Ad For Judge Nina Di Pietro Appeals To Racists





It doesn’t take a political genius to figure out why a last-minute ad supporting Broward County Judge Nina Di Pietro featured a picture of her opponent, former County Judge Ian Richards.

He is Black.

Di Pietro’s ad, from a committee backing her, is an age-old political appeal to racism.

The only reason you would include Richards’ picture is that he is Black. The piece also includes a weird, uncomplimentary picture of her other opponent, Brenda Di Iola.

The picture is a hidden message to the small group who would vote against a Black for judge. To use the popular political phrase of the day, the picture of Richards is a dog whistle designed to be heard only by racists.

It is interesting that Richards is the target of this tactic.  He largely hid himself from white precincts in an election eight years ago when he ran against incumbent County Judge Catalina Avalos.   He counted on some Whites who didn’t know he was Black to choose an English-sounding Ian Richards over the Hispanic-sounding Catalina Avalos.

Richards’ racist appeal was wrong in 2008.  Di Pietro’s racist piece is wrong now.






If that wasn’t bad enough, the advertising is false.

The mail piece states that Di Pietro has a “wide range of legal experience,” while her two opponents do not.

Who really does have a “wide range of legal experience”?

Di Pietro has been a judge for roughly a year.

Ian Richards was previously a judge for six years, losing re-election in 2014. Di Iola was a general master, a quasi judge, for over two decades.

Di Iola, 51, has been a lawyer for 27 years.

Richards, 41, has been a lawyer for 14 years.

Di Pietro 33, has been a lawyer for 10 years.



12 Responses to “Ad For Judge Nina Di Pietro Appeals To Racists”

  1. Susanna von Holstein Bott says:

    Is this the same Di Pietro who was terminated from the Broward County Public Defender’s Office?



  2. Sammie says:

    She is a racist pig. Despicable woman.

  3. Curious says:

    So, if those mailers were paid for out of your son’s PAC, Buddy…does that make him a racist too?

    Interesting point, I think.


    My son’s name is not on the PAC. If you are correct, it proves that I’m going to write posts as I see it. My son knows that.

  4. Cynthia Wenger says:

    Please explain to me HOW 1 year trumps 6 years or 20 years as having MORE experience. How does someone who has 10 years law experience have more “wide range legal experience” over someone with 27 years experience? Things that DO make you go “hummm”!!!!

  5. Knows says:

    Nina is an awful person. No one should be surprised to learn she is a racist.


    I never wrote that she was a racist. I wrote that her campaign was using literature that appealed to racists.

  6. scott says:

    This moron realizes her candidacy is dead. She has never ran or won any election. She thinks that having a big war chest of $ is going to win an election. She thinks by attacking her opponents race (Richards) or looks of her other opponent by posting an unflattering pic will win it. This is the way the Di Pietro people have and will continue to operate. I personally watched as Nina was telling voters that Di Ioia and ALL the judicial candidates Paid $40,000 to be on the “blue card”. Not only was this a lie but another move of desperation. She told me that her husband refused to pay money to put her on the card so that’s why they put an opponent on it….Nice try Nina… too little, too late…

  7. Hmmm says:

    I think “wide range” doesn’t indicate years of experience, but rather the breadth of areas practiced (criminal, civil, family, real estate, contracts, etc). As for the answer to who has the widest breadth of experience, I have no idea.

  8. Amoral says:

    “Amoral” having no moral standards, restraints, or principles; unaware of or indifferent to questions of right or wrong.

    Who is the Concerned Clergy of Broward as I believe she was endorsed by them? Buddy we need to know about this one….

  9. Racist says:

    Am I missing something? Now including a photo of your political opponent who happens to be black is de facto racism. We’ve really entered Mad Hatter territory with that one. Buddy, even someone like you should understand …. never mind .

  10. just one vote says:

    voted last saturday for Brenda Di Iola.
    believe she will prevail tomorrow.

    voters aren’t stupid.

  11. confused says:

    I don’t get it. I have seen his election signs with his picture on it. Is there something racist about the fact she put both her opponents faces on the ad? Seems far reaching to me. Are we now going to say it also appeals to people who look nutty in photos because she used a pic of Di iola looking nutty? This is a very strange accusation. Is there ever a time you could use your opponents photo in an ad who is black and not be accused being racist?

    Who is this PAC owned by? doesn’t even look like it came from her campaign.

  12. Hey Buddy says:

    Hey Buddy, why don’t you write about Broward Health? It has fallen apart at the Governance Level since David Di Pietro Left. We still don’t have an Audit. Little Lynn Barrett and the Board think they know more than a national accounting firm.