Any caucus-goers with tidbits to share about the Lieutenant Governor’s race, please let us know what you saw, what you think, what you dream … well, anyway, how the caucuses were for you, who you think had the strongest showing, and if there are any interesting links you think others should know about.
Please share widely!
There were two women collecting signatures for Tim Murray at the Watertown caucus, and they stayed through the entire thing to get all the delegates names and addresses. I talked to one of them, thinking that she was originally from Worcester, but now lived here in Watertown, but no, they had just driven here for the day and they stayed until the last vote was taken.
<
p>
From what others have said, that happened at caucuses statewide. That’s dedication!
I went to a couple caucuses and always saw Silbert and Murray volunteers pretty consistently. In particular the Murray people seemed to be everywhere.
<
p>
In my mind it comes down to those two.
I got this email from the Murray Campaign today. From the people I talked to, they had good caucus coverage across the state.
<
p>
Greetings From The Campaign Manager
I want to say thank you to everyone for helping the campaign get off to a great start. In just seven weeks we have: held a December fundraising kickoff event at Mechanics Hall which raised $150,000 and had over 800 people attending; in January we held a four city announcement bus tour that was attended by hundreds of supporters, activists and community leaders; and this past weekend we covered more than 400 democratic caucuses with more than 250 volunteers. Tim has also been endorsed by more than 60 elected officials from across the state and we are picking up more endorsements every day!
<
p>
Our campaign is moving forward and getting stronger every day thanks to the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donors who have made this campaign the talk of the state! Great job. Now we need to keep the momentum going. We need your help, so call or come on down to the headquarters at 316 Shrewsbury Street and get involved. You can also stay in touch with what’s going on in the campaign by checking our web site at http://www.timmurray.org or by calling the campaign office at 508-791-0400. Together we are building a great team, so come join us!
<
p>
Joe O’Brien, Campaign Manager
I think Lowell was popular because all 11 wards were meeting in one place. I think that it’s likely that any cities with more wards or more people expected to attend start splitting the locations. Which is why, I expect, Tim and Tom chose to stop by Lowell.
<
p>
Said a quick hi to Tim before I got too busy. People were in evidence gathering sigs for Bonifaz as well. We had people getting sigs for Deval of course. I don’t remember seeing a Reilly signature gatherer, but I could have easily missed them.
I went to a few caucuses and was working for a DA candidate and I must say that I was very surprised by Silbert’s showing… not only was she everywhere she should have been, but she was well staffed and had real women that she had helped along with her — not as a show off of what she can — but as testimony that people are willing to work for her because she worked so hard for them. Great message — great showing.
In my opinion it comes down to these two as well.
<
p>
Tim Murray gives the Dems something they did not have in 2002 – namely Worcester county. Mitt carried every town in the county save Worcester itself – and even there the Dems won by only by a small margin.
<
p>
County-wide – people of all stripes are behind Tim – from Sheriff Glodis’ machine on the right to US Rep. Jim McGovern and State Senator Augustus and State Rep. Jim Leary on the middle-left side of things.
<
p>
Silbert brings some hands-on non-profit experience and has helped creat a LOT of jobs which once they find out about that will resonate with a lot of voters. But, will voters wake up one day and say – “you know what? We don’t need a man and a woman as the top two on the ticket”. (I can’t wait for the day when two women will be acceptable to a lot of this state)
<
p>
Unfortuantely I think we can pretty much forget Kelley – as much as I’d like to see him on the ballot in September for at least the benefit of his supporters.
<
p>
I have a feeling some people are going to get pretty sick of hearing “Stop and Shop Heiress” a million times a day and will go for a regular Joe/Joette. I don’t think people can relate to the Heiress thing. Reminds them too much of Teresa!
<
p>
And if it’s Murray and two women on the primary ballot? You know what happens there.
<
p>
And going back to Sheriff Guy Glodis for one more second….how worried is he to see this Deval machine spring to life out here in Worcester County. I mean Deval carried entire town slates here – even when there were Reilly people showing up all over the place to run as “uncommitted”. The longer Glodis supports Reilly in my opinion – the worse off it is for him in the long run. Couple ALL that along with the trouble he’s getting from the union guys who GOT him into office – and it does not paint a rosy picture 4 years from now for him.
Nobody in the Somerville Ward 6 caucus talked about the Lt. Gov. race at all, and I don’t recall seeing any signature papers there either.
I was at a good amount of the caucuses and Tim Murray people were everywhere from what I heard. I think the dedication behind the people who are in support of him is a great sign of what he’s made of. Tim’s team was pleasant and very energetic, something I liked…a lot of the other volunteers looked as though they couldn’t have cared less about getting the crucial nomination signatures.
<
p>
Tim made a nice quick statement at the Lowell caucus that was positive and brief. He also seems to know how to work a crowd, really trying to get a chance to meet every person in the room. It’s going to be hard for Silbert to come near that- I only saw her at one high school in Boston.
A bunch of these comments are totally from campaign staffers or, at least, extreme partisans, so we should take everything with a grain of salt. Taking jordhc23’s comment as an example (I could truth-squad more): (s)he says that Murray was everywhere, that he spoke briefly in Lowell, and that he only saw Silbert in Boston at a high school. You know why? because jord23hc was probably with another candidate (Reilly? Patrick?) whose path crossed Murray’s in Lowell and Silbert’s in Boston, and that at the other caucuses jord23hc went to, (s)he didn’t see any Silbert evidence. Well you know what? At my caucus, there was no Murray, no Kelley, but there was Goldberg and Silbert materials. There was no Reilly, but there was Patrick. What does that all mean? Nothing.
<
p>
From what I’ve read on this board over the past few days, Murray’s partisans, volunteers and staffers have been posting a lot, trying to create the impression that he was “everywhere.” And you know what? He, or his people at least, probably WERE in more places than the other LG candidates. And he SHOULD have had that happen, because he has the biggest network of people who have supported him and worked on his campaigns. In fact, if he hadn’t done that, I would have been worried, because he’s an elected official and should have people who have either worked for or with him, who want something from him, or who believe in him.
<
p>
So, take all the Murray field power stuff with mucho salt, because, as we saw on that NECN interview, Sam Kelley can articulate a message; as we saw from da clerk’s post re. the Suffolk Poll, Silbert’s message resonates the best when voters learn about the candidates; and, as evidenced by her campaign literature, Goldberg has a lot of political support.
<
p>
Look, we all know that staffers, volunteers, and activists are all over these blogs, because we are all more politically involved. So stop trying to make a big deal of something we all know. Also, whoever jord23hc is, you have no right to attack him/her negatively. I know that I went to three caucuses as a volunteer for the Murray campaign and Cong. McGovern. So the fact that s/he went to Lowell and some Boston caucus should not ID her/him as an “insider” or whatever you wanna label him/her as.
<
p>
And after attending their caucus volunteer mtgs before the caucus I could tell that they were organized and had alot of people involved. So I don’t doubt the campaign covered 400+ caucuses. The “impression” is real – sorry to burst your bubble. Murray is the strongest candidate in the field. Keep in mind that Silbert, Kelly and Goldberg have all been in this race since last year, and Murray announced his candidacy and began starting up his campaign between late December/January. I think that is pretty immpressive to have that kind of organization (And fundraising) after being in the race for only about 1 month.
<
p>
Don’t get me wrong all the candidates are great, and they take the same stances on issues, but in terms of taking back LG’s office, I want Murray on the ticket because he has the experience, qualifications and leadership to be on that ticket.
<
p>
*And as I noted in another post, Kelly did not impress me at all from the NECN interview. He has no depth or leadership qualities and only speaks about healthcare. Yes, healthcare is important, but there are alot of other issues facing this State. I think all of the candidates would promote healthcare if elected as well.
I think Hoss was calling it as he sees it.
<
p>
Also, it’s a bit of a stretch to say Murray just got in the race. Perhaps officially, but it’s more than clear from his organization he’s been working on this campaign for at least as long as the other candidates – he just had that pesky “mayoral” race to win again before he made it official. Despite his city council experience and his diligent campaign efforts. If Tim is as strong as you say this race should be over. Despite his city council experience and his diligent campaign efforts, it is clearly not over.
<
p>
I am supporting Andrea Silbert as the best candidate for LG not because she has the most extensive political campaign experience, but because she’s got the clearest vision for the job, the longest and most unique record of public service in this race and would be the best balance against Kerry Healey. Compared to the other candidates, she is unassailable by Republicans: she’s a committed progressive who can light up Kerry Healey on jobs and economic issues.
Field guy if Andrea had been in more than this race maybe you would knopw Murrays organization has been up and running since he ran for mayor the first time. So for you to say “Perhaps officially, but…: is disengenious at best.
We all know you you are with/for Silbert, but are you comparing her in the NP sector as public service? If you are, I believe Mayor Murray,s time and service as a prosecutor, city councilman and Mayor can challenge her ” longest and most unique record of public service in this race ” In addition I have another queastion, after watching her on Chet Curis what is she running for governor or Lt Governor? Before you answer i want to reming you of your post “and would be the best balance against Kerry Healey” As far as I know Kerry Healy is running for Governor and AS is running for LG…. Are you suggesting a LG candidate is the best balance against a governor. If you are UI seriously question how you got the title field guy unless you just gave it to yoursel then that would make sense.
Hoss cant see beyond his AG blinders, Hoss is a poser
Leftisright:
<
p>
Not sure where that last sentence came from, but let me let that slide and instead try to flesh out for you and Pol Fem and everyone else what my agenda is in posting here:
<
p>
More than any other race discussed on BMG, there has been a ton of partisan posting re. the LG’s race (probably because most are pro-Patrick). I’m trying to take the semi-objective/blogger/experienced hand view of the race as its stands, which is to call the race as it really is, aleith through the lens of my own perception of things. I’m looking at this in light of my experience in Mass. staewide politics which extends well back into the previous century (as I’m sure yours and PolFem’s does as well). I’ve worked on campaigns, advised campaigns, and am sitting it out this year – but, as you all know, one can’t really “sit it out” after it gets in your blood, hence my too-frequent checking of BMG – god I wish it existed back in the day!
<
p>
But I digress…
<
p>
The truth that I know from all my experience is this: in down-ballot races, money and the best ad wins and field doesn’t. The convention doesn’t matter a lick. Endorsements are nice, but carry less and less weight each cycle.
<
p>
Maybe Murray is aiming to change all that this year, and maybe he will, but until I see it happen, I’m sticking with what history tells me. That means that at this point, I am impressed with Silbert’s fundraising, particulalry her January, even if she was going back to the well to her donors from last year. That means at this point I am also impressed at the splash Murray made in december with his big $ month and his endorsements. That means I am surprised Goldberg hasn’t been raising more money, because she can’t rely on her endorsements alone. That means I give Kelley no shot, except as spoiler. Who’s the favorite now? It’s gotta be Murray, it should be Murray. Who, if trends continue in the $, endorsement and organizing veins, wins the primary? Silbert. Who do I want? Dunno yet, but I’m glad we have such a nice field.
<
p>
PolFem: FG is right. I was singling out Jord not because he was a Murray person, but because it was his post that tipped it for me and made me want to write my post. As I expressly stated in my post, I could have picked a number of other posters to “truth-squad” as I called it. It was not personal.
<
p>
Pol Fem, your post is honest in that it comes from an admitted Murray supporter who was at his organizing meetings, so I will trust your assertion that his campaign is organized. 400-caucuses-covered-organized, I don’t know, but that’s a personal view that’s based not in fact but purely on my experience in politics.
<
p>
As for who is the best candidate: PolFem, LisR and FG are all right…in their own minds. Based on both of your posting histories, I’d expect FG to think Silbert is the best candidate and I’d expect PolFem and LisR to think Murray was just as I’d expect caro24 to think Goldberg is the best.
Hoss, the last line came in response to your post There’s a lot of BS-ing going on here, not just from Murray’s folks. And your comment âA bunch of these comments are totally from campaign staffers or, at least, extreme partisans, so we should take everything with a grain of saltâ with âSo, take all the Murray field power stuff with mucho saltâ There is a lot of busting going on with the 400 number being inaccurate and then you say everything campaign staffers and extreme partisans should be taken with a grain of salt? Is that accurate? I can tell you for a fact that there were over 400 caucuses planned to be covered. Since youâve been in this game for so long you know the logistics donât always pan out. If you have any information that the other candidates came close to attending the actual number of caucuses attended please share them to back up your diminishing of TMâs âfield power stuffâ. Those responsible for publicly stating 400 were actually covered are mistaken and probably didnât realize they and the Murray organization would be crucified. I donât know and no-one knows how many will be covered because they are still going on and yes TM and his staffers, supporters and extreme partisans are still attending as many as they can attend.
<
p>
As an experienced blogger you know this is a very appropriate forum for supporters. I am equally confident with your background in politics you will consider challenging the writers and their positions rather than making blanket statements that diminish what is really being said.
<
p>
With that being said Hoss please accept my apology, I was not actually name calling pmegan. It would be akin to me saying pmegan is a French quoter.
Resorting to name calling just discounts your argument and reflects poorly on you and maybe even your candidate. Everyone on this board is allowed to have their own opinions. So long at they agree that Bush is an idiot and Romney is a crazy experiment where Mattel decided to build a life-size robotic Ken doll and sic him on the world.
There’s no need to attack anyone here. You have strong opinions, but that doesn’t mean that you can discount other people’s opinions.
<
p>
And, for the record, I really haven’t paid much attention to the LG race so I don’t have an opinion on any of the candidates. Every time I hear anytihng about any of them I think “hey that sound’s great, I’ll go with that one!”… and then I hear something good about another one. I realize I have to do my research, but I figure I have a few months for that.
<
p>
But I’m already kind of sick of all the spin being put on Murray’s campaign, though, and for me that’s a real turn-off. I know that there was no presence at the Hingham caucus, and there are plenty of people on this board who say that there was no presence at their caucus. This doesn’t mean that he wasn’t at every other caucus except our, and y’all can scream “400+” all you want, but that doesn’t change what we saw.
<
p>
It’s very republican to tell us that what we saw with our own eyes is wrong.
You’re right, it is all subjective to where a person goes, but maybe we should consider that when attacking the credibility of someone who used their observations or hearsay to draw conclusions about who was where on caucus day. I think everyone should calm down and take each post or comment for what its worth and not get emotional about it. THX
Electing a woman to run on the ticket with Patrick or Reilly would be a big plus. The LG candidate runs as part of ticket… not against the other party’s LG nominee. Silbert or Goldberg can go after Healey in a way that a guy can’t.
Believe it or not I understand how the G and LG are elected. In 2002 we had the best candidate to go up against Romney and that candidate was a woman. a woman I worked very hard to get elected at the convention from hell, the primary and the general. I was on the phones the days after her last debate and it was the women that were screaming at me. So to make a sweeping statement that electing a woman……is insulting. Unfortunately Silbert and Goldberg can’t hold a candle to Healey and may be a factor in why they are not running for governor.
You may be right on Deb, but you can’t be serious in saying Andrea doesn’t match up to Healey. She has said all along that she’s running for LG to leverage her economic development expertise in partnership with the Governor. My guess is nobody in this race has made the decision on what to run for based on this Kerry Healey/candle-holding test.
<
p>
Also, in light of your “why they are not running for governor” comment, could you please enlighten us as to why Tim Murray isn’t running for Governor, or John Kerry, Tom O’Neill, Evelyn Murphy, Chris Gabrieli didn’t run for Governor?
<
p>
See, to me, Tim is running for LG as part of a calculated political career move. Deb is running, uh, for some reason not obvious to me. Sam is running – not so well – but he wants to be an elected health care czar. Andrea is running to continue her established public service commitment to growing opportunities, as she has for years.
Dude I watched he on NECN, to me she sounded more like she wanted to run for governor than LG. I am sure you saw that. Who cares about the past candidates we aren’t talking about them are we, seriously dont waste my time?
<
p>
Tim is running because he really wants to make a difference. I can’t answer for him why he isn’t running for governor but if I were to guess it would be because Tom Reillt is and unlike Reilly Tim is a man of his word and honor.
Here’s a reply worthy of your last post: ” .”
Since Saturday I’ve been reading the spin from the Murray camp that they had covered 400 caucuses. And now politicalfeminesta has upped it to 400+ caucuses…the fish just keeps getting bigger.
<
p>
I’ve expressed doubts because no Murray person was at my caucus and NO MURRAY presence was reported in Somerville Caucuses, which has 57 delegates…so they should have been there.
<
p>
This number of 400 was first reported as second hand information was then reported as fact and then this “fact” was increased to 400+. All along I expressed doubt. Other people reported facts that cast doubt on this claim; yet the unfounded rumor persists and grows.
<
p>
Karl Rove would be proud. This is a reality-based site, and the smell of BS surrounds this claim and yet people keep spreading it on higher and deeper.
There was no Murray presence in Hingham, and very little if any on the South Shore from what I’ve heard.
There was a volunteer gathering signatures for Murray, but no statement or real presence. I did not notice any other LG nomination papers. Other nomination papers I saw were for Deval, Kennedy, Fargo, Festa, and one shocked guy carrying around Reilly papers, but not even asking the people with Deval stickers (which was about 50% of the people there) to sign. I think many of us would have. He has as much right to run as anyone else. I think there were a few other left on the check in table, but none of the names immediately come to mind.
I was just going on info I was seeing on the blog on Saturday. So don’t take my 400+ as an official number. But I will say that I was the only LG Rep at the 3 caucuses I attended; NO Silbert, Goldberg or Kelly people there collecting signatures. But do u see me making a big deal, NO.
<
p>
You all seem to be attacking the legitamacy of what you call a “rumor.” But, based on the organization I saw, it seemed pretty accurate to me. If you want me to call the campaign and get cold hard numbers for you all, I will, but stop the absurb commentary and attacking of people who favor a different candidate than your own.
<
p>
For the millionth time, We are ALL DEMOCRATS and we all have the same goals. We all want to oust Bush, Romney, and Healy and any other part of the evil Republican machine. All this stupidty and catfighting is not the way to obtain party unity and victory in November.
<
p>
Just say the word and I’ll call the campaign, or maybe one of you want to since it’s really not that hard to get that kind of information if you just ask.
my “absurb commentary”. That to me sounds like “catfighting” talk. Something you decry as creating disunity.
<
p>
The info you read (about the 400 caususes) was from someone who talked to someone else. One the the subject headings was “Murray’s Army” and I and other folks questioned it based on what we saw…or rather didn’t see at a number of caususes. That is absurd commentary?
<
p>
I’ve been involved in many field operations and, as I wrote in my earlier postings, field claims are ALWAYS BS. They never have the amount of IDs they claim, never have the amount of signs in lawns, never have the amount of volunteers. So go ahead, call the Murray campaign–spin this all you want. It’s a waste of time, by this point–based on the numerous reports of no presence at caucuses–such a claim will have zero credilbity. (And I’ve always maintained that the Murray campaign had a strong caucus presence than Silbert and Goldberg–maybe combined. But the 400 number is being WAY oversold.)
<
p>
You say we should all just get along and focus on ousting Bush, Romney and Healy. (We’ll ignore the fact that we can’t oust either of the first two). Gee your taking the high ground and by questioning you I must be a low-life who is undermining the cause. PLEASE.
<
p>
If you don’t want to be called for embellishing the truth, then stop embellishing the truth. (Certainly stop repeating rumors as truth.) If you really want to focus on beating Healy, then write about ways in which we should beat Healy (and don’t say by nominating Tim…that just starts the debate all over again.)
<
p>
No, if someone continues to write about the wonderful campaign of a particular candidate–at the expense of other candidates–expect to be challenged on that. And a sure sign that you are losing that debate is when you start to complain that we shouldn’t be fighting among ourselves, but we should focus on ousting the bogeyman–Bush.
First of all I have never referred to any type of army and have merely commented on points that have been made on this blog. I never referred to the idea of 400 caucuses as “truth,” I simply commented on the fact that based on my own observations it seemed accurate. I never said that I was speaking hard facts, but merely commenting on what I heard and saw, which is what I thought everyone else on this blog was doing.
<
p>
I was never and have never meant to attack anyone, and I feel that I have made that very clear. None of my comments before were directed specifically at you, as I was referring to everyone. I don’t doubt that you have worked on several campaigns and have much political experience , but that gives you no reason to be so hostile. It is this type of attitude that turns young people, like myself off of politics in the first place. All I ask is that you calm down.
<
p>
My comments regarding party unity were heartfelt, and this type of infighting is what hurts our chances in November. I don’t see that as any sign of “losing a debate” and I understand that everyone is passionate about the candidates they have chosen to support. I am not taking “the high ground” and I have never referred to you as a “low life” I am trying to find a middle ground for all of us to rally around.
<
p>
I will start by apologizing if I in anyway insulted you or unknowingly “embellished” based on secondary knowledge.
<
p>
Lets start off on a new foot.
<
p>
And please I ask you to read some of my past comments. I try very hard to avoid these silly back and forth. But, as I said, since Saturday I kept hearing this 400 caucus stuff and I keep calling it into question.
<
p>
If it wasn’t constantly being repeated, I would have let it go. But folks kept bringing it up and I kept questioning it.
<
p>
I try to do my homework when I write here. Do original research using campaign finance reports. I am respectful to other people’s opinion and try as gently as possible to disagree. But when the Same Old Sh*t is repeated and repeated, I can mix it up with the best.
<
p>
So what I’m saying is I’m not looking for nasty arguments. I’m looking for intelligent discussions. But I won’t back down if I keep getting BS thrown my way and this 400 caucus stuff was and is total BS.
Truth in reporting- I am a Silbert supporter…. Way down in Brewster on Cape Cod, we did have a Murray rep at our caucus. I was impressed; it is a pretty good haul from Worcester to have representation on the Cape, next door to Silbert’s own town of Harwich. We did a straw poll after our caucus and the gentleman that came down for Murray spoke, made a nice impression. The straw poll results were 19 for Silbert and 3 for Murray. If the idea is to just be out there, gather your own strength and not alienate anyone, not a bad idea.
And has prominent supporters there. I know of one Kelley delegate that got elected, most others are uncommitted. There will be whipping for Murray in Northampton at the convention.
<
p>
I imagine Silbert could do well too, but I know of no committed delegates for her or anyone who is going to whip for her in Northampton.