Lewiston residents react to mayoral candidates' debate

Amber Waterman/Sun Journal

Pauline Rancourt, 77, likes some of the ideas Lewiston mayoral candidate Robert Macdonald has brought to the runoff election against Mark Paradis. The election will be held Dec. 13.

LEWISTON — After Monday's standing-room-only debate between mayoral candidates Robert Macdonald and Mark Paradis, 77-year-old Pauline Rancourt said she agreed with Macdonald about limiting welfare and immigrants in Lewiston.

What: Lewiston mayoral runoff election

When: Tuesday, Dec. 13

Where: Multi-Purpose Center

Robert Macdonald, 64, is a retired Lewiston police officer and Lewiston Middle School aide. He describes himself as a conservative with a mission to reform downtown subsidized housing and buff up the city's image. He said he would "slow down" welfare, citing it as the city's biggest problem.

Mark Paradis, 59, a former city councilor, is a service manager at Longchamps and Sons in Lisbon. He said he's a more level-headed choice. He will encourage economic development and education and work with the City Council. He pledged not to prey on fears to get elected.

“The city is going to pot with that welfare," Rancourt said. "Immigration is out of hand; it's too much.”

Immigrants have “overtaken Lisbon Street. Now they're going up Main Street,” Rancourt said. Of the two candidates, “Macdonald has a better view of the situation we have here.”

Macdonald and Paradis are the choices in a runoff election set for Tuesday, Dec. 13. According to those interviewed, Macdonald seems to be popular with senior citizens. Others say Macdonald, if elected mayor, could not change welfare rules and would be too negative to be the face of Lewiston.

Two city officials, including the current mayor, said they're afraid of what would happen to Lewiston if Macdonald becomes the next mayor.

“This is such an important election. It will either move Lewiston to a future or set us back 30 or 40 years,” said Jim Handy, a Lewiston School Committee member. “I have great fear about someone who wants to become our mayor who has never said anything good about our city.”

On Monday night, Macdonald said he likes Somali immigrant ZamZam Mohamed, that she and other female Somalis have come to Lewiston to work. “The others, they didn't want to learn,” Macdonald said.

On Tuesday, Handy said Macdonald paints people with a broad brush. “He needs to realize he's from away. He came from Massachusetts.”

Lewiston Mayor Larry Gilbert said during the debate that Mark Paradis offered reasonable approaches to issues.

“He carried the debate on every point," Gilbert said. "Bob Macdonald only presented unrealistic and hateful approaches to the issues. I would hate to see him as the face of Lewiston. I know him very well, having served with him on the Police Department.”

Gilbert, a former police chief in Lewiston, added, "He's preying on people's fears.”

The mayor of Lewiston cannot create a moratorium on Section 8 housing, Gilbert said. It's a federal program run by the Maine State Housing Authority. The Lewiston mayor cannot change welfare, he said. “General Assistance is a state-run program the city administers for the state. So he can't do any of that.”

Paradis, who ran against Gilbert for mayor, would offer a more reasonable approach, Gilbert said.

During the debate, the candidates agreed on several issues. One they disagreed on was tax-increment financing, which gives new businesses tax advantages in exchange for locating in the area.

Macdonald is anti-TIF; Paradis is pro-TIF.

Lucien Gosselin, president of the Lewiston-Auburn Economic Growth Council, said TIFs are “an essential development tool. Like it or not, there's stiff competition for economic development projects.”

The Walmart distribution center, which employs 700 and pays $2 million a year in taxes, would not have chosen to locate in Lewiston in 2002 without the TIF, Gosselin said.

Operating a business in Maine is challenging, and Lewiston-Auburn is competing with states that have lower costs, he said. The TIF is one of the few tools to help level the playing field to attract jobs, Gosselin said. “It does make a difference in siting a project.”

What do you think of this story?

Login to post comments

In order to make comments, you must create a subscription.

In order to comment on SunJournal.com, you must hold a valid subscription allowing access to this website. You must use your real name and include the town in which you live in your SunJournal.com profile. To subscribe or link your existing subscription click here.

Login or create an account here.

Our policy prohibits comments that are:

  • Defamatory, abusive, obscene, racist, or otherwise hateful
  • Excessively foul and/or vulgar
  • Inappropriately sexual
  • Baseless personal attacks or otherwise threatening
  • Contain illegal material, or material that infringes on the rights of others
  • Commercial postings attempting to sell a product/item
If you violate this policy, your comment will be removed and your account may be banned from posting comments.

Advertisement

Comments

Steve  Dosh's picture

Lewiston residents react to mayoral candidates' debate

. . . . 11.30.11 5 pm Hawai'ian time
[ full discosure - i used to work with a Mike Rancourt at the Warehouse restaurant . We were waitrons along w/ Jerry Bouchet :]
“The city is going to pot with that welfare," Rancourt said. "Immigration is out of hand; it's too much.”
Raise your hand if you are not a decendant of immigrants
The problem with quouting , Bonnie , is the double entendrés ( and i must admit , i know about enough ƒrench to get my face slapped :)
On a completly different subject , until this morning on N P R i didn't realize that that famous basketball player actually - volunteered - to be mayor of Detroit
We need more heros like him •
/s Dr. Dosh http:/www.peacecorps.gov ( retired )
~ Remember the needy this season ~ http://fukushimaupdates.wordpress.com/category/japan-relief/

DONALD FERLAND's picture

After reading the comments

After reading the comments and responding to some of them I have come to the conclusion that some will just never get it. Whether we agree with Mr. Macdonald or not one thing is painfully obvious....there is a right way and a wrong way to create change. There is a unified way to come up with solutions to the problems and a divided way to come up with solutions. If we have learned one thing over the years it is this....WE MUST WORK AS AN ENTIRE COMMUNITY TO SOLVE PROBLEMS.....if you go around alienating parts of a population then all you succeed in doing is dividing this city.

Here is another thing programs are not the problem...people are the problem....saying that welfare is the biggest problem is like my son saying his bad grades are the school's fault instead of his....it's like saying the Christmas tree is the reason my light bill is high...things don't cause problems PEOPLE CAUSE PROBLEMS. Until we change people nothing gets solved.

Yes Mr. Macdonald and his supporters are angry....so am I but I will NOT let my anger dictate how I see things. Anger is nothing but an emotion that leads to bad reactions.

Why can't people see that? Why can't people see that reaction is never a good solution to problems? Why is it that a few "bad apples" make an entire population look bad? And why is it that people just can't open their eyes and see that NO ONE PERSON OR GROUP OF PEOPLE have the solutions if they alienate all other groups of people.

Mike Lachance's picture

Tina. Its the some that DONT

Tina. Its the some that DONT get it that have allowed the status quo to continue for the last decade (or 2).

We do get it. You are right there is a right way to change and a wrong way... however, NO change is still wrong if the methods to achieve NOTHING are "right".... thats been the problem in Lewiston; too many people afraid to change for fear that it might be the "wrong way" and so..... nothing happens.

There is no unified way to change, it seems here in Lewiston. Too many people depend on the state and any attempt to "take away" from them is going to result in division. Period. No ifs ands or buts.

As far as alienating "parts of population"... If those "parts of population" are the ones abusing the system I say alienate them ASAP.. We dont need them, we dont want them, and we'd all be happier if they were somewhere else, be they white, black, yellow or green. Its not racial. Like it or not.

Anger? Yes.

you ask "Why is it that a few bad apples make an entire city look bad?" Answer: Because an entire city seems to warmly welcome BAD APPLES and do nothing about them but invite and welcome more of the same. That would make any city look bad.

Then you go on with the silliest statement:
"NO ONE PERSON OR GROUP OF PEOPLE have the solutions if they alienate all other groups of people?"

Seriously? Lets see. What one group of people is alienating ALL OTHER GROUPS OF PEOPLE???

Just a bit out there. If I were to treat you the way Macdonald is being treated Id say you are not using your words effectively, you are not saying what you actually mean, and youre definition of "all other groups" is a bit shady. You seem to be just as human as Macdonald. And that is precisely what matters. Elitism never holds up when we're all held to the same standard.

DONALD FERLAND's picture

Mike I am one of the people

Mike

I am one of the people getting some assistance and I am NOT abusing the system. There are reasons I get help that are no one else's business. However, when you talk of abusers and people with their hands out I will take offense. And have you actually HEARD the words spoken by Mr. Macdonald.....I have...we don't need someone who is going to divide this city more than it already is. "The Somali girls are smart and want to learn, the others are just lazy"....wow talk about alienation. The problem is when people refuse to work together to change things. And I have been treated the way Mr. Macdonald is being treated because I do have ideas and when I have voiced my ideas in community meetings I have been told people do not want to hear them. So again I will say....use the words he means because he doesn't mean "welfare" change....he means a stop of the influx of the people who are draining our resources.....We had a mayor try to do that once and all he succeeded in doing was getting a bunch of grief from others. More still came....more will still come. Wouldn't it be better to make sure everyone knows exactly what he is talking about? Because I for one feel like I have been pushed aside by Mr. Macdonald and his supporters because they are not willing to open their minds and hear what the people who have no choice but to live with assistance have to say. We are the ones in the trenches. We are the ones who have no choice about where we go. We don't get to go home to a nice neighborhood every night. We live it night and day. Listen to what we are saying....we are on the street....we know where the problems are....some of us might even have ideas on how to solve things....but instead we just get called "those people", "lazy" and told to go back to where we came from or told to get out.....well I am where I came from....I am not lazy....I won't get out....and I am not those people.

Mike Lachance's picture

Tina, Now who's angry?

Tina, Now who's angry? Remember, anger never solved anything. (According to the advice doled out here in these forums)... No. You DO have a right to be angry, just as any of us do. But your anger is being directed at the wrong people for the wrong reasons.

You say:
"I am NOT abusing the system"
then follow it up with:
"when you talk of abusers and people with their hands out I will take offense"

If you are not abusing the system then you are not the problem, and Macdonald HAS stated this numerous times. You choose to ignore this fact.

You say:
"he doesn't mean "welfare" change....he means a stop of the influx of the people who are draining our resources....."

So. If thats what he means (and it is) then you should have no quarrel with him. His goal is to eliminate the abuses (apparently not you) afreup the system for those who need it.

You say:
"I for one feel like I have been pushed aside by Mr. Macdonald and his supporters because they are not willing to open their minds and hear what the people who have no choice but to live with assistance have to say.

If you are 100% incapable of working then you should rightfully recieve state assistance. If you are able to work at all, then you should get a job. That doesnt mean you shouldnt recieve any help from the state. Quite the contrary. You might still claim benefits. It all depends. Nobody,NOBODY, Macdonald or his supporters is trying to eliminate assistance for those who REALLY need it. If you believe they are, then I must say you are sadly misinformed, or blinded by the fear of ANY change to the status quo.

You state:
"We are the ones who have no choice about where we go. We don't get to go home to a nice neighborhood every night. We live it night and day."

No choice? Tina. EVERYONE has choices. Some are easy some are hard, some take years (decades even) of hard work and perseverance. We may not always achieve our dreams or fulfill our goals, but CHOICES are what each and every one of us have. No matter our circumstances.

You say:
"Listen to what we are saying....we are on the street....we know where the problems are....some of us might even have ideas on how to solve things....but instead we just get called "those people", "lazy" and told to go back to where we came from or told to get out.....well I am where I came from....I am not lazy....I won't get out....and I am not those people."

You have said you are not "those people" but you are being called "those people"? Might I ask, WHO called YOU one of "those people"? Who said YOU were abusing the system? Macdonald? Who? I musta take your word that you are NOT one of the abusers. If you are not, then you have zero to worry about. However, if you are abusing the system, then it would make perfect sense that someone talking about people abusing the system would make you extremely uncomfortable and paranoid. I dont know. I know nothing about you personally, just your word.

If you want status quo, Paradis is your man, but dont expect anything to change in Lewiston

DONALD FERLAND's picture

Mike.... If you had really

Mike....

If you had really read all of my posts you would see that I have said neither candidate is the right person for the job of mayor of this city. You would also see that I have said I agree with some of what Mr. Macdonald has said. I have also said that his views would create more change if he were in Augusta or Washington.

The thing that gets me is you really aren't comprehending anything I have written...almost like you want to argue because it makes you feel like you are a big person....What was it Mr. Macdonald said..."you aren't smart enough to read my words"...."you're not comprehending them".....

I think there is too many things that Mr. Macdonald would be better suited to fight in Augusta or Washington then in Lewiston. Do I think Mr. Paradis is the best candidate...NO. Do I think Mr. Macdonald is the best candidate for Lewiston....NO. Do I think things need to change...YES. Am I willing to work to help change things....YES, but only if this city can find a way to work as a team. There is already too much discord and distrust and misunderstanding...we do not need more of this. Am I angry...YES, but not for the reasons you think.

Which of the candidates said this....the mayor is only a ceremonial head and cannot propose things....Since this is the case how does Mr. Macdonald figure this is the best position for him to do the most for this city? Policy is set by the council not the mayor. Do you see my points that I have been trying to make???? Or do you still see it as I am attacking Mr. Macdonald?

Mike Lachance's picture

Tina, NOW we're discussing

Tina, NOW we're discussing things a bit more and I like that.

I did read all your other posts (almost as many as mine i might add) and yes you did say you agreed with Macdonald, etc. But there are only TWO choices for mayor. You MUST pick the better of the two, because thats all there is. We can debate perfection forever, but it isnt going to change THIS mayoral race. We MUST choose either Macdonald or Paradis. Even if we vote holding our noses. Get behind a candidate and VOTE. And try to get others to vote for the candidate you feel will help initiate CHANGE.

I respect your perspectives here, and I also respect your writing style. As another contributor has stated, you have made some excellent posts.

And I havecomprehended everythig youve written, but I havnt adressed every point. Im sure something has been lost in that.

Remember, the mayor cannot change policy or laws, but he can propose ideas (various measn to do so, both directly and indirectly. While they may only be ideas, the council can, and often will move to act on an idea, or propose some vote on an issue as such. While the mayor is less powerful than a councilor, he is tasked with leading them, both in direction and focus. I believe a mayor (even in a weak mayor system) should be MUCH more than a wal-mart greeter.

You must decide. Macdonald or Paradis. Keep it private or make it public, but not voting is the worst thing you could do. You cant vote for both, and if you choose to NOT vote, you should not be a part of this discussion. I'm thinking your gonna vote!

DONALD FERLAND's picture

Well, I will say this.....I

Well, I will say this.....I vote when I can and I cannot in good conscience vote for someone who is going to draw more negative attention to the matters that face this community. I have asked in another post for information on how to talk to Mr. Macdonald as I have questions that I would like to hear his answer to and no one has yet to respond to the question. Until I can hear his answers to my questions I feel uninformed enough to not be comfortable with voting for him. If and when I get the answers then I will decide how I will vote and not before then. His misuse of words is a large problem in my mind and I would like to clarify things I have heard out of his own mouth and not from what I read in print taken out of context or interpreted by others.

Mike Lachance's picture

Tina, Bob's contact info can

Tina,

Bob's contact info can be found many places. He is listed. Look up his number and give him a call.

Charlotte Morin's picture

Um...I think that's the point

It helps to highlight how MacDonald and his followers think.

David Perry's picture

Debate article

It appalls me that you would choose such a negative and ignorant quote - “The city is going to pot with that welfare," Rancourt said. "Immigration is out of hand; it's too much.” to lead this article. It doesn't encourage intelligent debate about the issue, but does reflect the shortsighted and benighted attitude that is detrimental to the future of the city.

Wilma Turcotte's picture

Mayoral Candidates

Welfare is a problem facing this whole area and for anyone to say its not a local issue or ignore responding at all has their head in the sand and worried about votes. Its not just at city level its state level and the whole country level but if someone don't take a stand then what? You can't start in Wash. and work down. Its easy to say the economy is bad and there aren't jobs but those that have made a life of living on welfare did so when there was jobs. If a city or state don't have the means then they don't hand out money. There has to be a reason why some areas have the largest influx of immigrants legal or otherwise and thats cause of the welfare system that continues to hand out and they just keep coming. I am not saying there aren't good ones out there that found jobs and don't drain the system and if you are getting tired of being painted with the same brush then stand up and do something about it. If each city then state would clean their own backyards we wouldn't have to wait for a bunch of people in Wash. that only care about lining their own pockets to deal with it cause its obvious how little they are gonna do about it. How long can seniors that did work all their lives and those that do have jobs keep supporting those that don't. We need factory jobs not more "small business" jobs cause you can't support a family working at these base pay jobs. As long as this country lets GE and others just move to China and everything we buy is made in China nothing will change except we will become U.S. of China. They practically own us now. If no one can see this then their heads are in the sand or worse.

Mike Lachance's picture

Amen.

Amen.

Dave Bussey's picture

It's all so simple isn't it.

It's all so simple isn't it. “The city is going to pot with that welfare."

No. It's not that simple.

There are plenty of things causing Lewiston's problems.

But we can just blame it on welfare and not have to think too hard about all the rest.

(Sarcasm font)

Mike Lachance's picture

True, its not that simple.

True, its not that simple. But the reality is, that "that welfare" is infact a major contributing factor to the problems facing downtown Lewiston, and revenue vs expenses.

It's about money. Welfare does not bring economic vitality. Welfare can only help when it helps those who actually NEED help. Sometimes that means a hand up, sometimes that means permanent help (for those who are disabled).. but when welfare means a way of life for those who are able bodied, then "those people" (who are EXACTLY who Macdonald was referring to) are a blight and dead weight to the system.

Is it that simple? In alot of ways, yes, it is.
Symantics is no defense for the truth. It's easy to rip someone apart because they "didnt pick the right words".. but the real problems lay right beneath the surface. Enough with the symantics attacks. Macdonald is right on this one. He addressing ONE segment of welfacre recipients. He knows it, I know it, and his detractors know it.

Macdonald isnt afraid to speak the truth, the facts are only lost on those who choose to pick a word game in order to avoid the truth. Paradis, on the other hand is a consummate politician, who picks only the finest time-honed words or safe eloquence. It was noteworthy during the debate, that when Paradis was asked direct questions regarding his positions in his years in the council, he was silent. His "safe way out" word processor was working overtime.

When the answers did come they were wordy, boring, "safe", static, and most notably, meaningless. That is not the way to address problems facing Lewiston. That is the way to maintain status quo.

Dave Bussey's picture

"Symantics is no defense for

"Symantics is no defense for the truth."
"Enough with the symantics attacks."

You probably were thinking of the anti virus software, and really meant semantics. You seem to be someone who doesn't care to waste a lot of unnecessary time checking on all the little details. I'd guess you also don't have many family members or friends who are dependent on the evil and destructive welfare programs.

Consider "those who are able bodied" but who are not so able when it comes to the other facets of a productive life. I'll bet you can't imagine just how many of these people there are. Nor can you imagine just how powerless they typically are when their free speech rights are up against the free speech rights of, for example, corporations, who are "people" with free speech rights too and who are much more likely than them to own printing presses (and TV stations and so on) that give assistance in getting their ideas out.

Mike Lachance's picture

Dave, alot of energy spent

Dave, alot of energy spent being the spelling police. But thank you for illustrating my point. You are practicing precisely what Macdonalds detractors are doing. Avoid the point and instead focus on trivialities of imperfection. Good job. You're well on your way to being appointed hall monitor.

And to your point: I say, able bodied means just that. Mental illness is another factor, but equally important. Regardless they both indicate able bodiedness.

Dave Bussey's picture

Dispatch from a potential hall monitor

When what you say and what you mean to say are two different things, one wonders what you mean to say. Even people who are not hall monitors may wonder. I think you have made your point. Don't bother you with the details.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

While Frank Sinatra sings,

While Frank Sinatra sings, "Stormy Weather", the flies and the spiders get along together...

Mike Lachance's picture

Hey Dave, Its funny those who

Hey Dave, Its funny those who support Macdonald know exactly what he "means" and you folks (how about "you people") who dont like him choose to "not understand" him, or in actuality, you really DO understand him but are so wadded up about him you claim otherwise, or claim te most banal possible context his "less-than-perfect" words could mean.

Your entire arguement is based on nothing more than cherry picking word context (and of course acting as the spelling police). Its silly, really. Keep on operating that way though if it makes you feel superior. Its an old technique i've seen used by certain types for a decade or more.

Of note: You seemed perfectly knowledgable about "symantics" too! See, i dont think you're ignorant, just pulling the intelligentsia-elitist move. And hey, how about those semantics anyway? Did you catch the irony in your replies?

Dave Bussey's picture

Mike, what the devil are you talking about?

Mike

What the devil are you talking about? There's not a word in any of my posts about what McDonald said. And what argument do you think I made?

Mike Lachance's picture

Dave, Reading comprehension

Dave,
Reading comprehension please.
Distract and redirect hmm?
Doesnt work.
What the devil I'm talking about is you. Ive never argued you said Macdonald said this or that. Quite clearly. Yet you choose to redirect off into fanatasyland. What I *did* say (read em again bubb) is that Macdonalds detractors (by all intents and purpose, you, et al) are hell-bent on cherry picking particular words, phrases or other tidbits and taking them to the end of the philosphical spectrum as a means to argue the invalidity of said statements, intents, meanings etc. Its a rubbish debate technique that went out of fashion 12 years ago.

What arguements do I think you made?

You made alot of arguements, but not a single one of them address the issues facing Lewiston regarding public assistance, welfare, section8, etc etc (as Macdonald say, "whatever its being called this week") His point is simple: doesnt matter how one referes to a particular welfare program, someone is gonna come out of the woodwork screaming about how he didnt call it by the exact program name, etc. Who cares... the details details details.. whatever. The details are addressed later, when the problems are actually put on the table.

Everyone knows what we are talking about. You cant possibly be that ignorant. Or is your arguement just that? that you are infact that ignorant I dont think so, so you must simply be a schill, trolling for friction. Join the solution roundtable or go fishing somewhere else. Because its folks like you who have been getting in the way of those who want to fiz Lewiston.

Are you part of the problem or part of the solution? If youre part of the solution, let's hear one.

Dave Bussey's picture

You said my arguments were

You said my arguments were bad. I asked what the devil you were talking about. You said: "What the devil I'm talking about is you." Then you are making an ad hominem argument. This type of argument has been used and has been recognized as a producer of fallacies for thousands of years.

I asked "What arguements do I think you made?" You replied "You made alot of arguments," but did not refer to a single one. Nice try.

Perhaps you misunderstood, but I asked what (in my posts) you were talking about. You wrote: "Everyone knows what we are talking about. You cant possibly be that ignorant." Nice talk. Everyone knows that "You cant possibly be that ignorant" is a bass ackwards way of saying "Boy are you being ignorant." Another ad hominem. Another fallacy.

You must pay better attention to what I have actually written if you are to make worthwhile responses. You are not paying close attention, and as a result your responses are unreasonable. You must pay more careful attention to what is going on around you, or as a result your commentary will be related to fantasy and imagination -- in my view both wonderful things all in all -- but your commentary will be unrelated to the world as it really is, in all its astounding detail and variety.

Mike Lachance's picture

"This type of argument has

"This type of argument has been used and has been recognized as a producer of fallacies for thousands of years." And its the type of arguement I was calling you out on.

"I asked What arguements do I think you made? You replied 'You made alot of arguments,' but did not refer to a single one. Nice try."

Not a single one?:
how about:
"cherry picking particular words, phrases or other tidbits and taking them to the end of the philosphical spectrum as a means to argue the invalidity of said statements, intents, meanings etc."
or:
the spelling of "symantics" vs "semantics"
or:
"You probably were thinking of the anti virus software, and really meant semantics. You seem to be someone who doesn't care to waste a lot of unnecessary time checking on all the little details. I'd guess you also don't have many family members or friends who are dependent on the evil and destructive welfare programs."
or:
"Nor can you imagine just how powerless they typically are when their free speech rights are up against the free speech rights of, for example, corporations, who are "people" with free speech rights too and who are much more likely than them to own printing presses (and TV stations and so on) that give assistance in getting their ideas out."
or:
"There are plenty of things causing Lewiston's problems.
But we can just blame it on welfare and not have to think too hard about all the rest. "
(a non arguement, btw)
or:
"When what you say and what you mean to say are two different things, one wonders what you mean to say." (another useless non-arguement)

So, theres just a handful of your arguements that have no point, and offer nothing to the discussion.

You carry on again with yet another arguement(s):
"You must pay better attention "
"You are not paying close attention"
"your responses are unreasonable"
"You must pay more careful attention "
"your commentary will be related to fantasy and imagination"
"your commentary will be unrelated to the world as it really is"

Now let's talk about welfare. Or not. Or you can choose to continue the trolling. Youre not mentally crippled. You can "get it"... no fantasy required.

Dave Bussey's picture

Now you're getting somewhere.

Now you're getting somewhere.

Except:
"cherry picking particular words, phrases or other tidbits and taking them to the end of the philosphical spectrum as a means to argue the invalidity of said statements, intents, meanings etc.," is not from me. It's something you wrote yourself.

And "the spelling of "symantics" vs "semantics." I guess I did say there was a correct spelling to the word, but that wasn't an argument - just something that ticked you off.

And "You seem to be someone who doesn't care to waste a lot of unnecessary time checking on all the little details" is something I thought you agreed with. DO YOU think time should be spent on details (such as figuring out what the problem is before proposing a solution)?

And "You probably were thinking of the anti virus software, and really meant semantics." Was I wrong?

And "Nor can you imagine just how powerless they typically are when their free speech rights are up against the free speech rights of, for example, corporations, who are "people" with free speech rights too and who are much more likely than them to own printing presses (and TV stations and so on) that give assistance in getting their ideas out." CAN you imagine it?

And "There are plenty of things causing Lewiston's problems." Do you disagree?

And "But we can just blame it on welfare and not have to think too hard about all the rest." This was sarcasm. Did you miss it? Also, you included it in a list of "arguments" and then put a note next to it saying "not an argument." Why did you do that? If you say you are going to list some arguments, and include in the list items that you then say are NOT arguments, don't you think that's going to make people wonder?

And "When what you say and what you mean to say are two different things, one wonders what you mean to say." (another useless non-arguement" Do you disagree? You included this too in a list of "arguments" and then put a note next to it saying "(a non arguement, btw)." Why did you do that?

And then you list the following statements, claiming them to be arguments:
"You must pay better attention "
"You are not paying close attention"
"your responses are unreasonable"
"You must pay more careful attention "
"your commentary will be related to fantasy and imagination"
"your commentary will be unrelated to the world as it really is"

I expect from your post that you disagree with these statements. Nevertheless they are not "arguments." They are merely statements. I think I am beginning to see the problem. Perhaps you believe that any statement with which you disagree should be counted as an "argument." To me an argument is a series of statements beginning with premises, going on with logical inferences derivable from those premises, and ending with a statements ("conclusions") claimed to be logically derivable from the premises.

Do you believe I made any such "arguments" prior in time to your unkind statements regarding my prior posts, or not?

If you do not believe I made any such "arguments", if there were statements I made prior to your first claim that my arguments were unsound, what were those statements, and on what basis did you disagree? Your most recent post refers to material that I wrote AFTER your first comment critical of my "arguments," and after my original question. The original question -- "What argument did I make?" -- obviously referred to arguments PRIOR IN TIME to my asking "What argument did I make?"

Mike Lachance's picture

Dave you are having your own

Dave you are having your own circular arguement, and it seems its starting to affect your reasonaing. Or at least reading comprehension (once again) Theres not alot I can do to help you on that, but I'll try to be as brief as possible (so to help you understand the simple parts)

"cherry picking particular words, ... etc.,"
Of course i wrote that. Read it in context, it refers to you are the littany of word policing youve practiced here.

"the spelling of 'symantics' vs 'semantics.' Just something that ticked you off."
Actually, I wasnt ticked off in the least. Vindicated and thoroughly unimpressed, yes. Ticked off.. not even close. (See above)

"DO YOU think time should be spent on details?"
Not before the basic plans are looked at.
"figuring out what the problem is before proposing a solution?"
We already know what the problem is, at least the problem we are discussing ad naseum here. Or do you not accept that there is a problem with state assistance and its abuse? If you dont fee that way we have little to discuss on that, and you might want to move on to something ee. Otherwise, you admit there is a poblem with abuse of state assistance, and we can discuss solutions (you havnt acknowledged this, however)

"You probably were thinking of the anti virus software, and really meant semantics. Was I wrong?"
Once again, cherry picking, and yes you were VERY wrong.

"Nor can you imagine just how powerless they typically are when their free speech rights are up against the free speech rights of... ...their ideas out. CAN you imagine it?"
Isn't there an "Occupy" protest camp you should be attending somewhere? Big Corp is not the root of Lewistons ills. Not even going there bubb.

"There are plenty of things causing Lewiston's problems. Do you disagree?"
By all means, there are plenty of things. But one of the biggest things is prevaricators and appeasers. When we get rid of them alot will change. Abuse of State assistance is a huge problem in Lewiston. Do you disagree?

"list of arguments and then put a note next to it saying "not an argument."
Quite simply because they were 100& irrelevant to this topic. 100% filler. and 100% not an arguement.

"don't you think that's going to make people wonder?"
Only you, i suppose. But then again I guess i must be blessed with a better command of the written word.

"When what you say and what you mean to say are two different things, one wonders what you mean to say." (another useless non-arguement" You included this too in a list of "arguments" and then put a note next to it saying "(a non arguement, btw)." Why did you do that?"
See above, and above that.

And then you list the following statements, claiming them to be arguments:
"You must.....
etc ....is"
To me an argument is a series of ... etc ...the premises."

This is sad. Missed it all didnt you?

"Do you believe I made any such "arguments" prior in time to your unkind statements regarding my prior posts, or not?"

What??? You are clearly lost here. I'm realising as I read your latest Perry Mason-like diatribe about absolutely nothing to do with Lewiston, that its useless to try to bail any more water out of your logic row-boat.

Perhaps try to re read everything (although I wouldnt wish that on anyone.. except perhaps you, out of kindness)... then reply back with your assessment of what Lewiston's problems are and how you plan to solve them.

K? Can ya handle that?

Dave Bussey's picture

I now cannot tell whether you

I now cannot tell whether you are serious or not.

The following seems to epitomize the approach you take to having a discussion:
You quoted me: "'You probably were thinking of the anti virus software, and really meant semantics. Was I wrong?'" Then you responded with: "Once again, cherry picking, and yes you were VERY wrong." You say I was VERY wrong in thinking you meant semantics. Ok. There's no arguing with you. You won't even agree that up is up and down is down. You did mean semantics. But you now deny it. That doesn't even make sense.

And out of the blue you wrote: "Isn't there an "Occupy" protest camp you should be attending somewhere? Big Corp is not the root of Lewistons ills. Not even going there bubb." You seem that members of the working class in Lewiston were the source of the decision to send shoe manufacturing and the rest of Lewiston's former industrial base overseas. I have news for you. It was the owners and managers who made those decisions, not the workers. Don't go there, as you say, and you'll miss a big part of the explanation for Lewiston's problems, and miss one of the important factors that need consideration in finding solutions.

I cannot tell whether you are serious or not because your posts are incomprehensible, Bubba. And don't think you'll be impressing anyone with the depth or your wisdom by coming up with funny names to call me, Bubbooba. Try reading a basic logic book, fella. Then tell me if you know what it means. Or tell me that it's all the kind of academic nonsense that all those "Occupy" protest camp people would find important. Logic is logic. Your posts have rapidly declined into gobbledygook. Or maybe I just haven't read enough of your posts. Maybe it's not a decline.

Mike Lachance's picture

Bubba? Youre still stuck on

Bubba?
Youre still stuck on spelling. Something about software (?) Yes youre wrong. What the heck does software have to do with this debate?

So, you're admitting that Big Corp is what Lewiston needs? Youre admitting that its Big Corp that makes economies grow and prosper! Perhaps there is hope for you after all. We agree!

Yes, we need Big Corporations back.

But that doesnt solve the welfate state problem we have, because nanny states are taxing states, and guess what... Big Corp goes where the tax rates are low.

So.... Im sorry, you gotta get rid of the high taxes before Big Corp can come in and save Lewiston. Or you give away everything (aka WalMart) and we take up the slack in tax rates... which pours ice water on the economy here.

Im glad youve come to see the light that Big Corps are the answer after we get the freeloaders to move away and lower our tax rates. "Bubbooba"? Gobbledygook? Whats Bubbooba? You're right, I think I need to look that one up.

Im glad to say I did not use bubbooba and gobbledygook in any original posts, but its sure fun tryint to spell em!

So I ask again, Whats Lewistons real problem and whats your solution? Gobblewhat?

Dave Bussey's picture

I am SO embarrassed to see

I am SO embarrassed to see that I have been caught up by your trolling.

Mike Lachance's picture

Sure. So I ask again, What's

Sure.
So I ask again, What's Lewistons real problem and whats your solution?

DONALD FERLAND's picture

I think maybe Macdonald

I think maybe Macdonald supporters need to really listen to what Mr. Macdonald says....he is not talking about welfare as we all know it....he is talking about a particular group of people he feels is lazy and doing nothing but getting a free handout...I won't mention the group of people by name because that would start a whole new argument. But I will say this....Mr. Macdonald told Mr. Paradis that he(Mr. Paradis) was "not smart enough to read my(Mr. Macdonald) words" and "you're (Mr. Paradis) not comprehending them".....well if you really think that is what is going on then say what you actually mean. And before Mike goes on another tirade....yes I did watch the debate and yes it is an exact quote except for the names in parenthesis. So if Mr. Macdonald is being misunderstood maybe it would be in his best interest to actually use the words he means. And yes I will nitpick words because if you use welfare but mean handouts to a certain population then say that.....

Mike Lachance's picture

Tina, call it a tirade if you

Tina, call it a tirade if you will, but im simply pointing out the gaping holes in the PC crowd. You say Macdonald is talking about a particular group of people, the you say he is misunderstood. Then you say yes you will nitpick words and are upset he isnt using the words you would like him to use (therefore allowing you to nitpick... THEN you complain that he MUST mean EVERYONE when he talks about those on welfare who are abusing the system... (sigh) THEN you complain that alot of people dont abuse welfare and accuse Macdonald of calling everyone on welfare lazt... (ugh!) and THEN you go on to say he is not talking about welfare as "we" know it... Really? Is he or isnt he, because you are contradicting yourself in your own post. Make up your mind. Macdonald is, and has always been talking specifically about those who come to Maine not to look for work, but to take advantage of the welfare system (call it whatever you want!).

Now you want to label a certain group of people for no other reason that it would be much easier to play some kind of race card, or whatnot, but as Macdonald has said, its not a race issue, its a welfare (call it what you want) issue. So your race baiting is out the window.

The "group of people" are those who are abusing the system here in Maine and L-A. If someone moves here for the welfare (or whatever you want to call it this week), then that part of the system needs to be changed, fixed, discouraged, de-incentivized, etc etc.

What part of that do you not get? You're upset because he is not sticking some easy race label on groups of people. Boy that infuriates alot of people.. I believe more than if he did do that!

Mike Lachance's picture

fiz! fiz=fix. thats a great

fiz! fiz=fix. thats a great typo!

DONALD FERLAND's picture

I wasn't going to comment but

I wasn't going to comment but then I actually got a chance to watch the debate. One of the things that struck me is Mr. Macdonald actually said "you're not smart enough to read my words", "you're not comprehending them". Well get this....you have to actually use the words you mean when you speak so people will understand. Now that I have watched the actual debate I have learned one thing....Mr. Macdonald doesn't mean welfare as the rest of us know it; he means a particular population.....

His main agenda is a moratorium on section 8 housing and if he can accomplish that he will go back to retirement....(his words not mine) and yet he made a comment earlier in the debate that he has heard from one councilor that he (the councilor) will not seek another term and Mr. Macdonald then asked so why run this time......talk about hypocritical.

So my last question is this.....does anyone know how I can reach Mr. Macdonald as I have some questions for him and would like to hear his answers to them?

DONALD FERLAND's picture

Again the point is lost.

Again the point is lost. Where are the numbers of the actual people using the "welfare" as a way of life? Do you realize that there are time limits and requirements to receive "welfare"? Most people get "welfare" for only a short period of time. Those that get it for longer have "good cause". Again, the choice of words is the issue. Welfare is what you get through DHHS and includes financial assistance, food stamps, and MaineCare. Housing assistance is what you receive through the Maine State Housing Authority. There is a big difference between assistance and welfare. Words have to be chosen carefully. And to blame "Welfare" as a major contributing factor facing downtown Lewiston is incorrect. It is not the fault of "welfare". It is the result of people who either don't care, have given up, or don't have the knowledge of how to make changes i.e. lack of education which our failing school system is not helping.

However, downtown Lewiston is only a piece of the puzzle. Lewiston encompasses many neighborhoods not just "downtown" Lewiston. When people get off the turnpike in Lewiston they do not suddenly appear in "downtown" Lewiston. They arrive in the city of Lewiston. If Lewiston only encompasses the "downtown" area then where do the rest of us live.....do we have a different zip code?

If you want to solve the problems of this city then you have to involve the entire city. You have to bring ALL of us together and not pit one section of the city against the others.

Remember another thing....there was a time when people wouldn't go to Little Canada but now that area has welfare recipients as well as subsidized housing. There is welfare and subsidized housing off Sabattus Street. There is welfare and subsidized housing off Main Street. This is the city of Lewiston and not the city of "Downtown" Lewiston. Word choice is important and that is the lesson people need to learn if they want to be a part of the solution and not a part of the problem.

Wilma Turcotte's picture

Point lost

No one seems to get the point that "welfare is a problem". No one is saying there aren't legitimate people getting a helping hand and should but the point that is being missed is those that have made a lifetime of living on it and please don't say that it isn't so. The ones that are on it temporarily should be as outraged as people that worked all their lives and paid into SS or whatever to be told there isn't any money or enough money cause you have to share what you paid in to those that never did. Its not the fact that there is subsidized housing in all areas but the fact of who is paying for it. There was a time of a large influx of immigrants that came to work in the mills and became part of the community and only wanted an opportunity to work and take care of their families but this is not the case anymore. The influx we have now don't have any intention of becoming part of this community and our way of life as we knew it but to turn it into a completely different place then the one we know and love. We have people that can't afford their medications or go the hospitals but you go there and tell me what you see. I had to ask where the Dept of Human Services was and I have lived here all my life but alot of people seemed to know right where it was as soon as the boat docked. Its time to for the "welfare tellers" to close the window and say the vault is empty.

DONALD FERLAND's picture

Wilma I do get the point. I

Wilma I do get the point. I am not saying there are not abuses to the system. I am not saying there doesn't need to be reform. I am saying that the percentage of those that have made a lifetime of living on welfare is small in comparison to those that have used the system for the "helping hand" it was meant to be. I am saying that the problems for this city are more than just the "welfare" problems. I am saying that the place to change the welfare system is in Augusta and Washington not at the local level.

I am outraged at some of what goes on but my point is that anger isn't going to change anything. We are a city that needs to be one and not separate. We need to work as a team to create change. Here is a suggestion....Catholic Charities brought the recent "displaced refugees" to this city and got them settled with housing and assistance. Maybe the "city" government needs to hold Catholic Charities responsible for the "displaced refugees". Maybe the "city" needs to work with Augusta to change how the "displaced refugees" are helped.

I am outraged to think that our elected officials do not take a stand to make our federal government responsible for helping the "displaced refugees" instead of putting the burden on our local tax payers. However, I learned a long time ago that being PROACTIVE is better than being REACTIVE.

Do I think things need to change? YES YES YES. But in order to make things change and be better for all we need to work together and not play the blame game. Set up a committee of residents to come up with solutions to our problems that include all class levels, all educational levels, all levels of our work force, etc.

And for the record, I do agree with Mr. Macdonald on some things. However, I feel his agenda (or plan or platform) would be better in Augusta or Washington instead of at the local level where we really have no say in how DHHS or MSH works.

I know first hand that the current influx does not intend on becoming part of this community and our way of life. It outrages me that we are expected to accept their way of life when they won't accept our way of life. But angry reactions do not solve the problems and isn't that what we are all trying to do. It's how we do it that is going to make the solutions work or fail.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Well stated, Tina...good

Well stated, Tina...good post.

DAVE GUDAS's picture

Debate now onlie

To view the debate...
http://www.greatfallstv.net/webstream.htm
Choose: "Lewiston Government" on right side
Select: "Mayoral Runoff Election Debate" from the list

DAVE GUDAS's picture

Additional Cable TV Rebroadcasts of the Debate

Besides being available on-line as decribed above...
Great Falls Television will be rebroadcasting the Mayoral Runoff debate on Saturday and Sunday, December 3 & 4 at 1 & 7 PM on Time Warner Cable TV channel 7, and will rebroadcast it agian Monday thru Friday, December 5 thru 9th at 4:00 PM on Time Warner Cable TV channel 7.

DONALD FERLAND's picture

Let's take the time to look

Let's take the time to look at this unbiasedly....Mr. Paradis has some good ideas that have been tried time and time again. Mr. Macdonald is making promises that can not me kept at the local level. They are BOTH wrong for this city. We need fresh blood in our local offices that can see the problems, work as a team play to create solutions to the problems, and can be the "face" of Lewiston that the residents can be proud of. They both have presented what they want to accomplish while in office....neither have presented their goals for many of the issues important to most of us....what will they do about our failing school system, how are we going to bring this community together, how are we going to keep our tax base lower without hurting those that depend on services out of necessity not choice.

Now let's look at a few other things....Mr. Paradis is basically status quo....Mr. Macdonald wants to use the "bully pulpit" to create change...Mr. Paradis has been in local government before.....Mr. Macdonald has not served in public office but has been a public servant....

What do I want to teach our children....to stand up for themselves, to work hard, to be the best they can be, to get along with others even if they disagree, to think before they speak, and to be a team player.

This is a scary election for many reasons...we either get more of the same or we get scared into reacting instead of proacting. We get soft spoken old ideas that haven't worked or we get bullied into fighting each other over ideas that CANNOT be implemented at the local level.

The one thing this election has done for this city....it has started a dialog of the people to hear multiple sides of the things on our minds. The one thing it has not done is create an air of let's work together as one to create change.

Neither candidate is the right person to lead Lewiston. In fact, this years entire pool of candidates were not right for Lewiston. We need new blood, we need new energy, we need new ideas, we need to be creative not destructive. We need to live for the future without going back to the past. We need candidates who will actually get out and talk with ALL residents of Lewiston, not just family, friends, and comfortable neighborhoods. We need to work with our local businesses and not against them, we need to work with our residents not against them, we need to put personal biases aside and become one. This is suppose to be a city with diverse cultures and beliefs. It's time we act like a city not a group of individuals with differing agendas.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Ever consider running for

Ever consider running for Mayor, Tina? The Pirate considered getting into politics at one time, but remembered a promise he had made to his mother the last time he got out of jail; "Mom, I promise never to go back to a life of crime".

Mike Lachance's picture

Macdonald has made no

Macdonald has made no promises that he cannot keep. He has stated what he plans to do as Mayor, which is lead with an agenda. He can lead, and his agenda is clear. He will tell anyone who asks what his agenda is. (Unlike Paradis).

Having an agenda is not the same as "making promises". An agenda is a plan. He has a plan on which direction he wants to lead the council (of which Macdonald already has considerable support). But he (and Paradis) both attest to the fact that the Mayor cannot make the decisions regarding which way the city actually moves. The council does that, along with the manager.

DONALD FERLAND's picture

Again it seems the point is

Again it seems the point is lost Mike. Mr. Macdonald wants to make changes in welfare. THAT IS NOT THE MAYORS JOB. He would better serve the residents of Lewiston in Augusta or Washington not in local government. And my grandmother once told me that you can catch more flies with honey instead of vinegar. Words do mean alot. When you alienate an entire group of people because you don't choose your words carefully then you become part of the problem and not a part of the solution. And a person cannot lead when he is part of the problem. Haven't we learned yet....when you are constantly having to defend your position because you "misspoke" or "put your foot in your mouth" then you are not solving or leading anything. I would love to sit down with Mr. Macdonald and actually have a discussion but he needs to be more "tactful" in his choice of words because all he is going to accomplish is causing more discord not change.

Wilma Turcotte's picture

point

Maybe its time a mayor of any city made a stand. If more would say what they would like to do and would try to do then the ones that make promises they can't keep maybe we could straighten out gov. at every level. Everyone will say its not the city's job to change welfare but the state. Well whether the welfare money comes from city or state its still my pocket that its being taken from. If you live in Maine then you are "the state" and its still your money they are handing out.

Peter Blake's picture

Absentee Ballots

are absentee ballots available for the run off election and if so where can people obtain them?

DAVE GUDAS's picture

For Absentee Ballot Info.

Peter Blake's picture

Same Old Song

Democrats vs Republicans... same old song.
Fear the Republicans as they represent change
Hate the Democrats as they give away everything.

Mr. Handy's comment represents the narrow point of view that unless you are born here ... you are from away...

I agree with Mr. Macdonald, but if he is to win over the establishment of Democrats they need to get the voters out to the poles. The more the turnout, the better the city will know what people really want, but as I indicated yesterday having the polling place in only one spot limits senior citizen involvement and the chosen spot is in the heart of the kind of district that Mr. Macdonald wants to eliminate. This is hardly a fair election process as it is presently set up. I believe that all polling places in the city should be open so that more people can easily and quickly vote.

You can see by the comments how much the Democrats fear a Republican in the Mayor's Office.

Mike Lachance's picture

Its that fear of a

Its that fear of a conservative leading the city that spawns the liberals off on the "fear monger" warpath. The only thing the establishment have to fear is "the fear of a republican in office" itself.

Newsflash: Theres BAD NEWS out there folks, and it wasnt created by Republicans running Lewiston into the ground. Go ahead and fear, but don't fear Macdonald. He's the messenger.

Melissa  Dunn's picture

this is completely

this is completely disheartening to see and still hear misguided views based on fear tactics or from not being fully informed about certain issues re: new mainers. idt anyone realizes that macdonalds views-if they could be carried out-would affect them. not only is he making promises he can't keep-he's vowing to annihilate those in need whether it be the working class or our grandmother/father or neighbors that need help-even ms. rancourt.

Mike Lachance's picture

Melissa, are you serious??

Melissa, are you serious?? First you say this:
"this is completely disheartening to see and still hear misguided views based on fear tactics or from not being fully informed about certain issues"

Then you go on to say this about Bob Macdonald:
"he's vowing to annihilate those in need whether it be the working class or our grandmother/father or neighbors that need help"

A perfect example of the typical Macdonald detractor.

GARY SAVARD's picture

Having lived in Lewiston for

Having lived in Lewiston for all of my 59 years, I don't think going back to the way some things were 30 or 40 years ago is all that bad compared to the way some things are today. One example that often comes to mind is in 1970-71, my senior year at St. Dom's, students could walk safely back and forth between the Bates and Bartlett Street buildings, or to the "Arena", even after dark. Today you likely wouldn't do that unless you were in a large group of people. Sometimes, you have to back up a bit in order to keep moving forward, and sometimes, you have to turn in a different direction to get where you want to go. It's a matter of choice, and to some extent in this mayoral election, we have that.

Mike Miles's picture

Those immigrants

The recent mayoral debate reminds me of Lewiston's (The Letter) and Maine's (the KKK in the 20's) moments of shame and infamy. The KKK found Maine to be a bastion of strength, as they scapegoated people of French and Irish heritage, and Catholics in Maine, and black people elsewhere. There is always someone out there who needs to scapegoat immigrants and poor people. They need to find someone they can feel superior to, and point the accusing finger toward. In time, though, people of good will realize how awful that is, and do the right thing, which is to reject that mean and inhumane worldview.

Mike Lachance's picture

"well said"--> "KKK"??? And

"well said"--> "KKK"???

And you folks are giving Bob Macdonald a hard time???

Unreal. Un-REAL.

Melissa  Dunn's picture

well said.

well said.

Advertisement

Stay informed — Get the news delivered for free in your inbox.

I'm interested in ...