Hypocrisy & The Flying Monkey

I'll make this one quick.

This is one of the most hypocritical things I've ever seen.

The very woman who made people in her shelter beg for cash in the streets has the nerve to say this:

The level of hypocrisy is off the charts.

She should be ashamed.

Now moving on to the Flying Monkey. Speaking of hypocrisy, a guy that has no campaign experience of any kind, lives thousands of miles away, spent zero time at the polls, and can't even vote himself is try to say he knows why Niland won by such a small margin?

Put the Pom-Poms down Fallas Paredes. Perhaps you and the other crazies should take a look around. Dagda lost.

Niland won. She's going to be there another four years. You guys might not want to be writing her political obituary yet.

The political landscape changes dramatically from year to year. Four years is a lifetime. 

Fallas Paredes' analysis is like that of a kindergarten student. He alleges that the fire fighters had nothing to do with Niland winning by such a small margin. Based on what facts?

He also is part of the little Hector Montes echo chamber that wants people to believe it was because of a grassroots effort. I assure you that neither Hector Montes not Fallas Paredes know what a grassroots operation even looks like. Paredes has zero campaign experience and Montes has never won a race.

A third of voters that went to the polls had no voter history. If they had no voter history, how would a campaign even know to touch them? How could they #1 predict they would come out and vote and #2 develop, and them implement a strategy to touch that voter?

The answer is simple if you'd ever been in a campaign before you silly ignorant monkey, you can't.

Niland put the issue on the ballot. The fire fighters were out to get her. How do I know? Because I, unlike Fallas Paredes, was in the field talking to voters. 

So as David K accurately points out, Dagda's fundraising deficit wasn't all that bad when you factor in the fire fighters.

It was a vote against Niland, not for Dagda. There's no way a serious union person ever votes for someone who is saying they are gonna cut taxes because salaries and jobs are the first things cut. 

Niland had no ground game. Zip, zero, nada. She pretty much campaigned by mail, rallies, and forums. 

The reason her colleagues win by huge margins is because each of them had block walking strategies in addition to strategic mail programs. That was the difference.

And frankly, Niland had the candidate that was the most-viable of the opposition candidates despite what others will try to feed you. They all started campaigning at the same time, which is last-minute. None of them had money, except Dagda. He raised the most of the opposition candidates. The only barriers he had was a thick accent, zero policy knowledge (which they worked on because he was a quick study) and the DUI thing. He wasn't seen as crazy or racist like his fellow opposition candidates were. He was the most viable of the opposition.

And she still won.

Was she damaged in the process? Sure she took a few licks and she won't be mayor now, but she still has four years on council and doesn't have to worry about reelection now. Do you really think she's done?