Peter Schorsch
It must have been a lot easier 30 years ago for politicians to pander to separate audiences with contradicting messages and not get caught.
But that’s not easy in 2020 … and that’s a very good thing.
House District 81 candidate Michael Weinstein is learning this the hard way — but it’s a lesson perhaps too late in coming.
In the latest example of questionable ethics, Weinstein wanted it both ways.
He wanted the endorsement of the Palm Beach police union — and he wanted the support of voters who may disagree with the police union.
So, he said one thing in his interview with the union and the very opposite thing in his interview with the South Florida Sun-Sentinel and in talks at Black churches in the district.
It didn’t take long for folks to find out. The union immediately recanted its endorsement of him, and individual voters expressed feeling lied to and used.
Make no mistake: Weinstein lost the union endorsement as much out of concern about his character and apparent willingness to “say anything to get elected” as he did for the specific contradictory statements.
His attempts at winning the police endorsement back are the actions of someone who doesn’t acknowledge mistakes — someone who believes he is smarter than the rest of us; smart enough to write his own rules or talk his way out of trouble.
Sound familiar?
It’s a good thing that people monitor President Donald Trump’s tweets to show how he declares views in direct contradiction to things he has tweeted before — with equal certainty.
And, it’s a good thing that voters are watching more local candidates to make sure they’re not getting swindled into voting for what sounds good but is really nothing more than flimsy pandering.
The truth is, we don’t know what Michael Weinstein really stands for.
What we do know is that, if confronted with tough debates, Weinstein will do his very best to have the cake and eat it, too.
To voters, the choice should be clear: that cake is yours to share. Don’t let a politician eat it.
