Perhaps “Odious Glodis” has polling information showing that he is behind in the race for Auditor, consistent with the State House News poll that was out today, showing him trailing Suzanne Bump by 2 points. Statehouse News Poll, via John Keller This might explain why he has launched a misleading negative attack on his opponent, Suzanne Bump, both on the radio and in a a direct mail piece. In the piece, Glodis attacks Bump for a 20-year old ethics violation that she resolved by agreeing to pay a $600 fine. What Glodis doesn’t say is that in the interest of transparency, Suzanne Bump has referenced the violation and linked to the Disposition Agreement with the State Ethics Commission on her campaign website for months. www.suzannebump.com Glodis also doesn’t mention that the Commission’s agreement notes that Bump fully cooperated and that there was no evidence that the gratuity was intended to influence any official act.
Further, Glodis negative attack piece falsely states that Bump lost her reelection bid because of the ethics violation. This is completely untrue. The disposition with the Ethics Commission is dated May 12, 1994, yet she left office in 1993. The fact is that Suzanne Bump lost reelection because she took on the powerful lawyers’ lobby and led the reform of what was a completely broken Worker’s Compensation System. The lawyers recruited and funded the campaign of her opponent. Throughout her campaign for State Auditor, Bump has repeatedly said that she is proud of her work in reforming the system, that is today a national model, and that she would do it again, even though it cost her politically. In fact, this is one of the reasons the Boston Globe cited for endorsing her: Connaughton, Bump are best in broad field for state auditor
In a state dominated by Democratic elected officials, the Democratic nominee for auditor has a special burden to demonstrate independence from the party’s establishment and its most powerful constituencies. Perhaps because she has DeNucci’s support, Bump appears loath to criticize the raises he ordered. Still, she’s displayed significant spine in other ways. As a state legislator, Bump earned the ire of trial lawyers, and lost her seat to a primary challenger, in part because of her efforts to bring down out-of-control worker-compensation costs.
Perhaps Glodis has launched this negative attack tactic to stem the tide of overwhelming support that Bump has been enjoying this week, including endorsements by the Boston Globe, the Salem Evening News, the Newton TAB, Brookline TAB, Somerville Journal, Watertown TAB and Cambridge Chronicle. Or perhaps he is trying to distract voters from the recent news articles in The Boston Globe Glodis left loan source off his state ethics filing, Loan by Glodis followed one he received, and 2 more on ballot failed to pay tax related to his his consistent pattern of failing to follow the rules, including Campaign Finance and Tax Laws and an audit report that found that he awarded a no-bid contract and improper raises to staff in violation of internal policies at the Sheriff’s office. Either way, Bump is right to maintain her positive campaign and show the voters what real leadership looks like.
Is not the most positive campaigner in the world herself. I wouldn’t bitch about Guy unless my glass house was clean.
Have you seen the Glodis piece? Have you heard the radio ad? Has Bump done anything like that?
. . . it’s the worst kind of mudslinging that there is in politics. It’s false, malicious, and all too representative of what Guy Glodis is really like. Reminds me of those Republican and Chamber of Commerce ads that I hear on the radio an see on TV. Absolutely abhorent and disgusting. I hope someone can scan this or provide us with a link so everyone here can see just how odious Guy Glodis is.
former Senator Glodis’ M.O. since I first observed his back slapping joking style at the State House (Tell me how I’m supposed to vote again?) You can only imagine the harty har- har behavior with prison guards.
<
p>He always reminded me of the 7th grade bully loud mouth who loved to take a comment from the teacher or the smart kid in class and turn it into a dirty joke.
<
p>And there is no talking to him– he just doesn’t understand how his behavior or words can be characterized as rude or offensive. And there is not talking to his sock puppets on this site who simply don’t understand their lack of influence here.
Listen, you’ve got one candidate who has been endorsed by the LIBERAL Boston Globe and the CONSERVATIVE Salem News and another GUY who couldn’t even get their hometown paper to endorse him.
<
p>You’ve got one candidate who made a technical mistake TWENTY YEARS AGO and admitted to it, and another GUY who has made deliberate attempts to hide his multiple mistakes which occured in 2008, 2009, and 2010..!
<
p>You’ve got one candidate who can beat the republican after the primary, and another GUY who won’t be able to get the majority of democratic votes should he somehow buy this election.
<
p>You’ve got one candidate who reeks of class, and another GUY who, well, simply reeks!!!
<
p>You’ve got one candidate who is fearless and another GUY makes voters fearful..
<
p>In the end you have one GUY who thinks voters will believe his ‘up is down’ fantasy…
<
p>Maybe in Bizarro World, but not in the world you and I live in…
<
p>
Is owned by the liberal loving Boston Globe, which in turn is owned by the New York Times. So much for “fair and balanced” Hey Globe unions? How did those “givebacks” work out. Yeah, tell me about it moonbats!
of the name calling that passes for intelligent discussion in right-wing circles. When I see a post like this, it reminds me that the right wing has nothing substantive to say, and confirms my belief in American liberal values.
That is why it can be useful to allow conservative posters here: even though they often — although not always — detract from the utility of a constructive reality-based discussion they almost inevitably offer a valuable reminder of the nature of the opposition.
If the Globe and the Worcester Telegram are a single entity, how come they, too, didn’t endorse Bump?
Their silence on supporting the ‘home town boy’ or should I say ‘GUY’ speaks VOLUMES…
Nobody has done a better job in letting voters know about his screwups, his attempts to bend the rules, and his getting caught with his hand in the cookie jar by agency after agency, than has the Telegram!
I received an invitation from Tim Murray in the mail for his annual fundraiser at Mechanics Hall in Worcester. I was disappointed to see Guy Glodis prominently listed as an event sponsor/supporter. Guy’s done a wonderful job shaming himself these past few weeks – couldn’t Glodis have been left off as a sponsor? Instead of donating to Murray this year, I’ll be sending a check to Suzanne Bump.
I’m going to vote for Bump, and I don’t care for Glodis. But his attack ad, which I received in the mail, seems pretty fair to me insofar as it accurately reports a fact. Sure, it doesn’t put the fact in the light you’d like it to be put, but after all, it’s an attack ad. I suggest saving your ire for attack ads that work by insinsuations, falsehoods, covert appeals to racism, etc.
<
p>Incidentally, my favorite attack ad of the season so far is the Mac D’Alessandro ad comparing Rep. Lynch to Benedict Arnold and Johnny Damon.
<
p>TedF
Seems to be some whoppers in there, to me, like suggesting she “lost” her race because of the OCPF problem, when the OCPF problem only ever came up after she was out of office, from what I understand. That’s neither fact nor fair, it’s a blanket “insinuation” and “falsehood.”
So, this is chapter 2 of his reign?
<
p>I guess all is fair in love and war, but the photo he chose of his opponent was really over the top ugly. Like we are supposed to say, what a rhymes-with-rich. Like we can be manipulated that easily.
<
p>Maybe that will win him votes, but propaganda that calls attention to itself like that is never as effective as the propaganda you don’t take note off while it is doing its work.
TedF had it right. The facts as presented in the recent Glodis mailier are correct. Bump did commit an ethics violation and was fined for it. It involved a free dinner and show tickets. As Chair of a Legislative Committee she should have known the law. As Chair of a Legislative Committee with whom this lobbyist had business, you have to question her judgement in accepting anything from the lobbyist.
<
p>Bump did lose her next election (i.e fired by the voters). And then Bump went to work not once but twice as a corporate lobbyist for big insurance.
<
p>Glodis is allowed his opinion on Bump’s actions and the voters decisions. Personally I believe she lost her State Reps seat because of a flawed Workers Comp “reform” that she claims credit for on her website. Cutting benefits to injured workers didn’t win her many blue collar votes next time out.
<
p>It is amusing to read yellowdog complaining about negative content. Read yellowdogs first postings on the Auditor’s race (early June). Nothing but negative attacks on Glodis. It wasn’t til much later that yellowdog started explaining why Bump was the better candidate. (I find myself agreeing with yellowdog on many other issues, just not this one)
<
p>As for 20 year old ethics violations and the guilty finding – voters who haven’t stumbled onto Bump’s website might find the information helpful. Seen more then one post here attacking Glodis for statements or actions from his college days and in the early 1990s. Glodis’ 20-year record is fair game – and so is Bump’s.
<
p>And sorry, don’t think Glodis is running scared by being down 13 to 11 in a poll Which has Murphy beating Grossman). Much more likely he realizes that with both canddiates largely unknown that a smart campaign works to define himself and his opponent.
<
p>This race is a toss up. Most voters don’t know the candidates. Until this week, only Glodis and the Republican had radio ads. Small turnout means anyone – including Mike Lake has a shot.
<
p>So cry me a river Bump supporters. You went negative on Glodis and Lake months ago.You weren’t able to take Glodis and Lake out and the race is 6 days a a cloud of dust.
<
p>Disclaimer: My Union and I are supporting Guy Glodis for State Auditor.
I got the piece in question in the mail today and was immediately revolted by it. How dare someone with issues like his in the ethics department bring up and blow out of proportion a single relatively insignificant ethics violation that the candidate herself took responsibility for. He also tries to make a big stink out of “fired by the voters” as if democracy does not as a matter of course sometimes result in an incumbent being denied re-election, not necessarily for sinister reasons. Also, what negative attacks from Bump? Not that she’s never drawn contrasts; that’s what you do. However, I have seen no literature from her like this that focuses on the alleged evils of Guy Glodis.
I appreciate that you find me both amusing and that you agree with me on many other issues, Striker. But I still detest Odious Glodis. Let’s have a beer when this is all over.
Guy might seriously want to reconsider making embarrassments of twenty years past an issue. He notes on his website that he “quickly made a name for himself at UMass Amherst, where he served on the Board of Governors and the Student Government Association.” What he doesn’t tell is how.
If he served on the governing board of UMass, it could only have been in the capacity of student trustee, an elected position (by the student body).
<
p>When I was an undergrad there this was a high-ranking student-government position, co-president of the SGA; also a meaningful credential for a young person to cite. Fair enough
<
p>But, I smell a rat.
<
p>UMass does not have a “Board of Governors;” it has been run by a “Board of Trustees” since at least the 1970s. So, is this some other student organization? Of which there are hundreds.
<
p>The context of this quote sure sounds as though Glodis is claiming to have served on the UMass governing board.
When Guy and I were both in attendance at UMass, an elected student body known as the Board of Governors was indeed in existence and essentially governed assignments of space for student organizations in the Student Union and Campus Center.
<
p>Guy was never Trustee, but did serve on this BOG