Friday, November 02, 2007

ULSTER DEM LEADERS: BRADLEY CAMPAIGN MATERIAL INACCURATE


Candidate asked to stop using false endorsements


Town of Ulster: Democratic leaders in two Ulster County towns are objecting to false campaign advertising distributed to voters by Conservative and Independence party candidate Vincent Bradley, Jr. The mailer in question states that Bradley is a "registered Democrat" who has the endorsement of the Town of Ulster and Town of Wawarsing Democratic Committees.

"Mr. Bradley's enrollment in the Democratic Party does not take place until January 1, 2008. To advertise that he is a registered Democrat is not accurate. Accuracy and facts are the foundation of the work done by a district attorney," said Karen Markisenis, Chair of the Town of Ulster Democratic Committee and Vice Chair of the Ulster County Democratic Committee.

Markisenis also refutes Bradley's claim about having a current endorsement from the Town of Ulster and Town of Wawarsing Democratic Committees. "He has neither sought nor received our support following his failure to secure the Democratic nomination in June," said Markisenis.


"Bradley's decision to falsely claim that he has been endorsed by our committee demonstrates a significant lack of judgment and integrity. A small minority of our committee members endorsed him prior to the Democratic convention. Obviously, that endorsement has no effect in the general election. Our committee has not and does not support Bradley's campaign," said Markisenis.

Town of Wawarsing Democratic Chair, Sylvia Kalipolites, said: “He has not asked for, and most certainly has not received, our endorsement in this election. The Democratic candidate is Jonathan Sennett. ”

The Democratic leaders demand that Bradley cease claiming their endorsements and distribute no further campaign literature falsely claiming to have received endorsements he has not received.

"Mr. Bradley tried numerous times to gain the Democratic nomination. He did not succeed. Now he is running a campaign that is likely to interfere with the first election of a Democrat as District Attorney since the Great Depression. He seems fond of saying that the District Attorney's office is above politics. Yet, with his participation in the race, that is all that it has been about," said Markisenis.

Markisenis hopes that Democrats will rally around the party's chosen candidate, Jonathan Sennett. "While Bradley has called into question the integrity of others during this campaign, in reality he has his own issues to deal with. I don't see how Democrats can justify backing a conservative candidate who just wants to spoil this election."

26 comments:

Anonymous said...

Since Bradley was endorsed by the town of Ulster Democrats at the town caucus and then at the convention, he lost. What happens to that endorsement? Does the support that was voted at the Town Caucus disappear or was it only good until the County Convention? Anyone really know the answer to this? Did the Town Committee vote to support a candidate at any other time before or after the caucus?

I could give Bradley the benefit of the doubt on this one. No offense to MS. Markisenis intended.

Anonymous said...

Endoresements dont mean crap at this point. Who works harder, who framed the issues, and who gets their support out to vote. Markisenis, Kaliwhaterver...stop all the whining.....that goes for both sides.

Let's just get a good guy in the DA's office and heal the party. The fact is, both of these guys are qualified good attorneys who have a lot offer Ulster County. We should be proud of that as a party. Things have to change or the divide will only widen!

Anonymous said...

Bradley should not get the benefit of the doubt on this. Town endorsements are/were clearly endorsements for the nomination and nothing more. Once the County committee speaks (or the party through a primary), they are clearly no longer operative. All three candidates for the Dem nomination were endorsed by various Town committees, and all three were endorsed by various party leaders. Who cares now? We have one Democratic candidate. If Bradley thought he could get the support of those committees for the general election he could've gone back and asked for it. He knew he couldn't, so he didn't. His literature is misleading and inaccurate - all from a candidate talking about integrity.

Anonymous said...

No one votes to support a county-wide candidate at a town caucus. Town caucuses are held to nomininate candidates for that town. A town's committee can endorse a county-wide candidate prior to the county convention, but the county's endorsement is the only official one. Once the county nominates a candidate, (s)he is the official candidate of the party and requires the support of the committeepeople - it doesn't matter what a few people in a podunk town say to the contrary.

Anonymous said...

Jeremy I read Bradley campaign responded to this accusation. i saw that Nicky Woerner and Elliott Auerbach said that he was endorsed by both their committees and that there was never a vote to take that endorsement from him or give it to anyone else. Woerner said that Markisenis did not have authorization to say such a thing? What the hell is going on in Sennett's campaign I am sure he would of gotten the endorsement is it was revoted, but it was apparently never done! Sennett seems to be stuck on this who is a dem and who isn't crap and it is distracting him.

Anonymous said...

9:09 - You say we have "two good guys"for DA? How can that be when one of them lies and misleads?

And launches a negative campaign -- is that the only way he thinks he can win? To slander and mislead?

Maybe endorsements don't mean crap at this point, but Mistatements do!

Anonymous said...

Bradley is a liar that has the support of traitors to the democratic party. Any town committee that would go against the nominee is certainly not part of the party anymore. These traitors should not be allowed to serve on a committee ever again. To subvert the process to deny UC democrats their chosen nominee is beneath the standards of our citizenry. Kick out the traitors or lose our support. Two years in a row for Wawarsing. Enough is enough. Only democrats should serve on democratic committees.

Anonymous said...

Who gives a damn about party line. I'm a democrat and I support Vince Bradley, Jr. He is the better candidate.

Anonymous said...

9:13 and 9:20 are wrong on this one. While I agree that these endorsements were some time ago, it seems reasonable that a committee that chose Bradley over Sennett and Schreibman in June would do the same in October. If they chose to change their endorsment, it would signal a total lack of credibility of the respective committee!

Anonymous said...

Auerbach and Kaplan are traitors to the democratic party. Last year they opposed Spitzer. Nothing they say should mean a grain of salt. They still support Bradley,because they're not democrats. They work consistantly against the state and national democrats and have no business whatsoever giving out endorsements. When the nominee was chosen they either had the choice of supporting the democrat or leaving the party. They chose to leave. They can't take the town's endorsement with them. They belong to the conservative party now.

Anonymous said...

1:51-you don't give a crap about party line,that's why you're not a democrat. Loyal democrats don't stab their party in the back.

Anonymous said...

9:36 and 2:34 - you are absolutely 100% Wrong on this issue. You don't even understand the issue. Let me help you by putting it in Very Simple terms since your brain is stuck.

1. The purpose of a Town Cmte endorsement is to make a recommendation to the County Cmte at the Caucus.
2. After that, the Party speaks through the COUNTY COMMITTEE for COUNTY-WIDE races.
3. TOWNS can only speak for TOWN races.
4. For Bradley to continue advertising Town endorsements as if they mean anything is FUNDAMENTALLY MISLEADING.

Got it now?

Anonymous said...

Bradley has burned his bridges in Ulster County and in Manhattan by running such a shady race.

Anonymous said...

2:35 - A town doesn't "re-vote" its endorsement if it is contrary to the county committee's decision. A town committee's endorsement (of a county-wide candidate) is rendered meaningless after the county convention (it's actually meaningless before the convention, too - it's like a non-binding resolution). A town could certainly confirm its endorsement if it is in agreement with the county but it's not a nomination so it's pointless. Once the county nominates a candidate, that's the only endorsement that counts. And, by the way, if we should be unlucky enough to have Bratley win, he won't be considered a Democrat; Ulster County will have a Conservative District Attorney which will make us look like we're in a red state like Missouri or Alabama. It's not his enrollment, it's the party that ran the candidate that counts. Also, if Ulster County doesn't deliver Jonathan Sennett to Schumer, Clinton, and Spitzer, that's a huge "f--k you" to them; they're not going to be in too much of a hurry to help us out should we need any grants, economic development, etc.

Anonymous said...

I see the Daily Fuckman supported Carnright.

I cancel subscription now and no longer sell that satanic rag in my gas station.

Wahid

Anonymous said...

You're a piece of work Jeremy. Again, unpublishing posts that make too much sense.

Anonymous said...

to 11:13... The people who begged, borrowed or stole to get those endorsements will be shown to be nothing more than fringe people with big mouths. They will not be listened to again.

Who made the calls for those endorsements again?

Anonymous said...

The so-called town endorsements for bradley were bullshit to begin with. especially kingston, wawrsing and Ulster, where the boys ganged up packed the committees with their boys to force a vote for bradley.

It was sickening because no body wanted bradley. They didn't care what the people wanted. They just wantedwhat they wanted

Anonymous said...

9:05 - No one begs, borrows, or steals endorsements whether it's from a committee, union, or elected official. The candidates articulate their stances (to the committees and unions) and then the endorsers discuss and vote. I can't tell you whether or not they consider who's the front runner (though I know that's why Kingston wanted Bradley - they said he was electable) or who can do what for them. It would all depend upon the group and its mission. As far as elected officials go, they're not going to risk their political career for someone they think is of poor character. Bradley and Sennett (and Schreibman) went to the town and city committees seeking their endorsements - I wouldn't call them "fringe people". As far as getting the elected officials' endorsements, the candidates' campaign managers or pr people send the appropriate material and it is reviewed before agreeing to endorse. Though you scorn that they have to ask for an endorsement, as a poster wrote a few weeks ago, it would be really ballsy for someone to endorse a candidate without being asked. What if someone endorsed you and you didn't want their endorsement because you didn't agree with them? What if you're a liberal Dem and the NRA endorses you? You have to ask for their endorsement, so get it through your dense head.

Anonymous said...

No begging,borrowing, or stealing was involved. It was pure integrity and intellect that got them. A lifetime of service in truth. These people owe their careers to the most ethical supporters they have and and will certainly not pull a "Bradley" on our county. This county is not expected to deliver. Rather,it is expected to push forward against corrupt political machines. They have been identified and will not withstand the scrutiny going forward. The DA race is insignificant to the progress in outing the crooks. Jon will survive,even if he has to wait a little while for an appointment. (He may have to wear that green suit a little longer.)

Anonymous said...

11:13. deliver? What, are we offering first borns to Schummer, Clinton, and Spitzer? What a stupid thing to say. And worse, if the amount of economic aid depends on who the County DA is? What does that say about your dream team.

You're all acting like the County DA is just under the State Governor. The DA DOES NOT MAKE LAW, HE/SHE FOLLOWS POLICY!

Anonymous said...

2:41 - I agree with you that Ulster County shouldn't "deliver" Jon (I don't understand your comment about the DA not making the law - that has nothing to do with the topic). And though it certainly is a poor reason to vote for someone, understand that they (Schumer, Clinton and Spitzer) may take it as a slight if Jon doesn't win. They may not care, either - but if they do, we may not be first in line for any spoils. Ulster County isn't exactly thriving - we could use all the help we can get. Right now Hinchey, Cahill, Bonacic and Larkin aren't doing much to help our fledgling economy. Ulster County is known to be corrupt - if Bratley gets in, stick a fork in us, because we're done.

Anonymous said...

In some states, like New Jersey, the Governor appoints the county District Attorneys. No fan of Joisey here, but maybe they have the right idea?

I'm sure Spitzer would have appointed
someone far more liberal than Sennett.

Jersey Sucks

Anonymous said...

Spitzer would have appointed the smartest person he could find. Since it is scientifically proven that "liberal" equates to intelligent,and "conservative" equates to mentally deficient,the choice would obviously have been a liberal. Jon was the most intelligent candidate, and by scientific study, is the most"liberal." I don't think that the "flat-earthers" are going to be running very well in either party soon. Look for a race to liberalism next year as both parties compete to have the smartest candidates.

Anonymous said...

I don't know if I agree (or disagree, I haven't thought of the pluses or minuses) with a DA appointment, but what about only one term (six years, maybe?) so there is no incentive for them to do any favors while in office? Spada, Sottile, Hinchey, Ward Todd (and anyone with any connection to the jail) want Bratley in so that he can give them a free pass for all their graft and corruption. If the DA knew it wouldn't make a difference because there is no second term, maybe (s)he wouldn't be so quick to either turn a blind eye or, as in Nifong's case, be overzealous with re-election in mind.

Anonymous said...

I feel that as a non party voter, the fact that a local man whos father was a great judge, says aot for a candidate running an independent campaigne for what he personally and professionally belieaves in, his community and taht is what is important here, nothing else. BEB 11/6 1:30 pm