Monica Perez & My New Drinking Game

Sweet baby Jesus this lady invokes the name of Enrique Moreno like old school Republicans used to bring up the Gipper - or like Republitarians bring up Trump. 

She was part of the Eastside Democrats meeting Monday night and in record time drops the name. She's done it from the start of her campaign. Somewhere someone told her that was going to get her support I guess. Moreno is an important figure to the El Paso legal community, did ground breaking stuff and is to be admired. 

But to imply that someone who has passed is somehow supporting her is just tacky and disrespectful to his legacy. Someone had to say it. 

Her excessive use of the tacky name-dropping has inspired me to create a drinking game for the forums coming up during the run-off. I haven't fleshed out the whole thing yet, but I assure you that Run-Off Bingo will include a square that requires someone to chug a White Claw every time Ol' Lupita name drops Enrique Moreno. 

I'm not sure who is running her campaign, but whoever it is needs to take a long look in the mirror. For only having a couple of minutes on the mic, she said some pretty interesting things. Well, read actually. She was very clearly reading (not that there's anything wrong with that). 

So aside from the name dropping - she also was really proud that the guy who came in last place endorsed her for the seat. 

Well no shit. 

Color me shocked! Jk. 

Of course he was going to endorse her - he trashed Baeza in one of the most cowardly attacks on a female candidate that will probably damage his reputation for years to come - he wasn't going to reverse himself and endorse her after all of that. 

But more importantly - lets talk about how stupid of a premise it is that run-off candidates seek the endorsement of the candidates that lost. Longtime readers have heard my rant about this before but its timely so I'll repeat it. 

If the candidate could move people - they'd be in the run-off. The fact that they are on the outside looking in is all the proof you need that they don't move people to vote how the candidate wants them too. Take this premise to its logical conclusion - a candidate couldn't get voters to vote for him but is somehow going to convince the people that did vote for him to vote for someone who beat him? When in the history of elections has that worked?

That shit doesn't happen in presidential elections. You think its going to happen in a judicial race no one gives a shit about? It isn't. 

But more importantly - thats the endorsement you wanna roll out first? And then you adopt his talking points against Baeza? The ones that didn't work the first time? How many times do you have to see something fail before you realize its a bad idea?

I feel like I'm watching the political keystone cops. 

She said something else that made me Ja-Ja-Ja. For the bilingually impaired, thats LOL in Spanish. Ol' Lupita really likes to talk about all her titles likes she's British Royalty or something. I don't hang out in hoity-toity crowds so maybe that means something at the country club, but for those of us regular working stiffs - it doesn't really matter. But every time she speaks it sounds like the litany at the end of the Rosary where she runs through all the organizations that she's a somebody in. 

Noticeably absent from her list of things she's the president of, and in between her telling us how prestigious and exclusive they are - is any mention of anything noteworthy that has happened while she was a somebody at fill-in-the-blank organization. In other words - she talks a lot about her titles - but there's no mention of her leadership.

Included in her litany is the fact that she's the President of the El Paso Bar Association. Every time she mentions it I am legit surprised. 

Why?

Well I'm glad you asked...

It surprises me that she mentions it because despite being the organizations President - they did not support her for this office. The bar poll actually supported...wait for it...her opponent. The El Paso Bar is largely made up of civil lawyers. I guess there is some sort of nerd lawyer beef between criminal and civil lawyers that I'm confident started with use of the Oxford comma and a subscription to BritBox that led to the Bar Association being made up mostly of civil lawyers. 

That being said - if you're a civil lawyer and you're the president of the organization - the group of lawyers one would assume would be the most qualified group of people to distinguish legal acumen - and they don't support you, its a pretty bad sign. 

When you're the president of the organization and the membership support your opponent - after they elected you president - thats more than a chinga quedito. Thats GACHO!

Seriously - Zaaaaaaaaaaaaassssss!

Why in the Saint Vicente Fernandez, su rancho, y Los Tres Portillos would you mention being president of an organization that said your opponent was the better choice?

Okay, end of blog post...time to finish making the Run-Off Bingo Card...