As always, pay attention to every word. It's obvious what irritated Weatherford...the Dolphins' assumption that they were in control of the matter, and that the bill would sail through Tallahassee in the late going.
Weatherford has made sparing comments on the matter but he spotlighted that aspect twice, once before the session ended, and once afterward. It's hardly a coincidence.
dlockz linked the article. I've referenced it previously. Weatherford said before the session ended that the Dolphins never called Tallahassee and asked how are we looking, before paying for the referendum. That was in Marc Caputo's column, during the final week. Then in today's article, post session, he defaults to the same angle, with the "cart before the horse" comment.
People in positions of power don't like others making their decisions for them. If the guy is a jerk to begin with, you're even more vulnerable. Low level example: One semester at the Daily Trojan at USC we had a choice of a chain smoking bitch or an effeminate apparently harmless guy as editor for the next term. I voted for the bitch because she was my roommate's girlfriend, and I knew how knowledgeable and passionate she was toward that following term, spelling out all her ambitious plans. The vast majority of staffers despised her. They voted for the effeminate guy in landslide proportions. Then whispers began during the interview process. He didn't like that every department was seemingly locked in place, the promotions already made, with the most talented upperclassmen assumed to fill the roles. Instead, he literally recruited underclassmen who had no intention of applying for the staff for the following term, and handed them prime positions. It was unbelievable. I was impacted, along with dozens of others. Nothing was equitable or made sense. But the Journalism Council made it clear that it didn't have to make sense. We had a lengthy unprecedented hearing, with 50 people in attendance, but they concluded that while nothing like this had come up in prior decades, he was well within his right to pick anyone he wanted. I must say that I was the star of the opposition argument, with facial expressions alone prompting a panel member to ask, "Why are you so exasperated?" That opened the door for a 5 minute diatribe.
His name was James Grant. Still a jack***.
I was interested in one link in this thread, a hypothetical November 2014 article on Weatherford's ascension to the GOP gubernatorial nomination, and how it happened. Now, I don't know how Republicans think. And consequently I get their nominee wrong all the time. But it would surprise me if Weatherford can overcome his age and massive monetary gap to knock out an incumbent in the GOP primary against Scott. I assumed they would look to someone else, with more of a track record. I'm not sure who it would be. Adam Putnam is also young, but now approaching 40. It is true that the GOP isn't shy about dumping gubernatorial incumbents if they view him as a certain loser in November. Jim Gibbons was an embarrassment to the party, and forced out in Nevada in favor of Brian Sandoval, who won and will win again in 2014. It's also the reason the world ever heard of Sarah Palin. The incumbent Frank Murkowski was a disaster in November polling against former governor Tony Knowles, so Republicans knocked out Murkowski in the primary, favoring Palin.
