Theresa did well. She has the experience and the time to represent the common man. No doubt she puts in more than a 40 hr week to represent me, and every other working class citizen of SF. Will, or more importantly, can Jensen do the same? No, he can not. He kept ramming home his record in Pierre. Really? Does he really want to go there? He also mentioned Daugaard a few times. Why? I suppose he has to give props to the single highest campaign contributor he had, ($10,000), but again, why? If you think for one minute jensen will not bow to the wishes of daugaard, then I have some ocean front property down by Beresford you’d be interested in.
Often a Daugaard endorsement is a kiss of death. Daugaard’s endorsement of Alex! reminds me of the strategy that Jamison had at the end of his race against Huether, where he went totally GOP; and it didn’t work.
Remember, if you vote for Alex!, then you are voting for a greater council that hands out TIFs like candy to the affluent, who are often landlords, too, while it votes “No” to protect tenants from evictions during a pandemic and its adjoining economic downturn.
This debate was a worthwhile 1-hour listen. Everybody played fair, but Stehly was clearly the more mature and experienced public servant in the room. She presents herself as comfortable and confident in such a event; she stated clear, relevant answers while keeping her assertions positive ones. Stehly didn’t need to resort to disparaging any particular person, while still accentuating her record and positions on public issues.Â
Jensen didn’t throw any cheap shots, other than a reference to the current council having a poor record of drama or whatever, as “reported in the paper lately†or something to that effect. However, he responded to more than one question with far more a campaign speech template than a real answer to the specific question posed to both candidates.
Particularly telling was one of the latter debate questions, which was probably one of the most challenging to answer effectively: “Assess your opponents strength & weaknesses.†Stehly answered skillfully, objectively and effectively without resorting to negativity. Jensen’s answer to the same question demonstrated a far lesser degree of character, maturity, intelligence and diplomacy; he spoke only of himself without the courage to review Stehly’s strengths, weaknesses and qualifications. In short: he dodged the question, focused inward, and took the easy way out.Â
Another term for the far more experienced Councilor Stehly is what will best benefit Sioux Falls residents THIS year in THIS election. Jensen simply doesn’t have the years of municipal experience that Stehly brings to the table THIS YEAR.
Jensen is young, and will have to opportunity to buy one or more elections in the future. . . perhaps even this same office after Stehly term limits out of office.
Stehly, like or not, has a four-year track record on the Council.
With the challenging times SF faces in the very-near future, both with a potential resurgence of the covid virus and the drop in sales tax revenue (despite the rosy picture, Director of Finance, Shawn Prichett tried to paint) we need Stehly’s Vote on the Council.
You never know, could just be a two-year term. I’d like to see her run for mayor in 2022.
Theresa did well. She has the experience and the time to represent the common man. No doubt she puts in more than a 40 hr week to represent me, and every other working class citizen of SF. Will, or more importantly, can Jensen do the same? No, he can not. He kept ramming home his record in Pierre. Really? Does he really want to go there? He also mentioned Daugaard a few times. Why? I suppose he has to give props to the single highest campaign contributor he had, ($10,000), but again, why? If you think for one minute jensen will not bow to the wishes of daugaard, then I have some ocean front property down by Beresford you’d be interested in.
Do we need another yes man on the council.Stehley is a fighter for the common person.I thank her for sticking up for us.
Often a Daugaard endorsement is a kiss of death. Daugaard’s endorsement of Alex! reminds me of the strategy that Jamison had at the end of his race against Huether, where he went totally GOP; and it didn’t work.
Remember, if you vote for Alex!, then you are voting for a greater council that hands out TIFs like candy to the affluent, who are often landlords, too, while it votes “No” to protect tenants from evictions during a pandemic and its adjoining economic downturn.
This debate was a worthwhile 1-hour listen. Everybody played fair, but Stehly was clearly the more mature and experienced public servant in the room. She presents herself as comfortable and confident in such a event; she stated clear, relevant answers while keeping her assertions positive ones. Stehly didn’t need to resort to disparaging any particular person, while still accentuating her record and positions on public issues.Â
Jensen didn’t throw any cheap shots, other than a reference to the current council having a poor record of drama or whatever, as “reported in the paper lately†or something to that effect. However, he responded to more than one question with far more a campaign speech template than a real answer to the specific question posed to both candidates.
Particularly telling was one of the latter debate questions, which was probably one of the most challenging to answer effectively: “Assess your opponents strength & weaknesses.†Stehly answered skillfully, objectively and effectively without resorting to negativity. Jensen’s answer to the same question demonstrated a far lesser degree of character, maturity, intelligence and diplomacy; he spoke only of himself without the courage to review Stehly’s strengths, weaknesses and qualifications. In short: he dodged the question, focused inward, and took the easy way out.Â
Another term for the far more experienced Councilor Stehly is what will best benefit Sioux Falls residents THIS year in THIS election. Jensen simply doesn’t have the years of municipal experience that Stehly brings to the table THIS YEAR.
Jensen is young, and will have to opportunity to buy one or more elections in the future. . . perhaps even this same office after Stehly term limits out of office.
Jensen clearly lacks experience and substance.
Stehly, like or not, has a four-year track record on the Council.
With the challenging times SF faces in the very-near future, both with a potential resurgence of the covid virus and the drop in sales tax revenue (despite the rosy picture, Director of Finance, Shawn Prichett tried to paint) we need Stehly’s Vote on the Council.
You never know, could just be a two-year term. I’d like to see her run for mayor in 2022.
Jensen … lacks substance. This is s consensus I hear as these forums and debates continue.
An extremely well-funded, yet vapid and vacuous candidacy.