Congressional fratricide? The Fix lists Meehan (with the most money raised), Lynch, Markey, and Frank as potential candidates. What about others?
Jim McGovern would be an interesting candidate. Solid progressive who was a major force in getting both Deval Patrick and Tim Murray elected in the primary, then in the general election. Indeed, McGovern endorsed Deval back in 2005 when mainstream politicos thought that campaign would go nowhere. Now that McGovern can lay claim to the title of “Most Exalted Maker of Kings”, he is in a unique position to translate the grassroots support the Patrick/Murray campaigns built statewide into his own Senate race. Tons of low to mid-dollar donations and legions of canvassers could make McGovern competitive very quickly.
Of course, McGovern may be perfectly happy where he is, which is not bad at all. He sits on top of the Worcester County political machine, which will ensure that the 3rd District seat is his as long as he wants it. Then there’s his new majority seat on the powerful House Rules Committee, which sets the terms for debate on legislation on the House floor. Plus, he has a direct line to the administration by virtue of his importance and support during the campaign. McGovern may prefer to wield influence in the House and behind the scenes rather than gamble on becoming a freshman senator.
Would a constitutional officer run? LG-elect Tim Murray and AG-elect Martha Coakley likely wouldn’t run since they would have been in office just over a year by the beginning of the campaign season. Treasurer Tim Cahill might look at it considering he has to give up on running for governor for at least eight years.
What about outsiders? My favorite outsider candidate would be my candidate in the gubernatorial primary: Chris Gabrieli. During the primary, Gabrieli had strong favorability ratings, a positive and insightful message, and a good field organization. However, his late entry into the race plus Deval’s higher favorability ratings, strong message of hope, and larger grassroots network led to his primary loss. Be that as it may, Gabrieli still brings a lot to the table in terms of ideas and outside experience. Gabrieli would benefit from being the only candidate who isn’t a Member of Congress. Further, his visible support for Deval on primary night and through the campaign could endear him to Deval’s primary supporters if he contemplates a Senate campaign. The media and other Democratic candidates might brand him as a perennial office-seeker. Of course, this is IF Kerry doesn’t run for re-election and IF Chris even wants to run.
Thoughts on who you see running or who you would like to see run?
Of course the Senate free-for-all is all well and good, but let’s not forget that 3+ suddenly open Congressional seats will lead to half a dozen open state senate seats which will lead to a dozen open state rep seats…
<
p>
IF Kerry abandons his Senate seat, this state will go absolutely nuts over the next two years. Personally, I think it’s a pretty exciting prospect.
I’d hate to be a candidate trying to raise money in that madness.
A candidate trying to get a good number of volunteers…
You raise a very good point, but one I didn’t dare go into on this particular post for fear of developing carpal tunnel syndrome.
I hereby declare my candidacy for Finance Committee in Middleborough.
<
p>
I figure at least one incumbent financier will be running for school committee to replace an incumbent running for selectman who will be running for…
<
p>
It’s like watching a glacier calve in spring, and all the chaos that follows…
or you may find yourself in that perenially open seat on teh Middleborough FinCom!
I can remember going through all the same what ifs when he was running for president. So and so would run for this seat and open that up for her, etc. Those would all be special elections, and no one would be in danger of losing their seat. This time around, people would have to choose – do I want to stay in my comfortable state rep seat, or risk it all for a chance at Congress?
In 2004 Barney said that he’d run for senate UNLESS Democrats got a majority in the House, in which case he’d rather be a powerful committee chairperson than a freshman senator. Since Dems. took the House, expect Barney to stay where he is.
Barney said the same thing at a talk he gave at Northeastern a few days before the election.
A lot of the Congressmen have been in office long enough to have earned a chance at committee and subcommittee chairmanships. Is it worth giving that up to be a freshman Senator?
because the average IQ of the senate would jump substantially (then again, the average IQ of the house would drop too)
<
p>
Considering all forces, I think Barney in the House is better for the Nation AND Massachusetts
<
p>
M.
is to get a juicy discussion going about the likely candidates to succeed Kerry should he quit the senate, but please, please, at least let me imagine that he will not run for president. I’d hate to see him embarass himself like that…he’s liable to be the “Joe-mentum” of 2008.
But I agree with you.
<
p>
I think Kerry’s quotes are his biggest liability, and he’s uttered some quotes from 2004 to date that will hang him in 2008. I think he’s been a great senator and if he decides to stay in that role, I’ll proudly support him. However, I was already working to draft Mark Warner to run, which should give you an idea of what I thought about Kerry running for president. (Yeah, that whole draft thing didn’t work out so well…)
<
p>
So who would run for Senate if Kerry doesn’t?!?!
…somebody needs to run against him. I’m tired of the failed jokes and the failed Presidential campaign. I am tired of a Massachusetts senator trying to appeal to the swing voters of Ohiowa instead of representing the views of us Massachusetts liberals.
<
p>
If nobody else has the guts to run, I would appreciate your support.
I’d support a healthy challenge to Sen. Kerry, irregardless of whether he runs for prez or not.
<
p>
One write-in for pablo here…Or perhaps rollbiz will challenge!
Americans for Democratic Action, an influential liberal organization for decades, rated John Kerry at 100% in 2005 on legislative votes they considered to be important to liberals. Ted Kennedy got a 95%. How is John Kerry not representing Massachusetts liberals in the Senate with a voting record more liberal than Kennedy’s?
<
p>
Is Kerry an opportunist who wants the presidency? Yes. Does he represent Massachusetts when it counts? Also, yes.
during the DNC, or just before it, that Kerry was “To The Left of Ted”. It was based on the nonpartisan Congressional Quarterly report. He may tell newspapers in Iowa that he believes life begins at conception, but thats not the way he told the Clerk of the Senate to record his votes.
during the 2004 campaign. One of the spoof debates had Kerry saying “You know, this president likes to talk about how I called the war in Iraq “the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time;” that a few days later, how I said that anyone who doesn’t think the world is a safer place without Saddam Hussein is not fit to be Commander-in-Chief. But what he doesn’t tell you is that when I denounced the war in Iraq, I was speaking to an anti-war group, and when I endorsed the war, I was addressing a pro-war delegation from the U.G.A. The fact of the matter is, I have consistently supported the war in front of pro-war audiences and condemned it in front of groups that oppose it. That is not flip-flopping, that is pandering, and America deserves a president who knows the difference.”
<
p>
Show me somebody running for president who doesn’t pander, and I’ll show you someone who won’t even make the nomination.
I always felt Kerry was trying to find a sweet spot on the left-right continuum. So he was always shifting left or right to find it and was working very hard not to be pigeon-holed as a Librl. Running against Bush seems to have been a useful educational experience for both Gore and Kerry. Kerry has woken up to how dangerous Republican partisanship has become. His campaigning for Lamont has made me feel much better about him.
Where was Kerry when they were voting on the War? Voting for the war before voting against the war becasue he was worried about how his vote would play to Ohiowa.
<
p>
Where was Kerry when George Bush was pushing through this absurd unfunded pile of mandates called the Federal No Child Left Behind act? Not talking to Massachusetts educators, because he was worried about how his vote would play to Ohiowa. In the process, he came out with this contorted statement about his view of the law. Howard Dean spoke clearly about how this law was bad for small New England school districts, because Howard Dean hung around his home state and listened to the local school board members and superintendents who had to deal with this monster. I don’t know who Kerry was listening to, but it wasn’t anyone in Massachusetts.
<
p>
Kerry spends more time in Dubuque than Dedham.
Kerry spends more time in Canton, Ohio than in Canton, Massachusetts.
Kerry thinks Arlington is the place with the cemetery that you drive through to get to the airport.
<
p>
Kerry has stopped being our senator a long time ago. He has stopped caring about us, instead caring what they think in early primary states and the midwestern swing states. He cares more about
<
p>
I want our senate seat back.
There once was a Senator named John
That lefties could not depend on. "The state'll go to the Diablo If you don't vote for Pablo!"
Thus spoke DFA and MoveOn.
Wasn’t Kerry somewhat unreliable during the mess in El Salvador and Nicaragua under Reagan?
The campaign is now working on a melody for those beautiful lyrics.
…and thus will stop appealing to swing voters. I think it is his presidential unelectability that made Ted Kennedy a great senator for us, kooky Mass liberals, and I hope the botched joke will make Kerry the same.
giggle
Does Joe DeNucci roll out his campaign machinery after 20 years as State Auditor for a run at the Senate if Kerry doesn’t run?
It is a Massachusetts tradition that an Auditor who has stayed past the expiration date on their job interest will get re-elected without opposition (again) and then just over midway through their term will resign…that will trigger a ConCon to name a replacement to hold the job until the next election (This gives the bored and/or ornery Rep. selected an exit from the House and a leg up for election…and it will definitely be a Rep. as they have the ConCon vote control)…
hmmm…when Auditor DeNucci announces his resignation in 2008.5, who would be likely candidates for Sal to pick?
He’s Auditor-for-Life. I talked to somebody in his office who said he’s quite happy where he is.
If Frank runs, which I don’t think he will given his statements (but you never know), I think he’d probably win. He’ll be able to make up most of the difference in funds between he and Meehan, plus he has the added bonus of being very likable, fun, off-beat and rather endearing. He’d also have the progressive core with him (assuming McGovern doesn’t run, but even so I bet Frank would have at least as much support).
<
p>
Chris Gabrieli would certainly have a shot and likely has even more name recognition than Barney, but the only way he wins is if he takes a long, long look in the mirror and decides DLC-style politics and wonkish mannerisms weren’t getting him anyway. While he’s obscenely wealthy, I have to think that paying 10s of millions of dollars to run lots of ads that amounts to nothing is going to get tiresome sooner or later. He’ll also need to bolster his resume between now and then if he’d like to win.
<
p>
As for the Republicans having no credible candidates… I can think of one or two (including a certian Harvard Pilgram CEO) who could have a shot, but I think they’re more interested in being Governor.
about running for Senate, and then running for Governor after that. I think Charlie has a better chance at knocking off Kerry than Mitt had against Ted, and that race was pretty tight.
Didn’t Ted get 58% of the vote against Romney? That’s not exactly “tight” (though maybe it is compared to most Republicans’ performances in this state).
<
p>
If Kerry runs for Senate again, Baker won’t run; count on it. He would get clobbered, and I think he’d rather wait 8 (or possibly 4, depending on things go) years for the Governor to open up. If the Senate seat is open it’s possible Baker runs, though still unlikely.
<
p>
In either case, it’s a statement to how shallow the GOP bench is in MA that all the talk is around Baker. Beyond him there’s not a whole lot.
No Republican has a serious chance of knocking off Kerry in 2 years, or, for that matter, of winning an open seat if Kerry moves on. While one can imagine a scenario wherein the Republicans had held on to the Governor’s office, it is wildly implausible to talk about this state’s electing a Republican US Senator at the tail end of the Bush administration. With the balance of power at stake, elections are nationallized. And when voters here think in those terms, the Republicans are dead. Think about those stats on voters’ high opinion of Lincoln Chaffee. If he’d become a Democrat a year ago, or an independent who caucused with Democrats, with he’d have been reelected in a walk. Do you think things are any different here? Sure, lots of stuff can happen in 2 years, but barring some kind of immense scandal or cataclysmic miscalculation by the Democratic leadership, the kind that would lead to a sweeping reversal of the regional trend away from Republicans in federal office, there’s not much point worrying about which Republican runs for Senate in this state.
on Chafee. He completely misread his constituency and, subsequently, blew it. Had Chafee shown the balls we suspect he actually has and switched parties, he’d have held onto that seat until he was a doddering old fool. Alas, he didn’t either have the courage or the intelligence or both.
<
p>
As for Kerry’s seat, it’s safe. The confluence of events that would have to occur for this state to elect a Republican on the heels of John Kerry is so fantastical as to be beyond the pale. Ixnay on that one.
Barney Frank would be the best probably, but probably won’t run. I voted for Jim McGovern for Senate in 2002, but I doubt he’ll be running. I don’t think Ed Markey will either now for same reasons as Frank.
<
p>
I think Gabrieli would be a good Senator. I never thought him a bad candidate, just not great in leadership or vision next to Deval: but he knows education issues inside and out, so thought he’s be great as say Sec of Education at home, he could also be an excellent legislator on the national level. I think it’s a better fit for him than governor anyway, and I don’t doubt in two years he’ll have another few million burning a hole in his pocket.
<
p>
Another interesting name I saw in the Globe article on this on Sunday was Scott Harshbarger. I don’t remember anything of the 98 election, but I was very impressed by him when he was at Brandeis a few weeks ago.
Don’t you think the voters are just plain tired of Gabrieli trying to buy higher office?
<
p>
I am also told that Gabrieli is a smart guy. I would think that, at some point, he would decide that spending tons of money on these races is merely raising his negatives among the public. Instead of buying a senate seat, he should consider buying some small country.
i agree to some extent, but i actually think he’d probably be good in the job as senator. too pragmatic for the house, not dynamic enough for governor. there are a lot of people who like him, though there may be also a lot of people tired of him. but i think he takes it seriously and runs a real campaign, the public will take it seriously.
Pablo, I repeat my response to you from another post.
<
p>
Gabrieli had high favorable ratings with primary voters, just under Deval’s. Therefore, I don’t think that too many voters viewed Gabrieli as trying to buy the election, or at least they didn’t view his use of his well-earned (not inherited) wealth to promote his candidacy and his issues. Both Deval and Chris ran very positive campaigns, so I don’t know what negatives you’re talking about. Unless, of course, the fact that Chris earned his fortune is what you’re holding against him. You’re certainly not addressing any issues.
Gabrieli dumps a ton of his own money into a race for Congress and loses.
Gabrieli dumps a ton of his own money into a race for Lieutenant Governor and loses.
Gabrieli dumps a ton of his own money into a race for Governor and loses.
<
p>
Remember what they called his RV? The Loserbago.
<
p>
People can feel good about Gabrieli right now, because he dumped a ton of money into this race and, though he went negative at the end, that was quickly forgotten after Muffy’s hideous campaign.
<
p>
But what happens when Gabrieli declares for another high profile race? I think he becomes a joke. I don’t see him going much past his vote total in 2006, and unless he can split a five or six way race right down the middle, it ain’t going to happen.
I can’t comprehend from where you’re summoning such vitriol! Loserbago? You’re the first person I’ve heard who has called the RV that. Where did the race go negative, when he started comparing his position on taxes and immigration with the other two? Get over it!
<
p>
Yup, Gabrieli lost a Congressional primary in 1998 and the gubernatorial primary in 2006. He WON the LG primary in 2002. Get your facts straight, brother. O’Brien was at the top of the ’02 ticket, not Gabrieli. She lost the general.
<
p>
Seriously, where does this seething animosity towards Gabrieli come from? Why your obsession with his money? Why do you ignore the reality that Gabrieli actually had grassroots (and yes, I recognize they were not as large as Deval’s) during the primary? Why are you trashing a good liberal, not on his policies or educational work, but because he decided to finance his campaign using his own resources? Why are you dismissing the possibility that he could actually be a good, qualified candidate for high office because he’s loaded?
The numbers I referred to were poll numbers taken by various sources during the primary, i.e. before September 19th, which means that the numbers are NOT from today.
If Kerry runs for president I assume he’d leave the question of senate re-election open until he could see how likely he is to get the nomination. Since the presidential nomination will be effectively locked up by the end of March if not earlier, and the state primary will be in September, there’s plenty of time for Senate primary campaigns to get going after Kerry declares one way or the other. I hope that if he runs for president, he does not get the nomination, and I think he probably wouldn’t, so I expect he’ll run for re-election (and I’m happy to have him as a Senator for another term).
<
p>
In the not-so-likely (IMO) chance that the Senate seat opens up, I hope we’d get at least one exciting candidate who is not from among the set we’re all thinking of so far. However, I’m sure we’d get at least one or two open seats for Congress, and I think I’m more excited about those than about the Senate opening.
<
p>
(I’m very unhappy at the thought that all these races would happen without instant runoff voting)
1) do you know if John Bonifaz has thought about running for the MA-9 next time?
<
p>
2) Kerry would have to declare himself a candidate for Senate by Feb 08: late enough to have some idea (all the Jan cauci and primaries over) but not enough to have it locked up. and let’s hope he doesn’t but thinks he does 🙂
Not that one has to live in the district to run, but I’m pretty sure Mr. Bonifaz lives in the 8th.
i’m pretty sure he is, I think I checked last month some time. though that is weird you don’t have to live there…
There are some small parts of JP in the Lynch district, but anyway, a few people have moved in conjunction with running — Barney from Back Bay to Newton, Joe Kennedy from Marshfield to Brighton, as well as a couple of people in the race tbat Mike Capuano ran. It does protect people who may be redistricted out of their original district by allowing them time to find a new home, if they so choose.
But if he wants to be on the ballot, he’ll have to collect signatures.
<
p>
Sure, he can do that while running in the primary, but what does that say about his opinion of his own chances?
Lt. Gov. Kerry was in office for only two years when he ran for Senate.
I’m not sure if Kerry made comments on the trail which sounded like commitments to fill a full term in the Corner Office. After all, Deval and Time both said numerous times that they wanted to do and focus on the jobs if elected.
<
p>
We’ll see…
…the Republicans in Massachusetts may look like they are dead in the water right now, but, as much as I hate to admit it, I wouldn’t sell them short. If the Senate seat opened up in 2008, I can think of two Republicans who could run a competitive race: Andy Card, former Bush chief of staff and former State Rep. from Massachusetts, and Charlie Baker (Ryan alluded to him in his earlier post).
<
p>
That being said, I can’t believe that Kerry will be foolish enough to run for President in ’08…I wonder if he will even run for re-election at this point. Don’t get me wrong…Kerry has been a good Senator and I worked hard for him in ’04. But, frankly, I think he’s toast, at least as far as a Presidential run goes.
<
p>
If the Senate seat does open up, I hope we Democrats can come up with someone better than the tired old Marty Meehans or Ed Markeys. And I don’t think much of Chris Gabrieli’s chances. Three failed campaigns and 20+ million dollars later and he hasn’t even come close to being elected to anything.
<
p>
Jim McGovern and Barney Frank would both be excellent choices if they are interested.
<
p>
The other thought going through my mind is why we Democrats in Massachusetts can’t come up with a woman to join our all-male congressional delegation.
<
p>
He’s too linked to the incredibly unpopular (here moreso than other places) Bush administration. Sure, he’ll be a few years out, but I can already picture the ads and quotes turning Card into a Bush clone. That’s not going to fly in Massachusetts.
<
p>
Baker might do it, but only as part of a three-year campaign strategy for a run for Governor.
<
p>
I just can’t see Massachusetts sending a Republican to Washington.
…but I wouldn’t underestimate him.
How did Meehan and Markey get tired? I am new to being represented by Markey, but, at least on most issues, Markey seems quite good.
…and he does have a good, progressive voting record. I’m not saying he’s a bad Congressman, and I don’t mean to put him down.
<
p>
However, I have lived in his district for a long time and he is rarely seen in the district. He is a Washington congressman, he’s a bit of an elitist, he’s been in office forever and is rarely challenged. I just think he’s complacent. He’s fine in Congress…but I couldn’t get excited about a Senate run for him. Just my opinion.
As it is – Ellen Roy Herzfelter? Beth Lindstrom? Elizabeth Poirier? Kerry Healey? Jane Swift? Maria Medeiros? All have the resources and experience.
How about Andrea Silbert for Senate? She has solid state-wide name recognition, intelligent, not from Boston, and experience lobbying/educating for federal funding. Not sure if she can compete w/ the Reps’ campaign coffers but I would be excited about her campaign.
<
p>
And in addition to her qualities, I would love to see a women’s voice representing MA. I am very tired of all the white men representing us in D.C. They, including my rep. Capuano, are strong advocates for us, but we need an additional perspective.
<
p>
In terms of Lynch’s seat, Senator Walsh lives in his district, correct? I would not call her a “progressive”, but she is certainly better on the issues than Lynch. And she has a good track-record of endorsing progressive candidates-Felix Arroyo and Deval come to mind.
<
p>
On a similar theme, I would love for all of the Deval folks to come together and devise a strategic plan to elect more women to office, starting local and working our way up from there. To that end, does anyone know if the State Party has any sort of process to develop and cultivate women candidates? I know of some other venues (Barbara Lee Foundation, and UMass has a program/initiative) but I haven’t heard of the MDP investing their resources in to this.
For all the hype, Silbert proved to be unable to capture much of a vote total in the Democratic primary…she would get buried in a Senate fight…Coakley would be not only the woman to beat, but the candidate to beat in a Democratic primary…especially if there were more than one male candidate in the race.
Personally, I pretty scared of a repeat of Lynch’s first congressional race, where a crowded field ran in the special election and allowed Lynch to walk away with it. If a field of (say) Frank, Meehan, and McGovern all go for this, this could lead to a easy win for Lynch, who’d have the moderate-to-conservative Democrats locked up.
Shannon O’Brien, who is still respected in the party, could consider a Senate run, but she is rumored to be eye-balling John Olver’s House seat in 2008, when he’s expected to retire from Congress.
he’s lost his money people and his field people in both New Hampshire and Iowa. He won Iowa because he got to the key caucus leaders first and got them committed. That still matters in Iowa and any of them who were giving him a second look jumped ship with his comments last month. They also got a call from their good friend Guv Vilsack within seconds of that comment. In New Hampshire, Kathleen Sullivan couldn’t even defend Kerry’s stupidity and could barely muster a figleaf of support that a Kerry presidential run was possible. Jeanne Shaheen, if she decides to endorse, will go with the whoever looks like the winner a year out, which is just a few months away. Absent a remarkable turn of events Kerry won’t be in the top 5. If Kerry doesn’t get her it means he won’t get her husband which sinks any shot of him winning New Hampshire. Game over. Reelect Senator Kerry ’08!
<
p>
But if he did jump, don’t count out Markey. He can raise money like Bubba and has a huge amount of support in the business community in MA (and across the country).
Kerry does not run for re-election (or president).
Martha Coakley runs for U.S. Senate with 2 to 3 Congressmen and wins.
Essex DA Jon Blodgett, President of DA’s Association, wins Special for AG.
<
p>
That would be a fun year.
Come on folks wake up, we have a lot of very good candidate’s from Coakley,Neal,Lynch, Frank, etc… But the one who is extremely hot right now is Con Jim McGovern. He has a wacky district that spreads from Worc to Somerset, his name recognition is well-known in the inner city of Boston. Rememember he was the late Con Moakley’s chief of staff for many years, so he has the ability to work the money trees there as well. Also he was the FIRST elected to official to endorse Deval, never mind his strong relationship with Tim Murray. I will agree that Con McGovern will probably stay where he is, but I would never rule out anything from him, especially this early !!
It goes without saying that Jim mcGovern would be a primo candidate for US Senate…and more importantly, would BE a great Senator…of the whole Congressional delegation, he is the guy I could support with extreme enthusiasm…but if he was not interested in that contest (which I have not heard that he is), I would be with Coakley…