During the gubernatorial campaign, I wrote that Deval and Charlie are fundamentally alike; I said that Deval devotees are being blinded by partisan politics and their reluctance to admit they were fooled. I urged liberals to break out of the “lesser of two evils” trap and vote for Jill Stein, a real liberal (oops, I think we’re now hiding behind the “progressive” label, having allowed neo-cons to besmirch the concept of liberalism). I pointed out that Deval named as his political idol Michael Bloomberg, a billionaire Democrat-turned-Republican who is privatizing the public schools and who had New York’s term limit law revoked so he could run a third time. I cited Deval’s post-election (in 2006) Globe statement saying that the most common misconception about him was that he’s a liberal. This e-heresy made not a dent in the Democratic bogey-man fear-mongering.
Would it have helped if I had posted this article, reporting that both of these guys had entertained a combined candidacy, as definitive evidence of the Patrick-Baker identity?
No, I didn’t think so.
Well, you’ve had your great victory, and Deval Patrick knows he can do whatever he wants without being called to account. More subsidized layoffs, anyone?
Now, without the pressures of a campaign, perhaps we can all step back and take a look at what’s really happening to our state and our country and our planet, and start supporting (or more likely, recruiting) candidates with the vision and will to work for the public interest rather than for a plutocracy of corporate sponsors.
Or state senator? Or some other office that she actually has a snowball’s chance in hell of winning?
<
p>This, by the way, is a serious question. It’s all very well to want to change politics by blowing up the two-party system, but pie-in-the-sky fantasies of a Green-Rainbow candidate walking into the Governor’s office while the party’s only actual elected official in Massachusetts walks into prison are not the way to go. IMHO, anyway.
<
p>Stein is in Tom Stanley’s House district, the bulk of which is in Waltham. There are only three Lexington precincts included. She ran against Stanley in 2004, and while pulling over 20% was pretty impressive, it was still a landslide against her.
<
p>She’s in Ken Donnelly’s Senate district. I think she’d have an even tougher time against Ken, since his base is in the parts of the district where she’d normally get the most support (Arlington and Lexington).
<
p>The districts will be redrawn before the next election so things might change, but one likely result would be that she’d have to go up against Jay Kaufman. No chance of her winning that.
<
p>Why not something local like Board of Selectman?
First, it doesn’t have to be Jill Stein. There are lots of Green-Rainbow types in the state, some of them pretty impressive. What about Nat Fortune? He seems like a good guy. If he had run for a non-statewide office, maybe he’d have had a shot. And I’m sure there are lots more out there.
<
p>Second, the GRP should do it like everybody else does: wait for open seats. It’s hard enough to knock off an incumbent; even harder as a third party. Makes little sense to take on well-liked incumbents (especially those who share a lot of their values). Focus on open seats in areas where there are reasonable numbers of voters who share their values. There won’t be a lot of opportunities, but there will be some, and they’ve got to start somewhere if they’re serious about building a party.
And I actually think it would be more constructive than the 1-3% she picks up every four years. I think Jill is smart, energetic, and full of great ideas. And I think her voice should be heard from within the halls of government. Not sure where she is from, but she could move into a hacks district and be a true progressive challenger. Or the greens could run lots of candidates at the leg level. Its where the real change is needed anyway, sure Deval would be more progressive if the leg let him. Most of those candidates go unopposed so it would be 1 v 1 races. And I am sure BMG would happily endorse and fund good greens against bad Democrats. Run on local governance, local aid, clean elections, public option healthcare, cape wind, no casinos, no bad charters. Thats a damn good mandate and a lot of these lazier and more corrupt reps have just been sitting on their asses for years without a good fight. The one thing the state GOP did right IMO was focus on local races for a change and it did far better there than it did statewide. THATs how parties are built. Its how Tip O’Neill created the current supermajority in the 40s and how a future progressive movement could do so as well.
<
p>You want a green alternative start from the ground up. And hell its what their own platform says since they are grassroots first and foremost.
She could start by moving to Cambridge and taking out Tim Toomey, who collects salaries as a Cambridge City Councilor and State Rep. Or she could target a ConservaDem or hack. If they want to build their party and be taken seriously, they have to start at the grassroots. Building a delegation in the State House is the way to force the entrenched Dems to move to the left on certain issues, and to give the voters the idea that voting third party may not be throwing their vote away after all.
I like Tim Toomey and he is fairly progressive, though the double dipping is troubling (I wish he’d give up the Council and focus full time on being a rep).
<
p>Luc Shuster (full disclosure a former supporter and current friend and one time golfing partner) ran a great campaign the two times he made it to the School Committee and got great ratings from a lot of diverse constituencies (including the Republicans!). He quit to focus full time on school and job opportunities but he or one of his campaign workers could definitely put together a credible campaign for a local seat. Toomey’s in the house or DiDomenico/Petruccelli in the Senate. Again if they field the candidates they might see results. They biggest result they could see statewide or national is as a spoiler.
Tim Toomey has been both a Cambridge City Councilor and State Rep for a number of years. If the voters disapproved of his decision to do both jobs or were offended by his taking the salaries provided for offices he was elected to, they could have shown that disapproval on Election Day.
<
p>Donald Wong, who beat Mark Falzone for State Rep, made it clear he would keep his position as a Saugus Alderman prior to the election and that issue was used against him. The voters decided it wasn’t a key issue.
<
p>I don’t see taking salaries for jobs that voters have cast ballotts and approved you to do as double dipping.
His district is one where a Green or liberal independent could potentially win. I live in it, and a lot of people are dissatisfied with him but he runs unopposed. He does have a base of support in more traditional, conservative East Cambridge, but many of those people are moving away because of gentrification. I personally would like some new blood representing my district.
A progressive named Green did run against him and did pretty badly. Also Toomey smartly voted a lot more like a typical Cambridge liberal after that battle just to protect his left flank. Besides taking two jobs, which while I think its kinda shady is not currently illegal and obviously as Striker pointed out not an issue to his voters, how is Toomey not progressive?
Toomey used to be anti-choice. While I don’t think he’s a bad guy, I don’t like his double-dipping. Either resign from the Council or the State House.
ran against Toomey and Avi was/is a creditable canddiate. He posts here on BMG on voter access and voter registration issues.
<
p>Again, the voters in Cambridge and in Toomey’s Reps’ District have made it clear they have no problem with him holding both the City Council and State Representative seats. There is no reason for him to resign either position.
…in the sense of taking two paychecks for two jobs. It is I think a conflict of interest. Sometimes the interests of your community and the interests of your district aren’t exactly the same. For that reason I think it should be prohibited.
I agree with you that it’s time to put our values over party. If we can’t get support for them from the Democratic party than it is time to start looking elsewhere.
Sorry, but this is the same Ralph Nader/George Wallace not a dimes worth of difference baloney that’s both false and not very constructive.
I agree that if the GRP wants creditability it needs to look to local and State House races, alas the brief targeting discussion here is already off base.
<
p>Decent progressive incumbents like Toomey or DiDomenico are ill advised targets because they would split resources. GRP needs to be looking at first term incumbents in 2012, especially those Republicans who defeated progressive leaning State Reps. First termers are vunerable.
<
p>As suggested by others open seats should be targets in 2012. And with municipal races in 2011, there will be targets for a Nat Fortune, Jill Stein or other GRP people to run locally and then run again to move up in the elected offical ranks.
Galluccio (foibles aside), DiDomenico, and Capuano can never be ‘progressive’ because they have ethnic last names and lack Harvard pedigrees. Nobody looks at voting records to make these decisions. These elections have always been townie v gownie affairs. The Wolfe-Galluccio races were quite ugly even though both had identical positions, and they were some of my earliest political memories. The only big issue that separated them was rent control, which the CCA type ‘progressives’ supported because theoretically it helped poor people and some of them (looking at you Ken Reeves) leeched off of it, and which townies opposed because they actually own the houses they lived in which usually go back a few generations. It really comes down to how long you’ve lived in Cambridge and how far your family goes back. Very few politicians can appeal to both groups, though to their credit Marc McGovern, Craig Kelley, Denise Simmons, Majorie Decker and even Ken Reeves have done a great job doing so.
She and I have had our disagreements over the years but it takes a hell of a politician to win a write in campaign, especially on a PR ballot.
Capuano is definitely progressive; I think the others are too though I’m less familiar. I don’t know who says ethnicity is somehow a barrier to being progressive either in reality or in anybody’s mind.