Tom Reilly must be gagging on sour grapes.
Reilly thought he would be the annointed Democratic candidate for governor four years ago only to be trounced by Deval Patrick.
This year he sought to seek political revenge by endorsing Charlie Baker.
As we all know Reilly endorsement was a bust if not a kiss of death for Baker.
Well, Charlie Baker is gone for now but Tom Reilly is forever buried in his sour grapes.
Please share widely!
Tom Reilly brought Charlie Baker to one of the polling places in Watertown around 9AM on election day to introduce him around. He stayed here for about 45 minutes or so.
<
p>That polling place (2 precincts) went for Patrick by 67% to 26%.
<
p>When I first heard that Baker was coming to town, I got really upset, but then I realized that if he was spending any amount of election day in the most liberal part of a heavily Democratic town, I should be happy that he’s wasting his time.
<
p>Just one of many bad decisions made by the Baker campaign and our former AG. Even his supporters in town thought it made him look very small and bitter.
all that anger eating away…………he was a good AG
Organized labor was never excited about Tom Reilly’s enforcement, or lack thereof, of labor laws, like prevailing wage and wage & hour laws.
…that Tom O’Reilly’s on-line name is LawyerBC93?
<
p>Oh yeah, that Tom Reilly (not O’Reilly, BTW).
He truly was a good public servant and a man of the people, never put on airs and never thought he was owed anything. Unfortunately he acted like an entitled prick throughout the 06 primary and when he didn’t get what he wanted, acted even MORE like an entitled prick. I miss the DA who would still stop by the same shoe store in East Cambridge and say hi to all the employees and not act like the world owed him anything. I guess the power got to his head, like it got to Coakley’s. Frankly being MA AG is a political kiss of death in its own sort of way, you can always stay in office but never rise up. Looks like Bill Keating picked the smart way to move up, and hopefully Gerry Leone does the same.
He identifies as a prosecuter rather than politician. I can see him running for AG, but probably nothing else, and I think he would like that just fine.
I don’t think hot issues campaigning would suit him.
At this point I will not vote for anyone coming out of the Middlesex DAs office for any position of any kind, on principle.
<
p>IMO they were guilty of gross prosecutorial misconduct in the 80s, and then Harshbarger’s successors each made a conscious choice to dig the hole deeper to give political cover to their former boss. Once you exercise the power of the District Attorney for such political purposes, you are unfit for elected office of any kind.
<
p>It sure seems like they viewed this as a quid pro quo, because each subsequently behaved as if they were owed some political plum, whether it be the governor’s office or a Senate seat, and seem a bit bitter when these expectations were not met.
<
p>It is unfortunate that among the Democratic True Believers, keeping someone in prison for life without justification in order to protect the Party from embarrassment is a virtue, and not a vice.
…hasn’t been DA for very long. He’s been a very good prosecuter.
He is doing a GREAT job and it also seems like the job he always wanted to do. He really hates being a candidate and the money raising and unpleasantness that goes with it, so AG might be as far as he goes. But I disagree with CMD that Leone, Reilly, or Harshbarger were bad DA’s, or in Scott or Tom’s case a bad AG. But I would agree the office apparently (except with Scott) seems to breed the arrogance and sense of entitlement that makes them awful candidates, and its not unique to MA. Blumenthal is just as bad. Madigan in IL is like Leone, she loves her job too much to run for higher office. Though she would’ve annihilated Kirk and its honestly unfortunate she didn’t run.
Did you completely miss the heated exchanges on BMG after we published her statement about Fells Acres? Some were for her, some (seems to me more) were against.
<
p>Or maybe you aren’t including BMGers in the “Democratic True Believers.” It’s hard to tell.
BMG was definitely NOT Coakley Country during the primary. I still feel if she had a one on one vs Mike she would’ve been creamed. The Editors endorsed Khazei and were critical of her throughout the campaign for her missteps. They endorsed her for re-election mainly because the guy running against her was such a lightweight and a bit of an extremist (although he was my none of the above choice and my token Republican). So to say we are apologetic over her record is not true. She got grilled over the Patriot Act, health care reform, and her handling of the Amirault case. Have they been hatchet men out to discrdit her either? No. Fair is fair and thats all most people have been regarding her.
If you move from opposing her to voting for her in the name of “party unity” simply because she is the D nominee, I do put you in the category of True Believer, because you are voting for a letter, and not a candidate.