Matthew Ricchiazzi Bows Out of Mayoral Race

Independent Party hopeful in the Buffalo race for mayor Matthew Ricchiazzi has issued a statement, referring to his quest for the mayor’s seat in the past tense and making promises for the future.

The primary will be held one week from today with two Democrats, incumbent Mayor Byron Brown and challenger Councilman Mickey Kearns, on the ballot.  There will be a televised debate on Channel 2, WGRZ TV this coming Friday, and speculation is that next Tuesday’s primary will likely point to the winner of the November election if no other candidates make the final ballot.  Ricchiazzi’s letter is as follows:

Friends
and fellow Buffalonians,

Today, I’ve
been informed that the Board of Elections plans to reject my independent
nominating petition for Mayor on Wednesday morning.  On Friday, the New
York State Supreme Court will make a final determination.  I want to take
this opportunity to thank everyone who volunteered their time, effort, and
energy into this campaign.  I am immeasurably grateful and will forever
remember the passion, pride, and pureness of intention with which you’ve
engaged this ambitious effort.

Those of
you who helped knock on doors, collect signatures, distribute fliers, and
spread the word as widely as we could, know that this campaign had nothing to
do with me.  This campaign was about a generation of young people who are
absolutely irate that our incompetent political leadership has squandered our
future here.  This campaign was a rejection of the smallness of our
ambition and the pettiness that has plagued our politics for far too long. 
It was about people who refused to believe that our decline is inevitable, and
who understand that we need leaders who know where we’re going and how to get
us there.  It was a campaign full of people who don’t have the heart to
watch the City that we love die because of managerial incompetence and a
leadership deficit; people who didn’t have the stomach to sit on the sidelines
and to let that happen.

But more
than anything, this campaign was about a belief in Buffalo–a belief that you
and I share: a confidence in our potential, an unwavering understanding that
our best days are still ahead of us, and that one day we’ll have rebuilt this
City better than it’s ever been before.

It has
been my distinct pleasure to have engaged with you all in a conversation on how
we can rebuild this extraordinary City that we all love.  One door at a
time, my belief in Buffalo has been reinforced, strengthened, and invigorated. 
You’ve shared with me your ideas, insights, and energy.  Your openness–and
your willingness to be aspirational–has been a wonderful personal experience
for which I cannot thank you enough.

But our
efforts to change Buffalo cannot–and will not–end here.  Our City still
needs–and desperately deserves–a robust public discourse on how we go about
reversing a 50 year population decline, decades of hemorrhaging job losses,
rising rates of violent crime, a persistently underperforming school system,
and an endemic housing crisis.  We’re going to continue this effort in
three ways.

First,
the solutions for these extraordinary problems must stem from us all. 
That is why, over the next several months, I’ll be revamping ChangeBuffalo.org,
into a Wikipedia of sorts for urban policy.  Together, we’ll continue our
conversation in an effort to come to broad consensus on the strategies that we
must pursue in order for Buffalo to see a brighter day.  In the process of
reimagining our City, we’ll refine The Agenda to Change Buffalo, and put forth
a robust plan for progress and prosperity.

Second,
The Agenda to Change Buffalo, which was the independent body making my
nomination for Mayor, will continue to exist and will evolve into a
full-fledged political party committed to an assault on the status quo. 
Within the month, I’ll begin approaching local community and civic leaders who
are equally as unsatisfied with the status quo as I am, and who find mediocrity
simply unacceptable.  I’ll ask those leaders to serve on a non-partisan “Executive
Committee” who will identify Buffalo’s emerging out-of-the-box leaders and
thinkers who are of the quality and caliber that we need to run for local
office.  I’ll do everything that I can to help them get elected.

Third, I
intend to establish a firm that will specialize in providing consulting
services to municipal governments, helping them to build more vibrant, more prosperous,
more sustainable, more beautiful, more equitable communities.  I’ll begin
approaching venture capitalists with a concrete business plan before the end of
the year.

Let’s be
honest–a 23 year old, openly bisexual, half-Indian, registered Republican
running for Mayor of Buffalo was a long shot.  But you’ve made me believe
that it’s just within our grasp.  Truly, we have here a City of
extraordinary neighbors, and I hope that our paths cross in the future many
times.  Until then, don’t inhale stale air of orthodoxy.

Very
truly–and gratefully–yours,

Matthew
Ricchiazzi

 

 

 

About the author  ⁄ WCPerspective

Buffalo and development junkie currently exiled in California.

63 comments
fill
fill

It's hard to imagine a mayor who is young, bright, thoughtful, articulate and super cute.........It seems like fantasy thinking !!

JohnMarko
JohnMarko

Then you must know them ALL - because NO ONE can deny that the TODAY'S republicans have built their ENTIRE phoney "family values" campaign on the VILIFICATION of the GBLT community. And the hidden and almost BLATENT racism of the teabaggers and other astroturf ingnoramuses perfectly illustrate my point.

You CAN'T say that about DEMOCRATS because THEY DON'T ENGAGE IN SUCH DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR!!!

That is a FACT!

You're fantasy world of what you try to hide will not change that!

whatever
whatever

Blackrocklifer>"my comment was tongue in cheek"

Fair enough, but an extreme statement to be provocative or tounge-in-cheek doesn't deserve a substantive reasoned response as you then asked of OBrien. I don't see how a statement like that differs much from G-rated name calling he gave you in response.

Blackrocklifer>"Republicans are not known to be tolerant of gays"

That's not much better than your first try. I suppose based on the California marriage referendum exit polls you could say the same about some minority groups who are overwhelmingly Democrats -- if you wanted to generalize, that is.

whatever
whatever

Blackrocklifer>"I believe you are mistaken"

You sound sure it wasn't you I was thinking of, so I apologize if I mixed you up with some other anti-Collins person here.

MrGreenJeans
MrGreenJeans

Neither are Democrats. The destructive and idiotic "Don't ask don't tell" policy came from Clinton. Obama is no better. It's all one party, people : one corporate-owned party.

Black Rock Lifer
Black Rock Lifer

I believe you are mistaken, though I have been critical of Collins I do not recall any such comment.

Black Rock Lifer
Black Rock Lifer

whatever- my comment was tongue in cheek, an attempt at a little humor and yes, maybe absurd but my basic argument is sound, Republicans are not known to be tolerant of gays.

whatever
whatever

By the way, you have written that you sometimes are disingenuous when politically attacking those you feel deserving.

I remember you attacking Collins once for something the Dem legislature was in total control about and then I, like an idiot, tried reasoning with you about it. Your response was to acknowledge yes you knew it was really the legislature Dems, but you said you enjoyed blaming Collins regardless of that because you dislike him so much.

Good lesson learned that stuck in my head: trying to reason with extremists = idiotic waste.

biniszkiewicz
biniszkiewicz

I've read your proposals and I'll give you credit for being creative. I disagree with you on a majority of your proposed solutions, but you've put thought into your ideas and you have some specificity, so I'll give you kudos for that. Many of your stated goals appear to be far beyond the scope of the mayor's abilities to implement. Others seem at odds with the aim of cutting spending (and some of those that do cut spending, such as getting rid of clerical staff, I think are frankly penny wise and pound foolish). But you've put thought into things, and I applaud that. Plus you've inspired me to dust an old idea off and start a monthly tradition.

Soon I will roll out my long held idea for political debate (watch for a BRO reader submission explaining same). I call my idea: The-Chess-Clock-Debate-Drinking-Sandwich (a non partisan monthly 3 hour feast for the argumentative). You'll like it. Keep an eye out.

whatever
whatever

BRLifer>"I am surprised O'Briens name calling is acceptable yet you question my response to his personal attack."

Your extremist 2nd sentence at 11:34 was idiotic enough to deserve the response OBrien wrote or to be ignored.

It would've been more polite to call your act of writing idiotic instead of calling you an idiot. But he didn't sound angry, didn't curse at you, wan't vulgar. Idiot is a pretty harmless G-rated word. It's not even PG-13. How many times was President Bush called an idiot on this blog?

Yes, any name calling is usually an idiotic thing to do. However, it's also usually an idiotic waste to attempt a reasoned debate with someone immediately after they've written something so intolerant and extreme that even they don't believe it.

Facts disproving your 11:34 remark are already known by anybody as well informed as you are, and known by anybody informed enough to be reading this kind of blog. Then of course when OBrien later tried reasoning with you, it was just dismissed out of hand by you anyhow. That shows his first response made more sense than telling you things you already knew.

O'Brien
O'Brien

Uh huh, sure... I am far more tolerant about other opinions and perspectives than you will ever be. The only name you were called was an idiot. That is more my opinion than a call out, but if it threatens you to the point that you have to throw barbs back at me, then that's fine. Let me ask you, have you read your previous comments? You are obviously angry at the system that has failed so many, you have a chip on your shoulder about wealthy Americans and those who have moved to the suburbs. You have issues with commuters, with Republicans, with Conservatives, and with those who challenge your comfort zone. I am just calling you on it. Your anger and issues cloud your judgment and close your mind. It's all good! No worries here, we know what you stand for and what you stand against. You won't deviate from your stance and are closed to other opinions. You can call it sarcasm, but we all know it is truly bitterness, anger, and envy. Like I said, It's all good though. You have to live with yourself and with the world that you create for yourself. Take care now, stress and anger can lead to health issues, so be careful there. KTHNXBYE.

Black Rock Lifer
Black Rock Lifer

Your intolerance of opinions unlike your own is quite obvious. My comments are sometimes sarcastic but more tongue in cheek than angry. Name calling and personal attacks are much more a sign of anger.

I am not really a Democrat, they are too far to the right and lack the courage to challenge the status quo.

O'Brien
O'Brien

So what? They also have a lot of people who are a hell of a lot more tolerant of different opinions than you are. You seem to fit into the angry, old, white, male category. You just feel that your opinions are more acceptable than the other angry, old, white, males on the Republican side of the fence.

Why not open your mind to realize that the old "Republican" and "Democrat" stereotypes are antiquated. Things are changing across the board.

Oh, and one more thing. The beloved patriarch of the Demorats (Ted Kennedy) was an opponent of LGBT rights for decades.

O'Brien
O'Brien

I agree, but remember that the Bill Bradley refused a donation from HRC during his 2000 run for President. Does that make all Democrats homophobic? It took years for HRC and other groups to get a foot in the door with the Democrats and Republicans alike. Things have changed over the past decade, but very slowly. Granted, the Republicans are much further behind the Democrats in acceptance, but don't throw the baby out with the bath water or paint them all with the same broad brush. I know quite a few Republicans who are strong supporters of our community and same sex marriages.

To say that "Last time I checked the party only accepted straight people or those that pretend to be straight" is just ignorant.

O'Brien
O'Brien

I disagree, I know plenty of Republicans who are supporters of the LGBT community. Your claims are out of date and largely unfounded. If someone made a similar claim about Democrats you would claim that they were spending too much time listening to the hysterics of Rush Limbaugh. Your comments are the same from the other side of the fence.

Black Rock Lifer
Black Rock Lifer

Yes O'Brien, the log cabin Republicans exist, you must be right, the Republican party is just one big tent of love and understanding. Funny though that the tent is mostly full of richer, older, whiter, angrier males than any other party.

Black Rock Lifer
Black Rock Lifer

I have never admitted to "writing things that I do not believe are true". I may be guilty of being sarcastic but I was not being disingenuous and stand by my assertion that the Republican party is not accepting of gays. I think many others would agree. The party has a long record of intolerance and is quite comfortable using wedge issues to divide America.

I am surprised O'Briens name calling is acceptable yet you question my response to his personal attack.

John Carocci
John Carocci

Hold on just a moment.

There are plenty of Republicans who are fine with the gays. Many even support gay marriage. However, there are also plenty of Republicans who are not fine with the gays, and in fact the Republican Party Platform condemned homosexuality well into this century.

I find it interesting that you bring up the Log Cabin Republicans as an example of how all are welcome under the GOP's big tent. Do you remember when Bob Dole refused to accept a $1000 campaign contribution from a local Log Cabin chapter? He didn't even want gay money.

Again, there are plenty of individual Republicans who treat gay people as equals. The Party as a whole, however, has largely earned its reputation of being anti-gay.

O'Brien
O'Brien

To say that the Republican Party only accepts straight people or those pretending to be straight is an asinine statement. You only need to look as far as the Log Cabin Republicans to refute your assertion.

We all know that you have very strong negative feelings about the Republican Party, the wealthy, and the suburbs. From past threads we have seen how closed minded you are about these subjects, and anyone presenting facts, figures, or arguments that run counter to your bigoted assumptions will be met with one of your standard responses that accuse the responder of "blaming the victims" or quoting an inane statistic about distribution of wealth in America. If you don't offer one of those responses, then you call the responder out for being out of touch or turning their back on the city to live in the suburbs. At no time will you ever state that the City of Buffalo or the poor in the city have any culpability or responsibility, it is always some one else, or some other entity, that is to blame.

You are a closed minded bigot, and not worth the time of getting into one of your rants about distribution of wealth or the evils of corporate America.

whatever
whatever

You're the one who wrote the lie "Last time I checked the party only accepted straight people or those that pretend to be straight." and now you're saying he's the one who looks foolish?

As you've admitted here, you feel free to write things in blogs that you don't even believe are true just to stir up arguments. Isn't that an idiotic thing to do? Why should anyone debate with someone who admittedly is often disingenuous?

JohnMarko
JohnMarko

The republican party has BUILT it's fortunes on HATRED of gays and immigrants and anyone who is NOT WHITE or phoney "christian". It's a FACT. Look at the recent Presidential races - especially the LAST one and all the phoney tea-baggers (who don't even recognize the gay sexual practice in their "brillitant" acronym!).

Look at TODAY'S republican party - anyone not Straight, White (except for show) or "christian" need not apply.

okcheckitout
okcheckitout

You, Mr. Ricchiazzi, are precisely what we need in order for Buffalo to grow and prosper. An intelligent, honest, humble man who is forward thinking and truly cares about our people and city.

Please do not leave us for greener pastures.

Matthew.Ricchiazzi
Matthew.Ricchiazzi

Well, I've certainly learned my lesson in politics for the day:

Never be open and honest with people, because--apparently--that's not what voters want from politicians.

[since my tone doesn't seem to come across through text, insert sarcasm here]

Black Rock Lifer
Black Rock Lifer

Again, debate the issue if you can and save the name calling for the schoolyard. It just makes you look foolish.

whatever
whatever

Matthew.R>"You're hugely misinformed. I've laid on the table the MOST SUBSTANTIVE, MOST AGGRESSIVE, MOST DETAILED, MOST COMPREHENSIVE agenda of any of the candidates running."

That's all just opinion. I remember looking at your campaign agenda's "SUBSTANCE" and "DETAILS" back when this blog posted about your candidacy a few months ago and when you wrote something in the Buffalo News. I didn't think most of what you call substance looked substantive or realistic, and your self-proclaimed "fiscal conservatism" was accompanied by very questionable spending ideas that look fiscally liberal.

Nothing personal. I agree Kearns lacks substance on issues too, but that doesn't mean your campaign's substance is good, just as Mickey pointing out Byron's failures doesn't mean he's any better.

Byron has a record to run on, so there's four years worth of substance for the voters to see and most of it isn't good. Some of it is good or ok. When he ran last time he also lacked substance. Mostly he just kept trying to find new sentences to say about City-Stat no matter what he was talking about, yet he won in a landslide.

Matthew.Ricchiazzi
Matthew.Ricchiazzi

You're hugely misinformed. I've laid on the table the MOST SUBSTANTIVE, MOST AGGRESSIVE, MOST DETAILED, MOST COMPREHENSIVE agenda of any of the candidates running. Before you suggest that I lack substance and accuse me of not running an issue-driven campaign, you should pay a little attention. Look at Byron's "issues" page. Then look at Mickey's. You'll laugh at how superficial they are. When you're done reading their plans (it will only take you 2 and half mins), read my Agenda to Change Buffalo at ChangeBuffalo.org--all 40 pages of it. As for my qualifications, I'm certainly more qualified than either Byron or Mickey, and I have a much deeper understanding and grasp of the issues. I wasn't running on experience; I was running on skill sets that neither Brown or Kearns have. To suggest that I'm playing identity politics is ridiculous, especially given Brown and Kearns' campaigns.

O'Brien
O'Brien

Been done, your mind is closed. Your bigotry and ignorance are difficult to contend with because your are incapable of seeing any perspective except your own. That has been pointed out time and time again on BRO by people who are much better at this than I am. You hate Republicans with the same blind emotional rage that a white supremacist has for African Americans. You aren't going to convince them to think beyond their own prejudices, and we haven't been able to get you to see past yours. I won't waste anymore time arguing with a closed minded bigot like you.

Shoestring Budget
Shoestring Budget

I doubt there is anything sinister going on at the News website. Right now the top headlines are "Brown decries being target of 'dirty politics.'" Plus there is a Bills embezzling story and the Obama back-to-school speech. Search on dirty politics, embezzling, or Obama speech and none of these stories appear in your results.

What that tells me is that their search engine isn't powered by Google and may ignore current (however that is defined) stories on the assumption that readers are finding them by browsing.

Black Rock Lifer
Black Rock Lifer

I agree Brown looks pretty foolish trying to backpedal away from this one much like when his son "borrowed" the family car and got in an accident. I am disappointed but not surprised, politicians do favors for connected individuals all the time. This has always existed in our political structure and certainly reaches into law enforcement.

I don't think Brown is corrupt but possibly a little arrogant in believing he is beyond reproach. Not defending this crap, just saying its nothing new.

biniszkiewicz
biniszkiewicz

I agree. This issue should be pressed. Brown insists he did nothing wrong, but refuses to confirm or deny that he helped Stokes evade police charges. Well, confirm or deny: did Stokes come to your office, Mr. Brown? Did you make the violation disappear?

If you didn't, then state so very specifically instead of beating around the bush by claiming the motivation of the muckrakers is suspect. If you did assist Stokes, then explain to the voters why this was not wrong. Instead of questioning the motives of those doing the muckraking, answer the charge. The motives and timing of those who are digging the dirt is clear: they want you (bb) out of office. So what? What does that have to do with the substance of the charge, namely that you helped Stokes get out of a police jam? If Mr. Stokes was a nobody to you and your administration as you have previously insisted, then why the help?

biniszkiewicz
biniszkiewicz

RE: why you are a Republican: That's a good response. It's a reasonable philosophical position which I could support.

I think the third party endeavor is wasted energy, myself, but it's your time and effort. I'm a Democrat who is a deficit hawk and I am libertarian socially. I want the Dems to embrace lower taxes and libertarian social views. But I believe the Republican party of the not so distant future will be associated much more closely with the positions you articulate here. You are right: the social conservatives have hijacked the Republican party. But many others within your tent will want to kick out the social conservatives as they lead the Republicans over the cliff in the short run. You are young. Fight the good fight within the ranks of like minded deficit hawks and when the inevitable backlash against the social conservatives ferments, you'll be positioned to be a local leader in that party.

biniszkiewicz
biniszkiewicz

That response is a bit disingenuous. I don't think the fact that you failed to qualify for the ballot had anything whatsoever to do with you being either openly bisexual or having Native American heritage. I appreciate the line was intended to be lighthearted and it's certainly true you were a long shot (and to my mind you certainly should have been a long shot; you are exceptionally young to be entrusted with managing a major city's government, you have revealed no credentials whatsoever for the post so far as I can see, it is an exercise in chutzpah to deem yourself qualified for the top job in city government at age 23 and I haven't seen any substantive ideas whatsoever about exactly how you propose to change Buffalo's operation).

To highlight your sexual orientation and racial heritage is absolutely fine in my book. But you can't blame others for being offended when they interpret your line as vaguely accusing voters of failing to support you because of those qualities. Be gay or bisexual and be proud of it. Do you really think voters care one way or another that you are part Native American? Fight the campaigns of your future on your ideas for correcting the wrongs of government. If you want my support, make those proposals very specific and detailed as opposed to expressing vague dissatisfaction with 'your generation's' lot in inheriting whatever mess you object to.

Matthew.Ricchiazzi
Matthew.Ricchiazzi

I agree, and I think there is an opportunity for a viable third party: proud capitalists, moderate Republicans, pro-business fiscal conservatives, social libertarians, and deficit hawks. There is no reason that group cannot be diverse, tolerant, inclusive, forward thinking, and respectful of intellectualism. I hope it happens sooner rather than later.

Black Rock Lifer
Black Rock Lifer

Maybe a third party that is fiscally conservative and socially liberal might have a chance but changing the ingrained intolerance of the Republican party is unrealistic.

Dan
Dan

Republicans in New York State, I've found, tend to have a more moderate mindset that is closer to that of Barry Goldwater or the "Rockefeller Republicans" of the 1960s and 1970s, than the neoconservatives and paleoconservatives that are the dominant voice of the party today.

I say "tend to", because there are neoconservatives in the state. It's just that the Republican Party in New York tends to lean more moderate than ... oh, Ohio or Indiana.

burlapwax
burlapwax

Whoa! I'm sorry that I touched that nerve, and appreciate that you responded so quickly in this forum. I agree with a lot of your positions and ideas on the website, and I do appreciate the candor and eloquence of your letter. I apologize for the tone of my reaction to the last paragraph of the letter; it was ill-considered and I retract my last sentence; it was just my gut reaction when I saw what seemed to be a jab at the electorate.

That said, I stand by my initial statement: I wouldn't vote for a mayor who still in his early twenties, still matriculated in college. Without more demonstrated experience, I just can't trust that the can-do spirit, refreshing optimism and honest love for the city that I appreciate in your candidacy will neither fade in a position of power or be quickly squelched in the red tape of working with city hall.

But again, I'm sorry for the tone of my one-off response -- I thought I was just joining in a chorus of people who didn't like the tone of that last paragraph. I very much respect and admire the fact that you put all of your plans in an open-to-critique document on the web, and before even throwing your hat into the ring had developed and published comprehensive materials on all aspects of the city you intend to change. Independent of whether I agree with individual plans or consider them fiscally responsible, I applaud you for announcing real plans to accompany your candidacy.

okcheckitout
okcheckitout

Thank you for your honesty and openness, Mr. Ricchiazzi, it's most refreshing.

KarlMalone
KarlMalone

I'm not sure I would call it inconvenient, but by pointed it out you ( or in this case him) do make it an issue. I don't get it politically, but maybe that is what he is going for.

Scottwf
Scottwf

Good for you. I like this reply.

Shoestring Budget
Shoestring Budget

Oh, relax. It was a self-deprecating throwaway line but it accomplished something important. It told us that Ricchiazzi is breaking with the venerable Republican closet tradition.

While it may have been tinged with self-pity, is a thousand percent better than how Republican Larry "Wide Stance" Craig came out, how Republican Mark "Get a ruler and measure it for me" Foley came out, and how Republican Ted "I did not have a homosexual relationship with a man in Denver" Haggard came out.

Need I go on?

5to81ALLDAY
5to81ALLDAY

hoping matthew runs again in the next election. Great that he got his nose dirty at such a young age. He is the only candidate that I have seen that actually has his ideas on his website that you can picture yourself. His light rail map and plan looks great. Reasonable or not, at least it gives us something to look at, think about, and discuss.

Keep pluggin Matthew

Matthew.Ricchiazzi
Matthew.Ricchiazzi

To everyone who expressed kind words of encouragement, I'm wholeheartedly appreciative! Thank you so much!

Matthew.Ricchiazzi
Matthew.Ricchiazzi

I wasn't claiming anything of the sort. Suggesting that I was is a gross--and disingenuous--characterization. It was intended to be a light-hearted acknowledgment of the anomalous nature of my campaign (which my volunteers and I have satirically joked about, and it was aimed towards them). To suggest that I'm calling voters a "bigoted mass" is, frankly, ignorant and racist on your part. Apparently the Italian, or the Irishman, or the African American can acknowledge their experience and identity... but not me? Look at the line immediately following that sentence: "Truly, we have here a City of extraordinary neighbors..." You demonstrate precisely the kind of ignorance and pettiness that has derailed progress in our community year after year. My acknowledgment of my identity shouldn't be insulting or offensive to anyone. And it certainly shouldn't be construed into what you're suggesting.

Matthew.Ricchiazzi
Matthew.Ricchiazzi

Personally, I'm a registered Republican because I have fiscally conservative views. I think that our government should be smaller rather larger, our taxes should be lower rather than higher, and our society should be more free and respectful of individual liberty. I think that the goal of public policy should be to provide robust, well-regulated markets, and the orientation of regulation should be to prudently propel rather than to prohibit market activity. I think that we should tax consumption rather than productivity; and that creating broad based economic opportunity best happens through markets. I think that social conservatives need to be thrown out of the proverbial tent. Over the last ten years, social conservatives have absolutely ruined the Republican Party.

Matthew.Ricchiazzi
Matthew.Ricchiazzi

I intended the sentence to be a light-hearted acknowledgment of the anomalous nature of the campaign. How you construe that as "playing the race card" is beyond me. Perhaps if you refrained from flamboyant hyperbole to express a point, you'd realize that you don't understand what your point is either. If you're suggesting that I shouldn't be able to acknowledge who I am because it makes you feel uncomfortable, then, frankly, I'd prefer that you're uncomfortable.

I'm not going to try to appear to be something that I'm not in order to get more people to like me. That's the definition of political hackery. I am who I am; nothing more, nothing less. I would hope that voters respected the fact that I didn't try to give them a little song and dance, so to speak.

burlapwax
burlapwax

Only of the traits he identified that would affect my voting preferences is the first: he's 23. He has none of the experience necessary for a high-level governmental position. Claiming that he anticipated being discriminated against on the basis of the other traits just serves to alienate the voters by implying that they're prejudiced /before a single vote is cast/. Calling a voting majority a bigoted mass is no way to start a political career, Mr. Ricchiazzi.

whatever
whatever

Lame victim card excuse for not getting enough valid petition signatures: "a 23 year old, openly bisexual, half-Indian, registered Republican running for Mayor of Buffalo was a long shot."

How many people who wouldn't sign his petitions even were aware of all that, never mind how many would or wouldn't care.

I had no idea what his ethnicity or preferences are. Neither of those are anyone's business but his, and even if he announced them, neither would affect my vote in the least. Nor would his age or party registration matter at all to me. All irrelevant. But when I read some of his issue positions here a few months ago, he sounded as bad a choice as Brown or Kearns - and maybe worse in some ways. Just because somebody is new on the scene doesn't mean they should be rejected for that reason, and it also doesn't mean they should be supported for that reason. Substance does matter.

davvid
davvid

maybe it shows that he's an open and introspective person that prefers to honestly address inconvenient realities.

© 2014 Hyperlocal Media. All Rights Reserved.