Left In Lowell

Thursday Open Thread

8 Responses to “Thursday Open Thread”

1. K-R-S Says:
   September 14th, 2006 at 8:37 am

   So who were the winners & losers of last nights debate? Any thoughts?

2. Mr. Lynne Says:
   September 14th, 2006 at 10:43 am

   I don’t understand alot of what I’m reading from pundits\. My take is:

   Reilly: C
   Patrick B
   Gabrielli C+

   Overall, I don’t think it changes anyone’s mind, but it might be good for Gabrielli for those who haven’t been paying attention until now.

3. waittilnextyr Says:
   September 14th, 2006 at 2:09 pm

   Reilly certainly improved over last time, although he had a lot of room for improvement. I think he made some points with his stated prior position on Bulger’s appointment to UMASS and his extra pension benefit. I’d grade him B- for this round.

   Patrick did well, especially when he listed several ignored needs for State investment, but I was disappointed with his choice of question (why are you going negative?) to the other candidates when he was offered the opportunity. I’d grade him B.

   Gabrieli may have been the loser in this debate. First of all, when Reilly and Patrick accepted the sponsors’ offer of a small platform to partially compensate for the height difference, Gabrieli insisted he get one also, so they all were raised and inch and a half. Secondly, he used that height to apparently read from Patrick’s notes during the debate, an indiscretion not lost on many in the audience. Finally, when responding to the question on whether he would try to increased the 15% premium share for health insurance for State workers, he basically said “no”, but said he thought maybe municipal workers should pay a higher share. At least that was my impression, but if so, I would expect he shot himself in the foot if that was noticed. I’d give him a C.

   I expect that Reilly’s improved performance may give him some legs, and therefore take those votes off the table for the others, something that Gabrieli would need if he has any chance.

4. waittilnextyr Says:
   September 14th, 2006 at 2:18 pm

   If we dare peak ahead:

   Isn’t the Republican recipe for Governorship based on “balance in the State house” a little stale after 16 years? After all, it seems to be an excuse for things not accomplished. It’s time to turn that strategy inside out!

   Hasn’t Romney’s tax policy resulted in weakened municipal finances and decaying State infrastructure? Do we really need to continue down that worn-out path?

   Does anybody suspect that the recent rundown in gasoline prices is the oil companies’ contribution to the Republican National Committee? They can always re-institute their windfall profits after November.

5. Renee Says:
   September 14th, 2006 at 2:49 pm

   Something bugged me today. I ususally don’t mind participating in polls, even the pre-recording type. But I just participated in one in which they didn’t ID themselves. Not that I would lie about my opinion, but I would like to know who is asking.

6. I81U812 Says:
   September 14th, 2006 at 5:50 pm

   I saw a Tv ad today from Healey telling people NOT to vote for Patrick. Let’s think about that for a second. It really caught my eye. Initially I thought “Why would a Republican pay good money to run an ad against someone she’s not even running against?” The plot thickens. Ask yourself that question. I came up with two answers: Reverse psychology (she thinks she can beat him) or:She’s really afraid of Gabrielli. Healey vs Gabrieli could be one of the best tapdances since Sammy Davis Jr died. She lets people believe she’s Irish-Catholic (she’s not) and he lets people think he’s Italian (ditto). Clash of the Phonies.

7. Lynne Says:
   September 14th, 2006 at 6:03 pm

   So you missed the attack ad against Gabrieli then? The one that accuses him of a business conflict-of-interest with regards to his stem cell push?

8. waittilnextyr Says:
   September 16th, 2006 at 7:12 pm

   In a comment above, I noted I was a bit disappointed that Patrick used his question to complain about attaack ads. I think it was generally accepted as a bit of whining, and he could have initiated a discussion more favorable to him.

   But, as the days have passed, and the attack ads have grown more fierce, he may have made a political coup by distancing himself from the mud-slingers. With so many charges being thrown about, he who stays cleanest in this fight may pick up some additional votes.

   So, not such a bad question after all.

Leave a Reply