Future Candidates: Research Your Opponent!
Liar, liar pants on fire! Bring up the name George Santos, and that’s likely the response you’ll receive these days.
To be fair, the congressman-elect from New York’s 3rd Congressional District is a bald-faced liar.
In addition to constructing his education and work history from thin air, Santos went as far as to fabricate the death of his mother, alleging that 9/11 claimed her life, when in fact she died after a battle with cancer in 2016.
Perhaps even more egregious, Santos claimed to be Jewish and the descendant of Holocaust survivors. Like so much of his biography, these also turned out to be lies.
Santos is in fact Catholic, and his grandparents do not appear to be Jewish either.
Rather, all research points them to be practicing Catholics, along with his mother and father. When confronted with these inconsistencies in his biography, Santos claimed the entire situation was an unfortunate misunderstanding.
For instance, when questioned about the contradictions surrounding his faith, Santos has maintained that he is in fact "Jew-ish," not Jewish.
The difference between the two?
According to Santos’ logic, is that the former represents those with a Jewish background in their family’s ancestry.
Santos appears to have some precedent on this one, as Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., used the results of a DNA test to prove her claims to Native American heritage.
If you remember, the test ultimately revealed that Warren is approximately 1.6 percent to 0.1 percent Native American, which was enough for her to list her race as "American Indian" on a State Bar of Texas registration card.
But the Warren-designed litmus tests aside, it’s clear that Santos lied about most of his background.
Which begs this question . . .
Why did his opponent’s campaign never catch any of these blaring falsehoods?
This criticism is not some form of Monday morning quarterbacking, but rather goes back to Campaign School 101. The first thing a functioning and competitive campaign usually does is conduct background research on their opposition.
And I’m not even talking about investigating a candidate’s financial or criminal history, which aren’t the hardest things in the world to find out.
I’m talking about things that literally take minutes to discover.
Matters like a candidate’s education records, their work history, and parts of their personal lives, like their faith, the last of which could easily be discovered via social media through the help of a campaign volunteer or intern.
While a company or educational institution will not release specific records, the latter under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, you can easily verify that a person did actually attend a school or work someplace they claimed to just by speaking with the organization in question.
Robert Zimmerman, Santos’ Democratic opponent, raised over $3 million for his campaign. In fact, he actually outraised Santos by nearly $200K.
Just imagine for a second if those extra funds were spent on research into Santos’ background. The advertisements that could have been produced about Santos’ deceit, especially in a district with a significant number of Jewish, not "Jew-ish" voters, would have no doebt lost Santos votes, and most likely helped to push Zimmerman over the finish line.
President Biden won the third district by eight points in 2020. The previous House incumbent, Democrat Thomas Suozzi, was reelected with nearly 56% of the vote in the same year.
Even after redistricting, every metric to date reveals that the third district remains Democratic-leaning. In other words, Zimmerman entered this race with a built-in advantage, especially in a year that was supposed to be unforgiving for Democrats.
George Santos lies.
That fact isn't up for parsing or debate.
If I were a voter in his Long Island district, I would be demanding his resignation, and certainly wouldn’t consider ever voting for him again in the future.
But it still doesn’t change the fact that had his opponent done his homework, Santos would probably never been elected in the first place.
Let this be a lesson to future campaigns and candidates. In case you ever needed a reason, even if you think you can take your opponent at their word, it doesn’t hurt to do a little research.
To take one from President Reagan, "Trust, but verify."
Jacob Lane is a Republican strategist and school choice activist. He has worked for GOP campaigns at the federal, state and local levels, as well as with various PACs and non-profits. Read Jacob Lane's Reports — More Here.
© 2023 Newsmax. All rights reserved.