First, we need more progressive State Senators. Michael is a strong advocate for progressive public policy. We spoke with him at length about the issues prior to making our decisions to support him and know he will be at the front lines of the fights for social and economic justice — not only around the topical debates currently before us, like corporate tax credit transparency, the transgender bill, and protecting health care for legal immigrants, but for longer term challenges such as creating a more progressive tax structure, reforming our electoral process, and passing meaningful rules reform to make our legislature more accountable and transparent.
Second, Michael is not afraid to take on a tough fight. Especially in such challenging times, we need more legislators who are willing to take on the status quo-even when those decisions are daunting or uncomfortable-and to fight for our values. We can speak to Michael’s willingness to challenge the status quo in his strong support for each of us in electoral races when we were the underdogs.
Currently, some people in government believe that this is a time to slow down and proceed with caution. We disagree. The challenging times we face demand that we articulate a clearer, bolder path toward economic recovery, not timidity. This path should reflect our progressive values and our long term vision, even if that means disagreeing with our friends. Michael’s voice would be a valuable and courageous addition to that discussion.
Third, Michael understands the importance of ongoing organizing and building our movement. In fact he has lived it. We are not the only progressive candidates who faced tough odds in an important election whom Michael stepped up to help with his time, money, and council. He has been there for candidates from Rebekah Gewirtz, to Pat Jehlen, to Paul Hodes in New Hampshire. And his efforts were not based on odds-making or trying to be with the winner as, sadly, often happens in politics. They were based on who shared his values. We have no doubt that his work to further the progressive movement will only become stronger by serving in the State Senate.
Michael Albano helped to build our progressive team. We believe that progressives should help him join that team.
Please join us and Senator Pat Jehlen at Michael’s official campaign kickoff this Saturday from 2pm to 5pm at his campaign office at 56 Roland Street in Charlestown (a few blocks from the Sullivan Sq T stop). And please check out his website at www.ElectAlbano.com.
Largely because I’m impressed by your work in the legislature and I’d like to see you get the allies you want so that you have a better chance of getting the things you want to do, done.
The authors point out that Mr. Albano is “not the only progressive in the race,” yet they are supporting him because of his progressive credentials!?! Hmm. I think this is more about who helped who in the past (which the authors admit, to their credit).
<
p>All due respect, it’s going to take more than just another progressive rep to get anything done in the legislature. It’s not enough to “take on the status quo” and be willing to “fight.” Our current progressive representatives have done a good job voicing opinions, but to really be effective we need someone who can make the case artfully enough to convince the more moderate majority. I don’t live in Galluccio’s former district, but if I did I would be looking for someone who can be a bridge-builder between progressives and the rest.
Any thoughts on who that might be? Albano? Someone else?
Don’t know yet – I think a lot depends on how they run their campaigns. I just want more than stock players now. Substance along with the buzzwords, practicality along with ideals.
the person who wins this seat (it won’t be Albano) gets to the senate and spends every working minute thinking of ways to screw Pat Jehlan, Eldrdge and Chang-Diaz.
<
p>Getting this involved in someone elses district?
<
p>Amateur hour.
EB3 is right. Albano will not win. (Sonja, Pat and Jamie are paying back a debt, but do themselves no favors dissing other progressives in the race.)
Most of the Italian vote will solidify behind Sal DiDe (Galluccio’s wingman and enabler) the majority of which is in Everett and there is only one candidate out of Everett where voting address is a tradition.
<
p>No one from Cambridge will win because 4 candidates dividing up that turf will make Cambridge the loser…and beyond the math reality:
Simmons won’t win because she has nothing going outside her own neighborhood and although she may be counting on her Gay and Lesbian and African-American communities to support her, it will not materialize. She is seen as a spoiler who entered the race because she could not get the votes for mayor.
Dennis Benzan (sp?)- lawyer who lives with his family in his lovely Belmont home. Just because he went to high school in Cambridge won’t be enough to swing voters in Saugus, Revere, Somerville, Chelsea and Charlestown…they are not looking for Belmont suburbanite representation. Dennis, pahleeeze, run in Belmont if you feel the need.
Charlie Flaherty’s kid will have the same ol’, same ol’ crowd with him but he has lost every other race he’s been in…Dad will raise the bucks, but the pretty face, 1/4 inch deep presentation may not be enough (although a barn jacket might help)
Marjorie Decker started with the strongest Cambridge base and has made inroads in Revere, Somerville, Chelsea, Allston and Brighton and was the only woman in the race…but her chances are severely diminished with 4 Cambridge candidates in the race….it’s math.
<
p>Looks like the big winner out of the Cambridge scrum will be State Senator Sal DiDe of Everett….which translates to more of the same and does not raise the “beacon hill culcha” bar an inch.
None whatsoever.
Are you kidding? Sen. Galluccio had some serious issues going…for a long period of time…many people had to look the other way, come up with excuses, deflect criticism and basically cover for Anthony. Anthony himself finally admits to his problems and is facing the consequences and trying to head in a better direction. Imagine if his staff had been able to help him get help sooner by not covering for him…he might never have gotten to the point where he bottomed out in jail. And if Sal DiDe, his AA, says “I knew nothing!” while he is telling voters he was so efficient and on top of everything in that office, how did he miss what everyone else was seeing for so long? it’s not about my place in mentioning it, it’s about his place in not.
Anthony certainly had/has his problems, and I have often been the first person to point them out. I do not consider myself a Galluccio apologist by any stretch of the imagination; however, for all of his personal troubles, he was an extremely hard working Senator who cared deeply about both his constituents and the progressive issues that he championed.
<
p>Sal’s job as chief of staff was to facilitate and run Galluccio’s Senate office and staff. It was his job to make sure that #1 Anthony’s constituent’s issues were addressed, #2 his legislative initiatives were actively advancing, and #3 his district priorities were vigorously pursued. This is more than a full time job in any senate office, let alone in a Senate office as ambitious and hard-working as Anthony’s.
<
p>It was NOT Sal’s job to police Anthony’s private life. In his post here on BMG, Sal said that he was never around Anthony while Anthony was drinking. Sal also said that he has made the personal choice to not drink at all and that Anthony respected that decision, never involving Sal in his own issues with alcohol.
<
p>To call Sal a wingman and enabler displays a very simplistic, negative, and above-all untrue understanding of Sal’s job and responsibilities, and his relationship with Anthony.
<
p>I’d hope that in the future you will be a little more careful with your invective.
clearly.
But it would seem it is not just me who feels that way.
You do realize that Mayor of Cambridge is selected by the council members and it’s rare for someone to serve two terms.
<
p>The real power is the City Manager…
<
p>
<
p>
The big question is whether the goings-on over the Cambridge Mayoral selection has any grassroots reasonance.
<
p>If anybody knows, I’d be interested.
Anybody for establishing an automatic spell-check on this site for those whose spelling skills were crippled by Microsoft Word?
<
p>…and the lack of “edit” or “delete” options for comments?
…the built-in spell-check is great.
It’s a wonderful thing.
The Firefox spell check only works in the body (the comment field), not the subject.
<
p>Bummer, eh?
I spent years on firefox, but for the last year or so safari’s been my browser of choice.
but you have to right click the input field and ask it (nicely) to check your spelling. Okay stomv stoma? (Spell checker didn’t like “stomv”)
The position of mayor here is deliberately mostly ceremonial. To claim she’s running for State Senate because she didn’t make mayor this term is silly. The selection isn’t based on popular vote, regardless.
<
p>She remains popular, and not just in “her Gay and Lesbian and African-American communities.” Claiming that’s her sole support base is equally silly.
The Mayor of Cambridge may be ceremonial but it pays significantly more than the full time salaries given to the Councillors. It’s about the paycheck not the duties.
<
p>I am sure she is popular with her GLBT community and ethnic community but her problem is that others in this contest also have strong ties to those communities and they will not be voting as a block.
<
p>AND Ms. Simmons was lobbying hard to get the Mayor’s post again, but just did not have the votes.
Denise announced weeks BEFORE the vote. Your comment is a fabrication.
to get the Mayoral votes and then get out of the Senate race….but it did not materialize.
On a related note: which horse are you backing in this?
The best site for following Cambridge local politics is http://rwinters.com/ aka the Cambridge Civic Journal.
<
p>From there, I’m reminded that the city council only voted for mayor on 22 Feb, making HL’s claim complete hogwash.
<
p>
<
p>In point of fact, Denise brought up the motion to make the vote unanimous.
Both for the Cambridge local politics source and the browser suggestions.
<
p>My question was badly phrased. I should have asked whether the public reaction (if any) to the Mayoral contest would affect Cambridge public opinion re: the candidates.
…although Candidate Decker will most likely use the fact that she was the deciding vote as an example of her “leadership” on the Council. (“With my leadership the Council finally broke the gridlock, etc.”)
<
p>But when it comes down to it, the mayoral election will not have much of an impact on the Senate race.
<
p>HL was very right in saying that because there are 4 candidates from Cambridge, competing for mostly Cambridge votes, it is extremely unlikely that any of them will win. As much as this is casually thought of as a Cambridge seat, Cambridge only makes up about 20% of the district.
I think it’s fine to look at Winters’ site as one source of information in Cambridge, he is a good numbers cruncher but it is surely not the best place to go as a sole source. Mr. Winters and a few of the brickthrowers that enjoy his site have a decided agenda that they no so transparently promote. It is good to have multiple sources of information…even in Cambridge.
What other sites would you recommend?
<
p>Mr. Winters is far from my sole source, FWIW.
On Dennis Benzan-that is the correct spelling and he is much more than someone who went to high school in Cambridge. In fact, he is a person who has deep roots in this district as community member, educator, advocate, and now as an attorney. Prior to the lines being changed, Dennis ran for state rep for this district (years ago)-which brought monumental attention to constituents in this district whose needs are often ignored. Because of this he is widely known and respected in Cambridge and beyond. Needless to say, he is a very different candidate than the rest of the bunch and I for one believe he is the one to watch.
<
p>With the news of the list of candiates getting a bit shorter, I know this race will give us a lot look forward to.
…violate the sanctity of The District. No one must ever do that! Except Mr. Speaker, of course, and maybe the Senate President. Right, Erne?
Is this a right to die state? I love watching poltical suicide.
<
p>So take your high horse and stick it up your very ineffective state senators tukisses
…but you feel free, you’ve clearly got high horse to spare. I actually love political suicides too, though I think it’s pretty over-dramatic to apply that term to tick-tack things like making an endorsement in an open seat. On the other hand, something along the lines of going on a crazy groping rampage in broad daylight in a city park like Marzilli, or clumsily stuffing bribes into ones undergarments like Wilkerson, or committing perjury in open court during a civil rights trial like Finneran- now those were spectacular political suicides you could just sit back and enjoy! While I’d agree you clearly could debate the political value of this move, if you really think it rises to the level of suicide these days you may have lost your perspective.
This isn’t about those pols. It’s about the naive Chang-Diaz et al.
<
p>I’m glad they aren’t leading the charge on some bills I suppoort or stuff important to their constituents. Memories in the Senate don’t fade and vengance is a time honored tradition.
<
p>We won’t reasd in the paper about the many pay backs becausxe of this. But the three senators’ constituents will suffer.
<
p>Unless of course Albano wins. But he won’t.
I thought this was about high horses, political suicide, and the sanctity of The District. My bad.
<
p>Well, I will agree that Change-Diaz, et al may be arrogant if they think an endorsement will make much difference, so maybe you’re right that it’s not worth the political price to buck protocol for whatever reason. Now that I think of it, this is related Finneran’s political suicide in that that one had arrogance at it’s roots as well, hmmmm. In that case, it was an arrogance grown from a State House culture where nobody ever bucked the system and nobody ever ever dared to question Mr. Speaker- at least to his face, which was happening on the witness stand. Not as sure where Change-Diaz et al get their arrogance from.
<
p>Wilkerson and Marzilli just had something wrong with them, IMHO. They probably do have less to do with this.
Only self-obsessed overly conceited pols do.
<
p>It’s like never swing at a pitch when you have a 3 and 0 count.
<
p>People don’t like outsiders coming in and telling them what to do. Like these three outsiders are doing in Everett and Chelsea and Charlestown and Saugus and… It has rebound effect that motivates people to vote for other guy.
<
p>Chang-Diaz and jamie could do alot for the candidate without the public endorsement. Raise money, make some calls, line up a union or two. That is how it is done. And done all the time. Everyday. It works well for those involved.
<
p>The ineffective three. jamie, chang, and jehlen. Three tools of the far far left who can’t get out of the own way. They probably believe their endorsement is enough and Albano won’t see any money, union endorsements, etc from real “work” by the three amigos.
<
p>What are their legislative accomplishments again?
<
p>
…had the best, most karmic, political suicide (to watch) of this generation by far, that’s all I’m saying. You brought it up. I’m just really glad he wasn’t leading the charge on stuff important to me nor was I one of his constituents…he really would have blown it for us.
<
p>No doubt this endorsement will have little or no effect (and I think I remember Change-Diaz saying pretty similar things about endorsements in her race as an underdog against Wilkerson). And it’s not the most prudent thing from an internal body politics point of view for the three, obviously (though, as you imply, they don’t have much power anyway- so why not roll the dice). I’m just saying it wasn’t mortal and anyway not nearly as spectator-friendly as some other classics. As you are a connoisseur of political suicides, I’m surprised you don’t agree.
I have known the candidate for many years and am not surprised to see support from his would be future colleagues (Crossing fingers, knocking on wood as well as doors!)
<
p>For those who say he can not win, come on, seriously? I am not going to pretend like he is a sure thing but this is a wide open race and anything can happen. All of the candidates have great credentials and bases of support across the district. I believe any of them can win this thing, it will come down to who works the hardest and reaches out to the most people. Granted some candidates started off with greater momentum then others but Massachusetts politics over the past few years has had a history of turning presumptive results on their head.