Congressman Barney Frank has announced that he will “vote for Deval Patrick for Governor at the Democratic Convention and … will be campaigning with and for him from now on.” More from Frank’s press release:
I have decided to support Deval Patrick for Governor of Massachusetts. I believe that the public policies he advocates embody better than any of the other candidates for Governor what is needed to achieve the best possible quality of life for the people of Massachusetts. In addition, I think that by the nature of his high intelligence, his energy, his ability to articulate, and his experiences he is both the best candidate for the Democrats to nominate and the best qualified to serve as Governor.
I do not say this because of any dissatisfaction with the other Democratic candidates. Tom Reilly and Chris Gabrieli are both men whose values I admire and whose abilities I respect….
Deval Patrick is the Democratic candidate best suited to carry this fight against sixteen years of Republican indifference and incompetence. His thoughtful passion, informed by his own experiences both in life and in work, make him our best choice for articulating the point that Massachusetts needs both a vigorous and prosperous private sector, and an adequately funded and enthusiastically led public sector…. More courageously than any other, he has made the point that we cannot provide the public services that are so important both economically and socially if we were at this point to further reduce the amount of revenue that the state government collects.
In addition to these other factors, Deval Patrick in my view best understands the importance of an ongoing vigorous commitment to fairness on the part of society as a whole, through government among other avenues. In this connection, there is one very relevant factor, which everyone in the state understands but which too many are uncomfortable in discussing: race…. Deval Patrick understands the bitterness of unfair discrimination, and to his enormous credit, he has spent much of his life fighting against this discrimination, not just against people of color, but because he understands the pain of prejudice, against other forms of discrimination as well. His strong leadership for fairness for the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender population of our state is an example of this.
IIRC, we’ve now got two three Congressmen ([UPDATE: Capuano,] Frank and McGovern) declared for Patrick, two (Meehan and Neal) for Reilly, and the rest as yet undecided. Is that right? And does it matter?
UPDATE (5/24): Adam Reilly takes me to task for editing Frank’s press release by removing the following commentary:
Race is important also for us as Democrats. African Americans are an indispensable part of the coalition that Democrats need if we are to be able to win elections and carry out the policies to which we are committed. Excluding any of these important groups from the opportunity to win high office is both unfair and unwise from the political standpoint. No Democrat should be happy at the fact that in America today, so far only the Republican Party has nominated African Americans for statewide office at the highest level â for the Governorship in Ohio and Pennsylvania, and for the Senate in Maryland. In each case, I believe that the Democratic opponents of these men better represent the interests of all people, including African Americans, and I would not support any of the three Republicans. But the contrast between the parties does us no good. Were Deval Patrick lacking in ability, or wrong on the issues, this would not count for anything. But given the impressive qualities and insight he brings to this contest, then as Democrats I believe we should take into account the consequence of continuing a policy in which no African American is ever nominated by us for any office higher than State Senate, as a matter of both fairness and enlightened self-interest.
Our own rightmiddleleft has already posted about this part of the press release. And, upon further reflection, I shouldn’t have edited it out – I did so in an effort to keep the excerpt of manageable length, not because I didn’t want readers to see it, but it was probably a bad idea. My apologies.
Capuano is with Deval.
for all the Congressmen reading this…..early endorsements are really appreciated….and it’s NEVER too late to be early 🙂
<
p>
Mr. Lynch?
Mr. Tierney?
Mr. Olver?
Mr. Delahunt?
Mr. Lynch? < —– (obviously will not happen until 9/20 – :))
My bad – will update.
If you want to throw endorsements around, do please add Capuano to Patrick’s list. Along with more labor unions, state reps and senators and local officials than you can shake a stick at.
<
p>
And, no, you’re not right when you say that the rest {by which I assume you mean the other 5 members of Congress?} are “undecided.” I obviously can’t speak for my own Member, John Olver, but I and several other of his constituents have urged him to endorse Patrick. His response, at least so far, is that he will back the winner of the Primary. This Primary aloofness has been a fairly common practice among Dems over the years, and it’s actually quite nice, I think, to see that half our delegation has broken with that tradition. If forced to declare his real feelings, my hunch is that Olver would not be “undecided” at all — one has merely to look at his voting record and statements, the fact that he was recently arrested in DC (along with Patrick endorser McGovern) for protesting over Darfur, etc., to see that his politics line up quite nicely with Patrick’s. No mystery to me whom he supports. He just hasn’t said so publicly.
<
p>
As to your final question, I posted my thoughts here.
I should have said “uncommitted” rather than “undecided,” although in practical terms there is of course no difference. I already updated re Capuano.
<
p>
As for Olver, I’m a bit confused by your comment. You say that you can’t speak for him, and that you have a “hunch” that he would go with Patrick, but then you also say that I’m wrong about him being “undecided,” and that there’s “no mystery” as to who he really supports. Those are pretty different – are you claiming to have private knowledge that Olver supports Patrick? Or are you just reading tea leaves? Thanks.
My guess is that he can say that if OLVER did endorse prior to the primary that he fits in nicely with Deval’s politics and you can put two and two together to see where he’d go…
<
p>
Same way you could “guess” Lynch would support Zell Miller were he running for Governor here in the Bay State….
<
p>
(/joke)
<
p>
Wayne
“Uncommitted” is the right word for someone who says he’s not going to endorse in the primary before the primary happens.
<
p>
Further evidence that Olver’s private preference would be for Patrick comes with the overwhelming support for Patrick in Olver’s district, particularly the Valley where most or all of the state reps are on the endorsement list and Patrick swept all the caucuses that I’ve heard of.
<
p>
Sen. Stan Rosenberg is not on the Patrick list — he is enough of a wheeler-dealer in the Senate that he may have decided not to endorse before the primary as well.
I think you’ve got all of that right.
I think that “does it matter” is really a key question here, and my knee-jerk response is that it makes little difference. I an undecided voter sees that a Congressperson he/she really likes has endorsed someone, it offers some credibility. But particularly if candidates all have a few endorsements, I don’t see it swaying many people.
To some people, they obviously care what their elected official thinks if they help put them there.
<
p>
However, there’s something that extends far beyond gaining voters when you get an endorsement.
<
p>
1) If it’s a big name, that can mean more money. Big names can help raise money.
<
p>
2) Ground support. For example, perhaps Deval Patrick’s ground team isn’t as strong as it could be in Frank’s district. Well, if Barney Frank has a good ground organization in his district, that can really help get out the vote and help beat the polls in that area by 2-5%, Deval Patrick may be able to take advantage of that.
Ryan,
<
p>
I think you’ve got that right.
<
p>
Plus, it helps neutralize endorsements that go the other way. Imagine if Reilly had 5 Congressional endorsements and Patrick had none. That would be striking. But, Patrick having 3 and Reilly having 2 makes them both credible candidates.
<
p>
As to whether any of this swings any votes, I would guess at the margin it does. Case in point: the LG race. Several people around here who are Patrick supporters have asked me who Deval is supporting for LG, since they can’t make up their minds, and want to go with his choice. When I tell them he isn’t going to endorse any of the candidates, they give me a puzzled look, as if to say, “you mean I have to think for myself?” Of course, this is a special case because we’re talking about his running mate, and some people think he should have a say in who that is, but my point is that often voters who are undecided will look to someone they respect for guidance.
<
p>
btw, where are the Gabber’s Congressional endorsements?
Who are Reilly’s 2
<
p>
I know Patrick is:
McGovern, Cappuano, and now Frank.
/Sigh
/blush
Answered below.
Although Frank is one of best congressmen in the state, the endorsement is not surprising. I am sure they have a relatioinship going back many years. And they travel in same circles.
But whose vote will Deval get because of this endorsemnt?
<
p>
All these state reps and senators that endorsed deval; will they be working hard to get a vote out for Deval on primary day? Will they be tearing up the phone lines and mailbaoxes in the weeks before primary day for Deval?
Probaly not. Perhaps Capuano may do a little. McGovern will do most. But the grassroots reps and senators will do crappola.
Endorsements don’t cost anything, nor do they gain you anything. But if Frank et al. decide to turn out their field organizations, it could help Patrick significantly (similarly, of course, for Meehan and Neal vis-a-vis Reilly).
Why would anyone, even his friends, vote for anyone because Marty Meehan asked them to?
Getting votes for re-election to Congress is different than getting others to vote for anyone for governor. Oh sure, he’ll have the same faces holding signs for Reilly at the polls. Big Deal!
“the grassroots reps and senators will do crappola”
<
p>
I don’t think that’s true across the board, Ernie. I know our local rep endorsed Deval early and is pretty popular. He helped deliver just about every delegate in our caucus, giving Deval about 30 solid votes at the convention. Of course, you probably don’t think the convention is that important anyway… the Reilly spin is to down-play the convention now, right? Yeah, I thought so.
Our new Mayor, Kim Driscoll, also helped. Both are very popular and newly elected. They were able to gather their strongest supporters, hot off their own elections in 2004 and 2005 respectively, and persuade them that Deval was the best candidate for governor. Then they got them to the caucus (not hard since most of them were regular attendees anyway). And now we have almost 100% Patrick supporters in our delegation for the caucus.
<
p>
Endorsements that are just words are useless for the most part, yes. But endorsements that are followed up with actual activity can actually be helpful.
Caucus’s were easy. Preaching to converted plus core supporters who do what they are told. (inthis case show-up) Will they be able to get the old ladies to vote for Devasl in Sept.?
Doubtful.
Will they really try?
Less doubtful, but still doubtful.
As long as their district is within the “district” (in this case, the state) you’re running in, an elected official’s endorsement is very helpful. I see a lot of responses on this blog, anytime we get one of these endorsements, along the lines of “well who would it really convince?” and concluding that it doesn’t matter. People making these pronouncements sound, to me, like people who vote but don’t actually participate in electoral politics much in other ways (outside of presidential races, perhaps).
<
p>
When you run for office, you spend a lot of time a) raising money, and b) identifying voters who support you, and volunteers. Whether you win or lose, when the campaign is done, you have those lists: who gave you money, and who supported you. If you then contact these people and ask them to donate to, or support, another candidate, that carries a lot of weight. These lists are extremely valuable.
<
p>
Any incumbent US Representative has some great donor lists and some great supporter lists, and when they endorse, they can contact those lists on your behalf, and they can give them to you. Then you, as the endorsed candidate, can contact them yourself, but use the endorsing candidate’s name to get their attention and start the conversation.
<
p>
Barney Frank, incidentally, is also a persuasive endorsement. I do think there are a lot of people who, if they’re still undecided about the Governors’ race, will see “Barney Frank” and decide based on that. It’ll also reinforce Patrick’s identity as the progressive choice in the race, something Gabreili might try to cast doubt on. But even if Barney Frank weren’t an especially persuasive endorsement, he’d still matter, because he’s got those donor and supporter and volunteer lists.
the hordes of losers who racked up more endorsements than their opponents and relied on them.
<
p>
Siegel in 2002 comes to mind.
It comes down to whether those officials are going to let someone else use those lists. If all Barney Frank does is put out this press release and let Patrick put his name on his website, then I would say that the endorsement is only marginally helpful. If he works his lists, however, then it could prove a boon.
<
p>
This is true of any endorsement. They’re worth exactly however much effort the endorser puts into them.
As I noted in my comment, I think Barney Frank is actually a persuasive endorsement. By endorsing, he lets Deval Patrick put his name on literature Patrick’s people distribute door to door and at events. I think that even if that’s all Barney does, it will have an effect. But I suspect he’ll do more, and he has valuable assets that can really help the campaign.
People making these pronouncements sound, to me, like people who vote but don’t actually participate in electoral politics much in other ways (outside of presidential races, perhaps).
<
p>
Gee, that’s a bit of a rude dismissal, don’t you think?
<
p>
I don’t know if I’ve ever gone to a door or made a phone call and heard, “Oh, well if Congressman X supports this candidate, I will too.” Unions and other organizations, yes–people’s membership in groups can be a big part of their identity. But other elected officials? Not so much.
<
p>
Now, I certainly agree that if a politician offfers money, donors, or field organization, that’s altogether different. But as someone pointed out here, endorsements themselves don’t cost a thing. And they don’t always go with the investment of time, money, or contacts.
I don’t see door to door canvassing by young activists as having any significance in the outcome of a governor’s race.
Sorry Coz. Barney, or any other pol doesn’t have that appeal. Voters are independent thinkers. There is no Barbey Frank “brand”. Money raised by endorsing politicians is figured into it. Every credible has their’s
Then there’s the self-interested endorsement…
<
p>
State Rep. Michael Moran of Boston was on a short list of legislators backing Gabrieli that the Gabrieli campaign just released.
<
p>
Scroll down here:
http://www.frederickclarkson.com/2005/01/golden-opportunity-for-progressives-in.html
<
p>
The highlight is: “Michael Moran, a political consultant with Newgrange Consultants Group”
<
p>
As has been pointed out in the past, Newgrange Consultants is working the Gabs campaign…
<
p>
So, is Moran’s endorsement in earnest? Should elected officials have to disclose when they have a business interest in an endorsee’s campaign? What do you all think?
Intrepid and enterprising folks like you seem to always make the disclosure for people. Plus, I assume every endorsement has some degree of interest in it for the endorsor (there is no such thing as a completely altruistic endorsement).