Elizabeth Pierson has a piece in The Monitor about Sen. Eddie Lucio, Jr. and Eddie Lucio, III along the same lines as an earlier article in Rumbo. It alleges that Sen. Lucio is using strong tactics to get campaign contributors to help the younger Lucio and abstain from supporting other candidates.
On the one hand, it COULD happen. However, it seems illogical that a business person would throw money at one candidate and then turn around and throw money at an opponent. It would make more sense to spread the money vertically than horizontally. By this I mean that if I had spare cash to throw around, which I don't, it would make more sense to support a Senator (especially an incumbent or somebody with good name recognition), a representative, a judge for each court, one candidate for clerk, etc.. Why dump all your money on one race supporting different candidates? If your objective is to buy influence and access to officials, it would make sense to have access at different levels of government rather than just one particular office.
I think this is the resistance that Jim Solis's candidate, David Gonzalez is getting when seeking contributions. If you recall back when George W. Bush ran for Governor, it was a walk in the park for him to raise a crapload of money. For one, he had name recognition because of his shared name with the former President. For the younger Lucio, name recognition can't hurt; and I think contributors realize this. Adding to that, Lucio III has had the good fortune of rubbing elbows with government types since his youth. They know him. They know and have probably supported his dad for years. If I'm going to "invest" in a candidate, I want the money to go where I know I'll get a good result. Therefore, Gonzalez and Solis should not be suprised that contributions aren't coming as easily. They don't have the same brand name that the Lucios do. You have to go with the winners.
On the one hand, it COULD happen. However, it seems illogical that a business person would throw money at one candidate and then turn around and throw money at an opponent. It would make more sense to spread the money vertically than horizontally. By this I mean that if I had spare cash to throw around, which I don't, it would make more sense to support a Senator (especially an incumbent or somebody with good name recognition), a representative, a judge for each court, one candidate for clerk, etc.. Why dump all your money on one race supporting different candidates? If your objective is to buy influence and access to officials, it would make sense to have access at different levels of government rather than just one particular office.
I think this is the resistance that Jim Solis's candidate, David Gonzalez is getting when seeking contributions. If you recall back when George W. Bush ran for Governor, it was a walk in the park for him to raise a crapload of money. For one, he had name recognition because of his shared name with the former President. For the younger Lucio, name recognition can't hurt; and I think contributors realize this. Adding to that, Lucio III has had the good fortune of rubbing elbows with government types since his youth. They know him. They know and have probably supported his dad for years. If I'm going to "invest" in a candidate, I want the money to go where I know I'll get a good result. Therefore, Gonzalez and Solis should not be suprised that contributions aren't coming as easily. They don't have the same brand name that the Lucios do. You have to go with the winners.
Comments