Left In Lowell

God, I Was Punked

23 Responses to “God, I Was Punked”

1. Wow Says:
   June 9th, 2006 at 3:13 pm

   Lynne - You must think voters are complete idiots.

   A) Gabrieli’s campaign set a limit - they didn’t say “We’re spending $15 million.”

   B) Do you think Kerry Healey’s gonna adhere to any limits?

   C) If Gabrieli’s commercials weren’t back up by any message or accomplishments, they wouldn’t have any traction. He has an ad about stem cells because it is something he has worked on (successfully) and has a plan for. He has an ad on education because it is something he has worked on (successfully) and has a plan for. And so on.

   If you think TV ads alone can “buy” an election, you must think voters are complete idiots.

   And the next time you complain that Reilly is focusing too much on Deval’s Ameriquest relationship, and you say that Reilly should just “focus on the issues” and have a “campaign of issues and ideas,” just remember that you are complaining about spending that Gabrieli hasn’t even done yet — doesn’t really qualify as an “issue” the way that education and economic development and health care does, hmmm?

2. sco Says:
   June 9th, 2006 at 3:18 pm

   Healey will have to set a limit the same as Gabrieli, at least if Patrick or Reilly win the primary. She’ll have to if any of her challengers accept the public campaign finance money.

   Oh, and the 15.36 million is all too real, Lynne.

3. Lynne Says:
   June 9th, 2006 at 3:20 pm

   Doesn’t matter whether or not he spends that much (if this info were actually true, which I’m pretty sure it isn’t). He’s setting a bar too high. He’s saying that the likelihood of his outspending his opponants at least 2-to-1 is huge. Hell, the dude ALREADY spent 2.5M just to talk to 500 delegates.

   So, your answer to Healey is to send the candidate with the most money to face her. That’s a lovely view of democracy. Exhaust the other two candidates’ funds and forget about ideas and merit and groundwork. OK, that’s it, let’s just do away with the primary now, the other candidates should just forgo bothering to run with that attitude.

   Money DOES buy election, think for two seconds. The mayoral race in NYC for instance - millions of dollars for two percentage points that won the Republican the election. Give me a break. Money is a HUGE factor - that’s why people want real campaign finance reform. You know, limits and public funding.

   It would be an asshole move, to declare that high a cap. Never mind that it’d be legal and within the rules, it’s an asshole move. It’d be saying that he expects to buy his way in.

   Of course, we’ll have to wait for the real amount, since I don’t think this is it, given MaverickDem’s apparent need for attention with his bad joke.

4. Tim Little Says:
   June 9th, 2006 at 3:20 pm

   Globe link: http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2006/06/09/gabrieli_sets_campaign_spending_limit_at_1536_million/

5. Lynne Says:
   June 9th, 2006 at 3:22 pm

   OK, going back to ONCE AGAIN edit the post. What a jerk!

   (And apologies to MaverickDem)

6. Wow Says:
   June 9th, 2006 at 3:30 pm

   Lynne - Look at these two passages from your own response post:

   “So, your answer to Healey is to send the candidate with the most money to face her. That’s a lovely view of democracy.”

   “Money DOES buy election, think for two seconds.”

   Do you see where you contradict yourself?

   I’m not saying “Send in Gabrieli because he has the most money.”

   I’m saying:
   1) Gabrieli is a strong candidate who is great on the issues, is a tried and true progressive, has a positive message, and would be a terrific Governor.

   2) It doesn’t hurt that he can go toe-to-toe with Healey in the resources and funds department.

7. Tim Little Says:
   June 9th, 2006 at 3:33 pm

   In the end the it’s the still the votes that count, not the money.

8. waittilnextyr Says:
   June 9th, 2006 at 4:21 pm

   It looks like a showdown between money, grassroots and the GOB network.

   I’ll bet on grassroots, as they will be emboldened by the affront of purchased democracy.

9. Deborah Sirotkin Butler Says:
   June 9th, 2006 at 7:28 pm

   First I thought “No” he could not have done that (Gabrieli). Then following the link, there is was. That is really strange, to me. I will stick to my “dream ticket” which is Patrick/Murray and work for it. Maybe total volunteer hours will make a difference; I hope so. I guess I do mind folk trying to buy the election and hope that media purchases are not decisive and that democracy has not dumbed down to that degree.

10. Eleanor Rigby Says:
    June 9th, 2006 at 9:19 pm

    So, only the rich need apply?

11. mark Says:
    June 9th, 2006 at 9:28 pm

    Gabrieli makes me physically ill.

12. Lynne Says:
    June 9th, 2006 at 11:48 pm

    Yes, isn’t it a sucky and cynical contradiction? The best ideas can be drowned out by money. But the shallowest support and the appearance of insider dealing and other stuff Gabby has done will lose him votes. In his bid to do this, he’s compromised his integrity, Reilly and Patrick were willing to play on a level playing field (I suspect they would be still if Gabby hadn’t made it). Once again, if we get Gabby as our nominee we have a fresh, not-beat-on Healey against Gabby, who’s already looking like the “standard Dem” which every independent, moderate (and heck, even true blue Dem) loves to hate in this state.

    He can buy all the slick marketing that he wants, but consultant-driven politics is causing us to lose every single time. Just like the Bush admin and their marketing campaign touting US policy in the Middle East, it ain’t fooling anyone. The Republicans have marketing down, but they have (at least in other states and nationally) won with true believer boots on the ground who work their tails off, as misguided as those people - who are hurt most by Republican policies - are. Here, the Republicans have had Democrat fatigue which keeps them in the corner office. Well, this is a good start towards another round of that. Instead of listening to Gabby’s ideas, people will be wondering if he can really govern - spending an inordinate amount of money does not qualify one to govern. We saw that with Romney. They figure one hack is as good as another hack. If Healey can (because she has not had to maneuver in such ways as yet, having no opponent) convince the voters she’s a scad more genuine than Gabby, we lose again.

    Frankly, ever since I heard Gabrieli say in person that he bought his supporters’ hype that only HE could save the party, I wondered at his ability to logical reasoning. Surely that can’t be true, he’s the only guy who can win the general? Give me a break.

    If Gabrieli were actually doing more than just planning on spending his way onto TVs, putting together a ground game, and won, I wouldn’t be offended. Even if he outspent his opponents a little. Maybe he still will surprise me. But his entire game thus far has been to: buy his signatures (all right, somewhat justified, he got in late), use insider deals to get on the ballot (ostensibly because the Dems would look bad if not everyone got on the ballot, never mind that it was the same people who last year made it harder for people to get on the ballot to prevent this very thing in the first place. Now, he makes fun of the cap with this mockery of a number, decides he’s not going to play by a fair playing field against two candidates who are. Sure, fine, it’s a tactic, outspend your opponent to win, but is it really the best thing for the party? If Gabrieli is only looking out for #1, fine, but I thought he purported to be doing what he’s doing for the good of the party because he’s a good Dem? I’m sure he thinks he is by virtue of his self-declared savior status, but again, I go back to my premise that I do not think he is thinking outside the bubble of his adamant supporters nor is he thinking logically.

    By contrast, everything I’ve seen about the Patrick campaign is that they live off of reality checks, while working hard for the outcome they hope for. They’re playing a game of positives rather than tactics, on the issues, person by person. I wouldn’t be enthusiastic if I thought he was interested in shortcuts that might put him as frontrunner, but would reduce his support to something shallower. A different sort of race for an office which we have failed to obtain for 16 years in the old way. The Dem faithful is shrinking. Cynical voters have punished the Dems over and over in this race. Democrats are the “only game in town” and the Republicans have no deep bench of candidates, and yet they keep winning the governor’s seat. As I heard Deval put it once, we seem to think running the governor’s seat differently than our Senators and Reps do – a consultant, money, media-driven campaign rather than a person to person one – will work, when over and over it hasn’t. It’s a good lesson for the governor’s race, and it’s a good lesson for our national Dems too!

    But I guess it’s not enough to talk about it. We’ll see in the end if we’re right. If we can defeat Gabrieli against all the conventional wisdom, I hope that lesson is finally absorbed. I just hope that the force of the race with Gabby’s spending spree hasn’t totally exhausted the eventual nominee beyond the pale.

13. bugsy Says:
    June 10th, 2006 at 8:53 am

    I think Gabrieli is just sohwing people that he has a good sense of humor.

    He’s saying it not the money. Money is no object.

    He’s saying he’ll spend what it takes to get his message out.

    Gabrieli is the strongest candidate onthe issues so I expect this means we’ll be voting for him in November.

14. Wow Says:
    June 10th, 2006 at 9:34 am

    Lynne - I don’t understand why you’re so intent on taking personal shots at Gabrieli, twisting the truth so concertedly. He set a CAP, not a TARGET.

    And when Reilly pushed Deval to release his tax returns, in the name of political transparency, Deval supporters said “Oh, he doesn’t have to - the law doesn’t say he has to, so he doesn’t have to” — total political cop-out. But now that the law also allows Gabrieli to set a cap of his choosing, he’s the boogeyman? More Deval-supporter-double-standard.

    So far, all three candidates have been pretty positive, for the most part (Reilly on Ameriquest may be the exception) - but, as far as supporters go, the ONLY divisiveness has come from a small group of Deval supporters, and it’s really disappointing.

    Ultimately, you’re just threatened that your guy won’t win - no different from any political campaign in any race throughout the history of time — and if it wasn’t Gabrieli’s money, you’d find some other area to harp on or complain about because you just want to take shots at his competition.

    So, I ask you Lynne - can’t we just run a positive campaign about ideas and issues? Well?

15. waittilnextyr Says:
    June 10th, 2006 at 10:06 am

    “I think Gabrieli is just sohwing people that he has a good sense of humor.”

    A sense of humor that will go over like a lead balloon with so many people struggling to pay their bills.

16. Mimmsy Says:
    June 10th, 2006 at 1:31 pm

    People, please. Gabrieli is the best candidate because he he has the resources to win the Dem. primary. Period. It’s time for our Beacon Hill neighbor to lead the state worker-bees and “take the helm.” So, put on your best Lilly Pulizer and meet me at the Boston Athenaeum to coordinate this campaign! Remember, members only.

17. bugsy Says:
    June 10th, 2006 at 3:32 pm

    I know this may come as a surprise to some of you, but not everyone is impressed
    by Deval Patrick. He’s a lawyer who made a lot of money working for Republicans.
    I don’t see what’s so special about the guy.

    Gabby may be a wonk, but he understands the business challanges we face and has enough
    of an interest in process to unstuck an otherwise stuck system. To the best of my knowledge
    we don’t have problems that require the services of a civil rights attorney.

    Deval wants to lead parades and make bold pronoucements.

    Plz..haven’t you had enough of this with Romney?

18. Notokay Says:
    June 10th, 2006 at 6:49 pm

    Bugsy, you are so right. Gabrieli is the only Dem I would even consider voting for.

19. D. R. Tucker Says:
    June 10th, 2006 at 9:52 pm

    “I know this may come as a surprise to some of you, but not everyone is impressed
    by Deval Patrick. He’s a lawyer who made a lot of money working for Republicans.
    I don’t see what’s so special about the guy.”

    Bugsy, you can just count the seconds before a Deval
    devotee accuses you of being “cynical.”

20. Renee Says:
    June 11th, 2006 at 4:43 pm

    I heard Patrick on channel 5 this morning, I’m more impressed by the day with him. Even though there are issues I disagree with. Politics is about personality. There was an editorial about Patick in the Boston Herald on the 6th, and the commentary was right on he is Bill Clinton without the sleaze.

    You can have great ideas, but if you aren’t polite and decide to be condecending to the political process and the public I wouldn’t even want you as my nieghbor never mind running the state.

    Gabrielli lacks civility.

21. Lynne Says:
    June 12th, 2006 at 10:49 am

    And when Reilly pushed Deval to release his tax returns, in the name of political transparency, Deval supporters said “Oh, he doesn’t have to - the law doesn’t say he has to, so he doesn’t have to” — total political cop-out.

    Of course, you’re wrong. Patrick said specifically that that information would be available in the candidate disclosure forms that all candidates have to fill out, and he did fill it out - in more detail than he was required to. If you’re going to bitch about something, get the facts straight first.

    OK, so if I work for a Republican and make a decent salary, I’m no longer a good progressive? It doesn’t matter that I actually spend a lot of my personal time on progressive activism? I’m now disqualified? Well, guess most progressives better pack up and go home, because a lot of us work for Republican-owned companies. Just ignore Patrick’s civil rights jobs and his work for the less fortunate. Yeesh, no wonder people hate liberals…they reflexively hate anyone who’s gone and done that unforgivable thing - be successful and make money. It’s never so black and white as that and you should know better. What are we, Bushies??

    Bugsy’s just got a bug up his butt about anyone who disagrees with him about Cape Wind, and I tend to ignore him (and no, I don’t ignore ALL opposition to Cape Wind, just people like him who spread rhetoric around like it’s fact). OMG, if Gabrieli were for Cape Wind too, he’d be screaming that Gabby was a loonie looking to destroy all of the beauty in the world and save the whales and stuff. Whatever.

    Look, when Gabby first got in the race, I was angry about the WAY he got in - insider deals all the way through. However, I talked about how I basically agree with his stances on all the important stuff. Doesn’t make him the best candidate. BTW, he did the poorest of the three gubinertorial speeches at the convention. If he’s that lackluster against Healey, we lose. Healey may be a rich Republican same-old, but she’s not an idiot and she will be able to hold her own. Of course she’ll be pandering to the “moderate” just like all her predecessors. That doesn’t mean she isn’t good at the pandering. If Gabby can’t get more true believers than the handful he’s got, he’s in trouble come November, which means we ALL lose. All the money in the world won’t save him. Healey will easily invoke the “we need balance in the corner office” argument and that’s it, we pack up and go home. I do not think Gabby is the best candidate to go against her. If I did, would I be backing the other guy?

    So the fact he considers the cap his personal joke offends me, because his whole ride into the race has been a joke of one thing or another. The same old insider dealing that the state Democratic party is riddled with, that has disgusted moderates and independent thinkers everywhere in the state. He should have gotten into the race last year like the other two did, or else not at all. But he can’t seem to get past his self-proclaimed savior status to look at the facts on the ground.

    Of COURSE the insiders don’t want Patrick. He doesn’t owe them anything. I think, sometimes, they’d rather see the Democrats eat each other up and use up their money and then LOSE the governer’s race then see Patrick win at all.

22. Susan M. Says:
    June 12th, 2006 at 4:04 pm

    Of COURSE the insiders don’t want Patrick. He doesn’t owe them anything. I think, sometimes, they’d rather see the Democrats eat each other up and use up their money and then LOSE the governer’s race then see Patrick win at all.

    And that’s how we end up with Gabrieli. Reilly is a wash, and the Dem establishment needed someone, anyone except Patrick- who better than the Monopoly Money Bags man?

23. Susan M. Says:
    June 12th, 2006 at 4:05 pm

    Ugh- the first paragraph in my last post should appear as a blockquote - Lynne your blog hates me!

    You NEED a preview button - stat!

Leave a Reply