Well this is an interesting statement for a guy running in a Democratic Primary:
McChrystal’s involvement, Moulton said, is a sign that incumbent Tierney has not been effective in Congress.
“The fact that Gen. McChrystal is getting involved in this Democratic primary race is because so many people are seeing this story of a young, pragmatic veteran taking on a hyperpartisan, entrenched and ineffective congressman as emblematic of the kind of change we need in Washington,” Moulton said.
http://www.lowellsun.com/breakingnews/ci_26280827/hopeful-6th-congressional-district-endorsed-by-mcchrystal?source=rss&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
For the record I bolded hyperpartisan. So Seth what are you going to be pragmatic about when voting with the Tea Party lead Republicans in the House? Gonna trade off a minimum wage increase? Going to vote to support Hobby Lobby? Exactly how are you going to vote differently than Congressman Tierney? If I wanted a Republican leaning Congressman there is already one running in the 6th.
Seth Moulton thinks John Tierney is too Democratic. I think Seth Moulton isn’t enough of a Democrat to earn my vote.
LOL.
The thought that this will help in a Democratic primary is hilarious. Both Moulton and McChrystal are tools and they deserve each other.
of a soap bubble. What an effing lightweight he has turned out to be. He’s horrible.
…that Katherine Clark also has a primary opponent: Dr. Sheldon Schwartz, who is making a similar case. I don’t understand how individual candidates think they can go to Washington and take on the system. It takes a lot of people simultaneously committed to that to make it work.
All of these campaigns about taking on gridlock and hyperpartisanship are just cover for centrists with few values.
No one can seriously look at the recent years of gridlock and say the problem is because of too many progressives not compromising on policy.
It’s all such bullshit.
Also – Dr. Schwartz has some other campaign problems.
Since she is already getting nationally recognized for her bipartisan abilities and legislative acuity. What a n00b. I bet they both read a ton of Tom Friedman and felt real sure of themselves.
If we acknowledge that the guy has the right to run, and I assume we all do, what should he say? In a district that is more moderate, “hyperpartisan” might be an effective thing to say.
We all know what he could bring up, and we all know what wed’ say if he did that. So this strikes me as dudgeon that’s a bit too high.
we’d
but I doubt it will play in a partisan primary. Having a right to run and having a real reason beyond ego are two different things in my book.
And he already had his surrogates bring “that” up and got smacked for it.
I agree that he hasn’t really articulated one, but that doesn’t mean he doesn’t have one.
didn’t articulate a reason during that famous interview. Lost the Convention.
Getting kinda late in the campaign to have failed to explain why you are running.
n/t
However my opinion is that Tierney is running because he has a record of votes on issues he cares about and wants to continue fighting for those issues. As a former President of a Chamber of Commerece, whose built an impressive record on workers issues (especially on retraining programs), I believe Congressman Tierney wants to continue supporting small businesses and continue opposing Tea Party plans to strip workers of their rights, protect funding for OSHA and (given his district) oppose right wing efforts to demonize immigrants in legislation.
I’ve yet to read of an issue Moulton disagrees with Tierney on and yet to hear how Moulton will somehow pass legislation that Pelosi, Tierney, Capuano, McGovern and others have been unable to in a Republican led Congress.
N/t
But if they agree on issues … then his reason is just as valid as Tierney’s, no?
I’ve never seen, read or heard Moulton say those are his issues. His public statements have been that Tierney is ineffective. Saying you are going to be more effective than an experienced Congressman (as a member of the minority party in a House run by nutbags) isn’t a reason to run. It’s a campaign slogan with no depth.
Will Brownsberger also ran in a partisan, Democratic primary as the centrist, bipartisan, straight talking candidate. He felt that Keystone and Citizens United were merely liberal wedge issues and got buried because of his statements on those. Those statements revealed a naïveté about the ways of modern Washington, where there are few reasonable Republicans to try and deal with, and endless rounds of impeachment votes and Benghazi and IRS committees to deal with. In that environment, I want a skilled political fighter who is able to protect our interests.
Tisei, while laudably moderate on social issues, brags about how he will have access as a member of the majority that no other MA congressmen can have. But, if a superstar like Scott Brown couldn’t back aid to Gloucester fishermen due to the ideological straight jackets of his peers, don’t see Richard daring any better. And the last thing we need on our side, during an age when a populist response is needed to challenge the sheer dominance of business in or gilded age politics, is another Democrat whining about ‘class warfare’ and saving private equity whenever defending the middle class is mentioned as a priority. We don’t need another TFA loving teachers union bashed either. And a lot of Moulton’s background and rhetoric comes right out of that school of Broderisms and Bloomberg style corporate paternalism. Tierney has a ton I issues, and should strongly consider stepping aside after this cycle, but, on the issues, nobody will deliver better than he has.
I wear your downrates like … um … like everything else I wear. Which means I spilled coffee on them. So there.
seemed elucidating
Romney’s tax plan.
Why don’t we just vote for Moulton so we can find out what his reason for running is? On second thought, nah.
Moulton has an impressive biography and not much else. He simply has not given anyone, including moderates, a reason to vote for him. The “Mr Smith Goes to Washington” idea that a single candidate can change the horror show that is our national politics is just silly. Tierney actually has a relatively good record of making things happen in that town when compared to the current status quo. Moulton not only has every right to run he can use what ever arguments he likes it just so happens he has no justification for this race except that he wants to be a Congressman like really bad and stuff! Good for him but that won’t get people to vote in a primary for him. This would repeat itself in the general election should by some miracle he wins the primary and as a result Moulton would be the easier candidate for Tisei to defeat.
…why Gen. McChrystal is getting involved in a random US House race at all? He’s not from the district, is he?
Mr. Moulton has done a very good job building relationships with these kinds of folks. From what I understand their relationship goes back to at least when Moulton was a student at Harvard but for some reason they are being a bit coy about when and how they first met.
Moulton, like Stockdale, is an accomplished veteran, who seeks political office and is unable to answer the basic questions “who am I? And why am I here?”.
MY offer still stands. If “who am I? and what do I believe” beats Congressman John Tierney in the Democratic Primary on September 9 I will treat that Wall Street shill, DINO, phony, wannabe, and his sycophant mouthpiece to a lobsta dinna ! Any takers ? Crickets.
I thought so. That dog won’t hunt. Please procede.
Fred Rich LaRiccia
P.S. Another one bites the dust !
But FYI, Fred, no one is apologizing for Moulton. Are you asserting that he should apologize for running?
Why Moulton and not Tierney? Stating, as Moulton does, that Tierney is ‘part of the problem’ is a grossly ignorant statement, especially considering that a large ‘part of the problem’ is the Republican majority. It’s definitely stupid when Tisei says it, since he wants to make that ‘problem’ far worse by being another vote to keep it in power.
But, it’s even dumber for Moulton to say it in a Democratic primary since it shifts the blame for the partisanship and dysfunction of the house, from the House Majority to John Tierney. It’s a laughable attack, especially considering that conservatives from David Frum to Norm Ornstein would be the first to point out it’s clearly the GOP’s fault.
How will Moulton be a more effective advocate for Democratic priorities and issues than John Tierney if he is repeating partisan Republican talking points even conservative political reporters have shown to be discredited?
…but I’m not sure Fred will get an answer here. I don’t believe I have seen any Moulton supporters on BMG.
But he has said in the past he knows Moulton personally and people on his campaign, and seemed to be defending him on this thread. I think, if Moulton is serious about winning this primary and actually being an effective Representative, he should come on here and access the grassroots in the district. Respond to our questions, concerns, and charges.
When Leland Cheung got called out for running as a Republican in the past, he came on to BMG and articulated his reasons for running as a Republican then and why he is running as a Democrat today. Whether you agree with him or not, he at least had the courtesy to engage his opponents. An actual ‘out’ Republican like Dan Winslow came on here and sparred with us repeatedly. There is no harm for Moulton coming on here, and if he can’t handle the heat of BMG he won’t be able to handle the heat of a real campaign.
So far it seems that running is something he can put down on the resume next to his war service for the next corporate gig he aspires to, and it gives him an opportunity to wine and dine the Gergens, Bloombergs, and McChrystals of the world. He may even get a Charlie Rose episode out of this like Goodwin’s kid did after his similar run.
I do not know Moulton, and in fact I don’t live in the district. A friend of mine, who runs a nonprofit focused on getting people who have served (both in the military and in civilian service like AmeriCorps) to run for office.
Fred’s question is not really useful. It’s hostile to the notion of a Moulton run, I find that offensively undemocratic. Otherwise I’d probably keep my mouth shut.
You have a fair point that Moulton should explain his party switch (do we know this for sure?). I supported asking that of Cheung, and in fact I would support asking that of Senator Warren.
This is funny jc:
So far it seems that running is something he can put down on the resume next to his war service for the next corporate gig he aspires to, and it gives him an opportunity to wine and dine the Gergens, Bloombergs, and McChrystals of the world. He may even get a Charlie Rose episode out of this like Goodwin’s kid did after his similar run.
Does that really seem likely? Seth is more likely to get to wine and dine with Mac D’Alessandro and Phil Dunklbarger.
I didn’t finish my second sentence: my friend’s organization is supporting Moulton.
And I think Fred’s question, who is he and why we should vote for him is far from undemocratic, but the most basic question to ask. I have touted Seth before as a fresh face with a unique record, but I always said I needed to learn more before I could support him. His website, frankly, sucks at telling me who he is beyond what I already knew (vet who has dabbled in business since he got out of the service). Does he favor social security privatization as backers of his like Bloomberg and Gergen do? Does he favor military action with boots on the ground to stop ISIS as McChrystal, another backer, favors? Is he with the Booker wing or the Warren wing? His rhetoric, so far, seems to lend itself more to the Booker wing, with the “fairly centrist/both parties are too partisan” lines we’ve seen so far. But I want someone who is a real champion of better government. Tierney is a flawed incumbent and I’ve long seen the writing on the wall and have serious concerns about his candidacy, but that doesn’t mean anyone else will do. Certainly not a nut job like Di Franco, and certainly not a cypher like Seth. And he will remain so unless he shows himself here-I for one have been eager to learn more about him for about four years now-he is the one who doesn’t seem eager to tell me.
What more reason does anyone need? This whole thread is flawed, and that’s why I jumped in. Did Juliette Kayyem ever give a good reason why she was running? Was Barack Obama called to account for every stand taken by Colin Powell (who endorsed him in 2008)? Was Charle Baker in 2010 asked about every stand taken by Tom Reilly?
These questions are valid on the surface, yes, but there’s clearly a double standard at work. People don’t think Moulton should challenge a Democratic incumbent, and thus he’s some sort of scary centrist lightweight. Everyone’s welcome to think he shouldn’t run for the seat, but I wish people would just say it.
,
I could point you to post after post where I begged Driscoll to run or asked to know more about Seth, precisely since Tierney is a flawed incumbent from an electoral standpoint. From a performance standpoint, he isn’t. He votes the right way and moves the right legislation, he is the type of old style pol who still goes to wakes (I know he was at my grandmas) and works a crowd better than some more established members of the delegation. But, if he is unelectable, all that is moot. He isn’t unelectable, but a fresh face wouldn’t be running dead even with Tisei.
But just because we need a fresh face doesn’t mean Seth is the fresh face we need.
He’s the one who wanted to run as an independent! He is the one who described himself as “fairly centrist”! And he is the one who has surrounded himself with scary supporters! He is the one who talks in platitudes about rolling up sleeves and bemoaning too much partisanship! That impression is totally of his own making, and he is welcome to post to BMG or otherwise describe himself in a manner that could alleviate those concerns. I’d rather switch horses from Tierney, because this district shouldn’t be competitive every cycle and that drains a lot of money and activism that could be better utilized elsewhere. But Di Franco is insane, and is incapable of understanding how a convention works and thus, can’t be trusted to understand how Congress works. And Seth, until he bothers to show up and tell us who he is and what he stands for, is going to be defined by his past statements and his supporters views since we still don’t know what his are.
If you do, since you find him so compelling , please share.
By his use of the term “apologists.” You defended this “question” as “useful.”
You’d think any capable, credible, earnest Dem could emerge and beat Tierney in a primary with the “… but I’m not tainted by scandal” argument. Simply lock down your party bona fides, vow to stem the tide of right wing mania running rampant in DC and then clobber Tisei in the general election.
Moulton seemingly thinks the district is looking for someone more centrist when it’s clearly looking for someone less personally compromised to forward its preferred politics. It’s looking for a blue knight. Unfortunately Moulton doesn’t seem to be the answer. Really wish Kim Driscoll or Barry Finegold had jumped into this race.
You put it way better than I just did. Get it now Jim? An empty suit isn’t a better outcome than a damaged suit who has a known progressive voting record.
If he said that, how many diaries would we have denouncing him on BMG? I would estimate one a week.
…and even if he happened to be on the recently redrawn CD 6 side of Andover (though technically there’s no requirement to live in the district) he would barely have a base and would be running in a mostly different district from the one he ran in in 2007.
considering that he has yet to offer any believable reason for running with four weeks to election.
Moulton is a joke of a candidate to any serious progressive and he has the gall to run as a Democrat ?
For shame ! If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck…guess what? IT’S A DUCK !
The voters of CD-6 know a counterfeiter when we see one. Both Moulton and Tisei are phonier than a 3 dollar bill.
Fred Rich LaRiccia