Home » Board of Aldermen »Featured »Politics/Policy » Currently Reading:

Readers Rejected Apology From Lewis Reed Before Email Campaign Dramatically Altered Poll Results

February 17, 2016 Board of Aldermen, Featured, Politics/Policy 7 Comments

It was nearly seven years ago I began posting a new poll question every Sunday. These polls are non-scientific, but some of us find them interesting. The polls were open for an entire week.  Most votes came on Sundays, except when an email campaign would dramatically alter the more natural outcome of the regular readers.

In November 2014 I switched the poll from lasting a week to just 12 hours: 8am to 8pm each Sunday. Since then no poll has been the subjected to mass voting as a result of an email campaign. Until this past Sunday.

At 3pm, my daily nap time, the vote was still progressing like usual — 30 votes after 7 hours. A few hours later the total vote count had ballooned to well over 125. Thankfully I checked the results on my iPad — leaving the 3pm results on my computer untouched.

Here are the results as of 3pm — 30 total votes:

Q: Lewis Reed has apologized for his appearance on Bob Romanik’s radio show last month. Do you accept or reject Reed’s apology?

  • Strongly accept 3 [10%]
  • Accept 0 [0%]
  • Somewhat accept 4 [13.33%]
  • Neither accept or reject 4 [13.33%]
  • Somewhat reject 1 [3.33%]
  • Reject 8 [26.67%]
  • Strongly reject 7 [23.33%]
  • Unsure/No Answer 3 [10%]

Just over 23% accepted, more than half rejected. The remainder were unsure or fell into the middle.

A few hours later the results looked dramatically different — 159 total votes:

  • Strongly accept 113 [71.07%]
  • Accept 10 [6.29%]
  • Somewhat accept 5 [3.14%]
  • Neither accept or reject 4 [2.52%]
  • Somewhat reject 2 [1.26%]
  • Reject 12 [7.55%]
  • Strongly reject 8 [5.03%]
  • Unsure/No Answer 5 [3.14%]

Seven hours to get 30 votes, but another 129 came in the last 5 hours. A Reed staff person found out about the poll through a mass email. See screenshots of both here.

Here’s the problem I have with Reed’s apology: timing. Reed said he was trying to get Bob Romanik to stop by using a note/sign while on the air on January 11th. I too would’ve been shocked & speechless. If he was truly upset and embarrassed about what was said he’d have tweeted he’s feelings following the broadcast. But he didn’t.

A series of apology tweets didn’t come until nearly a month later, February 8th, after more people listened to the show on YouTube. An apology letter was posted on Facebook at 8:34pm on February 9th.

I’d never heard of radio host Bob Romanik before February 8th. From a look at the official show website I don’t think I missed out.

Image for Bob Romanik's radio show click for link
Image for Bob Romanik’s radio show click for link

Here’s the official show description:

The Kraziest Son of a Bitch you’ll ever hear on the radio.  Radio like you’ve never heard it before and will probably never want to hear again. If you think the real grim reaper is scary, wait until you see and listen to Bob Romanik “The Grim Reaper of Radio!”. The Grim Reaper’s show will be like his face, very scary and very, very ugly. “On the Dark Side” is the most controversial show on radio today. “The Grim Reaper of Radio” is not politically correct or politically incorrect, he’s politically insane!!

After your Experience with Bob Romanik, “The Grim Reaper of Radio”, Death Just May be Enjoyable!

Reed was so upset with Romanik during his January 11th appearance that he came back on January 28th (@25:20) — sending out a tweet w/photo! I listed to the entire show but Reed didn’t let Romanik know his January 11th comments were out of line. Fifty-seven minutes I’ll never get back.

Reed has embarrassed the Board of Aldermen.

— Steve Patterson



Currently there are "7 comments" on this Article:

  1. JZ71 says:

    I’m less concerned about what the Alder-people say about each other and way more concerned about what they actually accomplish (or not). When you get a bunch of people together, with strong personlities and differing agendas, there will always be (the potential for) conflict / someone saying the “wrong” thing(s), plus, there are some people who are in a continual state of being offended. Being a politician means having a thick skin – you will never, ever, EVER make everyone happy. There are way bigger battles to be fought than a twitter fight over who disrespected who?!

    • guest says:

      Usually agree with you, JZ, but have to disagree on this one. This affair shows a lack of class and judgement on the part of Lewis Reed. Given the negative baggage this has created, essentially offending one half of our society (women), how is he now supposed to be an effective leader?

    • Mark-AL says:

      I don’t understand the discussion to be about “who disrespected who”. I think it more pointedly was about the failure of a city leader, in a public venue, to maintain order and an expected level of polite behavior, good taste and human respect for his associate and constituent, and to take a clear and decisive stand against Romanik’s derisive comments. . In this case, L. Reed trumped Trump’s antics.

  2. CallieJean1947 says:

    It amazes me that Lewis Reed, would ever agree to be on the show in the first place. Reed should have know what kind of show it was,and what this guy was all about, and NEVER appeared on that show. I question Lewis Reed’s judgement. What kind of idiot puts himself in that position, unless he agrees with the content of the show?

  3. The Ghost of H L Mencken says:

    Anyone who displays this much lack of judgement should resign. He has no business serving as president of the Board of Alderman.

    • Mark-AL says:

      …..and he might become your next mayor–and if he does, STL will be taking a step from ineptitude to just plain awkward and artless.

  4. gmichaud says:

    The dust up about name calling aside, it may be more important to call Mr. Reed and his friends on a lack of leadership. Please tell me if I am wrong.
    I have mentioned Paul McKee and the Northside previously, it is a good example of failed leadership in government. The government, city government, Mr. Reed, Mr. Slay and the Board of Aldermen should act for the well being of the city, correct?
    We have a potential project, what is it 4 or 5 years old at least and 40 million or so of public money spent, yet no one knows what is happening.
    Representing the peoples interests would be building the Northside in a manner that included pedestrians, transit and bicycles.
    Where is that discussion? Especially in light of climate change. Quality of life and building a different city is also a worthy discussion.
    And if city leadership, including Mr. Reed had been vigorously pursuing the peoples interest NGA would have a more natural spot to embrace, seeing positive and proactive actions in their immediate neighborhood.
    Instead the leadership of St Louis, Mr. Reed, Mr. Slay stand with their hands in their pockets.
    The people of St. Louis’ interests are handed to developers like Mr McKee. So what is his solution, if he ever builds anything, is an autocentric, suburban style development?
    Is that the future of St. Louis City? does everyone agree with that?
    The failure is of leadership, of Mr. Reed, Slay and really I guess a clueless system of government that has failed over the past 5 decades and continues to today in that fine tradition.
    I suppose Mr. McKee has “donated” to the cause of each politician to make sure he gets his way, like Mr. Romanik.
    And now I hear they want to tear down the Edward Jones Dome. These people have no ability, it is one mistake after another.
    But name calling, I don’t know, maybe booger head or something.


Comment on this Article: