During heated campaigns, candidates make all kinds of assertions. Some of these comments are true. Some are not. It is incumbent upon the candidate to be savvy enough to know the difference between a comment ( if untrue) he can get away with and one that will come back to bite him.
A candidate can say, "My opponent is a liar." Nothing usually happens. A candidate can say, "Since my opponent called me a RINO, I have received overwhelming support." Nothing usually happens. BUT, when a candidate gets very specific with questionable assertions, he may create a problem for himself. This kind of comment MAY have unintended consequences. Case in point:
In the County Council District 3 race, the newly organized group called 'The RINO Hunters' got actively involved. The group's stated mission is to educate the public as to which candidate in the various races is deemed a "true Conservatives" and which is not. They initiated their local efforts during the District 3 race. The group concluded the challenger was the "true Conservative". But, because of past affiliation with the more Liberal party and his recent voting record which sided with the Liberal Democrats on Council, the group labeled the professed "Republican" incumbent, Bob Call, as a RINO (Republican In Name Only).
When the press asked Mr. Call what effect the RINO signs was having on his campaign, the gist of his reply was, 'I'm not worried about the RINO signs. As a matter of fact, "since they went up, I have received five thousand dollars in campaign contributions"'. This is one of those potentially problematic situations referred to earlier.
All candidates in all races are obliged by law to file financial reports to the Ethics Commission on an established schedule, declaring all contributions and expenditures of their campaigns. Mr. Call did not declare this supposed 5 thousand dollars in donations on any of his financial statements to the Ethics Commission. This fact leaves this incumbent in a conundrum. Was his statement to the press untrue or was his financial statement to the Ethics Commission untrue? Logic dictates it has to be one or the other.
It seems the Ethics Commission agrees. There is a hearing scheduled in November to get to the bottom of this situation. It will be very interesting to hear Mr. Call's explanation.
NOTE:
Mr. Call may have problems on yet another front. There are rumblings that not all of those responsible for oversight of legal proceedings are entirely satisfied that protocol was followed concerning Mr. Call's court challenge after he lost the election. Since this issue is still being officially investigated, we will save that story for a later date.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
I am waiting more on: "Did DD actually approach one Election Commission, personally, about getting the winner of the Republican Primary decertified, only to be told it was none of his business?
Did DD usurp the authority of the BC Election Commission by having someone in his administration hire an attorney for that defendant?"
In my opinion you are the ray of sunshine breaking through the cloud that sometimes hangs over the county like swamp gas. It's a shame the local news media don't seem to read your blog.
Uh, yes and yes.
With what has happened over the past couple of weeks, maybe more clouds will dissipate and, as the old Spiral Staircase hit song lyrics say, "we can see clearly now the... is gone"! Perhaps we can really say the corruption is gone!
I think local elections should be non-partisan.
Partisan or non-partisan makes no difference. Telling the truth and making informed decisions on behalf of ALL Berkeley County citizens should be what matters! Unfortunately, some Councilmen are there to please soley Mr. Dan Davis!
I MUST comment to your anonymous reply about non-partisan local elections... they are an abomination that SHOULD be stopped if at all possible... non-partisan elections is why Joe Riley will be the mayor of Charleston until he DIES or QUITS whichever comes first... NO WAY a FIELD of challengers will EVER beat him... same for Keith Summey in North Charleston... he will be mayor till he DIES or quits.... why FOOLISH people think this is a GOOD way to run a city or county is beyond me.. at LEAST with a partisan election, the opposition party can nominate 1 person to challenge the incumbent and they'll have a CHANCE of winning... but when the election is a FREE for ALL the incumbent WINS EVERY SINGLE TIME!!!
Post a Comment