Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Reilly the first to go seriously negative

By

Just saw clips of Tom Reilly’s newest ads on NECN (they don’t seem to be posted on his website yet).  And with two weeks to go, the claws have most definitely come out.  Rowr!!

They didn’t show the whole ads, but the first one appears to be about the income tax, and it chastises Chris Gabrieli and Deval Patrick for being millionaires who, consequently, don’t understand how important the tax rollback is for Folks Like Us™.

The second says Gabs and Patrick should release their tax returns.

From what I saw, these are honest-to-goodness attack ads – the first is marginally related to policy but is really about playing the class warfare card (they’re millionaires who don’t get it; I’m a Regular Joe™ like you), the second is about nothing that actually matters.  It’ll be interesting to see whether the much-feared Johnston-Kerry-Dukakis Commission springs into action!

Meanwhile, Thursday’s debate is looking more and more interesting.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

      • Would probably be more fact based and less emotional.  But keep up the good work!  I guess in life progress should be the goal not perfection. 

        <

        p>
        Practice makes perfect.

  2. …Boston Herald today.

    <

    p>
    Deval was the first candidate to take negative, personal swipes at Gabs and Reilly.

    <

    p>
    Read the Herald.  In order to see what’s going on.

    <

    p>
    I hear the Herald’s been giving out copies for free.

    • I hear the Herald’s been giving out copies for free.

      <

      p>
      No sense charging any more than a fair price.

      • I was watching am television yesterday and heard DP call Gabs tacky for using his own fortune on his campaign.  His voice reminded me of Steve Erkle, little on the squeaky side, little on the nerdy side.  He is using the voice black comics use when mimicking the square white guy.

        <

        p>
        BTW, David, did you put any of your vast fortune into that comment?  If so, I find that to be tacky.

        • Normally I would rate this type of comment a zero, but I wouldn’t want it to disappear. 

          <

          p>
          If you want to advocate for your candidate, then by all means do so, but this type of childish personal attack only makes your candidate’s supporters look like knuckleheads. 

          <

          p>
          And by the way it’s U-r-k-e-l.  If you’re going to go ad hominem, then at least spell the g-ddamn name right.

          <

          p>
          Tacky, indeed.

          • I support no candidate.  I have no horse in this race.  I am trying to keep an open mind, something quite rare with you Deval suckups.  But when someone says Reilly is the first to go negative I have to laugh. He does sound like Erkel though.

  3. Certainly call for desperate measures.  Reilly may not be done, but this is indicative that he knows what we all suspected and/or knew.  He’s in third place and needs to change the equation.  As a Gabrieli supporter, I cannot say that I disagree with Reilly’s move.  What I find curious is the topic – taxes.  A lot of us figured that he would fire the “I am the only one in the democratic race who is calling for an immediate roll-back to 5%” shot.  Not surprising and it may actually help him a little.  The other one though is an old strategy that never seems to gain much traction (e.g. they are following the law and have disclosed what is required, but I want more! What are they hiding?).  What is really curious about this strategy/topic coming from Reilly’s camp is this:

    <

    p>
    Reilly is focusing attention on two candidates who actually filed tax returns, but will not release them to the public.  On the other hand, this is the same guy who earlier this year was willing to run with a woman on his ticket who did not pay her taxes.  Brilliant! 

    <

    p>
    By the way, the press dropped the ball on another matter last week.  When Reilly went dark on TV for three days last weekend, this should have been a story and he should have been asked at least four or five questions.

    <

    p>
    1) Why go dark for three days now as opposed to the height of summer?

    <

    p>
    2)  Are your funds drying up?

    <

    p>
    3) Did someone incorrectly project cash flow through to the 19th?

    <

    p>
    4) Or are you hoarding/reallocating money to go negative and if so, is this indicative that your campaign may be in trouble?

    <

    p>
    The key now will be if, how, where, and when Patrick and/or Gabrieli respond/fire back.

    <

    p>
    PS Hey Ryepower12, hate to tell you this, but Deval went a little negative prior to the convention and started making pointed comments about his opponents a few weeks ago.  To date, Gabrieli has been by far the most positive and specific of the three candidates in the democratic primary. 

    • Considering that Reilly has just over $312K in the bank (OCPF Reports), I suspect he thought it was better to go dark last weekend rather than Sept 16-18th.  It is almost sad to see Reilly go out like this.

  4. but I’m pretty sure I can tie up this loose end:

    <

    p>

    It’ll be interesting to see whether the much-feared Johnston-Kerry-Dukakis Commission springs into action!

    <

    p>
    In the case of the first ad, the JKD Commission is hardly in a position to sanction Tom Reilly for a comparative ad (on the very same issue that Gabrieli has already run a comparative ad) that steers toward one of his messages: he’s the most regular guy in the race.  (Is it in dispute that the other two candidates are not millionares?)

    <

    p>
    In the case of the second ad re: income tax disclosure, Phil Jonston would presumbaly disagree with David’s assertion that it “is about nothing that actually matters.”  In fact, he has already given Tom Reilly’s position his blessing:

    <

    p>

    Reilly got support from the chairman of the Massachusetts Democratic Party Philip Johnston, who usually refrains from criticizing candidates in his own party.

    “I’m not that concerned with the income tax returns themselves as I am the sources of income themselves,” Johnston said. “The federal government has much tighter requirements both on the sources and the range of income disclosed.”

    Both President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney annually release their tax returns, even though it is not required by law.

    “I’ve always felt that this is something that is part of the price you pay for being in government,” Johnston said. (Associated Press, 4/13/06)

    <

    p>
    and this. . .

    <

    p>

    State democratic party chairman Phil Johnston is a longtime advocate for making public the personal finances of top officeholders to avoid any secret conflicts of interest.

    But that position has put Johnston in a highly unusual position — at odds publicly with one of his own party’s candidates for governor.

    “It’s important that it be done,” said Johnston. “Candidates should release their income tax returns so the public knows where they get their dough.”

    “If you’re doing business with people that you might be involved in a conflict of interest with if you’re in public life, then I think it’s important that the public be aware of that,” he said. (Jon Keller’s Blog, 3/31/06.)

    <

    p>
    So there you have it.

Archives