Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

  • Shop
  • Subscribe to BMG
  • Contact
  • Log In
  • Front Page
  • All Posts
  • About
  • Rules
  • Events
  • Register on BMG

Is a CrossRoads RoboCall within the agreement?

September 26, 2012 By jwarren

I got a call today from Crossroads to make sure I knew how much federal government money Elizabeth Warren wasted.   Is that PAC money being spent on the MA US Senate race?

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0
0

Filed Under: User

Comments

  1. kbusch says

    September 26, 2012 at 9:40 pm

    .

  2. johnk says

    September 26, 2012 at 10:26 pm

    I got one during dinner.

  3. Christopher says

    September 26, 2012 at 11:18 pm

    …is that the agreement covers tv and radio ads, such that those will be limited to what the campaigns themselves produce and include the line, “I’m…and I approve this message. My ruling is that robocalls do not violate the letter, but they do violate the spirit, of the agreement.

  4. David says

    September 26, 2012 at 11:29 pm

    the campaign wants to hear from you.

    • lynne says

      September 27, 2012 at 8:20 am

      Will report it. 🙂

      Richard Howe, local Lowell blogger/historian/elected official (Registrar of Deeds), got a robocall, according to his tweet.

      • lynne says

        September 27, 2012 at 8:21 am

        MRP (the state party), that’s not a violation right?

        • David says

          September 27, 2012 at 11:57 am

          are violations. However, both state parties are included in the agreement – neither of them can run TV ads etc.

          • lynne says

            September 27, 2012 at 12:58 pm

            not part of the Pledge at all though, if’n I recall…

      • lynne says

        September 27, 2012 at 8:22 am

        My dog chose THAT piece of mail to take a chunk out of that day. Hahaha.

  5. lynne says

    September 27, 2012 at 8:29 am

    Does the People’s Pledge set a precedent, similar to George Romney’s several years of tax return release started that as a presidential “requirement” (which his son disdains)?

    Are we going to see this happen in all or most future statewide campaigns?

    That would be awesome. And if it works here, it might spread…

  6. paulsimmons says

    September 27, 2012 at 1:04 pm

    As a practical political matter, robocalls are a waste of campaign money, for these reasons (among others):

    As a matter of political psychology robocalls are perceived (accurately) to be a form of telemarketing, and repel far more voters than they recruit.

    Caller IDs make people less apt to pick up the phone when they don’t know the caller.

    Voicemail and answering machines make it likely that robocalls are deleted unheard (particularly if caller ID makes a pickup unlikely).

    Many people’s sole means of communication are cell phones, and many of these people have plans where they pay for incoming calls. It’s difficult to underestimate the hostility generated by unsolicited political calls.

    Based on the upstream comments, the robocalls haven’t been targeted to likely Brown supporters or undecideds; they will probably work to Warren’s net advantage by firing up her supporters and nudging some undecideds away from Brown (a small percentage, but important in the context of a neck-and-neck race).

    • Trickle up says

      September 27, 2012 at 7:02 pm

      I’d certainly like to believe that robocalls do not work. I’m willing to believe that they do not work on you.

      But is there any research that suggests they do their candidates no good?

  7. demeter11 says

    September 27, 2012 at 9:17 pm

    On the Brown campaign site tab with the People’s Pledge there is also a link to a pdf memo which says in part:
    TO:    Interested Parties 
     FROM:   Jim Barnett, Campaign Manager 
     DATE:    March 28, 2012 
     RE:    Outside Spending in the Massachusetts Senate Race 
    It is widely known that Senator Scott Brown and Professor Elizabeth Warren have entered into an agreement, titled The People’s Pledge, that attempts to limit third party spending in Massachusetts by imposing penalties for such spending on the campaigns  themselves. 
       The way it works is simple:  if an ad supports a candidate or attacks that candidate’s opponent, the candidate who benefits from the ad must pay 50% of the ad’s cost to charity.  The money comes from the candidate’s campaign account. 
       Therefore, under these terms, Senator Brown is liable for 50% of the cost of any independent expenditure ad or issue ad that supports him or opposes Elizabeth Warren.   
       Senator Brown has, from the day he signed the Pledge, been crystal clear:  he will abide by it.  To that end, he has paid a penalty on two separate occasions, in an amount totaling over $35,000. 
       He has also been clear that he has no intention of violating the Pledge, and expects Elizabeth Warren to do the same.  Undoubtedly, since Senator Brown remains extremely popular in Massachusetts, and third party spending had to date favored Warren by a 3‐to‐1 margin, Warren will come under enormous pressure to break her word to the people she  seeks to represent. 
       No one should have any doubt about Senator Brown’s commitment to the Pledge.  End quote
    So, it seems to me that the language “any independent expenditure ad or issue ad that supports him or opposes Elizabeth” pretty clearly covers mailers and calls. No?

    • lynne says

      September 28, 2012 at 8:37 am

      Not to me, anyway. It depends on how you define “ad.” If you widen to mean “any advocacy at all” – sure. But by and large, the accepted definition is “advertising” – ie, media advertising…radio, TV, and we know it extends to internet advertising.

      I suppose you could make a case for the direct mail, since they LOOK like advertising I get in the mail for pizza joints and chimney cleanings, but I don’t see that anyone else has made that case.

      Certainly, I wish they had thought to explicitly include robocalls, as those can get just as nasty and invasive as ads do. Or moreso.

      • fenway49 says

        September 28, 2012 at 10:51 am

        the AFL-CIO plans to send direct mail to Mass. union families on behalf of Warren. They are doing this in several other Senate races as well.

        It appears they’re only sending them to households with a member of an AFL-CIO-affiliated union. As a result the AFL-CIO itself, rather than the PAC, is paying for the mailers.

        http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/28/afl-cio-gop-candidates_n_1921163.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

Recommended Posts

  • No posts liked yet.

Recent User Posts

Predictions Open Thread

December 22, 2022 By jconway

This is why I love Joe Biden

December 21, 2022 By fredrichlariccia

Garland’s Word

December 19, 2022 By terrymcginty

Some Parting Thoughts

December 19, 2022 By jconway

Beware the latest grift

December 16, 2022 By fredrichlariccia

Thank you, Blue Mass Group!

December 15, 2022 By methuenprogressive

Recent Comments

  • blueeyes on Beware the latest griftSo where to, then??
  • Christopher on Some Parting ThoughtsI've enjoyed our discussions as well (but we have yet to…
  • Christopher on Beware the latest griftI can't imagine anyone of our ilk not already on Twitter…
  • blueeyes on Beware the latest griftI will miss this site. Where are people going? Twitter?…
  • chrismatth on A valedictoryI joined BMG late - 13 years ago next month and three da…
  • SomervilleTom on Geopolitics of FusionEVERY un-designed, un-built, and un-tested technology is…
  • Charley on the MTA on A valedictoryThat’s a great idea, and I’ll be there on Sunday. It’s a…

Archive

@bluemassgroup on Twitter

Twitter feed is not available at the moment.

From our sponsors




Google Calendar







Search

Archives

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter




Copyright © 2025 Owned and operated by BMG Media Empire LLC. Read the terms of use. Some rights reserved.