Covering civic issues, news, and the secret life of Encinitas
Wednesday, October 21, 2026
Copycat campaigns not working
When you don’t have new or better ideas, you resort to imitation. Sort of, in this case. Excellent observations by Deputy Mayor Jim O’Hara that reveal how the three challengers get tangled up trying to be new, while copying the current.
O’Hara criticizes the use of national political labels in local elections.
Sure, residents deserve more than name-calling.
But this standard must apply consistently and O'Hara himself has insulted residents regularly for having different perspectives than his.
And criticism of a councilmember's voting record is not inherently partisan. Neither is questioning government spending, demanding transparency, or examining the consequences of council decisions.
It's impressive that Bruce and the stooges ran on stopping development, completely and utterly failed at it and are now bold enough to attempt to run on it again.
It's almost as if they believe voters are as dumb as they are.
Lying that Ehlers every said he would stop development is a little story cooked up by Marco Gonzalez. Produce one example where Ehlers and the guys ever said they'd stop development. Never happened.
On the other hand Clark St. is very much in play which is why Speedy G is on a break from his victory lap.
They may have avoided saying those exact words in public and on film, but it is something they all led voters to believe. All the talking was about "preserving Encinitas" or "keeping it a small beach town", etc.
I remember people constantly attacking others with the line that anyone that didn't vote for the councilmen were destroying the city. How would it destroy the city? Because those candidates were "developer puppets" and the proof was that developments had been approved. So does that mean if we vote for the councilmen, developments would be denied? Of course not, but the current councilmen & their handlers let this last part slide.
They also exploited a Blakespear boogieman, said awful things about candidates in an attempt to make it sound like they'd somehow do something different (kind of like the lies being pushed forward now). They all knew this wasn't true; they knew they'd be approving every single development and they did.
Deputy Mayor O’Hara seems to think that if challengers agree Encinitas needs safer streets, responsible housing policies, and fiscal accountability, they have no reason to challenge the incumbents. By that logic, agreeing on the destination means nobody should question who's driving—or how much damage they've done along the way.
He touts millions in spending while conveniently overlooking controversial decisions, costly reversals, and legitimate questions about results. He celebrates progress on homelessness without mentioning the loss of the Safe Parking Program. And he lectures others about political rhetoric while offering a sweeping caricature of the very candidates he's criticizing.
This isn't a serious comparison of competing visions for Encinitas. It's a defense of the status quo dressed up as an argument.
O’Hara's biggest contradiction is demanding that challengers defend their positions while treating the current council's record as though it should be above scrutiny.
Public office is not a lifetime appointment, spending is not an accomplishment by itself, and accountability is not an attack.
If the record is as impressive as he claims, he shouldn't need to mischaracterize the opposition to defend it.
Everybody's record is up for discussion, that is why we vote. How many times have you seen "Preserve and Protect" from a candidate in the last 20 years, or "I'm a local" or now it's Fire protection. These are things everyone would support. Hard to differentiate yourself. A lot of it comes down to temperament, did anything bad come out about you before the election or did people just want a change.
Stop with all the b.s. pronouncements. Man up to your record.
Avoiding Builders Remedy is the point and and the incumbents have managed to do that. Would the challengers have done a single thing different if given the decision?
That's the point. No one can do anything; people hating development is not an issue that a single person running can address. The councilmen like to make angry faces and small gestures to identify as anti-development and attack their opponents, but it really means nothing.
One of the reasons Marco Gonzalez is so unhinged is that they did not bring on his predicted avalanche of lawsuits. They are judicious In what they say yes and no to. How disappointing for Marco G.
It’s her site she can do what she wants. She can also lose membership from folks who see her censorship as not worth bothering with and constant personal emergencies as cries for help.
3:53 she never did say what he "threatened." She's ceased to be a believable source for anything. Wasn't it just a couple of months ago she was going to have an eyeball removed? Just last week she claimed her cat stepped on her keyboard and deleted posts. You are on shaky ground using that one as a witness to anything.
Make sure to remember after the election. Remember how EI run by Julie Thunder was pretending to be some kinda community page like EN. Instead of what it really is, the MAGAtt version of EV. Or what EV was before Lorri finally realized she'd put a handful of lyin MAGAtts into office. EI will go back to pretending. Guaranteed.
May as well throw blue MAGA Encinitas action, progressive unity, “now“ into the mix. Will take a dedicated person not to pick a side and offer truly open discussion.
Insider is a reflection of the "anonymous" admin. Angry, manipulative, ok with disinformation if it benefits MAGA, ok with censorship if it removes a comment or commentor who hasn't fallen in line behind the councilmen, lame anonymous commenters who are pretty obviously the same dummies we see commenting over and over everywhere in support of the councilmen...a basic shit hole.
It was her posters who were more tolerant than they should have been. Look for normal admins who plan to put up normal sites minus the histrionics and ER visits. Sorry, but really.
O’Hara criticizes the use of national political labels in local elections.
ReplyDeleteSure, residents deserve more than name-calling.
But this standard must apply consistently and O'Hara himself has insulted residents regularly for having different perspectives than his.
And criticism of a councilmember's voting record is not inherently partisan. Neither is questioning government spending, demanding transparency, or examining the consequences of council decisions.
Another blue maga making shit up. We see you, we booted your sorry asses last election. Dems did that
DeleteBruce, Luke and Jim are MAGAtts hiding behind an NPP label.
Deletethey are claiming they are not pro development. BUlLL LONE EE
ReplyDelete10:44 what evidence do you have that they are pro development? Beyond your bias and assumption.
DeleteIt's impressive that Bruce and the stooges ran on stopping development, completely and utterly failed at it and are now bold enough to attempt to run on it again.
DeleteIt's almost as if they believe voters are as dumb as they are.
Weak
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteLying that Ehlers every said he would stop development is a little story cooked up by Marco Gonzalez. Produce one example where Ehlers and the guys ever said they'd stop development. Never happened.
DeleteOn the other hand Clark St. is very much in play which is why Speedy G is on a break from his victory lap.
They may have avoided saying those exact words in public and on film, but it is something they all led voters to believe. All the talking was about "preserving Encinitas" or "keeping it a small beach town", etc.
DeleteI remember people constantly attacking others with the line that anyone that didn't vote for the councilmen were destroying the city. How would it destroy the city? Because those candidates were "developer puppets" and the proof was that developments had been approved. So does that mean if we vote for the councilmen, developments would be denied? Of course not, but the current councilmen & their handlers let this last part slide.
They also exploited a Blakespear boogieman, said awful things about candidates in an attempt to make it sound like they'd somehow do something different (kind of like the lies being pushed forward now). They all knew this wasn't true; they knew they'd be approving every single development and they did.
Deputy Mayor O’Hara seems to think that if challengers agree Encinitas needs safer streets, responsible housing policies, and fiscal accountability, they have no reason to challenge the incumbents. By that logic, agreeing on the destination means nobody should question who's driving—or how much damage they've done along the way.
ReplyDeleteHe touts millions in spending while conveniently overlooking controversial decisions, costly reversals, and legitimate questions about results. He celebrates progress on homelessness without mentioning the loss of the Safe Parking Program. And he lectures others about political rhetoric while offering a sweeping caricature of the very candidates he's criticizing.
This isn't a serious comparison of competing visions for Encinitas. It's a defense of the status quo dressed up as an argument.
O’Hara's biggest contradiction is demanding that challengers defend their positions while treating the current council's record as though it should be above scrutiny.
Public office is not a lifetime appointment, spending is not an accomplishment by itself, and accountability is not an attack.
If the record is as impressive as he claims, he shouldn't need to mischaracterize the opposition to defend it.
Derp
DeleteJFS pulled the plug on the parking lot.
DeleteEven Goebbels is laughing at your lying attempts.
The desperate cries of a belligerent unpopular councilman whose MAGA cover has been blown.
ReplyDeleteEverybody's record is up for discussion, that is why we vote. How many times have you seen "Preserve and Protect" from a candidate in the last 20 years, or "I'm a local" or now it's Fire protection. These are things everyone would support. Hard to differentiate yourself. A lot of it comes down to temperament, did anything bad come out about you before the election or did people just want a change.
ReplyDeleteStop with all the b.s. pronouncements. Man up to your record.
The only record we need is Blakespear suing her own residents to remove local control and her endorsing Viskanta, Lefkowits, and Golden.
ReplyDelete💯
DeleteO'Hara's concluding argument is revealing: voters should retain the incumbents because their opponents supposedly agree with them anyway.
ReplyDeleteBut that argument depends on accepting his characterization of the challengers' platforms and the council's accomplishments.
The important question is not whether the candidates care about the same issues. It is whether they would make the same decisions.
Well put.
DeleteO'Hara is a MAGAtt dbag in an NPP costume. The truth oozes from him like slime in everything he says.
DeleteAnd you wonder how that dude got himself into a state where he picked up the phone to threaten San Antonio.
DeleteAvoiding Builders Remedy is the point and and the incumbents have managed to do that. Would the challengers have done a single thing different if given the decision?
ReplyDeleteThat's the point. No one can do anything; people hating development is not an issue that a single person running can address. The councilmen like to make angry faces and small gestures to identify as anti-development and attack their opponents, but it really means nothing.
DeleteSuing the Clark Street developer is not a small gesture can you imagine any of the three blue MAGA candidates even considering this? Answer is no.
DeleteOne of the reasons Marco Gonzalez is so unhinged is that they did not bring on his predicted avalanche of lawsuits. They are judicious In what they say yes and no to. How disappointing for Marco G.
DeleteYeah, but they haven't stopped building on Clark and somehow, some way, that sucker is going through. The rest is just window dressing.
DeleteWould you see Rimga even lifting a finger to try? Her handlers would not let her
Delete3:17 I think the criticism is the councilmen are wasting taxpayer money on silly things to give the illusion of fighting development.
Delete"Silly things" still in play in court. No so silly and supported by two legal consultants. Try again Marco G.
Delete
DeleteThe silly things are all the rubbish created by witch Kathy
Lorrie having another tantrum on EV. Like the boy that cried wolf. Denying information is censorship.
ReplyDeleteIt’s her site she can do what she wants. She can also lose membership from folks who see her censorship as not worth bothering with and constant personal emergencies as cries for help.
DeleteI would not want to be personally responsible for running that page right now, especially with MAGA psychos like O'Hara threatening me.
DeleteKind of hard to do since EV is paused again. But go ahead with your silliness. It is amusing.
Delete3:53 she never did say what he "threatened." She's ceased to be a believable source for anything. Wasn't it just a couple of months ago she was going to have an eyeball removed? Just last week she claimed her cat stepped on her keyboard and deleted posts. You are on shaky ground using that one as a witness to anything.
DeleteMake sure to remember after the election. Remember how EI run by Julie Thunder was pretending to be some kinda community page like EN. Instead of what it really is, the MAGAtt version of EV. Or what EV was before Lorri finally realized she'd put a handful of lyin MAGAtts into office. EI will go back to pretending. Guaranteed.
ReplyDeleteMay as well throw blue MAGA Encinitas action, progressive unity, “now“ into the mix. Will take a dedicated person not to pick a side and offer truly open discussion.
DeleteInsider is a reflection of the "anonymous" admin. Angry, manipulative, ok with disinformation if it benefits MAGA, ok with censorship if it removes a comment or commentor who hasn't fallen in line behind the councilmen, lame anonymous commenters who are pretty obviously the same dummies we see commenting over and over everywhere in support of the councilmen...a basic shit hole.
DeleteAnd you expected more from garvin and thunder?
ReplyDeleteMAGA=
ReplyDeleteMake
Asshole
Gonzales (go)
Away
👏
Lorrie was more tolerant of a few posters that she should have been.
ReplyDelete5:02-Yes she sure was. I would have thrown their butts off of that group. Anyway she has paused it and rumor has it she may not open it again.
DeleteShe'll be back after the election. People just can't behave.
DeleteIt was her posters who were more tolerant than they should have been. Look for normal admins who plan to put up normal sites minus the histrionics and ER visits. Sorry, but really.
DeleteShe certainly deserves a break from all the bs sent her way.
ReplyDelete6:19pm So says one of those lowlifes that she should have banned.
ReplyDeleteshe let Gonzalez back in....
DeleteShe let Jerome back in.
ReplyDeleteWas it ever appreciated?
From the likes of him? Not possible.