Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Vids, vids, vids

By

Herewith, three new videos from our Senate candidates.

Pags says hello.

Cap says “I’m a lot like Ted.”

Martha still needs to look right into the camera.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. …but she needs the money to come in fast so she can get on the air.  Sure she can afford a big slide in the numbers, but frankly I think the more you get to know Martha, the less you’re gonna like her.

    <

    p>Pags spot did nothing for me…Capuano pushed all the Primary buttons–Iraq, Health care, Pro-choice, ect.  The question is can he stay on the air for the next 10 weeks to clearly define himself as the solid progressive voice.

    <

    p>For me, I’m not excited about any of them (Capuano is not some profile in courage taking all these progressive stands…he represents the most liberal district in the most liberal state in the country).  If it stays a 3 person race, I’ll vote for Capuano…but I want a chance to vote for the kind of candidate that I can get excited about–someone with a solid record of accomplished and altruistic public service instead of a ladder climbing politician or an investment banker whose “accomplishment” is a symbol of the conservative excess –so I hope to vote for Alan Khazei, even though I can’t see him wining (unless he is a huge trust fund baby and can self fund.  Ug, what an ugly system we have.)

  2. I have a feeling Steve Pagliuca is going to buy lots and lots of ad time, but I wonder whether he’s going to come up with a compelling vision that will inspire people to turn out and vote for him.  What exactly is “a new way of doing business in Washington” and how is electing him going to make that happen?  Seems like a well-financed vanity campaign.

    <

    p>I like the Capuano ad — hits the issues that Pagliuca ignores completely.

    <

    p>And I’m sorry, Martha, but I only got about 10 seconds into her video before clicking pause — she seriously needs to make eye contact.  Does she have a 30-second spot out that could be compared to the other two?

    • What exactly is “a new way of doing business in Washington”…you ask?  Clearly it is a tired and overused political cliche that someone got paid a lot of money to “write” (or did they just copy and paste?)

    • Capuano can stake out the left but is it enough? December election, so it could be. Watching Martha is painful. She needs some help. Serious coaching is needed. Capuano will eat her up in a debate. Is Pags serious? Not because he didn’t sound good, but seriously? Are Democrats supposed to forget his ties to Romney, George W. Bush and the fact that he trying to buy an election with good looking fill-ins at 15.00 dollars per hour, millions of bain dollars and high priced consultants.  

  3. Of course comparing Coakley in a casual interview to actual ads is a bit unfair but she didn’t seem relaxed or comfortable in even an intimate setting, not sure how she will appear in ads.

    <

    p>Mike made it very clear where he stood on the issues and nearly all of them were the right stances in my book. I didn’t like the ‘just like Ted’ portion since I want a NEW senator who will try to be BETTER than Ted and do things in a different and more innovative way. Pags clearly had the worst ad, talk about generic and not substantial and he seemed nervous on camera, I kept asking myself if this was the best take? Also where has he been involved in the community? All the money went to Romney, not a way to win a Democratic primary. “Turned businesses around” a)that’s not relevant to being a Senator and b)Bain ‘turns em around’ by laying off a lot of good people-no way to win labor’s support.

    <

    p>I hope the debates tell us more about the issues than the ads. Also while it might not be courageous to be incredibly liberal in the state’s most liberal district (in fact it’d be politically suicidal to be anything else) but I think it’s ballsy to run as a Kennedy style liberal statewide. I think Ted’s big broad support came from a lot of independents and even some conservative leaning Dems and even some Republicans who liked that he brought home the bacon and respected his family. I know a lot of Reagan Democrats that voted for Reagan through Bush II that still voted for Ted.  

    • You clearly are writing off Pagliuca based on your own personal bias.  While that is fine, don’t pretend as though you speak for the entire state.  To write off a venture capitalist in a horrible economy with all the independents and conservadems in our state, is downright foolish.

      <

      p>This ad was simply an introduction ad.  Pretty standard for those new to the political arena.  We just don’t see a lot of them in MA because we don’t get a lot of new faces.  He didn’t need to lay down the issues in this ad, just needed to get his face out there to get voters talking/thinking about him.

      <

      p>A week or so, the issue ads will come.  And I believe you’ll find a strong emphasis towards the economy with a touch of progressivism.  Not a bad argument in Massachusetts.  It’s worked for Republicans, why not Democrats?

      • You clearly are writing off Pagliuca based on your own personal bias.  

        <

        p>That’s correct. I have a personal bias towards working your way up from the local level. Capuano was a mayor and Coakley was a DA.  I don’t, as of this date, have any idea whether Pagliuca was even born here.  If I don’t find out soon, I’m going to start a gratuitous rumor that he’s actually Kenyan.  

        <

        p>A bias like this is not hard and fast (I voted for Deval over O’Reilly in the last go-round) if the candidate has some experience in government.  But I’m hard pressed to figure out what, besides raging ego, makes Pagliuca a lock on the big leagues.

        <

        p>

        A week or so, the issue ads will come.  And I believe you’ll find a strong emphasis towards the economy with a touch of progressivism.  Not a bad argument in Massachusetts.  It’s worked for Republicans, why not Democrats?

        <

        p>Worked for Republicans?? In Mass?   On what planet do you spend most of your time?  

        • I’m not speaking of the incompetent ones (Beatty, Healey, Mihos, and so on).  We may not like out national level politicians to be Republicans, but we certainly have had our fair share of Republicans as governors.  I understand this is a senate race, but open seat races are where Republicans have had the bets luck in MA.  Even recently, Niki Tsongas wasn’t handed the election, she definitely had to work hard for it.

          <

          p>I’m not saying I’m supporting him, which I’m certainly not, but to write him off before the election may be foolhardy.  

    • I like Capuano but the waffling on the public option in Roll Call gives me serious pause.

      <

      p>I like Coakley as well but want to hear more of her before I make a decision on her as a Senator.

      <

      p>No way I would’ve voted for Lynch. No way will I vote for Pagliuca. The Bush/Romney donations are a no-go for me. Also, they make me think he’ll go Blue Dog the second he gets into office.  

  5. Martha may not be flashy and she may not have the most polished video but I believe we’ve had enough of the big money ad buys, the sloganeering, and electing based on a cult of personality-
    Americans are used to being “sold” rather then listening to the boring facts about the frightening issues facing us.  If folks do their homework and can refrain from mud slinging and glitz I think we can get a candidate who rolls up her sleeves- as she’s done for 23 years in the non-glam world of DA offices and Organized crime task force.   Let’s get serious- the problems certainly are.
    You can’t judge a candidate by their ads- it’s really their political operatives who should be running.

    <

    p>Check out http://www.womenforcoakley.com/ and you’ll find a video of a different sort by a supporter- not one who has been paid-

    • it’s not just name recognition, it needs to be both.  She has both. I’m voting for Capuano but I don’t think she’s buying the election.  Plus I do like Coakley.

      <

      p>Case in point, the last poll, how many ad buys has she made so far?

    • While I respect (and agree) with what you’re saying, politics is a game.  It’s just the way it is.  If you want to win the game, you HAVE to play.  And right now Martha Coakley is not looking too prepared for the road ahead.  Policy wise, I highly doubt Coakley is offering anything different than Capuano; they are gunning for the same votes.  That being said, if she doesn’t work on her “game” a lot of those voters are going to see the polish on the Capuano campaign and see him as a better option.

  6. On a different note, I know that primaries are driven by the base of the party and that issues tend to reign supreme, but this election could prove different.  This is the first serious election in ages and Massachusetts has semi-open primaries.  Taking in to consideration that this primary will essentially be the general, you can imagine a LARGE amount of indepedents (who are the largest voting block in Massachusetts, about 43%) will turn out to vote.  That could give serious momentum to a guy like Pagliuca.  If he could also come out as at least somewhat progressive, this race could get very interesting.

    • He’d have to lie.  

      <

      p>On WBUR this morning he defended his support for Romney over Kennedy (let’s not forget, he supported Romney over Kennedy – some democrat!) as being about friendship, not politics.  So when it comes time to vote on regulation of banking, insurance, the environment or working conditions, are those votes also going to be about friendship, not belief systems and what’s right?  The number one reason not to elect venture capitalists to office, their friends tend to eat workers and the environment for lunch.  

      <

      p>Not all venture capitalists make bad politicians, but too much of the federal government is already owned by the finance industry to even consider this guy.  

      <

      p>I’m still undecided between Coakley and Capuano, but if money bags is going to try and buy this election and Doug Rubin is going to create the illusion of a grass roots, progressive campaign, then my fear is we don’t have time to hear the others out.  If Pags has a chance of winning, whoever is more likely to beat him is who I’ll support.  

      <

      p>This is exactly why campaigns should be publicly funded.  

      • too much of the federal government is already owned by the finance industry to even consider this guy.

         

      • Preferably on camera, in a debate:

        <

        p>Who did you vote for, Ted Kennedy or Mitt Romney?

        <

        p>and in the general election:

        <

        p>Who did you vote for, George Bush or John Kerry? Obama/Biden or McCain/Palin?

        <

        p>

      • I have been following the comments about Steve Pagliuca over the last few days.  It seems to me that there are some on BMG who want to write him off, right away, before you hear his views on the issues, understand the experience he brings to this campaign, or even get to know him as a person.

        <

        p>For what it is worth, I think it is important for the Democratic Party to attract people with Steve’s background and experience.  Based on his position on the issues, he is a progressive Democrat who brings a lot of knowledge and first-hand experience on the economy and health care.  That seems to me to be an important perspective to have in the party.

        • The Dem Picnic is this Sunday 2-5 at Jamie’s 85 Stow Street. The other candidates are attending and we would be honored to have Mr. Pagliuca as well.
          Who is doing his scheduling?

        • Professional sports team owners have a lot of experience in getting bigger and bigger percentages of the economy’s wealth to go to the people already at the top of society.

          • He is going to have to answer questions about his support for Mitt Romney over Ted Kennedy. Stating that it was loyalty to friends is bullshit.

            <

            p>I like Bob Hedlund, good guy to have a beer with, but I would not support his candidacy. I would not give him money to run a campaign on the principles of the republican party.  

            <

            p>Doug, I have a great amount of respect for your work and everyone that I know, that has interacted with you speaks highly of you, but this is strange. Steve has to answer for supporting a vermin like Mitt Romney.  

            • I agree.  Steve has provided an answer for that, and it is up to the voters to decide whether they agree or disagree with it.  But I would suggest it is one part of what the voters will look at, and it is my hope that they will give Steve the opportunity to present his entire candidacy before they make a final decision.  The fact that the economy and health care are the two great challenges we face at this time, and the unique experience Steve brings to both of these issues, is something I feel is important and worth a thorough review.

              <

              p>(For the record, I am working with Steve’s campaign.)

              • We already have two great candidates with genuine Democratic credentials and government experience. I don’t think too many people are going to buy into the idea that rich people know more about the Economy than anyone else; they don’t.

              • if your conservative Republican friend (I assume you have one) was running for Senate, would you vote for him/her over the progressive Dem?  Knowing that he/she would work to reverse all the policies you support, and replace them with policies you find abhorrent?  Because that’s exactly what we’re talking about.

                • Yes, I do have someone in mind who is a very good friend of mine (been acquainted since elementary school and good friends since high school) who used to be a moderate Republican and has drifted rightward over the years (after a brief flirtation with the Democratic Party over his disgust with the GOP’s religious right ties which apparently he now embraces).  He is steeped in government and policy and knows the issues very well.  He might not always vote the way we would like, but his positions are carefully considered and he wouldn’t make stuff up or put up with a lot of the nonsense from that side.  Part of our mutual experience is in model Congresses and debate societies so it’s very easy for me to picture this person as a Senator.  The only question would be how open I would be in the given year based on how much I value my status in the Democratic Party since I am aware of the rules prohibiting convention delegates and town committee members from openly supporting the opponent of our nominee.

          • My mistake – I thought that since other’s had made it clear that I was working for him in other posts, it was well known.  But you are right – I should have made it clear in my initial post that I was working for him.

            • That’s the easiest way to do it, and the most fair.

              <

              p>Click on your name below any of your posts.  Then, click on the Profile tab.  Finally, include something like

              <

              p>Disclosure: I am Democratic Senate Candidate Steve Pagliuca’s big money consultant

              <

              p>or somesuch.

              • I volunteer in a number of areas and the Editors have been clear that if I function as a volunteer that it is not necessary to disclose.  But I have been criticized for not disclosing a relationship.  

                <

                p>A while back I made a comment about a campaign on which I was very active, and my sig line reflected my role in that campaign.  Then I posted something related to the Democratic Party and I changed my sig line to indicate that I am a DSC member.

                <

                p>I quickly realized that the sig line is read every time so it looked like my campaign opinions were related to my role in the Democratic State Committee.  

                <

                p>So I decided to change my sig line to say “volunteer” and that has worked well for me.

                <

                p>If Doug did as stomv advises, then if someone were to go back and read comments Doug made as Governor Patrick’s Chief of Staff, it could look like they were made in his role as a strategist for a U. S. Senate campaign.

                <

                p>Maybe Soapblox will change that someday.  For now, disclose in the the post/comment itself.

                • A sig line can mention more than one relationship. The user profile can be very detailed, and the sig line can sketch those details.

                  <

                  p>In the examples you cite, both for yourself and for Doug, it seems to me that the upfront information that you are active in both, simultaneously, is an important aspect of what folks want to know about you. After all, a “volunteer” who is also, simultaneously, an active participant in the Democratic State Committee is a bit different from the neighbor across the street who simply likes to talk politics.

                  <

                  p>I think a similar case can be made readers want to know that Doug is or was:

                  • Head of Deval Patrick’s first campaign
                  • Chief of Staff for Deval Patrick until stepping down to run his re-election campaign
                  • Head of Deval Patrick’s re-election campaign
                  • Simultaneously, a paid consultant to Steve Pagliuca

                  <

                  p>I don’t think these are hard to capture in a sig line:

                  • “Political activist, volunteer, and member of the Democratic State Committee”.
                  • “Campaign consultant to Deval Patrick, Steve Pagliuca, and others, former Chief of Staff for Deval Patrick.

                  <

                  p>See? That’s not so hard.

                • It would not be appropriate for me to use the title Democratic State Committee member when advocating for a candidate in a contested primary.  It makes an implication that the Democratic State Committee is supporting the candidate.  Occasionally campaigns will make that association and are generally careful to add wording like (for identification purposes only).  

                  <

                  p>In a similar way it would not be appropriate for someone who has worked for multiple candidates to list the name of one campaign, while acting on behalf of another.  

                  <

                  p>Trust me on this.  Neither signature line that you suggested would be appropriate.  I’m sticking with mine and add additional disclosure, if I deem it appropriate, in the body of a diary or comment.  

                  <

                  p>Remember, the main rule is disclosure of paid support.  

                  <

                  p>In defense of Doug, in his role. especially in that context, I think that it was reasonable of him to assume that readers know who he is.  In some small circles I am well known so I sometimes assume people know who I am.  In Doug’s case I think it is justified.  Me, not so much.  

        • I have been following the comments about Steve Pagliuca over the last few days.  It seems to me that there are some on BMG who want to write him off, right away, before you hear his views on the issues, understand the experience he brings to this campaign, or even get to know him as a person.

          <

          p>All seriousness aside, the fact that he’s donated to Bush and Romney makes me wonder if he’s taken the time to get to know the Democratic party platform… or even democrats as persons.

          <

          p>And, as a liberal first I wretch at the mere thought of running government as a business. It’s insulting to my intelligence to even go there.  As a professional who’s had a great deal of experience with startups, entrepeneurs, VCs, other businesses and basic research and engineering, I have intimate knowledge regarding business people and  the “expertise” that they bring to bear. I didn’t vote for Ross Perot or Steve Forbes in the ’90’s.  Why would I suddenly turn around and make that mistake?

          <

          p>

          For what it is worth, I think it is important for the Democratic Party to attract people with Steve’s background and experience.  

          <

          p>He’s welcome to run for the city council.  School board beneath him?  State Senator?

        • Bain, as a key investor in KB Toys extracted over $100 million, forcing the company to take on even more debt – debt that eventually caused it to go bankrupt and lay off hundreds of Massachusetts workers.  

          <

          p>In 1992 Bain purchased Ampad, within two years a labor dispute erupted at a company Ampad purchased.  They laid of 200 workers and hired scabs.  Pagliuca’s good buddy Mitt Romney, claims he quietly tried to resolve the fight. but,  

          <

          p>

          That’s not how Wolpow, the former managing director at Bain Capital, remembers Romney’s role, however. Wolpow had been installed on Ampad’s board of directors as part of the leveraged buyout, and he reported directly to Romney before and after the Senate race.

          “He was in charge,” recalled Wolpow, who now is co-director of the Audax Group, another private equity group. “He could have ordered me to settle with the union. He didn’t order me to do that. He let me make decisions that would maximize the value of the investment. That was the right business decision as CEO of Bain Capital. But let’s not pretend it was something else.”

          <

          p>Pagliuca was a key player in taking HCA private, if HCA can’t make the huge profits Bain and Pags demand, who’s going to suffer, the investors or patients and workers?

          <

          p>I don’t have a problem with investors going into politics, Robert Rubin has a place in the democratic party, but he doesn’t have a place in the progressive wing.  Private equity puts private equity first, firms like Bain demand huge return on investment, and place that return above workers and the environment.  If you can explain how being a leveraged buyout specialist who made part of his $400 million net worth by using off shore tax havens and still be called a progressive I’ll catch a crow and bake it into a pie…  

          • Private equity puts private equity first, firms like Bain demand huge return on investment, and place that return above workers and the environment.  If you can explain how being a leveraged buyout specialist who made part of his $400 million net worth by using off shore tax havens and still be called a progressive I’ll catch a crow and bake it into a pie…  

            <

            p>I bet Senator Kennedy would have loved to use that line when he was running against Romney.  

    • Come on — indie votes in primaries are rare for a reason.  In aggregate, indies (unenrolled) voters are far less passionate.

      <

      p>So — a special election in December?  There’ll be low turnout, and I’d bet big that the turnout of indies will be particularly low.

      <

      p>None of that benefits Pagliuca.

      • I think this will be a big turnout election because it is all the local news media is talking about and its the first open Senate seat in 25 years. I think a lot of independents will flock to the Dem primary because its competitive and the smarter among them will realize it will determine the general election.  

        • Look at election data over the past few decades in this state. Many examples of lower voter turnout than people expected even with lots of money spent and fairly exciting candidates. The 2006 primary was a good example of this. Just over 911,000 voters submitted ballots in that election. With almost 3.4 million people eligible to vote in that election (D,U) we weren’t necessarily barnstorming the polls to vote for the most exciting candidate in recent memory. Say what you will about our Gov now, he was an inspirational candidate who excited a lot of people. I don’t know the split offhand between D’s showing up vs. U’s but I do believe stomv is right and it is a disproportionate number of D’s considering U’s are the largest voting block in the state.

          <

          p>Another example that always comes up is the 1998 election for Congress in the 8th with about 100 (10 or 11 really) candidates, including two millionaires that spent a combined almost 10 million dollars. That is a lot of 1998 money.

          <

          p>Turnout was 78,000 or so. But if you look at Joe K’s first run at the 8th in 1986 their were 110,000 voters or something close to that number, in a not very contested race. Joe K is good, but not that good.

          <

          p>Anyways, what does this mean? Low turnout in December for sure.

          <

          p>

          • How many can you name?  I don’t have any BMG mugs to give out, but a free subscription to the DDemDispatch for all who can name at least six without looking it up.  

            <

            p>Bonus points for the correct order, ranked by number of votes.  

            <

            p>Honor system.

            <

            p>Kate

          • The 2006 primary turnout was HUGE compared the 2002 primary…which off the top of my head was 650,000 or so.

            <

            p>And to StromV and you point about D’s showing up in greater % than U’s, I just take that as a given.  What is being over looked is the assumption that the U’s will be more moderate and, while I don’t have the data to back this up, that is not always the case.  First off, there are many “Reagan Dems” still around, yes they are 75, but they been registered Dem for 50 years and they’ll stay registered as a Dem tell they die.  

            <

            p>Also, the unenrolleds are not some monolithic voting block of “moderates”.  They are probably more diverse than folks in the Dems and Rep Parties combined.  With the unenrolleds, you have folks who think the Dems are to conservative and other unenrolleds who think the Reps are to liberal.  What is true though, unenrolleds tend to lean the way the community they live in.  So U’s in Cambridge break left and U’s in Weston break right.

            <

            p>The point I’m getting at is the U’s that vote in the Democratic Primary will mostly be self identified liberals. Yes, they may tend to vote for a liberal who is perceived as more liberal…but they will mostly be liberals.  

            • it wasn’t huge if relative to 2002, I am saying that it is small proportionally to the amount of eligible voters available to vote. 30 percent or so is not large considering 80% comes out for presidential elections.  

              • cite me the last Presidential election with a 80% turnout?  1960 still holds the “modern” record of around 60% (and we came close in 2008).  Sure, the US has relatively low voter turnout, compared to registered voters.  

                <

                p>But when talking about whether a particular election turnout was high or low, you have to compare it actual past turnouts and not a theoretical ideal turnout that we’ve never attained in the reality based world.

  7. First impressions:

    <

    p>1.  Pags:  Hello Huckabee.

    <

    p>2.  Cap:  The only ad without the candidate speaking.  Telling.

    <

    p>3.  Martha:  What’s she looking at?!?

  9. The other two videos are professionally produced 30 second commercials and Martha’s is a two minute web video made in the corner of a campaign office. I’m sure Martha’s will have a much better spot when she goes on TV.

    • Yes, the other two are professionally produced.  Nonetheless, this is what we have to go on right now from all the candidates.  These are what is posted at the candidates’ websites, so these are what people are seeing.  First impressions are made based on stuff like this, and in a race this compressed, first impressions may be tough to dispel.

    • go to her site and check it out. Not good. That was prepared and produced and it looks like it was a law office, and not a nice one. Can you say boring. I feel asleep at north adams…

  10. There are things that are said on a campaign trail that are just plain stupid and reveal nothing but carelessness (“I know how hard it is to put food on your family”, “Is are children learning?”, etc…) and then there are things that are said that are clueless but revealing (“I’ve been all over this state, from Boston to Worcester…”).  Pagliuca will repeatedly make the clueless statements. He may even resurrect Willards famous “Boston to Worcester” winner line for line from the ’94 Senate race.  Can’t wait for the debates…

    <

    p>Between Capuano and Coakley I’m more in favor of Coakly. This is strange since, on paper, I ought to be gunning strong for Capuano.  He’s apparently the stronger liberal (at least by record) and knows Washington. The transition, should it come, ought to be fairly seamless.  But I don’t know…

    <

    p>I really like the fact that Coakley jumped in first and didn’t defer to Joe Kennedy or any other potential.  It reminds me of a story about Lyndon Johnsons first run at a House seat in  Texas: It seems the situation was similar, where a vacancy was created by the death of the former Rep. Everybody was deferring to the wife, waiting for her to decide if she was going to run.  LBJ was prepared to wait also, until he spoke with his dad who said “she don’t want to run. Get in the race now and you’ll be the frontrunner.”  LBJ got his considerable political talents from his father.  I think Coakley here demonstrates a similar adroitness.   I think, too, that it demonstrates she can read the situation: the Kennedy era is done. It was good, but Ted Kennedy declined to set up it’s continuance.  I think the people of the CommonWealth are ready for that now.

    <

    p>Conversely I really DON’T like how Capuano DID defer to Joe Kennedy and the other potentials.  I think he ought to be able to read the state better. Either that, or it shows a native complacency.  The fact that his first commercial focuses on his ‘standing up’ to Bush feels like it might be a bit of a reaction to his own weaknesses.  

    <

    p>Anyway, the other point is that Coakley is the only one to have already ran and won a statewide race. Given the abbreviated schedule her rolodex of statewide contacts might be the decisive factor.  

    • Between Capuano and Coakley I’m more in favor of Coakly. This is strange since, on paper, I ought to be gunning strong for Capuano.  He’s apparently the stronger liberal (at least by record) and knows Washington. The transition, should it come, ought to be fairly seamless.  But I don’t know…

      I really like the fact that Coakley jumped in first

      • because she was first in, and only because she was first in? really?

        <

        p>What’s this “only”?? I never said that was the sole reason.  And I also said that Capuanos deference played a part… two sides of same coin.

        <

        p>What’s your point?

        • The reasons you give for favoring Coakley, despite you own judgment that ‘on paper’ you favor Capuano, are because she was in first and ran statewide before.  

          <

          p>I’m wondering why you discount the reasons you favor Capuano, on paper.

          • The reasons you give for favoring Coakley, despite you own judgment that ‘on paper’ you favor Capuano, are because she was in first and ran statewide before.

            <

            p>I never said I favored Capuano ‘on paper’ or otherwise… I said, given his record, and my tendencies, that “I ought to favor Capuano“.  It turns out I don’t.  This surprises me.

            <

            p>I further went on to state that I thought both candidates actions WRT to getting in the race, given the circumstances, says a lot about how they read the electorate and the circumstances.  That’s of importance to me.  If you want to reduce it to a triviality, feel free, That however doesn’t reflect on me nor make it a triviality.

            <

            p>

            I’m wondering why you discount the reasons you favor Capuano, on paper

            <

            p>As somebody else in this same thread pointed out, Capuano is from one of the more liberal districts in one of the more liberal states.  It’s not a stretch of either his imagination or his hide to take the positions he takes. To date (to my knowledge) he’s not been truly challenged.  Coupled with the deference he showed (intentional or otherwise) before getting into the race, I question his assertiveness and ability to take the political temperature.  Again, this is important to me, if not for you… but then again, I’m not voting for you. I’m voting for me.

            <

            p>I’m also willing to be proven wrong, if I am wrong.
             

  11. How often does Mr Pagliuca mingle with the middle class?  Has he visited poverty stricken neighborhoods? Any ideas on how to address poverty?  What’s his stance on middle class tax hikes?  How does he feel about repealing the tax cuts for the wealthy?

    <

    p>Disclosure, I have decided to support Mike Capuano for U.S. Senate.

Archives