Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Ogonowski OFFICIALLY off ballot

By

Something that I tell any candidate (some that ask, many that don’t) is that you need to make sure you have at least twice the number of required signatures before turning them in. Especially for progressive candidates (which Ogo certainly wasn’t), collecting signatures is the first step to building grassroots support and building the mailing lists.

Clearly, Jim O didn’t realize that…

UPDATE (by David): We asked John Kerry’s office for comment.  Here’s their response:

Republicans will have to settle their own political differences. John Kerry just keeps working and fighting every day for the people of Massachusetts who want the war in Iraq to end and want an economic policy that finally works for working families.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. a little less time making cute but vacuous youtube videos.  the silver lining for him is that now he doesn’t have to fill that echoingly vacant issues page with “ideas”.

    • Can’t the local Republican party do better?  There really needs to be a “loyal opposition” with some clout to keep the process honest.  Don’t you think so?  

      • sure, “loyal opposition” helps keep the process honest.  but clearly og wasn’t up to that important task.

  2. I actually signed his papers myself (I’ll sign for anyone on principle) and didn’t realize until after I walked away that it’d be stricken (struck?) from their list.  

    <

    p>

  3. Missed it by that much.

    <

    p>In how much disarray is the Mass GOP that they can’t believably forge 30 extra signatures? It’s time to go back and re-learn dirty tricks fundamentals, people!

  4. Something that I tell any candidate (some that ask, many that don’t) is that you need to make sure you have at least twice the number of required signatures before turning them in.

    <

    p>He claims that he turned in over 22,000 signatures, which would be more than half.  Still, if that is the case, then how could more than half of them get thrown out?

  5. ” Earlier today, the Ogonowski Campaign released a statement signifying that more than 10,000 certified signatures would be submitted on behalf of Jim Ogonowski to the Secretary of State’s Office. That statement was accurate and those signatures were delivered. However, when submitted to the Secretary of State’s Office we were notified that some town clerks had erred and had not properly signed the nomination papers. These papers were corrected by the clerks but were unable to be returned to the Secretary of State’s Office by 5pm.  The removal of those certified signatures from our totals, thereby dropped us below the threshold needed to qualify for the ballot. Previously, the campaign had made a conscious decision not to challenge questionable activity at town clerks offices, because it felt it would be unnecessary.  This activity included: missing signature sheets, sheets mailed to Jim before being picked up eliminating the possibility of a review, and great disparity between original claims of initial signature counts and actual totals. However, due to today’s developments, the campaign will be reviewing its options on the matter.

    We appreciate your patience as we review those options. This will be the only statement from the campaign this evening.”

    Alicia Preston, Spokeman for Jim Ogonowski for US Senate

    • The “Dog ate my nomination papers” Club is always accepting new members!

      • how many rmg-ers who derided sciortino for going to court that would be cheer leading for og to do the same, lol!

        • I specifically asked multiple times if a)the town clerk’s lost papers or if b)Sciortino lost papers.  It was finally answered that b)Sciortino lost the papers.  

          <

          p>Team Ogonowski seems to be saying that town clerks did not return the same number of signature sheets that were submitted to them.  If true this is different.  Had that been the case with Sciortino I would have stated that he deserved to be on the ballot.  

          <

          p>So I don’t think you are talking about this RMGer  

    • Previously, the campaign had made a conscious decision not to challenge questionable activity at town clerks offices, because it felt it would be unnecessary.

      Lesson: Never leave ANYTHING to chance.

      This activity included: missing signature sheets, sheets mailed to Jim before being picked up eliminating the possibility of a review, and great disparity between original claims of initial signature counts and actual totals.

      Did his campaign make these complaints public prior to this? I’ve been out of the loop on state issues and it would be interesting to see if this is the first we’ve heard of these “activities.”

      However, due to today’s developments, the campaign will be reviewing its options on the matter.

      Oops! Too late!

  6. It’s almost like that woodpecker the birdwatchers are wandering around the swamps in Arkansas looking for. Or some urban legend. Is there some minimum level of existence to even be considered a real party? (Seriously, is there? Or are the Republicans grandfathered in?).

    <

    p>You can’t get 10,000 signatures???? Statewide???? ARod could get 10,000, Kobe too.

    <

    p>Let’s look at the scoreboard:

    <

    p>Constitutional Officers: 0
    US Senators: 0/ 2, candidates: 1 (Jeff Beatty)
    Congresspeople: 0/10, candidates: 3 (? So says the State Repub Web site)
    State Senate: 5/40
    State House: 19/160

    <

    p>This is what I’d call life-support territory. Lose another handful of seats in the Legislature (a distinct possibility this year) and it might be DNR time.

    <

    p>I don’t think it’s a bizarre scenario anymore to envision progressives/liberals/leftists getting fed up with our Legislative leadership and taking / defecting seats for the Greens or Rainbows and claiming official minority party status.

    <

    p>You don’t think the Greens couldn’t win a handful of House seats, or a Senate district or two? Cambridge? Brookline? Amherst? Or the Libertarians, for that matter, doing the same thing on the right wing.

    <

    p>How many rich white guys with nice hair and good teeth are out there lining-up to “rebuild” the Republican Party, again? Mitt again, anyone? Where’s the squash guy Weld, he still around? Or, that guy who went to Canada, he ever come back?

    <

    p>The tide will turn eventually, and someday they might just be laughing at the Dems. They turned these numbers around down south, and in a short time. But, for the moment at least, this is a very sad day for the GOP. And, to an extent, for democracy.

    <

    p>

    • buying a house in California.

      <

      p>Maybe he’s going to claim a new “home” state, now that he’s persona non grata in Mass.

      <

      p>I for one would like to see more Libertarians and Greens on the ballot.

      • guess he can’t forgo the opportunity to usher marriage equality into another state.  more power to mitt!

    • are similarly not ready for prime time. (Too bad, because it wouldn’t take much for them become the opposition party.)

      <

      p>Indeed the Ogonowski shtick is eerily familiar–right down to blaming the town clerks.

    • Officially known as the American Party this crowd ran the table in the 1854 elections here in MA.  They captured every Constitutional office, the entire Congressional delegation(One of whom, Nathaniel Banks, was elected Speaker.), the entire Governor’s Council, the entire State Senate, and all but three State House seats.  I suspect it was a combination of anti-Irish sentiment following potato famine immigration and being able to outflank the Whigs and Democrats on abolition of slavery.  I wish the Democrats could beat that record.

    • it is a vile thing for you to be joking about.  Women were hurt and he’s sick.  But joke away.

      • Remember all the “progressives” who rushed to his defense the last go around because the Vast Right Wing Lynch mob was about to lynch him?

        <

        p>Folks oughta recognize the fact that because some lunatic hack politician is considered a “progressive” doesn’t give you an automatic pass. If you had read my posts during his last indecent A&B you wouldn’t be pointing a finger at me now. All of the bloody hands presently are democratic.

  9. How does Mitt look?  He actually came here to do a fund raiser, former Governor in state to do a fund raiser for a guy who couldn’t even get on the ballot?  Sounds like VP material to me.

    <

    p>Then even funnier is the elementary school response from the campaign itself.  Are you kidding me?  It’s the town clerk’s fault?  How did they do for the Beatty campaign?  What an idiotic response.  The campaign from the start (or this candidate from the start) just showed everyone how incompetent it (he) was.  How does someone even allow themselves to be even this close?  It definitely ranks up there as one of the most hilarious (pathetic) moments in politics in MA.

    • Rasmussen tells a different story:

      <

      p>Kerry 63%
      Ogonowski 29%

      <

      p>Here’s the number that would have alarmed the Ogo team, the underdog against the established incumbent that you have been attacking and Ogo had the higher negatives.  It just goes to show that things like SCHIP and attacking children of migrants is probably not the best path to office.  Then you have the whole competence thing.

    • I’d actually welcome a real, interesting campaign.  But to think that Massachusetts would send a Republican to Washington this year strikes me as fanciful.

  11. HE started March of 2007, before Jim even ran against Tsongas.  He went statewide, meeting with town committees, chambers of commerce, and on and on.

    <

    p>It wasn’t flashy, it wasn’t trendy, it wasn’t YouTube.  It was old fashioned shoe leather and local contact and district captains.

    <

    p>Because it wasn’t flashy, it was dismissed in some quarters as too low key, not heavyweight enough.  Mainly, by the same people who bumped off populist Kevin Scott and installed Ken Chase in order to lose the last Senatorial race.  (I backed Scott, myself).

    <

    p>Trips to DC, big ticket fundraisers – and an absence of fundamentals.  Only a cursory visit to the county which has the HIGHEST GOP turnout in the state – when you’re in a primary race?

    <

    p>Jeff Beatty turned 17,000 CERTIFED signatures to Galvin, and has been certifed for the ballot, where he will defeat John Kerry.

    • Are you really going to subject us to 5 months of this Beatty nonsense?

      <

      p>You know Beatty’s not winning. Beatty knows Beatyy’s not winning. We all know Beatty’s not winning.  

    • Your political prognosticator is a bit off this year.  To refresh your recollection:

      <

      p>

      Governor Mitt Romney will win the Republican nomination for President, and Sen. Hillary Clinton will win the Democratic nomination. Gov. Romney will be elected the 44th President of the United States.

      <

      p>Just sayin’.

    • ogonowski may have beaten him. (In fact, I was downright terrified that he would).

      <

      p>That’s just my prediction, take it for what you will =)

      • It seems that Kerry won’t have a legitimate opponent to underscore his lack of a compelling record in Washington DC, his time spent away from his constituents, his chameleon like inability to take solid positions and be principled, and his lack of ability to get things done for the state. No a football game telecast is not enough, co-sponsoring a climate change bill others wrote is not enough, it takes real leadership. I have a lot of disagreements with Senator Kennedy but at least he delivered real leadership in the Senate on issues I cared about, at least his office sent back letters to constituents let alone get him to sign them personally, at least Kennedy has solid principles even if a few of them are misguided. Democrats can do better than Kerry, much better, but sadly none of the House Democrats have the gumption to take him on, who can blame them when they too have similarly high levels of job security. Its a bad day for democracy when a candidate is unopposed.

        <

        p>I could have lodged a protest vote for Ogo. He seems like a clod, but at least he is a likable clod unlike Kerry. Sadly Beatty is an out of stater that is running to the right of McCain on Iraq and is running a campaign hostile to the rights of immigrant workers. So even a worthless protest vote for him would leave me feeling ill since his policies are repugnant. He also visually resembles Bill O’Reilly and is a frequent guest on his show and I can’t stand that bastard either.

        <

        p>So what do we have any credible Green or Libertarian opponents at least? Maybe Ed can run as an independent. Democracy dies the day people quit coming to the plate to step up and take a shot for their country as challengers to the status quo. The Senate was not designed as a heridatary lifetime appointment, every now and then we need new Senators and its time for this one to go.  

        • Sure — maybe you’d like to “have a beer” with Ogo too.

          <

          p>Utter nonsense, jc.  First of all, bear in mind that by comparing Kerry to Kennedy you are comparing Kerry to probably the single most effective Senator presently serving in the US Senate, and possibly in its entire history.  Does Kerry measure up?  I don’t know.  Certainly, no one else in the Senate does.

          <

          p>Second, your “protest vote” against Ogo, which you thankfully will apparently not have the opportunity to cast, would have been effectively a vote for Mitch McConnell to take over as Senate majority leader.  You know enough about the Senate to know that it’s not just about the individual Senators; it’s about who runs the show.  So stop acting petulant, and start acting on your knowledge.  It was you, after all, who recently published a lengthy screed about how you “hate” the white working-class voters who, you think, are voting they way they do because they don’t know any better.  You know better than to vote Republican for Senate, however much you may dislike the Democratic incumbent.  So get over your personal antipathies and act like the responsible citizen you think everyone else should be.

            • If the situation were reversed, so that you had the choice of voting for an incumbent Republican you didn’t much like or a Democratic challenger with whom you disagreed on most policy issues but who seemed like a nice and well-meaning person — and if the Senate was closely divided at the time — what would you do?

              <

              p>You know full well what you’d do.  It’s exactly what anyone who understands the Senate would do.  That’s what I’m telling jc, and you know it’s true.  So don’t play the mindless party hack line with me.

  12. You are a constitutional lawyer so I’m asking you this question.  

    <

    p>In Anderson v. Celebrezze, 460 U.S. 780 (1983), the SCOTUS said that is was unconstitutional for a state to have different ballot access requirements and timeframes to complete those requirements for Independent and Party candidates for an office, in this case the Presidency.  

    <

    p>In Massachusetts there are different ballot access timelines for independent and party candidates.  Independents have until July 29 to submit the signatures.  There are different ballot access requirements as well because anybody can sign an independents signatures, D, R, G, L, or U.  Unlike the party candidates where only people in the party or U’s can sign.  

    <

    p>Not the best scenario for sure, and this will take time and often what is legally right is not politically right.  But do you think there is any possibility of relief from the Federal courts?

    <

    p>  

    • it seems very unlikely to me.  Anderson is about a state scheme that disadvantaged independent candidates by requiring them to file signatures for the general election at the same time as candidates participating in party primaries.  Here, the situation is reversed — independents have longer to file their signatures.  The Court in Anderson noted that it was legitimate to set schedules for primaries so that the primaries would be concluded in time for the party conventions.  Since an independent doesn’t have to worry about a primary, it seems reasonable to allow independents more time, and the fact that Ohio didn’t do so in Anderson was what created the constitutional violation.  In other words, requiring an independent in MA to file sigs at the same time as Ogo (who wanted to run in a primary) would actually be in contravention of Anderson.

      <

      p>As for which signatures count, it seems perfectly reasonable to me to limit the people who may support a candidate’s access to a party primary to party members and unenrolleds.  Parties have 1st Amendment rights to control (to some extent) who their nominees are, and restricting signatures in that way strikes me as a legit way of doing so.

      <

      p>Disclaimer: as the title of this comment clearly states, this is off the top of my head.  It is not, and should not be construed as, legal advice.

      • Understood.  legalities aside, the politics of this ain’t good most probably.

Archives