In this first section, I want to look at the 7 races that are for governor or senator in neighboring states, and pare away the probable blowouts. In the states bordering Massachusetts, we’re looking at 3 governor’s races (CT, RI, and NY), and 4 senate races (NY, CT, VT, RI). There are also some targeted House races particularly in NY and CT, but I’m not going to get into those.
In some races, it seems a blowout is well underway. The New York races look to be strong victories for HRC and Eliot Spitzer, two Democrats who are certainly going places. The Connecticut races will likely be blowouts too — Governor Jodi Rell is hugely popular (leading 56-31 last month) and Quinnipiac University polls that the Connecticut Senate seat will not go to the Republicans (though Lieberman would win as an Independent, but he’ll caucus with Democrats. Or so he says). In Vermont, my man Bernie is leading 58-35 as of last month.
That leaves Rhode Island. The governor’s race is a dead heat (42-41 for Democrat Charles Fogarty), but why turn away from our own governor’s race for one in Rhode Island? So I think the question comes down to the urgency of the senate races south of us.
What I’m really looking at are the Senate races in Connecticut and Rhode Island. Things will be clearer (hopefully) as the primaries resolve — the Club for Billionaires Growth is helping Cranston mayor Steve Laffey take on incumbent Republican Lincoln Chaffee. Apparently, there’s something going on in Connecticut, too.
I anticipate that Chaffee will win his primary, and in that case we’re looking at a tight race between him and the Democratic candidate Sheldon Whitehouse — 46-41 last month, with Sheldon leading. I’ve seen other polling that marks it much closer (38-37 according to Brown University in late June). And there’s the question of keeping the Connecticut seat Democratic should Joe run as an independent.
So I come back to the question — is time better spent electing a Democratic governor in Massachusetts or a Democratic Senator in Rhode Island or Connecticut? Considering what an impact a real effort of Democrats from Massachusetts swamping the miniscule Republican party in RI could have, I think it’s a fair question. We were part of the success in New Hampshire two years ago, and could be in Rhode Island or Connecticut this year.
As passionate as we all are about this year’s gubernatorial election, Governor Patrick/Reilly/Gabrieli would not have the power to close Guantanamo, bring our troops home, enforce our constitution, or stop the selling of our country to the highest bidder.
Plus, we have a Democratic legislature that — while nobody’s favorite — does rein in the extremes of insanity a Republic governor may inflict upon us. And I realize folks in Haverhill, Fitchburg, or Truro have an easier choice than those of us who live toward the south. But if folks in the North Shore will keep the ball rolling for the Dem. candidate here, would we have a bigger impact (both on the race, and the benefits of ultimate Democratic victory) working a Senate race?
If it’s a month out, and if we’re looking at a close race in Mass. for governor, and also a close race for RI senator, what’s the priority?
I voted for Massachusetts governor as the prime campaign, but I don’t think it will be a very close campaign, so supporting efforts to make Rhode Island blue and Connecticut bluer, as taking back the Senate would be great step in Washington, and looks close to happening.
1) In grand scheme of things, obviously the senate race in RI has a more dramatic, short-term impact than a gubernatorial race in Massachusetts and as such is a priority for the Democratic party;
<
p>
2) For all that, as a party we can’t lose sight of the corner offices… governors are a major source for a party’s national candidates and the Democrats have been hurt by having fewer than the Republicans.
<
p>
3) I’m old fashioned enough to think that, beyond possibly contributing general funds to national political action entities that may direct money to local races, one should stick to the political community in which one resides. I used to be Rhode Island resident, but since I’m not any more, it’s not my place to tell Rhode Islanders how they should vote.
<
p>
I meant to mention that point too…
If you’re idea of canvassing is telling people how to vote, stop canvassing — you’re almost certainly not effective.
<
p>
If, however, your canvassing consists of getting out the vote of folks already likely to be sympathetic to your candidate, doing voter ID (prior to election day) to help determine where to spend GOTV efforts, or working to spread literature or other information about your favorite candidate, then keep doing what you’re doing.
<
p>
Canvassing is not telling people how to vote.
I swear to god some people who’ve never stepped foot in Connecticut are going to need someone to sit suicide watch with them tonight.
<
p>
There is a very fine line between being intrusive and being helpful as an out-of-stater. Long-time vets of successful campaign managing will tell you that it’s best to put the natives out front and keep the neighbors in the back. There was a great deal of hostility displayed towards the extremely well-intentioned Dean volunteers when they started showing up in other people’s states. Lots of folks don’t like that on principle. When Massachusetts folks were coming back from New Hampshire canvassing during the 2004 election, I can’t tell you how many reported to us that the first question out of people’s mouths was this: “Where are you from?” If the answer wasn’t New Hampshire, the encounter often tanked.
<
p>
So while, yes, you are right canvassing, as an example, isn’t telling people how to vote, it is coming into somebody’s else’s parochial territory, and people’s enthusiasm can get the better of them. People don’t like even tacit direction that they should listen to an out-of-stater’s opinions or advice on their local issues. We know that it REALLY doesn’t work given the abysmal crash-and-burn of the Dean Iowa influx, and we already know it doesn’t work on elections at the state level. Campaign Management 101.
Funny — I spent about 3 weeks in Iowa and New Hampshire, and people never shut the door on me once they found out I was from out of state. Frankly, it was often more of an in — why was some from Mass so opposed to Kerry?
<
p>
But there’s a lot more to campaigning than going door-to-door. To use a military analogy, the door-to-door is the “point of the spear.” If a campaign is worried that voter contact can only be done with in-state people (which really isn’t true in urban areas), than outta-staters can do the support stuff — copying/editing/routing canvass maps, data entry, sign delivery, training, orientation, leaving door hangers, stuffing envelopes, etc. There’s a lot of campaign volunteer work that doesn’t involve face-to-face voter contact.
when I said that you put the natives out front and the neighbors in the back.
i just wanted add aobut the locality issue, which is imporatnt to some people. not that big a deal for me, especially within new england.
I’m going to follow the instructions on the airliner Massachusetts passenger safety card that you will find in the seat pocket in front of you. Put on your own oxygen mask first, then assist others in need. We really need to fix some fundamental structural problems in Massachusetts, and Kerry Healey won’t (and probably isn’t capable of doing it even if she wanted to.)
you might have an interesting question.
<
p>
But, there’s no way to know if control of the Senate will hinge on RI-Sen, or if control of the House will hinge on any of the three GOP House members in CT, all up for somewhat or very tough reelection campaigns in 06.
<
p>
Since you can’t know for sure, and since the Dems haven’t seen the connah office in 16 years, I think playing for the Dem Gov-MA is most important.
<
p>
But, feel free to send money and/or spend a weekend in CT, RI, or even NH to make an impact. Any activism for Dems is better than no activism for Dems. If a non-MA candidate really moves you, go to work for him!
But from where I am (Gill, MA, once term starts) the Hodes race in NH-02 looks like the place where I’m going to work (along with MA-Gov, particularly if Patrick is the nominee). There’s also the VT-AL House seat which shows signs of being close. If I lived on the RI border I’d probably go there for the Senate race, but House races are more fun anyway.
has an outstanding campaign manager in Dana Houle. Houle is smart, savvy, and intuitive. He knows what it takes to win, so I have very high hopes that Hodes is going to prevail.
I mean, it’s where we live. What will help us more? Someone concerned about Connecticut and Rhode Island, plus the nation, or someone only concerned about Massachusetts? I gotta go with Massachusetts.
<
p>
A dem in charge of this state could get rail extensions to New Bedford, an extension of the Blue Line, better funding of UMASS and our state’s colleges, better early education (including full-day k, plus pre-k)… not to mention the fact that we’ll have someone else in charge instead of the State Legislature… and I’m sick of the Finnerans of this world and the replacements don’t seem much better.
<
p>
But, more importantly, why pick one? Lots of people can help in more than one cause – at the very least contribute $20 bucks to their favorite candidates in Connecticut and Rhode Island if they’re inclined to do so.
16 years of Republican rule has taken its toll on our cities and towns. Even after 9/11, we were laying off firefighters and cops. Local aid has been slashed, and many towns still receive less than when Jane Swift was governor. We have a bunch of right wing ideologues in control of the state board of education. We have a serious need for change here at home. As long as Chris (Romney Lite) Gabrieli doesn’t win the primary, the most important thing we can do is to clean up our own statehouse before we start telling others what to do.
<
p>
Put simply, this question needs to be asked after the September primaries.
Oh because someone who votes with Democrats 90% of the time, is the only man to challenge Bush/Cheney nationally twice, fought against SS privatization and the Bush Tax Cuts is a republican. This is just further evidence that there is no longer room in the blogosphere for principled democrats who believe in a war on terror and fighting for social justice not only at home but around the world. Tell Max Cleland, Ken Salazar, Chris Dodd, and Bill Clinton that Joe Lieberman isn’t a democrat. Please, I volunteered for the real democrat in the race, the one in the tradition of Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy, and Clinton, not the one of Wallace, McGovern, Carter, and Dean.
we’ll see if he’s a real Democrat. If he runs against his party’s nominee as an independent, he loses all claim to that mantle, AFAIC.
If he loses he will caucus with the Democrats if he wins as an independent.
Bernie Sanders will caucus with the Democrats more than Lieberman will; the difference there will be that Sanders always had the personal integrity to stand as an independent, rather than to do so only when politically advantageous.
<
p>
I wonder if asked in 1999 whether or not he’d ever break with the Democratic party what Lieberman would have said?
<
p>
All I smell is the stench of ambititous political vanity blowing from the south into Massachusetts…
Bernie Sanders accepted the Democratic Nomination this year. Why? Because it is politically advantageous for him. Not like he needs it or anything.
<
p>
From the Burlington Free Press:
<
p>
“MONTPELIER — … Sanders, the longtime independent who is running for U.S. Senate, intends to decline the [Democratic] party’s nomination if he wins the Sept. 12 primary, campaign manager Jeff Weaver said. He appreciates the Democratic Party’s support but prefers to run as an independent, Weaver said.”
It’s relevant because CT Democrats have said what they want. Time for Joe to go home.
…especially now that I’ve met Chan Woodcock!
Democratic Governor John Baldacci’s thin advantage in our mid-June poll, which showed him leading Republican challenger Chandler Woodcock 45% to 43%, has grown by four points. In the latest Rasmussen Reports election poll, Baldacci now leads Woodcock 43% to 37%.