Disclaimer: Although it’s obvious to veteran BMGers, new people should note that this is my personal endorsement and not authorized by the campaign.
Excitement is overrated.
First things first: I disagree with Steve on casinos. I wish he opposed them; he doesn’t. At times he’s seemed to roll out the red carpet for them.
But that’s who the guy is. He made his decision, and he’s stuck to it. He focuses on the practical aspects of casinos. What you get with Grossman is sincerity.
If I were writing this someplace other than BMG, I probably wouldn’t mention his opponents. But since this place looks like Berwick Mass Group lately, a brief mention. I have all respect for the good doctor, and I appreciate his goals. But long-time commitment to the Democratic Party means something to me, and Grossman has done more for Democrats than anyone reading this or writing it. Now one can say “insider,” but one might also say activist, and anyone who’s spent time on a town committee can tell you that party organization work is time-consuming, not exactly lucrative, and absolutely thankless.
Ah, but as Juliette Kayyem reminded us at the convention, governor is not a lifetime achievement award. She was right — but she didn’t mention that being governor is also a mountain of largely thankless work. One percent inspiration, 99% administration.
As for Martha Coakley, one could make similar arguments: she’s clearly committed to public service, because she rebounded from defeat and stayed in politics. She may well be on her way to becoming governor. I look at both of them and see things I disagree with, but there’s no difference big enough to sway me to her. In the end, his judgment seems more sound.
Grossman’s Issues page has some stories about practical steps he’s taken as Treasurer that have made a difference. It’s worth a look, but it’s not dramatic.
There’s no need to dance around it: Grossman does not inspire passion. At the moment, that seems like a flaw. During budget negotiations next summer, it will seem like a virtue.
But wait — what about Baker? The Colossus looms. Or does he? He’s polling at 28% against Martha. Grossman and Berwick have lower numbers now, but the dynamic changes if they nominate. The entire field is electable. We have the luxury of picking who we think will do the best job.
To me, when I consider everything that goes into being governor, it’s a pretty easy call. If you’ve decided to support someone else, good luck to you and to them, but if not, I hope you give Steve Grossman a second look. People who get to know Steve get to like him.
I am an ardent Berwick supporter as most of you know, but as I was sitting in the 5th Middlesex section, “donning” my Berwick T-shirt, I was surprised when Steve came over and introduced himself to me. It was a quick 2-second encounter, but it impressed me nonetheless.
And I think you make great points. When I was undecided, my head was with Steve but my heart was with Don. Now they both are-I think Don turned it around at the Convention beating back the conventional dark horse Kayyem and nearly outpolling the front runner. That said, I’ve always said id be happy to vote for Steve and have defended his strong record as a public servant and Democrat. I appreciate the thoughtful endorsement.
too.
And I imagine I’m not alone among Berwick supporters in the primary, in feeling that way.
Beyond all that you’ve said in your post — and I agree with you on casinos too — I’ve always greatly respected Steve Grossman for a whole host of reasons, many of which you mention. Just to add 2 that are real pluses in my book — track record and courage.
His track record as Treasurer is a real plus, I think. I’ve heard this from many of his supporters and they’re right. We could do much worse than having a Gov with a history of solid accomplishments in state government and of being a really good steward on behalf of the public.
And on courage — the first time I heard Steve’s name was during the Howard Dean campaign. He led Dean’s campaign here in Mass. As a member of the all-volunteer-led group of activists who basically ran Dean’s campaign in Mass for a year, I know how much courage it took — in the year of John Kerry — for a Mass elected official to be so visible and vocal in supporting Dean. I’m sure Steve made some enemies and pissed some folks off, and I bet there are some who still feel that way. I’ve always respected that he really stood up for his longtime friend despite the odds and the costs — says a lot about him, imo.
And I totally forgot that he was on board with Dean when nobody in Massachusetts was, that is a big plus in my book. I honestly wish we had an IRV system in the primaries. This race, and the CD-5 special which also had great candidates to choose from, would have been improved. It would also prevent one or the other campaigns and candidates from ‘spoiling’ the opposition to Coakley.
Yeah I wholeheartedly would support IRV in primaries and frankly across the board for exactly the reasons you cite. Anything that makes voters not feel in a bind and allows them to express their true preferences, however nuanced and complicated, in my book is a win win — helps voters feel more engaged and empowered by the process and helps electeds better understand their electorate.
I also agree on the need for IRV. We really need to press our state reps to make that happen.
This makes a very solid case, which I haven’t been able to articulate as well since my support for Grossman largely comes down to I’ve know him for 18 years.
But I do think Berwick is a more dynamic figure who has a higher ceiling and a bigger appetite for taking on the tough fights. This is what I want in the Governorship, someone who will lead Massachusetts to the forefront of state policy.
I feel about Grossman v. Berwick the way I do about a hypothetical Hillary Clinton v. Warren. Hillary has put in a lot of time, but I’d trust Elizabeth Warren to inspire people and be the catalyst for real change. In this scenario Coakley is Mitt Romney.
The Hillary v. Warren comparison is great.
Highly competent, experienced insider v. visionary leader (who is also incredibly competent). Grossman will definitely move the ball down the field, but Berwick has the potential and drive to make much greater plays.
I appreciate the comment, but I think the Hillary comparison undersells Steve’s record.
(Will leave it there — I told myself I would avoid replying to comments.) Thanks for reading.
Hillary has been identified with DLC/Third Way/Wall Street policies for over 20 years. Steve Grossman’s record is nothing like that, and he’s done nothing to deserve the lack of respect he’s received here for his lifetime of consistently liberal achievements.
The point of sites like this is to engage.
Sometimes, with diaries like this, I just think it’s better to let my argument stand or fall.
…but I don’t believe dynamic and Berwick belong in the same sentence. I’ve seen him speak on a couple of occasions and he has not risen to the dynamism of “Governor” for me. Baker may be rather pale, but he is loaded with charisma compared to Don. (But Martha has her own issues in that department also, and Steve–who I’m leaning towards–oozes insincerity that so many politicians suffer from. I’m in a real quandary on this.)
You could expand this further. 1. How good is the candidate at looking constituents in the eye and shaking hands? 2. Does the candidate have good posture? 3. Can the candidate apply make up properly? 4. When expressing indignation, does the candidate apply just enough heat without sounding crazy, whiny, or wimpy?
These are all simpler criteria than, I don’t know, transportation policy, education funding formulas, and the like. So I’m glad you’re not straining yourself worrying about such imponderables.
You might get a headache.
JimC, for a couple weeks I’ve had just this on my to do list. You beat me to it but did a great job. Here’s my story.
I was on the hunt for a candidate last Fall. I knew I wasn’t going with Coakley for many of the reasons that already have been set out in detail in this blog over the past year or so. I was open to Grossman, Kayyem and Berwick and spent a bunch of time reading about them and their platforms. I went to meet and greets, and I finally went to one with Steve Grossman. I was deeply impressed and found my candidate. I was all in.
I won’t go in to the reasons why I didn’t support Kayyem or Berwick, though there are a bunch. I won’t because I am excited about Steve. He has been a steady servant to Democratic and liberal ideals over the course of his life. At his unionized company, he never has had a matter go to arbitration (meaning, his management locked themselves in a battle to the death with labor). His company has offered paid family leave for 20 years. That is leadership. That is talking the talk while also walking the walk. How he treats his employees — while running a business over a long period of time — means a great deal and shows a tremendous amount about his values and commitment to society as a whole. It also shows his talent and capacity for management. Hello, I got a gubernatorial candidate.
While he’s moved through the business world, never leaving behind his commitment to progressive values, he also maintained his commitment to big P Politics — the progressive type. He was an early supporter of marriage equality, for example, and testified about a paid family leave bill in 2006 — and is still leading the call on it today.
I am looking for a wholly competent executive to be my next Governor, one who also will not waiver in his commitment to Democratic values. I am often in awe of Governor Patrick and get goosebumps when I listen to him. But one does not need to have his oratorical skills to be an tremendous leader. (Look at Obama’s struggles, for example, despite his own oratorical command, to get bills through Congress.)
It takes a sort of competence, perseverance, and over-all ability to work it to succeed in that office. Steve Grossman absolutely has that. He’s been working it in politics and in business his entire life, with a heaping side of genuine integrity. I could not be happier about my candidate.
First, his aggressive expansion of the lottery into more addictive forms, such as the use of credit cards to play and online gambling.
Second, when he was state chairman of the Democratic Party he took the side of a big money contributor against workers who were trying to organize a union in one of the contributor’s nursing homes.
Grossman’s choice of money over labor stood in stark contrast to the courage displayed by Phil Johnston, when he was state party chairman. Johnston sided with the workers and almost lost his job as a result.
I followed this closely because the contributor, Gerald Schuster, had previously been my landlord.
He led the party through the Weld years when we were in a bit of a slump and got a Democrat elected to Silvio Conte’s US House seat. He also was extremely supportive of getting a Young Dem organization going in MA. For me his party chairmanship is a net positive.
Thank….I forgot this hard fought battle that called for Dem honchos to stand up for low wage workers.
http://www.bostonphoenix.com/boston/news_features/talking_politics/documents/01666744.htm
During that fight, which was about 2000 to 2002 as I recall.
I don’t dislike Grossman. It’s his adaptability I’m very wary of.
His supporters say that he is progressive as well as a longtime committed Democratic. Then why do I feel that he’s greasing the skids as the state slides towards Pottersville?
unabashedly I promote the contrast of this candidate, but also Martha Coakley. Don Berwick stands out not only because he opposes Casinos outright, but how he expresses his views, and has made alliances both Republican and Independent to back his viewpoint. Take a gander.
And all praise and comments appreciated, thank you.
Like Jim, I have concerns about the casino position. Many years ago, when running for Congress, Barney Frank said the only time he ever voted for someone that he totally agreed with, was the first time he ran for office. After that, there were a couple things he might have regretted, but voted for himself anyway. No doubt, Berwick has staked the most progressive ground out there. I’m not sure it is winnable ground, or that his inexperienced at state government would be an asset in pursuing that agenda. A popular and charismatic Deval Patrick could not get the leadership to fundamentally change the state tax system. I simply don’t think he can win.
I think Grossman’s story of being successful and progressive in business and government plays well in the long run. By long run, I mean I have the most faith in him in the general election and ability to achieve once elected. Maybe many of you wish Gov. Patrick was running again. But similarly, there are positions the Governor took that you probably were not 100% on board. I think Grossman has the best shot chance of promoting progressive values and winning.