UPDATE (by David): Here’s the video, if you missed it earlier.
Please share widely!
Boston Mayoral Debate Round II–Live Blog/Open Thread
Reality-based commentary on politics.
Reality-based commentary on politics.
UPDATE (by David): Here’s the video, if you missed it earlier.
Great point, under-appreciated.
“drawing a line” versus “respecting public employees” and “putting all the cards on the table.”
From corporate giveaways to late night T hours, I like how Walsh always sees things from the point-of-view of working people.
Look to what the endorsers say, not to cynical tealeaf-readers.
Are you serious? Ever work in real politics?
If you don’t believe it, why be involved in politics at all?
You don’t think these leaders mean it when they talk about their communities’ needs?
Good point–mayors have to speak to DC on urban issues.
A few too many “light-hearted” questions for my taste here.
Apologies for spotty blogging–internet connection problems.
What do you think? Who won and what emerged as key issue?
He obviously thinks he can score points with EB3’s “Courtney Mayflower” set in Boston proper with his union-bashing, but it’s really quite unappealing to me.
Yeah, I thought Connolly (with Braude and Eagan’s help) set up that issue around the flyers expertly for maximum impact–but it all depends on the assumption that unions are bad actors and that labor is all cost, no asset. It drives me nuts too–it’s so unbelievably short-sighted.
but I consider it disqualifying for anyone claiming to be “progressive.”
I’d agree, but like I’ve said elsewhere, that term has been misappropriated. In my granddads day nobody could bash unions and claim to be called a Democrat let alone a progressive.
who’s grateful for the things the labor movement has acheived for me and my neighbors over the last 100 years. I’m grateful enough to feel obliged to tell my union brothers and sisters when they are acting like ***holes.
It’s a sacred obligation.
I’m a progressive and pro-union but the city needs to be run by someone other than a labor executive if we’re going to promote the city’s fiscal health.
doesn’t mean it is good or smart. I believe in the right to organize, not in ideological laziness.
no arguments over why unions are wrong about the issues they care about here, just incessant finger waving and attacks.
.
No, it depends on no such thing. By paying wages, benefits, and pensions that the City cannot afford, home owners will have to pay more in property taxes and/or city services will be cut. The city’s bond rating will go down and borrowing costs will go up. That disporportionately impacts the lower middle class, and middle class who consume services and cannot afford higher property taxes. Public employees are critical, need to be faily compensated, and they are in no way “bad actors and all cost.” Quite the contrary. I know, that’s just your bizarre way of setting up a straw man that’s easy to knock down.