2008 Honolulu Mayoral Debate

[TuNnL]

Veteran City Councilwoman Ann Kobayashi and UH professor Panos Prevedouros take on Incumbent Mayor Mufi Hannemann in the only televised Honolulu mayoral debate of 2008. Who made the most compelling argument for why voters should elect them mayor?

[sansei]

Re: 2008 Honolulu Mayoral Debate

hi this is sansei and i believe in my heart that our great current mayor will prevail and he will put the rail on the map which we need.

i think panos dream of H.O.T. lane's or toll bridge's would come true and only mayor's rail will come through and i agree wholeheartedly with our great mayor. i dont think Ann K's dream of Rubber on concrete would prevail either.

well thank's for your time

[TuNnL]

Re: 2008 Honolulu Mayoral Debate

Well, it turned out to be a rough-and-tumble debate where the candidates got down and dirty. A raucous crowd egging on their candidate not surprisingly favored Mufi. But on the issues, clearly Mayor Hannemann came more prepared. He had facts and figures at his fingertips, and he was able to state clearly and concisely his positions on the issues in a way that directly answered the question.

I felt Ann and Panos spent the majority of their time attacking Mufi and very little on what they would do for the city. Panos made a valid point that HPD needs better response training, a fact HT members like LikaNui and Konaguy have alluded to in their discussions on ‘Iolani Palace. Ann continued her dialogue on a rubber tire on concrete transit alternative, though she didn’t offer any specifics.

I came into the debate undecided, hoping to be persuaded. For me, I felt that Mufi’s answers demonstrates he has a plan of action to fix our roads and sewers, tackle trash issues, and build a transit system that directly addresses traffic gridlock — by his calculation an 11% improvement. In the end, Kobayashi and Prevedouros missed a golden opportunity to showcase their vision and blueprint for Honolulu, so hopefully, they’re ready to spend every last penny of campaign contributions to further clarify their message.

[bf334]

Re: 2008 Honolulu Mayoral Debate

I liked the format of this debate. It was good to see the candidates having to answer real questions vs. the softballs that are usually served up. Mufi had the two best moments.

1) Chastising Ann Kobayashi for calling him a "Bully," and saying she was insulting his parents by doing so.

and

2) Calling her out on why Duke Bainum suddenly became the heir apparent for her council seat.

Panos Pravadoros had to know going in that he has a snowballs chance in hell of winning.

[sansei]

Re: 2008 Honolulu Mayoral Debate

hi this is sansei and i agree with TuNnl and bf334 is what you both pointed out is true and i heard it on the mayoral debate and from my thought's,i know our great mayor is correct and panos and Ann k wouldnt know how to run the city.

i remember before when ann K ran before she lost,at that time i may have voted for her only by reading her crudential's,she wasnt the candidate at that time and even now and panos cant run our city is he wouldnt be a good mayor,all he want's is to stop rail and put in H.O.T. lane's and Toll and he never once mentioned much about rail only in the final where someone asked if in the future,if he were mayor,would he consider rail and im not positive only i believe he mentioned a monorail type of rail only please not quote me is i wasnt sure about that sorry.


Well thank's for your time

[TuNnL]

Re: 2008 Honolulu Mayoral Debate

Mufi had the two best moments ... Calling her out on why Duke Bainum suddenly became the heir apparent for her council seat.

I agree this was a Kodak moment for Ann. She was clearly perturbed and went through a litany of excuses for why criticisms many in the community have expressed on HawaiiThreads.com, on Honolulu Advertiser and Star-Bulletin messageboards were unjustified. In the end, she ran out of time before she could convince the Hawaii Theatre crowd, and she was booed.

Panos Pravadoros had to know going in that he has a snowballs chance in hell of winning.

You know it’s sad, because Panos is obviously an intelligent person and he got off to a pretty good start. In the end, his inexperience showed, and his answers became confusing and defensive less then halfway through the debate.

I have a question: where did you watch the debate? On your television set? On the LIVE kgmb9.com website stream? Or at the Hawai‘i Theatre?

[sansei]

Re: 2008 Honolulu Mayoral Debate

hi this is sansei and in response to TuNnl,i watched the debate on Tv and i agree with your thought's on this that Panos and Ann k in my own humble opinon,didnt say enough on how they'd run the city and Only Mufi had all of the correct answer's. i agree with mufi our great mayor.

well thank's for your time

[dick]

Re: 2008 Honolulu Mayoral Debate

The "debate," if you could call it that, was quite entertaining.

Kobayashi was reduced to blubbering and bizarre rambling, with very few coherent thoughts. The winner was the classic "could you repeat the question?"

Panos seems to be intelligent, but his constant harping on the transit thing got old, real fast. Completely reinforced the idea that he is, indeed, merely doing this for, well, the transit thing.

Mufi was slick. Knew what to do, what to say, didn't read from notes much, if at all. The weird smirk he would flash at the end of his spiels was a little strange, however. Used-car-salesman overtones.

The format was a joke. The "panel" merely read scripted questions. They never grilled the candidates. They'd ask a lame question, and that was it. Kim could have done that.

I also thought too much time was taken with the transit thing. We all know where they stand on that, and it all fell into the rhetoric and baloney we hear every day anyway.

There should have been more interaction between the panel and the candidates, and there should have been more surprising questions from Howard and his e-mail/Twitter machine.

I also thought the idea of letting them ask their own questions was strange... an ideal situation for veiled attacks. While making for great entertainment, it did little to inform me as a voter.

[Random]

Re: 2008 Honolulu Mayoral Debate

The format was a joke. The "panel" merely read scripted questions. They never grilled the candidates. They'd ask a lame question, and that was it. Kim could have done that.

I doubt they're willing to grill the candidates. It seems that with all the debates these days, everything must be approved by all parties or else they won't participate.

BTW, when will Honolulu-based TV stations -- the one that we neighbor islanders are forced to watch OTA (antenna) -- are going to start airing Maui, Hawaii, and Kauai Mayoral Debates?

I do agree with some of your points. Is Ann Kobayashi actually running for mayor is she helping Panos Prevedorous bash Mufi? I would be sorely embarrassed if I'm in one of her political [TV] ads endorsing her with praise.

[salmoned]

Re: 2008 Honolulu Mayoral Debate

I'm 1/2 way through watching it online - Panos is clearly in the lead - he's the only one advising public education on rail and other issues, so an informed electorate can vote. He identified the Alternatives Analysis for what it is, a biased promotional brochure for rail transit, and even though I don't agree with his support for building HOT lanes, I do agree that designating more HOV lanes on existing roadways is the optimal solution today. He also clearly stated that he will look at all areas of city operation with the 'fresh' eyes of his infrastructure engineering background. He's not committed to continuing expansive growth or any other irrational policies.

Mufi is still quoting that imaginary $3.6 billion figure for the 20 mile rail system, just as he cites the huge spending on the emergency sewer repairs as a notable accomplishment, rather than the failure it truly represents. He states we were 'in denial' about the homeless problem before his administration, but then says the state should handle the problem - great idea, eh? Helping to bring the Olympics to Chicago will benefit Hawaii (with much cheering in the crowd)? How? Did Ann call Mufi a bully in this debate? I must have missed it, it certainly didn't occur in her comments right before Mufi called her out on it. He was obviously just regurgitating a prepared response that didn't actually fit the debate, again. "I have never equivocated from that position", I may or may not serve the full 4 year term, if elected. Huh?

Ann's backing of a 'rubber wheels on pavement' transit system sounds very close to what we already have - buses - so why change? She's been an insider for years and I don't expect much new to arise were she elected. Homeless, growth, etc., are all important issues that she will address with respect and consideration for all - pure political pap.

Final analysis - A clear Panos win. I thought he was a one issue candidate, but he is actually the new perspective candidate - one that I now feel could improve the City & County more than the other candidates.

[TuNnL]

Re: 2008 Honolulu Mayoral Debate

Panos seems to be intelligent, but his constant harping on the transit thing got old, real fast. Completely reinforced the idea that he is, indeed, merely doing this for, well, the transit thing.

Indeed, Panos seemed dumbfounded when asked what he would do if O‘ahu voters chose steel-on-steel. His answer: educate voters and call for another vote. Great solution, Panos. Chasing your tail and doing nothing — now that’s mayoral leadership.

[joshuatree]

Re: 2008 Honolulu Mayoral Debate

Indeed, Panos seemed dumbfounded when asked what he would do if O‘ahu voters chose steel-on-steel. His answer: educate voters and call for another vote. Great solution, Panos. Chasing your tail and doing nothing — now that’s mayoral leadership.

Indeed, I found it a little disturbing that when asked what would he do if the majority of the public voted FOR rail, he said he will call for another election to toss out the results of the current one. Doesn't that sound like what 3rd world dictators do when things don't go their way? That answer displays a certain level of arrogance too because he implies should the majority of the public vote FOR rail, they were simply misguided and uneducated.

When he addresses other issues aside from transit, he falls back on infrastructure and traffic too many times. This debate only reinforces the image that he's a one issue candidate. Kobayashi seemed like she wasn't even paying attention and daydreaming at times. And they did definitely asked each other questions that only opened the way for the other to take another shot at the mayor instead of focusing on what each candidate will do as mayor.

[amagab]

Re: 2008 Honolulu Mayoral Debate

I really think Panos voice should be heard in this. As he pointed out, 80% of the mayor's duties are related to infrastructure so wouldn't it be wise to elect an engineer?

Tell me one thing, what has Mufi done for our infrastructure?

I work with people that are involved in "major Oahu construction" and all I hear from them is Mufi's band-aid fixes and blaming others. How can you trust such a person?

Not only are we faced with extremely high cost of living......we have mayor that wants to make it even more expensive. Really sad!

[Random]

Re: 2008 Honolulu Mayoral Debate

I really think Panos voice should be heard in this. As he pointed out, 80% of the mayor's duties are related to infrastructure so wouldn't it be wise to elect an engineer?

Considering that I only watch at most 1/4 of it off-and-on -- this Moloka'i resident can't vote for Honolulu's mayor -- Did Panos specifically tackled other issues besides rail, without using the above "I'm an engineer" speech?

[salmoned]

Re: 2008 Honolulu Mayoral Debate

I think Panos is exactly right in his response. Even if the public votes for rail now, few have any idea how much it will actually cost, disrupt existing infrastructure, fail to ease traffic, etc. If the public had exposure to the facts concerning this planned system, as well as of other existing rails systems and alternatives, and THEN voted for rail, the results would be meaningful. However, as it is, a vote can only reflect the ignorance of the voters and not their informed approval. It shouldn't be forgotten that Mufi and the city council made no effort to support a vote on this issue until the ballot initiative looked likely to garner sufficient support - I challenge anyone to cite another city, county or regional government administration that intended to implement a similar project without voter approval. In my opinion, the Stop Rail Now people are heroes for advocating a vote on the issue, even if a rail system is approved and built. At the very least, it is likely the city charter will be amended to clarify the initiative process (in one circumstance 10% of registered voters are required, in another 15% or 10% of ballots cast in the last election).