An Iraq-war-supporting conservative Democrat faces a primary challenge from a liberal who says the incumbent Dem is a Bush ally who true Democrats should boot out of office. Sounds like Lieberman/Lamont, but as Adam Reilly writes in this week’s Phoenix, it’s also incumbent Steve Lynch vs. challenger Phil Dunkelbarger in the ninth congressional district.
Reilly notes that Dunkelbarger hasn’t generated nearly the buzz that Lamont has, and he sees a couple of reasons for that. First, of course, Lieberman has a national stature that Lynch lacks. Second, Lamont has a whole lot more money than Dunkelbarger. Third, Dunkelbarger presently lacks the “blog buzz” that seems to have been very helpful to Lamont. (Reilly’s article also says that Dunkelbarger hasn’t sought Democracy for America’s endorsement, though a commenter who claims to be “the coordinator of South of Boston DFA” says otherwise – more on that from our friends at Below Boston.) In the article, Dunkelbarger sounded a bit befuddled by the whole blog thing, but promised better technology soon. Needless to say, we at BMG would be delighted to chat with Mr. Dunkelbarger, Mr. Lynch, and any other candidate for Congress.
So how’s about it, BMGers? Any of you live in the Ninth District, or otherwise involved with the Lynch/Dunkelbarger match-up? What are we missing?
First, a disclaimer. I attended law school with Steve (our Con Law professor would pit us against each other because we would almost always instinctively find ourselves on the opposites side of just about any position), and I like him a great deal on a personal basis, even though I disagree with many of his views.
<
p>
Steve’s position on the war, Schiavo, etc., are just not enough to get him unseated. After several terms in office, the fact that he was first elected by a plurality in a special election is meaningless–over the past quarter-century, Massachusetts congressmen have only lost when they are involved in scandal (remember Nick Mavroules?)
<
p>
Steve is a Reagan Democrat in a district where there are plenty of other Reagan Democrats who vote. (Most of the district is in the region which MassInc. labeled “Ponkapoag.”) As a former president of the local chapter of the Ironworkers, he is deeply connected with the traditional unions. He has a staff which does a good job of delivering constituent services. His work as an advocate for veterans issues goes a long ways with a lot of the voters who might not otherwise vote for a Democrat.
<
p>
I’m afraid Mr. Dunkelbarger is engaged in wishful thinking.
I have alot of family and friends living in Norwood and other parts of the 9th Congressional District and most of them are unhappy with Lynch. From what I can gather, their unhappiness not only stems from some of his stands on issues but also because they feel as though he doesn’t spend any time in the district with the exception of his hometown of South Boston.
If Mr. Dunkelbarger’s campaign gets aggressive and more visible, Congressman Lynch may be surprised on election day. I honestly do not believe that Lynch will be defeated but I would not be surprised to see a significant protest vote cast against the Congressman.
You may be right about wishful thinking, but maybe not. It was at least wishful thinking on Cheneys part when he described the insurgency in Iraq as a bunch of “dead-enders” in their last throes. After all what could they do in the face of the might of the great american military. it turns out they could do a lot. The question is for you and those like you. Are YOU willing to take some time out of your life and work for something you believe in, or do you need some sort of guarantee before mobilization? Are YOU going to be able to say when history is written about this presidency, and this Congress who aided and abetted him, that YOU tried to make a change in the representation whose priorities are to spend $8B/month on military adventurism while standards for most americans continue to decline, that you stood by while torture was accepted with a wink and a nod, and stood silent while the government invaded the privacy of ordinary americans? Or are you still going to be reciting the rhetoric and statistics that paralyzes you from acting in your best interests? Lynch uses statistics too but the story it tells is false. Look at the Phoenix article, he would like us to believe that he and Barney vote the same way. Do you really believe that too?
So much of the left is coffee table conversation, and slogans instead of thought, that when I went to Jamaica Plain to listen to guy running against Stephen Lynch several months ago, I figured, at best, I would hear some entertaining wacko, and at worst hear another doctrinaire diatribe.
<
p>
Boy, was I surprised. Phil Dunkelbarger actually made sense, and had ideas, and had considered nuances of public policy, and understood that to win an election, he needed to get votes.
<
p>
So I got involved in the campaign, slowly, hesitantly, wondering how much of it was one person’s ego, and how much of it could be a real movement. Not that I thought he had a real chance of winning, unless, of course, Lynch self destructs, but because, having a reasonable person running an articulate campaign on the issues, would move the debate in all elections of national significance toward the concerns that matter.
<
p>
Unless there was a news blackout regarding his campaign.
<
p>
Well, it is several months later, and yours is the first major article in a larger metropolitan paper. I understand Phil’s frustration. It is to his credit that he spoke so honestly with you regarding the issue of the press.
<
p>
You see, I figured it would be news when he gathered well more than the required 2000 signatures to run in the primary. Especially when a certain state Senator forgets to collect any, and that is treated as news, and spun, and spun. I figured it would be regional news, and that the national press would pick it up. I figured then Move-On, and the Dean people, and perhaps the progressive coalitions of Massachusetts would get involved.
<
p>
So I contacted the local, and regional, and national reporters and columnists, that I have come to know, however tangentially, over the years regarding the campaign.
<
p>
Nothing.
<
p>
I forwarded the press releases to those people, and to my politically active friends.
<
p>
Nothing.
<
p>
So, while I wish your article had been more positive about Dunkelbarger’s campaign, at least it was published, and you spelled his name correctly (no small feat). And for that, I thank you.
your letter on the Phoenix article itself, which accepts comments.
I thought I was posting a comment on the Phoenix article, but apparently I wrote a post and it sort of sits there unless people stumble across it…
<
p>
so how do I attach it to the comments regarding the Phoenix article?
With all due respect to MetroWest Dem, I wish like crazy that we could get Lynch out of office. Democrats like Lynch are helping to perpetuate this War and the ruin of our economy. Why accept the status quo? Is that what this blog is about? Is that what politics is about? Giving up on good ideas and strong leadership because winning is “hard”? Sound like Pres. Bush! And I hate sounding like that. Get the word out — give Dunk a chance to compete by spreading his ideas and his name rather than accepting Lynch’s pathetic version of representation.
Hey, I’m NOT saying that I PREFER Lynch (even though I personally like him) — I disagree with his politics and would rather see the district represented by a progressive. Lynch is Southie through-and-through, for better and for worse. But then, demographically, so is much of the district.
<
p>
I think a suburban candidate might be able to win the district, but it would be tough against an incumbent with a strong base. Whether a PROGRESSIVE candidate could actually win this district is something else again. Read the article in Commonwealth Magazine concerning the Ten States of Massachusetts — http://www.massinc.org/index.php?id=525&pub_id=1847 — and you will see that the core of the suburban part of the district is more Republican than the statewide average, and that progressives have generally not run as well in Canton or Stoughton or Norwood as they do elsewhere. In fact, the article calls the region “The New Southie.” Your friends and my friends do not make up a large enough voting block in the district to unseat a Reagan Democrat with a very good organization.
<
p>
Any condidate would need to overcome the substantial organizational and GOTV advantage which Lynch currently enjoys as a result of the Southie/Dorchester/trade unions base. The district stretches from Needham (where my office is located) to West Bridgewater, so the candidate would need to work hard for at least a year prior to a primary to develop the organization and raise the funds necessary to unseat this particular Congressman. The candidate would then need to work hard to get folks out to vote in a primary — and we all know how abysmally low the turn-out for primaries are in this area. Based on what I gathered in the Phoenix article, this particular opponent does not seem to be the person to wage that fight.
I appreciate what you’re saying, but that’s no reason not to try. Demographics this and type-cast that. So what? Dunk wants it to happen. I want it to happen. If you disagree with Lynch, why would you want him representing you in Congress? Of all the votes I could cast this fall to truly make a big change in the way I’m represented, a vote for Phil Dunkelbarger would be the best thing I could ever do. Help me make that vote count! Why wouldn’t you want to help? Cause Lynch is a nice guy? Cut it out.
Winchou, welcome to the site – we’re glad to have you as a user. I would suggest to you that troll-rating a comment with a “3” (“worthless”) is not really appropriate simply because you disagree with what is being said. This site is all about constructive vigorous debate, and that will of course mean that reasonable people disagree from time to time. Normally, a “3” rating is appropriate only for abusive, grossly ill-informed, or wildly off-topic comments. Nothing in the comments that you’ve troll-rated in this thread seems to me to be all that bad. There’s more on our ratings system in the Rules of the Road.
<
p>
Thanks.
Maybe add a little button link to the page that explains the ratings next to the menu? Anyway, didn’t mean to be a downer. MetroWest Dem is cool; his concerns about the Dunkelbarger campaign might be my own, but I don’t want to let those concerns stop me from acting. That’s all. Up with everything! 🙂
One can simultaneously like a political opponent on a personal basis and want to see him beaten at the polls. I talk about demographics and polling data because they are objective measures of the challenges facing a progressive in this distict. While the district has its progressive pockets, Ponkapoag isn’t Cambridge or Newton, and no amount of wishing or insulting someone you disagree with will make it so.
<
p>
The article in the Phoenix painted a picture of someone who has not put in the time, effort and money to develop an organization that will deliver the votes and who does not seem able to sell the voters on himself as a viable alternative to an entrenched incumbent. (Deval Patrick is a prime example of someone with the potential to sell himself to voters who might otherwise not vote for a progressive by force of intellect and personality.) Insulting me because you don’t like the facts I set out won’t change that impression.
But to say on the one hand that you “would rather see a progressive represent the district”, and then list all the reason not to do anything about it is meaningless to me. Phil’s campaign is working really hard to be heard. Just trying to get your message heard at all is really hard. But if they also gotta cut through all the doubt, it’s like an effort multiplier. The least (the very least) we can do, as progressives, is help to lift the doubt. Tho he doesn’t have Deval Patrick’s political standing (Clinton Administration), connections (ditto), or money (money); you can’t be exposed to Phil’s force of intellect or personality if you don’t give him a chance. I’m not calling you names or nothin; it’s cool — sorry.
Well I seem to have botched this up in every possible way, so let me start over. Nice to meet all you nice-nice folks. Here’s an x-post of my comment WRT The Phoenix article:
<
p>
Lynch’s contention that he’s a critic of the war is laughable. If Lynch has not been identified as a Bush accomplice, let me fix that now.
<
p>
There have been twleve significant votes in the House — opportunities for Democrats to voice their opposition to the War: Lynch chose NOT to support the Murtha Bill or the McGovern Bill. Of the remaining ten votes, he voted with the Republicans six out of the ten — he voted with his fellow Democrat (Frank) only four of twelve times.
<
p>
His record on Iraq is by far the worst of any rep in the Commonwealth; note the following specific votes:
<
p>
Frank : 12/12
Delahunt : 11/12
McGovern : 11/12
Meehan : 10/12
Olver : 9/12
Markey : 9/12
Tierney : 8/12
Capuano : 7/12
Neal : 7/12
Lynch : 4/12
<
p>
The votes are for: OOI Caucus, HCR 35, Woosley Amd, HJR 55, HR 551, HCR 197, HR 3142, HR 612, HR 4232, HJR 73, and HR 861.
<
p>
I sure hope Adam Reilly is wrong; this can’t be tilting at windmills. A system in which people with strong ideas run for elected office is called something else: it’s called a “democracy”. But I should thank him and The Phoenix for helping get the word out.
<
p>
Lynch is part of the problem — the only part of the problem that I can vote to fix. Dunkelbarger is spot on; Lynch has got to go.
I respect Metro West Demâs traditional assessment of our prospects of unseating his good friend from law school. A conventional evaluation would naturally lead to the conclusion that, however well-intentioned and correctly positioned on the issues, such a poorly financed and relatively unknown candidate stands little chance of success in challenging an extremely well-financed, “entrenched” politician. Here are some points, however, which argue that this might be the wrong conclusion this year, in this case:
<
p>
⢠The incumbent won this seat in 2001, under circumstances which call into question the strength of his original mandate. It was a Special Election, called to fill the unexpired term of Joe Moakley. With a number of candidates running, and no “run-off,” the incumbent won this seat with only 39% of the votes cast. The candidates finishing second and third (Jacques and Joyce), who could reasonably be seen as “splitting” the left of center vote, combined to attract 43.3% of the vote. Having captured the seat with this simple plurality, the incumbent has not faced serious opposition since. This upcoming Primary vote will be one-on-one.
⢠It should also be recalled that this Special Election was unfortunately held on September 11, 2001, when nearly everyone in America was glued to a TV screen. There was no small degree of confusion, as there was talk during the morning on local TV about the possibility of postponing the election altogether. These were certainly conditions which favored the candidate with the most “disciplined” organization and voters.
⢠Demographic changes in the District since 2001, do not favor the incumbent. Population in the urban areas of the District have reportedly declined and South Boston, the incumbent’s home base, has experienced a significant (some report over 50%) turnover as high real estate values combined with convenient access to Boston have resulted in lifelong residents selling to many “newcomers.”
⢠National polls all indicate that incumbency is not a positive attribute and public respect for Congress is lower than that for all other political institutions.
⢠To this you might add the “Deval” factor in the 9th District. Patrick lives in the District and scored caucus sweeps in Brockton, Stoughton, and other 9th District communities. While I claim no endorsement (he is probably only peripherally aware of our challenge at this point), Patrick has a very strong GOTV organization in the 9th District. As long as the voters know that Dunkelbarger is running and what he stands for, which Congressional candidate are the Patrick voters more likely to select on Primary Day?
⢠Finally, if Lamont beats Lieberman, do you think we might get a little more attention?
<
p>
I concede that Metro West Dem might be right. Heâs certainly betting the safe money. But, I am betting about $30K of my own money and the better part of a year of my life on this project, so you can be sure that I am not engaged merely for the purpose of modifying Lynchâs behavior. I donât believe that to be possible, in any case. I am in this to win, and to restore democratic representation to the MA 9th District. If you vote on the issues, Metro West Dem, youâll vote for Dunk. Only if you and others like you vote against your conscience, and if Lynch escapes a well publicized debate with me (which he will continue to try desperately to do), and if the media continues to neglect its purpose, will we lose.
If so: first, welcome! Glad you’re here, and hope to talk to you in more detail soon. Second, you might consider filling out your “bio” so that people know exactly who you are. To find it, click the “Dunk’s page” link in the “menu” box, then click “profile,” and you can fill out the “bio” box from there. Then people will see it when they click on your screen name. You might also consider adding a signature line that will appear on all of your posts. (Signature lines are also on the “profile” page.)
<
p>
Thanks!
I am glad to see your response. My office has been in Needham for the past seven years, but I live in Jim McGovern’s district, so I already have a terrific progressive I CAN vote for. :-> I know that many folks who live in this part of the the 9th would be interested in hearing from a progressive candidate.
<
p>
Even though there has been turnover in Southie since 2001, a lot of those constituents moved into other communities in the 9th, so I don’t know to what degree the shift in demographics towards the suburbs equals a shift in attitudes towards the progressives. Is there any polling data out there to support your assumptions? I would be interested in your hearing your response to the MassInc. profile of the district.
<
p>
I think your assumption that you might get taken more seriously if Lamont wins is flawed. Even if there is a general national anti-incumbent mood, any pollster will tell you that that mood does not necessarily translate into an “anti-MY-incumbent” vote unless either the incumbent has really, deeply ticked people off (see Rick Santorum for a prime example) or has otherwise committed some sort of (potentially) criminal or offensive act (let’s get back to my Nick Mavroules point here). Lieberman is in trouble not just because of his position on Iraq, but because after 18 years, he has annoyed people with his increasingly sanctimonious persona, which, combined with the dislike of his positions is turning into a personal dislike of HIM. At the same time, Lamont is working hard to broaden perceptions of himself as being more than just an anti-war candidate.
<
p>
I do not know how well the Patrick camp’s ability to sweep the caucuses will translate into a GOTV in the primaries — but you certainly need to be hooking up with these folks–and their money–NOW. You also need exposure in the media–have you connected with the editorial or news departments at the various papers which cover the district? Get yourself in the two weekly papers that cover Needham and in the other weeklies that paper the district (it’s summer, the reporters are looking for stories, and Lynch doesn’t show up much in the local papers except to announce that he’s seeing constituants at the Senior Center). Write letters to the editor, if that’s what it takes.
<
p>
I’ve been kicking around in politics long enough to know that you need to sell people on the bread-and-butter issues (a/k/a “what have you done–or not done–for me lately?”) as well as the policy questions to get any electorate past the usual inertia of voting for the incumbent based on name recognition. And yes, money helps. It helps a lot. Other people’s money sends a signal that other people take your candidacy as seriously as you do.
<
p>
And BTW — why does everyone assume I’m male? Because I try to use facts and argue coherently? Unconscious sexism at work? I thought that the internet was gender and color-blind.
First, MWD, my apologies for my pc gaff. Of course I should have written, âheâs/sheâs,â and Iâll be sure not to make that mistake again. Thanks for the heads up.
<
p>
Regarding the demographics, neither one of us, I suppose, knows for sure whether your characterization of âa lotâ of the Southie exodus staying within the District is correct. It might surprise you to hear that our strongest organizational contingent is in Southie. Of the 5,000+ signatures we collected to get on the ballot, over 1,200 came from Southie. Another 800 came from Dorchester where we are also well-organized. Both groups are either ânativesâ or have lived in their neighborhoods for 20 or more years and are personally familiar with those who have departed. What they tell me is that, yes, some have relocated into suburban communities within the District, but others have moved to the 10th and New Hampshire. In any case, I think you would agree that the migration has been significant, and has resulted in a meaningful net loss of Lynchâs previous voters.
<
p>
To your second point on incumbency I can only offer you anecdotal information. From Southie to W. Bridgewater we have heard a familiar refrain, âWe worked hard to get him elected, and now we canât even get a phone call back. Heâs forgotten where he came from.â Granted, the disaffected are the ones who will speak up and join the opposition, irrespective of issues, just to strike back. And, granted, it happens to many incumbents no matter how effective their constituent service skills. But, in this case, it seems to be more pervasive than I would have expected with someone that comes from Lynchâs political tradition. My political experience is as a City Councilor, so I am very tuned to constituent service issues. In the end, itâs what itâs all about, everyday service and responsiveness to your constituents. I knew Nick Mavroules very well and you should remember that he won his last primary even under indictment because, as a former Mayor of many terms, he understood the importance of constituent service and insisted on performance from his congressional staff. He used to say, âIf you donât weed the garden, you donât get the harvest.â
<
p>
As to the single issue factor, I think a perusal of our website (www.DunkDem.org) should disabuse you of the notion that the War is our only concern. Unfortunately, in our position, we have to keep our message as focused and simple as possible until our stage and our audience expands a bit. Frankly, I would much rather be talking about Global Warming, because it is, of course, a far greater threat to our nation long-term than this War. But short term, this ill-conceived and incompetently managed conflict is bleeding us in every sense of the word, and does command our urgent attention.
<
p>
On the âbread and butter issuesâ I couldnât agree with you more. And here is where I think the incumbent is most vulnerable. One case in point is the questions of jobs, particularly for Lynchâs core supporters. Deer Island is long finished, and the Big Dig is coming to an end. Those two projects have underpinned the entire METRO Boston economy for twenty years and employed the building trades with high quality jobs during those two decades. On what will those workers earn their bread and butter now? You might have noticed the Op-Ed piece that Lynch co-authored recently on the North South Rail Link project. I offered the Globe a different perspective which they apparently felt did not contribute to the conversation, so didnât publish my piece. The complaint in his Op-Ed piece was that there are insufficient funds being made available to proceed with this very important, in fact crucial, project. My point was that part of the reason for that is that Lynch insists on pouring $8 billion a month into a sink hole 5,000 miles away. Weâve already spent the equivalent of 28 Big Digs on this useless failure in nation building which is precluding the building of our own nation. If and when the building trades make this connection, they may be more inclined to hold him accountable for the fact that their best prospects for employment are with Haliburton and Bechtel in the desert half way around the world.
<
p>
Thanks for the suggestions on generating more exposure and raising money. As you know, thems thats got, get more and thems that donât have have difficulty getting, but weâre working on it everyday and making some progress. Hopefully youâll start to notice the fruits of those labors soon.
<
p>
You may have noticed in the Phoenix article my admitted weakness in blogging. Iâm already questioning if I should get in deeper. Itâs sort of like my kids with instant messaging: it gets in the way of homework. What I should be working on is our formal complaint to the FEC and House Administration Committee concerning Lynchâs abuses of his franking privileges to create, print, and distribute campaign literature at taxpayers expense. But thatâs a whole other story, for another day.
<
p>
But it has been great to talk with you MWD! (is that anything like WMD?)
I know what it is like to put yourself on the line as a candidate. I also know what it is like to put a lot of time on the line for a candidate.
<
p>
Sometimes you can have the best candidate in the world and that still won’t change the outcome.
<
p>
From what I have read here and the recent Globe article, it seems like it or not, you are up against it in several ways.
<
p>
First, the money. How much have you budgeted it would take to win the primary? Running against an incumbant is more challenging than running for an open seat.
<
p>
Second, the district. This isn’t the 8th CD. Not that Capuano is going anywhere, but, I just bring it up as a comparison. Yes- to your argument, if Lynch had been representing the 8th, he’d be in serious trouble. But he’d also have more than one candidate running against him, if there was blood in the water. I don’t sense the district itself being too far off of the positions Lynch has taken. I understand you are betting that Lynch is way off, or at least 50% plus 1 off on primary day. But at the end of the day, like Lynch’s politics or not, he didn’t get to where is by misjudging his state representative, state senate or congressional districts.
<
p>
So I tend to agree with MWD’s take on the situation. I know you don’t want to hear that, but that’s the reality as I see it.
<
p>
Lynch’s strategy is to completely ignore his opponent. Sadly, it was probably working. That’s why I’m so pleased that Adam Reilly highlighted this particular race in his Phoenix article. His criticism that Phil has not been active on the blogs may be true but, as he has almost proven with his article, the blogs are more often mass media driven than the other way around.
<
p>
This race is comparable to the Lieberman/Lamont race in the sense that it is time that the co-opted Democrats pay for their treachery. True, Lynch was not caught playing kissy face with W like Lieberman, but he has, in his own low-profile way, voted with the Republicans on some of their most egregious legislation: for a flag burning amendment, for interference in Schiavo case, against allowing military families overseas to terminate pregnancies with their own money, for the Iraq War Resolution and for the sickening “War in Iraq Anniversary Resolution” affirming that the world is “safer” because Saddam Hussein was overthrown, and against protecting net neutrality. Vote Smart
<
p>
The 9th district is not just South Boston, it stretches into Braintree, through Canton, Stoughton and Westwood, all the way to Bridgewater and Brockton. Phil was a member of South of Boston Dean for America, not Boston Dean for America. We at South of Boston DFA knew and endorsed Dunkelbarger (I am the host of South of Boston DFA). As I mentioned in my comment on the Phoenix site, I do not know how Burlington (DFA central) decides who they will put on the A-List. I have noticed that they have only recently endorsed candidates who are running against other Democrats (Lamont, Patrick) and they tend to chose “sexier” races with national hook. Other than that, I am symied.
<
p>
Lynch should be gone. If enough light is shone on this race, he well might be. There are many, even in his Southie base, who are sick of his act. Ergo, his strategy to lay low and depend on incumbency to win the day. Dunkelbarger has asked him for debates. What are the chances of that happening if the media continues to ignore this race? Less than zero.
Congressman Lynch has the following two chances to be voted out of office: slim and none. With all due respect to Adam Reilly, he is trying to find a race where there is none.
What’s all this negativity? What’s up with supporting only “easy” candidates? You wanna take back this country or what? Lynch has been a do-nothin, war-supportin republicrat. I can’t vote for Lamont. But I can vote for Dunk. We just gotta stay positive and get the word out — and I see more every day:
<
p>
http://ryanpadams.blogspot.com/2006/07/holding-media-accountable-cover-races.html
http://dumpstephenlynch.blogspot.com/2006/06/todays-question-for-mr-lynch.html
<
p>
We can take back this one seat — I’m not rolling over. No way.
See Dunkelbarger