Geller Claims He Is Leading Comfortably
BY BUDDY NEVINS
The battle of the South Broward polls continues.
Former Senate Minority Leader Steve Geller claimed today he holds a big lead in the South Broward race for county commission over opponent, incumbent Commissioner Sue Gunzburger.
Steve Geller
The key poll question was: “If the election for County Commissioner were held today, who would you vote for if the candidates were Steve Geller and Sue Gunzburger.
In answer to that question, Geller received 44% of the vote, while Gunzburger received only 32%. The undecided/refused to answer voters totaled only 24%.
An earlier poll by Gunzbrger showed her with a 47%to 33% lead after voters were asked questions about Geller’s background. The question was only asked after voters were supplied information about Geller’s and Gunzburger’s background.
Such an “informed” poll tells voters the information they will eventually receive from campaign advertising. Thus, it is a more accurate portrayal of how the campaign will eventually play out, said Ron Gunzburger, the commissioner’s son and campaign manager.
Geller’s campaign argues that an “uninformed head-to-head question is more accurate. Their reasoning is that Gunzburger’s poll was stacked because of all the negative information it provided about Geller.
Independent political scientists I talked to at the University of Florida backed Geller’s contention that the “uniformed” head-to-head question was more valid. They called the Gunzburger poll a slanted “push” poll.
Geller also cites numerous political experts in his news release who agree with him, including Jim Kane, the noted Broward-based pollster and Browardbeat.com contributor. Kane confirmed to me Geller’s comments about Gunzburger’s poll.
But Gunzburger says he has political experts who agree with his position on how polls should be conducted.
Hmmmmm.
All this proves is that politics is not a science.
The truth is that neither campaign released the actual poll and the questions…just select portions of it.
One other observation: I had to break up most of the dense paragraphs on the following Geller news release, otherwise your eyes would have glazed over.
So, don’t blame me. They wrote it.
Here it is:
Geller Announces Poll Results:
Every Legitimate Poll shows Geller with Double Digit Lead
(Hollywood) – Former Senate Democratic Leader Senator Steve Geller continues to maintain a double digit lead over his opponent in his campaign for Broward County Commission, Seat 6. The results of the latest poll were released today.
The poll was conducted by Jim Kitchens of The Kitchens Group, which has done polling for hundreds of politicians across the Country, including over 40 members of Congress. Telephone calls were made between March 3, 2010, and March 10, 2010.
In the all important head to head question “If the election for County Commissioner were held today, who would you vote for if the candidates were Steve Geller and Sue Gunzburger, Geller received 44% of the vote, while Gunzburger received only 32%. The undecided/refused to answer voters totaled only 24%.
Geller enjoys:
1) a 10 point lead in name recognition (79% for Geller, 69% for Gunzburger),
2) a higher combined Very Favorable and Favorable response (60 % combined favorable for Geller, 51% combined favorable for Gunzburger) and
3) Geller receives substantially higher Very Favorable responses, while Gunzburger receives substantially higher Very Unfavorable responses.
The significance of the Very Favorable or Very unfavorable is that these strong positions are almost certain not to change. Geller’s numbers were the highest of any candidate on the survey.
There have now been 4 polls taken in this race over the last 28 months. Two were taken by Kitchens, an independent poll not connected with either candidate was taken by prominent local pollster Jim Kane (for Browardbeat.com), and one poll was taken by the Gunzburger campaign.
The three that have revealed their response to the “who would you vote for if the election were held today question all show Geller with a 12-16 point lead.
Gunzburger has declined to reveal that number in her poll, but standard polling analysis of the raw data in that poll, which shows Geller with an 11 point lead in name recognition and an 11 point lead in favorable ratings, shows that Geller has a double digit lead in that poll as well.
One of the most important issues in this poll is how close Geller is to reaching a majority of the vote. Historically, undecided voters typically split in about the same percentages as the other voters, meaning that Geller should receive the majority of the vote from voters that are currently undecided.
“Geller needs only 6% out of the 24% undecided to reach 50%, while his opponent needs 18%. It is statistically highly unlikely that his opponent would receive 75% of the undecided vote, said Kitchens.
A review of the crosstabs in the poll shows Geller leading his opponent in all three cities in the district (Hollywood, Hallandale, and Pembroke Pines), in all age groups, and among single family homeowners, renters, and condominium residents. Geller also leads among both men and women.
“I am very humbled and gratified that the constituents that I represented for so many years prior to my retirement from the Legislature have such high regard for my service to the community, said Geller.
“The poll results show that whatever negative campaign the Gunzburger campaign is planning will not be able to sway the voters that have known of Steve’s record of achievement for the residents of South Broward, said Gunzburger campaign manager David Brown.
“We expected that the Gunzburger campaign would run a negative campaign after she reported last spring that one of her first major expenditures was $10,000 on an Opposition Research firm with slogans such as ‘No Mudslinging. Unless, of course, you’re into that’, and ‘It’s a dirty job. We’d love to do it.’, continued Brown.
The poll also showed that the majority (61%) of the voters rated the job performance of the Broward County Commission as “only fair or “poor, while only 23% rated the performance as “excellent or “good.
When asked the question “regardless of whether or not Sue Gunzburger has done a good job, it is time to give someone new a chance to serve on the County Commission, 58% of the voters agreed with that statement, while only 34% disagreed.
Positive and negative statements were asked about both candidates.
Positive statements about Geller received higher positive ratings than did positive statements about Gunzburger.
Negative statements about Gunzburger received worse negative ratings than did negative statements about Geller.
“This shows that when the voters are given the facts about both candidates, Geller’s already substantial lead should increase, said Kitchens.
The Gunzburger campaign has embarked on a campaign of disinformation, attempting to disguise the fact that they are behind by double digits in all polls.
“When I heard that my opponent was in the field taking a poll, I spoke about this with one of the prominent local political bloggers. I told him that I was confident that my opponent’s poll would show that she is behind by double digits, and that her campaign would not release the actual head to head numbers. I also told him that since my opponent could not show being so far behind in every single poll and remain as a credible candidate, that her campaign would instead use an “informed poll, where questions would be asked that guaranteed that she would look like the stronger candidate. That blogger confirmed in his blog that I said this to him before her poll results were released“said Geller.
The Gunzburger campaign has argued that her “informed poll (which some people have termed either a “push poll or a “disinformed poll) is a better predictor of the outcome of the election than asking who is ahead today.
Virtually all major political polls that are released for major offices, and covered by the media ask the question “who would you vote for if the election were held today?, and not the “informed poll relied on by the Gunzburger campaign.
“Trying to argue that the Gunzburger poll’s informed ballot in any way mirrors reality is totally wrong, said Kitchens. “’Informed test ballots’ are not true simulations of campaigns.
“In real campaigns, when candidates are attacked, the voter judges the credibility of the messenger, and the person being attacked may counter in a credible way. This is not taken into account in the Gunzburger poll. The ‘informed test ballot’ assumes that they know what Geller’s responses will be, as well as knowing which issues the Geller campaign may choose to attack Gunzburger on. Obviously incorrect.
“Most importantly, an ‘informed test ballot’ only works at all where both candidates are relatively unknown. In this case, voters already have strong impressions of both candidates that will not easily change. Those people that already have a Very Favorable and, to a lesser degree, a Favorable reaction to Geller will simply not react to a smear campaign about him in the way that the Gunzburger poll assumes. The numbers reflected in the Gunzburger poll assumes that they will run a smear campaign against Geller and Geller will simply sit by and let it happen an unlikely scenario, continued Kitchens.
“The argument that the ‘informed test ballot’ gives a truer picture of reality than the standard question of ‘who would you vote for if the election were held today?’ is simply wrong. What is interesting about this exchange is that it is now clear that the Gunzburger campaign plans to run a smear campaign against Geller. Why is it that she believes that she cannot run on her own record after 28 consecutive years in office? added Kitchens.
“The Gunzburger campaign has declined to provide the ‘informed test ballot’ question used, so that people can decide if the question was in any way fair. Providing the poll results to this type of question without providing the wording of the question is considered unethical by pollsters, and violates the standards of the American Association of Public Opinion Research, concluded Kitchens.
“In an effort to try to stay viable, the Gunzburger campaign has tried to confuse the issue by making it appear that this is a battle of competing polls, with each poll being legitimate, and leaving it up to the pundits and voters to determine which poll is accurate, said Brown.
“That is simply not the case here. Don’t decide based on the statements of either campaign. Look to what the independent third parties say about this. Virtually all agree with us, said Brown.
The independent blogger (Browardbeat.com) mentioned earlier showed the Gunzburger poll to a group of political scientists at the University of Florida. None of the political scientists were in any way involved in this Broward County race.
According to the blogger “All the UF political scientists and graduate students I consulted with who included some of the leading political scientists in the state disagree with the conclusions of Gunzburger’s pollster.
Based on the news release and memo from the pollster that was released, the UF political scientists contend that the news release and the pollster’s memo is biased. They say that Gunzburger’s lead was generated because the slanted questions asked about Geller seemed to outweigh those asked about Gunzburger. All said the contention that Gunzburger was leading Geller 47% to 33% was ‘questionable’.
Two political scientists said that the key figure was that Steve Geller had 69% positive ratings, while Gunzburger had only 57%…. If the election were held today, it appears that Geller would easily win, according to a top UF political scientist
“It is wrong to assume that all positions from all campaigns are equally valid, said Brown. “If the Gunzburger campaign produced a document saying ‘the Earth is flat’ and the Geller campaign responded ‘No, the Earth is Round’, it would be unfair for the media to simply report “Gunzburger campaign claims Earth flat, denied by Geller campaign’.
“We invite the media and other neutral interested parties to check on their own. Contact Jim Kane, Broward’s own local top pollster. Contact Sergio Bendixen, an internationally known pollster located right here in Miami. Contact Professor Kevin Hill, of Florida International University. Contact Professor Stephen Craig, Chair of the Political Science Department at the University of Florida.
“None of those people are connected to the Geller campaign, yet we believe that all will confirm that the Gunzburger Press Release claiming a lead over Geller is at least inaccurate and possibly deceptive.
“Contact the Political Science Department of the University of Miami, FIU, FAU, UF, UCF, FSU, or Quinnipiac University (known for its’ polling), show them the Gunzburger press release and this one, and we’re confident that they will all tell you the same thing: Geller is well ahead in the polls, and the ‘informed poll’ used by the Gunzburger campaign is slanted, inaccurate, biased, or worse, concluded Brown.
For additional questions or comments, please contact David Brown at 954-927-2388, or Senator Steve Geller, at his Law Office, 954-491-1120
April 2nd, 2010 at 12:25 pm
It’s obvious Geller is winning, according to the information you have provided, Buddy….and thank you, lord, for that!!
Gunzburger answers to one boss, that is Bernie Friedman and Becker Poliakoff. We can do better, much better.
April 2nd, 2010 at 12:26 pm
Steve Geller is right. A poll is not accurate when you smear one of the candidates first and then ask voters who they would pick. Right from the start I believed Geller was the right choice based on his service in Tallahassee. Now I know my choice was right.
April 2nd, 2010 at 12:41 pm
Steve Geller took money from ponzi fraud criminals, crooked lawyer Scott Rothstein and Mutual Benefits insurance scam president Joel Steinger.
I dare you to vote for him now.
April 2nd, 2010 at 1:53 pm
Let me respond to a few points which David Brown raised:
1. “The Gunzburger campaign has declined to provide the ‘informed test ballot’ question used, so that people can decide if the question was in any way fair.”
You should know, David, that I personally read Buddy Nevins our entire poll script, question by question, several weeks ago. Buddy knows every question asked in our poll, the positive and negative questions, on both candidates. He knows it was a truly balanced, fair and complete survey.
2. “Positive and negative statements were asked about both candidates. … Negative statements about Gunzburger received worse negative ratings than did negative statements about Geller.”
That would be because — and Geller directly acknowledged this in a phone conversation with Buddy a little over two weeks ago — Geller refused to ask about two of his worst negatives in this poll he paid for. Thus, it is true the Geller negatives he tested were not that bad … because he left the bad ones out! Hmmm.
Geller refused to include any questions about his ties to the billion dollar Mutual Benefits ponzi scheme and the Scott Rothstein ponzi scheme. Combined, Geller took over $70,000 from individuals and entities tied to these criminal scams. Geller held even went so far as to give Scott Rothstein a gift, proclaiming Rothstein as Geller’s personal superhero. That’s why New Times called Geller “the central nexus” between the Mutual Benefits and Rothstein ponzi schemes.
Source: http://blogs.browardpalmbeach.com/pulp/2009/11/scott_rothstein_vs_joel_steing.php
In fact, Geller didn’t want people in his poll to know anything about his sordid ties to Mutual Benefits. and the Mafia-connected felon who ran it. But you can read all about it here:
http://blogs.browardpalmbeach.com/pulp/2009/04/steve_geller_joel_steinger_mutual_benefits_campaign_contributions.php
and here
http://blogs.browardpalmbeach.com/pulp/2009/08/charlie_crist_joel_steinger_mendelsohn.php
(just to list two of many articles).
Of course, Geller’s poll also didn’t tell people that Geller voted for the so-called “scarlet letter” legislation which would have required women to print an ad in the newspaper listing all of their sexual partners, if the woman wanted to place a child up for adoption. What a disgraceful anti-woman and anti-privacy stance by Geller!
And, while we’re on the subject of Geller’s sorry record, what about the $600,000+ per year he earned as a lobbyist for developers and special interests … and the same time he was collecting a salary as one of our State Senators.
Source: Sun-Sentinel, 10/7/09 (“Steve Geller, former Democratic leader of the state Senate, defends the [status quo] system. While in the Legislature he lobbied for high-rises along the coast, making as much as $648,000 a year.”). Note: Geller did briefly ask about his lobbying in the poll, but didn’t give any detail about the dollars involved or his 700% increase in net worth over these years at issue.
So, yes, Geller would certainly be leading in any flawed poll in which he was either so cowardly or dishonest as to leave out his ponzi scheme/felon ties and anti-woman vote for the “Scarlet Letter” bill. Geller knew perfectly well what the result would be if he asked an honest and complete poll, as we did. But he didn’t ask them. Why? Because it would have confirmed that Geller is going to lose, and lose big!
Sincerely,
Ron Gunzburger
Campaign Manager
http://www.sue2010.com
FROM BUDDY:
Since Ron Gunzburger dragged me into this, I’ve got to respond.
Ron Gunzburger did read me questions about a month ago over the phone that he said were from the poll. Since I was driving, I did not take notes and I have very little memory of the conversation. I do remember that there were some negative questions about Sue Gunzburger, and some about Geller.
Bottom line: I heard questions read to me as part of a 45 minute conversation with Ron, but I don’t remember most of them. And I don’t remember the exact wording. Wording is the key.
I also don’t remember any conversation I had with Ron Gunzburger about Geller’s poll questions.
Gunzburger doesn’t need me to validate what questions Geller asked. He told me one of Sue Gunzburger’s supporters was called and they copied down the questions.
I find it hard to believe Geller would not ask about the allegations concerning Mutual Benefits. It has already come up in the campaign and Ron Gunzburger mentions it every chance he gets.
Both candidates can roll out a ton of negatives about their opponent.
What I would like to see is their vision for the future of Broward County and how they hope to achieve it.
April 2nd, 2010 at 2:38 pm
Political campaigns are designed to slant the views of voters in favor of a particular candidate. Early polls determine the best way to achieve that objective.
It’s too early in an August primary to determine which of two candidates, both well known and funded, will win because no meaningful campaigning has begun.
Look at the Crist Rubio race, a few months ago Crist was up by so many points that nobody gave Rubio a second thought. Now the polls have Crist behind Rubio in the polls by a growing margin.
Crist is figuring out how to organize his message to beat Rubio. Rubio is doing the same. Early polls can help raise money, but the main purpose is to help candidates understand how best win. Push polls are important tools because they test an election outcome based on a presumed scenario that can be created by an effective campaign.
The only uniformed poll result that matters happens about 7 days before an election. That is when most campaigns go into ultra high gear.
So asking “Who would you vote if the election was held today” is a question that really can’t be relied upon until you get within days of an election, not months. At this stage push poll questions are more interesting because they illustrate how an opponent can be beaten.
April 2nd, 2010 at 2:47 pm
Oh, I forgot.
In a tight financing time like the one we are in, an outcome like Geller’s poll could easily work in his opponent’s favor because his potential supporters will say he’s going to win without my giving more, and her supporters will become more motivated to win.
It could also work to unmotivate Geller’s opponent’s supporters. It depends on the race.
The Sun Sentinel had an interesting piece about how Broward is over polled. I happen to think that’s not true. I think the problem is how we use polls. There is little discipline in fighting a poll with another poll.
It is much more effective for an opponent, when confronted with a poll to say “I’ve done my own poll and I know better. Let’s see how this ends on election day.” Releasing polling information early is not particularly smart in my opinion, unless it advances a campaign’s strategy, because all polls can be criticized as not telling the truth. In reality they are pretty good at measuring an outcome based on the scenarios presented.
So it is probably true that if the election was held today, Geller would win. But the election is not being held today.
It is also probably true that under the conditions Gunzburger tested, she would win. But those conditions are not in place yet.
FROM BUDDY:
You have to assume that Geller has information about Gunzburger he could use to drive up her negatives.
If both candidates’ advertising drive up the negatives, how does that change the race?
April 2nd, 2010 at 3:12 pm
to What Everybody Knows says:
uh, dude or dudette, how about Sue taking money from Rothsteins’ firm, uh, was it the day before a vote she was making on one of Rothstein’s clients…uh, anybody out there who can pin down on what I am saying for absolute 100 accuracy sake? i know i am in the ballpark on this.
April 2nd, 2010 at 3:30 pm
County Commission Candidate’s official name, as it will appear on the Ballot:
Sue “Bernie Friedman B&P” Gunzburger
April 3rd, 2010 at 6:02 am
Assuming that both polls are correct, it is clear what Gunzberger’s strategy must be. It says she can’t win unless she makes it a dirty campaign. So any statement from her camp that she will not do so is wrong. Otherwise her own poll says she cannot win.
At least now the matter is clear how it will play out. Both sides can now stop playing the game of who has the moral high ground. It is already settled.
April 3rd, 2010 at 6:24 am
Buddy, is Gunzburger’s claim true that Geller didn’t poll on the ponzi scheme and Scarlet Letter law negatives?
Bottom line: seems to me the Geller camp hurls insults and vague accusations at Gunzburger but doesn’t give any verifiable details. Gunzburger seems to admit their campaign is going negative but he’s at least sourcing his attacks. I guess I don’t get Geller’s whining. Isn’t it fair that two veteran politicians should gave to defend their respective records?
FROM BUDDY:
I believe both candidates polled on what they saw as their negatives and their opponent’s negatives.
Here is the difference:
Geller released the uninformed head-to-head. This question was asked at the front end of the poll before any of the negatives are mentioned.
Gunzburer released the informed head-to-head. This question was asked after voters heard the negatives about both candidates.
April 3rd, 2010 at 6:45 am
Ron Gunzburger’s contention that asking the “whom will for vote for?” question only after the push questions in a poll is the most valid way to answer this question is not normally true.
His reasoning is that one should only ask the “whom will you vote for” question in the context of a “fully informed” electorate. That is, only after respondents are exposed to what is likely to be said in the campaign.
This is based on two faulty assumptions:
(1) that all voters will hear all information, both positive and negative, put out by the actual campaigns, and will process that information in the same way as intended by the campaign. WRONG! We selectively perceive information that we hear, and of course none of us will be exposed equally to the same campaigning.
(2)that the questions asked in the poll constitute the universe of all information to which voters will be exposed. This is a particularly ridiculous assumption in a poll done 5 months before an election. Things change, people run out of money and can’t put out all messages, etc.
Having said this, though, not everyone agrees on all these things. These observations are based on my own experience and research. But I could be wrong.
Kevin Hill
NOTE FROM BUDDY: Kevin Hill is a well-known and often-quoted political scientist at Florida International University.
April 3rd, 2010 at 7:31 am
Ron Gunzburger, shut up. You are and always have been a dirty say anything to win low life. One of the most disappointing days in my life is when Lori hired you. She, of all people, doesn’t need you yet she propped you up.
April 3rd, 2010 at 8:02 am
The campaigns I’ve been involved in have often been hard-hitting but truthful. In fact — and I think Buddy would back this up – I’m very careful to thoroughly source all attacks. If a person did something in his/her capacity as a public official, it is fair game. If some had an affair or their kid had gotten in trouble: that’s always out of bounds for me and I won’t touch it.
Frankly, the races were usually so aggressive because the stakes were so personally high to me (ie, electing uncompromising environmentalists who will stand up to the greedy & powerful developers … or getting rid of an incumbent I believe is a crook). With the vitriol you are spewing, CuriousO, I can only presume you are one of those bad incumbents I proudly helped to defeat (or are related to one) or you work for a developer. I sleep soundly at night – no regrets – for having worked to make this a better community by electing good people (or, sometimes, elected just okay people when they were seeking to oust a really bad person).
Bottom line: I’ve run some very tough, but very honorable and brutally honest, campaigns over the years. And often done it with a good dose of much-needed humor, too, in these races.
To quote Harry Truman: “I don’t give ’em hell. I just tell the truth and it makes them feel like they’re in hell.”
Regards,
Ron Gunzburger
http://www.politics1.com
http://www.sue2010.com
FROM BUDDY: I agree that Ron Gunzburger quotes sources for all his attacks.
This following explanation doesn’t refer to anything Gunzburger of Geller’s campaign manager David Brown has done in the past. It is just my observation.
Voters should always questions whether the source — i.e., the publication or person quoted — used in political advertising was correct. Is it a legitimate, trustworthy publication?
Voters must also realize that quotes used in political advertising are often taken out of contex.
One other observation: I love the sense of humor Gunzburger brings to political campaigns. He lacerates his opponents with humor. He knows that humor is always, always, always the best weapon.
April 3rd, 2010 at 9:57 am
To Ron G. and Buddy:
So the fact that Ron takes things out of context is honorable? Come on, its scummy and not forthright. Ron, you are far from honorable.
FROM BUDDY:
I did not write that Ron Gunzburger took quotes out of context to use in political advertising.
I wrote that quotes used in political advertising are often taken out of context.
If I was so inclined — and I’m not on this beautiful Florida day — I could pull out my vast collection of Broward political mail pieces and find dozens of examples. Are some the product of Ron Gunzburger or David Brown, Geller’s campaign manager? Without looking at them, I wouldn’t say.
I do remember a Tamarac election where the candidate, long dead, took something I wrote for the late Fort Lauderdale News and transposed the paragraphs to completely change the meaning of the piece. That one resulted in a State Attorney’s investigation and a public chastising by prosecutors.
April 3rd, 2010 at 10:21 am
Using political polls for anything but giving objective information to the candidate is a terrible waste of money.
I cannot tell you how many times I have had to tell a candidate that he or she is likely to lose based on a poll. They usually refuse to believe it.
I also cannot tell you how many times I have had to argue with a candidate who wants to ask tons of push questions in order to get the result he or she wants.
Now, having not done any polls in this race, I honestly do not know who is ahead and who is behind. The one thing I do know is that the incumbent in this race seems to be well below the 50% mark, which is not a good sign for her. Still, there are months left until the primary.
Disclosure: I do not live in the district, so I have no interest in who will win. I just would like to see an unaffiliated poll on this race; this it is obviously the hottest race in the county at this point, between two well-known and generally well-respected candidates. Then again, with the death of the print media, and the lack of interest by the local broadcast media in local politics, I am not holding my breath for some media outlet to pay for a poll we could all read.
Happy Easter to all. Kevin.
April 3rd, 2010 at 1:38 pm
CuriousO is right about Sue Gunzburger.
While her son calls Geller a lobbyist, his mother is bought lock, stock and barrel by lobbyist Bernie Friedman of Becker Poliakoff. He controls her vote & everybody knows it.
April 3rd, 2010 at 2:04 pm
Does anyone find it ironic that the sources Ron Gunzburger quotes is Bob Norman’s articles in the New Times? Everyone knows that Bob Norman is a lackey and the New Times was never considered a reliable news source until they recently broke the corruption stories. Let’s be honest, if it wasn’t for Rothstein, Bob Norman would have nothing to write about today.
April 3rd, 2010 at 2:35 pm
So attacking Bob Norman — an SPJ award-winning investigative journalist — somehow means Steve Geller isn’t closely tied to two different billion dollar ponzi schemes and Mafia-connected felons? I don’t think so, David. I’d note Bob Norman has detailed many other pre-RRA scandals, long before they hit the main newspapers. It was Norman who helped bring down former Deerfield Mayor Al Cappelini, former Hollywood Commissioner Keith Wassterstrom, School Board Member Stephanie Kraft (she appears likely to go next), and many others.
Of course, what about the cite to the Sun-Sentinel about Geller earning over $600,000/year as a lobbyist while also serving in the State Senate? So that’s presumably a “lackey” paper, too, David?
Here is what the Miami Herald Editorial Board wrote 3 years ago about how lobbyist-legislator Steve Geller acted: “Without shame. Willing to exploit their public position on behalf of private vendors, contractors, developers. Willing, for a nice fee, to lobby for contracts, zoning variances, tax rebates, project approvals and other goodies from the city. They come armed with something unavailable to conventional lobbyists — the threat of retribution. … Reject the senator-lobbyist’s client and maybe the senator neglects the city’s needs in Tallahassee. … Ethics ought to preclude this mess. Ethics, however, have been trumped by lobbyist fees.” Source: Miami Herald, 6/10/07.
Oh, and don’t forget how the SUN-SENTINEL reported how Geller was one of those key legislators who took money from the Mutual Benefits ponzi scheme in 2002-04 and then helped them evade state regulators by changing state law. Source: Sun-Sentinel, 2/23/09.
As for Bernie Friedman and his clients, in what was just the latest example of Sue Gunzburger yet again proving her environmentalist credentials and independence, she voted against one of his biggest clients — the Diplomat — when she was one of the votes which killed the expansion plans on the golf course site just last week. Source: Sun-Sentinel, 3/23/10.
And some more on the Becker-Poliakof law firm that you’re attacking, David, wouldn’t this be the same B&P firm whose clients are some of the biggest donors to date to Geller’s ECO group (to wit: all of lobbyist Alan Koslow’s big paramutual clients, for example)? Yup, the record proved it. Source: http://election.dos.state.fl.us/committees/ComLkup.asp
Any more gripes, David?
Regards,
Ron Gunzburger
PS – If you haven’t checked it out lately, please check out http://www.sue2010.com — and download and sign a ballot petition there if you live in District 6 and haven’t yet signed one!
April 3rd, 2010 at 4:23 pm
Ron says:
“I’m very careful to thoroughly source all attacks.”
So that is his style. That’s how he runs a campaign, and always will. First and foremost.
“Frankly, the races were usually so aggressive because the stakes were so personally high to me ”
Great, its his mothers election. Nothing gets more personal than that.
This is exactly what turns off the voters, and I am sure it will happen here. Just the little I seen of how Ron runs a campaign, and the fact that it is his mother’s, I wouldn’t support anyone in a campaign he is running. He turns me off. And I don’t live in the district. Too bad.
I believe that Kevin Hill is right on point.
April 3rd, 2010 at 5:42 pm
Dear Buddy
In your opinion, why is South Florida’s news media unwilling to ask Steve Geller the following questions, on-the-record?
1. What is your deadline for moving yourself and your family into the Commission District in SE Broward that you are running for, from your current home in Cooper City? (The election is in less than five months.)
2. Why were you so deadly quiet during the public discussion by the
Broward Ethics Commission on specific details of creating an Inspector General that could probe city and county officials and employees in Broward?
3. Under the proposed legislation the Ethics Commission cobbled together, you could NOT lobby in this county once you were elected Commissioner.
If you are elected in November, is it your intention to go to court to overturn this law if it is passed by both the FL legislature and the citizens of Broward
County?
4. What is your position on the controversial Diplomat LAC proposal
that would build multiple 25-30 story condo towers -on secondary roads- in single-family residential neighborhood of Hallandale Beach, that would also adversely affect residents of south Hollywood?
FROM BUDDY:
Hallandale Beach Blog,
Geller has told me on more than one occasion that if elected, he will not lobby in Broward County. He says he will not lobby even if a proposal forbidding it doesn’t pass.
I plan to hold him to this pledge.
April 4th, 2010 at 5:43 am
Geller’s dirt on Gunzburger is that her late husband got a county contract selling plastic wood that his company produced. She has an explanation that suggests she had and could have had nothing to do with that. He also has a contribution made to her by Rothstein that she returned.
Gunzburger has dirt on Geller involving his links to Mutual Benefits owner Joel Steinger and also Rothstein. There is a longer list with Geller of unsavory connections than with Sue and her campaign has a pretty good inventory of those items.
The reasons why uninformed polls mean nothing at this point is that the public will be informed by election day. That is why push polls at this time make more sense. Those polls test a result givien a certain scenario yet to be established. They create a pathway to success for the campaign strategist. All you have to do is establish the scenario in the hearts and minds of voters and bingo. You win. Both sides know this.
What awaits us in this campaign is one of the bloodiest political races this county has ever seen. They will stab and bite, scratch and claw at one another. The loser will lament in a grave and the winner will celebrate in a hosptial. It will be a fight to watch. This is far from over, the fun is only about to begin.
April 4th, 2010 at 6:39 am
I will make sure that Sue Gunzburger feels like she is chopped liver after this election. I have Steve calling for a clean campaign while I plan Armageddon. I never ran a clean campaign in my life, so watch out Sue Gunzburger because my campaigns so dirty that Sue and Ron Gunzburger won’t know what hit them.
April 5th, 2010 at 7:48 pm
Steve Geller spoke to us and said he was bring a new outlook to the county commissoin. He has been in office longer than Sue Gunzburger so how new can he be.
April 6th, 2010 at 9:34 am
To Ron Gunzburgur:
Stop sucking up to Bob Norman, you low life; you are thoroughly insincere and what you did with your poll is horrific, disingenuous and dishonest. God, I hope your mother doesn’t leave her purse around when are around. You will say anything , no matter how dishonest and skewed it is, to win and you will suck up to the Devil to win. Don’t look in the mirror, it will shatter and break (oh, maybe you should look in the mirror.
April 6th, 2010 at 12:39 pm
Ron, I don’t gripe. I have never attacked Bernie Friedman or the Becker Poliakof law firm which you seem to know a great deal about. I only post on blogs under my real name. I had no idea you have 45 minute phone conversation with Buddy – let alone the substance of that conversation – and how can you possibly claim to know what process went into creating our poll that leads you to claim the “Geller refused” to include this or that. Your obviously much better at the inuendo game than I am. I’m so bad at this negative campaign stuff I lost my own race against Miriam Oliphant in 2000. I’ve got a lot to learn from you.
April 6th, 2010 at 4:17 pm
Ron, …. Ronnie…..
Where’s my purse? ……..(Ron……….ron…)
April 7th, 2010 at 7:39 am
I sat down with David Brown to outline what he could do for me.
He began by telling me how he could destroy my opponent using highly negative and slanted ads. Then he wanted me to buy thousands of pencils, Ts, sponges from him.
I read all these comments about Ron Gunzburger. I know first hand who is going to start the attacks.
April 7th, 2010 at 8:40 am
Ron, ….Ronnnie…
I still can’t find my purse…..Ronnniee…(ron..)
April 7th, 2010 at 3:48 pm
I didn’t need to meet with Ron Gunzburger for my race because I knew his history of mean spirited campaign where he twists the truth and utilizes quotes out of context.
April 7th, 2010 at 8:01 pm
Geller is only leading in his mind. Everybody I know wants a true environmentalist who is against overbuilding and handing everything over to developers.
Geller is a lobbyist for developers. He might even have clients who want to build high rises next to Century Village.
FROM BUDDY:
To be fair to Steve Geller, I have never heard of any plans to build high rises next to Century Village.
April 9th, 2010 at 6:22 pm
To: Geller is a tool:
There you go again. Now you’re using scare tactics try to get the good people in Century Village to vote for Sue. You know there are no such plans and Steve has no such client.
Steve Geller has EARNED a great deal of support in Century Village, Hollybrook and throughout the district through years of honorable, effective service. Try as you surely will to distort his record and suppress his supporters, you will not be able to drive a wedge between them.
April 11th, 2010 at 9:25 am
to Ronnie and Sue:
the fact that you are losing to a person who doesn’t even live in the district, shows you are a horrible county commissioner and a bratty, overrated consultant.
April 11th, 2010 at 10:10 am
What about the development plans for the car dealership, Mr. lying Brown. Steve Geller knows about them and so will everybody else in Century Village. We are Sue Katz Democrats.
April 11th, 2010 at 12:35 pm
to” Geller is a Tool”:
What development plans and what Geller involvement??? You are SO MISINFORMED! STOP SPREADING LIES, RONNIE GUNZBURGER AND YOURS!!
YOU WILL DO ANYTHING AND SAY ANYTHING TO WIN!! STOP LYYYYYYYYYING!!