Character and a County Court

I've written very little about the race for County Court at Law #3 because quite frankly, it hasn't been very exciting, even for normally boring judicial races. 

The candidates aren't even very exciting. They are pretty stiff-necked and seem mostly conservative in their demeanor. None of them seem like they are putting lamp shades on their heads, shotgunning beers, or cranking up Metallica to maximum volume. 

They probably drink their coffee black. 

I'm positive they have an app to track how much water they drink every day. 

They probably think mayonnaise is a spice. 

I'll bet they order a salad as an entree on "date night", and they probably actually schedule "date nights". 

In general, they are probably the people most likely to say they don't watch television and actually mean it. I'm pretty sure all of them have golfed and their playlists on their phones is classical, unless they are feeling wild and frisky and then they might pepper in some Yacht Rock. 

Oh, and they probably hated the halftime show because none of them every heard of Snoop D-O- Double G, the Chronic Album, and have no idea what Mary J Blige means when she says lets get it crunk...

Nothing like the dumpster fire of the 327th. 

But alas - controversy has finally struck that race. 

For those of you that can't keep track of who is running in which race - I don't blame you, its hard to remember even for Yours Truly. The candidates for this race are Jorge Rivas, Monica Lupita Perez, and Melissa Baeza. 

First let me tell you about Rivas. He's the one candidate I personally know in that field and he's truly one of the nicest guys you'll ever meet. Really, really, really genuinely nice guys. 

Army veteran. 

Family man. 

Acts brother. 

Which is why for the life of me, I can't understand why he let his campaign team of Eddie Holguin and Lily Limón of Sun Circle, talk him into one of the ugliest attack pieces I've seen in recent memory. 

Its just not who he is as a person. 

Its definitely who Eddie and Lily are based on their campaign tactics over the last couple of years- but its not who Jorge is as a man. 

The mailer was ugly. 

And by ugly, I mean in its design and its tone. 

It was about her voting record. Baeza voted in the Republican Primary in 2016, aka the Trump election. She'd voted Democratic before and Democratic after. 

Of course she was going to get hit on that issue at some point. I'm surprised it didn't come up sooner but I think I know why it didn't. I'll get back to that in a minute.

I've seen the campaign fog of war change people. I've seen candidates do things they normally wouldn't do when they get caught up in the heat of a campaign. But that's where character and integrity come in. Especially if you're someone wanting to be a judge. 

Trust me - I love a good negative mailer. They are effective - as much as every tries to pretend they "don't like that kind of politics". But as I have said many a time - there is a big, and obvious difference, between negative and flat-out dirty. 

So as I said earlier, its not a surprise that she got hit on the issue. I don't fault him for hitting her on it - she absolutely should answer for it. I'd hit her on it too if I were her opposition.

But it was the WAY it was done. 

Nowhere on the mailer was there any indication of where the mailer was coming from. It wasn't like there was a negative side about Baeza and a positive side about Rivas. If there had been, it would have been an effective attack on her, showing him as the alternative. 

Instead, it was negative on both sides with no indication where it was coming from except the fine print. The fine print was the required legal disclaimer indicating who paid for the political advertisement. 

Nowhere on that mailer does it say Jorge Rivas' name on it. 

Why? 

Well to me it looks like he wanted to do the attack, but didn't want his name attached to it - but you know who's name IS on the mailer?

His wife - who is the treasurer for his campaign. Also an attorney at a prominent firm here in El Paso. 

I mean how sexist is an attack on a woman - executed by a man - but he doesn't put his name on it, it only bares the name of his wife?

By any standard - thats pretty freakin' bad. And nameless attack pieces ALWAYS look shady to voters. Because the first thing they wonder is - where is this coming from? The second thing is - why isn't their name on it? 

The answers to both of those questions are either they are embarrassed to be associated with the attack or they fear the blow back. 

Either one makes voters think the sender has something to hide. 

Again, this isn't the action of the Jorge Rivas I knew. 

I don't know if he fully considered the consequences of sending out a mailer like that. First, the potential backlash of sending an attack piece against a woman, but not being man enough to put your own name on it. Second, voters will probably wonder if someone is willing to go to the lengths of having a nameless attack piece is someone that should be wearing a robe in wielding a gavel. 

He probably also didn't consider that she'd punch back. 

And she did. 

It was at basically the last campaign forum of the season which was hosted by the Northeast Democrats. I do my best to attend candidate forums in the Northeast because they never disappoint. Something interesting always happens and this year was no different. 

Here's a clip of Baeza punching back at Rivas. 

My favorite part is the end. She sorta mic drops and sits down because it was her closing statement and she was the last candidate. The other two candidates didn't know what to do after she sat down. They just sorta sat up there for a quick beat. Rivas was wanting to somehow explain his way out of it - which I personally would've loved to hear - but he had used all his time and left shortly after. 

If you didn't click the video you'll notice Baeza enumerate the Democratic history before the election and after the election. Something she mentioned a week earlier with the Eastside Dems. 

Quick sidebar: I have other video clips from the event but I'll be honest - my video is mostly trash. I haven't been to an in-person forum in a couple of years, and I was late so I didn't get a good spot to capture video. So in all the videos you'll see people go in and out of view because I'm an idiot and picked the worst possible place to shoot from. I'm rusty, its been awhile. 

Anywho - lets get back to the premise of the mailer. Obviously he was talked into doing the mailer by his campaign team. But talk about an ironic attack source. Eddie likes to use the voting record as a litmus test for candidates when he can, but does Eddie think we forgot who he is? His long time campaign advisor was a Republican - and then got worse - and became a Libertarian. That was the voice in Eddie's political head while he was in a policy-making position. He governed like a Republican. His closest paid political adviser was a Republican. Thats a fact. So it always strikes me funny that Eddie tries to throw voting records around. 

Now let me circle back to why I think it was sent out. I'll bet they ran a poll (Eddie loves to run polls) and it came back showing Rivas is behind. Thats the only think that would motivate an otherwise really nice guy to do an attack piece of this nature. Last minute attack pieces are always a sign of desperation. 

Desperate people do desperate things. 

I guess Rivas didn't think through one of the lines on his attack piece that I actually agree with considering his team of consultants that talked him into sending the mail piece. 

Dime con quien andas y te dire quien eres.