about her conflict of interest in voting against the pharma rep bill. If being perceived as aggressive is the only way of preventing a politician from dodging a perfectly reasonable, important question, then I think a responsible moderator needs to be aggressive.

Maybe Nutter could have held Gym accountable by some means other than apparent aggression. Something about catching flies with honey instead of vinegar. But, as a voter, it's much more important to me that they do it than how they do it.


ConfiaEnElProceso t1_j9kj6vp wrote

I mean, Alan Domb's entire campaign seems to be a conflict of interest and Nutter let him off way easier than Gym.


ADFC t1_j9lcf1y wrote

Except one of them answered how they’ll avoid conflict of interest and the other candidate dodged the question


ConfiaEnElProceso t1_j9lcqmo wrote

He said he would announce a plan. I didn't find that answer convincing.


Cadiz215 t1_j9z844m wrote

He actually did announce a plan though


Barmelo_Xanthony t1_j9l6jn6 wrote

Is he there to “suck up headlines” or is he just pissed that the city that was in its best shape in history when he left in 2016 has reversed most of its progress?


TheNightmareOfHair t1_j9lef6y wrote

I'm sure there are a lot of pieces to this claim, but I'm just going to take the one I'm most knowledgeable on: "Homicides and violent crime hit record lows during my administration" (specifically 2013). Guess what? Homicides and violent crime bottomed out nationwide in 2013-14, then started trending up again everywhere after that (including in Philly, including in the last two years of Nutter's administration).

I'm tired of politicians who take credit for being in the right place at the right time. That's a signal that doesn't need boosting.


UndercoverPhilly t1_j9pvc5l wrote

Were you living in Philly from 2008-2016? If you were you at least saw the physical changes that were made in Center City (can't say that North Philly experienced the same) during that time. I moved to Philly in 2006 and it had changed for the better, including decreased crime in 10 years. The number of restaurants, businesses had increased in Center City as well.


TheNightmareOfHair t1_j9qcbf8 wrote

I was not living here, but the city that I was living in also changed greatly for the better during that time -- as did downtowns across the country.

So, just to be clear: I'm not saying that Philly didn't change for the better under Mayor X or Plan Y. I believe you when you say that it did -- and, specific to 2008-2014, I'd be a little surprised if it didn't. What I am saying is that if you're going to subscribe to a Great Mayor Theory, there's a higher bar than, "the city followed trends seen in most other American cities during that time." You wouldn't keep paying a financial advisor whose investments on your behalf merely tracked the market, even if that meant you got a 20% return, because an index fund would have accomplished the same thing.


UndercoverPhilly t1_j9rwal7 wrote

Okay. So it seems that you are attributing all the positives in cities during 2008-2014 to ex-President Obama then. It was a much better time for sure.

Back to Nutter. Was he better than Kenney? Check. Better than Street? Check. Better than Rendell? (Maybe not--I wasn't here before Street so I don't know, but people say Rendell was a great mayor). Better than Rizzo? Check--so racist that people wanted his statue removed. Better than Wilson Goode? Check. (MOVE bombing was his claim to fame).

That's going back about 40 years, and other than Rendell, Nutter was one of the best. Granted, the bar is low for Philly, but it is a city with a lot of problems.


TheNightmareOfHair t1_j9u9ea6 wrote

>So it seems that you are attributing all the positives in cities during 2008-2014 to ex-President Obama then.

Not really, no. I think there are some large-scale social phenomena that are just tough to explain. Going back to crime data (which, as I mentioned earlier, is what I know more about, so this is what I feel more comfortable dealing with -- and I also think crime/safety has a lot of knock-on effects that result in things like business development and cities "getting better" etc), there was somewhat of a global downward trend in homicides from 1990-2015 that no one has a particularly good explanation for either. Less pronounced than in the U.S., but still very noticeable and definitely statistically significant.

Anyway, I'll stop here, because I feel like you think I'm trying to fight with you. I'm really not. You might be right, for all I know -- maybe Nutter really was better than Street. IMO he was probably better than Kenney even under my stricter criteria, because most recently under Kenney Philly has actually been defying the national violent crime trends (and very much in the wrong direction). Ultimately I am trying encourage people to probe a bit more into the question of what indicates a "good mayor" and why. I appreciate you for engaging.


UndercoverPhilly t1_j9uu3gb wrote

You are basing your opinion just off of statistics, since you weren't even living here. A mayor is more than just crime statistics. They are the leadership, public face of a city, they choose the police commissioner in Philly, and many other things related to quality of life in a city. What and how we experience life in a city is important. You can look around your neighborhood and see if businesses are booming, more are starting up or they are closing. You can gauge how safe you feel, how many bums are on the street, etc. These are quality of life issues, and of course they are subjective, but they matter, and these are the mayor's legacy. Most people when they decide to move or stay in a city, they are considering quality of life issues, not statistics of what was going on in the world or other cities in the nation.


[deleted] t1_j9jypfu wrote



uptown_gargoyle t1_j9k1ve9 wrote

what makes you say that?


[deleted] t1_j9k2b1j wrote



dotcom-jillionaire t1_j9kdscm wrote

did nutter actually say "i'm exploring a run for mayor"? that whole 2 week episode just seemed like political gossip, which then required nutter to come out and say "no" so he could put an end to it.

as for brand, i know he was an occasional talking head on CNN but not sure he's even doing that anymore.

i feel like former politicians, who definitely have their own interests, can make for good hosts in these types of forums. journalists really don't play hardball or hold the subject accountable, especially when it comes to politics, lest their organization be denied some kind of access down the road (which is its own conflict of interest).

EDIT: thanks for the downvotes i guess?


a-german-muffin t1_j9kw50l wrote

> did nutter actually say "i'm exploring a run for mayor"? that whole 2 week episode just seemed like political gossip, which then required nutter to come out and say "no" so he could put an end to it.

Nutter didn't, but those in his circle/the wider Democratic party were somewhere between nudging and pressuring him to jump into the race, which was largely what those stories were about (and which arguably represented a part of the push, since the publicity didn't leave much room for him to continue to chill on the fence).


RoverTheMonster t1_j9kc9yy wrote

Ya I agree with this. Another run for mayor could damage his brand because he’s be walking into such a shit show that he couldn’t possible clean up


FifteenKeys t1_j9lpvnp wrote

It seems like there are not a ton of exciting paths for ex-mayors. The obvious next step is governor, but other than Rendell, when was the last time a Philadelphia mayor was able to pull that off? I think it'd be particularly hard for a Black mayor.

There are federal cabinet or agency positions, especially if a Democrat is in the White House. Buttigieg and Julio Castro come to mind. Nutter would be the right age and was based in a neighboring state to Biden, but I never saw his name tossed around when Biden was making his appointments.

There's also consulting and the private sector, but that doesn't keep you in the limelight. So I guess staying active in the media is what Nutter has to do if he wants to maintain some relevancy.


ClintBarton616 t1_j9kqihz wrote

Exactly. If you as an ex-elected want to be involved in debates like this, you need to be able to have some humble pie and expect that your choices might be criticized. It is not the place for you to relitigate your own record


bukkakedebeppo t1_j9ou07t wrote

I just saw the video - it is finally up - and he's not really confrontational at all. He's asking uncomfortable questions, to be sure, but he's cool as a cucumber. Helen is the one that gets hepped up.


uptown_gargoyle t1_j9ozi89 wrote

lots of people can't tell the difference between aggression/abuse and normal reasonable conflict anymore


CoffeeCrisis t1_j9jw28x wrote

I'd prefer any actual substantive rigorous journalism over the partisan shills that infect every level of news nowadays.

Edit: really hit a nerve lamenting the death of journalism huh lmao


ParallelPeterParker t1_j9kk7p7 wrote

>I'd prefer for the Inquirer to spend fewer words describing how aggressive or confrontational they perceive Nutter to be in these series and more words on the actual substance of the exchanges themselves.

I completely disagree. It goes to the substance and value of what nutter is doing. If he's putting his thumb on the scale, then just endorse someone instead of doing this song and dance.


Level-Adventurous t1_j9kqvft wrote

“ In his final question, Nutter noted that Gym said during a recent mayoral forum: “When I walk into the room, systems of oppression fall and new systems of opportunity come up.”

“I literally never heard Martin Luther King, Nelson Mandela, Mother Teresa, Mahatma Gandhi ever say anything like that,” he said. “But I guess I just want to ask, I mean is that what happened when you walked into the Union League?”

He was referring to Gym’s visit last month to the swanky Center City private club days after she criticized it for presenting an award to Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis.”



karensPA t1_j9kuwfg wrote

Lol I will say I miss the Nutter sense of humor.


NoTradeClause19 t1_j9luw9r wrote

So dry and so savage.

I love that progressives ragged on Nutter for years. Now he's in a position of impact where he can effect THEIR mayoral run and he is utilizing it.

Basically saying, "Oh, you thought this was over. This shit ain't easy."

I don't think getting offended when someone asks you tough questions and then whining to the press about previous history is smart electoral strategy. I guess we'll find out.

Gym's attitude in those quotes and her going to the media to cry about it might have just cost her my vote.


Rheum42 t1_j9lysxh wrote

Yeah, I would like to vote for her but she's not exactly prompting herself as one of "the common people"


NoTradeClause19 t1_j9m0z21 wrote

That "Systems of oppression fall" line is the most self-agrandizing BS I've heard come out a politician in a while.

I don't discredit people's experiences but acting like you're the only person just in this race who has had to deal with systems of oppression is laughable. She just comes across as a progressive who has had a lot of smoke blown up her bum.

Nutter was one of the better mayor's this city has seen in a while. Gym was constantly on his ass for not being progressive enough. I'm pretty liberal, but this city needs a fucking technocrat that gets the streets paved, the trash picked up, and cameras on street corners. Not someone virtue signalling by changing the pronouns used by the City Council.


Sunni_tzu t1_j9mnaia wrote

I’m pretty liberal too and I would volunteer for that campaign in a heartbeat. We need a good technocrat to run this city. We would probably actually get more done.


[deleted] t1_j9mqfcs wrote



Sunni_tzu t1_j9mwj0m wrote

Agreed. I do miss Nutter. Times have changed and things are different but I feel like he was respected by most, even if people didn’t agree with him. Plus he legit took part in the Red Bull Soap Box Derby in Manayunk like a million years ago lol.


KFCConspiracy t1_j9oqnmi wrote

Honestly, this has been who she's been all along. Those of us in progressive circles who have known her for years know she's more about attention than substance and action.


illy-chan t1_j9ljrsv wrote

If she wants to make a claim like that, she should expect people to ask her to prove it.


mexheavymetal t1_j9k5tbe wrote

At this point Helen Gym is a dead end candidate. All talk, no substance, no planning, and for all the posturing and holier than thou arrogance she has, her husband is an attorney for a company that helped perpetuate the opioid epidemic. As far as I’m concerned this mayoral election is between Rhynhart and Domb.


99centstalepretzel t1_j9k7ioa wrote

I've followed Helen Gym's trajectory ever since she worked at Asian Americans United (when there was talk about casinos being built in Chinatown), and when the Asian students at South Philly High took their case to the DoJ. I'm disappointed and sad at what's she's become (maybe it's always been like that, without the gift of hindsight), but not surprised at all. The fact that some of those kids who took their case to the DoJ are now adults who work in public service/community organizing/nonprofit/advocacy and who are giving back to their communities is no coincidence to her impact.

We could have had it all...🎶

EDITED TO ADD: A few words.


ConfiaEnElProceso t1_j9kln8w wrote

Excuse the ignorance but what do you mean? You seem to imply that you used to support Gym but are now disappointed by her. What changed in your opinion?


internet_friends t1_j9l5df9 wrote

I'm not the person who wrote that comment but I do like Helen Gym and do not plan to vote for her for mayor. I agree with the previous commenter that I really liked her start into politics and my values align closely with hers; I also like the focus she puts on Philly's school system, which is a fucking trainwreck. With that said, I don't plan to vote for her because I haven't seen any substantial plans from her on how she'd tackle a variety of issues if she was mayor. I was also extremely put off about the whole Union League debacle and finding out about her husband/that pharma bill from 2019. I think the most off-putting thing about her to me is that much of her platform is built on accountability, which I find extremely important, but haven't seen her take much accountability herself.


KFCConspiracy t1_j9or1h7 wrote

> I also like the focus she puts on Philly's school system

Well, for what it's worth, without fixing the state's school funding formula, that's probably not getting fixed either. There's been some progress on that front through the courts, but the mayor and city council don't have much power to fix that. Hell, we didn't even have a locally controlled schoolboard until very recently.


internet_friends t1_j9orgo9 wrote

Oh, it's a mess. I'm with you - one person cannot solve Philly's education crisis. But I do love the focus Gym puts on the school district, and admire her for trying.


KFCConspiracy t1_j9otj9m wrote

I think the more serious candidates talk about the funding crisis and tell those harder truths about it. I think the more in touch someone is with the reality of it the more likely the problem is to get solved.


TheNightmareOfHair t1_j9ley5o wrote

This may not be what "accountability" looks like to you but FWIW she apologized swiftly & publicly for the Union League debacle.


internet_friends t1_j9lg4rc wrote

I saw that apology. I wasn't a huge fan. She basically said "I attended, and I shouldn't have. I'm sorry. I have opposed the Union League for a long time. I'll continue to uphold my values that Philly has no place for hate." Which feels incredibly contradictory to me. If you shouldn't have gone and realized it that night, okay...but you've opposed the Union League for a long time yet still showed up? But you're going to continue to uphold your values? To me, her actions signaled to the Union League that this behavior is okay, even though it's against her values. I would have preferred to have seen her take accountability, admit that the Union League does contradict her own values, and commit to making sure that she will not make similar missteps in the future.


kilometr t1_j9livqy wrote

I think the Union League debacle was shows the issues with her style of politics. She forgot about her past statement. So much politics nowadays is about opposing and boycotting every organization/corporation/person that holds views you don’t agree with. At a certain point it gets exhausting and I bet politicians can’t keep a mental list of what they need to avoid to not look like a hypocrite.


99centstalepretzel t1_j9kaahg wrote

PS - Despite my feelings - I'm in full agreement with you on who Helen Gym is, as a mayoral candidate.


Marko_Ramius1 t1_j9kbpkj wrote

I've said this before, but I'm somewhat expecting that Gym will end up winning due to the primary laws. All she needs is 1 vote more than the second place runner up in a field of 9 (?) people running, with plenty of candidates overlapping in their natural constituencies i.e Rhynhart and Domb get the establishment white Dems, Derek Green and Cherelle Parker split the black vote etc. And with reclaim behind her, that may be enough because even though they're far-left loons they show up to vote for their people


99centstalepretzel t1_j9kcexm wrote

Yup, Helen Gym winning due to primary laws is very much a possibility, too. In that case, it would be more disappointing, since the person who is running on 100% pure ✨vibes✨is rewarded (There's more than 1 candidate running on fumes, but Helen Gym is Queen of ✨vibes✨ for me at this point).


internet_friends t1_j9l5qpy wrote

What makes you say Gym is the queen of vibes at this point in the race? I don't plan on voting for her, but I'm curious as to what makes you say that. In my opinion almost all the candidates currently are running on vibes, and Gym is no different (but not worse) than several other candidates.


TheNightmareOfHair t1_j9lfdja wrote

Cherelle Parker was 100% vibes last night. Truly verging on stream of consciousness. Gym's answers seemed direct and crystal clear by contrast.


espressocycle t1_j9l5kep wrote

I think there's more overlap between the establishment white Dems and flaky progressives than you might be assuming here. I'm personally hoping MQS will be a dark horse and end up building the largest coalition, but really... anybody but Gym.


espressocycle t1_j9l3vgk wrote

Rhynhart and Domb? I'm not gonna say they have no chance because in a crowded race you can win without broad support but I will be very surprised if Domb is more than a blip and Rhynhart has a very narrow path.


99centstalepretzel t1_j9k3e71 wrote

I have very mixed feelings about this article.

On one hand, I love Philly, I do. And anybody who takes the Mayor's seat needs to be confronted with tough questions, instead of running on ✨vibes✨. And who better to do it than Former Mayor Nutter? He's done the job a couple of times and knows what it's like. I'm not his best friend or anything like that, but I am glad that he is there to ask the questions. Still not crazy about him asking Rhynhart softball questions, but whatever, politics schmolitics.

What I'm not crazy about is how The Inquirer (I'm only subscribing to them because I want more accountability as an org; for every one or two good journalists there - you get clowns that write articles like this) okay'd an article that basically paints a Black man as "scary" for "being aggressive" in asking questions or whatever. As someone who's very visibly marginalized person, I'm especially attuned to things like this, because it's an everyday occurrence for me (it just happens in a form of death by a thousand papercuts and not written down by a journalist who clearly doesn't have as good of grasp of power dynamics that they might have thought). And how journalists and editors okay'd this is...just fucked up.


Marko_Ramius1 t1_j9kcxe2 wrote

>And anybody who takes the Mayor's seat needs to be confronted with tough questions, instead of running on ✨vibes✨

I agree with this, especially since the current guy has done nothing in his tenure to improve city services. IMO that makes it even more important in this election to have someone who's a good at dealing with the nuts and bolts of running government efficiently, since that's 95% of the mayor's job. Another candidate who's asleep at the wheel and only cares about platitudes/abstract policies is just gonna lead to more of the same as it has been under Kenney.


99centstalepretzel t1_j9keoo0 wrote

Right?! You want to be the face of a city?! Step up and be accountable to your actions and answer to your constituents.

Anyone who runs for office for the 'gram should be summarily casted out of the race.


Robert_A_Bouie t1_j9ki0kt wrote

Cancel your Inquirer subscription (I did) and stop sending them money every month for their garbage "journalism."


99centstalepretzel t1_j9kisxh wrote

It's a thought that's crossed my mind more than once, as of late. Sigh.


AbsentEmpire t1_j9lbleu wrote

I also canceled my subscription because of the shit quality articles they put out and blantent conflicts of interest.

I don't care about a politician's vibes, I care about what thier qualifications are, what thier vision for the city is, and how they will implement it.


bushwhack227 t1_j9qcrnq wrote

They have produced some great journalism recently, like the investigation into the PPD disability scams.


MagnusUnda t1_j9w8hej wrote

That series saved us all tax money. They should get a Pulitzer for it


ConfiaEnElProceso t1_j9kklcj wrote

Which section in the article do you think painted Nutter as "scary" for "being aggressive?"

I can understand that as a legitimate concern. It just didn't read that way to me. The full videos are online so people can certainly make their own judgments. I don't think it is unfair to say that Nutter was the most aggressive questioner of all the candidates, or that his approach has differed from candidate to candidate. I didn't get the impression of him as "scary" either in-person nor in the article.


99centstalepretzel t1_j9l49fb wrote

I wasn't saying that he was aggressive, because I watched the videos, too. I appreciate anyone who can cut through the bullshit and ask the tough questions. I think you and I are in agreement, for this much.

But if I were someone who was reading The Inquirer alone? I would have thought that Mayor Nutter was personally waterboarding Gym, live on stage. "it was tense", "he kept asking her questions, shown by the repetition in paragraphs". I mean, shit, I get that newspaper articles are supposed to be simple to read, but a responsibility of a journalist is painting a picture. And the journalist was painting *a picture* that some folks who are historically in the majority will get, and a wholly different picture for people not historically in the majority will get.

Could he be less confrontational about his questions to Helen Gym? Sure. Why not? The fault is still on her for running a ✨vibes✨-based campaign.


ConfiaEnElProceso t1_j9l9nsc wrote

Thanks for the response. I was/am genuinely interested in understanding the way the article read to you.

Do you mean to say "I wasn't saying that he was *NOT* aggressive?" in your first line?

I'll admit that it may be hard for me to read the article as painting a sinister picture because I read it only after watching the encounter in person. Being in the room, it was tense. Very much so. He did keep asking questions. The description matched what I felt while in the room, but at no time did it feel threatening or scary or anything out of place for the forum.


PHL852 t1_j9khaj9 wrote

Maybe because Rynhart isn’t incompetent talking head who just stirs controversy for PR? Gym has been totally useless, is a total fraud.


karensPA t1_j9ku7wn wrote

I don’t remember Nutter being “a bogeyman to the left?” seems like some revisionist history.


Beer_Summit t1_j9l0bpp wrote

Right. Nutter ran against the machine-endorsed candidate and won because of strong support from white liberals and black professionals. He was the candidate of competency, not centrism.

Staying with this theme, Gym was an exceptionally competent and effective agitator, activist, and advocate for our public schools before she ran for office. As a councilwoman, however, she's been an embarrassment. I identify as a progressive but above all else, I want honest and competent governance. I have little faith that she's up to the task.


kilometr t1_j9mx4x1 wrote

At the end of the day all the candidates are part of the same political party, and thus support almost the same politics/ideals. There isn’t much room between them all and debating which one is a true progressive is a waste of time. We should be focusing on competency since we’ve been dealing with the lack thereof for 8 years in a city that is struggling.


randym99 t1_j9k2r7t wrote

I'm looking forward to the video of the interview. If you haven't yet, please check out the Philadelphia Citizen's YouTube channel, the interviews with each candidate are the longer videos (~50 mins)


thefirststoryteller OP t1_j9koaqe wrote

I was there for the event last night (I was the guy whose question for Cherelle Parker was about Disability quality of life under a Parker administration) and I kind of thought Nutter was tough on both Parker and Gym. Parker and Gym both differed on how they approached those questions.

Gym got a lot of applause out of the crowd during her exchanges with Nutter. Another panelist, Leaphart, wasn’t so friendly to Gym either.

It’s also important to think about Nutter and his connection to the Citizen. He’s trying to do stuff post-mayoralty and right now that includes a podcast series with the Citizen (The How to Really Run a City podcast) which is probably why he was at these Ultimate Job Interviews too.

Another UJI isn’t scheduled which is a shame. There are more candidates to go but I sense the Citizen has a small staff so capacity is an issue. Also the candidates who haven’t gone (A. Brown, DeLeon, Bloom, Mike Stack, David Oh) are probably seen as less-viable.


TheNightmareOfHair t1_j9ktna4 wrote

Sorry your question got such a non-answer from Parker. I wholeheartedly agree with "we need a walkable city, not just a city built for cars," but she didn't seem to be directly addressing the question at all.


thefirststoryteller OP t1_j9kw9v9 wrote

I agree it’s not a direct answer. A lot of us do use mobility aids so issues like not blocking curb cuts, having walkable sidewalks, and etc are all really important.

But are we gonna get those sidewalks fixed under a Parker administration so a woman who uses a wheelchair can safely travel outside? Is a Parker administration gonna help the Housing Authority make units accessible? As Mayor would Parker work with the Mayor’s Commission for People with Disabilities or would that group generally be ignored? We don’t know.


espressocycle t1_j9l65ow wrote

The only benefit to pedestrians of a Parker administration would be that she will have her own driver.


ConfiaEnElProceso t1_j9kyhyq wrote

Nutter was significantly more aggressive in questioning both candidates last night than he was with Domb and Rhynhart. He pressed both on specific issues and legislation that they supported (Parker the residency requirement stuff, Gym the lawsuit against the city by the school district.) I wonder if he got feedback that he was too soft the last round, or if those candidates just aligned more with his moderate, pro-business values.

That said, the animosity felt real and personal when Gym went on the attack against his record as mayor in terms of supporting schools. It was only after that he dropped the line asking whether she said the quote about systems of oppression falling away, when she entered the Union League. It felt like a low blow. It was certainly fair to ask about the Union League but in this context it felt like a punchline to get a rise out of the audience and Gym. I also thought that he pressed her way harder on the potential conflict of interest with the pharma bill than he pressed Domb about his potential conflicts of interest.

Didn't they mention possibly trying to set up a second round of interviews focused more on policy? I would certainly attend. This format was more effective than listening to a stump speech while offering more depth than a traditional debate.


vmtyler t1_j9l5dz2 wrote

The entire nutter schtick is a joke. The “just asking tough questions” except to his two preferred candidates. Rhynhart is particular is egregious because she worked for him.

The only reason people even care about nutter is because Kenney is so terrible he mades Nutter’s shit job look a lot better in comparison.


ConfiaEnElProceso t1_j9la1u0 wrote

Is it a schtick? I am not familiar enough with him to know.

I will say that the "Is she tough enough" question to Rhynhart was the single most offensive question asked of any of the candidates. No way that gets asked of a male candidate.


ADFC t1_j9le1tn wrote

It’s not a schtick. Nutter had some tough times in office navigating budget cuts and the recession, but he left this city in a much better place than his predecessor and probably feels irked that his successor is leading us back down the drain we crawled up from.


espressocycle t1_j9l0neq wrote

Gym is the Marjorie Taylor Green of the left, a master of performative politics, feigned outrage and shameless hypocrisy. So try to interview her and that's what you're gonna get.


internet_friends t1_j9l68kk wrote

Really don't think this is a fair comparison. Hate Gym all you want, but please don't compare anyone to the monstrosity that is MTG.


TheNightmareOfHair t1_j9ky7mk wrote

I've been to two of these events (4 candidates), and my observation is that Nutter has consistently been leaning into a "tough guy asking tough questions" vibe. He likes his "lightning rounds," even though it's obviously ridiculous to expect an illuminating answer to "All-time most/greatest/worst ___" in 30 seconds. IMO his treatment of Rhynhart ("Some people are saying you aren't tough enough for this job; are you tough enough for this job?") did as much of a disservice to her as his treatment of Gym ("How are you not a hypocrite?"), just in a different way.

What this article doesn't mention is that early on in her interview (in response to a question from the first interviewer, I think), Gym straight-up accused the last several mayors of either completely ignoring or actively working to undermine public education. You can see why that might have raised Nutter's hackles. I am torn between appreciating Gym for being willing to stick her neck out and say what she believes (I think too many politicians follow the path of least resistance to [re-]election), and feeling like it shows really bad judgment to pick a fight with one of your interviewers.

On the flip side, as others here have already said, Nutter had the opportunity to be the adult in the room and focus on doing his job -- interviewing the candidate for our collective edification -- instead of defending his record. He chose to defend his record.

It was also kind of a dick move for him to ask Gym about a specific bill in a public forum (he loves leading with the bill number, which I think is just another tactic to make them sweat), and then cut her off when she tried to (very briefly) characterize that bill. No one cares whether you understand the bill, Nutter; the real audience is the other 250 people sitting here. Gym pushed back firmly on that and was right to do so.


ConfiaEnElProceso t1_j9lbbzt wrote

Agreed on Nutter relishing his role as the tough interviewer after a bunch of softballs lazed up there by the other interviewers. It almost makes me wonder if they asked the other interviewers not to push the candidates on anything, but leave it to Nutter.

I mean, I haven't been back in Philly long enough to remember the Nutter administration, but from what I read, Gym has been a thorn in his side going back at least a decade. I don't get the impression that either of them needed to say anything to raise the hackles of the other. They seem to have real long-standing animosity. They didn't shake hands or interact at all on stage afterwards either (as far as I could see)

I don't think asking a candidate to defend a controversial vote or policy is a dick move at all. He did the exact same thing with Parker and the residency requirement. It was unfair not to allow her to give context to the audience. And the Union league quip seemed like much more of a low-blow, when it could have been asked in a thoughtful yet critical way.


TheNightmareOfHair t1_j9lcz27 wrote

Right, to clarify, I was saying was that the dick move was cutting her off when she tried to say anything about the bill in her answer. The question itself was a fair one and I'm disappointed that Gym dodged it.


BigShawn424 t1_j9kfbj4 wrote

No surprise there. Nutter should run again.


joaofava t1_j9ofhqp wrote

Please no more city councilpeople for mayor.


DutyRoutine t1_j9mpjgb wrote

I give Nutter credit, he'll ask the tough questions, as opposed to the so called journalists of the Inquirer, who don't have the guts to ask the tough questions.


Argazm t1_j9lc98t wrote

If you’re being interviewed by a former mayor when running for mayor, doesn’t seem like it would be beyond the pale to bring up that guy’s record


seeyouinhelenkellers t1_j9luy5t wrote

Nutter is a terrible tipper.


JoeMarini t1_j9of3fv wrote

he also loves doing coke in the Del Friscos bathroom with hookers


seeyouinhelenkellers t1_j9pbwoy wrote

YO THANK YOU. I was trying and failing to remember the other shitty rumors about him.


_Celine_Dijon t1_j9ordda wrote

Meh. Tipping is whack. We got to get rid of that system .


seeyouinhelenkellers t1_j9pcz7m wrote

Doesn't change the fact that Nutter is a notably shitty tipper and overall restaurant patron.


amtworks t1_j9ocdqw wrote

Say what you want about Nutter but at least he ran the City, unlike who we have now.


hoagiesaurus t1_j9w8rul wrote

After watching the video, the inquirer's take of the interview was disorienting. Voters are worried about corruption in politics; his questions were about swapping positions on charter schools,and he asked about her conflict of interest and did allude to the union league visit, after she declared a protest to the Union league. These are totally fair questions, and important for voters to understand what politicians say versus actions they take.

The inquirer had a very poor idea to just talk about the drama (out of proportion) and not the actual issues. Very disappointing.


sunshinegal_7 t1_ja1k6ub wrote

While I’m never been a fan of Gym I’d like to note that clearly he asked Rynhart the most basic rudimental questions in the world which I’ve noticed a lot when it comes to questioning her,


AtBat3 t1_j9kiui2 wrote

Damn Nutter looks like shit now