I can't quote exactly because I wasn't polled, but here's what the friend says it asked: "Would you support Sam Kooiker for mayor if you knew he had been censured for abusing e-mail?" There is apparently another question asking respondents if they would support Kooiker if they knew he had asked that the city's insurance pay his personal costs associated with hiring a lawyer to defend himself against ridiculous charges.
Wow. I suppose this could be coming from a candidate other than Alan Hanks, but it seems really unlikely, since Hanks is supported by Stan Adelstein (who has the money for such a poll) and Jody Severson (who has the know-how to conduct such a poll.) Maybe Stan can just re-read his quote from an earlier campaign:
Adelstein was quoted as saying: "Poor Alan, he wasn't comfortable with what we had to do. But we had to do it."With Kooiker not even declaring his candidacy yet, it seems pretty premature to go negative right out of the chute, especially in light of the public's opinion, as well as those in the media. (They didn't get really dirty until the day before the election, last time.) Check the Journal's editorial after the censure hearing here.
It is even more surprising in light of the public's reaction in the following election where voters sent censure proponent Lloyd Lacroix packing. Read that one here.
Whew! I'm only assuming that Mayor Hanks is behind this poll. But who else could it be? No matter who it is, I'm stunned than anyone other than Kooiker would want to remind voters of this travesty. I'm more surprised that anyone would think of picking up this turd with the idea that it could be polished.