Brian,
Christy's web ads are only running on the Local news tab of the Star and on the Ventura version of YourHub. They won't appear over your blog.

It's something she's trying to engage voters in a positive way so they can click on the link to her website and learn more about her. She likes this approach better than putting out campaign signs on every public corner of the city as some candidates are doing right now. She has signs out there, but most of them are on private property with the owner's permission. Her supporters have put out a few elsewhere, though, I've noticed.

Marie, for some reason her website isn't pulling up when I click on it. It works with the www.PoliticalCentrists.com link so there must be something wrong with the banner ad.

Re: signs - they are everywhere! "they" being all the candidates but Carl Morehouse. Is it usually like this?

And Carrol Dean Williams - no signs for him either.

It works when I do it, Katie. It doesn't turn into the little hand symbol though, when your cursor goes over it. You just click and it goes. I'll mention this to Christy.

Yes, the signs are everywhere and they are unsightly, in my opinion. Carl has yard signs out. I've seen them. He isn't putting them on the street. What happens here is the supporters of each candidate try to outdo each other with more and more signs. Jerry Martin's signs are the worst. They are just too big.

I would love to know what the research says about campaign signs. Anybody out there know? I have been told they are useful in small amounts and are only notable in their absence.

Marie,

Actually, I've seen Christy Weir's signs all over the place too (not just on private property). She also has some pretty big signs out there too. I agree Jerry Martin's are obnoxious-looking and pollute the landscape, but I thought Weir would be more sensitive about cluttering up the City with those things given her stand on the environment, etc.

Fulton's are few and far between. Rencher's are all over the place and many of them have been thrashed by the wind, which makes them even more unsightly. Gibson has quite a few out there now, although they're a bit more tasteful looking than the others. Same thing with Halter (I like the colors he used). Cunningham's look like those you'd see on a used car lot.

Christy's big signs are on private property with the owner's permission. I don't think Jerry has gotten permission for any of his big ones, but I could be wrong.

Christy's small signs, like Bill's, are only placed sparingly on public property, from what I have seen. It's hard to stop supporters from doing this when they see other's signs out everywhere.

Bill had more signs up at one time but they were stolen. Kids like to vandalize then.

I don't understand Cunningham's slogan: "Honesty you can trust" Huh? As opposed to honesty you can't trust?

Yeah, I think whether Weir's signs are on public or private property, it's the same result - big, ugly signs in public view (and in some cases, blocking views).

I agree with you though on Cunningham's slogan - it sounds like old world politics at its worst. I think Nixon had a similar slogan back in the '60's and look how that turned out.

I will say, of all the signs, I think Gibson's convey a certain sensitivity for the environment (they're small, simple, direct, "green", and may even be made of biodegradable paper, from what I can tell). From what I've read about the impact of political signs, if you are trying to achieve more name recognition, you definitely need to get signs out there, as long as you do it tastefully and inoffensively. I think he's the only one who has come close to hitting the mark on this.

That's hilarious. Maybe he should go instead with "Chopped down a cherry tree". ROFL!

Well gee, Green Team, I wonder who you are rooting for?

Actually, the property owners where Christy's big signs are asked Christy if they could display a sign for her. For example, the owner of the new restaurant which is being renovated on Chestnut and Main asked for the biggest sign he could get and put it in his window.

Marie, no, actually, I'm not rooting for anyone at this point. I'm one of those dreaded "undecideds". Given my environmental involvement, I'm leaning towards supporting the incumbents, but I'd give someone like Gibson a chance if I knew a bit more about his positions on things. I'm definitely not going to vote for someone because I like his signs (pretty shallow reason).

Oh please, you are without a doubt a Gibson supporter. Nobody else would go on and on about a candidate's signs like that.

I just argue with the same person over and over on this site.

I wish somebody would make a pre-campaign "gentleman's agreement" between all the candidates (school board, too) that we wouldn't do the sign wars every election season. Even the greenest of candidates feels compelled to put up signs. Mary Haffner (a bona fide environmentalist if there ever was one) tried telling her supporters two years ago to just keep them in their lawns.

But when her supporters saw signs for other candidates springing up everywhere, they started doing it, too.

Is Gibson an environmentalist? Has any green group come out to support him? I know he supports Walmart and that his backers said he was too conservative for the Chamber of Commerce. On top of that his supporters brag about his ties to the Ventura County Republicans. His signs look like a greenwash attempt unless I see any proof he supports any green causes.

Didn't he rail against trying to locally fight against global warming?

Marie,

Can't an honest voter get a fair shake from you? I am totally appalled and insulted by your assertions.

I will bet anyone that "Green Team" is a part of the Gibson campaign. We on Mr. Team?

Hey, Green Gibson, at least Mr. (to you) Gibson has the huevos to speak up when the State Attorney General tries to ram another foolish notion down the throats of cities and counties. Morehouse just folds like a deck of cards when Attorney General Moonbeam starts flexing his muscles. I thought the League of California Cities' role was to advocate and fight for the interests of cities, not roll over and play dead.

Oh, wait a minute, I get it. Morehouse agrees 100% with Moonbeam. Never mind. Now we have Mayor Moonbeam to contend with. Out you go.....

Green Team,

You are insulted that I thought you were a Gibson supporter? Why would that be?

Marie,

Because you have doubted the veracity of what I said in my previous post. That I am an "undecided" voter at this time. I am considering my options and, yes, Gibson could be one of them. I would sincerely like to know more about some of his positions and I'm currently researching this.

It looks like you are definitely a Weir supporter. If I were her, I'd have strong reservations about having someone like you representing her given your attitude toward other voters.

I'm not representing anyone but myself.

If you were posting under your real name, I'd be happy to believe you. Everyone is suspicious on a blog, especially on this one, it seems!

What could the motivation be to post under a fake name that you haven't chosen a candidate?

This guy is just here to pump his candidate. Kind of like the other fake names that always pop up when someone says Gibson. Speaking of which, where did Jill Dominque and Mongo go?

Nothing is wrong with supporting a candidate, but be honest.

Green, feel free to reveal your real name being that you have said nothing of any consequence besides you are undecided and thinking about voting for Gibson. There would be nothing to be afraid of if all of that is true.

How come all of the Gibson supporters come and go and have fake names? Seems like fickle support.

Thanks, "Not a Member..." I don't know who you are, but I appreciate the backup.

Jill, Pick Axe, Mongo, Chastity, Green Team. Same person. Same viewpoint. Same deceptions.

Ventura, Ventura Freedom, Ron......

Mongo and Chastity are the same person but a younger/more naive version of the rest.

Ventura, Ventura Freedom, Ron......

Mongo and Chastity are the same person but a younger/more naive version of the rest.

All you Ventura bloggers might be interested in this: Carroll Dean Williams was escorted off the grounds of Foothill High School yesterday for trying to crash a high school debate at lunchtime. He's also running for School Board.

I did a search and Mike Gibson's name came up 684 times on the Dennert blog. I think he should win some kind of an award for that.

I decided I am going to take Green Team at his/her word (despite what other bloggers here think). GT, since you are an environmentalist and an undecided voter, I would suggest going to the site linked to my name.

Here you will find video interviews with all the Ventura candidates. They are asked to issue a statement first and then they are asked questions by Star and CAPS-TV reporters.

It's really informative and will help you make up your mind.

I'm just jumping in on this one and want to back-track to the signs--

I think that they are ridiculous! Nonetheless, has anyone else noticed that the one with by far the MOST signs in high-population and highly traveled areas is BRIAN RENCHER. Wouldn't that be nuts if he won.

The unions are also putting out a lot of Jerry Martin signs and it appears that Fulton is trying to attach his name to almost every candidate.

Regarding Mike Gibson---I emailed him regarding Wal-Mart and asked him more questions and I have to say that I was quite impressed with his answers. If anyone wants to read it, send an email to hchristenas@gmail.com

The Wal-mart issue is one of the questions on the video interview I linked to. Everyone was asked about it. I think the answers are pretty interesting.

I'm not quite following you on Fulton. Why would the front-runner in fund-raising need to attach his name to anyone? I know the three incumbents are supporting each other, but that's it.

Heather, is that really you, dear?

Sorry if I have caused any sort of confusion, because I got a few emails of panic from a couple of friends after my last post and a couple of people think I'm buying my socks and detergent at Wal Mart now.

To be clear, I am not saying I am pro-Gibson, I am just saying that I am impressed with his response. Just as I am impressed with Fulton's various alliances on issues with almost everyone running. Ha ha, I even think that Brian Lee Rencher is going to score some points because his name sticks out when I see the names of all the people running because I remember "that guy has tons of signs all over the place." I'm not an expert political strategist; however, I think that both are executing some good strategy.

What I meant in regards to Gibson and his response is that he answered all of my questions very clearly and in a straight-forward manner and, while I am against Wal Mart coming into this town, he brought up some issues and explained some opposing viewpoints in a very thoughtful and impressive manner.

While I will no-doubt NOT vote for him because I am so anti-Wal Mart, I really do appreciate his straight-forward and strong stance on his positions. I wish that everyone running for any office ever could be that straight-forward and strong in their positions. I am tired of wishy-washy politicians who try to play moderate so much that they end up appealing to no-one.

Of all the people in this race, with some seriously hot-topics for Ventura politics coming up, I think that the ones with the best strategy will end up winning. Weir's strategy with these STAR ads is awesome too.

The only one that I am really concerned with is the Mayor...I see his name nowhere, I have heard very little and I just read in the STAR that he only raised something like $3000 by the end of September...what is Morehouse doing???? Is he really running?

If signs could win an election for Rencher, he'd have won by now. He goes overboard every year. On the other end of the spectrum, other than attending forums, I don't think Brian Brennan even campaigned two years ago. But he was the mayor and he still won.

A friend of mine who knows about these things says signs don't make any difference in local campaigns. It's word of mouth.

I think it's good to get a few out there in the right spots but not be obnoxious about it.

Heather,I agree with you on your assessment of Mike Gibson's candidacy. I have been very impressed with him and how he's presented himself and his positions at the candidate forums (two of which I've attended). He seems thoughtful, committed, and sincere and has a way of presenting his opposition to the incumbents and their records without doing it in an offensive manner (like some of the other folks). He really seems like he would be a leader at City Hall.

For a virtual unknown to come out of the woodwork and run a credible, serious, and change-oriented campaign is really quite remarkable, particularly in a parochial community such as Ventura that seems to value name recognition over everything. The other positive thing is that he has actually forced the incumbents to talk about some issues they probably would have chosen not to otherwise, like economic development and the City's slow development review process, for example.

If he doesn't win this time, I, for one, will be encouraging him to try again in the future.

I think we can all agree that Gibson has made a name for himself by stepping up to the plate in this election. But, really, what are his chances? When was the last time a non-incumbent won in Ventura? I think he's going to need to get a little more involved at the grassroots level to have any real impact in the future. But, I've got to admit, the guy's got courage and convictions, something that's real lacking in today's political world. I would say, stay tuned.......

Get real, Gibson is a rank amateur and it shows. All the VCRCC money in the world won't save this loser from coming in 5th at best. He's got the stink of LOSER all over him.

This just cracks me up how these two (maybe one) Gibson acolytes get on here and take over every thread dealing with Ventura politics. The Halter camp is doing a much better job at running a pro-development campaign than Gibson is.

And I think you're going to have to revise your tired refrain about the city's slow development review process. The council voted to streamline the process on Monday night.

Taking over a blog isn't going to get you any votes. That's pure laziness. Get away from your computer, man! Go walk some precincts.

If his methods weren't effective, you two Bozos (Get Real & Venturan) wouldn't be rushing to your computers to counter all the good stuff that's appearing on this blog by many supporters (I'm sure it's well over 900 posts by now) about Mike Gibson. He's making serious inroads and it's got you two running scared, clearly. Otherwise, you wouldn't care so much.

BTW, Venturan, the City's slow development review process is still a huge issue that's gained a lot of traction in this race solely because of Mike Gibson's strong, steady voice of advocacy at all the forums and, yes, out on the precinct trail. The City Council went until 12:30 AM last Monday night and finally voted to try and streamline some of the City's review processes. There was acrimonious debate throughout and it ended up barely passing on a 4-3 vote. I don't call that exactly moving forward enthusiastically on the issue. Clearly, much, much more needs to be done in this area and Gibson is the man to do it.

Halter is too strongly tied to the City's old school establishment. It will be the same old, same old if he gets in there, I'm afraid.

Chastity/Mongo/Jill/ et al

If you had not been so offensive in your previous posts, you would not be catching the flak you are now. We'd let you continue to sing the praises of your candidate. But since you insist on offending women and getting entire threads shut down, insulting the integrity of other candidates and just plain mischief making, we post back.

The Chamber of Commerce (which didn't endorse your Mr. G) has been much more responsible for shaping the debate about development than anything else. We all know that.

Doug Halter has more integrity in his little finger than your and your split personalities will ever know.

Oh, you'd continue to let me sing the praises, huh? What are you anyway, the blog police? Venturan, you and your cronies (Marie & Get Real, who may, in fact, be the same person) are such hypocrites. You slam my candidate time and time again and then get all twisted when I have the gall to criticize yours. This is called democracy, my friend, whether you and your liberal hack brigade like it or not. I will continue to post on this blog, will continue to represent voices other than the status quo Ventura candidates that you're so fond of promoting, and will continue to participate in this great thing we call democracy.

My candidate actually loves to get criticized, by the way, because it gives him a chance to respond to the narrow views that are being touted by the status quo/stay the course candidates in Ventura. He represents change, my friend, and that's obviously a very fear-inspiring thing for you and your buddies.

Hey guys, leave me out of this, OK? I am NOT "Get Real." I have not posted anything negative about any candidate here. Nor am I that liberal.

I was trying in vain last night to talk about campaign signs. Brian asked us to talk about the ways people are campaigning here. I'd also be happy to talk about issues. Remember those?

For all I know, Gibson may be a great guy. It's the company he keeps that I have issues with.

Marie, to try and get us back onto the issue of campaign signs and campaigning techniques, what do you think of precinct walking? Do you think people view political candidates coming to their door as an annoyance (just another solicitor), or do you think their is any value to it as far as securing votes?

Hooray! A civil human who wants to talk about the thread topic.

I am really mixed on precinct walking and I can only speak from my own experience as a volunteer. They give you a list of the most likely voters in a precinct; you don't go to every house. The last time I did it, at least half had already voted absentee, a quarter didn't answer their door and another quarter answered, hadn't voted yet and were receptive (I think).

Now I suppose if they saw the candidate themselves standing there they would be more impressed than they are when it's just me. Once Jack O'Connell knocked on my door during a precinct walk. I was definitely impressed.

The tough part is finding volunteers. Nobody likes to do it. It's easier to get them to do it if you just give them their own neighborhoods to walk.

I've also done a lot of phone polling. This I'm pretty good at. I think that works better and it's easier to find volunteers to do it.

Marie, I think I agree with you about signs to some extent...I think that so much of it is about name recognition and you have to attack that on all fronts...signs, word of mouth, internet, ads, etc. I think the example of Brian Brennan not even campaigning is perfect for that, better is Jim Monohan...that guy will continue to get elected because people recognize his name.

Name rec is statistically proven, but the type of name rec is so different in different races.

In regards to Mike Gibson, I think it is funny that people continue to think that MG-supporters are supposedly taking over a blog with comments and postings and that they think it really is going to get them elected...if that is really happening, that is. Again, no offense to anyone, but a lot of that 23% in Ventura that is going to come out to the polls this November for the city of Ventura DO NOT read blogs on their computers.

I know I have upset people by saying that before and I am not trying to upset anyone, just say that in this race, at this time, blogs are not where it's at.

Now, if we were talking about a Congressional race that is being supported and funded by the DCCC, that would be different...then I, myself, would probably be working for a candidate and a part of that would probably be trying to take over the blog threads. Not worth it now...these campaign-groupies should be doing more general populace GOTV stuff, like walks and calls.

Hey Marie--what do you think about doorhangs versus precinct walks (i.e., leaving a door piece but not talking to the people, less personal but easier)?

Hey Heather,

Another reasonable human, thank goodness. I agree that not that many people in Ventura are reading these blogs. But I know plenty of Ventura folks look at the Star online.

As to door hangers, I always leave campaign literature on doorsteps when residents don't answer. But I guess if you're going to go to all the trouble of walking precincts, you might as well knock and try to make a memorable personal contact. Otherwise you might as well just mail the pieces.

Years ago, I walked precincts for Hannah Beth Jackson in a rough neighborhood. It wasn't much fun. I skipped the house with the truck parked on the lawn with a bumper sticker which said F@%* the Sierra Club. :-) Ever since then I have been a little pickier about where I go. I did this for HBJ because she is so tuned into children's issues, which is something I am also passionate about.
I was sorry to hear that she has been sick.

That's interesting on the door hangers vs. personal contact. I personally think a lot of people treat any mailers or flyers that come into their households as just more junk mail, unless, of course, they happen to know or like the candidate.

It would be great if people understood the orgin of the mailers they receive. Most are paid for by the candidate and placement is on a first come basis. Name recognition is huge and the more gullible voters get bombarded with smiling faces and bold print names usually with a catchy slogan that tugs at emotion and not any substantial issue. The other strategy is the important sounding "institutions" they are sent from ie: California Taxpayers Alliance. Sounds great but who are they?

This season check the stamp, each mailing house has their name on it. The DMH represents the VCRCC. Some candidate will not be charged for these as the committee claims it as 'Member Communications.'

Not one membership communication has come to me from the Democratic party. Nor has one come to my best friend, a Republican, who always votes absentee and would surely have received one by now. If they are out there, I haven't seen them. I received my absentee ballot on Thursday and voted right away and mailed it.

If someone is donating slate mailers to the Republicans, they better declare the "in kind" donation.

There was a lot of bragging being done by the Republicans about how they're going to "place" Republicans on the Ventura City Council this round. They know the way to win is communicating with the absentee voters, so if they haven't been sending out mailers, then maybe they don't have as much money as they thought they would.

watchdoggie-
There is no need to declare as these are "Member Communications". I went through this in the last election. I filed a complaint but the FPPC declared there was no violation. The rules are designed by the parties for the parties.

In the Ventura City Council race, I predict Carl Morehouse will lose. His heart doesn't seem to be into the race and I think he's particularly vulnerable with the business community. He doesn't seem to be getting many endorsements either.

I think Doug Halter will win and I predict Mike Gibson will have a much stronger showing than his detractors are saying.

The candidates don't have to declare the donation of slate mailers, but the political parties doing the Member Communications do.

Of course, they bank on the fact that once the election is help, no one cares. And if an investigation results in a fine, it's just considered a cost of doing business.

I agree with "Morehouse Lacks Desire." I went to the candidates forum the other night downtown and the guys seems like he's just phoning it in.

Watchdoggie, we'll see if Mike Gibson reports his contributions from the VCRCC (both direct contributions and any in-kind mailers) on his next campaign filing statement (due to the City Clerk's Office on Oct. 25th). As I always say - just follow the money.

Did anyone see in the paper today where our esteemed City Attorney settled his case in Boulder, Colorado for assaulting his neighbor's property? And our City Council is paying this guy over $200,000 a year? A guy who is paid all this money by our City Council to uphold our City laws and he can't even abide by the law himself? Wonderful. More waste of taxpayer funds by the 3 jokers. These 3 jokers (Morehouse, Fulton, & Weir) that are up for reelection need to be turned out and fast!!!

Thanks for pointing out that article, Chastity. I'm just getting around to reading the Star and I saw that in Section B. What were the Council thinking when they hired this guy? Did they even do a background check? Can we start a recall on the rest of these guys after we boot the 3 jokers out on November 6th?

The same Gibson fan posting under two different names.

I predict Gibson finishes seventh.

Venturan, I predict he finishes fourth!!!