BlogaBarbara

Santa Barbara Politics, Media & Culture

Monday, November 07, 2005

Under the Mud?

Wow -- I've never seen so many people taken to task in one editorial for the woes of the world. Travis names more than a handful of people as the reason for negative campaigning but takes no responsibility for throwing buckets of water over the dirt.

Blum and Williams supporting other candidates is not negative campaigning in and of itself. Backstabbing? They may have felt backstabbed by the candidate in question! -- despite Travis' protestations, she is not without some responsibility here.

I'm personally not a fan of all the consultants mentioned in the editorial. Lindaman for instance should have known better than to email The Slugger at City Hall and seems to take a Machiavellian view towards campaigning. Kyriacos, however, doesn't deserve the hit by Armstrong this morning. The Rev. Horton Heat received endorsements from just about everyone and it is a tough tightrope to walk in a campaign like this.

We also need to remember that they take candidates in a certain direction and it is the candidate themselves that are responsible for pulling them back or keeping them in line. I also don't know if it serves anything for Armstrong to act as if this is a presidential campaign and analyze who is consulting for whom -- isn't that very Sacramento-like of his reporting?

12 Comments:

Anonymous a city watcher said...

Travis's column (and it's interesting how he gets two bites of the apple — what's his editorial if not a personal opinion column?) again gets it wrong.

From what I've seen of past campaigns (and I am not involved this time) the candidate sets out the ideas, the policy, the tone and the consultant, the campaign manager, does the essential grunt work. That's the analysis of precincts, getting volunteers out walking, assisting in fundraising, scheduling the candidate and so forth and so on.

If Falcone loses this election, something that would normally not happen to an incumbent, unless, like Babatunde she doesn't campaign, she can blame — or we can credit — the one-sideness of the News-Press. Their editorials and treatment of letter writers are insulting to the residents of SB.

Maybe we'll or a majority of us will stand up tomorrow and say "Enough already!" and vote down all of their choices, for mayor, council, voting NO!, too, on the propositions. Maybe then the McCaw-Cole-Armstrong group will see that to win supporters or even reading of their ideas, there has to be at least a perceived fairness, rather than personal bile.

11/07/2005 7:09 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bye, bye Bloga Barbara. Your relevance is at an end. How did it work out for you, Nels?

11/07/2005 9:15 AM  
Anonymous First District Streetfighter said...

And the winners from this new, but likely not last, low in the Factswrong missive are:

James Kyriaco... for affirmation in the Travis column that his candidate indeed stayed out of the spat (as if entering a "controversy" is somehow good, except for the apparent preference for entering the side Travis prefers).

Stephanie Langsdorf... not sure for what... for helping a candidate who just may receive more votes than the entranched incumbent Falcone, and for holding a grudge from the Third District Supervisorial election that somehow applies to the Santa Barbara City election this year? (so nice for Factswrong to make allegations of a grudge without even noting about what any grudge is about.)

Jeremy Lindaman... Similarities to Karl Rove is high praise. Rove won elections quite well, as that is the point one should understand. At least Lindaman does it legally, or knows how to find the ambiguities in the process. After this election is done, campaign tactics will be remembered for about 2 weeks, but who actually is elected and their positions on the issues will last for a decade or more.

11/07/2005 9:37 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anyone see that Micky Flacks pulled her endorsement of Iya.

11/07/2005 10:15 AM  
Blogger Sara De la Guerra said...

AGAIN -- we are not going to uncover our identities -- and there are several of us.

Let's concentrate on the issues and not on who is blogging...

Here's a blog on our our readers made -- I promised I'd link to it late last week -- no affiliation at all:

http://thesbreview.blogspot.com/

11/07/2005 10:43 AM  
Blogger David Pritchett said...

that claim in the editorial is hillarious...

Lindaman is Channing's brain!!!!

(you have to know the Rove-Bush brain title to get this)

11/07/2005 11:42 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Lindaman is no ones brain. He took a cannot lose campaign and made it a mess. He took what should have been a high point for the slugger or slug and made it a low point.

An this is nothing new. He got so beaten in the third district also based on his lack of ablility and ugly nature. Lost in the third getting into a runoff with four candidates - sort of never happens. Same problem as with the slug - he got into the weeds, got dirty and focused on all the wrong things.

As much as I dispise Karl Rove - it is an insult to Rove to compare Lindaman. Lindaman will be the fall of the progressive side of the community as he tears us apart for his own gain. He created a race so he could get paid and has made the slugger or slug powerless and useless in what should be a great end to her carrer.

11/07/2005 12:21 PM  
Anonymous First District Streetfighter said...

hmmm... I thought Lindaman and Buttney lost in Third District Supervisor race because Firestone outspent them three-fold, with hideous negative attack ads against Buttney designed by Davies.

If the third candidate in that 3rd District Supervisor race was not a well-known criminal, and the fourth candidate was even memorable, then Firestone getting less than 50% would have been likely instead of "sort of never happens", especially if Buttney camp even had half the funds that casino-backed Firestone did.

11/07/2005 12:29 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The more one reads that Factswrong editorial rant today, the funnier it gets. Somehow Kyriaco has a problem for Roger Horton not picking sides in the purported vendetta, and thus losing votes by pretending that an actual conflict exists.

Stephanie Langsdorf has a grudge, but against whom and about what? (Brooks Firestone is not involved in city elections)

And Jeremy is now a local Karl Rove, paid as a percentage and skimming off the top like Joni Gray alleges the Girl Scouts do (if you do not get that one, you soon will in the daily newspaper tomorrow or via web now).

Just like the editorial rant yesterday criticized Grant House because he HAS support of The Mayor, now Jeremy Lindaman is criticized because he is as shrewd in local politics as Rove is in national politics, which somehow is supposed to be an insult. Somehow I doubt Karl Lindaman will convince the County Elections office to remove polling booths in the Golden Triangle precincts, thereby discouraging pro-Channing voters to give up on their long wait to vote, as happened in Ohio in Nov.2004 presidential election.

With enemies like Travis Factswrong, one does not need need friends.

11/07/2005 12:32 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Humm Iya Falcone takes a bunch of dirty money from Bill Levy, gets endorsements from Micky Flacks and the Sierra Club pulled, and you are still fixated on Blum not endorsing Falcone saying she is the cause of all this supposed "nastiness"? Blum just saw how bad Falcone was early on, now that everyone else is seeing it too Falcone's side is trying to blame Blum and the "evil" Lindaman for her loss of support. Oh and didn't Firestone and his buddy Davies out spend Lindaman in the 3rd district by 5 to 1. What a coincidence I wonder how similar that will be to what Falcone will outspend Channing by this time around.

11/07/2005 12:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Iya lost the Sierra Club? Link....? Proof???????

11/07/2005 6:06 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Lindaman lost the third district because he wasted time making false and proven wrong statements just as "First District" has here and blew it for all of us in the county.

Instead of the heavy north tilt we would have John Buttney in the third after having to run the third from the back seat for Marshall. He would have been awesome.

But instead of getting the vote out in Isla Vista to stop Firestone into a run off - Lindaman wasted his time on in fighting and signs in IV. If he had done as others had in IV getting another 10 to 20% turn out Firestone would not have acheived 50% and Buttney would have beaten him in the runoff.

Thanks to amature hour and too much pride, Lindaman made Buttney into a fool. Sound like what he has done to Marty? Same bad deal.

If Lindaman is Marty's brain she sits on it at each council meeting.

11/08/2005 12:18 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home