Mitt Romney (right) and son frolicking on a dock in the 2002 campaign commercial called "Ann," after his wife. It was an effective commercial that introduced Romney and his good looking family to Massachusetts. I thought it was hilarious and kind of exhilarating, actually, that he could be seen in his bathing suit in the ad. Romney went on that year to beat the Democratic contender, Shannon O'Brien from Easthampton, who I, a political reporter at the Daily Hampshire Gazette at the time, was convinced would win.
Shannon, who was state treasurer at the time, was very charismatic and down to earth. She grew up in a political family and her father Ed was one of the most supportive and nicest people I ever interviewed. I covered Shannon's victory party when she was elected state treasurer and I remember Ted and Vicky Kennedy sitting on the stage with her and that the two of them were SO bubbly and clearly excited about her winning.
I mention it now, because Massachusetts is in the political spotlight now, according to the New York Times, because another western Massachusetts Democrat appears to be struggling, Martha Coakley who is running to fill Ted Kennedy's United States Senate seat. Coincidentally, as I write, I just got an automated call from Vicky Kennedy in support of Coakley. I and many, many people have complained that we've gotten TOO many such calls about this election. I, for one, will always be interested in hearing from Vicky Kennedy. I'm NOT so much interested in hearing from all the other people who I've gotten robocalls from and who I've never even heard of!Just an observation: We've noticed that Coakley's advertisements have not been very personal and have not humanized her the way Romney's did him. She's from my neck of the Massachusetts woods, but I don't even know if she's married, has kids, any hobbies or anything that would make me feel connected to her other than that she obviously shares some of my values.
My sister Maureen and her baby Evangeline. We need to see Martha holding a baby! And, Martha, can you put a stop to the robocalls?
Martha has campaigned poorly in this short special election cycle. In the primary, she played rope-a-dope with her three male opponents, one of whom was far more experienced as a legislator and as a campaigner than she.
ReplyDeleteBut Martha got into the race early and cleaved off half the voters by emphasizing the first female Senator, and being a woman "a plus". I was disappointed becuase I thought Democrats took people on their merits not their genders.
After she won the primary she really took a low key approach even as her support continued to decline and her opponents continued to increase.
She doesn't like to meet voters and so she didn't opting instead to meet with union bosses and health care and pharmaceutical industry lobbyists. If a candidate appears to not like voters, then there's no reason to think voters will like them.
Martha is surprisingly not very progressive. If anything she is centrist and right-leaning on some counts such as government authority, the Patriot Act versus civil rights and corporatism. Not only has she lost the independents becuase of her luke-warm campaigning style, she's lost the left because of her centrism and right-leaning policies. Not all, she progressive on LGBT issues, DADT, in defense of children and elderly.
I don't like her as a candidate. The only reason I would give her my vote was if I thought Obama needed it AND it would make the health care and other legislation more progressive instead of an industry bailout for health insurance industry (and giving Martha might vote won't do that.)
I'm writing in
Elizabeth Warren
Harvard Law School
1563 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA 02138
I tend to vote third party -- Nader/Greens..., but I'll vote Coakley (and even may offer to drive dems to pools). I think this is one of those times you hold your nose and vote for the lesser of the two evils...what do we really gain by making things even a little bit worse?...
ReplyDeleteOne of the real problems with politics in this modern climate is that it a candidate’s viability has almost everything to do with having the right looking family and smile, and less with their philosophy, ideas, intellect, or commitment.
ReplyDeleteOne of the great disservices that modern journalism has committed has been to focus on politicians, and not on their politics!
Personally I used to frequently vote independent, libertarian, and green. But since 2000 and after seeing what has happened to our American democracy, and the generally unconcerned or even hostile attitude that the media took toward having the American people defrauded of their most basic right and belief, that of self-determination, I have gone to voting straight ticket democratic. No I don’t think that is an ideal or a permanent solution, but as Brian pointed out there is nothing to be gained by making things worse. And a split ticket just makes things worse on several levels, and will until some fundamental changes in vote counting, political campaigning, and media coverage of politics occur.
Oh and just as a side question for Brian: Why don’t you ever finish up a paragraph, sentence or idea, and put a period at the end of your thought?
Anon.-
ReplyDeleteI resemble that remark! My ellipses addiction is partly just that, a bad habit (I abuse semicolons and parentheses too), partly a reflection of my fragmented and irresolute personality, but also a deliberate brief signal acknowledging that there is more to the topic than I said -- (yes I abuse "--" also) that I didn't cover it all or presume to end the matter. I think most/all (oh yea, I abuse "/" too) thoughts are an incomplete (even if not wrong) part of the larger whole...(Oops, there I go again.)
On how to vote: (yup ":" too) a lot of leftie types I know resolve the dilemma by deciding that you can vote 3rd party when the election results are going to be clear either way (e.g., vote Nader for Pres. in MA or TX), but vote Dem. when it is close (Not Nader for Pres. in FL; vote Dem. now for Sen. in MA!). One vote of course rarely makes the difference, but then you can honestly tell others that idea too.
I think one should always vote (3rd party or write in if you can't stand anyone else). Not voting in protest is indistinguishable from not voting because one is too dim to find the polls, etc., at least in vote counts (though you can of course talk about why you don't vote).
(Yup, I abuse "etc." too.)
There may rare times when it is good to be a purist, to shake things up and/or bring on contradictions (e.g., revolution; or just let the republications mess things up). One bright side if Brown wins might be forcing the Dems to finally get it together to go around the filibuster (there are ways, such the so-called nuke option, etc.)...
[Heavens, there I go with /, ;,(), etc., and ..., not to mention [], all in one paragraph. Sorry!]
If you want to give rides to Coakley voters today you can call 1-800-485-0444, which is the Coakley campaign number to ask for rides. I called to see if they need ride givers and they said they do, and will get back with details. (look no ..., well almost)
ReplyDeleteDisappointing to see the election results…
ReplyDeleteHowever: I appreciate the clarification of punctuation and sentence structure -- (and I can see that sometimes there are things left unsaid…)
I DID like the calls I got from real people trying to get out the vote for Martha. I always think those are more effective than the robo calls, which I agree are the pits.
ReplyDeleteYour point about the lack of "personal" information about her is interesting. Women have avoided that for so many years, trying to sound "professional." (And of course Martha didn't seem to have a naked picture of herself to share, thank goodness.)
Let's hope for better news next time around!
Mary, You and your wonderful blog have been awarded the Kreativ Blogger Award, congratulations! Please come to my blog to accept this award, http://www.onlarchlane.com/
ReplyDeleteYou've always inspired me, I'm happy to pass this award along to you!