In an article in the November 1, 2007 the City Paper chose Brown over Foster in a "newspaper" primary but made this statement. "A quick caveat: We are not issuing an endorsement in the overall 8th
District race because we haven't met with Miller or Green Party
candidate Brian Rudnick." And..."Brown.. declined to offer any thoughts on what legislation he might introduce, should he be elected."
Full article here and below
"THE DECIDERS
The choice is ours. Last month, we published a story arguing that Philadelphia's 8th Councilmanic District had too many damn candidates, and that the only way incumbent Donna Reed Miller could be given a real test (and voters a real choice) would be for the field of challengers to somehow be winnowed down [News, "Fight of the Conquered," Oct. 11, 2007].
Well, a week ago,the two independent challengers, Jim Foster and the Rev. Jesse Brown, came to us with a surprising proposal: They would seek endorsements from the Inquirer, Daily News, and City Paper, and the candidate who received fewer endorsements would officially support the other. Well, the Inquirer endorsed Brown last week, and the Daily News hasn't endorsed yet, so as far as we could tell Tuesday, we could still make or break this thing.
A quick caveat: We are not issuing an endorsement in the overall 8th District race because we haven't met with Miller or Green Party candidate Brian Rudnick. We solely agreed to endorse in the Foster/Brown "newspaper primary," even though not a soul among us lives in the 8th. We did so because a) we were asked to, and b) the situation there is ridiculous. Although, for the record, we don't believe media endorsements are a great way to weed out candidates.
So, down to business. We interviewed both Brown and Foster in our offices on Monday. Both
were knowledgeable about the 8th, and generally straightforward; both
also seemed, at times, a little green as politicians. Brown, for instance, declined to offer any thoughts on what legislation he might introduce, should he be elected.
But for all his familiarity with the district, Foster seems to be
driven largely by an animus for the incumbent; when we asked what he
thought each neighborhood in the district needed, he basically said,
"for Miller to go away," which, whether justified or not, seems
irrelevant. Brown, by contrast, expressed a positive vision, at least
in terms of constituent service. So in the end, we've decided to go
with the Reverend.
Short of hearing the Daily News'
take, we suppose this means Foster has to drop out and back Brown.
Whether this will matter, we couldn't tell you. It sure seems late in
the game, with the election on Tuesday, after all. Still, we applaud
the candidates for the gesture in any case, and wish them luck — even
if the only vote Brown gains from this whole production is Foster's."- Doron Taussig
