It has been told to me by a good source that candidate for commission seat District 3, Andy Amoroso, has hired Patriot Games, Inc. political consulting firm to help in his quest to be a Lake Worth city commissioner.
What Patriot Games does, as well as other similar companies involved in political consulting, is remain invisible behind the scenes, transforming the candidate for success. They can take a lackluster campaign and polish it up like a finish on a brand new Toyota. They can take a candidate, virtually unknown, and make him into the most interesting person alive and someone you must vote for if you want the "best for your city." Sometimes they even can fool the best of us.
Patriot Games has had some winners and some losers such as Paula Russell for State Attorney, Molly Douglas for West Palm Beach Mayor and Fercella Davis-Panier, a guidance counselor who lost the 2009 mayor's race in Riviera Beach to Masters in a runoff.
Having a firm sometimes can make all the difference in a winner and a loser. It didn't help Ramiccio in the last campaign. In smaller cities, those who actually come out to vote are fairly familiar with the candidate. No matter how you want to dress them up or fool the public with a professional political campaign coordinator, they still won't smell like a rose.
13 comments:
That's right. Go Jo-Ann Golden even though I am not happy with her either, a clone of the city mgr. You don't vote for taxes when I'm out of a job. It does get down to the me factor sometimes.
I think Andy has a good chance of winning since Joann has turned her back on the majority of the people. She does not respond to our letters, e-mails, or calls, people will not give her the vote, she cannot do that, it is her own fault if she looses. She doesn't seem to be for the common people anymore. Or was she ever?
Anon at 10:46, I think you are right. If she loses, she did it to herself.
And because she has turned her back and not represented the people its time for her to go. Sorry but sometimes you need someone new and regardless if you like or dislike Andy is not the issue. A vote for him is a vote against Golden period.
But what is worse is now that its campaign time she and all the politicians will come out all smiles and huggy huggy and I wonder how many will forget the damage done just because "she seemed so nice" You have to remember the facts and not because someone seemed nice.
It will be interesting to see all the new faces and what they are going to say they stand for including those who are running for re-election.
Golden has always been for the common resident. Now she supports Stanton who is just the opposite. What's going on, Joanne?
Thank you for posting photo. I had no idea who he was.
WHAT DAMAGE DONE???????
I applaud Andy for getting outside help to run a campaign since he has never sought office before. I hope I always remain teachable when I am learning new things.
I hope since the city is in major upheaval now, that this blog might play a more objective role regarding the candidates....at least to the degree of not trying to spread absolute hatred for any of the candidates, as has been done before.
Of course any blog has the right to post their own opinions, but it would be so helpful this time to have this blog be educational about the candidates.
I don't think Amoroso intends to run a smear campaign against JoAnne at all - can't speak for the mayoral race.
Readers are really getting good factual information here regarding numerous issues now - can we keep that going for the elections?
Look, friend, the last campaign was totally objective. You just did not like the factual information that I posted. I am not sitting around here dreaming up stuff. Everything was supported and documented. There was no "hatred" being spread by me. It was the truth, something that you, on the other side of the issue, can not handle and can not tolerate. This election will be decided on the facts. To what degree that I get involved here is yet to be determined.
J. Golden is a class act. Her opponent, who knows.
Lynn, if you think that posting constant images of a candidate, photoshopped as Satan, is being objective, posting derisive comments and photoshopped photos about the candidate's looks is objective...if you won't admit that you went sooo far to the dark side to damage candidates who opposed your gal, Rachel Waterman, then you have a very subjective criteria of what is educational.
Blogging that a candidate is akin to Satan cannot help the public become aware of what is going on.
It is fear mongering plain and simple, in my opinion.
And when you say that you now have trepidation about an unknown candidate...???
Ms Waterman is still that unknown candidate....do you really feel you 'know' her now?
Hi Anonymous--
You don't read my policy.
The only person in the world who doesn't realize that the Lisa thing was satire is you. The only person in the world who would believe that I believed she is Satan must be the candidate herself. Is this Lisa?
I have said before, I am not a candidate. If I were a candidate, I would have kept my election clean as did Waterman and Maxwell.
Bloggers use satire to get a point across. I think I did that during the last election. Newspapers use it all of the time against everyone in politics and bloggers do too. Candidates understand that is part of the territory.
As far as Waterman is concerned, all I know about her at this very moment in time is, she wants to raise taxes and believes that the assessments are fair. The other thing is that she has not reached out to me to undestand my point of view on anything. I'm just another schmo in town or as an old friend of mine once said, another bozo on the bus.
Post a Comment