The top fundraising story of January 2006 in the LG’s race is a tossup: does Silbert’s amazing month win, or does Murray’s letdown get the nod? I don’t know, but the folks over at Silbert HQ must have been doing something right. $100K is an impressive start to the new year, and should help solidify her top-tier status. Along with what from this board appears to have been a solid showing at the caucuses and the results of the first major poll, I think we can safely say that Andrea Silbert is going to be a force to be reckoned with, both politically and financially. She’s still the underdog given her non-political history, but she represented this month and the other candidates have to either step it up or get left behind.
The other big story is Murray’s disappointing month. After an impressive December where he netted more than 112K, this showing is a total surprise. If what has been written on this site is true, then maybe the Murray campaign really did pour all of its resources in the caucuses. If that’s the case and they locked up their 15%, good for them. But at the expense of a 150K deficit to Silbert? Not sure that was worth it. But Murray does have to win the convention, and if he can do it on the first ballot (which is doubtful given the strenghts of the other 3), then he’d solidify his status as the guy to beat. I think that’s probably the thinking in Murray HQ: we have to win in our hometown so let’s make sure we do by spending whatever it takes to do that. But surely Murray’s folks know that in a down-ballot race all the political support in the world won’t do you any good if you can’t compete on the airwaves, especially given how much airtime is going to be taken by the Gov and Middlesex DA candidates (both of whom have tons of COH as well). He is not anywhere close to dead yet, but he’s in trouble if he doesn’t pick it up, and I’d expect him to do so this month. If he doesn’t, people may start talking about what could have been…
Deb Goldberg’s numbers also continue to amaze. She has been spending at a 30K per month clip for some time now and doesn’t seem to have the pickup in fundraising to show for it. Her free media was noteworthy in January given all the LG attention. But either her fundraising staff isn’t getting her quality names or she isn’t making the calls she needs to because if she wants to compete on the airwaves, she’s going to have to do better than $5K per month net. (I know, I know, she’s the “heiress” and all, but until we see that $$, I ain’t bettin’ on her using it – if she has it, that is…).
Sam Kelley: what can you say, the guy has a message, he’s out there talking to people, and he’s raising enough money so that it’s likely we’ll hear him on regional radio stations come Labor day. You do have to admire his commitment, and given all the experience in health care he has, he’s the kind of person we Dems NEED in government. He’s in over his head, but his drive is impressive.
See you next month for another installment of “The LG Money Race”
There IS only one ballot…for all the offices…right? There’s no finagling the ballots to give someone else a shot in the arm at the convention. The rules changed…
From what I heard at my caucus, it’s going to go like this:
<
p>
From 11 until around 2:30, ALL candidates in contested races will do their presentations and speeches before any votes are taken.
<
p>
Then, at around 2:30, a vote will be held on all those races. In other words, when you vote then, you’ll be asked who you support for Secretary of State, LG and Governor. Unofficial tallies will be taken by computer, so results will be known within minutes of the vote being done. The official results will take about an hour.
<
p>
If there are 2 people in the race, presumably one will get 50.01%, in which case that person will be the winner.
<
p>
In the LG race (and now possibly the Gov race), the TOP 2 finishers will move on to the second ballot to compete for the convention’s endorsement. The others will not, but WILL be on the primary ballot if they’ve gotten 15% on that first ballot.
<
p>
Anyone who does not get 15% on that first ballot is OUT and is NOT on the primary ballot.
<
p>
That second vote will take place around 3:30 or 4:00.
<
p>
If this is wrong, please correct accordingly.
I believe a candidate must get their 15% on the first ballot, or perish, but the candidate finishing last is dropped from the next ballot. I tried to find the exact information on MassDems, couldn’t, but did see that I could still volunteer for the 2004 DNC.
<
p>
That’s not really that funny.
Money isn’t everything. Tim had many more people out on Caucus day, has more delegates, and has recieved overwhelmingly more support from mayors, legislalors, and other democratic leaders throughout the state. She might have a lot of money, but she doesn’t have a lot else. At least Murray is building consistent momemtum and support that will go a lot farther than money in the long run.
Clearly this is your first experience looking at a down-ballot race in Massachusetts. I agree Tim’s organization is well-oiled and solid. In fact, if he doesn’t win big on the first ballot of the convention, it will be a shocker. But, you need to be able to purchase media and break through the din in September.
<
p>
Silbert’s got the $ lead (for now, anyway), but also has a great non-politician story to tell about why she wants the job. It’s a good combo.
<
p>
You have to be going out of your way to point out in post after post that Andrea’s got no merit or story to tell. The facts of her career blow your message out of the water. Take that schtick Goldberg’s way – she’s the rich kid.
. .to an extent. Yes money is very important especially in a statewide race, but it is still early in the year and there is plenty of time for raising money in Feb, March, April & May – just in time for the convention. And when Murray wins the convention (due to his grassroots organization and support) he will bring in even more money which will solidify his campaign and his place in the Lt. Governor’s chair in Boston.
to win this, but at this point Jord I would rather have the upper hand in organization and momentum. So I am with you there. I am sure when Murray needs to raise the money he will, there will be a time in this race where the $$$$ will make the difference.
Remember that basic creed of politics: early money is like yeast: it grows.
<
p>
if you don’t make a splash early, you don’t get it later.
Early Money Is (definitely) Like Yeast, as I learned while working at EMILY’s List during the 2004 Election cycle.
Of a down ticket, statewide race that had a strong field organization that made a major contribution to winning the election…
do you want that Frank? I told you before don’t expect anyone else, (especially me)I’m one of those progressives that like the progressive “drool”, to do the work for you. You want to compare this campaign to those in the past go right ahead BTW what does that have to do with anything? Do you think everyone has to follow the FrankSkeffington campaign plan, is that the plot for your namesake? I am beginning to think you are a bit of a narcissist.
<
p>
Hoss Im not discounting the early $$$ at all, do you feel Murray did not make the mark before the end of 05?
<
p>
Murray raised about 350 k in 05, he raised about 100k of that between Jan and October , so he raised like 250k from October until December. IS that close to AS’s #’s?
<
p>
I am quite confident when he needs the $$$ hell get it.
I dunno if he’ll raise it or not, I was just evaluating the snapshot as of 1/31 that daclerk laid out. I think Murray did a a good job in 05 and I agree with daclerk that it was surprising that he didn’t go back to the low hanging fruit in january. maybe he will going forward, but maybe not, who knows. Silbert’s January seems to have positioned her well, though.
<
p>
Re. the field stuff, like FrankSkeff, I think $$ wins, but from what people have posted here, it looks like Murray wants to run a field campaign. I may be wrong, but I would LOVE it if he did so and was successful, because that would give me more faith in that type of race. While I am not challenging anyone to prove that a down ballot field campaign has worked in the past, I don’t believe it has in recent cycles, but am happy to be proven wrong this time around.
I am not totally discounting db races from the past, I am not convinced that should be the reason not to run a field campaign. I am also not discounting the $$, believe me I know you need both, Jan was disappointing, as long as it doesn’t continue he’ll be ok . I feel Murray’s message is on target. I’ve heard wise smart men learn from their own mistakes and wise men learn from others mistakes. We’ll see.
<
p>
If no one has ever won this type of race (im ok with that) and Murray pulls it off it will be more than just a win.
…if you can’t answer it…the response is “I don’t know”, not some attack on a fellow dem…when we should be attacking the Republicans…sound familiar?
<
p>
As far as me needing to do “the work”…I’ve done my work and can’t think of a single down-ticket race that won based on a strong field. So based on my “work” your wrong. Unless you can do some work on your own and prove my work wrong.
would be a more appropriate response from me than I don’t know. What exactly am I wrong about Frank? Are you suggesting a candidate doesn’t both? Are you sugesting money is the only thing that will win the LG race?
<
p>
Yes it does sound familiar, what was your response to politicalfeminista when she suggested that, I don;t seem to recall?
<
p>
Oh, so your “work’ is what you think, is that what your research is ?
History tells us that money and message wins down-ballot races, with money the dominant of those 2. If the money is even, then the quality of the advertising is the factor. Endorsements only get one so far. Field is a non-factor.
<
p>
Perhaps Murray could be able to re-write history if his endorsers turn out what they promise they can. Of course, history tells us that endorsements don’t always carry the day either. They may turn out volunteers for standouts and put up signs on election day, but I would expect that most of Murray’s endorsers will also feel much more loyalty to the Gov. candidate that they’ve endorsed and will have their people working for them first. Sure, there will be exceptions, but even the Mayors (who hold more sway due to their staffs than almost any other endorser) involved in both races have to look our for #1, and their fate and their city’s fate will be decided by the Gov. candidate, regardless of whether the LG promises to be a “voice for cities and towns.” (Note: I have not cross-referenced any of the LG endorsers with the Gov candidate those people support, so it’s possible a Mayor Lambert or some other political leader could throw all his or her resources behind an LG candidate, but that would be the exception not the rule.)
<
p>
In terms of message, none of the LG candidates’ messages are proven statewide. Re. Murray and Goldberg’s message: cities and towns will likley fare better under a Democratic Gov., so while that campaign theme may be effective in terms of winning political support, it isn’t likely to translate into actual policy any more than a “jobs” platform or a “health care” platform will, and is not a guarantee of more votes. Nor is it proven to be an any more effective message on a statewide level than a jobs or health care platform. (Caveat: I believe one of Jim Segel’s main themes in the Treasurer’s race in 02 was being an advocate for cities and towns since Lottery $ goes to them and since the Treasurer oversees the lottery. People picked Cahill because a)he had a memorable ad that he could afford to get out there, and b) because he portrayed himself as a professional treasurer who was ready for the job. That trumped the cities and towns-advocate message.) Silbert’s “jobs” message seems the most “gubernatorial” in that it seems to want to take people to a higher and better place. Is that what we want the person who is a heartbeat away to be like? Do we want a visionary? Or do we want a meat and potatoes kinda thinker who is looking out for the local guy? I don’t really know, because the office is so undefined and the candidates really define it.
<
p>
Back to my point: perhaps Murray will have the ability to put together an actual field operation – i.e IDing voters and pulling them to the polls, a massive, expensive and resource-intensive task; maybe field is something for which he may have the volunteers. However, if he only puts his $$ into that and doesn’t have it to invest in TV, he’s in trouble. His people have to know that.
<
p>
And what’s to say the other candidates don’t build the same kind of network? Don’t you think that Goldberg will be relying heavily on the jewish progressive community in the Boston ‘burbs? Don’t you think Silbert will be relying heavily on the suburban moms who decide elections in this state? Won’t both be working those constitutencies, building support there and making inroads?
<
p>
I think it will, in the end, come down to $.
As I watch the LG race develop, some of the posts try to say that the race as seen in February is the way it is going to be. As we have seen in the race for Governor between Tom Reilly and Deval Patrick, the race can change suddenly and dramatically. Everyone was saying that Reilly had the race sewed up, but boy did that change.
<
p>
The LG race shows that the field is established at four different and unique candidates. Most people at this point don’t know anything about any of the candidates. And some of the posters have gone overboard boosting their candidate.
<
p>
As I sit back and watch the race, I look at who has the most consistent and on target message. I’d agree with David that in the only televised forum, Sam Kelley was the winner, truly on message as he clearly and succinctly presented his case where healthcare is a crucial issue that is driving the economy. He was a breath of fresh air.
<
p>
I give him credit for tenacity, spunk and determination. I have heard all the candidates speak at other forums and again Sam Kelley was well spoken on all the issues and impressive in his discussion of early childhood education and the effect that that has on children and ultimately on the economy.
<
p>
So, as good Democrats, lets not get side tracked thinking that only money defines our hearts and minds. Lets keep an open mind and at this very early stage of the game, respect all candidates and give someone whose life story is interesting (as is Deval Patrick’s) and brings a focused message to the race on dominant issues like healthcare and education. I bet that way down the road when voters actually look at the race, that people will look kindly on a doctor in race. Dr. Sam Kelley has impressed a number of people with his compassion for children and his common sense grasp of all the issues.
I have been contacted by the Murray camp twice in the past week, once by mail and yesterday by phone, asking for my vote at the convention. I don’t think that means a whole lot other than proving that Murray is organized and is actively courting delegates. He seems to know the system and is using it.
<
p>
I have not been contacted by any other campaign. Just thought you all would like to know.
I’ve been contacted (by mail) by both the Murray and the Silbert campaigns….
I did get a leter from Bill Galvin, though. The letter could have been written before he decided which office he was running for. It touted what he’s done as Secretary but highlighted all the things people might look for in a gubernatorial candidate.
<
p>
I bet he’s really kicking himself for bowing out so early.
agree completely Sco. He’s got to be saying “what if” or “only if” 15 times a day.
Ok, this is admittedly petty, but I’ve now received the identical mailing 3 times from the Murray folks. I appreciate their enthusiasm, but this is starting to get annoying. It also seems a tad wasteful (that better be recycled paper!) and appears like they don’t quite have their act together (spelling my name right would be a good start, too). One letter would have been plenty; three is getting dangerously close to being considered junk mail.
I have only gotten one. đŸ˜›