The Chainlink

When asking around, I heard these three candidates are some potential good bike-friendly options:




Let's use this thread to discuss, bring in articles, quotations, and proof of bike-savviness. Cool?

Views: 4256

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Well, I think the outrage some folks share with us here re. the bike lane matter seems sincere. As to the matter at hand - who is bike savvy (or not) - is in play, and mayoral candidate conduct and/or that of their staff is worthy of consideration on some scale, which is more or less what we're mulling over here. 

There are certainly different ways of measuring that as well, and folks wouldn't want to be off the mark on that, although atop that list may be driver (or candidate staff) bad behavior, whether impolite, inconvenient, or down-right dangerous to pedestrians and cyclists, and so all of that is worthy of evaluation on some scale, and the scale we use here in the "what's this doing in the bike lane..." thread is at least one such scale.  It's serious and relevant, especially in consideration of readiness for the office.

People have lapses too, and maybe they atone for that as well.  With all this in mind, how best should we measure the conduct of mayoral candidates/staff along side that of the bike lane transgressors?  

 I believe this is rather over-wrought.

That was kinda my take-way on the whole ice caps thing too.  It should be interesting month 'til the finals. 

Yeah, the "whole ice caps thing" would be over-wrought, if it weren't also true.

But let's do sweat the small stuff -- that the future mayor of the City of Chicago has a habit of exceeding the posted speed limit and blowing an occasional red light.

Well, that's a fair point and I'm still thinking this over ahead of the final vote.  Certainly cyclists could consider that a candidate speeding around in SUVs impacts warming, ice caps, etc. and the NYTimes link seems to show those climate concerns.
Meanwhile per this link below, worrying about speeding and "blowing an occasional red light" may go beyond sweating the small stuff when it comes to risks associated with speeding or red-light running.  $1500 worth of tickets may also go beyond occasional as well, so respectfully we may end up with separate views on this issue, and I'm ok with moving on to other topics.  

Yeah, moving on is appropriate, as we seem to be talking past each other. I get the sense that you didn't even bother to read the Times piece (I could be wrong), and my throwing a link out there does not obligate you or anyone to do so. For what it's worth, I am personally not interested in a single hit & run story in D.C. I have limited bandwidth.

I have some insight. People are terrible drivers in the DC area. TERRIBLE. DC and Chicago have very different infrastructure (Chicago has more) and Chicago seems to have (believe or not) more awareness for cyclists.

I moved to Bethesda recently and there are no bike lanes near me so I am stuck partially riding on the very wide sidewalks because driving in the street is too dangerous here. People speed with reckless abandon while not paying attention.

Speaking of tangents -- I KNEW I shoulda made dat left toin at Albakoikie!

I enjoyed my tangent. :-) It's not often DC comes up in a thread.

There was a mayoral debate on NBC yesterday.  The two candidates were asked about biking.  The entire debate is broken into segments on the website.  The part about biking is at the 6:03 mark of part 9.

Wear a helmet and follow traffic laws. If that was all that was covered in the debate it sure doesn't point towards any cycling infrastructure improvements or better treatment towards cyclists.

Not a big enough voters block, I guess.

Not sure what the point of asking that question was when it is prefaced with "bikes don't stop at stop signs..." and nothing about cars disregarding traffic rules.


© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service