For months, Stefani Carter has presented herself as an aggressive and competent former prosecutor and has touted her experience in the Collin County DA’s office as a qualification to serve in the Texas Legislature. Once again, Carter’s claims are simply untrue.
Employee records obtained by the Lone Star Project show that Stefani Carter’s performance was so weak that she “Did Not Meet” the minimum standards required by the Collin County DA’s office. While Carter continuously portrays herself as “tough on crime,” she actually convicted criminals in less than 62% of the misdemeanor cases she tried - the minimum threshold for a misdemeanor prosecutor in Collin County. This rate is determined in part by the regional average of convictions in Dallas, Tarrant and Denton counties. She also left her job as a assistant prosecutor after just a year to take a higher paying job.
Garland Mayor Ronald Jones has endorsed Republican challenger Stefani Carter in the election for Texas House District 102 in Dallas County.
The Mayor of Garland then had his own e-mail in responce which he sent to Quorum Report:
“In my role as the Mayor of Garland, I strongly believe it is not appropriate to get involved in partisan campaigns. My job is to advocate for the people of Garland, and not distract our mission with partisan rhetoric. I am not endorsing Stefani Carter in this race as reported in several media outlets, and will not make any endorsement in this, or any other partisan races. I regret that my earlier communication with Ms. Carter has created this distraction.”
And, finally, Rep. Carol Kent's campaign released their statement on this ridiculous lie from Carter:
“This episode is yet another example where Ms. Carter is simply unable to or refuses to get the most basic of facts straight,” said Kent Campaign manager Phil Lovegren. “The fact that she is falsely using the good name of one of our esteemed public officials is not surprising.”
Tension rose when Republican Carter accused the incumbent Kent of a legal, common, and bi-partisan action where legislators use campaign and state allocated funds to defray costs of serving in an elected capacity. Both the Republican and Democratic Chairs of their respective caucuses issued a joint statement defending the action as a legal and common practice to defray costs of serving.
Undoubtedly Republican Carter's bizarre and misleading attacks on Representative Kent are in response to a floundering campaign in which the challenger's own law firm endorsed Representative Carol Kent. How terrible of a campaign must one run if even your own employer won't endorse you? Carter is apparently writing the manual on running such a campaign.
As the final sprint toward November begins Republican Stefani Carter feels gutter politics is the most appealing way to get elected. HD-102 voters stand ready to prove her wrong.
A lesson on how to show you aren't a serious, qualified, or legitimate candidate, have your staff endorse your opponent.
Apparently if you know and work with Stefani Carter, it only makes you want to support Democratic incumbent Carol Kent even more. The Dallas Morning has the blurb here.
Republican Stefani Carter, a lawyer at the Sayles Werbner law firm in Dallas, won't have the support of her bosses in the District 102 House race.
The firm's co-founders, Richard "Dick" Sayles and Mark Werbner, have endorsed Democrat and incumbent Carol Kent for the seat. They have also given Kent campaign donations.
"Carol Kent is one of the most effective voices that North Texans have in Austin," Sayles said in a news release from the Kent campaign.
House District 102 is one of the races the Republican Party says in play. It's not. Carol Kent will be in Austin for a sophomore session. If co-workers won't even stick with you, how are you going to convince voters you are qualified. Carter can't and that's why she is going to lose November.
Candidates and elected officials are held to a higher standard in terms of honesty, integrity, and character. However, an emerging and rather disturbing trend among Texas Republican candidates and elected officials give reason for many voters to question whether possessing those qualities and upholding those standards are an integral part of the GOP candidate vetting process.
Voters are beginning to ask a fair question, which is whether the Republican Party cares about not only vetting candidates that live up to high standards that we as citizens expect of our elected officials, or if the Texas GOP simply takes for granted what power they hold as a Party and suffer from a dual case of incompetence and arrogance about who they are and what they stand for. We have no choice but to presume the latter based on the following evidence:
From a candidate perspective, the challenger to Representative Paula Pierson, Republican Barbara Nash, had serious questions raised about whether she was less than honest to voters about past business affairs nor was she forthcoming about horrendous allegations of elderly abuse at nursing homes managed by companies she and her husband owned. All of this leads one to question the character and integrity of the individual seeking to be a Texas Legislator representing House District 93. If you attempt and hide troubling allegations, attempt and hide questionable business affairs, and potentially falsify state documents in answering questions related to those allegations and business affairs, do you really believe Republican Barbara Nash is capable of being honest with District 93 voters?
Yet another candidate, Stefani Carter, the Republican challenger to Representative Carol Kent, raises questions about her character and integrity when she was caught on tape plagiarizing President Barack Obama's famous 2004 Democratic Convention speech. Republican Carter also embellished on her resume. If Republican Carter isn't original enough to articulate her own viewpoints without copying and pasting, or fails to be honest about her real background and work history, can voters in House District 102 expect Carter to be honest with them?
And finally the character and integrity of Republican Linda Harper-Brown, the State Representative from House District 105, is questioned because she was driving a $55,000 luxury car compliments of a highway contractor headquartered in her district. This contractor, with the help of Republican Harper-Brown, received over $12 million dollars in business with the state of Texas. Republican Harper-Brown is being challenged by Democrat Loretta Haldenwang. Can voters in House District 105 honestly say that Harper-Brown possess the character and integrity they expect from their elected officials?
Enough evidence has come forward to suggest that Republicans care little about the high standards and overall qualities that we as voters expect in candidates and elected officials. The ideas that politicians should be honest, possess integrity, and have moral character worthy of the office they seek or hold, are bedrock principles that Texas voters not only demand, but deserve. So far this election cycle a handful of Republican candidates and elected officials have fallen well short of voter standards.
Democrats keep knocking on Goolsby's door, but he's been a tough nut to crack. This cycle, though, Kent is turning heads with her massive fundraising efforts (almost doubling the contributions amount of Goolsby while spending less than him). Her endorsement in the Dallas Morning News was excellent, too.
Here's the real reason to be hopeful: Democrats perform better in a Presidential year in HD-102 by at least two points (who knows how well they'll do with Obama atop the ticket). If Kent can construct a successful GOTV plan that puts her name ID out there enough, I think she could really ride the Democratic wave this cycle.
The Dallas Morning News released endorsements in 3 of the 11 state house races it plans to cover this cycle. All three this round happen to be for the Democratic candidates.
Carol Kent (D) in HD-102 the challenger to incumbent Rep. Tony Goolsby...
Veteran Rep. Tony Goolsby has served 10 terms in the Texas House. Longevity doesn't equal leadership, however. Mr. Goolsby is known for constituent work and as a reliable conservative vote. But he has had 19 years to break into the ranks of leaders who could boost the fortunes of the region and future of the state. That hasn't taken place.
Ouch.
Rep. Kirk England (D) in HD-106 over his challenger Karen Wiegman.
Incumbent Kirk England gets our nod over challenger Karen Wiegman, chiefly because Mr. England has a more realistic view of school funding and the role of government. Ms. Wiegman offered either unrealistic or purely ideological ideas.
Mr. England, 47, was elected to this seat as a Republican in 2006 and is seeking re-election as a Democrat. He says he changed parties last year because the GOP leadership in Austin "had no tolerance for the values and priorities of the folks I represent."
And Rep. Yvonne Davis (D) in HD-111 over her challenger Homer Fincannon, who was barely mentioned other than owning a pest control service. Now, what other Republican did we once know that was an exterminator...
Dirty tricks and scandal plague another Republican race. No surprise Tony Goolsby's campaign is under intense scrutiny. The good news is Carol Kent isn't going to put up with Goolsby's deceptive campaign tactics.
Carol Kent is calling upon Tony Goolsby to terminate his relationship with his campaign consultant, Rob Allyn and his firm, Allyn & Company, for its pattern of negative campaign tactics.
Last week, Goolsby's campaign encouraged D Magazine, the Dallas Morning News and the Quorum Report to falsely report that the Kent Campaign had run a so-called "push poll," when in fact it had not done so.
In this case, Goolsby flat out lied about the fact Carol Kent has utilized negative campaign tactic. He then forced the press to write an unconfirmed story.
"I am particularly disappointed about this," Kent said, "because I sat face-to-face with Tony and told him we had not done any sort of push-poll." Kent continued, "The state of Texas faces serious issues, and the voters deserve nothing less than a serious discussion of those issues. Any candidate who cannot win an election without the help of discredited dirty-tricks experts is not worthy of the public's trust."
Will Stovall, Kent's campaign manager make it clear that the Kent campaign will not tolerate such "manipulative campaign tactics". In a statement, Stovall said, "It's time for Goolsby to disassociate himself from consultants like Allyn & Company-to start talking about sues that the people of District 102 care about, rather than disseminate lies he's made up about his opponent."
The Goolsby campaign has a long association with Allyn & Company, paying the firm at least $300,000 over the past 5 years.
"Rob Allyn is infamous for manipulative campaign tactics," said Will Stovall, Kent's campaign manager. the is"It's time for Goolsby to disassociate himself from consultants like Allyn & Company-to start talking about sues that the people of District 102 care about, rather than disseminate lies he's made up about his opponent."
The Lone Star Project warns Texans about Tony Goolsby's dirty tricks.
Two years ago, Tony Goolsby set the pace for dirty campaigning by filing an entirely fabricated voter fraud charge against his opponent. He then used the fake charge to launch a series of negative mail and media attacks and kept it up until election day. Goolsby's entire 2006 effort was based on a lie designed to smear his opponent and obscure examination of his own record in office. Both Tony Goolsby and his political consulting team are being sued in State District Court as a result of their unethical activity. More details here and here.
Now Goolsby is in another competitive race against Carol Kent, and now he is reverting back to the Karl Rove playbook.
Goolsby floating false "push polling" rumor
One of the oldest campaign dirty tricks is to accuse an opponent of "push polling" even though no evidence of a push poll exists. The Tony Goolsby Campaign is already falsely accusing his opponent of push polling without ANY evidence. This cynical tactic forces an opponent to prove a negative. Uninformed reporters often bite on the false charge and either report the charge itself as a story or begin demanding proof that a candidate DID NOT push poll. Ironically, it is Tony Goolsby's campaign consultants who have been involved in past push polling efforts.
Goolsby campaign consultants are push poll specialists
It is extraordinarily hypocritical for Tony Goolsby to accuse someone else of push polling. Goolsby's own campaign consultant, Rob Allyn and Associates, has been outed as a regular user of unscrupulous push polling.
Below are newspaper excerpts detailing Allyn's push polling practices.
"Allyn has drawn fire for some campaign tactics that critics have called stealthy and misleading. Strategies such as telephone "poll pushing," a maneuver Allyn's company deployed to push Denton County Judge Jeff Moseley's recent campaign....callers can sound like independent pollsters even though they are promoting candidates and criticizing opponents. " (Fort Worth Star-Telegram, December 15, 1998)
One columnist wrote about the Rob Allyn's push polling:
"I had never heard of push polling because there were no known examples of it in North Central Texas. Until now. Last month, up to 9,000 Denton County voters received calls from Florida, where the callers identified themselves as representatives of American Polling. American Polling was a subcontractor hired by a Dallas political consulting firm ...Rob Allyn, Moseley's Dallas consultant." (Fort Worth Star-Telegram, March 27, 1998)
When Goolsby's consultant, Rob Allyn, was pointedly ask if he would use push polling in another race he said, "I don't know what kind of polling we're going to do." (Fort Worth Star-Telegram, March 27, 1998)
Lone Star Project makes it clear that Goolsby's effort to start rumors about Carol Kent is just the beginning. It is obvious that a series of false negative attacks that will come from Tony Goolsby and his campaign. Goolsby barely won in 2006, and showed his true colors. Now it is time to support Carol Kent. The media needs to ensure that the Kent campaign is not guilty until proven innocent. Goolsby must have to prove his outrageous assertions and he must be held accountable to false claims.
