Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Ogonowski testing a Kerry challenge?

By

I just got off the phone minutes ago with a poll questioner who was clearly testing a challenge by failed Republican Congressional candidate Jim Ogonowski against John Kerry.  Maybe it’s a branch of the DC Republicans trying to recruit Jim, but it’s more likely something that Ogo campaign and the state party are underwriting.

It was clearly a “professional” poll, in that it first pre qualified me as a likely voter, then asked some presidential questions before spending that last half of the poll asking about Kerry and Ogo.  Starting out with favorability opinions, to describing Candidate X that fit Ogo to a T and asking my opinion of them, to testing negative themes about Kerry (tax raising, gov spending liberal who is rich and is not in tune with voters), to retesting Jim’s last campaign.

Ogo couldn’t hold a candle to a first-time candidate like Tsnogas and he thinks he did so well that we can hunt bigger fish. 

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. I think we need to learn a serious lesson here. You can’t take ANY opponent lightly. I didn’t think Ogo would come close; he almost won it. While I’m more than sure Kerry could defeat Ogo, people would be making a serious mistake to think it would be a cake walk.

  2. I really liked Ogo initially, but he proved himself to be from the Rove wing of the party. I also dislike our Senator and wish to see him kicked out of Washington and replaced by someone who will actually fight for us. But Ogo is not that person, a sensible moderate Republican might have a decent shot but I doubt any of them will run.

    <

    p>
    -Richard Tisei and Bruce Tarr are two liberal Republicans, but its likely they prefer their State Senate leadership positions to a risk on an expensive campaign especially when they lack name recognition

    <

    p>
    -Charlie Baker is running for gov in 2010 so dont expect him to challenge Kerry

    <

    p>
    -Weld is in NY and while he has the name recognition to come back its been awhile and a lot of people still remember how he tried to ditch MA for an ambassadorship, he also couldnt beat Kerry the first time

    <

    p>
    -Kerry Healy while a sensible moderate on paper used a lot of disgusting campaign tactics against Deval Patrick so I doubt Id support her, she does have a lot of leftover money from 06 and would likely be the most formidable Republican seeing she has name recognition and won a decent percentage of the vote for a GOPer in state, I doubt shed beat Kerry though

    <

    p>
    -Andy Card is associated with Bush too much and would likely lose

    <

    p>
    -Michael Sullivan is likely going to become permanent head of the DEA and would probably prefer that job

    <

    p>
    -Peter Blute has a ton of baggage, and Peter Torkildsons tenure at the State GOP and his one lousy term in Congress likely keep him out

    <

    p>
    so Im not sure who the hell else they got on their side.

    • The more important question in my mind is: which political party/leadership fights for interests more aligned with Massachusetts?

      <

      p>
      If it’s the GOP, than perhaps you ought to be supporting any candidate the GOP digs up.  If it’s the Dems, then perhaps you ought to be looking toward Kerry primary challengers.  Just look to Connecticut for recent inspiration.

      • Um, let’s examine that for a minute.  Lamont beat Lieberman in the Democratic primary.  Lieberman elected to run as a Republicrat–sorry, “independent.” Schumer, head of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, supported the Republicrat Lieberman over his own party’s nominee Lamont.  The Republicrat Lieberman was elected, probably as a result.

        <

        p>
        That Connecticut?

        <

        p>
        That is what showed me that the Demoblican financing operations in Congress are nothing more than incumbent protection operations.  I suspect that it is the same with Republicrat financing operations.  But it is obviously a mistake to believe otherwise.  And it is interesting to see what the Demoblicans have reaped by supporting the Republicrat Lieberman: concern over whether the Republicrat Lieberman will jump ship over to the Republicrat caucus.  It is unlikely that the Demoblican Lamont would have threatened to do so.  Obviously, Schumer shot his Demoblican party in the foot by supporting the Republicrat Lieberman, but he protected the incumbent.

        <

        p>
        What that should have told you, but which it obviously didn’t, is that the Demoblican party (probably the Republicrat party, too) are going to oppose insurgents like Lamont.  Hence the “incumbent protection operation” that I mentioned earlier.  They don’t want insurgents.  Insurgents might threaten their own positions.

        <

        p>
        But that “incumbent protection operation” is one reason why I am neither a Demoblican nor a Republicrat.

        • The one where, going in to the election, 60% of the House seats were held by the GOP [3/5], instead of 0% [0/10].  Also, it was the first time a Dem had lost in a primary and stayed in the race in a long long time… leadership had a learning curve on that one.  Honestly, I don’t think they’d take the same course a second time.

          <

          p>
          So, you can make comments designed to blur [or merely highlight your perception of blur] between the two parties.  You can ignore the obvious notion that the Connecticut political landscape is far more “purple” than Massachusetts, and you can ignore that Lamont v Lieberman was the first time anything like that had happened in a long long time.  You can ignore the fact that many Democrats stayed mum, and that even more did support Lamont once he won the primary.

          <

          p>
          I don’t ignore those things.  I think that a strong Democratic primary challenge would induce party leaders to stay hands off.

          • What was clear to me in the Lamont/Lieberman case was that the national Democratic party was not going to support their own party’s nominee, an insurgent who won the primary.  The only reason for that, that I could fathom, is that the national Democratic party would refuse to support an insurgent (Lamont), and instead support the incumbent (Lieberman) who claimed that he would nominally vote with the Democratic caucus, but who has shown that he would otherwise reject many if not much of what laughingly passes for a Democratic agenda, and might even jump to the Republican caucus (unlikely, for reasons that I have described elsewhere here).

            <

            p>
            And the only reason that I could fathom for that is that the national Democratic party is only interested in keeping their seats in Congress, by telling insurgents that they are unlikely to be supported by the national Democratic party, particularly in states (such as Connecticut) that are stupid enough to allow persons who have run in a party’s primary to run as an independent with their names on the ballot.  Write-in, sticker campaign, fine.  But not with the names on the ballot as an independent after having run and lost in a party’s primary.

            <

            p>
            The other matters that you raised are somewhat orthogonal to those issues, because they largely relate to inter-party contests.

            • …the national Democratic party is only interested in keeping their seats in Congress…

              The same is true for the other party, no doubt; but the egregious error of the supposedly progressive party (Dems, in case you wonder) is that ‘business as usual’ protection of incumbents completely ignores the actual crises we are facing as a nation, a people, and a species, and plays into the public cynicism that undermines faith in democracy. A neo-con outcome, for sure.

        • When it looked as if Lamont was indeed going to win the Connecticut primary, the DSCC and Schumer in particular started to waffle about whether they’d support Lamont if Lieberman entered the race. They were met with a sea of outrage. If they had tried to do that, they would have had heaps of trouble fundraising.

          <

          p>
          So they backed down. Possibly their backing down was not covered in Der Spiegel or Die Zeit or the Zeitung of your choice. You might have been in Bayern at the time. Who knows.

          <

          p>
          But they did back down and the DSCC decidedly did not back Lieberman.

          <

          p>
          On the other hand, the national Party did not particularly support Lamont against Lieberman. They were pretty neutral.

          <

          p>
          There were exceptions. Kerry campaigned actively. Boxer did too. Dodd eventually made a campaign ad for Lieberman and Dodd’s presidential campaign is being headed by Lamont’s former campaign manager. I still get regular lamontograms asking me to support Dodd.

    • State Senator Scott Brown, R-Wrentham. The guy is bright, articulate, telegenic, and loaded (kinda like a mini-Romney). Brown has been talking up a potential US Senate run for the past year, at least. I think he’s said he’s leaning against it, but I bet a few phone calls from Washington stroking his ego would push him into the race.

      • Who read profane comments to high school students at an assembly (story here)?  Apparently he was angry about he and his daughter being targeted on facebook for his virulent homophobia during the marriage debate, and he decided he would address the issue by repeating the most noxious postings for the entire school audience.  Not my idea of bright and articulate.

        Brown, a guest at a King Philip Regional High School assembly to discuss legislative initiatives, opened by reading obscenity-laced facebook.com Web site comments directed against him for his anti-gay marriage stance and, by association, against his family.

        He said some of the written comments attributed to KP students, whom he named aloud at the assembly, were directed at his daughter.

        The lawmaker held captive to his outrage many KP students who were innocent of the name-calling and foul language, and did so in a manner unbecoming to his roles as caring parent and respected lawmaker.

        <

        p>If he or Ogo is the best the GOP can do, I’d say Kerry doesn’t have much to worry about.

  3. I fully agree that you take no opponent lightly and that you take nothing for granted.

    <

    p>
    (Reminder here -we need to keep working for Jim Marzilli. He is, by far, the most qualified candidate in the final but voter turnout during the holidays will be dead.)

    <

    p>
    While taking nothing for granted – John Kerry romps in Massachusetts in November 2008. First, he has been elected and re-elected several times statewide. As a sitting Governor, Bill Weld couldn’t beat him – no way Ogo has a shot.

    <

    p>
    Second – Presidential election year. Massachusetts voters will be out strongly for the Democratic nominee and they will vote to re-elected Senator Kerry as well.

    <

    p>
    Over the years John Kerry has been very responsive to my Union. He has suppoted and fought for legislation that improves conditions for workers (Davis-Bacon protection on federal projects, increasing the minimum wage, funding for OSHA). He has taken the time to meet with the rank-and-file members when issues directly impact them (the Clear Channel strike comes to mind).

    <

    p>
    I haven’t seen any potential candidate mentioned on BMG or anywhere that could beat John Kerry – much less be a better U.S. Senator then he is for Massachusetts.

  4. It would be the toughest fight since Weld, but Kerry would still win. Probably would make more sense for Jim to run against Niki, but that may wait until 2010.

    <

    p>
    I had forgotten that Kerry was up next year: I may actually vote for him, unlike the last 3 times he was on my ballot. (I really wish I had the last time)

    <

    p>
    Side note: I was really annoyed to learn John Bonifaz had moved out to Amherst. I was hoping for him to challenge Lynch in the 9th.

    • For one simple reason: turnout.  If you look at the numbers from the special election, Republican areas had much higher turnout than Democratic ones. For example, Dracut had more than half the voters of neighboring Lowell, even though Lowell is four times bigger.  This simply won’t be true in a presidential election year.  The Democratic voters that Tsongas failed to motivated will be out in force and barring some consider change in the political situation, it will be fairly hopeless for Ogo.

      • and somehow does pull out a win,* he should enjoy his one term in congress. Because the redistricting will be that year and we’ll most likely be losing one seat.  Guess which seat would be eliminated if there’s 9 Democrats and one Republican…

        <

        p>
        * (The climate may be better that year, especially if we have a Democratic President.  Historically the incumbent party does badly on off years.)

  5. Kerry is already putting the heat on the MA dem leadership to assure he will not be challenged by his own party, but there is already a challenger in the wings.

    <

    p>
    MA Republicans have a few folks ginning up and Ogo is surely one of them. The usual suspects are out because they have ties to the village idiot in the White House.
    It appears that Sullivan has made some sort of a sweetheart deal with Kennedy, so if a democrat gets elected president, he may be safe at DEA, but I wouldn’t bet on it. Personally I think he is just another incompetent hack. Card’s political career was finished when he made the midnight visit to Ashcroft.

    <

    p>
    I think Kerry’s days are numbered. He has been an absolute zero for MA and USA.

    • the political graveyards of Massachusetts are full of all-up GOP candidates who thought they could eject John Kerry from the US Senate.

      <

      p>
      I wish Ogo well….

    • http://www.boston.co…

      <

      p>
      This is just TODAY’S paper.  This is the story of the Quincy soldier who was killed in Afghanistan under mysterious circumstances.  Relevant quote:

      <

      p>

      “It just doesn’t add up,” said Douglas Bailey, a spokesman who is representing the family at the request of Senator John F. Kerry. “Ciara was very happy when she was home. She loved being in the military; it was really the right place for her. The family absolutely does not believe it is suicide.”

      The military has said that its autopsy should be done by the end of this month, but that its investigation into how Durkin died could take many months, even years. An independent autopsy, paid for by Kerry, is also expected to be presented to the family soon.

      <

      p>
      And this is just one case the senator is helping with.  Who knows how many others there are not covered by the press.  And sheesh, just Google him and you’ll see lots of articles that are very much related to Massachusetts.

      <

      p>
      Hey, you can say you disagree with him ideologically, but to say he does “zero” for Mass & and the USA is just a lie.

      • Off years —-faghhheedddabouuuutit. He wouldn’t tell you if your shirt was on fire. Kennedy does in fact make every effort to do every thing he can for his constituents. Kerry is a joke and he is disliked by 50.01% of the public and that’s all it takes.

        • residents in the run up to election years (or is that only during election years, which actually would mean 2008, but I digress).  Looks like he was helping small businesses in Mass. in 2006:

          <

          p>
          http://www.inc.com/n…

          <

          p>

          The Federal Emergency Management Agency, Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency, and the Small Business Administration will join Kerry on May 22 at the first-annual Massachusetts Procurement and Business Expo at Sal’s Riverwalk in Lawrence — a conference that was already planned but has since added a session on flood assistance.

          <

          p>
          There really are two stories here:

          <

          p>
          1.  That Kerry has been there for small businesses in Mass. (as we all know, Small Biz creates more jobs than Big Biz, so that helps a LOT of Mass. residents).

          <

          p>
          2.  The article I referenced above was when Peabody got flooded, something Kerry didn’t forget, as the water bill that just passed Congress (and overrode the president’s veto) has items in it to help Peabody from flooding so often.

          <

          p>
          Pertinent articles here:

          <

          p>
          http://media.www.nu-…

          <

          p>
          (Second Annual Business Expo at Northeastern U.)

          <

          p>
          Peabody op-ed:

          <

          p>
          http://www.salemnews…

          <

          p>
          Once again, you may not like him, but I see a senator taking care of his state.

          • Kerry’s constituent services are notoriously horrendous.  Especially with what Kennedy’s office does.

            <

            p>
            here’s Laurel’s take

            <

            p>

            It’s not “ribbing” Sen Kerry, it’s flat out deserved criticism when Skipper points out a real problem with the Senator’s office.  And that is as it should be.  It’s also not “ribbing” when I and others point out his shameful duplicity in soliciting gay people for campaign contributions all the while insisting that we shouldn’t have even one of what he’s had 2 of (civil marriages).  If Kerry doesn’t take legitimate criticism seriously, he can kiss jolly ole ribbing goodbye.  Ribbing is something you do with those you respect.

            <

            p>
            Skipper’s comment refered to above:

            <

            p>

            Kerry should add staff to answer constituent questions via phone inquiries and forget the Blogosphere He is out of touch with the average voter, that is why Ohio is a painful memory.

            I have called his office twice in my lifer regarding Iraq armament and unemployment benefits. Both times, I was dumped into a voice mail…

            Yet I received a fundraising call from somebody in California for Kerry. . I asked why the senator was nor employing

            When the phone does not ring, it is Kerry!

            When the oval is not marked, it is ME!

            <

            p>
            Orhow about HeartlandDem

            <

            p>

            Constituent Services
            Constituent services matter on every level of government.  Kennedy, Markey, McGovern – all responsive with follow-up.  Kerry, Neal – nada, zilch, nothing.  With the Congressmen it was not about living in the district, or not, we have family in all of the above districts that were in need of assistance.  I would be curious to see some ranking of elected officials on constituent services.
            by: HeartlandDem @ Fri Jan 26, 2007 at 19:33:36 PM EST

            <

            p>
            These are not posts by rabid right wing ideologues but post by progressives on this site.  Kerry’s constituent services are non-existent.  It’s the one thing Kennedy does right.

            <

            p>
            And if you want a whole list of them try this Google Search on BMG only

            • …one of the reasons that Barney Frank is popular in his district is his constituent service.  As I’ve mentioned here before, he is not hesitant to calling a constituent himself to discuss an issue that the constituent has called in about.  They might agree to disagree, but at least he listens to his constituents. 

              <

              p>
              That’s more than I can say about most politicians at the federal level.

          • both News stories.  Nobody ever said Kerry doesn’t show up when there is a camera present.  He loves the camera, they don’t call him “live-shot” for nothing.  It’s what he doesn’t do when the camera is not running that people are talking about.

            • He (JKerry) loves the camera, they don’t call him “live-shot” for nothing.

              <

              p>
              …is what they used to say about Marty Meehan.  Don’t get between him and a TV camera.

  6. Most people who meet Kerry, end up voting for him. There’s only one other politician in all of America whose press is so deeply at odds with his true character and that’s George Bush.  Whereas, with Bush and his deeply flawed and savaged soul, the press is uniformly good: all about his straight shooting and firmness of purpose when in reality he’s a deeply mendacious person with no firm grip on anything. In regards to Sen. Kerry it’s the opposite, painting him as willowy stick-at-naught with a snooty demeanor.  The outcome of all this our tragedy. 

    <

    p>
    All Kerry has to do, which he does every time he’s up for election, is to barnstorm the state and get face-to-face with people. They then vote for him because they see the difference between what is said and what he is. Simple as that. He did it in Iowa in late ’03, when he was being outpolled by Howard Dean, Dennis Kucinich and the Rev. Al Sharpton. And again in NH in ’04.

    <

    p>
    Anybody who says that Kerry hasn’t been good for Massachusetts is an idealogue and hasn’t done their homework.  Anybody who thinks Kerry has been a detriment to Massachusetts is somebody who’s got a bass ackwards view of what’s good for this state.

    <

    p>
    Anybody who says Sen Kerry is done as a force in politics is joining a loonngg list of people who’ve written a premature political obituary of the Senator. Sen. Kerry’s a player in the Senate, and a player in the Bay State.  Again, contrary to the derogatory ‘live-shot’ nickname, he’s actually not someone who spend s a great deal of time thinking about publicizing his efforts… You’ll never, ever, see a President Kerry on the deck of an aircraft carrier until the mission actually really is accomplished…

    <

    p>
    Anybody who says Sen Kerry doesn’t ‘fight for us’ is mistaking the bluster and swagger of Pro Wrestling with politics. And anybody who doesn’t admit that Massachusetts has two of the finest Senators seated today is trying to sell something…

    • Just take a long hard look at John Kerry’s legislative record, say—— as opposed to Sen. Kennedy. Look at the bills and ancillary items that Kennedy has championed. Now look at Sen Keyy. The result looks like the next score of the Patriots/Dolphins game.

      <

      p>
      Why does this imbecile have so many apologists? I guess for the same reason that Robert C. Byrd has his.

      • All over the state there is this Robert C. Byrd public work, that Robert C. Byrd public work and the other Robert C. Byrd public work dotting the landscape.  He’s been almost as prolific about getting money from the federal government for WVA as Ted “Bridge to Nowhere” Stevens has been for Alaska, but, unlike WVA, Alaska doesn’t need money from the FedGov, and hasn’t for decades.

        <

        p>
        I’m sure that most West Virginians know Byrd’s background, but as long as the senate (both parties) have their seniority system (longevity hath its privileges), they’ll continue to be re-elected.  Unless, as Huey Long is reputed to have said, they are caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy.  I wish we could get rid of JKerry (his sanctimonious style grates on my nerves), but I’d replace him with Barney, not Ogonowski.

  7. Ogonowski’s poll comes on the heels of a poll by Jeff Beatty showing him (or an outsider like him) in a dead heat with Kerry. Then there’s the Suffolk University and News7 poll a few months ago that showed 56% (!) of Massachusetts voters said Kerry should not run for re-election:

    <

    p>

    When voters were asked whether Kerry should run for another six-year term in 2008 or if it is time to give someone else a chance, just 37% indicated that he should seek re-election while 56% said that it was time to give someone else a chance. Among political parties: 76% of Republicans, 62% of Independents, and 39% of registered Democrats said that it was time to give someone else a chance.

    <

    p>
    It’s high time we recognized not only that Kerry is ineffectual and widely disliked, but that a strong progressive Democrat is already challenging him for the primary election: Ed O’Reilly.

    <

    p>
    Ed O’Reilly challenges Kerry on a range of serious issues and Ed’s positions are in synch with the MA Dem platform, while Kerry’s are not: single-payer health care; out of Iraq now; end the hedge fund tax ripoff; marriage equality; impeach Bush/Cheney; municipally-owned renewable energy.

    <

    p>
    Kerry’s bloggers like to beat up on Ed in BMG, by invoking bygone images of Kerry as a liberal standing up to Bush. But we know Kerry didn’t stand up to Bush when it mattered: in Ohio and on the Iraq authorization. Kerry’s bloggers never try to tangle on the issues. They can’t afford to. It’s increasingly clear they also won’t be able to maintain the air of a strong incumbent.

  8. In Iowa in ’04, Kerry won after getting Governor Vilsack’s wife to endorse him.  Kerry’s ploy was not admirable.

    <

    p>
    Iowa law nixes any endorsement by the Governor.  That’s to prevent pressure on Iowa state employees to stand up at the caucuses, where everyone knows for whom you’re counted, for the Governor’s choice.

    <

    p>
    As soon as MRS. Vilsack’s endorsement of Kerry became public, an Iowan whom I canvassed on behalf of Howard Dean told me that Dean’s quest was now essentially futile.  The Iowan said that every Iowa state employee would know to stand up at the caucuses for Kerry, because his or her boss would find out if s/he didn’t. 

    <

    p>
    The results, I’d say, speak for themselves. 

    <

    p>
    The truth is that Kerry in ’08, and therefore a Mass. Democratic Senate seat, is vulnerable to a generic Republican who is even halfway attractive. 

    <

    p>
    Massachusetts doesn’t necessarily see Kerry between campaigns, or even during them.  If Kerry stormed a barn west of the Quabbin in ’02, when I campaigned for him, it’s news to me.  But Mass. already knows Kerry very well indeed, and for the most part doesn’t want him. 

    <

    p>
    Suffolk U.’s poll last April showed that more than half of Mass. voters (voters, folks, not Dems alone) want Kerry OUT of the ’08 U.S. Senate race. 

    <

    p>
    That’s not the only reason for us to run progressive Mass. native Ed O’Reilly as the Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate in ’08. 

    <

    p>
    Ed O’Reilly worked his way through UMass Amherst & through law school.  He cares about the Commonwealth and our people.  He listens.  He (unlike Kerry) is solidly in sync with the Mass. Dem platform.  For a quarter-century he has fought for Americans’ civil rights (remember those?  So quaint.)  Ed also has a sense of humor.  And, among other things, unlike Kerry, he’s been right on Iraq.

    <

    p>
    But Mass. voters’ desire for a junior Senator other than Kerry is one darned good reason to run Ed O’Reilly.

  9. …may not exactly create a ground swell of the conserative base or how that will play with the casual voter who will make decisions with very little issue-orientated information, that can make a big difference.

    <

    p>
    The only result in a Brown run would be 4 Republican Senators in the State House.

    • His vulgar language and naked Cosmo pose

      <

      p>
      Burt Reynold’s naked Cosmo picture spread in the early 1970s did wonders for his film career.

Archives