Wednesday, May 31, 2017

Undervoting is the Principled Stand

If you're someone who just votes Democratic or republican because your family does or because of the brand, then this post isn't for you.

Frankly, this post isn't for you if you're a republican either. You should stop reading now and I'll see you guys in the comment section.

This post is for those that are Democrats because of their values.

For those of you that are actually Democrats because of your values, you should really consider undervoting.

I wrote about this before and it got under the skin of a few people and I feel its necessary to respond to some of the "counter-arguments".

First, lets dispel with the myth that any of the two candidates is slightly better or worse than the other. Both are terrible for the border. One voted to gut public education, the other a spoiled right kid who was born with a silver foot in his mouth, to borrow a phrase from former Texas Governor Ann Richards, and a terrible leadership record.

Both are bad for El Paso.

Second, undervoting won't prevent either of these two clown candidates from winning. One is going to win and as a result, El Paso will lose. But this isn't like the choice between Hillary and Drumpf. Neither candidate was particularly appealing to me, but I know Hillary was no where near as bad as Drumpf...and now we have Drumpf as POTUS.

Someone has to win and that is going to suck. But...if you are a Democrat for your principles and values, you'd never vote for a Republican for a policy-making position because their values and priorities are antithetical to ours.

So why would you sell out those values to vote for either Republican? Seriously, if voting for a Republican in any other policy position is a non-starter for you, why would you all of a sudden be willing to compromise your values just because this race is allegedly non-partisan? Just because the candidates don't declare their party in this race doesn't mean it isn't relevant. Party is about your governing priorities and the orientation of values as a governing body. Why do you think that all-of-a-sudden doesn't matter?

Think it doesn't matter, take something said by David Saucedo at a recent forum. He was asked about the sanctuary cities bill and he did everything he could do to sound like a Democrat because he knew he was in a room full of Democrats. But what he said, from a policy stand point, was scary. He said he'd like to stop paying the CBP $3 million a year for overtime and give that money to police to do the job.

He essentially is advocating in favor of having local law enforcement become defacto border patrol agents.

I've heard some say that its stupid for people to put their party before El Paso.

Those people that say that are what I like to call, ignorant.

Undervoting isn't putting your party before the community, its putting your values before bad choices. When did it become a bad thing to take a principled stand?

I realize for some people like Abel Rodriguez and his Cathedral clique that words like "principles" and "values" is a foreign concept to them. But nonetheless, for the rest of us that are Democrats because of values and being informed, voting for any candidate that is from a party that is antithetical to what is important to us is not an option.

And finally, understand that there is a mountain of difference between NOT VOTING and UNDERVOTING.

Saucedo said something really poignant at that debate that actually resonated with me, so mark this down. When complaining about low voter turnout and voter apathy he said it was in part because "we continue to vote in mediocre candidates".

He's absolutely right. And the fact that despite having so many options to vote for, El Pasoans set a record for voter apathy in the general election. Candidates like Margo and Saucedo are both the symptom and the cause.

When voters don't like the candidates, they don't go vote. They stay home. You need candidates that force them to leave their homes to go and cast a ballot. Sitting out isn't an option because it doesn't send a message.

But if you're a Democrat and you go through the trouble of going out to the polls and undervote, you're sending a principled message. You're saying I choose none of the above.

You aren't throwing a vote away, you're taking a stand on your values. Consider it a meaningful act of civil disobedience to say you refuse to give up your values to vote for the least shitty of shitty candidates.

Undervote. Vote in the other races on the ballot, just skip the mayoral race.

And tell your friends.

Don Williams View on Undervoting

Below is an email sent to me by Don Williams a few days ago about undervoting and I asked him if he'd like me to post it.

I'm gonna write a response on why an undervote is the principled action to take, but I think Don makes a lot of valid points here.

Don Williams is a past president of the Black El Paso Democrats and member of the El Paso County Democratic Party Hall of Fame.

Here is Don's view:


I came across the May 19, 2017 LionStar Blog of the "under-voting" exchange between the Chair of the Paso del Norte Tejano Democrats, Mr. Eddie Holguin and the Chair of the State Democratic Party, the Honorable Gilberto Hinojosa.  Mr. Holguin made a claim that was attributed to me that is not accurate and I'd like to address the issue in full.

The El Paso Municipal Election is non-partisan.  There were a total of 8 mayoral candidates and all but two were democrats. Since the election is non-partisan and the candidates do not have to declare a political party, the local democratic party researched and reported the party affiliation and voting history of all of the candidates be they mayoral, city representative or judge.  As you may know, the election resulted in a run-off for the mayoral race between two Republicans.

Below is the email I sent to the State President of the Texas Coalition of Black Democrats, Gene Collins, Chairman Hinojosa and State Legislative Affairs Chairman, Glen Maxey.  I received answers and opinions from Collins and Maxey.  My request to them is below. No singular or concrete answer or opinion was given by either.

Of the two mayoral candidates, David Saucedo and Dee Margo, my concern was how to diminish the chances of the one I believed to be the most detrimental of the two.

Candidate David Saucedo is supported and advised by a local democratic official who approached me a few years ago and complained that I should not seek a third term as SDEC because I'm not Mexican and cannot adequately represent the culture and interests of the overwhelming majority of El Paso democrats.

David Saucedo entered the race and immediately attacked a number of municipal departments with his unfounded allegations of corruption and misdeeds.  Some of us in the Black community believe these attacks were geared toward Purchasing and Strategic Sourcing, Human Resources, Police, Interim Deputy City Manager of Public Safety and Support Services and Libraries because they are headed by African-Americans.

Mr. Saucedo has questionable life and governmental experiences and will inherit a city council that has overwhelmingly endorsed his opponent.

The other choice, Dee Margo, is a noted business leader with unparalleled community service, contributions and involvement. He has served as a civilian aide to the Secretary of the Army at Ft. Bliss; chairman of the El Paso Chamber of Commerce; elected to the Texas House of Representatives and served on the powerful House Appropriations Committee; appointed President of the EPISD Board of Managers that rescued and restored the district from corruption and other criminal activities committed by the Superintendent and other key administrators and teachers. Mr. Margo was appointed by the Texas Governor on the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas Oversight Committee.

The leading democrat in the mayoral race came in third behind the two republicans. She, along with the outgoing  mayor, who is a democrat, immediately cast their support for Dee Margo.

In his second unsuccessful bid for state representative, Margo was endorsed by two democratic representatives in a partisan election.  I assisted in drafting the letters condemning their actions and requesting that they receive some appropriate actions or sanctions against them.  These letters were signed by the then County Democratic Party Chair and by the leaders of all of the active democratic party clubs and organizations.  I openly campaigned against Dee Margo on both occasions.

The advice and opinions of Gene Collins and Glen Maxey included that there is no impediment to a democrat voting for a Republican in a non-party designated, non-partisan election; especially, when only Republicans are candidates.  Under-voting is a legitimate option; but, it is not very effective if there are distinctions between the two candidates that are of immediate concern to the voters.  A no-vote emboldens the person that you are more against.

Maxey also recommended that the party could draft and present a resolution to the public espousing the attributes, characteristics, values and issues for people to use in assessing the candidates.

I have only publicly voiced my opinion and the ideas shared with me by Collins and Maxey on two separate occasions.  Mr. Holguin was not present on either occasion.  Under these circumstances he may have misunderstood or it was presented to him in a manner that caused him to misinterpret what he thought I said incorrectly.

As a child of the 50s and 60s growing up during the Civil Rights Movement in the South, voting was considered sacred and must not be taken for granted.  Unfortunately, the fight continues today with the onslaught of repressive voter suppression laws designed to limit our effectiveness at the ballot box.  Too many people have fought and died so that we can properly exercise this basic constitutional right.

Based on our dismal voting turn-out record in this last election (418, 665 eligible voters; 34,887 ballots cast and 8.33% turnout) I strongly recommend that we concentrate on voter turn-out instead of under-voting.

In my estimated 48 years of voter eligibility, I have never voted for a Republican in a partisan election. I have never knowingly voted for a Republican in a non-partisan election.  While I respect the differing opinions concerning this matter, circumstances can cause right-thinking people to reach different conclusions.

While under-voting is a legitimate political option, I feel that in this particular case, under-voting increases the chances of a candidate that does not have the best interests and common values of this community to be voted in as mayor. 

This upcoming run-off will be the first time in my life that I will knowingly vote for a Republican.  I am casting my vote for Dee Margo, Mayor of El Paso and I encourage you to do the same.  

Tuesday, May 30, 2017

Barceleau's Bombshell

In a very clear sign of desperation, Jaime Barceleau dropped the most negative mailer I've seen in a really long time. Looks like a Forma piece and if it is, its an example of a candidate needing to reign in their consultants. But it also has the potential to be a major story and headache for another elected official.

And if he went to Forma its a recent development because his last mail piece as much cleaner than the rest. The rest of his mailers looked like some cheap-ass furniture store Memorial Day sale advertisements, so he clearly has a new design crew.

The reason you know its a sign of desperation is because the mailer was so negative and so late. In order to be effectively leveraged a negative message needs time to work. Dropping it at the last minute is not only ineffective, but often leaves the voter thinking the candidate who sent it is in desperation mode.

Interestingly the only other name I noticed on the piece as Barceleau's treasurer Al Velarde. Not sure if he's cool with the mailer too, but damn its a pretty negative piece. And thats coming from me, who is used to some elbows being thrown under the rim and who has never been shy about sending negative mail.

First, you have to understand that the details of the piece are true and public record. District Clerk Norma Favela has been wanting to use it for some time. Obviously as District Clerk she's uniquely positioned to have access to those records, and I'm not saying she has, but if she has (which should be an easy enough open records search) is up to you all as constituents if you think that is an appropriate use of her position to access those records.

But Favela actually posted a comment about Cassandra Brown's record during the debate that KTSM had for the District 3 candidates. So that shows she has known about it and tried to make it public.

The real question for the media is whether she, or a staff member under her supervision accessed the record for political purposes - and whether it was at Favela's instruction.

The cases have been adjudicated for a long time, so the only reason I can thing of that they would have to be accessed would be for political purposes.

Which I sincerely hope isn't the case because it would really undermine the public's trust.

***************************
Misleading



The worst part of the mailer sent by Barceleau is that it is so blatantly dishonest. If you look closely, they go to the step of redacting information and of all things...its the date.

Why?

Because he wanted to make it seem like it was recent. Why else would the date be redacted? There is no other rational reason for redacting a date - he just tried to be slick about it.

This happened in 2004 and 2006. 

For context, in 2004 Brown would've been 17 if my math is correct. But I can't wait to see him in a debate - it would be WONDERFUL to see him try to explain away why he redacted the date.

****************************
Attacking Women

So the REALLY bad thing about this mailer is Barceleau's attack on a women opens up the door for his own skeletons to come out - which has already happened, which is why it puzzles me that Favela was okay with the attack on another woman.

Favela knows what its like to be attacked as a woman running for office. When she first ran, another woman was trying to get media or bloggers, or anyone that would listen, to cover some persona stuff about Favela. It was personal so no one bit on it.

But since I personally told Favela about the fact that someone was trying to trash her when she first ran for office, she knows full well what its like to be trashed by your past as a female candidate for office.

A while back I posted a link to a post about Barceleau on my social media and someone posted this really interesting comment about him:


For the bilingually impaired, she essentially alleges she was sexually harassed by Jaime Barceleau - he allegedly sent her obscene material. Its pretty direct.

I know for a fact that this behavior isn't isolated to this woman who posted this comment. He's done it to at least one other person and I have screen shots of it. What is terrible about it is that at least in the case of the previous instance, it happened after he had proposed to his now spouse Norma Favela.

I notified Favela and shared with her the information because I knew she was excited about getting engaged and wanted her to be fully aware of her choice before she said I do. She chose to stay with him and they are married now, which is between her and her spouse.

But when her spouse attacks a woman for her past - going back to when she was a minor - well I guess I just thought there would be a little solidarity between women.

Guess not.

Thursday, May 25, 2017

Leeser Endorses Tolbert

BREAKING NEWS!

Mayor Oscar Leeser is endorsing Jim Tolbert. That is a MAJOR development.

Lol, jk - its not.

Of course he's endorsing Tolbert, they are all in the same boat. They don't really have a choice but to stick together.

Also, I was noticing the other day how much Jim Tolbert looks like the host of one of my favorite shows, Last Week Tonight with John Oliver.


Wednesday, May 24, 2017

DA Confirms Investigation of Tolbert

David K., Chris Hernandez and Jim Tolbert have been trying to sell the public a bum steer. They have been pushing this mythical story that Jim Tolbert is somehow NOT the subject of a criminal investigation.

Their explanation defies logic, but it is funny to say the least. I mean a state agency (DPS) sent out a press release that they say wasn't sent out, to the media that they say never got it (but they did) and say that the DPS spokesperson was wrong for saying that the Texas Rangers are conducting an investigation of Jim Tolbert and others regarding the secret meetings with Max Grossman and others about the downtown arena.

Funny thing is that the Texas Rangers could've come out and said that their sister law enforcement agency was lying about an investigation if one truly didn't exist.

But they haven't.

And we are supposed to suspend belief in reality and buy into the story that despite the fact that the Texas Rangers haven't disputed the press release sent out by the DPS, but instead believe David K when he says he spoke to someone at the Texas Rangers who allegedly told him that there was no investigation of his old family friend Jim Tolbert.

And that person apparently has no name. Gotta love the wonderful, whimsical world of make-believe.

So back here in reality,  a spokesperson from the District Attorneys Office apparently confirmed the on-going investigation of Jim Tolbert in this story yesterday in the El Paso Times.

Its happening. No matter how much those three try to lie about it - which makes no sense to begin with. Its a dumb thing to lie about.

So now that is the Department of Public Safety and the District Attorney's office - the agency that ASKED for the damn investigation to being with, that have confirmed the existence of the investigation. Guess what agency hasn't come out to call them liars...the Texas Rangers.

You'd think if there were now TWO different entities that have confirmed the investigation that if there weren't an investigation that the Rangers would come out and say so right? Maybe David Karlsruher is confused and is calling the baseball team instead of the "Walker, Texas Ranger" Rangers.

Speaking of which - lets stop acting like Mr. Jim Tolbert is some sort of transparent man of the people for a moment shall we? This guy - at least according to the open record requests done by media, omitted text messages that were relevant to the request. He either deleted them, or just failed to turn them over.

Not turning over records is LITERALLY the opposite of being transparent.

That is the part that bothers me more than anything else. There's no reason to not turn over those records, especially when other members of council that were in that shady backroom meeting turned over theirs.

Now, this is the part of the story boys and girls, were Susie Byrd is assigned magical powers were she's able to dance like Selena, write children's books, direct traffic, plan next years Homecoming parade for Austin High School and direct the El Paso Times all in a single bound and wearing heels...

Oh Hey, Speaking of Socorro Mayoral Elections...

Maria Reyes, the city rep that will likely cost the tax payers of Socorro a ton of money in a lawsuit because she led the effort oust a political rival without due process, and her tag-team partner on council Yvonne Colon-Villalobos, have apparently decided to take the crazy train on the road to Ysleta.

I was catching a ballgame in the YISD district at Ysleta High in my neighborhood and lo and behold, who should I see? Yes, the dynamic duo of Reyes and Colon-Villalobos. I usually hear about things in the valley, but come on, this wasn't even hard to catch. I literally live walking distance from the baseball fields.

Why were they there?

Watching their son or grandson play in the championship game maybe?

Nope.

There to root for a Socorro school?

Negative Ghostrider. There were no Socorro kids.

So why on earth would they show up to a middle school ballgame at Ysleta High School?

Simple.

Come on, its Socorro people, you know there is a movida involved and you know how this story ends!

To spy on a political rival of course.

Reyes and Colon-Villalobos, under the direction of Lorenza Fraire are trying to get a majority of members of council so that they can bring back Fraire as the City Manager. She was such a terrible City Manager that even the Gandaras had her fired. She made Manny Soto look like a tremendous upgrade!

And this isn't the first time Reyes has tried to bring back someone and get them a cushy city job in Socorro. She's been trying to get her brother to be the municipal judge again for years. She's also tried to bring back a police chief by scheduling ambush meetings with several members of council who were really upset that she tried to pull that stunt.

So to that end, Reyes and Colon-Villalobos have candidates running in the various municipal races in an effort to bring back Fraire.

Gotta love Socorro politics...

Monday, May 22, 2017

Only in Socorro: The Campaign Edition

Come on El Paso, did you really think your mayoral election could out-Socorro Socorro?

Don't be silly, Socorro is still the pound-for-pound champ of crazy.

They are the Floyd Mayweather of cray-cray.

They have a special election for mayor coming up because City Representative Maria Reyes decided to put the city of Socorro in a terrible legal position by having a shady back-room deal to railroad the Mayor Gloria Rodriguez out of her seat.

Now get a load of this.

The former municipal judge of Socorro is now running for mayor. Her name is "Elia" Garcia. No, I don't know why she always puts it in quotes, but she actually wants to be known by as Judge Garcia. No, she wasn't elected to the position and no, she's not the judge now.

And wait til ya find out why.

Because she was trying to get a shit ton more money out of tax payers in Socorro. As much crap as I talk about Socorro city government, one thing I am pretty sensitive to is the fact that the people of Socorro have been screwed over for years by bad leadership.

People that have taking advantage of them for generations.

It bothers the shit out of me.
Not really a judge in Socorro. She's a judge in Clint.
So what happened with Elia Garcia is that she had been hired as the municipal judge in Socorro, meaning she heard traffic tickets for the municipality. Its meant to be a part-time gig. Socorro has had a lot of drama with their municipal judges. Talk about a kangaroo court - since there wasn't even a requirement that the judge be an attorney, City Rep Maria Reyes' brother was the judge.

Eventually the Gandara got some guy in that was a protege of Elliot Shapleigh and he had at least gone to law school. But that vato couldn't pass the bar.

Eventually the last council made it a requirement that a) you must have gone to law school and b) you must have actually passed the bar. Which is how they ended up with Elia Garcia as the judge. She was a baby lawyer and had actually passed the bar.

Socorro has finally got it right and their current judge, who is another attorney, actually went to law school, passed the bar exam, and is experienced.

At some point while she was still Elia Garcia had it in her head that the tax payers of Socorro needed to pay her even more for her part-time traffic-court judge position in a municipality that is only 32,000 people so she tried to get more money out of the city for the position.

We are talking a HUGE increase in pay she was going after. Guess who would pay for that big pay increase? The tax payers of Socorro.

So they would have to make a cut somewhere else or raise taxes on the community to pay for Elia Garcia's pay raise.

That is why I found the two screen shots so interesting. I mean on the one hand she's making honesty her calling card but she's referring to herself as a judge when she's not one. Not the biggest thing in the world under most circumstances, but in a place like Socorro where they are pretty sensitive about being lied to by candidates, it has the potential to blow up in her face.

Now she wants to be the mayor of Socorro. Obviously that raises a lot of questions.

For me, the biggest question is why she would want to draw attention to her time as the judge in Socorro.



This is the kind of thing that really drives voters nuts. She's on the one hand saying that she saved tax payers money, but what she fails to mention is that she's no longer the judge because she wanted a fat raise that would've mean either cuts or a tax increase to pay for and council said thanks but no thanks.

You can't claim you're saving some unspecified amount of tax dollars and at the same time be the person who was asking tax payers to foot the bill for your tax-payer funded raise!

Sunday, May 21, 2017

A Higher Standard?

Jaime Barceleau is a man with a lot of personal flaws. Seriously flaws that should make him the last person to run for office and use words like "trust" and "accountability" and "confidence" and I could go on and on all day.

He send out this mailer to voters.

He should stop saying this shit.


He doesn't hold himself to a higher standard and he should stop saying that because it isn't true.

Or he should clarify what that standard is because I have a whole lot of one-liners for that guy!

Oh yeah...


Friday, May 19, 2017

David Karlsruher...All in for Family Friend Tolbert

I seriously doubt that David Karlsruher is doing all of this denial of a criminal investigation of Jim Tolbert because he's stupid. I mean its possible, but I don't think that is why.

I think he's just lying because Tolbert is a family friend.

And he's lying a lot.

And he has been for a long time.

So first of all, David K says there's no investigation of his close family friend.

He even goes so far as to say that the DPS told him that they never sent out a press release about an investigation of Tolbert.

He also says that only the El Paso Times has even reported it.

So here is the press release he says doesn't exist.

It says there is an investigation.

Its from the DPS.

And you can see the time, date, and email addresses it was sent to. Feel free to look through it, its every media outlet in town.



"Mind you" David K said this press release didn't exist. He said DPS told him there was no investigation yet here is the press release from the DPS stating there is. He said only the Times reported it and no one else in the media got it.

David Karlsruher is clearly lying.

Again.

For his family friend.

Undervote Rumor Clarified

Apparently there is a rumor going around, allegedly from a particular source that I haven't been independently able to confirm yet that has been telling people that the Texas Democratic Party Chairman has said that it is not okay to undervote in the upcoming election.

This became such a thing that the Paso Del Norte Tejano Democrats Chairman Eddie Holguin reached out to the State Chairman to ask him if that was the case.

In his emailed response, Chairman Hinojosa very clearly states, "Eddie, the Texas Democratic Party never encourages Democratic voters to vote for Republicans - and never will."

Later Chairman Hinojosa also states, "If voters want to go to the polls and vote on any of the other contested elections on the ballot they should be encouraged to do so. If they don't want to vote for any of the mayoral candidates then they should skip that position on the ballot or vote a write-in name."

So for those of you in the Party that are being told that the TDP doesn't want you to undervote, here is clarification from the Chairman of the Party himself.



Duranguito Wasn't Important to Voters

I've said this and predictably it pissed some people off.

But its true, don't get mad at me just because it happens to be the truth. I know, the small but loud minority of people that have been ringing the cowbell about Duranguito and following around an extreme right-wing conservative like Max Grossman would have you believe that the electorate is really pissed that the arena is in Duranguito, that they are so mad that they want to put it on the ballot again and that we should hire Joyce Wilson again, just so we can fire her.

But they aren't. They voted in big numbers for candidates that are in favor of putting the arena in Duranguito. Thats got to piss off poor Maxie.

Anywho...

Here is the best way to underscore the point I was making about how the voters clearly didn't give a damn about the arena issue.

Lets see how Duranguito and Segundo Barrio voted on the issue. They vote in precinct 37 at the Armijo Center. That is in the heart of Segundo Barrio.  Lets start with the premise that the people who are against the arena would be voting for someone who has expressed opposition to the arena. Of the three top candidates, that would be David Saucedo. Margo and Acosta were for the arena.

So lets look at the numbers. First, as you can see by the color code of the precinct, the precinct is colored light green, which means it went for David Saucedo.



At first, that might make you think that indicates that since Saucedo is allegedly against the location that those voters were inline with Saucedo's position. But if you look closer at the figures in the black box, you'll see that Saved actually only narrowly pulled out a plurality.

Saucedo 31
Acosta 30
Margo 29

So even in the precinct in which Duranguito resides, Saucedo was only able to carry it by one vote.

One.

I'm not making that up, he won by one vote.

And when you calculate how many votes the other two candidates who are for the Duranguito site, Saucedo struggled to get half of the votes that went to other candidates.

What does that mean?

It means that voters in the district in which Durganguito exists gave nearly twice as many votes to the candidates that were for the arena in the current location than the candidate that wants to "Save Duranguito".

Now before anyone tries to spin the data, that precinct is a 100% barrio precinct. Its not mixed in with anything that would dilute the support of the Save Duranguito people. In short, its a precinct that should've gone for Saucedo like gang busters.

If even Segundo Barrio turned out 2-1 against Saucedo, he's in real trouble. Especially because he hasn't dropped mail, Margo is making it rain and now there is a Margo TV buy...

Thursday, May 18, 2017

Lies Are Told on the Internet...

You survived the last presidential campaign cycle, so you already knew that.

But I've now seen a pretty funny meme floating around Al Gore's invention that is funny - but mostly because when you see people share it, you immediately know who is stupid, or just lying.

For those of you needing a little refreshing of the memory - Tolbert's campaign team has been going around telling people that there's no investigation of Jim Tolbert going on. So someone actually created a meme stating that says in part, "there is no verifiable proof that Jim Tolbert is under investigation".

Except that there is.

Here's a link to the story that was done on the topic at the El Paso Times. Here's also a screen shot.

Pay close attention to what I have highlighted.



"The Texas Rangers have begun a formal investigation and there are no further details available at this time." - Lt. Elizabeth Carter, Department of Public Safety

Now Tolbert's campaign team has made Tolbert look like the Trump Administration. In fact, had you put some quotes around the text of the meme, I would've thought it was Trump's twitter feed. 

Here's the meme that is going around:


I guess a Lt from a law enforcement agency stating that there is an investigation going on isn't "verifiable proof" that Tolbert is under investigation.

Now that I think about it, that would've made a great quote for a mailer or walk lit against Tolbert.

D8: The Candidates

If you missed the District 8 forum on KTSM you missed pretty much the only time you'll get to see the candidates that are vying to replace City Rep Cortney Niland.

Here's a quick run-down of the candidates:

Trini Acevedo - Smart guy - but doesn't have a serious chance of winning. He's from Segundo Barrio and is a Bowie grad. He seems to be a nice guy and really focused on what he believes is right, but he doesn't have experience, money, infrastructure, etc to be able to be a contender.

Robert Cormell - He ran for mayor last time and was a surprising contender. Did better than a lot of people expected him to. He's a Republican, but that isn't a problem in D8. He's a business owner, has money, and has already dropped mail. He looks and sounds like a city rep. He is one of the major candidates and as long as he can ease up on the Jesus, he is likely going to end being in the run-off.

Cissy Lizarraga - The only female in the field of candidates and she has resources and a field game. She has good, clean lit and has a strong command of the issues. She has a chance of making the run-off if she can execute in the short period of time that she has. The concern is whether her field game can get the job done, she's using Chris Hernandez who already has a mayors race and three, possibly four other clients in the same election. But her message is solid and if her mail lands when it is supposed to, she can make up for a vulnerable field game. She has a real good shot at making the run-off and if she does't, it will be because of a failure in field.

Adolfo Lopez - Strongest command of the issues of any of the candidates. Smart guy. Dynamic and extremely likable. He was able to quote several studies about economic development and the downtown area, chapter and verse. He's a Forma candidate and whether or not he can get money flowing to get mail in mailboxes is going to be the unknown. If he can make that happen, he's going to duke it out with Lizarraga and Cormell for the run-off.

Gilbert Guillen - He started the earliest and has probably walked the most. Honestly, he's the guy I find the most likable. He sat down and visited with me to talk about some questions I had. I admire that because he knew I disagreed with him, but he still wanted to make sure I fully understand his position. His problem as a candidate is this - he's a one-trick pony. He speaks only about Durganguito and NOTHING else. If you look at the election results, Duranguito clearly wasn't the issue that drove people to the polls. Segundo Barrio, Chihuahuita, Duranguito, etc don't belong in D8. They aren't communities of interest with the westside. But until that changes, Guillen's message is tone-deaf to the rest of the district.

Bottom line I think you'll see two of either Lopez, Lizarraga, or Comell in the run-off.

Pearson's Priorities

I'm helping a candidate in the Hanks area, Cruz Ochoa, try to get elected as the trustee in the area so in full disclosure, I'm totally biased in this one.

He's running against Trustee Paul Pearson who has wasted a lot of tax payer money on dumb stuff like paying lawyers to fight efforts to make the school boards more transparent about their finances and paying for frivolous law suits to prevent some retired teachers from getting pay that was owed them.

But as much as that stuff bothers me from a policy stand point, I'm most annoyed at something that is a pretty stupid self-inflicted wound.

Its Pearson's misplaced priorities. The guy seems more preoccupied with Eastwood than he does his own area. But if the guy wants to represent Hanks and coach at Eastwood and his constituents don't have a problem with it, so be it.

But here's what I do have a problem with - taking off early in a school board meeting so that he can go see Phantom of the Opera.

I'm not making that up. The guy is in a run-off race and thinks its a good idea to leave a meeting EXTREMELY early so that he can go catch a show.

Don't believe me?

Okay, well here's a selfie he posted on his own Facebook page. Take note of the date and time.


Another example of an elected official and a self-inflicted political wound.

But more importantly, its an example of misplaced priorities.

There was a budget vote on the agenda, which he stayed long enough for, but the message he is sending the Hanks community is that whatever else was discussed was apparently not as important to him as catching a play downtown.

Barceleau Wanted Questions in Advance

Remember I told you that temperament was going to be a big issue? Well I've got a side story for you before I go on.

Former State Rep Marisa Marquez used to pull this shit and I hated it and never let her get away with it. When I interviewed her she always wanted to know in advance what I was going to ask her. Look, if you're a candidate you either do an interview or you don't - but don't try to play that bullshit.

Well Barceleau has taken his douchedom to an even more extreme level. Turns out the reason Barceleau was a No Shoeau at the KCOS debate was because he asked for the questions in advance and since he didn't have them, he didn't want to do the debate.

What kind of chicken shit is that? Who does he think he is, Hillary Clinton?

Where did I get that little nugget of information from?

From the debate moderator himself, David Crowder.

Take a look at this post from Facebook:



Cassandra Brown is no fiery or articulate debater. It appears to be her weakest area, so you'd think a guy like Barceleau would be licking his chops to be on TV against a candidate who is a weak debater.

And frankly, if the story was that Barceleau was a no-shoeau because he was out campaigning instead, then I would a) find it more believable and b) respect the campaign strategy.

But wanting the questions in advance and then blowing it off goes to his temperament.

And temperament is really important especially with the current make-up of council. You have a council who wouldn't sit next to one another, goes on morning FM radio shows to bash their colleagues, yells at people, etc...and that was just Cortney Niland.

Jim Tolbert calls constituents assholes and allegedly breaks the TOMA because he's allegedly upset that another member of council hasn't been kissing Duranguito ass as much as he has and was included in the meeting more than he was...allegedly.

Emma Acosta targets members of the community critical of her.

Mike Noe is apparently the world's oldest middle-schooler and trolls his colleague with his SnapChat name.

So having even-handed, grounded, and mentally stable members of council is pretty damn important to this community. Barceleau - with his previous "nobody asked you sir" remark and now demanding questions in advance shows he's got a temper problem like Jim Tolbert.

Imagine Barceleau's temper on council, along with Sam Morgan's temper problems he's shown with his inability to rationally deal with the media asking a routine question, and Jim Tolbert all on council at the same time.

Now imagine the Brown Trump, David Saucedo, as the ring leader...

Yeah, imagine that is who will represent you and your city...

Also, have you seen this video yet?

Wednesday, May 17, 2017

Barceleau a No Shoeau

Jaime Barceleau was a no show last night at the KCOS debate taping.

First, I don't blame any candidate that would rather campaign right now than debate. There's no benefit to it - unless its on TV. If I were Margo, I'd be chomping at the bit to take Saucedo into the deep end of the policy pool and drown him. Saucedo is like a fighter (just kidding, he's not like one at all) that is behind on points and his only hope is haymakers. Thats why he's turned into the brown Trump.

Or slightly less orange Trump. Whatever.

Anywho, the difference between Captain Freedom Fence and Barceleau is that Jaime had originally committed to attending the debate. But come debate time, Barceleau was a no shoeau.

Sources indicate that both he and his spouse were called but no one answered.

Must've gotten cold feet. A constituent called him out a couple days before about something that happened several years ago at a forum recently and I think it shook him up.

Which reminds me, I haven't posted this video in a few days.

My bad.

District 8 Candidate Forum on KTSM Tonight

I know I really haven't given much love to the district 8 race, but tonight is probably your best chance to hear the candidates before their inevitable run-off election.

KTSM will be doing another of their FB live debates, so find their FB page and it should give you details of the particulars.

I haven't heard anything from the candidates because I live in the Lower Valley, but I am interested in what the next city council will look like so I'll be tuning it.

Tuesday, May 16, 2017

Why Democrats Should Undervote in the Mayoral Run-off

As I have said a while back, the bad thing about this election for mayor is that someone has to win and for El Paso, thats a bad thing.

As I have said before, neither candidate is someone I feel good about voting for. Now as I have said before I have voted for a Republican previously. It was a judicial race and I feel okay with it because the guy was just a better choice and the Democrat in that race was Manny Barraza. I don't like the idea of electing judges in the first place but that is the system we have in Texas.

But the mayoral position is a policy position. Party affiliation is about values, priorities, and governing styles. If you won't vote for a Republican in a policy position like commissioners court, state rep, congress or basically any other policy-making elected position, why on earth would you not be concerned about party when it comes to local policy?

That is why I am urging people to truly express their feelings about the field of candidates. We don't have to accept a crappy field of candidates. We don't have to be okay with candidates that would be considered weak even if it was a school board race. We don't have to accept mediocrity from candidates.

Not only do we not have to accept a crappy field, we shouldn't. When we do so, with low voter participation and making a binary choice, we are sending the message that we are okay with whatever terrible or unworthy candidate wants to put their name on the ballot. We have the ability to send a message that we reject the slate of candidates on the ballot.

We can undervote.

An undervote is when you go into the ballot booth and choose to not accept either candidate. You can just skip the mayor's race and vote in the judicial races. There are plenty of down-ballot races you can vote in.

Undervoting is a much different action than not voting. Let me be clear about that. The easy thing to do is to not vote, and with record-low voter turnout, it is likely a reflection of the fact that no one liked the field of candidates. Staying at home and not going to the polls is what most people have done in El Paso elections and with the really low talent in the mayoral race, its easy to see why.

But the undervote sends a louder message. Its not encouraging people to stay home. Its actually quite the opposite. Going through the trouble of going to the polls and not selecting either candidate sends a strong message. Its saying you reject the final option of having to choose between two candidates that are wrong for El Paso.

Especially if you're a Democrat, and frankly, especially if you're raza. I truly believe in the values of my Party. I believe in the policy priorities my Party stands for and they don't go away just because I am left with the choice of having to choose the lesser of two evils. I don't just dust off some slogans from the Democratic Party every four years during a presidential.

As the presidential race has shown, choosing between the lesser of two evils has real world consequences.

I'm most especially talking to you older voters that don't like Dee Margo, mostly because he's white. I get it, it was a lot harder for you back in the day and Dee Margo looks and sounds like the face of all those people who wouldn't hire you, payed you a low wage, talked about you like you weren't there right in front of them, were condescending, promoted other less-qualified people over you because you weren't the right color, threw their money around etc.

I completely understand that. Trust me, I do.

But voting for Saucedo because of what Margo represents to you isn't any better. Saucedo is a brown Trump, and its worse because he's raza.



Undervoting won't prevent either of these terrible candidates from winning, but it does send a message when they have a really high undervote that even when there is historically low voter participation, that even the people that actually did go out to vote didn't vote for them.

Trust me, elected officials pay attention to the undervote. It is a slap in the face to them. It says that for whatever reason a voter went out to the polls, voting in other races and then skipped voting for them.

So if you truly believe in the values of our Party, of a fair wage for working families, equal pay for women, access to affordable healthcare and better education, investment in people and programs, and most importantly in a border community, comprehensive immigration reform - then you can't vote for either candidate. These are issues and values that aren't just for presidential years. They are issues that affect American families and El Pasoans every single day, not just empty platitudes.

And most especially don't vote for a Tio Taco who is banking on people voting for him because he's brown after having invited not only an anti-immigrant like Lou Holtz, but even Donald Trump to this community. I know some of you think, well he's better than voting for Dee Margo, porque es mexicano.

Well he's not better, and in many ways he's much worse. I'll get into that in another post, but the short of it is when you have one of our own advocating for bad border policy its worse than when Margo does.

If you vote straight ticket because you believe in the values of the Party, then you have a moral obligation to undervote in the mayoral race.

Send the right message. Do the right thing. Undervote.

Saturday, May 13, 2017

Ruh-roh Max

Looks like Max Grossman found out he can't charge the public for shit they already own.

Whoopsie!


Friday, May 12, 2017

Max Grossman & The Election

Well its been a while since I've mentioned ol' Maxie but I'd be remiss if I didn't point out the fact that he was a miserable failure at trying to influence the outcome of this election.

He berated and bullied a few candidates into adopting his positions, or at least attempted to do so with others, then was a failure at getting his agenda across.

Dee Margo supports the downtown arena and went into the run-off with the most votes by a huge margin.

Jim Tolbert and Alexsandra Annello were both against the arena, but only one of them isn't being investigated by the Texas Rangers for being part of a shady meeting to hammer out an 11th hour deal on the issue. So that is a wash.

In D3 - BOTH the candidates that made the run-off were in favor of the downtown arena and actually made it a part of their campaign message.

In D4 - Morgan changed his position on eminent domain a couple of times and eventually landed on being against the downtown arena. Haggerty sounds like he's kinda for it being downtown but mostly focuses on the fact that it can't be moved to Cohen and talks more about what to do with Cohen stadium.

The point is, for all the noise that has been made about the election it turned out to be a non-issue.

Max likes to play on FB all day long and I think he learned a valuable lesson that many of us have been saying for years...you can't Facebook your way to a campaign victory.

****************************************
Grossman's Gross Hypocrisy

So here's something fun to think about, especially for policy makers at the city.

Max Grossman is advocating for legal action against the city because of Duranguito but is using influence with the historic preservation office to gain access to the City Fire Stations,

AND CHARGING MONEY FOR IT!

Don't believe me...check out this announcement on Facebook:





D8 Race Analysis

Let me start off with a question that has been bothering me. I only know about Gilbert Guillen from the context of the Duranguito conversation - which turned out to be a non-issue to voters and if you don't believe me, just look at the results of the election.

I heard there was only one property owner than hasn't signed on the dotted line for the arena yet, but I noticed that the name isn't Gilbert Guillen. So since I only know of him because of the Duranguito thing I'm wondering if he his the lone hold out that hasn't signed with the city yet.

Since that is what he has become most notable for as it relates to a bid to replace the controversial Cortney Niland I think the public needs to know one thing...

Has he sold-out, or is he the hold-out?

That being said, lets move on.

The race has a few interesting candidates. Guillen for obvious reasons is one of the more notable candidates and got off to an early start. The other notables in the race are Robert Cormell who previously ran for mayor, Cissy Lizarraga who is the wife of District Court Judge Marcos Lizarraga, and former state rep candidate Adolfo Lopez.

For bilingually impaired media folks, the name is pronounced Lee-SAH-rra-guh. That names kicks everyone's ass on TV, so consider this my good deed for the day.

Cormell has already dropped mail. He is a religious conservative but has been on the ballot before and if he can keep down the Jesus, he is likely to appeal to a lot of voters on the westside.

Lizarraga is wealthy and they have lived on the westside for a long time so they are well-known and Cissy is smart, classy, and has a strong grasp of issues. She's more popular than her spouse.

Adolfo Lopez is really likable and very bright. He was Forma's candidate to replace Marisa Marquez in the legislature. He didn't win but a big chunk of the district has had his mail in their mailboxes not too long ago. He'd be great on council but the question for him is if Forma is going to help him in the race. They have their hands full trying to win a mayoral race right now, which they really need to win so that they can regain a little of their credibility back after that disaster of switching candidates DURING a campaign cycle from one camp to another in the Svarzbein race.

Guillen has to find a way to appeal to voters other than those in Segundo Barrio. I know there are a lot of raza that get annoyed when I say this, but in terms of elections Segundo Barrio has no weight at all. There aren't a lot of voters there and you can pretty much add up the total number of votes in all the segundo precincts and that is probably equal to just one precinct on the westside.

Segundo really needs to be in another district.

If Guillen were the only Latino in the race he'd stand a much better chance. But right now it looks like a run-off between Cormell and Lizarraga - unless Guillen or Lopez gets some money behind them quickly.

I will say this - and it is of almost no consequence but its something I pay attention to - Lizarraga and Guillen have the best signs. The old-school big G with the names is cool even though the colors suck, but Lizarraga's logo is clean, unique, and stands out. Its hands down the best logo of the run-off and D8 cycle.




Election Analysis: D4

The northeast seat has been pretty quiet in the first round of elections - uncharacteristically so. Normally anything having to do with the northeast part of town and politics is a lot of drama featuring El Paso's most diverse community.

But don't expect that to stay the same. Expect things to get heated and expect it to come from Sam Morgan based on his behavior in the race so far.

Sam Morgan went into the run-off with 42% of the vote. I expected him up around 48% of the vote because the district has seen his name on the ballot before, he came within a few votes of winning previously and was so close to winning that he asked for a recount.

So he is sorta the incumbent. He went through the trouble of cutting his hair - and made a public spectacle of it - because he felt like a few votes didn't go his way last time because of his dreds.

But lets keep this in perspective, Sam Morgan was in a run-off with an incumbent and managed to lose! That almost never happens. When and incumbent in El Paso is in a run-off election, they are almost always toast. He was a younger and more progressive candidate running against a much older candidate in Representative Carl Robinson who was also pretty unpopular - and managed to lose that run-off election.

He's facing Shane Haggerty who comes from a prominent family that are basically all Democrats now with the exception of Andrew Haggerty. Haggerty has only been on the ballot in a small portion of the northeast - the Parkland area that he represents on the YISD Board of Trustees.

From what I understand, he sent no mail in the first round and had only a small about of support from the unions. Now the unions, especially the fire fighter's union, are coming in big for Haggerty. He may have been sparing some powder in his musket for the run-off election so it wouldn't surprise me if he all of a sudden started hitting mail boxes and doors in this round of elections.

The challenge for Haggerty is can he get voters to vote for him in the areas of the district that don't know him yet. If the election were about qualifications, then Haggerty would've won in the first election without a run-off, but they aren't.

On paper Haggerty would be the easy choice. He was the only candidate that has ever managed a multi-million dollar budget paid for by tax payers. Morgan I believe is on an advisory board for the EPISD bond, but its advisory and doesn't actually touch any money. Haggerty is the only candidate that has secured millions of dollars in infrastructure for the northeast - something the city rep hasn't done - and Morgan hasn't. In an era where people don't trust government Haggerty is the only candidate that has actually made government more transparent.

Morgan is a Green Beret, Special Forces veteran of over 20 years in the Army. The guy has more medals than Patton. A real life Rambo. Very well respected in the veteran community and there are a lot of veterans in the northeast.

Haggerty is a retired fire fighter of over 20 years. So you've got two guys that have made a career of putting their lives on the line for their community both vying to represent the northeast. Frankly, that should make the northeast very proud.

Its not that Morgan isn't qualified, its just that Haggerty is so much more qualified than Morgan. If you listen to Morgan himself, he has said one of his biggest contributions to the Northeast was getting the once-dormant Northeast Democrats started again. At most they have 50 members. And he speaks a lot about a book her wrote on leadership.

That doesn't compare too well with $60 million in upgrades in the Parkland area, new scoreboards at the high school, ensuring teachers got fair pay, passing a bond, and balancing a budget in which YISD was the lowest tax rate entity over most of his tenure at the District.

Where Sam has the advantage is the solidarity of the African-American vote and being known across the district. Haggerty has to get voters across the district to know who he is and he only has a short time to do so, which will require a lot of muscle to get it done.

Morgan's weakness is two-fold. One, its his demeanor. At a time when council has been plagued with personality problems, people who can't get along with one another and city reps that lose their temper, Morgan has already demonstrated that issue. There are reps being investigated for not following the rules when it comes to transparency and Morgan allegedly hasn't followed rules about campaign finances and then didn't want to answer questions about it when asked by the El Paso Times.

His other weakness is field. His field guy is working several other campaigns. You can't afford to have a field person that isn't 100% focused on you when the chips are down like they are in a run-off.

Morgan still has a lot of advantages in this race, but its not in the bag for him like he might believe it is judging by his statements on Election Night.

This race will likely be the closest of them all on election night.

Thursday, May 11, 2017

Saucedo Lands Cager Support

Just a few minutes ago Republican candidate for mayor David Saucedo took this pic with Willie Cager.


I'm expecting a full press conference on this later this afternoon with Saucedo declaring he was the reason they won the championship and then expose a kick-back scandal involving soccer moms running illegal fundraisers from the concession stands at games.

But hey, if everything stays true to form for Saucedo...

The rest of the team will then turn around and endorse Margo.

Oh wait, the current coach of the Miners has already given him money...

Somebody Save Saucedo...

Save him from himself, his advisors, his team, his ego, or whatever it is that made this guy think coming up with an outlandish conspiracy theory was going to be a smart campaign move.

Seriously, even David K doesn't come up with conspiracies this stupid.

Just kidding, he does. Hell it was probably David K's idea. Word on the street is that the two Republicans hang out and make matching tin foil hats at Morris Pittle's Jew Boy Burger joint in Austin.

Anywho, Saucedo makes a stupid claim, can't or won't back it up, and manages to unit basically the entire city council against him.

Exactly how bad did Saucedo screw up? He had the last remaining members of council still under the cloud of the Texas Rangers investigation - and the two members of council most opposed to the border wall and GOP's stance on immigration - Svarzbein and Tolbert, endorse Margo.

So there's a lot to take in with this particular debacle so lets break it down. Saucedo realizes he's gotta do something to change the game now that he is in the run-off. Most rational people would sit down, do election analysis, methodically plan a strategy, perhaps even reach out to other candidates that have won a run-off and talk to them about what they did to win, etc.

Nope, not Team Douchebag. They decide fuck it, lets go on ABC 7 Xtra with absolutely no plan and say some dumb shit to get attention.

He and his campaign team have slowly morphed into the brown Trump and his team - complete with surrogates that say dumb shit like Sean Spicer and Kelly Ann Conway. These are the same genius that never thought it was a good idea to get him to shave that beard, get a haircut, and perhaps ease up on the manteca in his hair.

Saucedo made a series of outlandish claims that disparage the employees of the City of El Paso and then seemed shocked that members of council like Mayor Leeser, Rep Ordaz, Rep Noe, and others came to their defense? It shows how completely sheltered, inexperienced, and out of touch he is.

But it also shows Saucedo is a massive hypocrite. You see all of those people that are in departments that issue permits, conduct inspections, or issue citations - that Saucedo accuses of committing crimes like bribery and extortion - all answer to one man...

City Manager Tommy Gonzalez.

Okay, all the candidates for mayor that want to hold the city manager accountable please take one step forward.

Nope! Not so fast Saucedo...get your over-privileged, blue-blood, born-with-every-advantage ass back in line.

Yeah, for all the conspiracies that Saucedo said has been happening for years ONLY David Saucedo actually went to council to ADVOCATE for Gonzalez's raise. The very guy allegedly allowing this alleged crime spree and Saucedo insults the staff and advocates a raise for their boss.

Trump had a better nonsensical explanation of firing the FBI director than Saucedo's claims.

I think I'm gonna start taking bets on the over-under of when Saucedo's hands start to shrink and he uses the word "bigly".


**************************************


If He Feels That Strongly...

So this is something the media should be asking of Saucedo. If he REALLY feels like Jim Tolbert, Mayor Leeser, Cortney Niland and the rest of the members of council under the Texas Rangers investigation are part of the "cabal" at city council - and he is REALLY that much against the "status quo" ...

Then why does he have his two main campaign consultants still on staff?

Chris Hernandez and Jeremy Jordan are both former city staffers. Hernandez was a staffer for Tolbert until he resigned in order to run Saucedo's campaign and Jeremy Jordan was a staffer for Cortney Niland until he was arrested for a domestic violence incident involving his ex-wife, which was ultimately dismissed.

And Hernandez - in a bit of irony that sounds too comical to be true - is also running ... you guessed it, Jim Tolbert's campaign in addition to running Saucedo's.

It is the height of all things hypocritical to point the finger at people like Ordaz - who unlike Saucedo has solid support in her district winning every precinct in her district in the last election - who actually tried to hold the city manager accountable while Saucedo as advocating for his raise, and calling members of council like Niland and Tolbert a "cabal" and having their staffers as his campaign staff.

One last thing...doesn't Saucedo take issue with the fact that of the three city rep races in a run-off, all of which have a candidate being managed by Saucedo's campaign staffer Chris Hernandez, that two of the three have endorsed Dee Margo? I mean the guy Saucedo is paying to run his campaign is running three other campaigns and two of the three are endorsing Margo?

Ya know with all this talk of loyalty contracts, you'd think the one who really needs one would be The Sauce!

Wednesday, May 10, 2017

Election Analysis: D3

Jaime Barceleau had a huge edge in spending. Big-time lead in money.

And he still came in second.

No matter how you look at it, Barceleau is in trouble. I know, I joked that he wouldn't even make the run-off because I knew he was going to have a hard time getting voters to support him.

Now the choice is between Barceleau and a younger progressive female candidate. Guess who El Pasoans vote for almost always when given the choice?

Barceleau is really in trouble because no one around him has told him he doesn't know shit about campaigning. I heard he had the same problem during the EPISD election in which Jaime is actually proud of the fact that he raised your taxes BIGLY in the bond election. Multiple sources in that campaign told me how much of a pain in the ass he was and how he kept coming up with terrible ideas and tried to be the boss. Eventually he was pushed to the side and was just a titular campaign chair.

Barceleau has to understand that two things matter in a run-off - field and mail. Barceleau creeps people out, so knocking on doors doesn't help, and he has to let someone else do his mail. Its the same old American flag design no one can read, which is good because the last one he sent out had a typo.

They look like junk mail from a furniture company.

Judging by his wife making a very sharp personal attack in the comment section of the debates on KTSM, I'm expecting this part of the race to get down and dirty. And frankly, you could tell for a long time, going back to my post about demeanor and temperament, that Barceleau has wanted to go after Brown and her past.

Its not a matter of IF he does it, its a matter of WHEN he does it. And he's gonna wait to do it until the last minute and its going to come across as desperate on his part.

It'll be the print version of "Nobody asked you sir!"



If I were Brown, I would stick to doing what I'm doing but jumping at any chance to get into a debate with this guy and step on the gas when she does. Turn up the heat a little on Barceleau and watch his anger take over and he will blow up again.

Brown has to focus north of the freeway. She won the valley portion of the district but the area north of the freeway in the Hanks and Eastwood areas of the district she won but by margins that could be dangerous for her if she doesn't go and win a few of them by bigger margins. I'd work his own precinct just to make him play defense in his own back yard too.

You'll Have to Forgive David K...

But he's a huge hypocrite.

David K wrote another piece about me and Susie Byrd.

I get sick of David K implying shit about me - but I get really bothered by it when he's being a massive hypocrite.

I'll get to me in a minute, but lets talk about his comments about Susie Byrd. David K won't admit this in his blog, but he couldn't be more far up Jim's ass if he were a free steak dinner at Ruth's Chris.

So he gets mad when anyone is opposed to Jimbo. He blames Tolbert being in a run-off on Susie Byrd. He says its because she's a campaign goddess and that the Times does her bidding. Why does he say that?

Because David is a crazy. He hath become that what he dreadeth.

First of all, Susie had four Girls Night Out candidates or whatever that PAC is that she runs. Alexsandra Annello, Cassandra Brown, Diana Ramos, and Leila Melendez.

Ramos and Melendez lost and didn't make run-off elections. And hate to pull the rug out of your conspiracy theories there David, but Susie and I were actually head-to-head in that school board race. My guy beat her candidate.

And to blow another hole in DK's little tin foil hat...the Times didn't endorse her candidate in the D4 race. They mentioned two candidates, gave the endorsement to Haggerty and didn't mention her candidate.

So much for control of the Times.

Susie is batting .500 in this election cycle.

David K refuses to admit that the investigation is an issue for voters. Apparently the results of the election don't matter to David, but facts should at least register with the guy. They do matter and you'd know that if you weren't trying to blog about a town you don't live in. DK has become completely detached.

But I will admit that David K at least understands that Byrd doesn't support Tolbert anymore. That is yet another self-inflicted wound that can be added to Steak-gate, Asshole-gate, and Meeting-gate that David will somehow find a way to blame Susie or me for.

And where the hell DK gets his idea that I'm critical of Tolbert because I didn't run his campaign would be funny if it weren't so damn stupid. First of all, I was critical of Tolbert since the start of Steak-gate, which was a really long time ago. Way before all of his other problems. Second of all Chris Hernandez is running his campaign.

I get really sick of David K implying shit on his blog when he's a massive hypocrite. David K writes stuff for the financial benefit of his family business - and then has the nerve to point at other people.

Come on David, everyone knows that is why you write what you write and that you are in the tank for your buddy  Jim Tolbert. I have friends that are politicos too and sometimes they are candidates. You know what the difference is, I have the balls to be critical of them if I think they deserve it and you don't.

So while you're pointing the finger at me - just realize that your boy Jim Tolbert made a picture of your mom and daddy with him as his Facebook cover photo. Seriously, stop being such a massive hypocrite.


Tuesday, May 9, 2017

Temperament & The Run-Off

Now that we are in the run-off I'm interested in seeing how all the candidates that are left deal with the issue of temperament. Normally that is a phrase I only use when speaking about judicial candidates but of the municipal candidates, there is at least one candidate in each race that has issues with temperament.

When you consider the behavior of city council over the last couple of years you'll understand why they are often referred to as dysfunctional. People like Niland, Limon, Noe, and Tolbert haven't helped fix that image much. All the fighting has been bad for the city.

So I think the temperament of the candidates is going to be something voters consider when it comes to the run-off vote. I don't think voters are going to want to send people to council that are drama queens or have issues with their anger.

Lets take a look at the guys with a problem controlling their anger or temperament.

David Saucedo - His volume is always at a 10. He's always angry and it can't figure out why. In addition to his age, bad experience with money, and inability to keep a story straight, its gonna be hard to see how voters look past his presentation. Also, he should've cut that greasy hair and lost the beard a long time ago. Gotta look like a mayor if you want people to envision you as one.

*********************************
Jim Tolbert - Tolbert is the poster boy of emotional candidates. Jim has two speeds - really nice and really fucking angry. All of his self-inflicted wounds have to do with him losing his temper and that is bad on council.

Steakgate - anger. Jim was mad that he didn't get invited for free steak. Probably the most juvenile thing he has been mad about.

Quorumgate - Tolbert expressed being pissed about other players being in the now-infamous meeting when he felt like he did more than others that were included.

Assholegate - The most obvious example of Tolbert losing his temper. How is D2 at all benefited by the emotional outbursts and anger?

*********************************
Jaime Barceleau - He's used to be in charge and not used to working within the confines of a body that questions him because he's been the boss, or in the Army, for most of his career. How can that guy even begin to be a constructive member of a legislative body that a will have some tough conversations coming their way? Just look how he reacts to the slightest bit of criticism:



I know, I know, you guys think I just look for excuses to post this video again.

And you're right, I do. But it does underscore my point about his lack of ability to control his temper. Look how he reacts to a member of the public. What happens when there are difficult and perhaps confrontational conversations at council? Is that demeanor going to benefit District 3?

*********************************
Sam Morgan - I don't know what got into Sam in this election cycle but he's almost a different guy. There has been an edge to him from day one that seemed like it was annoyance at having to campaign against other people for a seat he perceives rightfully belongs to him. It was so notable I actually asked him about his tone after one of the first debates. In that debate he went after Diana Ramos in a really harsh tone. He came across as angry that she was running for the seat.

And then there's the interview with the El Paso Times when they called him and asked him about his campaign finance report appearing to show that he had paid his business rent with campaign money. He hung up on the reporter when they asked him questions about the situation. Well what is he gonna do on behalf of constituents of District 4 in the northeast if he gets a tough question he doesn't like? What does he do if the question comes on the dais and not on the phone where he can hang-up?

These candidates probably want to avoid a candidate forum because now that the races are down to two candidates, how they comport themselves, especially now that the stakes are higher, is going to come out.

Election Analysis: D2

Saturday night's results showed us that the Texas Rangers investigation matters to voters and that judging by Jud Burgess' absolutely terrible performance, that you still can't campaign via Facebook and hope to win.

Incumbent City Rep Jim Tolbert is in a world of trouble and baring some kind of miracle, is going to lose his seat that he won just a short time ago.

Rep Tolbert has taken a huge nosedive in popularity within a very short period of time and it was all self-inflicted wounds. Steakgate, Assholegate, the Texas Ranger investigation - all of those mistakes were avoidable and now you end up with an incumbent in a run-off.

Incumbents in run-off elections lose. Only one - District Attorney Jaime Esparza was able to overcome that trend but he didn't have anywhere near the problems Tolbert is facing. Tolbert not only ended up in a run-off, he went in to the runoff behind. That doesn't matter much - but it does when you're the incumbent.

Annello I don't think even expected to be ahead. If you saw her doing election night coverage, it was from her living room. She wasn't at a party or celebration or anything like that. She was at her place.

In any other election a transplant from the Northeast part of the country with almost no local voting history and very little time in the area loses and loses big. But that is how much of a rejection it has been of Tolbert.

And Tolbert even sent out a piece of negative mail. Granted it was a weird and creepy piece of mail, but it was a negative piece nonetheless. To my knowledge Tolbert wasn't even hit by any of the candidates in the campaign - although I'd expect that to change now that Annello made a run-off and will likely get some cash flow heading in her direction.

Now is the time Annello needs to drop mail that highlights all the negative shit Tolbert has hanging over his head and that should seal the deal for her.

On election night Tolbert was whining about how he had to deal with so much dirty campaigning, which made me chuckle because no one hit him. If anything, everyone else should be complaining that he had his campaign guy posing as a disinterested party tossing softballs to him and attacking other candidates at a forum until Annello boyfriend called him out on it.

Tolbert should stop the narrative that there is nothing to see here with the Texas Rangers investigation and realize that the investigation is looming over his head and voters don't like it. Especially when he tries to hang his defense on the ethics complaint being dismissed. Voters are smarter than you give them credit for.

As much as some people hate to admit it, the investigation matters to voters and the election night results proved it. Thats why such an inferior candidate like Henry Rivera beat Limon.

First it was Lily Limon and now Tolbert will likely be the second victim of the Texas Rangers investigation.

Monday, May 8, 2017

"Data-driven" & Other Saucedo Lies

Saucedo referred to his campaign on election night as "data-driven" and I almost spit out the water I was drinking.

The Saucedo campaign has been modeled after the Trump campaign for those of you who haven't noticed the blatantly obvious. But they are also the biggest producer of fake news of the election cycle.

More on that when I hand out sprinkles later.

There is a saccharine quality about Saucedo that is completely undeniable. He's about as authentic as NFL merchandise at the Bronco or a J-Town boob job.

So the rehearsed and fake confidence at his campaign party on election night wasn't a surprise. I expected it.

But let me show you just how "data-driven" that amateur night shit-show of a campaign really is - on May 3 the campaign put out their newsletter and it proudly proclaimed that according to poll data, Saucedo was "officially in a dead heat".



Lol, no you weren't.



When the first early voting numbers came out, Saucedo was down by nearly 25 points...in a crowded field...in a race with record-low turnout!

On what fucking planet is that a dead-heat? Seriously, the people who counted the crowd at Trump's inauguration are blushing!

They were either lying or they don't know shit about data.

Here's what the data REALLY said:


It said Margo whooped his ass.

Here's another one they told...

On Xtra Saucedo was pissed about not getting the endorsement of the El Paso Times and he and his team had some pretty freaking sour grapes about it. Saucedo himself went so far as to call the endorsement of the El Paso Times the "kiss of death".

There's no way to walk that one back.

Also, its completely wrong. All the candidates they endorsed are in the run-off and in good shape - Annello, Haggerty, and Brown.

So aside from the incredibly dumb campaign move of insulting the daily paper of record, and then being wrong about it, he then takes his hypocrisy to a whole other level.

He goes from calling the paper the "kiss of death" to sending a screenshot of the headline and proudly proclaiming "We did it!"





Did what? Came in 20+ points behind your opponent and you have no money left?

Seriously, who writes that shit? Its getting better than Trump's tweets. And by better I mean more detached from reality.