Aside from slick campaign mailers, A-List Democratic support and her husband's money, do we know really know her? By Nicholas Terry
You know what really grinds my gears? Misleading campaign material. One particular candidate’s campaign and story, are just that…a political fairytale.
Is this all the rage these days or are people just getting sloppy? Is the sloppy work just misleading and are people getting wiser or is the Internet a foe to candidates?
I wrote previously about the expensive mailer Alameda County Supervisor candidate Nadia Lockyer mailed out and how that doesn’t give any candidate creditability. It just proves (as we learned later) that they have BIG BUCKS. Today, I received a fourth piece of mail (I also received a standard mailer with big name support and another asking me to consider Mrs. Lockyer), this time with more pictures.
Something stood out…the locations of the pictures and the key calling out where they were taken.
Picture number one is of Nadia with two young females, looking at a computer; the caption is ‘Nadia, working with staff.’ What kind of staff? Campaign Staff? Because that looks like her A Street campaign headquarters. That’s fine if it’s campaign staff, but say so, otherwise it leads you to believe otherwise. I drove by just to make sure the blue awnings in the reflection are on A Street.
Next is picture number two, Nadia and three unnamed community members and the caption reads ‘A community education event in Union City.’ This looks like a picture outside of Starbucks on one of her first campaign precinct walks (at least it looked familiar with some on her official Facebook page). Again, no big deal if that WAS not a community education event, but, again, it’s misleading. I didn’t think those types of things were held at Starbucks. And if it WAS a campaign event, this is the first time I’ve heard them called “community education event.” Saul Alinsky missed out on that term.
Number three looks legit, we’re told Nadia is ‘reviewing a domestic violence issue…’ she’s an attorney and member of the State Bar since 1997. But this came into play once before and make it appear as she is personally handling a domestic violence case/trial. I may have to eat crow, but I don’t mind saying, “is that REALLY what’s she’s doing in that picture?”
In picture number four (don’t worry only one more) she’s pointing at a map of southern Alameda county and is ‘training interns for community education.’ By that, does she mean, pointing out which areas to hit with campaign materials? After all, she’s wearing the same outfit as picture one and the same two young “interns” are in the picture. I have a serious problem with using the “community education” as a synonym for “campaigning.”
And last, the only picture I CAN’T argue with, is number five. It’s of a younger Nadia Lockyer, President of the Santa Ana Unified School District Board of Education, who “led efforts to increase college attendance, reduce teen pregnancy rates (that’s a parents job by the way) and improve collaboration between schools and local government.” Since the picture has the SAUSD seal on it, I’ll just refrain from speaking out. Besides repeating the sentiment that it’s not a schools responsibility to teach abstinence. Or manners. Or diets.
The cover page is of Nadia flipping through a copy of West’s California Reporter (law book), and perhaps saying something. The caption includes “ONLY ONE has direct experience working as a county manager inside county government.” I’ll say this, she is the ONLY candidate with a campaign headquarters that displays a JERRY BROWN 2010 poster, while boasting the support of a (former) Republican politician. One could argue she appeals to both sides, but I’d be content in arguing that she’s playing one side.
The continuing problem is the manipulation of words and facts. Mrs. Lockyer’s campaign is not the only one doing so this year. However, Nadia’s is on-going and money is being used to promote her “experience.” Even though a small amount of money has been raised privately and the bulk of it is from her husbands war chest; I’ve always found it ridiculous that that’s even legal or ethical. I mean, on the surface, she IS the perfect candidate; she has known A-list politicians since her youth, she is married to the state Treasurer (and former Top Cop of California), she’s endorsed by the Vice Mayor of Union City, Assemblywoman Hayashi, Hayward Councilman Bill Quirk, a ton of other organization and people outside of her district and of course, the ghost endorsement of state Sen. Corbett.
But in reality, when we look at the fine print, when we stop and take a minute to take away the slick ads, glossy flyers, heavy endorsements, campaign headquarters and spouses own campaign funds, we see an outsider who has decided to run for office (not that she isn’t dedicated) but because someone’s or some group has figured the stars seem to be aligned in her favor. And that maybe she is the ideal, if not perfect candidate for the job.
When we look at the facts and not the printed marketing material or hyped up excuses and spin, and when we consider the opponents, only then do we learn that the one with the biggest bank account and connections, isn’t the truest of them all.
Nicholas Terry is a Hayward resident and former candidate for the 18th Assembly District.