Monday, May 11, 2015

 
ROMAN PEREZ, "I CAN RUN FOR OFFICE, BUT NOT FROM MY REPUTATION."
 
I had no comment on an election night article concerning Rick Longoria's seat and whether or not Michael Gonzalez would back Roman Perez because the one person who was not interviewed is the one person's who opinion mattered most - Michael Gonzalez.  And beyond that I am not going to trust anything Roman Perez says.  But if in fact he lied about having Michael Gonzalez endorsement even before all of the ballots were counted, Roman Perez hung himself by admitting he is for sale to Abraham Galonsky and Tony Martinez.   Roman Perez has no morals or loyalty.
 
From Tuesday official Herald "Perez said on election night that Gonzalez would support him in the runoff, but that assessment appeared premature Monday when Gonzalez said he would wait for provisional ballots to be processed before making a decision on a recount."
 
Let's assume Perez did not outright lie and that Gonzalez suddenly realizing the provisional ballots could change things changed his mind, Perez basically told all of his supporters he was going to take money and help from Abraham Galonsky - you know the same Galonsky who wants Lincoln Park sold - the same Galonsky who sold a building to the city for $2.3 million dollars, while failing to inform the city commission his attorney was Tony Martinez's business partner.  Wasn't part of Roman Perez's agenda to end the Galonsky deals?  But now by his own admission, he is ready to work with Galonsky's boy Michael Gonzalez.
 
Saturday's night story made no sense to me because I know enough to know Galonsky will fund a recount if Michael can get within 1 or 2 votes.  This is why the BV did not comment on the bizarre story.
 
So the question to Roman Perez is, did you lie to Herald about Michael Gonzalez?  Did you lie to your supporters when you said you were against Abraham Galonsky, but then with a blink of an eye stated you would work with his machine to get elected?
 
Is you name even Roman Perez?
 
 
ALL IN WITH RICK LONGORIA AND OUT WITH PAT
 
I  said from the beginning, we either had to beat Tony Martinez outright, or at least make him a lame duck.  The numbers are not there - Pat Ahumada cannot win and every penny given to him only makes it easier for Tony to maintain his majority. 
 
All I can say about Cesar de Leon is, no one knows - for every person who has called me to tell me he will keep his original promises about ending the back door deals with Galonsky and save Lincoln Park, others call me to say he is a snake in the grass.  He wants a political future, so smart money has him as a swing vote - which hopefully means saving Lincoln Park and ending the real estate deals with Tony.  This does not mean he cannot vote with Tony on other issues.  In a perfect world I would love to have de Leon and Portillo as swing votes.  So for now I am giving Cesar de Leon a Honeymoon - we shall see how he votes and performs, before we decide.  It is not that he cannot vote with Tony, because Tony may be right sometimes.  But on Lincoln Park and the real estate deals, they have to end.
 
NO IFS AND OR BUTS, MICHAEL GONZALEZ WAS FUNDED IN LARGE MEASURE BY ABRAHAM GALONSKY
 
ROMAN PEREZ BY HIS OWN WORDS SAID HE IS OKAY ALIGNING WITH MICHAEL GONZALEZ WHICH MEANS ACCEPTING GALONSKY'S MONEY AND TONY MARTINEZ'S POLITICAL MACHINE
 
Given the two above realities, there is no choice, Rick Longoria is going to need every penny and every block walker he can get.  Every penny anyone gives to Pat Ahumada instead of to Rick Longoria will only make it easier for Tony Martinez to maintain a solid majority.  Tony Martinez and Abraham Galonsky are going to hit Rick hard whether it is Roman or Michael. 
 
Our best hope at this moment to make Tony Martinez basically a lame  duck mayor is to back Rick Longoria 100%.  Pat Ahumada based on the numbers has zero chance of winning.  There is only so much money.  If you have it to give and want to stop Tony, give it to Rick Longoria.  If you can block walk - message his campaign and block walk for him. 
 
This is the final line in the battle - we either make Tony Martinez basically a lame duck mayor [there will be times he will get a majority - but not always] or we turn over the city to Tony without anyone being able to stop him.
 
Roman Perez can lie all he wants, but it was Roman himself who said he  is ready to work with Abraham Galonsky's money and Tony Martinez's political machine, by accepting Michael Gonzalez's help..  Now it may have been a lie about having Michael Gonzalez support, but we need to hold him to it. 

9 comments:

Pat 4 Mayor said...

Look at the numbers, a resounding 56 percent voted against Tony and his policies. Tony won two out of 19 precincts and not by much. Your analysis is also not taking into consideration the 2000 missing votes that did not make it to the polls because of Mother's day, reshuffling of precincts and the voter identification requirement.

Anonymous said...

Wow what a lame suggestion..give money to rick but keep Tony..wow..ridiculous.
Tony got 3400 votes. ..hes not getting anymore. ..pat got over 1400. If pat can pick up the other candidates vites, which he already is, and get some of the 2000 people that didnt vote out to vote he has a chance.
To say he has a ZERO chance is stupid.
If you recall he beat cowen and zavaleta, both political machines who had all the elite behind them, many endorsements, very well known, big bucks
And Pat was just a shrimper and a nobody,so never say never Bobby.

BobbyWC said...

You think posting two comments back to back at 1:05 in the morning my readers are not going to realize you are the same person?

REALITY CHECK

Castro after Pat has the next largest biggest set of votes - Castro will not endorse Pat - Castro's voters will not be motivated to go out and vote - Pat was being Pat and had Castro removed from Galonsky's barbecue - so now the score will be settled. Two petty assholes screwing Brownsville together.

Sanchez trashed Pat day in and day out - do you really think Sanchez's handful of supporters are going to forget that Sanchez trashed Pat day in and day out?

Brenda and William's voters voted for them - their numbers are too small to make a difference.

They have no motivation to turn out.

Jessica's district will have a small turnout now that she is not on the ballot.

Where you get this missing 2000 voters no one knows - making up a number in your head does not make it so.

What did Mothers day on Sunday have to do with an election on Saturday plus all of the days of early voting?

Pat will be Pat and be selfish. Our last line of defense is to make Tony into a lame duck mayor and we do that by electing Rick Longoria.

There is only so much money. If Rick loses Tony has complete control.

Pat cannot see that stopping Tony is the key to protecting Brownsville - like Castro he did not run for Brownsville he ran for himself and now refuses to do the right thing to help Brownville.

As to previous elections Pat did not have the reputation he has now - people do not like him - the second I would try and convince people to vote for him they would go off on me.

I do not care what the jury said - people believe he intentionally stole that check. They see him as someone who cannot get along with others. They see him playing games over the 8 Liners - he knew Saenz under the feds was closing them down and he kept his going thinking he could not be touched. This is what people tell me.

Tony will take the run-off with about 65% of the vote. His machine will turn out - Pat's is too small to make a difference and none of the other candidates have a machine to help Pat. Castro will not lift a finger for Pat without a promise of something real big.

So lets do our best to make Tony Martinez a lame duck mayor by putting 100% of all available resources into Rick Longoria.

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

Your analysis is also not taking into consideration the 2000 missing votes that did not make it to the polls because of Mother's day, reshuffling of precincts and the voter identification requirement.

Whoa, Anon. You polled 2,000 non-voters in 2 days' time to reach that conclusion? KUDOS. So THAT'S why those folks stayed home and sat on their hands? And only 2,000? Why not 4,000? 6,000?

Seriously: Drop the disenfranchised voter narrative, already. More didn't vote, because more simply don't care. And more of those that DO care voted for the incumbent than anyone else.

And they'll lather, rinse, repeat in June. Just come to grips with it already, William Wallace. You've been irrevocably cut.

Anonymous said...

In a city of an estimated 400,000 thousand, Brownsville has a ton of voters. Mark my words: getting people to vote will happen. People are tired of Tony, but thought Pat had no chance, so they didn't even bother voting. Now that they see it's possible, they will come out in numbers. It's not coincidence several groups are coming out to support Pat. So negative. That's the kind of attitude that doesn't help advance our city.

BobbyWC said...

Stopping Tony is how we advance the city and our best chance is making him a lame duck - we do that by insuring Rick Longoria is reelected.

Really how many times are you going to publish your made up number of 400,000 before you realize everyone knows you are wrong.

It's called google - try it - Brownsville is in the 200,000 number.

And since you said it now come back and list the organizations endorsing Pat.

If you are 100% off about the population of Brownsville every single time why would anyone believe you have a clue about how many people will vote

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

(God, why does one even bother?)

MATH, son.

The county has an estimated 400,000; not the city. But don't mind me, dream on.

Anonymous said...

Do you not know what a "lame duck" is? I have noticed you have used the term incorrectly several times. Here is what Webster thinks it means "an official (especially the president) in the final period of office, after the election of a successor."

BobbyWC said...

At a substantive level it means someone who is in office, and has no power - yes it is commonly used for a second term president - but people understand it to mean at a substantive level someone who holds office without any meaningful power

Bobby WC