The featured item on tonight’s agenda was the appearance of three of the four lieutenant governor candidates (Tim Murray, as the mayor of Worcester, is also the chair of the school committee and had a meeting tonight to run), as well as Sec. of State Bill Galvin, who led off the candidate segment by delivering what appeared to be his stump speech. (Was he lending his support to Silbert with his assertion that the biggest problem in the state is job loss?). Then the LG candidates gave their own speeches, after which questions from the group were put to the candidates for their response. What follows is admittedly a brief, not-very-analytic breakdown.
The first speaker was Andrea Silbert. I had seen her literature and met a senior staffer on her campaign at the DCI sessions in Worcester in March. To be honest, the “jobs, jobs, jobs” mantra does not win me over. And looking at her website to research this post, I am astonished at how monocausal her approach to politics is. She was a contender for the most polished speaker of the three tonight, and I could easily imagine her as a right-hand person to whoever wins the governor’s race, but I am not sold on her entrepreneur-centered proposals.
Next up was Sam Kelley. I am inclined to believe that health care is the most important issue that we currently face (and that’s saying something, given the state’s long list of troubles). Having neither heard him speak before a crowd nor vistited his website, I learned something new tonight. That is that Kelly had worked for Rep. Jim McDermott, a champion of single-payer healthcare in the House.
Deborah Goldberg rounded out the panel of candidates in attendance. My first impression was that she must be positioning herself as the most generic candidate, if that makes any sense. She does not have any of the easy hooks upon which the other candidates are “hanging” their campaigns. Overall, I thought that she seemed lost during both her speech and responses, especially when she strayed from her tried and true issues. Despite these lapses, she did come across as not only intelligent but also politically seasoned enough to acquit herself well on Beacon Hill (but she does need to add more substance to her website, which surprisingly lacks an issues section).
Paul McGeary, the district’s Democratic candidate for state senate in 2004, spoke as a surrogate for Tim Murray, who will be making a solo visit to 1EM next month.
I think part of what is going to make choosing an LG candidate given the depth of this year’s field so difficult is the ambiguity of the role itself. Voters will have to come to grips with what they think is the LG’s political purpose and “pull the lever” accordingly.
Very good candidates for Lt. Governor. I had no idea who Deb Goldberg was, but she is the one person that impressed me the most. Her knowledge of all the issues, her proven track record in Brookline as Town Councilor supporting the Green Initiatives of the Town, increasing fire and police without a 2.5 override, year after year. Add to her resume her experience at the family business, Stop & Shop, and the importance of quality jobs and health care to all their workers, in an industry that has razor thin margins ( I worked at the NBPT Market Basket when it opened in 1987) coupled with her Harvard education- wow! She is smart, quick on her feet, someone who has been on the Mass political fringe all her life, is well-spoken and who can talk to ALL the voters around this Commonwealth. Of all the candidates I saw last night, she was the one that I could truly see being governor.
<
p>
I wish Tim Murray was there as well. Worcester is in the midst of this great downtown project – replacing the outlet malls with a blended commercial (retail shops & small businesses), residential (mixed), artisan, project that could really take that city to the next level. I have two customers, Fallon Healthcare and a Law firm out in Worcester – it’s always great to visit and check in on how things are progressing. Also having attended UMASS – Amherst – there is voter bias towards candidates that are from inside the route 128 belt. Tim Murray as LG candidate could minimize this effect for the ticket.
<
p>
Having said all this I think Andrea Silbert will get the nomination – that’s my prediction. She’s got the early lead on raising money. I am cool with that – the best welfare program is a job. And job creation, which will raise state income tax revenues, is her background – that’s not a bad thing.
<
p>
Jeremy Hathaway
Ipswich Delegate
John, if you haven’t been that frequent of a visitor here, you’ll soon learn that debates about the merits of the various LG candidates is a hot topic around these parts. All of the campaigns actively participate and many of the site’s frequent users are LG partisans.
<
p>
I think your take on the candidates is fascinating, and it’s too bad Murray wasn’t there because I would have liked to have heard your impressions.
<
p>
What I particularly noted about your recap is that it seems you were not blown out of the water by any of the candidates. I would guess that that is due in part to the quality of the field – i.e. there isn’t someone who is so out of their league as to make the others look better than they might otherwise be. If I’m misreading you, apologies. I dare say that had Murray been there, you would probably not have been overly moved to be with him either.
<
p>
Democrats simply have a great field of candidates, and I think I speak for all of us LG race watchers here when I say that I hope this ends up helping the Party in the general election. Each of the candidates can make a legitimate claim that they would add the most value to the ticket and bring the most to the job. They’re all probably right. The deciding factor will probably come down to money and strategy, with the candidate who has the most money, or, more precisely, utilizes that money most effectively, coming out on top.
<
p>
So far, it has been shaping up as a three-tiered race, with Silbert and Murray in the “top tier”, Goldberg not really in the second tier, but more in Tier 1-A, and Kelley in Tier 2. This assessment really comes out of the fundraising and issues that the candidates have been putting forward in my impression.
<
p>
The wildcard issues that remain are: will Goldberg dump millions into her media buy? Will Murray be able to step up his fundraising to be able to afford a substantial enough media buy? Will Silbert be able to maintain her significant money advantage and afford a media buy on par with Murray’s? What will be the “unexpected event” that comes out in the next few months? Will Murray win the Convention as handily as he should? Will all four even get on the ballot?
<
p>
Ah, the fun of it all…
First, Bob, thanks for bumping the post to the front page. I truly didn’t think I was all that coherent when I tapped out my thoughts following the event.
<
p>
Hoss (and anyone else who wasn’t there), I’ve left out a lot of stuff that was talked about at the event. Most notably, I didn’t get to the specifics of the question-and-answer portion, which covered issues from Cape Wind to public school funding to state support for agriculture.
<
p>
You’re right that I really wasn’t overwhelmed by any of the three. I guess I have mixed feelings about this group. On the one hand, I have pretty high standards for candidates, especially in Massachusetts, where unconventional, principled politics should be more common than it historically has been. On the other hand, I think the fear that some in the party have of candidates tearing each other apart in a primary has not been borne out in this particular race so far, and the candidates seem to have fed off of each other to produce some creative thinking. Right now I think some of the candidates strike me as more suited to serving in a cabinet-level position rather than as someone who could eventually be governor.
<
p>
I had seen Tim Murray speak briefly in Worcester at the Democratic Campaign Institute in March. He didn’t sway me very much, but I also have not looked at his specific proposals yet. I look forward to him coming to the 1EM event next month.