These are interesting results:
First, who are the 505 idiots who voted for Carl Lundin? He’s the guy who dropped out. We’ll call that the “ignorant voter” quotient.
Second, the two candidates who identify themselves as Conservatives, Mary Weigand and Monte Schmiege, won convincing pluralities. Schmiege is an incumbent and one of two conservatives on the current board. Weigand is a well-known local conservative. This is, perhaps, not surprising in a conservative community like West Bend, but the results of the past few local elections seemed to indicate a softening of that demographic feature. This election seems to indicate that perhaps the previous elections were anomalies.
Third, turnout for this primary election was 35% higher than the general election last year for school board (22.53% vs. 16.68%). This is a pattern that we have seen in West Bend for a while. There is a vocal, committed, organized liberal minority. They vote more reliably than the conservative majority. This means that turnout is everything. When turnout is below 20%, liberals can win victories in local elections like they did last April. When turnout is higher, there just aren’t enough liberals to overcome the conservative vote. The liberals can turn out every single liberal in the county and they can’t win if there is even a moderate conservative turnout. It’s just math.
Let’s hope that turnout is decent for the April election. Given that the Supreme Court race is likely to be very heated, I think Schmiege and Weigand have the inside track to the school board. That bodes well for the district.
Owen: Your readership may be getting the wrong impression about the school board candidates, in particular Chris Zwygart. Your article implies that Mr. Schmiege and Ms. Weigand are the only conservatives running. That would be inaccurate. I am very familiar with Mr. Schmiege, having served on the school board with him; with Ms. Weigand, having served with her husband on the school board; and Chris Zwygart, having worked with him for over 15 years. Of the 3, Chris Zwygart may be the most steadfast conservative that I have worked with. Of course, he doesn’t run on that platform. He recognizes that this is a non-partisan local election. But also, he, you, and I know that the best intentioned person is of little value in any enterprise, if they do not have the fundamental experience and skills to be of service. The current school board sorely needs Chris Zwygart’s skills and experience, a point that I believe you have made.
Chris is a CPA, an attorney, Chief Legal officer and a Vice-President at West Bend Mutual Insurance Company. He has worked at a Board level in multiple ways, not the least of which has been serving on the Board of St. Joseph Hospital. He has worked within West Bend Mutual in the Finance Department, Legal Department, IT Department and has in depth experience in analyzing critical issues that will be coming before the next School Board. His financial acumen, legal expertise, responsibilities in legal compliance and high level business experience is sorely needed on the School Board. I believe that every person who has ever worked with Chris has only praise for his abilities and for his genuine problem-solving skill.
He will bring skills in reviewing finances, proposed building referendum for Jackson Elementary, investment and bond strategies and most importantly conducting job searches for the next Superintendent and key administrative positions. We have seen how poor judgment and lack of experience has led to some disastrous management of personnel issues by a school board. Chris understands these critical needs and especially the need for transparent and deliberate decision-making.
So, while I personally do not vote based upon party or philosophical affiliations, I respect your or your readers sometimes desire to do so. If they want to vote for a conservative, then that is their choice. Chris is a conservative. But, they should also consider the superior qualifications that Chris Zwygart would be able to bring to the board. Chris is offering his expertise to the school board, and I think we should be grateful and make sure we accept the offer.
I had the opportunity to meet Christopher Zwygart and would agree that he will bring a level of expertise, professionalism, and leadership above what currently exists on the Board. In my opinion, the Board has evolved into a Parent Teacher Organization trying to govern a complex enterprise. I brought up my concerns about introducing a building referendum while the WBSD is in the process of a substantial turnover in administration, and my reasoning that efforts should be directed at finding an experienced interim superintendent who could stabilize operations and assert proper working relationships between board, administration, and community before a permanent and hopefully long-term superintendent is hired. As I recall, Owen, back in spring of 2016 in your Daily News column you had suggested that time be taken in appointing a new superintendent, using the services of an acting superintendent if necessary. One of our stellar former board members, Charles Hillman, made that recommendation to the Board at a recent meeting during the Public Participation session. Anyway, I am not the most articulate speaker – what I found in Mr. Zwygart was the ability to drill down into the core of what I was attempting to say and he showed an understanding of my concerns. It is my hope that if elected, he will serve as a catalyst for other equally competent candidates to run for office in future election cycles.
I hope you have the opportunity to meet with him when you collect information to develop your recommendations.
Thanks, Therese and Mark. And thanks for serving on the board, Therese. Your points are well taken. I did not mean to imply that the other two candidates were not conservative. I’ve never met them, so I can’t speak to that. I know that Monte and Mary are. As we get closer to the general election, I look forward to meeting them all.
Im curious, in what Universe is having Mary Weigand on a School Board good for a school district? Why do you so hate your local kids? http://www.forwardlookout.com/tag/mary-weigand
Awesome link Jeff! I am really liking Mary Weigand a lot more after reading that progressive screed.
I love it when evolution disciples rear their ugly head like their religion is supreme. No one has solved Darwin’s great doubt, the Cambrian layer life explosion, which really backs up sudden Creation. Read Dr. Stephen Meyer’s book “Darwin’s Doubt”. It documents how the evidence across the world in last 150 years only affirms the Cambrian layer life explosion problem which Darwin himself spent a whole chapter on explaining how this is a huge problem for his religion…I mean “theory”.
Why is it that evolution disciples claim the holiness of their “science” except when it comes to the Cambrian layer life explosion evidence? Answer: You want to ignore the data and evidence for your godless religion.
I think I might send Mary a small campaign contribution now. Thanks for shoving your evolution religion post in my face, it is really clarifying how far the evolution disciples penetrate into the public sphere with their false religious zealotry.
Can’t possibly hate those kids any worse than Monona Grove hates theirs:
http://eagnews.org/blogging-school-board-member-links-records-request-to-pedophilia/
Nord,
There you go again, ignoring the biggest “science/data/evidence” problem evolution religion faces…the Cambrian layer life explosion. Darwin acknowledged the problem destroyed his theory and true scientists that pay attention to all the data—not just the data they want to ignore to keep their religion alive—say the data collected over last 150 years confirms sudden creation vs “gradual evolution”. Many true scientists acknowledge this problem destroys the theory.
Evolution disciples strut around like the science is solid on evolution, when it’s not, it is just a platform of faith—mostly religious zealotry that puts even the most faithful Evangelicals to shame.
At least Evangelicals can admit their faith. Evolution zealots are dishonest, they cannot admit their faith, and worse, they violate their own scientific covenant when it comes to the Cambrian layer sudden life explosion evidence. That means evolution is not just a religion, but a religion full of hypocrites with no provision for forgiveness.
k:
Again, you provided not a single iota of proof. But that should come as no surprise to anyone that reads this blog. And what is a “true scientist”? Someone who relies solely on their beliefs rather than evidence?
p: How is it bigoted? What does WN mean?
Nord,
I addressed the unmistakeable, destructive, flaw in the “science” of evolution, you refuse to acknowledge it. You choose to keep your faith in evolution despite the giant flaw the evidence exposes.
Your major problem is: you are too cowardly to admit you ignore the Cambrian layer life explosion evidence. I can admit my faith, you do not have the honesty to admit your faith.
That is disappointing.
k:
You have done nothing of the sort. All you are doing is repeating something you heard from another denier. Again, please provide proof of you claim re “Cambrian layer life explosion” if you can, and how whatever you are making up disproves evolution. Now who is the coward????
BTW, by even acknowledging that there was a Cambrian layer (550+ million years ago) you contradicting your 6000 YO earth claim.
More anti-Christian bigotry from the sock puppet.
ESAD, OR
interesting, yes as Nord points out by your argument your admitting that that Weigands elevator falls a few floors short of the top.
By the way my religion is Christian and if Mary is remotely true, im curious do you think that they were able to housebreak T-rexs?
Paul, thanks for bringing that up. It was awesome, Wiggy proved that he is an idiot who cant handle opinions he doesnt like and Jim Bender got so much crap when I exposed him(never once did I compare him to a pedofile) that he changed his ORR and the children were protected.
You were also removed from a village board unanimously for misconduct in 2011.
And it is spelled “pedophile,” you brain dead fuck.
It was actually a committee not a board, by a bunch of right wing snowflakes for being in a public building. EVeryone who voted to do so never won another election.
Who are you anyway
Nord,
https://darwinsdoubt.com
I don’t buy the accuracy of carbon dating on many levels. However, I never rule out that an all-powerful God can create material of any age at the point of Creation. There is also issue corruption of a-perfect creation at point sin infected creation in Genesis 3.
I can lead the horse to the water, but if you keep drinking the evolution cult kool-aide, by ignoring the evidence shredding it, not much I can do to dissuade you from your religion. The problem is: you fail to walk your talk on your “scientific covenant”.
K:
You don’t have to “buy” anything. That is the beauty of science, it makes no difference weather you believe it or not, it is still true.
You have presented no evidence to shred anything, there is no religion on this end, and what is my “scientific covenant”? You are relying on gibberish again..
Typical evolution disciple—ignoring the evidence, relying on faith, not science.
I can be honest about my faith.
Why can’t you?
k:
No, that is your world of denial, where up is down, black is white, ……… You have offered proof of nothing, yet accuse me of not believing in science. Wow, just, wow!
Gotta catch up on the science, Kevin, you’re at least a few decades behind. Google “punctuated equilibrium”.
(I actually took one of the authors of that theory out for beers once upon a time in Madison. He was not recognized at the KK.)
You both demonstrate the religious ferver of the evolution disciples.
The evidence disproves the idea of “gradual evolution”. You want to ignore the evidence because you want to cling to your religion.
That’s fine, but be honest and admit your faith….is that so hard?
“The evidence disproves the idea of “gradual evolution” “.
Where? If all you have is the pseudoscience of Meyer, then you have nothing.
Nord,
So Dr. Stephen Meyer is “pseudoscience”?
His adherence to the scientific method is outstanding.
It is your passionate discipleship in your religion that is showing again. The “science” disputes your faith outcome in evolution.
I’m fine with you having faith in something, I just detest your dishonesty in failing to admit it.