I thought this was a good write up on the race for AG on the Democratic side of the state primary. Under Maura Healey the office more than lives up to its enormous potential to protect consumers, hold businesses accountable, and protect our state from runaway right wing Republicans in the federal government. Healey will have heavy shoes to fill.
I’m still undecided, although I’m leaning toward Andrea Campbell due to her background in city politics, inspiring life story, and intimate understanding of what it’s like to be on both sides of the criminal justice system. Having had a father and brother in the system while raising her younger siblings after her mother died gives her a grit and perspective the other candidates lack. That said, she has run a somewhat safe campaign and I’d like to hear more specifics from her.
I worry the other two candidates mean well, but lack prior political experience and come from the affluent white liberal suburbs while self-funding their races. They are right to point out that the big tech funded corporate PAC backing Campbell in both her mayoral and possibly now backing her AG run is a problematic conflict of interest. I worry all three failed in their previous attempts for higher office and are settling for AG when we need a proven fighter in the role and that none of them have precious prosecutorial experience.
What say the BMG hive mind?
I must confess to paying little attention, at least for now. I’m feeling pretty much burnt out about the entire political process. So far as I can tell, the political system is failing to address or even talk about the most important issues across the board — both nationally and locally.
At the local level, MBTA crashes, derailments, and passenger deaths are now commonplace — and NOBODY is talking about it. Our obscene wealth concentration and the extreme economic suffering that comes with it – right here in Massachusetts — gets ZERO attention.
Massachusetts has had an overwhelmingly “Democratic” legislature for the nearly fifty years I’ve lived here (I moved here in 1974), and we have little or nothing to show for it.
I see the incredible damage done to Massachusetts by our GOP governors since I’ve been here, and I see the minimal repairs accomplished by Deval Patrick (the only Democratic governor after Mike Dukakis). In my view, Ed King was just another Republican who lied about his party affiliation in order to win (just one) election.
My national elected officials appear to be working on only ONE thing — asking me for money. My state-wide elected officials seem similarly focused on re-election and asking me for money.
I stay in contact with elected officials in my city, and I’m busy unsubscribing from pretty much everybody else. That alone is no easy task these days. I’ve learned that if I make the mistake of contributing to even ONE state-wide or nationwide candidate or elected official, I get spam from dozens of PACs and organizations.
I’ll no doubt pay more attention when the election gets closer. I may well write in “Donald Duck” or “Goofy” (I did that for most the years that John Kerry was our junior senator).
Until then, I’m spending most of my energy attempting to protect myself from the deluge of media propaganda and hysteria flooding me from all sources — including the “mainstream” media. So long as the elected officials that represent me continue to talk in bumper-stickers and slogans, I’ll continue to ignore them. Sadly, that includes both Ms. Warren and Mr. Markey as well as Ms.Pressley — whose office has never responded to any of my several emails or phone calls. Not so much as a form letter! I will tell you that if somebody announces a primary campaign against Ms. Pressley, I’m all ears.
I’ve been a passionate Democrat my entire life, and I’ve had enough. I’m not surprised that so many younger people ignore the entire thing.
I share a lot of your frustration and it’s a big reason why I was attracted to the UIP when I first moved back here as an attempt to shake up the status quo. It’s basically impossible for an effort like that to succeed without a lot of voter buy in and we found out the hard way most of the unenrolled voters we were banking on were either oddballs with idiosyncratic political positions or just too apathetic to even join a party and participate beyond occasionally voting. Without a blanket primary, ranked choice, or some combination of the two, I suspect we will remain stuck as a one party state for a long time. Especially with Diehl taking whatever’s left of the MA GOP down with him in the fall.
I reverted to unenrolled and have remained so despite several attempts to convince me to attend a convention. I honestly think voting in the 2024 Republican primary might be a better way to stop Trump. If more Democrats and independents had done that in 2016 we might have had a better outcome for our democracy.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/05/primary-election-voting-party-switching/630171/
Our 3 biggest challenges locally are as you said, affordable housing, income inequality, and climate change and I’m hopeful our two candidates for Governor seem to be addressing those concerns (totally ignored by Deval and Coakley IMO).
As someone who has officially worked the polls (as opposed to watching for a candidate or party), I implore you in the strongest possible terms to not write-in Donald Duck or Goofy. We still have to manually count and record those votes and it’s nothing but a waste of time. PLEASE limit yourself to the following options:
I think what you describe is an argument for getting more rather than less involved. By all means unsubscribe from the mostly fundraising emails, but go to where the elected officials are and ask the questions and share the concerns you have. You can watch the convention both tonight and tomorrow here if you are interested in what people will say about the issues you mention. If you check out that sends the message that elected officials don’t need to pay attention to you.
My biggest thing is make involvement easy and a good use of my time. Too often I feel like politicians I’m dealing with are looking ahead to the next rung of the ladder.
Politicians look for promotions as much as people in any line of work I suppose. I find your first sentence to be usually true in my experience.
I was very surprised to see evidence of Campbell doing so well given how little campaigning I’ve seen from her. Seems she is focusing on Boston to get her 15%. I’m with Palfrey myself who seems to have the progressive reputation in this race. Also fun fact (and that’s all it is, not to be construed as an argument for or against him) – he is descended from Congressman/Secretary of the Commonwealth John Palfrey as well as President Theodore Roosevelt. He is also first cousin, once removed, of our 1994 gubernatorial nominee Mark Roosevelt. Once you are related to Roosevelts that puts several other notables in your extended family tree as well.
I guess my biggest question for him is why AG and how does his life experience and political experience prepare him for that? Why should we back a straight white man over two pro choice women to protect our state in the post-Roe era?
You also have to admit it’s a thinly experienced field compared to the last one. Tolman had almost two decades in the state senate and a strong record as a labor ally and on campaign finance reform while Healey had a long record as an AAG and ADA before that with strong links to the marriage equality fight.
All 3 failed at other offices they wanted and I worry they are settling for AG which will be a critical position in the coming years. Campbell at least had experience on the Boston City Council and were it not for a quirk of timing would have ascended to the acting mayoralty instead of Janey and probably done better in the role and been the frontrunner instead of Wu in the last race.
Also with the desperate need for Democrats to get tough on crime nationally, especially on gun crime, I’m not sure two rich white liberals from crime free suburbs will relate to the Lawrence’s and Revere’s of the world facing unprecedented gang violence which is starting to trickle into our schools.
For starters, Palfrey is also pro-choice, and seems to be considered by those who care about such things as the most progressive overall. He has experience in both the Mass AGO and the federal administration which I think will serve him well. I have no doubt that he will be a strong and reliable AG in all sorts of ways. Liss-Riordan has Labor’s endorsement this year. It bugs me that in two of your comments you referred to his skin color (and once also his orientation and his gender). For crying out loud let’s get beyond identity politics!
I do not think it is identity politics. Otherwise a black female pro life Republican would be a better choice by default. Or a hack Democrat like Dianne Wilkerson. I am not arguing that.
What I am saying is that I think her own life experience is relevant to the position as is her experience as a woman who’s rights could be in jeopardy down the line. It’s a different perspective, one Palfrey is somewhat insulated from.
I was unaware of his federal experience or prior AAG experience. In what other ways is he more progressive than the other two? Like I said, I’m undecided.
Here’s some info on his issue profile including comparative progressiveness. He has been endorsed by Progressive Mass and Our Revolution. To be clear I for one am not arguing the others are not as I hate spitting contests on this matter.
I understand identity isn’t be all, end all, and that perspective may come into play, but I’m so attached to the ideal that such things shouldn’t matter that seeing it stated that starkly made me cringe. It almost sounded like you were saying Palfrey’s demographics were disqualifying. I for one look at issue profiles and experience as most relevant to the office being sought, and in the case of MA politics I’ve been involved long enough that personal connections come into play as well.
Not sure if his issue page is totally honest in the comparisons nor are they issues an AG really addresses. Single payer, safe consumption sites, and charters are all out of the purview of the AG and it seems intellectually dishonest to twist Campbell’s council votes to argue that she would be less progressive.
I’m sure if Weston’s schools were going under state receivership like BPS, Quentin would want other options for his kids, so attacking a black candidate for supporting schools inner city parents seem to want seems a little intellectually dishonest. Personally I hated working in a charter and voted not to expand them, but it’s also hard to argue against parents in low performing districts with fewer options electing for charters. It’ll likely increase in the short term with the disastrous Walsh-Casellus run at BPS.
I’d also add it’s reasonable for Roxbury and Dorchester residents to go NIMBY on safe consumption sites since the problem has been at their doorstep since Walsh killed the Long Island shelters and city leadership has done nothing to address it. It also seems her mayoral campaign had good policies to address those concerns.
So I’m not warming to his campaign and will likely choose between the two women, but you’re welcome to support him and I’m open to persuasion. They should Al come here.
I think the comparisons come off of questionnaires, but I tend to agree that he seems to stretch the AG’s role in policy making a bit. When I asked him about it he said that he sees an advocacy role for the office and also will make absolutely sure charters and private insurance are serving the people. I’m not necessarily going to try to persuade you as there are no candidates to whom I am hostile and always know good people supporting various candidates. I suspect when we vote later today my own district will yield few if any votes for Campbell and will split between the other two. Again, you couldn’t resist noting Campbell’s race in a way that makes it sound like because of that she should not be criticized. I’d love for the candidates to come here too, but sadly it seems like there are only a handful of us left.
Agreed on that latter point,
unfortunately Twitter is dominating the conversation although I think there’s still a place for longform local political commentary and the kind of enablement this platform offers. In general, getting any info on these races is difficult other than the occasional newspaper piece, public radio, Talking Politics, or OTR segment. I’ve heard next to nothing on the LG or Auditor race and was so surprised this race made the Times I decided to share its analysis with the rest of you.
I’m only bringing up identity where I think it is relevant. I agree with you the PM litmus tests lack nuance. Campbell had direct family experience with the criminal justice system her opponents did not have and I also think it’s relevant that voters of color she represented as a city councilor wanted charters in their community. Access to equitable schools and equitable justice is still not a reality for people of color in our Commonwealth, and while all three candidates acknowledge this reality, but only one has actually lived it. Your candidate is not on the receiving end of the abortion issue as his two opponents will be. It makes a difference to me, it may not make a difference to you. It’s not the only factor in my decision making, but it is a factor.
Palfrey is making charters into a red v. blue issue when their history, at least in our state, is that they were started by and for communities of color as an alternative to underperforming urban district schools. I absolutely agree any candidate for AG should hold charters accountable and they absolutely should investigate my former employer for union busting and continue to hold Mystic Valley accountable on racial justice issues. There are other examples of charters here started by right wing foundations and even Turkish political factions. I was a hard No on 2 precisely since I think charters need more oversight and local control in order to be successful before we build more. They are neither an ed reform panacea nor a scalable alternative to equitably funded, properly lead, and properly staffed public schools. I doubt Campbell will enforce the law any differently on education issues.