As a Sam Kelley supporter, I’m disapointed as I review these results. I would say that at this point it is virtually impossible to turn the fund raising around, and even if he could, he couldn’t catch up.
The “Romney for President” Health Care reform, also takes a big chunk of space out of Sam’s portfolio. Based on the difficulties even well financed campaigns are having getting together the 10,000 signatures needed by May 9, 2006 5PM (Statewide) deadline at Town & City Halls across Massachusetts, I now doubt if Kelley even makes it to the convention. By Mid May Secretary Galvin will be getting accurate reports from cities and towns across the state on how many signatures were turned in and being processed.
Then it is a three way race by Worcester. Murray becomes the only male candidate. The question is, if Kelley is out, where does his 10% to 15% of (his) convention delegates go? If Murray has
Firefighter’s picketing, they won’t be going his way. I’m hoping that convention delegates aren’t facing the question of crossing a picket line.
To recap, Kelley’s raised only 5% of all the money raised in the LG race, spent 7% of all the money spent so far and has only 2.9% of what’s in the BANK between the four candidates.
The question is not when will he be getting out, as it’s seems to be clear he’ll be out before the convention, but why has it taken so long to realize the reality? My educated guess is someone isn’t telling Sam like it is. This can’t be sugar coated anymore. Time to think about an exit strategy to leave with dignity and pay off ALL the debts left over. If I was anyone in that position, I’d want to go out with my head held high and reputation intact.
A poster after my own heart: filling these pages with numbers and analysis. Welcome RM!
Do we have any information on delegate numbers for Lt Gov candidates? Estimates/informal polling/etc?
that the majority of Worcester firemen & women don’t agree with the stance their bargaining unit organizer is taking, with regards to contract negotiations. So if the man infront negotiating proposes a strike, I highly doubt it will happen if the majority in the union disagree with him in the first place.
<
p>
But, like I said thats just a rumor.
<
p>
Oh and comliments to RM as well. It is always good to think realistically. Kelly is a nice guy, but its not looking like he will get to far, unless he has been paying people to collect signatures.
RM, Sam is a very nice guy. I had the opportunity to meet him when he traveled out here to central Massachusetts. Even as Murray supporter I signed and collected signatures for him. He really wanted to be in this election and I felt he deserves to be in it as well. Your analysis does not paint a pretty picture for Sam. If he decides to stay in this race I honestly believe he will get his 15 % which will make the picture you’ve painted even worse. If he decides not to pursue this race I certainly hope he makes himself available and the remaining candidates use his talent.
leftisright. I appreciate your help with signatures. What I need to clear up is where I am coming from on my “reality check”.
<
p>
Several unnamed statewide candidates are now paying “unofficially” for signatures. That is, I doubt you’ll get anyone to go on the record and admit, “yes, because we lack a full field operation in the state, we are now forced to start paying for signatures.”
<
p>
Keep that in mind, look at the numbers I posted earlier, and ask yourself if Sam’s current campaign is even in a position to start paying anyone the $1.00 or more to collect and organize a signature drive. That’s probably north of $15,000, which is everything Sam has.
<
p>
Maybe Colt will come through, with the field organization he has built as Sam’s Campaign Manager. I know this. Since Late November, I’ve been getting more campaign communications from SILBERT, MURRAY and GOLDBERG individually, than I have from KELLEY. My conclusion, and I hope I’m wrong, there’s a lot of “blue smoke and mirrors” on how “Great” things are going in the campaign.
<
p>
But back to the “reality check”. If you check with the MDP (HQ Charlestown), if you don’t have 10,000 plus certified signatures turned in to the SOS (17th floor elections) by the statewide deadline of June 6, 2006, you’re not on the ballot. This isn’t just for Sa, it’s everyone. Since June 6, is after the convention, you might assume that everyone “automatically” goes to the convention.
<
p>
Not true. Thanks to the Republican Nomination Signature Round Table Fraud of several cycles ago, Town and City Clerks now transmit totals of turned in signature counts and certified signature counts electronically to the SOS office. What happened in the signature fraud was, nomination papers with just a couple of certified signatures were passed around a table in a circle, and names were forged to get to the 10,000 plus needed.
<
p>
So bottom line. The MDP will know from the SOS office which will know from the 351 cities and towns, how many Signatures were turned in BEFORE the convention. Even if 10,100 signatures are turned in, they still need to be certified. If you have worked on this as many have, you know right away you have to throw out 10% or more that don’t make it for one reason or another.
<
p>
I’m hoping I’m wrong, but it will take a severe course change to accomplish all of that by 5/9/2006….
that based on my experiences helping with the Murray Campaign, they are not paying professionals to call delegates or to collect signatures.
<
p>
I have personally made phone calls and stood outside of supermarkets to get Murray on the ballot.
<
p>
But, I can’t speak for the other campaigns.
honestly right now, in this, this year race from what I am seeing that is very low , I can tell you personally that on one particular full sheet I collected, 23 signatures only 7 were certified. Out of 3 full sheets 45 were certified.
<
p>
For the record; personally I have a problem with paying for signatures for any reason.
I gotta disagree that the new health care law takes the wind out of Kelley’s sails. If anything, it’s raised more questions about the law’s implementation, which Kelley may be in a better position to address than the others. Or maybe not.
<
p>
My point is that, if anything, health care just became a bigger issue for November.
The new health care law isn’t going to take any wind out of Kelley’s sails, but on the other hand, it could be a boost for him in several ways:
<
p>
Disclaimer: I’m not a Kelley supporter, I haven’t made up my mind in the LG race. And since I know certain readers who love to jump to conclusions around here will willfully misinterpret what I’m saying, I also need to explicitly state that I’m not saying that this makes Kelley the strongest candidate, or makes up the difference for his weak fundraising, or anything like that. I’m just saying that it is likely to make him better off than he would’ve been if it hadn’t happened.
The healthcare legislation that was just passed was flawed before Romney sunk his teeth into it ($295 fine for not providing health insurance, but $395 to provide it per employee?!). This provides more fuel for democratic candidates like Kelley to attack Healy/Hillman on healthcare.
<
p>
Healthcare will continue to be a major issue, one which I hope all the candidates take stances on. This issue makes all of the Democratic Candidates stronger in the Fall.
<
p>
BTW Cos – I am sorry that we all have to put out disclaimers now in order to write our opinions, for fear of people jumping to conclusions. At times it seems BMG posters can get a little too hostile.
This issue makes all of the Democratic Candidates stronger in the Fall.
<
p>
I didn’t think to mention that, but you’re right, that’s important. We have a start on health care, but we’re clearly not where we want to be yet. Making it a big issue this year will get voters looking for candidates they trust more on health care reform. Whoever the candidates are, on this particular field, brand Democrat has an advantage over brand Republican.
Renaissance Man… Thanks for the stats. Did you separate out the amount of money the candidates have loaned or given their accounts? I know the bottom line is what matters, but contributions from supporters is a good indicator of a candidate’s strength. I suspect the percentages you’ve posted would change significantly if you took out Goldberg’s own checks.
Slushpuppy asked: “Renaissance Man… Did you separate out the amount of money the candidates have loaned or given their accounts? “
<
p>
Answer: Here are those results:
<
p>
“Self Funding” or “Written” as Slushpuppy calls it.
<
p> $150,000 ___Goldberg___83.6% $24,389 ___Kelley______13.6% $__5,000 ___Silbert______2.8% $_______0 ___Murray______0.0%
__________ $179,389 Total
<
p>
“Raised” less “Self Funding”
<
p> $599,977 Silbert 35.9% $578,109 Murray 34.6% $419,842 Goldberg 25.1% $ 74,419 Kelley 4.4%
____________ $1,672,347 Total
<
p>
Then the interesting question, what if you deduct the self funding
from the current reported bank balance, (Assets minus liabilities)?
<
p>
“Bank Balance” less “Self Funding”
<
p> $403,227 Silbert 55.0% $323,235 Murray 44.1% $ 5,480 Goldberg 0.7% $ 1,650 Kelley 0.2%
___________ $733,592 Total
<
p>
Under current laws in Massachusetts candidates can
contribute basically as much as they want or loan as much as
they want to their campaign. Of course if you’re running a losing
campaign, you have a slim to none chance of paying yourself back.
Bottom line, candidates can’t be judged by the table above. You
must also ask yourself who has 1) the assets to make a difference
and more importantly 2) the willingness to donate/loan to their
own campaign. So I’m not knowledgeable enough, to go into
who has the most wealth and who is willing to use that wealth
to inject it into the campaign.
<
p>
The only caveat I have is that the Silbert Campaign may have
paid back the candidate, as the Annual Report Year End Report
isn’t showing the $5,000 as a liabilty. Therefore, she may have
decided that it is a contribution and not a loan (campaign liability)?
that the majority of Worcester firemen & women don’t agree with the stance their bargaining unit organizer is taking, with regards to contract negotiations. So if the man infront negotiating proposes a strike, I highly doubt it will happen if the majority in the union disagree with him in the first place.
<
p>
But, like I said thats just a rumor.
<
p>
Oh and comliments to RM as well. It is always good to think realistically. Kelly is a nice guy, but its not looking like he will get to far, unless he has been paying people to collect signatures.