Health care. Murray argued passionately for an expansion of employer mandates. “To me it is patently unfair to have employers who are doing the right thing and then have to pay an additional tax to pay into the free care pool to help companies who do not do it.”
Campaigns. “A campaign is like a three-legged stool: Organization, Message and Money. Of all of the candidates we had the best up and running field organization [before the caucuses]. Our goal was to collect 2,500 signatures. We collected 3,600 and we’re still counting. The minimum is 15% to get on the ballot. I think we’ve very close to that minimum threshold. That’s a testament to the hard work of the team we’ve put together in a relatively short period of time.” With respect to dollars: “We’ll have enough money to be competitive.”
Environment. Murray is President of the Massachusetts chapter of the National Brownfields Association. “The faster and the better we’re able to clear up brownfields, we take some of the pressure off open space acquisition in suburban areas. This is one of those cross-cutting issues where strategic investment by the state can bring about broad improvements. We’ve been pushing at the legislature to recapitalize the brownfields fund that has been underfunded for the last two years. You talk about something that is an economic development stimulant, that’s one of them. That will include some lead paint and asbestos removal issues.”
Republicans. “We have a governor and a lieutenant governor who lament the lack of housing opportunities. Typical Healey-Romney: point fingers rather than doing the hard work of getting things done.”
Finally, unity. “Too many people spend too much time on too many issues that divide us.”
In sum: informed, engaged, active. This is the candidate to beat in the LG race.
Bob,
<
p>
Your take is as I would have expected. One question: of his three-legged stool analogy (which I would aregue may not be exactly applicable in a down-ballot race and instead could only be money and message, with organization a bonus), what were his comments on his message? Did he expound on his wanting to be an advocate for cities and towns? Is he expanding his message beyond that?
<
p>
Also, not sure if you got a sense of whether when he said “we’ll have enough $$ to be competitive”, was that in response to a question re. Silbert’s strong showing and Goldberg’s alleged largesse? Did he seem worried when he said that? His numbers haven’t come in a strong as (i would argue) they should have, so I’m curious about that.
<
p>
I suppose these questions could be answered by your colleagues in their posts, but I figured I’d ask while I was thinking of it.
<
p>
Thanks.
I think after Mayor Murray brought in over $100,000 in December clearly his numbers would drop for the few months following. I have been invited to a number of fundraisers for March and attended several. In my opinion this month Mayor Murray will lead the pack in fundrasing and close the gap on Silbert whose just about used all her Kerry and women connections.
<
p>
I think the key in the interview was the talk about Unity. Let’s face it Cape Cod is not going to determine whose going to win or loose come November. It’s the towns around and west of 495. I challenge anyone look at a map of the 2002 election. The Romney ticket won nearly every city and town west of 495 besides Worcester. Murray is the only candidate in the LG race with the connections, and experience in being able to unite this region around his campaign and bring many of these cities and towns back into the blue. More importantly help take back to the office with either Reilly or Patrick.
<
p>
I think we are all busy picking apart each candidate which is always going to happen, but whose going to help bring areas of the state that clearly were not in play in 2002?? The answer is Murray. Think about it Boston and the surrounding cities and towns are going blue, Middlesex is a mix my guess blue, Cape Cod blue, What about the other half of the state?? That’s where we lost and that’s where a lot of the citizens from east of 495 have moved. We need someone like Tim Murray whose knows this area and has the backing of people like Congressman McGovern (who I might add Tim played a crucial role of getting electe in 1996).
<
p>
Let’s just take a look beyond September and see who can bring the most to the ticket where we need it most. The answer is Murray.
Possibly spot on.
<
p>
Another credible argument is this: if Reilly (the current leader) wins, Murray makes the ticket blander than wonder bread. Face it, none of these candidates can be called a dynamo on the stump, and I’d argue none fall into the category of “future leader of Mass Dems”, although certianly Silbert and Murray are the two who could claim that mantle.
<
p>
There’s a legitimate political argument to be made that having a woman on the Dem ticket is crucial because even more than the West-of-495 vote, support of women is essential for victory.
<
p>
There’s an old adage in MA that races are won or lost inside 495. With the growth of the ex-urbs, it’s debatable whether that’s still true. Murray could tap into that, but as has been said here before, will people outside of the immediate environs of Worcester gravitate to that city’s mayor? It remains to be seen.
<
p>
If Deval gets the primary nod, then Murray helps him, but again, the female argument still holds true.
<
p>
As for Murray being an “insider”, he’s certainly that in CMass, and he’s certainly got the Reps and Sens behind him, both of which correctly put him in the catbird seat as the one the others are aiming at. But the people who are the real power players in this state are the people who control the money in downtown Boston. They’re the ones who donate in the general and who, if they decide to get behind a candidate in the primary, can affect the outcome with significant amounts of $$. (See, e.g., Reilly 98 where he rolled in the dough after the convention when the downtown boys got scared of Lois Pines.) As far as I can tell, those people are not committed yet, and my instinct tells me they’re not inclined to get behind anyone, let alone someone they would arrogantly (and incorrectly) view as a second-tier mayor from a city they don’t have any reason to visit. If they stay out of the race, then it will still come down to $$ and message, and on those fronts, where you’re from don’t matter too much.
I initially leaned towards Murray and that lean was cemented as full support after watching the LGs non debate on NECN. Kelley came off more boring than any previous political candidate I’ve ever seen, didnt seem too aggressive, in fact seemed too timid for politics. Silbert kept saying jobs over and over again as if the fact that she kept saying that would create them, a political neophyte and no new ideas coming from her. Goldberg and Murray seemed the most experienced and committed to the LG race though Goldberg came off as too feisty and that always hurts woman candidates (think Shanno O in 2002) so Murray it is. Of course Murray only works if its a Patrick-Murray ticket since balancing an African American outsider with an Irish Catholic insider would bring in a lot of votes (dont forget working class Dems in Southie, Somerville, Charlestown,etc. could always stay home if their boy Reilly loses).
<
p>
A Reilly-Murray ticket would be two Irish pols running with one another and could be a liability. We have a pretty cruddy field for candidates this year with the exceptions of Patrick and Murphy. And no one in the LG race has any big name recognition.
<
p>
Also the grassroots needs to let Gabrielli know that our party is more important than his ego.