Snow Storm Grassroots

My intrepid friend Garrett Quinn wrote the Globe piece that striker57 quotes, and also took this fabulous photograph:

If Lynch wins, it will be because of guys like that. - promoted by david

I’ve seen a decent amount of media speculation on Senate candidate organizations’ ability to collect nomination signatures in a compressed time period and the impact of Nemo on top of the shorten window. Pleased to see grassroots can grow under blizzard conditions:

SOMERVILLE – Hurricane force winds and sideways snow could not stop two Stephen Lynch supporters from gathering signatures in the middle of Davis Square this afternoon. Jay Fraiser and Joe Kelly set up a table on a traffic island across from the Somerville Theatre around 10 a.m. with hopes of getting about 100 signatures.

By 1 p.m. they had over 250.

“I didn’t think there’d be this many people out right now. I did think people would be out walking their dogs. We love Jack Williams but how much more of Jack Williams can we take? It’s been like 48 hours straight of Jack Williams,” said Kelly, 32, a Somerville based union electrician and avid fan of the WBZ news anchor.

Kelly, layered up with Carhart pants, said they had to be out there to get signatures for Lynch because they did not have much time to get him on the ballot.

Fraiser, who says he has gathered around 2,500 signatures for Lynch, chalked up his support for the South Boston congressman because “he’s a regular guy.” . . .

, , , Yunits said that Kelly and Fraiser were not being paid by the campaign


29 Comments . Leave a comment below.
  1. Good for them

    This is a great illustration of New England toughness/stubbornness, with a great Jack Williams quote thrown in to boot. (Off-topic: if you’ve ever had a chance to hear Liz Walker as a public speaker in the past five years, she is electric. Amazing experience.) Good for these guys; if there’s going to be one positive legacy of Martha Coakley, it will be several years of Democratic campaigns going out of their way to show off how hard they’re working.

    Surprised to see Yunits throw in with Lynch — he’d struck me as a forward thinking guy, and he’s working for a campaign with policies 20 years in the past…a Democratic Bob Dole.

    Oh, and can we stop with this “Nemo” nonsense?

    sabutai   @   Sun 10 Feb 3:51 PM
    • Down with Nemo!

      Also this cutsie “nor’easter” crap that is foisted upon us by news anchors from New York City and beyond.

      It’s “no’theaster,” (nawTHEstah) if you want to be authentic. As every New Englander knows full well.

  2. I was gathering signatures today...

    …for Ed Markey! I’m on a call right now with the campaign – we had set a target of 1,500 sigs today, and we’ve more than doubled that!


    • I saw a lot of reports of teams out there for Markey – but they were out and about rather than setting up a perfect-looking photo op.

      One of the teams involved Rep. Sciortino and around six other individuals in Medford.

      That said, both of these campaigns will easily hit the signature total. I am more skeptical about the Republican candidate(s), especially without the use of some paid workers.

      • 250 signatures in a couple of hours in a progressive city like Somerville . . and a Boston Globe story and photo about grassroots support for their candidate – sounds like better than just a perfect-looking photo op to me. And something tells me that wasn’t the only Lynch signature collection activity this weekend – lame potshots aside.

        That said, yeah I suspect Dan Winslow’s $100 k loan to his campaign will go to buying 10,000 signatures. Unclear if the other potential Republican candidates have the financial resources to paid for signatures.

  3. Lynch voters considered " OBSOLETE" by Ed Markey and his supporters

    Wow, they expected 100 signatures and received 250. Interesting they work for IBEW, those guys clearly know which side of their bread is buttered, and why they are supporting Stephen Lynch. Had a high school buddy work for IBEW 103, he wore work boots every day and when we met over a friends house to watch a game or whatever, he would fall asleep b/c he worked so hard.

    Too bad many here do not care about the IBEW or the other unions impacted by Markey’s past votes that liquidated millions of high paying union in the U.S.A. I can only conclude by your indiference to their suffering and your support fo Ed Markey, that most of you have found these people to be….OBSOLETE!

    To all Markey voters, do not turn your back on these people. Ed Markey’s support for unfair trade policies may not have impacted your jobs yet, but remember, what goes around, comes around. Please watch the short video below….it could be your occupation if Mr. Markey is our next Senator.

    • …I like Markey more and Lynch less.

      sabutai   @   Sun 10 Feb 7:26 PM
      • Seems time to remind danfromwaltham that Ed Markey and Ted Kennedy had the exact same vote on NAFTA and other trade agreements. And I don’t think you will find too many unions or union members who think Ted Kennedy turned his back on working women and men.

        Senator Kennedy voted for NAFTA and similar trade agreements while fighting for language that reguired labor and enviromental standards be met by trade partner countries under those agreements. Those efforts were not always successful and Senator Kennedy voted for the final agreements in one of his few breaks with Organized Labor. Congressman Markey’s record on trade issues mirrored Senator Kennedy’s votes.

        I’d remind dan that Congressman Lynch opposed expansion at Boston College that would have created construction jobs however you will find a large number of construction unions, like IBEW 103 and my union, endorsing and working for Lynch for Senate.

        Congressman Markey has a solid labor voting record. As I said in my post supporting Congressman Lynch, I believe both will be solid votes on Democratic policies. My support for Congressman Lynch is based on where the priorities Lynch and Markey will be as a US Senator. IMO Lynch wil bring a middle class jobs and economic priority and for that reason has earned my support.

        Dan – as we seen with corporations from Uppercrust to Hostess the enemies of middle class American jobs are corporate CEOs and greed not elected officials with voting nrecords on workers issues like Congressmen Markey and Lynch.

        I know I’m not going to convince a progressive on BMG for whom climate change or internet freedoms are strongly held beliefs to vote for Steve Lynch. Wouldn’t even try. But I do want to have made a rational case that after the primary that same BMG progressive voter be with Steve Lynch as the Democratic nominee, same as I will be with Congressman Markey if the shoe is on the other foot.

        Leave the venom to the Tea Party crazies Dan.

        • Striker- Is it greed or survival these CEO's are engaged in?

          Your so-called friends like Ted Kennedy or John Kerry or Bill Clinton or Ed Markey gutted mostly private-sector working class jobs. If what you say is true, and Kennedy tried to have labor and environmental standards but failed, and yet still voted for NAFTA, then that tells me Kennedy had no principle. That speaks volumes, doesn’t it?

          You won’t get any sympathy from me by blaming CEO’s. What you call greed, I call survival. Your so-called bosom-buddies set the rules and the playing field, thus began the race to the bottom and jobs vanishing before our eyes.

          Just like the unions with Kennedy, the progressives will line up behind the nominee, don’t worry about that. If you are going on BMG saying there is no difference between Lynch and Markey on jobs/ trade / agenda, then not only are you going against your candidates own critique of Markey, you are playing to lose, and I don’t play that way. In fact, you like free trade, just vote Republican, at least they are not hypocrites about it.

          I have no idea about Lynch being against Boston College expanding. IMO, these private colleges need to start paying federal/state taxes rather than Deval rattling the tin cup in my face for more of my money. Don’t tell me striker, you held a sign for Deval too? Good grief ..

          • Proudly Supported Deval

            Sorry Dan, I proudly supported Deval (and Elizabeth Warren and Mike Capuano and Martha Coakley and State Senate candidates like Tom McGee and State Rep candidates like Marjorie Decker and Mary Keefe . . oh and NH Governor Maggie Hassan and Maine’s new independent US Senator Angus King). In otherwords candidates across the political spectrum because I believe in looking at an elected official’s overall record not a single issues.

            And Dan since you are talking union, I’m sure you are aware that Governor Patrick signed a groundbreaking 10-year, $1 billion Project Labor Agreement for UMass-Boston’s capital Construction Plan. That PLA puts all contractors on a level playing field and increases the potential for Union construction workers to get jobs while taxpayers get the best deal possible. Certainly those hardworking IBEW members you talked about deserve that opportunity provided by Governor Patrick.

            We are lucky in the Mass US Senate Dem Primary Special – we have two good choices and damn I get to support the candidate of my choice instead of the lesser of two evils for a change.

            As for survival of your friends the CEOs – well when the owner of Uppercrust steals hundreds of thousands of dollars from his workers (US Dept. of Labor Court Actions), fails to pay them back wages, gives himself a bonus, avoids jail and is part of a group attempting to buy Uppercruust store locations he put into bankruptcy – I say he’s surviving pretty well on the backs of workers. Same at Hostess. Millions in executive bonuses, 2-years of failing to pay into the employee pension fund, profits ripped out by Hedge Fund investors and 18,000 American workers out of jobs. Quite a survival story for corporate America!

            And let me get this straight, Ted Kennedy was bad for American Workers? I’m no fan of free trade – fair trade guy all along. I certainly don’t celebrate NAFTA in anyway and disagreed with the Senator’s vote. But you go right along believing Senator Kennedy had no principles. And I will go right along being a fan of OSHA (you know that little worker safety agency Ted Kennedy created with Legislation and fought to fund) and the Davis-Bacon Law, and Unemployment Insurance and Project Labor Agreements and Minimum Wage laws and all those laws Ted Kennedy supported and fought for (as have Ed Markey and Steve Lynch).

            • Striker57- Depends on the definition of the word "friends" is.....

              When Gillette laid off over 1,000 workers and relocated their jobs to Mexico, was that greed on their part, or survival? When Whirlpool closed that plant in Indiana (see my prior post titled Reason not to vote for Ed Markey), was that greed or necessity?    When GM closed three auto plants and presto, three new ones popped up in Mexico, was that greed?    Then you mention all the wonderful things Kennedy did for unions, but which ones?  Was he a “friend” the unions that needed the most protection, the ones in the private sector? Clearly not, right, agree on that? A lot of good his bills did for the millions who lost their livelihood, in part, because of his and Markey’s free tade votes.  Now I know why Kennedy/Markey pushed to increase minimum wage so much, by their support for NAFTA and GATT, he sent millions from middle class to minimum wage jobs. 
              As for Hostess, I was a big fan of the Ding Dongs personally, Twinkies to a lesser extent.  Hostess still had a pension plan for their employees?  No wonder they had to go out of business, that is unheard of, a private company offering a pension to its employers.  How about this, perhaps Hostess should have taken full advantage NAFTA, made their goodies in Mexico, and had Mexican citizens drive them to their destinations, bypassing the Teamsters. 
              I plead ignorance to the PLA.  From what little I read, it requires job sites to have union wages, even for non-union contractors, who pay union dues, while they work on the job site.  First priority goes to the union hall?   If this helps you and your union, I can see why you would support Gov. Patrick.  But perhaps we can look what others have said about NAFTA.  Right her on BMG, one suggested it is “progressive” to transfer jobs to other countries, spread the wealth/opportunity sort of speak, especially if the quality is the same.  Why not right here at home.  Would you not agree, if the quality is the same, the PLA should go away?  Why be greedy, spread the wealth to everyone, no?  
              Glad to hear you supported Deval.  How did you feel when he tried, and in some cases, removed the ability of our domestically deployed soldiers, the police officers, from doing details?  Do you believe hiring flagman, at a prevailing wage rate, is really going to save money?  Prevailing wage rate for a flagman?  That a joke or waste or both?  Almost as bad as a parking lot attendant at Mass Port making $100,000 a year.  Or the Chelsea Housing Authority Director making over $300K, padding his pension, or the Boston fireman out on a disability, yet he looks like Mr. Atlas b/c he is a professional weightlifter.  For every bad CEO, we can point to others in politics or public sector, no need for the tit-for-tat, but I digress.   I’ll take the cop, at least he protects and serves, and hopefully is busy on details, rather than setting up speed traps on Main St or Totten Pond Rd in Waltham.   
              You see the many negative ratings I have?  I chalk it up to a old movie quote, “Logic is an enemy and truth is a menace”.  As you know, Stephen Lynch’s only chance at winning is to have Unenrolled voters, like myself, flood the primary as we did in 1990 when we put Silber over the top.  Lynch distinguished himself as “more moderate” than Markey.  We will not attract voters whose main concern is weather patterns or who has the highest NARAL rating.   I believe, with all due respect, the Markey supporters like your comments, is because you fog the issue of trade, Markey’s Achilles heel.  To win, we must expose it, you should aswell, if you want Lynch to win.    

              • "We put Silber over the top" -- Precisely

                I note that the effect of putting John Silber “over the top” was to elect the Republican, William Weld. I think your “support” for Mr. Lynch has the same goal — electing the Republican candidate.

                • Tom- you really believe Bellotti would have defeated Weld?

                  Unlike many, I don’t do party labels.

                  It was Independent voters that allowed Silber to defeat Bellotti, it was on tv as early returns came in, that if over 40% of the primary voters were Independents, then Silber would win. Just a fact. As I said before, I voted for Silber in November, what don’t you understand? Dilusional to suggest Frank Bellotti would have defeated Weld if he were the nominee, Weld would have been declared the winner by 8:01 PM

                • Dan's a hallucinogen.

                  Every time he comments we all become delusional.

              • 'It's all about greed

                Dan – the corporate jobs moves are all about greed and nothing to do with survival. The CEOs of corporations in the auto indstry (and most others) are about delivering profits to major shareholders on a quarterly basis. And then those wealthy shareholders responded in kind with millions of dollars in bonuses and multi-million paychecks. It’s the top 1% taking care of the top% and American jobs be damned. Of course you can make it cheaper in Mexico or other third world countries – no labor or environmental standards to deal with. So let’s dump these pesky American jobs like our auto plant in Framingham, shift the jobs to low paying third world countries (Seems Apple learned this lesson as well so it’s not limited to our older industries) and I – Mr. CEO – get my bonus. Greed pure and simple.

                As for Hostess and pensions. Hmmmm. Those 18,000 workers bargained for 50 years to defer wages and have that money put into a pension fund. A legal commitment made jointly by management and the union to ensure a future for retirees. Then the hedge fund owners of Hostess decided to ignore 50 years of commitment and stop paying into a leaglly bargained pension fund. They pull out the profit and figure a bankruptcy judge will void the pension commitment.

                There’s an old union song that asks “what side are you on?”. Well Dan, I’m on the Hostess workers side, the Uppercrust workers side, the immigrant workers getting srewed by day labor contractors side. I figure the CEOs have their “survival” well planned out among their own kind.

                As for my friends the Democrats – I’m not always happy with their stands and their votes on every issue. I know when NAFTA and other trades agreements passed American workers lost jobs. I also know that the only elected officials who fought for and won money for worker retraining programs for those displaced workers were the Democrats who voted for NAFTA. The Republicans were MIA after the trade agreement votes.

                As for PLAs – they require any contractor to pay the state prevailing wage for the job classification on a public job. PLAs set standards around help insurance and apprenticeship programs. They level the playing field for all contractors. I understand why some non-union contractors don’t like PLAs -accountability. Accountability to taxpayers, accountability to awarding authorities and accountability to their own workers.

                As for flagmen vs police details, there is no saving on paying a flagman vs a police officer for the job. And yes a flagman is a prevailing wage category. Or do you believe that a worker should stand in traffic with no enforcement authority (how many police officers and their vehicles have we seen hit while on details?) for minimum wage?

                Now onto unenrolled voters. You and I agree that unenrolled voters could make the difference for Congressman Lynch in this primary. Just as unenrolled voters could well decide the June final – so the Lynch campaign best to a very good job IDing and pulling supportive unenrolled voters. And depending on how active a Republican primary we have that could be a tough job.

                I reject your Silber comparison. John Silber was a very poor nominee for the Democratic Party. He had no geographic base and no record to base his candidacy on. His primary win was a protest vote. And he was matched against a very good Republican nominee in Bill Weld, who was well financed. Silber was a disaster that one hopes the Dems never repeat. Congressman Lynch, while more moderate to conserative within the Democratic Party, has a geographic base, a voting record that includes some progressive leaning votes (again, I’m not trying to sell Steve to my progressive BMG friends in this primary – just thinking June final) and a campaign organization. And unlike Silber, Lynch (or Markey) will be facing off against a reasonably unknown Republican (with little more than a State Rep district or town election base) in a short time frame election. My money is on the Democrat in that final.

                And yes I will be with Congressman Markey if he is the nominee. I think it’s easier for me to move to Markey than it will be for some progressives to move to Lynch after a Primary. So Dan, that’s why I continue to make a pro-Lynch case. Not for + or – ratings but I firmly believe that a Democratic loss in Massachusetts in 2013 gives shaky Dems (like Harry Reid) cover to derail much of President Obama’s agenda.

        • Again fantastic posts

          And you have gone a long way to convincing me that Lynch won’t be too terrible as our nominee, for reasons stated in my positive post I am a Markey man through and through, and I would posit he cares about climate change (which is a middle class and jobs issue as well-just look at the Sandy damage and the closed fisheries) and internet freedom as much as the bread and butter issues that Lynch is focused on. But we can respectfully disagree and you show us how. And for that I will also tone down my anti-Lynch rhetoric in the spirit of the Christopher pledge, I would be willing to vote for any of the Democrats over Dan Winslow, as much as I respect him as well I might add.

  4. regular guy

    That’s why Scot Brown was such a great Senator–he was a regular guy.
    Is Lynch even more regular?
    And why is a regular guy a guy?

  5. Actually a pretty perfect metaphor for the Lynch campaign

    Two guys alone in a deserted, frozen wasteland.

    • Davis Square - A Wasteland?

      Hmmmmm. 250 Somerville voters wandered through that wasteland and signed Steve Lynch’s nomination papers.

      And since both Lynch and Markey will get the signatures they need, one could wonder Bob, how the “standing alone and deserted” Lynch campaign mananged to generate a favorable media story on grassroots commitment while the Markey campaign missed the opportunity to show the voters that level of activity (and please note as Johnt posted the Markey folks were out doing exactly the same work – not knocking their commitment. Just noting the Markey campaign missed another opportunity to highlight its loyal supporters)

      • It was a joke

        Of course, Davis Square is awesome. But, was my comment perhaps a bit too close to the mark? Of course, it is impressive that these guys set up that little table, and almost as much of a miracle that they got 250 signatures as that the Rep. has coincidentally completely reversed his long-standing position against women’s reproductive rights. But it is also true that standing at a deserted intersection locked in ice is an amusing metaphor for a candidacy that is way out of step with the values of most people in Massachusetts — last-minute Romneyesque desperation flip flopping notwithstanding.

        • OK Bob. My bad on missing the humor

          And my rose colored glasses allow me to view two volunteers braving the elements for their candidate as plucky commitment rather than a desperate action.

          As for the Congressman’s position on reproductive rights – fair game to question the sincerity of his developing stand. My problem with labeling every change in position an elected official makes as “flip-flopping” is that it discourages politicians learning and growing and developing new policy positions. Did President Obama flip-flop on marriage equality or did he after reasoned arguments and internal reflection change his opposition on same sex marriage? If the Congressman has moved in a more pro-choice direction I view that as a twofer. The anti-choice crowd just lost a vote and the reproductive rights folks added a vote. Nice two vote swing if its the reality.

          Again, I’m old enough to remember that Ed Markey won a crowded primary as the pro-life candidate and evolved. And now has a voting record to back up his change of position. So time will tell.

          As for out of step with “the values of most people in Massachusetts” I tend to not make that level of blanket pronouncements – especially when it comes to elected officials who have won repeated elections (and in Lynch’s case in his old and new CDs). While agreeing he starts from behind with normally progressive primary voters it’s a candidate’s job to grow his voter pool. I’ll leave the “values” judgements to others.

        • Something to celebrate not mock

          I am a committed Markey supporter, but considering we had a Senate candidate in 2010 who asked ‘Me? go out in the snow in front of Fenway?’, this is a good sign, as was johnt001′s post that shows Markey’s supporters are just as excited. I was worried this would be a nasty race that would divide the party, but if Lynch and Markey are both bringing grassroots to the table than thats good for everyone. The flip flop on choice is also something to celebrate, perhaps that is Lynch recognizing he was out of step with Massachusetts values and now he is coming back.

          The real question is how he would vote on judges, Moakley was solidly pro-life but would have likely oppoesd most conservative judges had he become a Senator on constitutional grounds. Moakley was also rather dovish on foreign policy. Asking Lynch where he is out of step is definitely valid and the debates should bring this out. But I will not mock good Democrats trying to get votes and getting excited about this race.

  6. Danfromwaltham...

    …demonstrates above that he can’t even play nice with a fellow Lynch supporter – that says a lot!

    • I disagree

      Danfromwaltham is a troll. He is representative of nothing, except FUD.

      I support Markey. I am also not naive enough to think a Lynch support will have it easy here, on a decidedly liberal site. But, folks like striker57 are the folks we will be collaborating with come May 1st.

      My focus of criticism will likely be on the communications of the Lynch campaign. How his consultants try to frame him. I’m keen to watch them balance him so that he will appeal to Brown supporters, but allow him to pivot, should he be the nominee.

      I don’t see me whacking at Lynch, as a person. He is suitable to be a Senator. I certainly don’t see myself whacking the vols that go out to support Lynch. That is bad mojo, imho.

      I prefer Markey, but can accept Lynch.

      It would behoove us, as a Party, to take this approach.

      • I'm with you, John.

        I’m leaning Markey, but waiting to see what the rest of my crew is doing and why. If Lynch wins the primary, I’ll be very happy to support a Democrat. As senator, he’s going to have to represent the entire state, not just Southie.

        • I'll have a very hard time voting for Mr. Lynch

          He wasn’t some naive greenhorn when he chose sides on the Schiavo episode, and he pretty much gave a middle-finger to me, Democrats, and progressives when he voted for Stupak and against the ACA.

          I sincerely hope that Mr. Markey makes mincemeat out of Mr. Lynch in the primary, so that I never have to make the awful choice between Mr. Lynch and any of the prospective GOP candidates. If Mr. Lynch is the nominee, there is very good chance I’d just skip the special election.

          • I'll always vote and always vote

            for a Democrat.

            • Let's defer this

              I fear we’re having the dress rehearsal before the script is finished. Let’s wait till the primaries are over. I, like you, always vote and always vote for a Democrat. I even voted for Martha Coakley (against Scott Brown).

              With any luck at all, Mr. Markey will win the Democratic primary and we can duck this whole question.

  7. Pays off in the short term AND the long term. I still haven’t decided between Lynch or Markey, and I am reading all supporters’ comments on them. However, I’m sure there were also Markey supporters out there over the weekend who didn’t happen to be captured on film.

    I didn’t venture into Davis over the weekend (yes, I’m a wuss), but I would have given these guys 5 signatures if I could just to reward their dedication.

    However, regardless of who these particular people were gathering sigs for, this is the kind of grit and determination Democrats need to make sure we win the general election on June 25, and the regularly-set election again in 2014.

    We need to remember not to lose the fight for this seat in 2014 as well. Yes, we will all be working hard for MA GOV and a bunch of seats in the Legislature in 2014, but we can’t let a hard-fought victory go to waste a year later.

« Blue Mass Group Front Page

Add Your Comments

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Thu 27 Apr 11:02 AM