According to the Herald’s Brian Dowling: “Bay State Congressman Stephen Lynch said he’d ‘consider voting for Gov. Charlie Baker in 2018 and criticized attacks trying to link the governor to failed GOP Senate candidate Roy Moore through Baker’s fundraising for the Republican National Committee. ‘Charlie Baker is a good and decent man,’ Lynch said, addressing arguments from Democratic gubernatorial hopeful Setti Warren. ‘To tie him to a pedophile, come on, come on. That’s the worst of politics right there.’”
No Congressman, the worst of politics is for you to distort facts and side with a Party that is becoming more reviled by the day – and on the wrong side of history.
Of course, neither Setti Warren nor any Democrat suggests Baker supports a pedophile. It’s just that Baker is so focused on circumventing our state campaign finance laws that he is willing to facilitate the Republican National Committee’s support of the very things our governor says he disagrees with. Yes, this includes RNC support of an accused child molester, but it also includes support for the GOP tax bill that will screw Massachusetts and money to pay Trump’s legal bills.
At a time when Republican Charlie Baker can only mumble quietly that he is “disappointed” with what the Republican tax bill will do to Massachusetts, we need our Democratic Representatives to shout about it, call out all Republicans who fail to take a moral stand – and fight these outrages. Congressman, you should be asking the Governor, “Whose side are you on? Either you are with the hard-working people of Massachusetts or you are against us. There is no middle ground in this fight.”
The national GOP wants to kill Democrats, and they really don’t make too many bones about it. Many Democrats, for whatever insane reason, still want to be friends with the GOP. Charlie Baker is helping the efforts to literally destroy our country and everyone in it worth less than $1M and also our planet.
He may find supporting a pedophile a bit too much, but what about supporting Moore in the absence of the pedophilia charges? Moore is still very much a monster and little different than David Duke (and actually worse in many ways). What about supporting the party that wants to throw millions of people off health insurance? Or end CHIP? Or punish immigrant children? Or pass a tax bill that will in no uncertain terms kill the most vulnerable in this country? Or embrace white supremacy?
Baker is apparently fine with all of those things because he still proudly carries that R next to his name and will raise money for them.
If he’s willing to do that, calling him what he is should not be hard. He is simply NOT “a good and decent man.”
Democrats thinking and acting the way Lynch is is going to help get hundreds of thousands of Americans killed.
I’ve been quite vocal that we need to attack Baker on his lack of action on the T, schools, jobs, and housing. An affordability and mobility agenda can defeat him. Trying to tie national Republicans around his neck is a fools errand. This is the kind of inside ball stuff that doesn’t resonate with unenrolled voters, let alone the 60% of Democrats who say they approve of the job the governor is doing.
Now the tax issue will affect Massachusetts. It will cripple our universities ability to be engines for social mobility, job creation, and luring talented people to the states too industries. It will raise taxes on middle class families and first time home buyers. It will kill deductions for teachers that benefit our kids and medical expenses that benefit our seniors and disabled. Those are fair attacks and the kind of issues a supposed lunch pail/kitchen table Democrat like Lynch is should be a drum major on.
Net neutrality repeal will make your internet provider as bad as your cable package deal, and a local monopoly to boot. Nobody is talking about the taxpayer waste on corporate welfare from the dud Olympics to the GE deal to the Partners merger. Baker serves the wealthy and connected, not the working majority of this state. That’s our message.
I’d counsel against saying “this will work, this won’t work”. You don’t know. Nobody does — until you repeat it again and again. That’s how messaging works. The notion that Baker is helping the national GOP croak our quality of life is not that hard to understand. It’s not the only message, but it should be made known.
Headline Omits Important Word: AGAIN
Pretty nasty of Lynch to say that when there’s a declared candidate already. How hard would it have been to say “I’m a Democrat, I’ll vote for the Democratic nominee.”?
On the “tying Baker to Moore” stuff, I have to admit he has a point. That was unfair.
It wasn’t unfair, he helped raise the money that went to Moore. If he does that, he should be linked to every bad thing they do.
Well there we are. It’s not the most unfair thing in the world, but I think it’s a stretch. Baker is a Republican. But raising money for the RNC links him with Roy Moore?
Are you comfortable being linked with EVERY Democrat in the country, even the worst one you can think of? (That’s a rhetorical question, you don’t have to answer it.)
It’s not unfair at all. He’s not linking Baker with every Republican, only every Republican receiving money from the RNC. And that’s entirely reasonable. To take an easier to understand example: If he was fundraising for Al Qaeda to buy food for their starving fighters, would we give him a pass because it’s just for food, or would we recognize that money is fungible and giving them money for food frees up more money for bombs?
At this point in the election cycle, Moore was probably receiving a lot more $ from the RNC than anyone else. https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/with-trumps-support-moore-could-gain-influence-in-washington/2017/12/04/02da209c-d917-11e7-b1a8-62589434a581_story.html?utm_term=.d84873fbfa69.
I’m comfortable being linked with every Democrat the DNC gives money to. As far as I know the DNC has never (in the last 50 years anyway) knowingly supported a pedophile, or a bigot (beyond the level of bigotry required to get elected in more conservative districts). If Baker didn’t support the RNC’s actions, he wouldn’t raise money for them.
Oh, well, then ….
If I understand the arrangement correctly, Baker has a fundraising agreement with the RNC. You’re saying he should fundraising because he doesn’t like one nominee? Fundraising NEVER stops.
^ Typo — “he should stop fundraising.”
Maybe Seamus is comfortable, but luring voters from Roy Moore’s funders to Harvey Weinstein ‘s fundees doesn’t sound like the
best approach.
Less unfair than ineffective.
Baker’s teflon-coated steel plating right now.
Lets be frank. There’s no downside for Lynch in this, which is why Boston Mayor
Walsh said the same thing back in April
Source link: http://www.masslive.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/04/boston_mayor_marty_walsh_wont.html
(Sighing loudly) You’re right.
“There will be no heroes. The Republicans will sell it all to feed and bathe the super rich. Souls are officially for sale. The consequences of elections can be grave, America. Voting to “shake things up” or “send an outsider to Washington” or going third party to “send a message” can mean literal life, death or suffering for lots of people. This mess was made by voters, non-voters, cruelty and greed.” Joy Reid
Everyone knows that Lynch has a primary opponent, right?
Brianna Wu for the house. https://ballotpedia.org/Brianna_Wu
And… so?
A computer programmer whose website is (presently) down. Color me skeptical on her chances… or even how serious she is about her run.
More importantly, for us at least, (if I’m reading the tone of your post correct) why should we automatically flock to the banner of a primary opponent? I dislike Lynch as much as the next guy, but my distaste doesn’t (nor should it) automagically give a complete unknown a shot. In fact, I suggest that a knee-jerk anti vote on just these grounds is likely to be unmitigated disaster whereas the incumbents disaster has been somewhat mitigated by his fierce pro-labor stance.