Sore Winner (Pt.1)

First things first. The primary is over and Ron Sandack is the Republican nominee for Representative of District 81. Now we move on to crush any Democrat silly enough to stick their foot in the race, and work hard to elect “other” to the White House in November. Because after the primary we close ranks, right? That’s what Radogno said way back when.

Sandack doesn’t seem to remember what Radogno said way back when. He’s on a winner warpath to conclusively prove nothing more than Debbie Boyle smacked the smug off his face by responding to his initial attack campaign. You heard that right: Debbie Boyle responding to Ron Sandack’s  initial attack campaign.

Set the scene in it’s proper chronology.

February 20th Ron “solicits” comments about Debbie Boyle on his face Book site, and relishes the negative slams by people. All good fun and games unbtil two people question why.

 (Name redacted) “is not the only person posting here who is expressing discomfort with this post, Ron. Just sayin’ that if you are soliciting your friends publicly for input, then maybe you ought to listen carefully to what they are saying.”

Another supporter:

“However, it seems many of those who commented answered the first not the latter. I don’t disagree with your comments at all. I do, however, think the entire post paints you negatively – because name calling is what it resulted in, regardless of the word used.

“And that is a radical shift for you in my experience…”

His response (emphasis mine):

“I am listening, (name redacted), and further responding in fact. Perhaps you do not care for the manner in which I sought people’s impressions? That’s fair and certainly your right, but your takeaway or impressions notwithstanding, I asked what people thought of certain facts. Those facts are as follows: My opponent does not show up to public events, including a joint candidate endorsement interview– which the paper tried to schedule at her convenience. That’s not negative campaigning … rather relevant facts. I did not call her names nor did I ask that others do so. Shining a light on her (non) practices is fair so that people know what is happening (or not happening). Voters can characterize, or determine, what to make of it. Again, serving as a State Rep. is a public job. Not appearing for public vetting opportunities is absolutely fair game… or don’t get in the game.”

Fair enough. Slamming someone repeatedly, at every opportunity, for screwing up and not responding to initial requests for an interview are fair game. No question the Daily Herald and the NACOCPAC/Skarr interviews were total screw-ups. They made multiple requests that were left unanswered. She did not deserve any consideration from them, and she got none. Fair enough that Ron crowed about those. You jump on an opponents mistakes.

And we knew from experience Advocates is superb at the whispering, tweeting, on-line comments smear campaign. It happens every election season, with the believers acting as myrmidons (my new word learned from this election).

Then comes the mailer, making attacks of fact and fantasy. Handlers. Tax and spender. Sued the school district for special treatment. Threatened to sue a second time so she could vote to benefit family members. Her support of Republican planks made her Sandack-lite.

An Advocates playbook writ large.

The handlers is a fantasy slam oft repeated by Sandack. Cicero Dan Proft, Brian Krajewski. Anyone, just a woman being her own boss? Unthinkable. Slam away. That’s fair game every strong woman in politics has to deal with.

Anyone who knows her knows she doesn’t do “Handle”. You don’t run her, you don’t intimidate her. Sean Coughlin found that out the hard way twice at the train station.

And really, relying on angry 99 BOE member Terry Pavesich for the flat out lie that Boyle was threatening to sue a second time time so she could vote on a benefits package for all teachers? Hey Ron, go ahead and post up the records on that one. Because everyone would like to see that pig grow wings and fly.

UPDATE- I was asked to prove Pavesich was the source. Here is the first mention of a threat to sue, made in public, made by Pavesich. Yeh, I taped it.

Ron threatening, and attempting to bully, residents. This is what factual supporting documents look like.

Let’s see the letter or email where she threatened to sue. Put on your big boy pants and let’s see your supporting documents, statements by the candidate, court case proceedings, whatever it is that led you to publicly declare that Debbie Boyle would sue again. You’re repeating a fabrication-no, let’s call that lie out for what it is, a lie, and for repeating it to every household in the district.

Just for the record? I can show you your email letter, the one you wrote resident Laurel Bowen threatening her and a resident who lives on Brookbank with legal action.

The Republican Party as Sandack-lite? That is bold, I’ll give him that.

So Sandack was having a smooth sail, having friends slamming away, sending out his attack piece first, relying on his shills to do the diurty work while he pretended to take the high road.

The only problem with that was Boyle put on her big girl pants, took the gloves off, took the piles of research many people did on Ron, and three days later smacked him back. Hard. Repeatedly. Did he put on his big boy pants? No he stayed in his diapers and cried foul, played the victim card, yet never conclusively disproved a single fact claimed. Not one. How bold.

So says Sandack: “That’s not negative campaigning … rather relevant facts...Shining a light on her (non) practices is fair so that people know what is happening (or not happening).”

He didn’t say squat, so she smacked him again with “Your Choice” Still no reaction, so she smacked him again. He kept playing the victim, and simply ignored who started it all.

And Ron won. I know, hard to tell from the way he’s still complaining, the way he’s now on the attack again in the ‘day after’ articles about his victory. He was a graceless as ever when Boyle called him to congratulate him on his win, first talking smack that she would never call, and then when she did as soon as all the votes were in election night, bitching about her smacking the smug off his face during the campaign.

Hey Ron, your Advocates pals introduced the playbook, you tried to use it without getting your hands dirty, and now you’re whining about getting slapped around. You ran and hid behind every politician, every lobbyist, every PAC, and in the process exposed just how bought you are.

Good luck with your high hopes for higher office, when you’ve shown yourself such a prima dona with such thin skin. A friend relates they got a robocall after the election asking why they voted for Boyle. Her response? “They didn’t have a number for ‘Because I think he’s an asshole’, so I just hung up.”

Many of Sandack’s supporters have expressed confidence he will represent all residents fairly. He might keep that in mind in light of the comments he has made so far, and he might keep it in mind with the impression he’s left more than a few voters.

Does a uniter continue the fight once won?

Put on your big boy pants, Sandack.

As always, don’t expect to have any private email exchanges or conversations.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: