The contrast couldn’t be starker. Boston Mayor Marty Walsh was the de facto political leader of Massachusetts today: protecting our livelihoods and ideals by defending immigrants and standing up to an unpopular and incompetent president who lost the national popular vote by millions and was obliterated in Massachusetts.
Baker was nowhere to be seen. That’s because he can’t challenge Trump too explicitly since they both stand for the same values: the GOP. It’s an impossible position that, based on the events of this week, will become increasingly untenable.
This will create a huge political opportunity for Baker’s rivals if he keeps it up.
In Boston, 48% of children have at least one parent who was born outside the United States. I identify with those kids because I was one of them. My mother and father came from Ireland to Boston looking for opportunity. They found their American Dream, and I got to live mine by becoming mayor of the city that embraced us.
My family was far from alone. In Boston, immigrants make up nearly one-third of our population. We welcome and cherish those who are fleeing persecution or simply seeking a better life. We know our success — and our nation’s success — has always depended on the drive, talent, community and culture of newcomers.
That’s why I was so angered by the White House’s executive orders this week, aiming to strip cities like Boston of their federal funding and shut the door to desperate refugees. They sent the message that America is rejecting its heritage as a nation of immigrants and giving up on its role as a beacon of hope in the world. More immediately for cities like Boston, these orders threaten to undermine public safety, sap our economic vitality and tear apart our families.
against evil Trumpist bigotry and xenophobia.
I was so moved to watch you stand up and speak out on MSNBC Lawrence O’Donnell’s show.
You and I became friends both as cancer survivors and working for our mentor and hero, Senator Ted Kennedy. And you and my friend, Congresswoman Katherine Clark, together were recently honored with the Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt Democratic party award.
As you are the son of Irish immigrants and I am the grandson of Italian immigrants, you make all of us proud !
Fred Rich LaRiccia
…that Baker can’t challenge Trump explicitly? There’s no law that says a GOP Governor has to support a GOP President. In fact, he should send the National Guard to Logan Airport to safely escort lawful persons through customs in defiance of an unlawful executive order – kind of a Central High School scenario in reverse.
Anyone else getting the sense Moulton is 2020 presidential material? Give or take a bad choice on Question 2.
He’s got more than a few bad votes in the mix. He’s incredible on these foreign policy and civil rights-related issues that hit exactly on his remarkable backstory, but on many other issues he’s not the most progressive. For example, in a recent vote he backed the HALOS Act, which weakens investor protections in the JOBS Act. The law could open the door to con men pitching fake businesses (including in events at schools and churches) to non-sophisticated investors. For comparison – Capuano, Clark, Lynch, McGovern, and Neal all voted against it.
There was one amendment to this bill that would have required sponsors of these investment pitch events to provide written disclosures that would provide more background on the event and outline the risk of investing in the securities being offered. The amendment failed, and 15 Democrats joined Republicans to kill it. Moulton opposed the amendment and was the only MA Dem to do so.
There was another amendment that would have limited attendees of these events to people with financial sophistication and would require that the issuer of the securities be an actual business (i.e. not just someone with an idea). This amendment also went down. 17 Dems joined the Republicans in killing it. Moulton again joined the Republicans and was the only one from MA to do so.
These positions seem well in line with what some of Moulton’s bigger Wall Street backers would want (as does his charter school support).
I hope that the 2020 race is not one that is primarily foreign policy oriented (for soooo many reasons), and if it is not, I don’t think Moulton is anywhere near the top tier of candidates looking ahead to 2020.
He also broke with the party (again the only MA rep to do so) on the Investment Advisors Modernization Act of 2016, which allows for Private Equity and Hedge Funds to avoid certain investor disclosures. He broke with the party on the Mortgage Choice Act of 2015, which would undo some changes from Dodd-Frank after the mortgage crisis. Both bills were heavily backed by industry. He also frequently breaks with the party on defense spending.
He may be similar to Cory Booker. Great speaker, inspiring, and an incredible force on certain issues, but also largely deferential to corporate power. There’s not enough votes yet to be sure (like there is for Booker), but some of these aren’t a good signal. Also not a good signal is his sources of funding (Wall St.) and some statements back in the day about calling himself “a pretty centrist guy” and having considered running as an independent. I think you can agree that he doesn’t have a long track record of progressive action.
Don’t get this wrong, I really like him, and he’s a great leader on important issues, but I’m not ready to buy-in completely yet.
And, in terms of the newer MA Congresspeople, I think Katherine Clark has been significantly more impressive across the board.
I still like him and think he is exactly the kind of candidate that could beat Trump. But he’s also incredibly unknown outside the beltway and Boston media markets and House is always a harder stepping stone. Those votes are important to monitor though and I appreciate your homework. Though that primary is far away it’ll be an interesting contrast between the Sanders/Warren wing and the Clinton/Booker wing.
I am looking for someone who could bridge that divide and appeal to the specific subset of swing voters that picked Obama over Romney and defected to Clinton. Seths definitely one of the 20 or so figures capable of doing that, though I agree he needs more seasoning and smarter votes.
He could bridge that divide since he is far to the left of the party on social issues, racial justice and criminal sentencing reform while being to the right of the party on defense and business. A good combination for the primary but a lousy one for the general.
I don’t see that issue mix appealing to those particular swing voters-he would essentially be 2016 redux. It would be a good test case for whether or not it was the emails and her gender that did her in or her lack of intensity on midddle class issues. Not sure it’s worth the risk to the country though.
It’s gonna be a helluva tough dance to play for whomever our ultimate nominee is going to be. I’m really concerned that in order to win our nominee has to be very vocal on these questions of identity that are incredibly important to our core supporters but are simply non-starters with the voters we have to win back. Basically pivot to the social left to win the primary and pivot to the economic left and social center to win the general. Basically the opposite of how our nominees have pivoted in the past.
Due to a Mass-based federal judge’s order broader than others, affected persons are being advised to fly into the United States via Logan Airport.