NEWS
College Dems endorse Judge
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Nick Penzenstadler:
- For whom the bell tolls (November 29, 2007)
- New apartments for West Wash? (November 20, 2007)
- One-and-out: Kumar will not seek 2nd term on Dane County Board (November 15, 2007)
- Displaced Carroll residents call university, bookstore helpful (November 13, 2007)
- Carroll Street fire displaces students (November 12, 2007)
Related Stories:
- Mayor endorses Woods in alder race (March 1, 2007)
- Woods, Judge debate (March 16, 2007)
- District 8 elects UW sophomore to City Council seat (April 9, 2007)
- Woods kicks off alder campaign (February 1, 2007)
by Nick Penzenstadler
Wednesday, January 24, 2007
The University of Wisconsin College Democrats endorsed Eli Judge Tuesday night in the race for Madison's 8th district city alderman seat.
The political organization came to its decision after hosting an issue-oriented debate between Judge and his opponent Lauren Woods at the meeting. Both Judge and Woods are vying for outgoing City Council President Austin King's vacancy.
According to College Democrats Chair Eli Lewien, the organization based its decision on recommendations from the executive board.
Judge's track record with College Democrats was a large factor in determining their support, according to Lewien.
"Eli Judge has worked closely with College Democrats, and he represents our organization very well for our endorsement," he said. "He has worked with College Democrats in the past and will be on campus for the next two years."
Judge chaired the Students for a Fair Wisconsin campaign, an organization advocating against the proposed gay marriage amendment last fall, and said he developed a relationship with College Democrats.
"They are really respected — that is really going to help," Judge said in a phone interview. "A lot of people look to College Democrats, and I really appreciate that they gave me the nod."
Woods said the debate was lively and gave a great opportunity for her to gain exposure to the campus. And although she didn't receive the endorsement, Woods said she hopes a relationship develops after the election.
"Obviously I was disappointed, but I definitely think I have the qualifications and I think I have the experience," Woods said. "I respect the process, but I hope that when I win in April, we will have a strong relationship despite what happened tonight."
College Republicans Chair Erica Christenson said her organization is planning on endorsing a candidate sometime next week.
Woods said she has been involved in a more varied environment than Judge and brought more to the argument Tuesday.
"I have done extensive activities on campus and at the Capitol," she said. "I could talk from other perspectives than my opponent."
Although it is a setback, Woods said the endorsement "won't shatter [her] campaign." She immediately resumed her campaign after the debate.
"As soon as I left, I was out hitting doors," she said. "It would have been nice to have them endorse the more qualified candidate — which is me."
Lewien said Judge is the right person for the job after hearing his comprehensive plan for campus safety.
Woods also proposed her thoughts about safety Tuesday at the debate.
"I think I did a good job of expressing my ideas about safety and pushing for pedestrian lights to illuminate the blocks and aesthetics of the neighborhood," Woods said.
Anonymous (January 24, 2007 @ 2:45am):
The irony is that Woods totally beat Judge hands-down in the substance of the "debate". Judge was completely scripted and came off fake, reading talking points like a robot, while Woods was natural and highly effective, and actually had answers other than "I chaired Students for Equality". Problem was, there were only six undecided people in the whole room, and though Woods probably won them all over, it didn't matter because the outcome was predetermined.
This endorsement won't end up mattering anyway - everyone knew the CDs were going to back Judge from the start, obviously. It would be like the Black Student Union endorsing Woods. Would anyone be surprised? I'll be at that meeting, too. Just don't know if we're actually allowed to endorse. In any case, chalk one up for Lauren Woods - she put on an educational clinic tonight.
Anonymous (January 24, 2007 @ 1:11pm):
Sour grapes, eh?
Anonymous (January 24, 2007 @ 1:33pm):
Kudos to the College Democrats for an excellent and fair endorsement meeting. Although I agree that Eli deserves the endorsement, I am overjoyed to see two qualified candidates raising the level of debate on campus.
Anonymous (January 24, 2007 @ 1:42pm):
"College Republicans Chair Erica Christenson said her organization is planning on endorsing a candidate sometime next week."
Is either candidate even hoping for this endorsement? Or are they going to endorse Lapidus as a write-in? Maybe they could endorse 'Vote No' - I hear she's really popular on campus.
Anonymous (January 24, 2007 @ 3:02pm):
Hi Lauren Woods! Thanks for writing!
Eli won with what I estimated at over 75% of the membership voting for him. What people saw was that when Lauren did not have talking points from Austin King and Ashok Kumar, she was unable to perform. And as one of the "6" you reference, I don't appreciate you deciding who I voted for.
But as you said, the Black Student Union would most likely endorse Lauren and that is OK. She is a member of the organization. Eli is a member of the College Democrats. Lauren... is not.
Anonymous (January 24, 2007 @ 3:27pm):
True. Good observation. Should be a close one.
Anonymous (January 24, 2007 @ 6:24pm):
What has Austin King done for us in during his past terms? Can the average student name one single thing? Why would I vote for his mini-me Woods unless I wanted another term of all talk and no action.
Anonymous (January 24, 2007 @ 8:20pm):
I think that Austin has some several things (rape apology, wage, book issues) so when the pro-King people come here to mention it, just spare us all that list.
But, it's not that King is so bad at policy, it is that he and Ashok Kumar are dictating what Lauren does. A lot of shady things have been done by King/Kumar during this race (none from Lauren, she's a VERY smart and articulate girl who is going places, so I am not accusing her) and if King/Kumar ever try anything funny, I imagine people will hear about it.
Further, King was arrogant. He hand picked Woods to go for his seat as that he decided not to run again when students were NOT on campus to organize an alternative candidate. Eli had to run at the last second. Woods however, has been plotting this out for a long time with King (and yes, people behind the scenes with her campaign have told me privately this is the case) yet they forgot to secure the College Democrat endorsement. King should be nervous because he figured this would be a cake walk, while Eli has a huge network and will most likely win. King isn't doing this to help Woods as much as he wants to be known as someone who helped elect her to office. Future political run for King, anyone?
What is also troubling comes from Ashok Kumar who has been acting recklessly behind the scenes. Many people who have voted for him lost respect for his decency last night. Ashok doesn't care about this as that he LOVES the attention and "increasing discourse" on the issue, but the moderate Democrats on this campus don't like what we are hearing and are going to work for Judge.
I don't know what is going on behind the scenes anymore, but students should be scared of a puppet alderpersyn. I'm a senior, this is it for me, and I am a four year College Democrat. I plan to vote for Eli and will get every single friend I have to as well.
Anonymous (January 24, 2007 @ 11:47pm):
"All talk and no action"? From King? Most of his critics complain that he's too much action. He's introduced like 800 things - he's probably the single most active member of the City Council, not to mention the President of the City Council. You Judge supporters have a lot of sour grapes if you're going to attack King. Eli Lewein's editorial summed it up well: King has served us very well.
Anonymous (January 25, 2007 @ 7:39pm):
Austin King is a douchebag.
Anonymous (January 25, 2007 @ 10:19pm):
ashok needs to lay off the coke .. seriously
Anonymous (February 8, 2007 @ 11:57am):
Austin King had his hand in the NATIONAL MIN. WAGE Agenda that is going on right now because of his work in Madison. No other alder has been more active and more pro-student since his election.
Before y'all waste your time posting responses (because you can't actually write for the Herald), and call him a douchebag just because your vocabulary pails in comparison to his, you should consider looking into what you are talking about so you don't look like such a douchebag...
Oh so you are a member of the college democrats and that makes you a big shot? But you aren't big enough to influence actual policy... is that why you hate Austin so much?
Anonymous (February 19, 2007 @ 7:08pm):
someone actually responded to this WEEKS later? What a loser. It is most likely Austin. So, since you read this: don't think everyone who knows the backhanded tactics you have will be silent when you return to run for office. Eli Judge kicked your butt that night.
Add a comment
We welcome your thoughts, but please keep your feedback thoughtful, on-topic and respectful. Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted.
Login...
Not registered? Sign up now.
It's quick, free, and the email address you provide will not be sold or solicited.
