The Scottsdale Independent recently published two articles about failed mayoral candidate Bill Crawford.
In these articles Crawford criticized active mayoral candidate Bob Littlefield and fawningly praised Crawford’s supposed competitor Jim Lane. From the recent and numerous articles favoring Mayor Lane, one might conclude that the Independent is prejudiced in their coverage of the mayoral candidates.
Crawford has always been desperate to be elected to the Scottsdale City Council — this was his fifth failed run — so his story that he collected a record number of signatures. And, then just decided not to run doesn’t pass the smell test. The more he protests he is not shilling for Lane the clearer it becomes he is doing exactly that.
To quote Shakespeare … “me thinks the lady doth protest too much.”
You have to wonder why Lane, an incumbent who supposedly has a $150,000 campaign War Chest, would buddy up to someone as negative as Crawford. The answer is Lane cannot win re-election by running on his record, because for the last eight years he has always voted against Scottsdale residents and in favor of his campaign contributors.
If the voters see his record for what it is he would lose in a landslide no matter how much money he spends. His only hope is to divert attention from his record by going negative on Littlefield. By having Crawford do his dirty work for him lane also gets to pretend he is Mr. Positive.
I feel confident that the scottsdale voters will see past the hyperbole of the mayor’s campaign and vote accordingly.
Editor’s note: Mr. Lindeman is a resident of Scottsdale