2025 Omaha Mayoral election

[damonhynes]

It certainly wasn't mentioned on local Houston news, the ABC station is a Disney O&O and they usually go out of their way to snark on the GOP.

Further, my raw-meat ultra-righty web sites never had a word about it.

Ditto for Flatwater Free Press.

This election reminds me of Terry v. Ashford, which is the last time I voted for a Democrat. (More precisely, i voted against a Republican.)

[HskrFanMike]

Nationally, Dems have been winning elections since the presidential election, so this is yet another example of it. But in most cases, elections are won on local, not national issues.

That being said, GOP leaders like Bacon, Ricketts and Heineman seem to be publicly refusing to admit why Stothert lost so badly. The weakest is it's anti-incumbent...but that doesn't explain why an 18 year county treasurer beat a 12 year mayor.

Last week I brought up a Reddit thread that said Stothert's internal polling had her down 8 points to Ewing. Suffice it to say that was probably correct after all. Tim Royers, who lost to anti-LGBT candidate Kathleen Kauth for the 31st district in the legislature tweeted similarly yesterday.


Bottom line to me is that Stothert didn't gain many votes after the primary. Most of the other candidate's support likely went to Ewing, and based on the relatively low turnout, I suspect that some Stothert primary voters simply checked out in the general election. That would also explain why it took until Wednesday for the Aimee Melton/Tim Carter battle in district 7 to be decided.

Why did they check out? It had to be the bathroom policing aspect. State Sen. Merv RIepe pulled his support yesterday of Kauth's bill which would have enacted a bathroom regulation. He even went on the floor of the legislature yesterday to say he didn't run to be the "potty police".

Not a coincidence that this happened yesterday. The GOP isn't going to admit it, but the anti-LGBT crusade hurts them in the state's population centers.

Stothert lost because Ewing looked like a more-than-competent leader and more of a consensus builder than the Mean Jean autocrat. The anti-LGBT ad was simply akin to a desperation end-of-game sports analogy where you onside kick, foul repeatedly, and do things outside what you typically do...with the result being that it turned into a blowout loss.

[Athomsfere]

In the primaries I voted Harris because she seemed like the second best choice for what I want most: Continued interest in the core and more, more, more multi-modal stuff.

Harris lost, so I was pretty sure I was voting Jean. Even though I still think she has mostly cruised and hasn't been nearly progressive enough.

But that trans mailer killed her to me. The choice between two OK looking candidates, but one is letting bigotry and fear mongering sneak into the platform? Nope.

[riceweb]

The trans issue polls massively in favor of Republicans. Anyone in here lamenting "hate" isn't tuned into the average American's feelings on the matter.

It's just not even remotely a factor in why she lost, except insofar as it signaled that was desperate in the final moments of her campaign (but not so desperate that she'd actually try to get anything done or present a vision for Omaha in the weeks leading up to the election).

[BRoss]

The trans issue polls massively in favor of Republicans. Anyone in here lamenting "hate" isn't tuned into the average American's feelings on the matter.

I very much disagree here. Average Americans just want to let people live their lives. Those who attack groups they don't approve of are doing so out of hate, whether they want to admit it or not.

That ad may not have been the reason she lost and would have regardless, but it certainly did hurt her. She lost a lot of votes while likely only gaining a few.

[Erik]

The trans issue polls massively in favor of Republicans. Anyone in here lamenting "hate" isn't tuned into the average American's feelings on the matter.

I very much disagree here. Average Americans just want to let people live their lives. Those who attack groups they don't approve of are doing so out of hate, whether they want to admit it or not.

That ad may not have been the reason she lost and would have regardless, but it certainly did hurt her. She lost a lot of votes while likely only gaining a few.

It absolutely did hurt her campaign. Though she was losing to begin with.

[almighty_tuna]

Live their lives stops with me when girls and women have biological males in their locker room.

You completely missed the point, but clearly defined yourself as the target audience for Jean's/Ricketts' mailers.

[bbinks]

Live their lives stops with me when girls and women have biological males in their locker room.

You completely missed the point, but clearly defined yourself as the target audience for Jean's/Ricketts' mailers.

So let's just make every restroom and locker room unisex?

[almighty_tuna]

So let's just make every restroom and locker room unisex?

You're still not getting the point.

It's not about locker rooms and bathrooms. Let people live their lives instead of exploiting a group to be part of a misguided, fear mongering political agenda.

[Linkin5]

Here’s what I’ll say on the topic. I do not personally feel that people that were born male should participate in women’s sports as there is an unfair physical advantage. However, I hate when it is overtly injected into political races and becomes a dog whistle for transphobic and homophobic people that want to cause actual harm to these people. That may have not been Stothert’s goal for these advertisements, but between the messaging and the intended audience, it came off as very hateful and unnecessary for a mayor’s race.

[Stan]

...it came off as very hateful and unnecessary for a mayor’s race.

This is entirely it. It's such a non issue for the most part of society and misguided rage bate. Kids are most at risk from family and friends of the family then they are from using a public restroom. Tackle mental health/healthcare, gun control, food availability before you even use lgbtq+ as a major threat to our youth.

[Garrett]

Injecting an issue like this into a mayoral election is farcical. There’s basically nothing a mayor can do where this is a relevant policy debate. It’s pure theater and meant to distract from actual issues.

[Garrett]

...it came off as very hateful and unnecessary for a mayor’s race.

This is entirely it. It's such a non issue for the most part of society and misguided rage bate. Kids are most at risk from family and friends of the family then they are from using a public restroom. Tackle mental health/healthcare, gun control, food availability before you even use lgbtq+ as a major threat to our youth.

Which is why everyone has men’s and women’s bathrooms in their own homes, right?

[locoluke]

I don't think anyone who is intent on preying on someone in a public bathroom is going to be stopped by a law dictating which bathroom they should use. If safety and privacy are such a concern, why don't we just mandate more private bathroom stalls? Porta potties are almost never gender-specific b/c they are entirely enclosed.

[PWL73316]

I think Ewing's race is probably an underrated factor in the election (which is amazing, good for us as a society). I volunteer with the election commission, filing away the already-counted votes, and most of the heaviest boxes were from black precincts. Most precincts felt like a light notebook while certain parts of North Omaha felt like a heavy tome. In a very light turnout election, the possibility of the first black mayor definitely brought some people out, I think.

I also think it's probable that some west Omahans stayed home just out of apathy - we are all kind of ready to move on from Jean, but she hasn't really done anything to make people mad lately (until those last ads, maybe), and Ewing is also eminently qualified. It wasn't two bad choices but two good choices that might have made people not bother.

And regardless of the "average" Omahan's feeling on the bathroom stuff, I can't imagine there were many would-be Ewing voters who were moved by that appeal. It's hard for me to picture a voter who was anti-Stothert but then would be swayed to her side by trans bathroom stuff. It certainly wasn't an important issue to Ewing who immediately dismissed it. Frankly it's hard to associate an older straight black man who is a former cop with strong feelings on that issue.

[Mr.Nuke]

The Friday update is out with only 3,400 less votes cast versus the general in 2021. Ewing's lead grew to nearly 12,900 votes with a margin of 57 to 43%.
https://www.votedouglascounty-ne.gov/me ... sults5.pdf

[Renovator2559]

Overlaying the maps show that Ewing gained ground by taking in the disaffected voters, that Mike McDonnell took in
Still, good riddance that Mike McDonnell is out of the picture, as his lack of vision would of caused "regression" in Omaha becoming a more car centric city.





Also Ewing excited a lot of North Omaha voters, so there may be a shift in prioritizing North Omaha followed by South Omaha as he emphasized, over the urban core. Though he may be able to balance all. The good news, is that we have several urban core projects in motion that are set to complete in the next few years.

I think this shows that the anti-streetcar sentiment is still strong and there is much work to be done in relaying the benefits of the streetcar, since we have yet to finish construction of the first streetcar route. Once people see the streetcar as tangible, they'll be able to weigh the benefits and request expansions; like KC's successful streetcar which follows a similar design pattern, with 2 expansions underway.

Many still hold to the misconception that the the streetcar is funded by tax, despite TIF actually covering for it and never mind all the wonderful development projects we have in the pipelines because of the streetcar.

The national economy is still currently down the tubes and people feel the effects, so right now projects like the "streetcar" appear to be senseless spending (despite all the long term economic and lively downtown benefits), while the roads are in need of resurfacing. Yes a city ordinance was just passed in 2024 for funding of road repair but it may have been a little too late.

Right now economic relief appears to be resonating with those most affected with this tough economy, so they may support policies that target economic relief. Mayor Jean Stothert lowered property tax 5 times for a total of 11.94% but people want more, including repealing the restaurant tax. Though repealing restaurant tax, would most likely cause budget cuts in other areas.

Ewing emphasizing "Living Wage", "Equity" and "Affordable Housing" seems more bold in terms of economic relief.
Small business owners are the ones that have to make the tough decisions if they can afford the same or a lesser head count. Some of these policies have been implemented in Los Angeles and Seattle, so people can do their own research to make their self determination if that is a good thing for Omaha in the long term or not.



Still Mayor Jean Stothert ran 3-term (12-year), which was impressive. Cementing her as the 2nd longest running mayor in Omaha and all the great projects we have completed and projects currently in motion.

Ewing will have the opportunity to make a case for his direction, if he is lackluster like the previous 2 Omaha mayors prior to Jean Stothert, it may just be for 1-2 terms, if he's good he may run for longer. Like Mayor Jean Stothert did with 3-terms.

I couldn't be more happy just getting back from visiting a southern peer city for a week and appreciating all this great work that our talented Omaha team has achieved during Mayor Jean Stothert; while dealing with covid, economic, inflation, other issues, and still coming on top over many cities. Omaha is such a mighty city for its size.

Sidenote, I missed the energy and vibrancy of our Omaha Riverfront, despite visiting a similar riverfront but very different in practice; Omaha nailed it on this one. I may expand on this, on its pertinent thread; later.

[nativeomahan]

I’m just amazed that she lost by 14 points. That is a total absolute blowout. And she was a 3 term incumbent. There were obviously many factors at play (anti Trump vote, Jean Fatigue, the streetcar, the ridiculous last minute “bathroom” theme). No one issue can explain such a thumping.

[Erik]

I’m just amazed that she lost by 14 points. That is a total absolute blowout. And she was a 3 term incumbent. There were obviously many factors at play (anti Trump vote, Jean Fatigue, the streetcar, the ridiculous last minute “bathroom” theme). No one issue can explain such a thumping.

This blowout was absolutely multifaceted. Clean up one or two of those areas and Ewing still wins easily, but is closer.

In an election, you need to know your audience and get it right. While mayor, you need to know your audience and get it right. It isn't easy, but it's on you.

[Erik]

Overlaying the maps show that Ewing gained ground by taking in the disaffected voters, that Mike McDonnell took in
Still, good riddance that Mike McDonnell is out of the picture, as his lack of vision would of caused "regression" in Omaha becoming a more car centric city.





Also Ewing excited a lot of North Omaha voters, so there may be a shift in prioritizing North Omaha followed by South Omaha as he emphasized, over the urban core. Though he may be able to balance all. The good news, is that we have several urban core projects in motion that are set to complete in the next few years.

I think this shows that the anti-streetcar sentiment is still strong and there is much work to be done in relaying the benefits of the streetcar, since we have yet to finish construction of the first streetcar route. Once people see the streetcar as tangible, they'll be able to weigh the benefits and request expansions; like KC's successful streetcar which follows a similar design pattern, with 2 expansions underway.

Many still hold to the misconception that the the streetcar is funded by tax, despite TIF actually covering for it and never mind all the wonderful development projects we have in the pipelines because of the streetcar.

The national economy is still currently down the tubes and people feel the effects, so right now projects like the "streetcar" appear to be senseless spending (despite all the long term economic and lively downtown benefits), while the roads are in need of resurfacing. Yes a city ordinance was just passed in 2024 for funding of road repair but it may have been a little too late.

Right now economic relief appears to be resonating with those most affected with this tough economy, so they may support policies that target economic relief. Mayor Jean Stothert lowered property tax 5 times for a total of 11.94% but people want more, including repealing the restaurant tax. Though repealing restaurant tax, would most likely cause budget cuts in other areas.

Ewing emphasizing "Living Wage", "Equity" and "Affordable Housing" seems more bold in terms of economic relief.
Small business owners are the ones that have to make the tough decisions if they can afford the same or a lesser head count. Some of these policies have been implemented in Los Angeles and Seattle, so people can do their own research to make their self determination if that is a good thing for Omaha in the long term or not.



Still Mayor Jean Stothert ran 3-term (12-year), which was impressive. Cementing her as the 2nd longest running mayor in Omaha and all the great projects we have completed and projects currently in motion.

Ewing will have the opportunity to make a case for his direction, if he is lackluster like the previous 2 Omaha mayors prior to Jean Stothert, it may just be for 1-2 terms, if he's good he may run for longer. Like Mayor Jean Stothert did with 3-terms.

I couldn't be more happy just getting back from visiting a southern peer city for a week and appreciating all this great work that our talented Omaha team has achieved during Mayor Jean Stothert; while dealing with covid, economic, inflation, other issues, and still coming on top over many cities. Omaha is such a mighty city for its size.

Sidenote, I missed the energy and vibrancy of our Omaha Riverfront, despite visiting a similar riverfront but very different in practice; Omaha nailed it on this one. I may expand on this, on its pertinent thread; later.

McDonnell was terrifyingly bad.

[Busguy2010]

I'm no analyst by any stretch. I'm just kinda baffled what there was so wrong that so many people wanted "fixed" by voting against her.

I get many were offended by her last ditch effort, and that was a misstep. But put that aside and ask yourselves, what has she done other than benefit the city of Omaha in the last 12 years?

Nothing against the man himself, it just seems like a mistake to me to let her go after all shes done. Its a step back, or a lateral, at best.

If I had to compare this to a Husker game, I'd be tearing my hair out. They had a great day running the ball, and a good lead, yet inexplicably abandon the run for pass, and end up losing. That's how this feels to me, and the best way I can put it. I know not everyone is a football fan lol.

[Erik]

I'm no analyst by any stretch. I'm just kinda baffled what there was so wrong that so many people wanted "fixed" by voting against her.

I get many were offended by her last ditch effort, and that was a misstep. But put that aside and ask yourselves, what has she done other than benefit the city of Omaha in the last 12 years?

Nothing against the man himself, it just seems like a mistake to me to let her go after all shes done. Its a step back, or a lateral, at best.

If I had to compare this to a Husker game, I'd be tearing my hair out. They had a great day running the ball, and a good lead, yet inexplicably abandon the run for pass, and end up losing. That's how this feels to me, and the best way I can put it. I know not everyone is a football fan lol.

Would "faith lost" be a qualifying explanation?

Stothert developed a reputation of becoming less engaged, broke the tax promise (especially sticky to the restaurant tax), the pothole and snow plow issues immediately got worse and never recovered.

Then you have the the public image shift from moderate, where she was an lgbt and minority ally, to trumpist with anti-lgbt motivations.

This shift in public image changed the target audience she was asking for a vote and made an enemy of her previous allegiances. Add to that, people are weary of culture politics this day and age.

I don't think the streetcar issue was as damaging as people think. Even the most staunch conservatives I know were for it.

Then you had the never-Stotherts that never forgave the Conagra fiasco when the city and state claimed to have known nothing about their move, but the executives claimed to have contacted them both. Not that any communication would've made a difference, cause I dont know. This was the core of the original crowd that never got over their disgust with her.

There are so many factors, but I can say the last term was especially bad image-wise for her. Not just what has been noted above, but also of the image that she was in St Louis far more than Omaha. There were attendance law changes for the city because of this.

And thus, all this could very well explain the previous notes of overstaying her welcome. Much the same happened with Hal daub.

And let's not forget that Ewing was a legit candidate with decades of service. No need to understate the effect that had.

This is my post mortem.

[ThreeGGG]

Ewing seemed to be more than just a legitimate candidate. I think people who take an interest in politics in this day and age are looking for more transparency and honesty than anything else. And my personal views are that Ewing better fit that narrative than Stothert did.

[HskrFanMike]

I'm no analyst by any stretch. I'm just kinda baffled what there was so wrong that so many people wanted "fixed" by voting against her.

While there were the "big vision and dreams" of the streetcar and press conferences of potential development, there were the basics that she fumbled.

• Endless road construction that takes FOREVER. (That's kind of true of most mayors, though, TBH).

• Negligent winter storm preparation efforts. When you get called out by both Jim Flowers and Bill Randby, you aren't winning this argument

• I understand there may be other issues at play, but the downtown sinkhole should have been turned into a bad memory and not a meme by now. Now it just looks like another example of incompetence by the Stothert administration.

Then there are the litany of broken promises that she tried to footnote away: repeal the restaurant tax, hold a vote on the streetcar.

IMHO, her margin of victory in 2021 was enhanced over compassion over her first husband's death. I think Neary had to pull his punches in the campaign. After the election, there was the St. Louis thing which she never really explained well. I think if she would have been more forthright in saying that she needed to help get her mom to assisted living rather than hide her absences and dismiss concerns that she was AWOL, people would have reacted more compassionately.

She chose to govern as a bit of an autocrat, and that works as long as things are going well. But Ewing ran as a competent leader who's going to listen to the city's concerns. Most of the primary voters wanted somebody else, and she never gave a cohesive response to that. Two big developments continue to go nowhere: Crossroads and the former Civic Auditorium sites. She turned instead to the potty issue, and that probably alienated much of her moderate support. That's how you turn a single digit loss into a double-digit blowout loss, and that'll be the enduring memory of Jean Stothert.

[Busguy2010]

I don't blame her for the civic site or Crossroads. NONE of us wanted the white lotus proposal. So I'd say she did a good job of NOT letting that happen. At least she gave us a blank slate.

She got us the streetcar, which in time will help us get what we really want. I'd even venture to say that has potential to make Ewing look better than he otherwise would.

I don't blame her for Crossroads. Its a difficult site, one. Especially with Aksarben right down the road, and already so many restaurant and shopping options in the immediate area. At least she accomplished getting the mall torn down and gave a canvas to build on. And remember how much the developers were trying to drive up the tax levy. They were trying to exploit her and the city, and us. She did a good job of NOT letting that happen.

Remember when ConAgra up and left? It was a surprise to us all. We were flipping the bird at THEM, not the Mayor. Ask, did we really want them anyway? They're the reason we don't have Jobbers Canyon. The new CEO didn't want to be here, and i don't think there was any convincing them to stay. In place of them, look at what we got/will get. I mean...?

Yeah, the roads suck, but I don't think anybodys gonna find a good way to manage that.

On the restaurant tax, who cares if she "broke her promise" on that? Its literally a drop in the tank on an individual level, but since it applies to everybody, it adds up handsomely. I doubt Ewing is gonna remove it. Maybe it'd be a good look, but a bad move.

In 2020, she did good not to give in to the "defund the police" stuff. Although there were some negative images here, that was happening in every city. There was only so much to do to limit the damage there, and the department did a pretty good job of not letting it get out of hand more than it did. I was right in that area when the Crossroads riot broke out, and I ran away from that as fast as I could. That was just a scary situation and they managed it.

Anyway, we could beat a dead horse for a lifetime. When it comes down to it, I think people voted with their heart, not their head. Its one way to do it. We'll see how it goes.

[Greg S]

I think Stothert's time as Mayor will go down as the best since I have been alive (and to be clear I am not a Republican). Fahey was a mess. Lost all faith in him with the sweetheart deals he gave the first responders that led to the pension spiking (just idiotic or dirty to allow OT to apply for pension calcs). Suttle inherited that mess and did come up with the restaurant tax that helped dig us out of that hole. I was a supporter of him early on but that faded fast. He got a major park bond passed with millions that was going to really upgrade and add to the city's parks. Items that were intended and listed on the ballot never got followed through on. He diverted the funds to fix up the Leahy Mall that had deteriorated prior to his tenure. First of all, if that was going to be the path he chose, fixing up the mall (but ignoring the bigger issue that it was not any sort of downtown attraction sitting on valuable real estate) it should have been a separate funding source. He really wasn't a forward thinker and nothing of note resulted in his tenure.

Stothert came in at the end of the recession and also faced Covid and the George Flloyd/defund the police and seemed to navigate all adeptly. For me her two biggest achievements were the new Riverfront Park (and with the private funds raised an absolute bargain for Omaha). It's been far better than I ever imagined it could be. Just wish we had it when my boys were younger. The other is obviously the Streetcar. I think most if not all on here understand how it will lead to great things not just for it's immediate area (and more if we get another Mayor that will get behind and expansion) but also the city as a whole. I have watched how the Streetcar in KC has been such a catalyst for additional development (and they are putting the finishing touches on expanding it right now at both ends, with more expansion plans in the planning stage).

So many other strong developments. Stothert seems to work almost seamlessly with the Chamber (which is led by a former opponent of hers), Heritage Services and developers. Other notable achievements (but certainly not all) are the new Mutual HQ tower downtown, the new Children's Museum and adjoining apartments, the way she has redone parking (the app and garages, it now is so easy to park downtown and the funding of the new garages (not just downtown but elsewhere like Crossroads), attention to public transportation like ORBT (can't remember the last mayor that really tried to address public transportation-and she did this and the previously mentioned streetcar). I know some wanted the library branch downtown but I really like the new one down there and the one on 72nd looks awesome and is on the ORBT line (and so much was paid for privately). Steelhouse. UNMC/Blackstone continuing development, I could go on and on.

So much of what she has done is make Omaha not only more attractive to families but the 20 somethings that have options on where to settle down out. We don't have mountains, beaches or a warmer climate so she and others have really done a great job coming up with other attractions and quality of life options.

Greg

[Garrett]

Speaking of attracting 20 somethings, Blackstone didn't even really exist as a concept when she took office, and now it's competitive to be the best neighborhood business district in the city.

[Busguy2010]

She's an all time great Omaha mayor. I think she deserved the honor to serve one last term to see it through. And to be clear, I did not like her at the beginning. The outcome just doesn't feel right to me.

The voters spoke. It is what it is. Hope it works.

[Erik]

She had many positive traits, but enough negative ones to lose to a good candidate when one showed himself.

I definitely wouldn't put her as the best mayor in my lifetime. The best started with Hal Daub through and through. He was present and consistent from start to finish.

To me Stothert had good things about her that stood out, especially in her second term. She grew on me as someone that really learned on the job.

However, she wasnt as present to serve this last term. She began to shift away from the very groups she rallied around in the first few terms that supported her. So much so that her campaign publicly rejected them. Plus she never was able to make ground on the small things, the fundamentals that citizens deal with day by day.

I'm a big proponent of development myself. However, im a more complete voter that also takes in to account these other factors. She lost me and a lot of other people.

And enough with the gaslighting, to the one or two of you who are calling detractors emotional. People who have voted for her in previous elections now had legit reasons to reject her this time. So stop the subtle jabs and trolling. We all want the best for the city.

Finally, in a final note, Hal Daub was a much more complete mayor. He was even better at development and was able to service the basic needs of the citizens.

I'd even put her behind Fahey.

[Garrett]

More or less official results compared to 2017, the last time Stothert had a competitive election. Only the second council district had a higher raw vote total, while the city as a whole had about 94k votes compared to 99k in 2017. Looks like the total turnout is just a hair above 32%.

[Erik]

More or less official results compared to 2017, the last time Stothert had a competitive election. Only the second council district had a higher raw vote total, while the city as a whole had about 94k votes compared to 99k in 2017. Looks like the total turnout is just a hair above 32%.

It's difficult to make an apples to apples comparison given the redrawing of districts that happened in 2020, but the gist is there.

Ewing support was higher in almost all districts than Heath Mellows, while Stotherts declined.

[Busguy2010]

Sorry for having an opinion lol. I'm done with this conversation.

[Erik]

Sorry for having an opinion lol. I'm done with this conversation.

It has much less to do with having an opinion and much more to do with the dynamic of some reserving opinions (which most of us do) for the sake of keeping the board civil and more importantly, following the rules.

We all have a lot of hot, drive-by, Twitter/Facebook takes ourselves. Yet, I keep them to myself because this isn't Twitter/Facebook and none of us want this to turn into such. And again, rules would be broken and chaos reigns if we all gave our opinions.

That said, I can believe you if you didn't mean to rile anyone up. So, let me explain how telling us we are emotional, and not using our brain, for changing our vote is both unfair and insulting.

First, as voters, all have different criteria for voting. Here, we all clearly are development focused. But we do have other standards as well, like: how the streets are taken care of, how a candidate behaves, if said candidate targets people for political gain, if a candidate is present, if a candidate is does well with urban design and works with MAPA, the chamber, the developers, the city council, special groups etc.. Each reason given isn't arbitrary. There are levels and nuances to it. There are levels of depth to determining the girth of importance as well. There are many differing factors that all play out in determining a vote for a candidate for each and every voter.

To cynically imply that people use their heart and not their brain implies that people who changed their vote had no criteria and went to the booth as drones.

Now for my hot take response, since we are now all being allowed one: This is a terrible, cynical, and lazy assessment that has absolutely zero explanatory power. How do you know? How do you know that people who changed their vote did it without assessment? You dont know us. So I fail to see how you can make such a lazy, quick and terrible assessment that explains nothing except to paint us as one of the dumb, non-thinking NPCs who betrayed you and the rest of the city because of hearts.

I'm tired of being expected to keep opinions to myself and then being gaslit after being called emotional or dumb or whatever ad-hominem. This is a very unbalanced dynamic that I see in a lot of places, and I hope this place doesn't go in that direction.

[snick]

Sorry for having an opinion lol. I'm done with this conversation.

It has much less to do with having an opinion and much more to do with the dynamic of some reserving opinions (which most of us do) for the sake of keeping the board civil and more importantly, following the rules.

We all have a lot of hot, drive-by, Twitter/Facebook takes ourselves. Yet, I keep them to myself because this isn't Twitter/Facebook and none of us want this to turn into such. And again, rules would be broken and chaos reigns if we all gave our opinions.

That said, I can believe you if you didn't mean to rile anyone up. So, let me explain how telling us we are emotional, and not using our brain, for changing our vote is both unfair and insulting.

First, as voters, all have different criteria for voting. Here, we all clearly are development focused. But we do have other standards as well, like: how the streets are taken care of, how a candidate behaves, if said candidate targets people for political gain, if a candidate is present, if a candidate is does well with urban design and works with MAPA, the chamber, the developers, the city council, special groups etc.. Each reason given isn't arbitrary. There are levels and nuances to it. There are levels of depth to determining the girth of importance as well. There are many differing factors that all play out in determining a vote for a candidate for each and every voter.

To cynically imply that people use their heart and not their brain implies that people who changed their vote had no criteria and went to the booth as drones.

Now for my hot take response, since we are now all being allowed one: This is a terrible, cynical, and lazy assessment that has absolutely zero explanatory power. How do you know? How do you know that people who changed their vote did it without assessment? You dont know us. So I fail to see how you can make such a lazy, quick and terrible assessment that explains nothing except to paint us as one of the dumb, non-thinking NPCs who betrayed you and the rest of the city because of hearts.

I'm tired of being expected to keep opinions to myself and then being gaslit after being called emotional or dumb or whatever ad-hominem. This is a very unbalanced dynamic that I see in a lot of places, and I hope this place doesn't go in that direction.

Well said. If anything, it seems like some of the folks saying 'emotion got the better' of Ewing voters are a bit emotional themselves about Stothert losing, and that's OK. But it comes across as a bit disingenuous and hypocritical to use that line to dismiss the reasoning/viewpoint of others.

I initially wasn't going to vote. To echo several others, I thought Stothert was a fine mayor and brought a lot of positive developments for the city. However, just as you put it above, that is not the only factor to be considered. We're all pro-development on here I think, we all like seeing more density and skyscrapers grace our city. But I think this can create a bit of an echo chamber. Think what you may but the heavy use of TIF, rising property taxes, and general poor state of the roads absolutely contributed to the outcome. Obviously not something Ewing is going to be able to wave a magic wand and fix either.

A lot of people just aren't feeling the benefits of the new development concentrated in a few areas. In the end, it was up to Stothert to sell the city on it, and she failed. And that shows in the numbers for her prime voting bloc.

And I know this has been discussed to death, but the injection of national-level politics that should have nothing to do with local issues was likely the nail in the coffin for the Stothert campaign. Even my parents who are older and live in West O and had liked Stothert were just turned off by that, and thought it signified a mayor who was losing sight of the ball. You can argue that is an overblown reason, my point is that was just one factor in addition to many, and at the end of the day, it was a self-inflicted wound by her campaign.

[bbinks]

It was easy for Ewing to bring up potholes, police staffing, homelessness, and the restaurant tax.

How long should he be given to implement solutions? Particularly police staffing, which is not exclusive to Omaha. The applicant pool isn't there. And it's not going to get better. The 2007 economy is now causing a shortage of young adults entering the workforce.

It's easy to talk the talk. Hopefully Ewing can walk the walk.

[Erik]

It was easy for Ewing to bring up potholes, police staffing, homelessness, and the restaurant tax.

How long should he be given to implement solutions? Particularly police staffing, which is not exclusive to Omaha. The applicant pool isn't there. And it's not going to get better. The 2007 economy is now causing a shortage of young adults entering the workforce.

It's easy to talk the talk. Hopefully Ewing can walk the walk.

12 years?

Yeah, hopefully. Because people care about those things. That is one of the very basic city services one should never neglect.

[OmahaRedWing]

I'm no analyst by any stretch. I'm just kinda baffled what there was so wrong that so many people wanted "fixed" by voting against her.

While there were the "big vision and dreams" of the streetcar and press conferences of potential development, there were the basics that she fumbled.

• Endless road construction that takes FOREVER. (That's kind of true of most mayors, though, TBH).

• Negligent winter storm preparation efforts. When you get called out by both Jim Flowers and Bill Randby, you aren't winning this argument

• I understand there may be other issues at play, but the downtown sinkhole should have been turned into a bad memory and not a meme by now. Now it just looks like another example of incompetence by the Stothert administration.

Then there are the litany of broken promises that she tried to footnote away: repeal the restaurant tax, hold a vote on the streetcar.

IMHO, her margin of victory in 2021 was enhanced over compassion over her first husband's death. I think Neary had to pull his punches in the campaign. After the election, there was the St. Louis thing which she never really explained well. I think if she would have been more forthright in saying that she needed to help get her mom to assisted living rather than hide her absences and dismiss concerns that she was AWOL, people would have reacted more compassionately.

She chose to govern as a bit of an autocrat, and that works as long as things are going well. But Ewing ran as a competent leader who's going to listen to the city's concerns. Most of the primary voters wanted somebody else, and she never gave a cohesive response to that. Two big developments continue to go nowhere: Crossroads and the former Civic Auditorium sites. She turned instead to the potty issue, and that probably alienated much of her moderate support. That's how you turn a single digit loss into a double-digit blowout loss, and that'll be the enduring memory of Jean Stothert.

Wow. I could not have a bigger difference of opinion on the 2021 election. Initially Neary seemed like a competent candidate. I remember he based a lot of his campaign on Covid. He was going to have some sort of Covid Czar. He was really big on not having another year like 2020 with the CWS and Berkshire Meetings being cancelled (among other events). As we know things really go going and moving forward from Covid by the start of 2021. So, his Covid campaign gamble failed. Spectacularly.

By the time the election moved on to the general election, Neary just seemed done with it. Not sure if internal polling had convinced him he had no shot, but he no longer seemed to be even trying.

He just ran an awful campaign.

It seems like you have some sort of personal issues with Stothert for years. Trying to constantly explain away any sort of successes and trying to poke holes or paint a negative impression of her. I think it's kind of laughable to suggest that she gained votes based on her husband's death. I would agree the negative attacks on her subsided, but I don't recall a single person that was going to vote against her (or vote for Neary) that changed their vote out of sympathy....

One major issue that Stothert really screwed up that was preventable. St Louis. Early in this last term when she was making the trips there to move and care for her mom, she didn't address the rumors. The internet went on and on about it being for her significant other/eventual husband. I don't think she understood how prevalent they were, and people actually believed them. Didn't want to give them any credit (even though it was incorrect). People just grew to accept them as fact. She later addressed them, but the cat was out of the bag. Should have confronted them so much earlier. If she had been clear that it was care for her mother, many would have viewed it differently.

[HskrFanMike]

Wow. I could not have a bigger difference of opinion on the 2021 election. Initially Neary seemed like a competent candidate. I remember he based a lot of his campaign on Covid. He was going to have some sort of Covid Czar. He was really big on not having another year like 2020 with the CWS and Berkshire Meetings being cancelled (among other events). As we know things really go going and moving forward from Covid by the start of 2021. So, his Covid campaign gamble failed. Spectacularly.

By the time the election moved on to the general election, Neary just seemed done with it. Not sure if internal polling had convinced him he had no shot, but he no longer seemed to be even trying.

He just ran an awful campaign.

It seems like you have some sort of personal issues with Stothert for years. Trying to constantly explain away any sort of successes and trying to poke holes or paint a negative impression of her. I think it's kind of laughable to suggest that she gained votes based on her husband's death. I would agree the negative attacks on her subsided, but I don't recall a single person that was going to vote against her (or vote for Neary) that changed their vote out of sympathy....

I think we were seeing the same thing...just interpreting it different. I never thought that many people changed their vote (if any) out of sympathy. I merely believe that Neary did not go harder against her in the campaign after the funeral. Maybe it was out of respect for her loss, maybe it was compassion, maybe it was thinking that some voters would find it distasteful to hammer a widow politically (even if the topics had absolutely zilch to do with Joe Stothert).

Do I have an issue with Stothert? Yes I have several. I found how she led the city council's efforts to handcuff Jim Suttle's ability to negotiate union contracts only to reclaim that authority a year later once she became mayor to be politically self-serving. I've brought up snow removal consistently over the years; she's been an abject failure in that regard. (Look up 90th street and the police from a few years ago; it's just one example.) We'll never know (thank goodness), but I really believe that if Stothert had been mayor in 2011 instead of Suttle, we would have lost Eppley due to flooding. Suttle was quick on the draw and acquired additional pumps and had them installed before the floodwaters rose too high. Stothert's track record suggests that she would not have been ahead of that unprecedented situation.

Everybody has their opinions and they are entitled to them. Mine is that many of the things that Stothert gets credit for probably would have still happened under any another mayor. A decade-plus of overall economic growth in the U.S. sets the stage for growth locally as well.

[Greg S]

I'm no analyst by any stretch. I'm just kinda baffled what there was so wrong that so many people wanted "fixed" by voting against her.

I get many were offended by her last ditch effort, and that was a misstep. But put that aside and ask yourselves, what has she done other than benefit the city of Omaha in the last 12 years?

Nothing against the man himself, it just seems like a mistake to me to let her go after all shes done. Its a step back, or a lateral, at best.

If I had to compare this to a Husker game, I'd be tearing my hair out. They had a great day running the ball, and a good lead, yet inexplicably abandon the run for pass, and end up losing. That's how this feels to me, and the best way I can put it. I know not everyone is a football fan lol.

Would "faith lost" be a qualifying explanation?

Stothert developed a reputation of becoming less engaged, broke the tax promise (especially sticky to the restaurant tax), the pothole and snow plow issues immediately got worse and never recovered.

Then you have the the public image shift from moderate, where she was an lgbt and minority ally, to trumpist with anti-lgbt motivations.

This shift in public image changed the target audience she was asking for a vote and made an enemy of her previous allegiances. Add to that, people are weary of culture politics this day and age.

I don't think the streetcar issue was as damaging as people think. Even the most staunch conservatives I know were for it.

Then you had the never-Stotherts that never forgave the Conagra fiasco when the city and state claimed to have known nothing about their move, but the executives claimed to have contacted them both. Not that any communication would've made a difference, cause I dont know. This was the core of the original crowd that never got over their disgust with her.

There are so many factors, but I can say the last term was especially bad image-wise for her. Not just what has been noted above, but also of the image that she was in St Louis far more than Omaha. There were attendance law changes for the city because of this.

And thus, all this could very well explain the previous notes of overstaying her welcome. Much the same happened with Hal daub.

And let's not forget that Ewing was a legit candidate with decades of service. No need to understate the effect that had.

This is my post mortem.

I am not buying the broke the tax promise (especially the sticky restaurant tax as you put it). She's literally won 2 re-election campaigns since then.....

[Erik]

I'm no analyst by any stretch. I'm just kinda baffled what there was so wrong that so many people wanted "fixed" by voting against her.

I get many were offended by her last ditch effort, and that was a misstep. But put that aside and ask yourselves, what has she done other than benefit the city of Omaha in the last 12 years?

Nothing against the man himself, it just seems like a mistake to me to let her go after all shes done. Its a step back, or a lateral, at best.

If I had to compare this to a Husker game, I'd be tearing my hair out. They had a great day running the ball, and a good lead, yet inexplicably abandon the run for pass, and end up losing. That's how this feels to me, and the best way I can put it. I know not everyone is a football fan lol.

Would "faith lost" be a qualifying explanation?

Stothert developed a reputation of becoming less engaged, broke the tax promise (especially sticky to the restaurant tax), the pothole and snow plow issues immediately got worse and never recovered.

Then you have the the public image shift from moderate, where she was an lgbt and minority ally, to trumpist with anti-lgbt motivations.

This shift in public image changed the target audience she was asking for a vote and made an enemy of her previous allegiances. Add to that, people are weary of culture politics this day and age.

I don't think the streetcar issue was as damaging as people think. Even the most staunch conservatives I know were for it.

Then you had the never-Stotherts that never forgave the Conagra fiasco when the city and state claimed to have known nothing about their move, but the executives claimed to have contacted them both. Not that any communication would've made a difference, cause I dont know. This was the core of the original crowd that never got over their disgust with her.

There are so many factors, but I can say the last term was especially bad image-wise for her. Not just what has been noted above, but also of the image that she was in St Louis far more than Omaha. There were attendance law changes for the city because of this.

And thus, all this could very well explain the previous notes of overstaying her welcome. Much the same happened with Hal daub.

And let's not forget that Ewing was a legit candidate with decades of service. No need to understate the effect that had.

This is my post mortem.

I am not buying the broke the tax promise (especially the sticky restaurant tax as you put it). She's literally won 2 re-election campaigns since then.....

My point wasn't that she lost some people's faith on that account alone, but that it was part of an cumulniation of many. I hear people still talking about it, but also other things since.

The restaurant tax doesn't bother me. I know, and appreciate, city services. I'm not a tax-me-less NIMBY. I'd rather live in Connecticut than Mississippi, and recognize that services make for a better society.