Like most of you, we're tired of the Claremont 400 trying to make these school board elections into high school popularity contests.
We're also sick of the thought that the outgoing board members and their friends feel that they possess a divine right to choose the people they happen to like (whether they are qualified for the job or not) and simply will the positions over to their hand-picked replacements - see Xavier Alvarez for an extreme example of the sort of trouble this type of thinking leads to.
And so, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, we are asking you (and us) to set aside our prejudices and to weigh the evidence on its merits. Let's remove personalities from the equation and look strictly at the candidates' qualifications.
We've put together a table with the three candidates for the CUSD Board of Education. We've randomized the candidates (listed as candidates A, B, & C) and have taken their qualifications and proposals and listed them below. We removed the names and have attempted to give you just the information the candidates themselves have presented.
We took the information directly from the candidates' own literature. We'll assume there are no Alvarezian misrepresentations and that all three candidates are truthful about their educations and job histories.
You tell us who you think is the more qualified of the three - A, B, or C - and who is second-most. On election day next Tuesday, we'll reveal which candidate belongs to which column. Those of you who've been following the election can probably figure this out pretty easily, but that's not really the aim of this exercise.
Posts
