I am one member of a five person board. The opinions I express on this forum are mine only, and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the Escambia County Staff, Administrators, Employees, or anyone else associated with Escambia County Florida. I am interested in establishing this blog as a means of additional transparency to the public, outreach to the community, and information dissemination to all who choose to look. Feedback is welcome, but because public participation is equally encouraged, appropriate language and decorum is mandatory.

Sunday, December 4, 2016

Smashing Sour Grapes

It's no secret that failed 2010 Mayoral candidate Diane Mack was in the tank for one of my opponents in my recent campaign for County Commissioner in District 1.  In February, she wrote this piece in the PNJ.  During the campaign over the last 11 months, Diane Mack was a consistent facebook "like" to many of my opponent's posts on her campaign page.  Who cares, though? I didn't, I just went about my campaign doing what I do---campaigning hard and crushing elections.

Didn't matter what Diane Mack said, thought, or did--- I won the primary and general election by a large margin.

Here's the thing-----It really is not about two of my opponents in this last election being male or female--it is about who the voters select.  The voters selected me.  I'm sure Diane is distraught about the national elections as well, where her superstar Hillary Clinton was beaten by Donald Trump---despite Barrack Obama campaigning harder for her than any sitting President in American History ever campaigned for his successor....really embarrassing for him....

But back to local politics...

Just today----- along comes this piece of tripe in today's PNJ by Diane Mack....  Where she takes a shot at me by saying   "In this year in which we witnessed the defeat of a woman who was the most qualified of four candidates for a vacant Escambia County Commission seat (District 1) the community has been given an uncommon opportunity"  Here is what I have to say to Diane about her

meaningless gibberish in today's paper:

Diane Mack: The first sentence to your viewpoint is all wrong.... and also a shot at me and those who supported me in my victory in the recent 16 month campaign for County Commission. That is okay, though, as the voters have spoken loudly in District 1-- I won a victory that was substantial, by nearly a 70%-30% margin (and the highest margin, percentage wise, of any Republican candidate on the ballot this year locally that had a Democratic opponent) I dispatched your candidate in the primary not because your candidate was a woman, but because the voters felt that I was the most qualified candidate and that I was a candidate they knew; I was the most qualified candidate Diane-- a truly objective, detailed, side-by side analysis of my resume, compared to your candidate's resume, would illustrate this to even the most casual observer (e.g. I started and completed my Masters Degree in Public Administration, your candidate didn't finish; I have served a decade as an elected constitutional officer representing District 1, your candidate has not, I live in District 1, your candidate does not, and I could go on but I won't.) Here is the thing, Diane: Your candidate, who is a resident not of district 1-- but of district 2,--also has a residence she shares with her husband in district 4 where she lives part-time. Perhaps you should encourage your candidate to run in district 4 in 2018? Your candidate was defeated in District 2 in 2010, and now she was defeated in District 1 in 2016 (last place in the primary despite your endorsement). Perhaps the third time could be a charm in district 4 in 2018?


Anonymous said...

I think what you have to admit, though, at some level we are operating on many biases Jeff. Some much less so than others, but you have to consider the fact the public as a whole may not have a more educated background to be more aware of the subtle biases that blind you.

I dont think you're unqualified for the position, and heck, I dont even know who qualifications Audra Carter has. But I think more of her point is this: Sometimes we overlook candidates based on the fact that they are a woman, and even more so because they are minorities. We can be completely unaware of it too: yet, I hear people say Hilary Clinton sounds like a man, and we gave heavy weight to that judgement, Michelle Obama is criticized for her strong arms. As a woman, I have to be careful what I say and how I say (or else I am too aggressive), or else I will be perceived as "emotional," I have to take a lot of heat of how I dress, since the public will be evaluating that, and I will no doubt be evaluated for my looks as well. It's those sort of factors that subtly influence our decisions. And by the way, I think Diane Mack may have supported Trump -- I am not sure, she is a Republican and a staunch Republican at that, as far as I can gather.

So, one way or the other, whether those were factors were present or not (I am sure they are to a subtle degree, my personal opinion is that you were able to win, in part, because you just have more clout in the community and people know who you are. You are also outspoken (and dont have to worry too much about it, I do, as a woman -- because I am told it's not "acting like a lady"), and you have controversial ideas and opinions. Despite this all, I do think that if you guys has a bit more of an equal standing in popularity from the beginning, the race would have been a bit more competitive.

Jeff Bergosh said...

I simply think to say that one candidate that lost badly and actually came in dead last-place was "the most qualified candidate in the field" is a shot to the candidate that won---me. More importantly--it isn't true. She (Diane Mack) states this in her first sentence of this garbage viewpoint-- without the disclaimer that she was 100% behind this candidate that lost. Mack was behind this candidate all the way from day 1. It is a sour grapes article, not unlike her sour grapes candidate who lost. I say this because the other two candidates in the race were gracious in defeat and reached out to me to offer congratulations and well wishes after their elimination from the race--whereas Diane Mack's hand-selected, chosen candidate (the one she wrongly espouses as the "most-qualified" candidate in the district 1 Escambia County Commission race) did not concede, did not call after she was beaten. Sour Grapes.

Anonymous said...

I can see why you think that, I have no idea since I wasn't involved. But I think part of her point is to illuminate an important point in politics and life in general: woman are not always rising up to the table, and I mean talented woman who have a desire to make a difference and change the culture. I think it's great they are offering resources and support to women who are interested in running for public office; I just think it will change over time like any other social issue. As more and more woman take on leadership roles, so will (and has) the public's perception of their ability to lead change.