Both parties to have spirited Senate primaries
Low in spirit, that is.
"So far, Senate special election race lacks pizazz" by Frank Phillips | Globe Staff, March 23, 2013
What the political world thought would be a barn-burning US Senate race that would draw national media attention has fizzled into a slumbrous event that has yet to stir the sort of passions and interest that marked recent campaigns.
So far, the primary election battle that will be decided in just five weeks has barely made a blip on the electorate’s radar screen. The race has failed to spark interest among political activists who follow and work for candidates. The attention of the national media has waned.
That is not the way it was supposed to be....
Awwww.
“It’s not the prizefight we thought we would have,’’ said Thomas Whalen, political historian and associate professor of social sciences at Boston University.
The yawning tone of the race could help veteran US Representative Edward J. Markey, who has been focusing on mobilizing his supporters within the liberal wing of the Democratic Party, which generally dominates primary elections. The Malden Democrat, who has registered a comfortable lead in public opinion polls, is hoping to allow the campaign to move quietly to the primary.
US Representative Stephen F. Lynch, a centrist Democrat and feisty underdog from South Boston, is trying, without much success so far, to kick up a storm to get a larger voter turnout....
Meanwhile, the Republican field is struggling to get its act together....
Scott Brown’s decision to take a pass was most responsible for draining the sizzle from this race. He would have brought star qualities to the campaign....
Yeah, we all miss Brownie.
Debra Kozikowski, a longtime Democratic activist in Chicopee and vice chairwoman of the party’s state committee, cites tough weather as a factor, as activists struggle through winter doldrums that seep into spring.
“It’s really quiet,’’ she said. “People are tired. It’s a special election. Winter hit us again this week. All but the most hard-core political activists are just living their lives, shoveling out.’’
That takes away one of Markey's top issues.
************************
Also diverting attention from the race is Governor Deval Patrick’s campaign to urge the Legislature to back his plan to raise taxes for investment in transportation and education.
“The Senate race suffers from the Patrick proposal that is dominating the political story of the season,’’ said Lou DiNatale, a veteran Democratic analyst. “That’s taking up all the oxygen in the political world.”
Related: Highway Robbery in Massachusetts
Mass. Manipulation of State Economic Numbers
There is still time for the race to catch fire....
It's the economic numbers that did it to me.
--more--"
Man, this election is putting me to sleep.
"Wake me when the special election is over" by Yvonne Abraham | Globe Columnist, March 24, 2013
I know I should be living and breathing this special US Senate race.
I love politics. I’m an issues nerd. Debates over tax policy, gun control, abortion rights, the environment — these are usually major boat-floaters for me.
And yet, the nitty-gritty of this election makes me want to go nighty-night. Every time I contemplate the candidates, I . . . Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
What? Huh? Oh, sorry.
The primaries are April 30. The general is not till June 25. But already, I feel as exhausted as the Democratic candidates look. Really, you could store small nations in the bags under their eyes.
I can’t blame those guys for being tired. Ed Markey has been in Congress for 36 years. Stephen Lynch arrived in 2001, but it wears on you, bucking your delegation.
Neither Democrat is known for his electrifying personality. Still, chances are the senator we send to Washington will be one of these two — a guy who has already been down there for years.
(Whatever happens, it’s going to be a guy. Not a single woman put her hand up for the job on either side. Apparently, having reached a grand total of two, we’ve hit the limit on Massachusetts voters’ tolerance for women in the Capitol.)
Though GOP political veteran and former US attorney Michael Sullivan is about as riveting as Markey and Lynch, there’s a little more intrigue on the Republican side. Representative Dan Winslow, on whom more later, can be entertaining. And former Navy SEAL and private equity investor Gabriel Gomez seemed like the kind of candidate who might have Democrats quaking, given a certain special Senate election of yore. But then came the revelation that, in an attempt to be appointed interim senator after John Kerry was named secretary of state, Gomez wrote a letter kissing up to President Obama’s agenda on gun control and immigration, claiming positions he apparently doesn’t agree with. Or does. Who knows?
He’s not the only candidate with identity issues. Sullivan’s people grafted their candidate’s head onto former congressional candidate Richard Tisei’s website, and their fund-raising efforts onto former senator Scott Brown’s e-mail list.
How do you get excited about a race where getting a handle on the candidates is like trying to pin Jell-O to a wall?
(While we’re on the topic of borrowing: People have Internets, Representative Lynch. They can see the striking similarities between your “I am Stephen Lynch” ad and the clever “I’m a Mac” spot your opponent ran in 2010.)
But maybe I’m being unfair. After all, Gomez and Lynch do have compelling back stories. Sullivan and Markey have impressive resumes. Winslow is smart on the case for GOP moderation.
Perhaps it’s not this campaign that’s my problem. Perhaps it’s campaigns, period. For years, we’ve been in continuous election mode. The special election to fill the late Ted Kennedy’s US Senate seat started in 2009. A pitched presidential battle began shortly thereafter. The gazillions poured into the Senate contest between Scott Brown and Elizabeth Warren made that ugly battle inescapable. Uncle!
It’s also hard to get excited about who will represent you in Washington when Washington is such a disgusting mess. After all those elections, lawmakers are still kicking the heck out of one another, getting little done. As we learned last week, not even the slaying of 20 first-graders moves them. Assault weapons ban? Nah, they’d rather stay in the deep pockets of the NRA. It’s so dispiriting, I don’t want to think about it. Yet these Senate candidates keep trying to make me.
I called Winslow to tell him all of this. He seemed genuinely upset. If junkies like me are feeling this way, how will he convince sane people to pay attention? “I’ve got to get you excited about this race,” he told me. “You’re my target demographic: a woman, a millennial, a new American.”
A millennial? When all else fails, try flattery.
“Don’t be co-opted by apathy,” he urged. “This race in Massachusetts, especially on the Republican side, is a race of national historical significance. You just don’t know it yet.”
It’s not you, Dan. It’s me.
I need more. Or maybe less. You got a truck?
--more--"
Left the TV on and it woke me up:
"Senate candidates spar in debates" by Eric Moskowitz | Globe Staff, March 28, 2013
NEEDHAM — In the first televised tussles of the Senate special election campaign, Representatives Edward J. Markey and Stephen F. Lynch, the two Democrats in the race, tangled over health care and abortion, defending their role in Washington gridlock, while Republican hopefuls Gabriel Gomez, Michael Sullivan, and Daniel Winslow, sought to introduce themselves to voters in their own fast-moving, half hour-matchup.
The debates, held back-to-back on WCVB-TV, Channel 5, offered candidates in both primaries a chance to reach out to voters who have yet to become engaged in the quiet special election race to succeed Senator John F. Kerry, with barely a month to go before the April 30 primaries.
On the Democratic side, Markey cast himself as an experienced lawmaker and liberal successor to Massachusetts senators Kerry and Edward M. Kennedy, while Lynch, a onetime ironworker, positioned himself as a populist fighter unafraid to buck party leadership.
In a preceding debate between the three lesser-known Republicans — also organized by a consortium of Boston media — the GOP hopefuls were quicker to challenge the two Democratic candidates than each other. They disagreed on some social issues and on policy nuances, but sounded similar themes about the need for balanced budgets, smaller government, and fewer regulations, while appealing for Massachusetts to send a new face to Washington.
Early questions from moderator R.D. Sahl to Democrats zeroed in on Lynch’s votes against President Obama’s health care overhaul legislation in 2010 and his self-described prolife status, positions that put him outside a Democratic establishment that has coalesced behind Markey.
But Lynch, who said he respects Roe v. Wade, defended his votes as a reflection of an independent streak and pressed Markey for supporting NAFTA and a Wall Street bailout without doing enough for Massachusetts fishermen.
Oh, Ed!
Markey called his own vote in favor of Obama’s health care legislation “the proudest vote of my career,” helping to extend coverage to tens of millions of previously uninsured Americans. He also called it a defining cause of Democrats “from Harry Truman through Ted Kennedy” and a bright line dividing the parties.
If it were a good, decent, single-payer system you could say that, but crap care written by health conglomerates is far from it.
“Steve, when that vote came up, you were wrong when you were needed most,” Markey said. “That was the only option we had to support President Obama and to put that bill on the books.”
A devil's choice.
Lynch said the legislation gave up too much to insurance companies to get them to drop their fight while imposing taxes that he said would harm middle-class workers and local businesses.
“It was like a hostage situation where we not only paid the ransom, but we let the insurance companies keep the hostages,” said Lynch, a 57-year-old from South Boston. He called himself proud to stand up at times to party leaders.
“Hey, I don’t work for Nancy Pelosi, and I won’t work for Harry Reid,” he said.
The Democrats also jousted on the Wall Street bailout: Lynch called it a sop to banks; Markey said it was necessary to prevent another Great Depression.
Lynch won that clinch.
But they agreed on the need to keep interest rates low and for tough sanctions against Iran.
What a shock.
In the Republican match-up, all three GOP candidates indicated they would repeal the president’s health care plan, arguing that Massachusetts had already addressed the issue of universal coverage, but they also said they would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act that prevents the federal government from recognizing state-approved same-sex marriages and that is now before the US Supreme Court....
That's not happening, and as for the marriage stuff I've already divorced myself from covering that.
For the Republicans, the Wednesday night matchup represented the first televised opportunity to get their message out to a wider audience. A WBUR-FM poll released this week showed that even among likely Republican voters, 60 percent had not heard of Winslow, 47 had not heard of Gomez, and 34 percent did not know Sullivan.
Related: Mass. Senate candidates debate Wednesday
Gomez quit his job for last place?
Winslow, with experience as a litigator, appeared most comfortable before the camera and even squeezed in a plug for viewers to check out his campaign website.
Sullivan played the role of unexcitable senior statesmen, a former state legislator and Plymouth County district attorney who became the state’s top federal prosecutor and then director of the US Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives under President George W. Bush. The most conservative of the three on social issues, Sullivan challenged Gomez on experience and jabbing at his wealth as a private investor, asking him to describe the largest budget he has managed — besides his own.
Gomez said he had been in the business of investing in companies small, medium, and large and had sat on the board of a large company, responsible for managing a budget of more than $3 billion.
He also cited his experience as a pilot and Navy SEAL, as well as his private sector work, and said, “I’ve got leadership experience and I’ve been effective my whole life.”
But, given an opportunity to challenge his two Republican opponents with a question, Gomez, the least-tested of the three candidates, took a pass. “I’m not here to ask questions of my fellow candidates, to try to tear them down or put them on the spot,” Gomez said, instead posing a rhetorical question to the unseen Democrats who would soon follow on the Channel 5 stage.
He had a Clint moment?
The Republicans addressed a large swath of topics, offering glimpses of their positions on abortion and how they would balance the federal budget.
The WBUR poll found that Sullivan led his two opponents on the Republican side, while Markey was leading Lynch in the race for the Democratic nod. Both Markey and Lynch were still seen as likely to beat any of the Republicans in a direct matchup.
--more--"
Related:
"Wednesday night, all three Republican candidates for the state’s open Senate seat said they would not support reappointing Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke when his term expires in 2014."
Easy position to take seeing as he is retiring; however, none of them came out against the Fed and the private central banking scheme, 'eh?
Also see:
Ah, without Brownie in it there is nothing to see or read:
"2014 state race looks unlikely for Scott Brown" by Jim O’Sullivan | Globe Staff, March 11, 2013
Former senator Scott Brown appeared to place a temporary freeze on his political career Monday, announcing that he had joined a Boston law firm and, senior Massachusetts Republicans said, removing the most serious GOP obstacle to former nominee Charles D. Baker’s potential candidacy for governor next year....
In a telephone interview, Brown said, “I meet with Charlie all the time. I have business dealings with him all the time. I speak to him regularly, give him guidance regularly.”
I'm sure you could type Charles Baker into my blog search and see what comes up. I voted for him because this state needs a check on one-party, Democratic fascism.
Baker, a former health care executive and state budget chief, lost to Patrick by six percentage points in 2010, less than 10 months after Brown shocked Attorney General Martha Coakley to win the Senate special election to fill the slot long held by Edward M. Kennedy.
I'm still not sure of the fairness of the results; however, I've accepted them.
Since then, top Republicans say, Baker has oscillated about whether to run again, eager to return to Beacon Hill but uncertain about whether a decidedly Democrat-leaning state would revert to electing a Republican governor to counterbalance the Democrats’ grip on the Legislature. Before Patrick’s victory in 2006, the state had chosen a Republican chief executive in every election since 1990.
Yeah, he didn't need the hassle of running. The member of the elite did it because he cares about this state. Baker isn't a saint, but he did choose Tisei as his running mate.
Former governor William F. Weld said he had tried to convince Baker that as a second-time candidate he would adjust more naturally to the campaign trail....
At a press conference Monday, Brown said he will be working at the often gray intersection of government affairs and business.
Oh, so he's going to be a lobbyist.
During his unsuccessful run for reelection against Democrat Elizabeth Warren last year, the financial services industry was Brown’s biggest donor group....
Related: Did Warren Really Win?
If Brown chooses not to run for governor, Baker would probably emerge as a party establishment favorite.
Who would want to go from Senator to guverner?
Other prospective contenders include any one of the Republican contenders now vying to succeed former senator John F. Kerry, should one of them not ultimately win the seat.
They are Cohasset investor Gabriel Gomez, former US attorney Michael J. Sullivan, and state Representative Daniel Winslow.
--more--"
Also see: Brown Betrays GOP
Scott Brown less than candid? Bqhatevwr
Like him this one time because despite the other things because he disses the Globe.
Scott Brown makes his Fox debut
Related: The Reddish Brown Dog Jumped Over to Fox News
And look what did light up the political and elite establishment of Massachusetts:
"Patrick trips online firestorm with reelection joke" by Jim O'Sullivan | Globe Staff, March 20, 2013
For a few minutes early Wednesday afternoon, the Massachusetts political world was in flames.
Governor Deval Patrick’s attempt at humor during an appearance at the University of Massachusetts Boston went viral, leading many to believe that he would seek a third term. That would have been news, indeed, since Patrick has long professed to be satisfied with two terms.
And, while there is no law prohibiting a third consecutive term, there is no modern precedent.
“#Breaking: @MassGovernor announces he’s running for a third term” New England Cable News network tweeted at 1:10 p.m. to its more than 19,000 followers.
That ignited a firestorm of retweets, online exclamations of disbelief, and panicked phone calls by news organizations looking to catch up on a story that would dramatically remake the state’s political landscape.
With Patrick considered a potential 2016 contender for president, the thunderclap had national implications.
What would Patrick’s third-term agenda be? Would his entrance clear the field on the Democratic side? Would there be a 2010 rematch between him and Republican Charles D. Baker? Perhaps most importantly, had Patrick skipped Sunday’s St. Patrick’s Day breakfast to save his best material for remarks about state government efficiencies at a project management conference at UMass Boston?
Then, four minutes later, @NECN tweeted again: “#Correction #update: @MassGovernor says he was joking around when announcing he’s running for a third term.”
As heart rates slowed, the Twitterati made light of the mishap.
“[W]ell, that was a fun 8 minutes,” wrote Brendan Ryan, Patrick’s chief of staff.
A Patrick aide said the governor joked that his flattering introduction by Ira Jackson, dean of the McCormack Graduate School of Public Affairs at UMass Boston had smoothed the way for a reelection announcement. The limited audience reaction, the aide said, indicated that Patrick’s humor had not been delivered with pinpoint accuracy.
“It was obviously a joke,” Patrick spokeswoman Bonnie McGilpin told the Globe. “It just didn’t go over well.”
According to a transcript provided by the governor’s office, Patrick said, “First of all, thank you very much for the warm welcome and for hosting us today and for the setup to the announcement that I’ve come here to make, which is that I intend to run for a third term as your governor.
“It sounded so good, why not?” Patrick went on, “By the way, I just want to point out, I did notice what the reaction was, or the lack of reaction, to my announcement.”
At an unrelated press conference later Wednesday, he referred to the incident as “my teasing earlier.”
The governor said he “wasn’t even out the door” of the UMass Boston event, “and someone told me Twitter was lighting up.”
He reiterated that he would not seek a third term.
“I promised Diane two terms, and I really mean two terms,” he said, referring to his wife.
To sum up: no bombshell reelection announcement by Patrick.
It was, to borrow a phrase from one of Patrick’s best-known speeches, just words.
How odd. That's why politic$ $tink$ anywhere and everywhere in AmeriKa right now.
--more--"
I also hold that agenda-pu$hing, $pecial-intere$t-promoting, $tatu$ quo mouthpiece culpable.
