Author Archives: Michael Froomkin

This morning I got another robocall.  I picked up the phone, said “hello” and there was silence. “Hello? Hello!” As a result of all the helloing, I missed the first few words of the call in which the speaker on the scratchy tape identified himself as Somebody Something former Mayor of Something. But whoever he was, his recorded voice asked me to vote for Sanabria because he understands budgets and good public policy. It closed appropriately, identifying itself as a call paid and approved by the campaign for Gonzalo Sanabria.

[Late evening update: I came home to find a message on the answering machine left around 7:30pm from “Victoria,” a real live human who was calling to encourage me to vote for Sanabria.  I don’t know what it is about his phone lines or his volunteers, but what she was saying was really hard to make out on the tape (sounded cheerful, though).  I’d start to worry it was my phone, or maybe my hearing, except the other messages were fine.]

This afternoon’s mail brought three mailers:
Continue reading →

Below I offer an account of the debate among the three candidates for Mayor in Coral Gables held on Tuesday at the Cosford Cinema. Yesterday I posted Coral Gables Candidate Debate: Part 1 – Commission Group 4 and Group 5 (Updated). Since then there has been writing about the debate elsewhere, notably George Volsky’s dyspeptic but not unfair critique of the format in the Coral Gables Gazette, Chamber’s Election ‘Forum’ A Bust. Candidates were limited to tiny short answers about complex subjects, were not actually allowed to engage each other (thus, it’s not really a ‘debate’ at all), and the questions were somewhat limited in range.

Before the debate I had not been paying as much attention to the Mayor’s race as to the Commission Group 4. One reason was that, as I have written before, I think the incumbent, Don Slesnick, has done an OK job. (I know many others disagree, but that’s how I feel.) So I went in willing to be persuaded someone else was better, but not feeling that I had to have a change. I was willing to listen to challengers James Cason and Thomas Korge, but I was feeling skeptical. For all its faults, which were numerous, I thought the debate told me something useful about each of the three candidates. I left leaning fairly strongly towards one of them.
Continue reading →