The Miami Herald editorial board — not the world’s most utterly reliable source, but one worth considering — endorses Tom Korge for Mayor saying his “experience on key city boards coupled with his vision for change offer a winning mix.” This is slightly surprising since the don’t-rock-the-boat Herald usually has a strong pro-incumbent bias. Bodes well for Korge.
In Group 5 they endorse Kerdyk, no surprise, see above on incumbents.
In Group 4, they say this:
In the packed field to replace 20-year veteran Commissioner Wayne “Chip’’ Withers, three of the seven candidates stand out: insurance salesman Rene Alvarez, lawyer Frank Quesada and clothing businessman Brad Rosenblatt. Each offers energy and imaginative ideas, but Mr. Alvarez is our pick.
I was starting to thinking I’d end up Quesada, but maybe it’s time to take a more careful look at Alvarez too. It’s interesting too that they don’t put Sanabria in their front rank.
Lets play a little. How about this scene:
The Herald’s endorsement for Mayor, publicly, Tom Korge, in reality, Slezsnick, however, by publicly endorsing Korge, Heral aims at having votes for Cason, the real contender, funneled to Korge instead, thereby giving Slezsnick the win.
The Herald’s endorsement for Commissioners in group 4, publicly, Alvarez, in reality, Brad Rosenblatt, by publicly endorsing Alvarez, Herald aims at having the votes for Sanabria, funneled to Alvarez, therefore giving Rosenblatt the win.
Honestly, I don’t think they are either that smart or that Machiavellian. Besides, if you were going to endorse an Hispanic candidate to block Sanabria on the strange theory that this helps Rosenblatt, why would it be one who has raised next to no money, instead of Quesada, who is anyway sounding pretty conservative and thus at least as likely to appeal to Sanabria’s vote as Alvarez? (Plus if you were for Sleznick-Kerdyk, Quesada has to look good, since he used to work for Kerdyk — which is one reason some have doubts about him.)
Simply put, to split the votes, been done for ages and ages. The math is simple, if you endorse a possible winner not your chosen candidate, your candidate may not win. If, on the contrary you endorse a candidate that was an unknown and would not have gotten many votes, he may, by your endorsement take away votes from both of the other candidates that constitute a real threat to Rosenblatt. It has nothing to do with a hispanic vote, it has to do with splitting the votes that might have gone to one candidate so he does not pose a threat to your candidate.
Same in the mayoral race, steer votes away from the candidate that posed the threat to your chosen candidate.
Splitting the vote is neither machiavellian nor anything new.
The real Machavellian move was “planting” Alvarez into this race by the Rosenblatt camp in order to split the Hispanic vote. Note the following: 1) Alvarez registered for this race on the last day possible, 2) Alvarez works at the office of a prominent Rosenblatt supporter, 3) he has not conducted any fundraising nor any campaigning, 4) his name is the first on the ballot. And, now, he receives the Herald’s endorsement – the plan is working out perfectly.
That Alvarez was a plant was obvious from the start, but the plan is not working perfectly, the Herald may have endorsed him to help their chosen one , but, the voters can see right through it.
Its obvious and I agree Herald too embarrassed to directly endorse Rosenblatt so they are doing a backdoor move of splitting Hispanic vote by endorsing a plant as they know poll numbers show Sanabria leading
Where they gave themselves away was not even mentioning Sanabria. Gables people know the score and Herald endorsed another “Alvarez”? Thats not working folks. Nice try Herald
If Sanabria is winning why has the FOP continued to attack Brad Rosenblatt?
Because his background and lies are not worthy of being a candidate. Nothing to do with Sanabria.
There are enough conspiracy theories floating around on this blog right now that one could be convinced this is a tea party based blog.