Reader disagrees with my winners and losers from the Loraine Report

A reader offered this response earlier this morning to my assessment of the winners and losers from the release of Osage Beach lawyer Tom Loraine's investigative report:

Except for (Mike) Woolston, who's probable corruption has been exposed in this report and the testimony (which I'm still plowing through), I'm not sure as of today, as opposed to after the next election or two, that I'd categorize any of the Losers as actually losing:

As you note about Carol Stark, she "still may end up playing a key role in the outcome of Tuesday's election. The further exposure of the Globe as "a newsletter for Joplin's special interests" is just that, it's not news after the Speck debacle, which only ended when he went a step too far for the board.

Joplin Progress Committee: can't figure out what their angle is, since in even the medium term their agenda is "bad for business", but there are plenty of short sighted people out there, and, again, if their candidates win in the elections, they too will have won.

Joplin Globe: Again, if they successfully play kingmaker, how can you say they've lost, at least by their own priorities, which of course don't include being a real newspaper. They could go out of business because what's the point in paying good money to read a local version of Pravda.

The Four Who Voted For Rohr: again, they lose only if they lose in elections.

Lane Roberts: OK, he's suffering a reputational loss, but he got out before he could be fired, and is no doubt enjoying his pension.