"[Michael] Wukela claimed he doesn’t look at his paychecks to see where the money’s coming from." -- Eva Moore, on conflicting answers to the question of who is paying the mayor's spokesman
Big last-minute donations, a negative mailer, political advice from McMaster's political director -- these eleventh-hour strategies are a change from the indie-insurgent campaign Grant Robertson seemed to be running.
Mass mailings have not been part of Grant Robertson and Aaron Johnson's shared campaign thus far; they've stuck more with rock show fundraisers and Facebook notes, soliciting small donations and campaigning on a DIY platform of creative, open government and fiscal responsibility. But this weekend, 10,000 local households got a flyer in the mail from Grant Robertson.
And although this mailer isn't as slick as those from the likes of Finlay, Benjamin, Powell and Mizzell, it has a more traditional polish than the rest of the Aaron/Grant campaign to date.
It's targeted at Tameika Isaac Devine, the at-large city council incumbent Robertson is running against. It hits her on ethics and support for public safety, saying she has "wasted our tax dollars, sunk us into debt, and cut critical services." It mentions the disallowed city-administered loan that Devine's mother had to pay back, a HUD loan that went to buy a building that houses Devine's law firm. It mentions the TIF districts and efficiency study Devine pushed through council.
I was curious. How much did this cost? Whose mailing list did they use? And given their shoestring campaign budget, how did they pay for it?
I emailed Aaron/Grant campaign manager Rachel Thomason, who wrote back “The cost was $2500 if I'm not mistaken and that included the list.”
Now, as of March 15, his last filing with the State Ethics Commission, Robertson had raised $1,211 since December and spent $909, leaving him with just over $300 to work with. That was three weeks ago.
Robertson also has a commercial running on WACH, the local Fox affiliate -- another significant expense.
So I called Robertson to ask about the recent fundraising and new mailing.
Robertson said he has taken in some much bigger donations in the last few weeks -- “a bunch of $100 donations,” he says, in addition to the take from a few recent fundraising events. Previously, most of Robertson's donations were in the $5 range.
“Alex Postic's law firm helped us out a lot,” Robertson said. In addition to donating money himself, Postic helped recruit other donors.
I also asked Robertson about the mailing list, which he said comprised 10,000 names. Did they buy or borrow it from a political consultant or another campaign? Did his campaign put it together themselves?
He was reluctant to answer, dodging the question several times.
Finally, he said “My brother-in-law kind of helped us out a lot.”
Robertson's brother-in-law is Anthony Quattrone, the political director for Attorney General Henry McMaster's campaign for governor, and a veteran of political firms and groups including Richard Quinn & Associates and Americans for Limited Government.
Got that? Robertson's mailing list -- and campaign advice -- came from McMaster's political director.
Robertson was uncomfortable talking about it, he said, because of the family connection -- even though he knew the information would come out anyway. Candidates have to file another ethics report after the election with a final list of contributions and campaign spending.
Most city election watchers I've talked to say Robertson is unlikely to win. Robertson himself agrees with that assessment. But in the last days before the election, it appears he’s trying out some more traditional political strategies.
This seems like a pretty negatively worded article that's really just saying, "Grant is doing some orthodox things that every other campaign is doing and has always done." Even with an extra couple thousand dollars, his campaign is still ultralightweight compared to Tameika Devine's $30,000 in funds, and his donations still all came from private individuals.
Is it really surprising that there are a lot of people who want Tameika Devine out of her seat after all of the ethical transgressions she's committed? And it's not as if the flyer is mud-slinging. It's pointing out facts. If she doesn't want those facts pointed out, she shouldn't have committed the acts in the first place.
It would be nice if the Free Times and other media outlets were this hard-hitting about some of the more well funded candidates.
Aaron Johnson
April 5th 02:18pm
Aaron, I agree that Eva's post is basically saying, "Grant is doing some orthodox things that every other campaign is doing and has always done." And personally, I don't see any problem in Grant changing his tactics. In fact, one of my questions would be why he waited this long to take advantage of the anti-incumbent sentiment.
In the background, however, is the ethos that has underpinned both your campaign and Grant's -- the idea that these are different kinds of campaigns, representing a different way of doing politics. People expecting a different kind of politics might be surprised to see Grant's campaign getting involved with Henry McMaster's political director.
Personally, I am neither surprised nor offended that a campaign that started out with an outsider ethic is, at the end, adopting a more traditional tactic. But some people might be.
Dan
April 5th 03:03pm
Dan, I want to take issue with that last statement: "I am neither surprised nor offended that a campaign that started out with an outsider ethic is, at the end, adopting a more traditional tactic. But some people might be."
I think that attitude is a journalistic crutch that is used far too often in the media. Journalists speculate that a particular interpretation of a particular situation might - might - offend someone, and then build an entire story around that premise.
Then there is usually a follow-up story in which sources are recruited by the journalist to buy into the original premise and express some type of outrage and/or offense. The recruited sources usually have something to gain socially or politically. Then those responses from those biased sources are used as justification for doing the story in the first place.
At its base, however, is a journalist making a negative insinuation about someone, then using the power of the press to justify the insinuation. It is a totally warped interpretation of the media's watchdog role. And journalists wonder why they are held in such low esteem by the public.
sacbuoy
April 5th 04:04pm
It is important to point out that the city races are non-partisan affairs, and more importantly, that the Aaron and Grant campaign has attracted a wide base of supporters, some of whom may support Republican candidates in other, partisan races. The veiled insult from Eva is that because Grant's brother-in-law is a part of the Henry McMaster campaign, that somehow Aaron and Grant are some sort of tea-bagging conservatives, and thats BAD BAD BAD.
One of the cornerstones of the Aaron Grant campaign was chucking out all the partisan, racial, and ideological nonsense that clutters up what is essentially meat and potato issues. A balanced budget, end to ethical lapses, and reinvestment in basic services. We don't need the nonsense of Cayce municipal elections where people, with straight faces, talk about partisan chicanery that has nothing to do with running a city. Maybe, just maybe, if we stopped constantly try to guilt by association people for their political support or opinions, we would actually start focusing on issues and not letting elected officials whip us into a frenzy against each other.
Sean S
April 5th 04:15pm
"I am neither surprised nor offended that a campaign that started out with an outsider ethic is, at the end, adopting a more traditional tactic. But some people might be."
- Dan
Well...I was both surprised and offended.
Corey
April 5th 04:46pm
Anyone who is surpriised or offended by this article should give Grant a call. He is eminantly accessible and can be reached at his business phone number, 771-2732. Or email him at grant@fstopcamerashop.com
Talk to him. He will listen and respond and perhaps you will see that this has been blown out of proportion.
Aaron Johnson
April 5th 05:19pm
OHHHHHHHHH! Snap! Grant used a list of voters that is pretty much accessible to anyone.
I like that only three Free Times writers think this is a story.
You guys should just call it a day and tweet your baseless accusations.
Your blog has about as much integrity as your newspaper.
I really enjoyed the payoff Free Times received from the Tameika Isaac Devine campaign in quarter page advertisements the past few issues.
I am sure that has nothing to do with this hack job.
The true irony is that not only will you censor this comment but Free Times is the one getting a direct financial benefit from political insiders.
Grant is running a campaign and getting information out there. Free Times should start running a newspaper that does the same and shut down this pathetic attempt at a blog.
Samantha
April 5th 08:17pm
Just have to say this article does start out extremely negative. It wouldn't have been a big deal if there was real coverage of their campaign before (seemed like it'd be up Free Times alley), but there wasn't, so it kind of seems ridiculous to start giving Grant attention now. Seeing how nothing close to an article of this length was given to how they ran their campaign, I don't really understand the shock reaction article about how Grant is trying to close the gap between Tameika and himself.
Obviously I'm a big supporter of the Aaron and Grant campaign so let's get that out of the way (rock a zine I endorsed them in).
I love Eva & Corey, and may have met Dan at some point, not sure (all three are writers for The Free Times, Dan being the editor). Just feel like it's a gang up on Grant and want to say I'm happily surprised and have no idea why anybody would be offended (really, are you seriously offended Corey?) to have a candidate raise $2,500 (tiny in this election) to compete with a $30,000 ($20,000?, don't remember) campaign.
This is our future and when there is a race where we can make Columbia better this might be one. Is Grant evil for doing this, hell effin' no. I've known him since we lived in a dormitory at USC and I think anybody in this race and anybody in the public would have done the same thing and I don't think any of his morals were harmed doing so.
I almost ran for mayor because this city needs a major shake-up. I didn't because I would have run a joke campaign on Soviet propaganda posters and socialism (you would have had every right to ignore me). They didn't at all and raised awareness for everyone on our city's real issues.
It just seems the Free Times would be more supportive of them (I know The State is on it's way out but y'all are still the alternative media) from the beginning (not an endorsement, just real coverage) and not just give them some coverage once Grant got some major donations besides my $25 and others of similar amounts. Elections happen only every four years and this blog post is fleeting and mos' def' this blog post comment is. This was an exciting election and I feel nobody really covered it (especially The State, which is kind of their job).
You want the creative "so called" class? Don't squander it. This is real.
I was disappointed in the media. Life goes on. But it makes you think.
Hardy Childers
Hardy Childers
April 6th 05:07am
I have been disgusted with Ms. Devine and her performance at City Council for some time now. She has become increasingly more arrogant, as if her place on Council was divined by God. Needless to say, I was thrilled when I received Robertson's dm piece in the mail.
I was very disappointed that Ms. Devine did not have more opposition to her seat. I had planned to only cast my vote for Mayor (Finlay) and leave the At-Large seat blank; however, after seeing the card, I was glad to see that Robertson might actually be serious about running. Everything in the mailer was absolutely true and needed to be said again and again.
I don't know how everyone else feels, but I hope Robertson manages to pull off an UPSET! That would certainly shake up City Council.
Beverly
April 6th 02:41pm
The only thing I see wrong with the article is the lack of critical coverage of Ms. Devine. Grant (whom I support), like every person running for public office, opens himself up to the critical eye of the media. It's the media's job to make things like this known to the public so that we can make informed decisions. Who else are we supposed to get this kind of information from, the candidates? When writers and editors hold back information or don't pursue these stories then it is the public that ultimately suffers.
Tommy Hart
April 6th 04:55pm
This is all from a food reviewer who doesn't like Chic-Fil-A. Consider the source.
This Just In Posts
