Tag Archives: Stephen Lynch
Any remaining aura of collegiality in the race for the Democratic nomination vanished last night and it’s not just because we are in closing week.
It was the people guy against the policy guy. It didn’t change the race; debates almost never do. But it was a fiery Lynch and a calm Markey in an interesting debate.
The new Masslive/ Western New England University poll didn’t change anything for the odds makers.
In 1807 Thomas Jefferson wrote to a friend who asked his opinion of newspapers and answered: “I will add, that the man who never looks into a newspaper is better informed than he who reads them; inasmuch as he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods & errors.”
I thought of Jefferson’s words yesterday upon reading a column by Joe Battenfeld in the Boston Herald. According to Battenfeld, Ed Markey Needs to Step Up His Game . . . or Else.
Three out of the five candidates running for John Kerry’s vacated US Senate seat have pinned their electoral hopes on a flawed theory of the election, namely that their are enough potential voters in this race who want to vote for a candidate that is willing to buck his political party’s establishment and to exercise “independent” judgment in the senate to cobble together a winning coalition. Gabriel Gomez, Dan Winslow, and Democratic Congressman Stephen Lynch have all staked their electoral chances on this theory.
Scot Lehigh has a very important piece in today’s Boston Globe, What are Markey, Lynch promising to interest groups?: The Democratic Senate candidates are making promises, but won’t make them public. Lehigh argues that the Democratic candidates are making “covert commitments” in order to secure the backing of interest groups including unions (mostly) and refusing to make public the “questionnaires” these groups require of candidates.
Congressman Lynch, don’t say I didn’t warn you.
In the Boston Herald today Congressman Stephen Lynch takes a solid whack at the Party Central Committee – excuse me, Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee – for showering Congressman Ed Markey with money while blocking contributions to Lynch. Here’s a sample:
“They haven’t been fair,” Lynch said of the national Democrats who he says have funneled donations and some union support Markey’s way. “No they haven’t been fair. I think they’ve done their best to discourage people from sending me contributions from Washington. They’ve basically said Markey’s our guy, don’t give to Lynch.
I thought both debates went well. A doubleheader – reminded me of NBA doubleheaders when I was a kid, Syracuse Nationals vs. Knicks in first game, Celts vs. Cincinnati Royals in the second. Terrific. Democrats may have had a better grasp on substance but then they have been in Congress working on national issues for years.
I’m most disappointed that there was no question on money in politics. I guess we’d get a lot of talk about Citizens United, but the problem was well established before that decision. Simply put, the affluent get their policy preferences met and the rest of us don’t. Citizens United just tilts the board even further in the direction of the super-rich.
So on to my thoughts on the debates.
Congressman Stephen Lynch is banking heavily on his union roots to appeal to the working class segment of the Democratic Party electorate. The state AFL-CIO was unable to endorse in the race, torn between Ed Markey, a 36 year member of Congress with a strong labor record, and Lynch, a card-carrying member of the Ironworkers Union. A frustrated Leo Fahey, business manager of Pipefitters Local 537, complained that “He’s one of us; that’s the difference. There’s a difference between a friend and a brother.”
Does that really matter?
Congressman Stephen Lynch finds himself in some unusual company in having opposed Obamacare. Let’s not forget that Democratic Party 2010 senate nominee Attorney General Martha Coakley and her main primary opponent Congressman Michael Capuano both pledged to kill the Affordable Care Act.