I have a great deal of respect for many folks who call the Democratic Party home; they are hard-working, honest and care deeply about the people they serve. I am honored to have the support of Democrats around the state, including several town chairs. (And honored to have support from folks across the political spectrum as well.)
But I hope you are ashamed of the Democratic nominee for Secretary of State. Beyond the fact that, somehow, he is the only statewide candidate of any affiliation not to debate this fall, he feels it is necessary to malign me, and falsely at that.
From the SHNS:
“I have to run an election,” Galvin said. “Mr. Henderson doesn’t even vote, so he doesn’t have to worry about that.
“It’s hard to take someone seriously when they’re running to be chief election officer of the state and they don’t even vote.”
Galvin, who has begun airing television ads to promote his candidacy, said Henderson has missed the last 23 local elections in his hometown of Stow.
These statements fail in two basic ways: (1) I have lived in Stow for 15 months – there have not been 23 elections for me to miss; and (2) Galvin’s own Central Voter Registry confirms that I voted in 19 of 27 elections from 1998 to 2010. And a couple of those “misses” were party primaries in which, as someone not enrolled as a Democrat or Republican, I exercised my right not to pull a party ballot.
If you choose not to vote for me because you do not agree with my proposals, that’s fair. But please do not simply cast your vote for the incumbent Democrat, who refuses to debate and whose only response to a thoughtful opponent is to call him names and generate irresponsible fabrications, because of his party affiliation.
Jim Henderson
Independent candidate for Secretary of State
http://www.JimForSOC.com
I am a life-long Democrat, but I have to admit that I simply cannot vote for Galvin. Galvin has harmed the Democratic party in this state. We should be making it easier for people to register and to vote. Instead, Galvin uses nineteenth century technology and policies that discourage participation in government. As an example, Galvin opposed bi-lingual ballots for our Chinese citizens. Geesh!
<
p>Nobody pays attention to the office of Secretary of State, and Galvin never gets a well-financed opponent. Galvin doesn’t debate. He doesn’t answer questions. He doesn’t answer phone calls. He doesn’t deserve re-election.
<
p>Jim Henderson, an independent, would be a breath of fresh air.
<
p>Throw out the bum, Galvin. Vote for Jim Henderson.
<
p>
Checking Mr. Henderson’s website, he has education and experience that qualify him for the job (UG degree in econ from a moderately respectable đŸ™‚ school, law degree) and he has specific, sensible proposals to make voting more accessible.
<
p>While I like the Green/Rainbow candidate for Auditor, I’m voting for Bump because there is a clear danger of a Republican being elected to a position that would enable her to make mischief. In the SoS case, though, there appears to be absolutely no chance that either Henderson or the Republican will be elected. Therefore, the more votes Henderson gets, the more encouragement there is for he (or someone with the same platform and more backing) to challenge Galvin in the future. So it makes sense to vote for Henderson.
<
p>Am I missing anything here?
I looked, I read, I asked around. The answer seemed to me to be “no”.
Except for this race. Galvin doesn’t deserve my vote and therefore I won’t give it to him. I blanked his bubble in the primary, and I was going to blank it next Tuesday. After taking some time to think about it, reading your issues page, etc., I’ve decided that I’m voting for you.
<
p>Galvin needs to go.
and I am very prepared to say that I didn’t vote for Galvin đŸ˜›
<
p>He’s a relic of the old Beacon Hill politics we don’t need anymore. Jim is a fresh breath of air.
…and you’ll be happy to know that you earned a bunch of votes that night! We meet the second and fourth Wednesday of every month, and last night was our last meeting before election day. We discussed your race, and most everyone there (myself included) was planning to vote for you.
<
p>Good luck on Tuesday!
Why did you not go ahead and register as a Democrat in time and contest Galvin in the primary? I tend to prefer two-way races in general elections, at least until we have IRV.
While I may be voting for other candidates than many of the people on this thread, Mary Connaughton for Auditor for example, I will be voting for Jim in this race.
<
p>Here’s why. I despise Galvin. His approach to the office and his challengers has been nothing short of anti-democratic. I wish that there was only a two person race that would provide a better chance to oust Galvin.
<
p>I have met both Jim and Campbell and found both to be engaging personally and with new ideas that they would bring to the office to move it to the 21st century. I also found that both were willing to listen to differing viewpoints and achieve a workable compromise. Galvin does not even listen so compromise and progress is not possible.
<
p>I would be happy with either Bill C or Jim as Sec of State. However, I do not see Bill C obtaining enuogh votes from Democrats who have had enough of Galvin. I think that those folks will either blank the race or vote for Jim. I have tried talking to people to see if they would switch to Campbell and too many had trouble voting for a Republican. That’s a discussion for another day. Removing Galvin is more important. So I started talking about Jim. That was more pallatable for the folks with whom I spoke so started asking people to vote for Jim.
<
p>So in the spirit of moving this state forward and getting rid of Galvin I am going to vote for Jim. I also ask each of you who may be thinking of blanking this race to not do so and vote for Jim. He is our best shot, and admittedly a long one, in this race so let’s give him all the help we can.
Christopher:
<
p>John Bonifaz ran a very thoughtful campaign 4 years ago, had a hard time getting his 15% at the convention, then lost in a landslide in the primary election. I did not think the underlying party mechanics had changed all that much, particularly in the context of a primary election. Accordingly, I chose not to take the same path.
<
p>My campaign has appealed to folks across the political spectrum, including the 51+% of voters who are independent. I thought my best opportunity to get my word out, despite the obvious challenges, was to run as an independent. Since I was already unenrolled, this was a simple choice.
<
p>Jim
…though as I recall he wound up getting about 30% at convention. Truth be told I’d be just as happy if the Secretary were not subject to a partisan nominating process at all. As the overseer of elections he shouldn’t be attached to a party, lest we get another Katherine Harris situation. As long as current rules are in place I’ll stand by what I said earlier.