There’s Utterly Classless…Then, There’s Chris Doherty
Words can’t describe. I really mean it this time. I think images can, though. So here’s a scan of the latest Doherty state Senate direct mail piece. Front and back. Click on them for the full scan in PDF format.
First, the front:
It gets worse. And less classy. The back:
Particularly classy and so very mature is the photoshopped photo on the back of Eileen in a crown. I mean, WTF? And the slogan is like something out of 7th grade. “I know you are, but what am I?”
And once again, of course, Doherty twists facts in order to attack Eileen - modus operandi for his entire campaign.
This whole thing smells of severe desperation - Doherty obviously thinks he’s going to lose next Tuesday and is pushing a gambit that is sure to backfire like Kerry Healey in a parking garage. But one thing is definitely for sure. We now have proof positive that this whole campaign is about Eileen Donoghue, not about Chris Doherty. Taking down Eileen - that’s the only thing that matters here, for those Doherty-Cox supporters. A toaster could have run against Eileen and we would have seen the same campaign.
The manner in which Doherty has conducted his whole campaign is extremely telling. He might be trying to attack her character here - laughably, ridiculously - but it is his poor character that is showing through like a beacon in the night.
By the way, Chris, you should really leave photoshopping comedy to Jon Stewart and his crew. (Added note: who the f wrote the drivel on the back? Jim Campanini? I think Chris should also leave marking writing to real marketing people…)
September 8th, 2010 at 5:41 pm
I can only repeat one caution. Think long and hard on Chris Doherty. As in the classic mystery novels, it is not what someone says but how he or she behaves that reveals the measure of the individual. In a mystery, the murderer is exposed. In life, it is the dimensions of one’s character.
September 8th, 2010 at 5:56 pm
What’s really sad about this crap besides the crass campaign style throughout Mr. Doherty’s efforts to tear down a person rather than run FOR something is that he has introduced lots of UMass Lowell students to the campaign/electoral process and what they’ve seen is the junk-style slash and burn politics that have got this country so screwed up.
The Carl Rove playbook is alive and well in Lowell! If you repeat that someone has doubled their salary at the expense of the public long enough, well I guess it must be true.
This economy is in the toilet - pure and simple. Please tell me how sending a mailing a week before the election with such poor taste makes me think that Chris Doherty has a clue about how to work with other people to get the economy moving again?
How does tearing down a person who has worked very hard for the city of Lowell at numerous levels instill any faith that if he is elected, he knows how to get things done by working with people he might have disagreements with?
How does charicature and ridicule do anything but mimic the totally dysfunctional legislative process we now have in place? The state legislature essentially wasted months debating casinos - a cynical effort at what passed as a jobs debate.
Sadly this campaign all the way around has wasted a precious opportunity to talk to voters about kitchen table issues, the decling higer ed budget, the tremendous toll budget cuts are taking on our schools, the spate of ugly violence across the region.
Its the economy Chris - not stupid cartoons and misleading postcards sent to my house. Please stop!
I ‘m looking for someone who will take a serious stand on behalf of working people and decent jobs. And, I’m still looking as this campaign winds down at the local, state and national levels. Everyone claims they’re for jobs and working people - how so? Tell me - give me some ideas - make me listen to something other than cheap rhetoric.
And, by the way, in our criminal justice system Chris last time I checked everyone had a right to a defense attorney when they need one. I di dnot go to law school so maybe I’ve got this wrong? Fortunately I’ve never needed a defense atty, but if I did would that somehow make my atty a bad person?
And I wonder why my students at UMass Lowell are so disconnected to much of what passes for political debate in this country. Put me in the ‘a pox on all their houses’ column next Tuesday. Ugh - I need a shower.
September 8th, 2010 at 6:19 pm
“…pushing a gambit that is sure to backfire like Kerry Healey in a parking garage.”
Good one, Lynne. Speaking of Kerry Healey by the way, after last night Deval now knows what she went through four years ago and whats in store for him for the next 2 months…
Back to the actual topic, as a registered Republican I can only sit back and enjoy this while deep, down inside of me, PRAY that Donoghue is able to pull it off.
Even though both candidates will never see a tax hile they will not fall in love with, even though both have no problem with illegal immigrants coming here and stealing our money and jobs, and even though both are lawyers, Eileen is a good person who was a damn good mayor and she actually CARES about people, even if I happen to disagree with her.
Ive never heard of Chris Doherty until this race began. And if Eileen happens to win next Tuesday and Doherty disappears forever and ever, there will only be one distant memeory for which he left:
nasty, Nasty, NASTY
September 8th, 2010 at 7:00 pm
This post is too rich … if you don’t think Jim Campanini and the Lowell Sun are basically working for Eileen Donoghue then this blog should be callled “Lit in Lowell”. The Sun, which is basically an arm of the Donoghue campaign, even had to give Doherty some credit on this charge: http://www.lowellsun.com/ci_15793414?IADID
I’m sorry, but as a long time reader of the Lowell Sun, I can attest that the paper has never … ever cast a critical eye towards Donoghue.
What facts are inaccurate?
September 8th, 2010 at 7:47 pm
Well you guys have accused Doherty of running a dirty campaign from the moment he announced his intention to run for this office. So this is more of the same. Big Yawn. Maybe I would not have put a crown on Eileen Donoghue. However, I am one person who is sick and tired of his taxes being spent not based upon what the public needs, but on the basis of which special interests have the closest connection to Beacon Hill. Eileen Donoghue can try to deny and distort the facts if she likes. She can cry dirty campaign all she wants. She can avoid the real issues in this race. However, the facts speak for themselves. Lobbyists are running her campaign. And she knows it. And everybody knows it. As far as “everybody deserves a lawyer”? Yeah, I agree with that too. But when you are an elected official and want to hold yourself out to the voters as a person who has strongly held beliefs (like about illegal immigration, drug dealers) you should hold yourself to a higher standard.( I think Donoghue has even incredibly tried to claim some responsibility for the reduced crime rate in Lowell during a part of her tenure on the City Council- while she was apparently at the same time putting drugs back on our streets). If Eileen Donoghue had refused to handle these cases- guess what? Those defendants still would have had the represention that the constitution guarantees them. And maybe we would have a candidate who could really, with true credibility take a position on the issues of drugs and illegal immigration. Instead, her record on these issues WILL FOLLOW her to the State House. And I, like Doherty, am troubled by that fact. Exactly how much credibility do you think she will have pretending to care so much about keeping drugs off the streets or addressing the very difficult issue of illegal immigration? And most importantly, while Eileen Donoghue spends all her time complaining because somebody (Chris Doherty) is actually calling her on some real substantive issues- she has NO POSITIONS on any of those issues! She has managed to run a campaign without telling the voters a single thing about where she stands or what she will do if elected. The way I see it, the “new negative” in campaigning is making false accusations of dirty campaign tactics and unnecessarily crying victim. The Donoghue campaign has perfected it. All with the help of this blog and the Lowell Sun. Maybe it was about time Doherty strike back.
September 8th, 2010 at 8:04 pm
Lurker:
Campi working for Eileen…Hah, hah, hah. I do admit that there might one or two individuals at the paper that like Eileen but I do not agree that the paper is in her corner.
And if the Sun was so anti-Doherty why does he keep quoting them in his mailings as well as on his web site?
This campaign is not about the paper, it is about leadership and integrity. And Chris has shown that he lacks both allowing himself to be a surrogate for those who at all cost did not want to see Eileen elected. He allowed himself to be used.
September 8th, 2010 at 8:09 pm
Well Professor Forrant, maybe if you’d actually ever been in Chris’ campaign office you would have a better idea of the “junk-style slash and burn politics” that we have been introduced to. Like having Chris sit right next to us and make calls with us to voters so he can get in touch with them personally. Like pointing out the truth about his opponent’s past in a calm and informative way at the Tyngsboro debate while she loses her temper trying to cover up the fact that lobbyists run her campaign (check the expense reports). This is not negative campaigning, nor baseless reputation slashing, its PRESENTING THE TRUTH. I guess since he’s been a prosecutor for the past several years and not a seasoned politician, its his mistake for presenting facts rather than spin.
September 8th, 2010 at 8:10 pm
Doherty runs his campaign like a Republican. (So does Lowell Lurker, running against the media. Why don’t you just tell us she faked her military awards while you’re at it?)
This was a major mistake. People in Lowell like Eileen Donoghue. They know her, they know her record and style, and they respect her as a leader. Look at how she trounced Beloved Lowell Icon Niki Tsongas among Lowellians three years ago - and people really like Niki Tsongas!
It might be possible for Doherty to make the case that he’d be a better legislator than Donoghue, or that he’s better on the issues, or even that he’s more in touch with the concerns and political beliefs of the voters. I don’t know that any of those are true, but I could see someone running an effective campaign like that.
But sending out mailers treating her as an object of scorn is going to turn a lot of people off. This isn’t a U.S. Senate race or presidential campaign, where the candidate on the receiving end of attack ads is just some pol you’ve seen on television. Doherty is mailing these things out to people who know Eileen Donoghue, who’ve seen her at Council meetings and spoken to her at city events.
September 8th, 2010 at 8:14 pm
As far as “everybody deserves a lawyer”? Yeah, I agree with that too. But when you are an elected official and want to hold yourself out to the voters as a person who has strongly held beliefs (like about illegal immigration, drug dealers) you should hold yourself to a higher standard.( I think Donoghue has even incredibly tried to claim some responsibility for the reduced crime rate in Lowell during a part of her tenure on the City Council- while she was apparently at the same time putting drugs back on our streets).
Well, I’m convinced: there’s no way I’m voting for that John Adams guy.
You do realize this a Democratic primary, right? Go peddle that Richard Nixon B.S. to the teabaggers.
September 8th, 2010 at 8:17 pm
I couldn’t agree with jdayne’s posting more!
September 8th, 2010 at 8:29 pm
Observer:
You are giving the Sun and this blog too much credit. Your candidate has tried to redefine Eileen for us. He has failed miserably. We, those of us who live, work and vote in Lowell, know much better than him what she is all about. He showed little or no respect for those voters who have continuously supported her.
We know politics; we know how it works and we do not need Chris Doherty to paint a picture for us. He needs to listen to the electorate a little bit. By the way, please go check out Gerry Nutter’s blog where he connects the dots on the “push poll” and then come back here and talk to us about credibility and character.
September 8th, 2010 at 8:43 pm
UML student - a campaign is more than making some phone calls and knocking somebody down - at least the way I look at the world. And, espically now with the country as polarized as it is and it seems on a razor’s edge to go off the deep end in blue state - red state frenzy, while the suffering caused by foreclosures and joblessness escalates, I expected a lot more from both candidates on how they would represent the region and help reduce the name calling, finger pointing, and continued escape from reality.
I’m glad you are involved and am glad other folks are involved working hard for the candidates of their choice. In this particular race I don’t have a candidate per se, have contributed to neither one, and as I said before I was really looking for positive ideas on how to put folks back to work - earing none I remain agnostic.
Maybe in my old age I’ve gotten more selective in who I will work really hard for, including stuffing envelopes, making phone calls, and holding signs, which I enjoy doing. In fact I’ve been to a couple of debates and read everything I can find to see what both folks have to say and I’m underwhelmed.
I do draw the line and have stopped supporting candidates I once believed in when I feel like the character of the campaign turns into something I can not be proud of and stand with. There is a sort of cringe affect - and photo-shopping a crown on smeone’s head was the cringe affect or gag reflex for me. Maybe that’s too purist - but differences of opinion are indeed part of what make the world go around.
BTW, say hello if we pass in the halls of higher learning!
September 8th, 2010 at 8:44 pm
This is not negative campaigning
You realize we can still see the flier, right? What do you think you’re going to accomplish with this, when we can just roll our scroll wheels a little and see:
A cartoon of Eileen Donoghue as a puppet?
“All for her; none for you?”
A photoshopped picture of her wearing a crown?
Nope, nothing negative there. Highminded stuff about issues and vision. Adlai Stephenson would have been proud.
Chris Doherty runs his campaign like a Republican.
September 8th, 2010 at 8:47 pm
Desperate actions by a flailing candidate.
Chris Doherty is one bad poll away from accusing Eileen of being born in Kenya.
September 8th, 2010 at 8:56 pm
Mimi-
I did read Gerry Nutter’s post. I also found it very funny that you think he should be nominated for some kind of an investigative journalism award. That was a riot! I am amazed that he was able to “connect the dots” around the wide gaping holes in the story. Not the least of which is the fact that the expenditures he claims to be some sort of “evidence” were made in late August. I really think I am missing something in that story. Can anybody enlighten me? Just don’t quite see the amazing “connection of the dots”. Not to mention- does anybody seriously believe that Eileen Donoghue herself (and her husband) got calls from a pollster for Chris Doherty? Names like that are always purged from any kind of polling. Any political novice can tell you that. But Donoghue insisted that she personally got a call. I guess that was the part of this campaign when I started to suspect that the Donoghue campaign was on to a new strategy. And I was right. The new negative.
But yeah, Gerry Nutter deserves some kind of award. After all, he typically gets about 1 out of his every 7 stories right.
September 8th, 2010 at 8:58 pm
Joe- Maybe you should ask Eileen Donoghue what it feels like to actually BE a Republican.
September 8th, 2010 at 8:59 pm
I don’t know Chris Doherty, except by his campaign. That hasn’t shown him in a very good light. The distorted push poll, and his feeble attempts at not only denying responsibility for it, but deceiving Gerry Nutter to carry that message for him, was enough for me.
September 8th, 2010 at 9:12 pm
Observer, I luv ya man, but I really don’t want an amateur voting for me in the Senate. I was on the fence, but I’ll hold my nose and vote for Donoghue. You’re spot on about Nutter, though.
September 8th, 2010 at 9:22 pm
“Observer,” “UML student,” etc. are all Doherty campaign plants if I’ve ever seen one… heck, UML admitted to it.
Love Joe’s comment: “You realize we can still see the flier, right?” lol. That’s an Observer/UML student/etc. FAIL.
I had only lukewarm interest in this race before this flier… now I’m thinking I need to carve out time in my insanely, insanely busy schedule to give Donoghue a few volunteer hours, somewhere, somehow. I’ve never seen such a gross tear-me-down style campaign at the local level. Karl Rove couldn’t have done any better than Chris Doherty… shame, shame, shame, shame, shame on him. A hack if I’ve ever seen one, for sure.
September 8th, 2010 at 9:24 pm
I’m voting for Eileen, but I have to admit that Nutter’s “conclusions” do not really hold a lot of water. Also, that attempt by LSG to promote some 23 year old kid to campaign manager is pretty lame.
But Doherty gives me the creeps. Really. Really. Creepy. This latest stunt just reinforces my opinion of him.
September 8th, 2010 at 9:25 pm
Observer,
You are welcome over on my Blog to comment anytime. Especially if you would like to challenge me, I appreciate a good debate based on facts.
It wasn’t hard to connect the dots and once you see the MAD DOG web site and the expenditures from DOHERTY that wer PAID IN JULY for the JULY POLL - I don’t recall getting any direct mail flyers in July it wasn’t hard to reach the conclusion.
I know it’s a pain when you let facts stand in your way but in this case facts are facts.
This is direct from YOUR CANDIDATES Filing:
7/30/2010 Mad Dog Mail
5542 First Coast Highway Fernandina Beach, FL 32034 Direct Mail $17,864.68
waittilnextyear,Thanks but I am guilty not Chris, he played me because I let him, I assumed things because I wanted to and it was my error. Unlike some I admit I screw up and make mistakes on occasions.
September 8th, 2010 at 9:34 pm
Prince Charming- We are all entitled to our own mistakes! All I can say is that I started really listening to both candidates a long time ago- around the time I began to suspect that this push poll story was a manufactured one. What I learned is that Doherty is far from an amateur. Despite what you read (here and in the Sun), he has been running a campaign talking about the issues all along. To the contrary, I have not heard the Donoghue camp say much at all about the issues. And she seems ill prepared to address them in the debates. She certainly does not look or sound like any polished veteran or anything. I add to that my disagreement with her support of Republican candidates in the past and her close connection to the Lowell Sun. It is obvious the Sun is in the tank for her. After too many years watching the Lowell Sun try to control our elected officials- do we need another one who may be indebted to them. I can’t go along with that.
September 8th, 2010 at 9:34 pm
This is really the pot calling the kettle black. You and Mimi have attacked Doherty and pumped up Eileen and now you are attacking him for telling the truth. This is something I wish Chris said at the campaigns outset. The establishment wants Eileen to win this race to keep the status quo, but the status quo isn’t enough. Chris is a different kind of candidate who isn’t afraid to point out the truth about Eileen. Check your facts Lynne. Everything he says in that ad is the truth. She is backed by lobbyists, she has voted to raise taxes as well as her own salary. I notice that you have blurred out the place where Chris cites where the information is coming from. I’m betting that was intentional. You have gone from being Eileen’s cheerleader to her attack dog. Why doesn’t Eileen let her record speak for herself, why doesn’t she defend it? Because she knows that she doesn’t stand for reform, she stands for the status quo and people in Lowell and other places are tired of it
September 8th, 2010 at 10:35 pm
Wow, how awful. I hold a candidate accountable for what he says and does!
Oh noes!
You know, people, when this race is over I know that you’ll be slinking off and will not continue to be engaged here. That’s how I know that Doherty should not be elected.
Because of his supporters. You’ve done more to prove your candidate is not the best person for the job better than anything I could ever have said when refuting the bull that came dripping out of his campaign.
September 8th, 2010 at 10:48 pm
Tom - “Also, that attempt by LSG to promote some 23 year old kid to campaign manager is pretty lame.”
Are you HIGH?? I know the campaign manager very well from my volunteering, and yes, she is the campaign manager, she is young, and she kicks some serious butt. LSG isn’t running ANYTHING over there.
Good lord…
September 8th, 2010 at 10:49 pm
Also - I love the lobbyist angle against Eileen…Um, JOHN COX is a registered lobbyist, for heaven’s sake! And he’s definitely pulling for Doherty.
I think Doherty really did have his Healey parking garage moment here, according to at least the anecdotal evidence I’ve been gathering.
September 8th, 2010 at 10:56 pm
“You know, people, when this race is over I know that you’ll be slinking off and will not continue to be engaged here. That’s how I know that Doherty should not be elected.”
If Chris wins, will he earn your endorsement, or will you go endorse the Republican. I’m betting if he wins you won’t write as much as you have about this race
September 8th, 2010 at 10:59 pm
Wow, this doherty takes the cake. He ran the campaign like a political hack, yet claimed he will be a breath of fresh air? If thats what he is then please pass the LISTERINE. yukkkk… Come on Eileen we are pulling for you.
September 8th, 2010 at 11:30 pm
I DO NOT EVER endorse Republicans. Get a life, dude. Do you even READ my blog??? Obviously not. Just another temporary shill…
Anyway, it’s not an issue. Short of actual polling which we don’t have, I think I know the score that we’ll be seeing on Tuesday.
And I’ll be working this weekend to see that it happens that way. As should all of you! (Plenty of room at the Donoghue campaign HQ for GOTV, folks!)
September 9th, 2010 at 8:03 am
I find it sad that young people supporting Doherty believe this is campaigning. Low blows, personal attacks, etc are not campaigning. They are what make people hate politicians. Out with the old, and in with the new? Let’s get rid of the status quo? This is the same old!
Doherty may not like Donoghue. He doesn’t have to. Nor do the voters. That’s why this is a democracy. I see no ads proclaiming him Martys puppet, yet I’d be lying if I didn’t say he seems to be.
His “style” of campaigning seems more like a page out of the national enquirer or rumors spread in a high school cafeteria. Pathetic.
September 9th, 2010 at 9:38 am
“I DO NOT EVER endorse Republicans.” Didn’t you endorse Joe Mendonca for City Council? He’s a Republican. And don’t give me that b.s. about the council race being non-partisan. And he voted against the extension of the Manager’s contract because of the length and dollar value (both legit reasons) and the woman you love to hate, Rita Mercier, the Democrat, voted for it.
I had an open mind with regard to both candidates in this race. I contacted the Doherty campaign to get an understanding of his position on a couple of issues important to me. HE WOULD NOT ANSWER ME DIRECTLY AND HONESTLY. He gave me the soft shoe shuffle. That’s when I started to turn.
At the beginning I was going to vote for Doherty to change things up a bit. But honestly, he has made me sick to my stomach. He clumsily dodged the whole poll question. His ads and flyers have been gutter politics and this one tops the cake. I’ve decided I just don’t like him as a person and do not want him representing me. I may just skip voting for anyone in the Democratic primary but if I do color the oval it will be for Eileen.
I have decided I will vote for the Republican in the general election even though I’m a registered Democrat.
September 9th, 2010 at 10:03 am
“And don’t give me that b.s. about the council race being non-partisan”
It isn’t BS and you know it. If he ran for any higher office I would never endorse him. There are plenty of indys and Repubicans that run for Council who were some of the best local pols we’ve had. Because by and large local issues are not about Republican vs Dem values - those policies are largely settled at the state and federal level. The local government basically gets stuck with whatever is decided above their heads - particularly in MA, where a lot of local control is taken away (in some cases for the better, in some cases not).
Dems have voted on the local City Council to be cautious with money on any given issue. Does that make them bad Dems?
But don’t let facts get in the way of a good attack on me…god knows you aren’t the only one.
September 9th, 2010 at 10:22 am
This race makes me sad. Like the swiftboaters made me sad. Like the bush campaign’s attack on John McCain’s adopted daughter made me sad. Doherty is now in that same league from my perspective.
September 9th, 2010 at 10:38 am
I’m having a hard time following these comments … what is Doherty saying that is inaccurate? He’s running against someone who’s been saying one thing and doing another thing for the better part of two decades. She’s against pay raises, but doubled her. She’s a reform candidate, but has hired a lobbying firm to run her past two campaigns, she’s going to bring fiscal discipline to Beacon Hill, but raised property taxes in Lowell, she’s against illegal immigration, but defended a counterfeit green card ring, she’s going to be tough on crime, but has made a conscious career decision to work as a criminal defense lawyer … I could go on, but let’s start with those charges. Is it “gutter politics” to talk about an opponent’s past???? Just because the Sun, this blog and others have given her a lifetime pass on scrutiny, it doesn’t mean that the voters shouldn’t be able to make an informed decision next Tuesday.
September 9th, 2010 at 10:56 am
Wow, I guess we’ll have to explain it to you…again.
You see, when you pull something completely out of its context, in order to use it to attack an opponent, that is called twisting the truth.
Doherty has done this over and over and over. But when you place all of these things back into the context from which they were yanked, they’re actually not controversial. Indeed, most of them make perfect sense - you would have done the same if faced with these decisions.
For instance, the stupid pay raise issue. A canard if I ever saw one. In context, at the time, the Council had not addressed pay in a long, long time and were not at par with their contemporaries in other comparable towns.
However, her being against a pay raise now - in context - makes perfect sense. We’re in a downturn, and constituents are suffering, as are public employees. People are losing jobs. It makes no sense to vote for a pay raise in the legislature, at least until we’re in better shape and the economy rebounds.
But don’t let context get in the way of a good smear!
And the criminal defense lawyering - I can’t even BELIEVE that anyone would possibly use this as an attack. I think being a defense lawyer - a PUBLIC defender at that - is a most laudable thing. Our justice system is about fair trials and fair representation, even if you are indigent. It’s EASY to go to law school and wind up in a prosecutor’s office - very politically acceptable, and easy to launch a political career from it. It is very difficult to choose the hard way, and put yourself in the public defender pool, or go into defense as a practice, because it’s damned thankless job, and later on, when you want to run for higher offices, small minded political opponents will use it to tie you to unsavory characters that you might once have been picked to defend.
I think Eileen’s career as a defender and public defender actually makes her MORE qualified than time in the DA’s office. She has seen what is it like out there for people who are down and out, and tried to make sure they had a fair shake in the system. Being “hard on crime” is easy - actually doing the hard work of the justice system, THAT is the hard thing.
It is gutter politics to take everything about your opponent so far out of context that basically, should people find out the context, they’re like, WTF? Doherty has given us a lot of WTF moments in this campaign.
As Mill Girl says, it’s very sad.
September 9th, 2010 at 11:06 am
Ok Lynne … I agree that being a PUBLIC DEFENDER and helping INDIGENT defendants is a laudable thing. Are you sure that’s what she’s been doing? If so, I stand corrected.
In terms of the pay raise, I’m going to continue to respectfully disagree with you. Do you think qualified candidates weren’t running for office because the job paid $7500 instead of $15000 a year? It’s called public service for a reason. It’s not a full time job for most councilors. It’s a privilege to serve. And, I can’t get in Eileen’s head like you can … so, when it comes to voting on pay raises in the future, I look to her public record. Call me crazy, but that’s how me and a few other people make our best judgement on what’s going to happen in the future.
While we obviously have come to different conclusions on this race, let me also add that I appreciate the role your website is playing. The posts sometimes get a little heated and perhaps once or twice out of line, but generally I enjoy reading the back and forth. I think it’s a good sign that so many people are weighing in on this campaign and other issues on LIL.
September 9th, 2010 at 11:32 am
Yes, that is the stuff Doherty is pulling out to attack her with, regarding defending less than seemingly savory characters. I know of at least one of the attacks being about a person she defended while part of the public defenders pool. Only a sleazy candidate would attack someone for practically giving away their time in public defense.
$15,000/year is not even part time pay for most people - except really unskilled laborers. Yes, I think people might make the decision they cannot afford to run for office because they’d have to reduce time at a regular job to do it. Only people of means, or people like Patrick Murphy (still don’t know how he does it) willing to sacrifice a LOT can just do it for little to no pay.
Certainly, that’d be one reason *I* wouldn’t run - I have a business to run, and time away from it would cost me money, for constituent services or attending meetings for various groups in the city or dealing with other city business (plus meetings, plus subcommittees).
It might be a privilege to serve, but if only the privilege CAN serve, then you might as well not bother to call it democracy.
And anyone who thinks she’d so boldly state no pay raises until things get better for the state, then would turn around and vote otherwise, is so cynical i wonder that they ever think anything positive about anyone at all?
September 9th, 2010 at 11:57 am
What is the “public defenders pool”? I thought you said that she was a Public Defender. Is that the same thing? Is she volunteering her time? Are you saying that she never defended an alleged criminal through her private practice on retainer? Would that make a difference? What about people accused of crimes that have a direct impact on Lowell, like drug traffickers?
I thought some/most of the City Councilors had day jobs. Are there millionaires serving on the Council? I know Donoghue spent nearly $500K of her own money in the Congressional race, so I’m guessing that she’s wealthy. The current mayor is a VP at a credit union, and some other professions include small business owner, EPA official, law firm partner and software engineer. Those sound like full time, good paying jobs to me.
In terms of future pay raises, are you saying that she would vote for pay raises but not “until things get better for the state”? I must be reading that wrong.
September 9th, 2010 at 2:04 pm
Whatever registry it is that you as a lawyer put yourself on and get called upon to do public defending for indigent clients. I called it a pool out of a lack of an official designation. Yeesh!
I have followed up now about that whole issue - all ***8*** of the cases Doherty is attacking her for having defended in the last 30 years were from public defender situations where she was appointed someone’s attorney! Unbelievable. More sleazy than even I thought.
And even if it were on retainer (none of the cases Doherty has brought up were) - so, people who can afford to pay for defense don’t deserve it?? Or the lawyers who get hired to do so are somehow less worthy than prosecutors?? Okaaay.
So you think it’s OK to pay people $7000 a year for governing the city? I would get paid that much for teaching a single class a semester at UML. Somehow, I think they work at least that hard but given the outside time they put in, more than that generally. (And adjuncts are severely underpaid.)
I know that being a city councilor does suck up some time. A LOT of CC’s are self employed - their own practices, businesses and such. This allows for a flexible schedule, but it certainly can mean “less than full time” so don’t assume they are working full time. It can be done, but at that point you are literally eating into the time you would spend with your family. There’s sacrifice for being an elected official, so to pretend that it’s its own reward to be a city councilor.
Now, granted, there are some legislators on Beacon Hill who retain their businesses or positions when elected, and it might be the case that they might be too well compensated, but honestly, I don’t want to live in NH, thank you very much. NH pays crap, and it shows.
September 9th, 2010 at 3:12 pm
If we have learned anything from this race, let it be that Lowell likes candidates who run FOR something, not against someone. I realize that on the national level, when your polling numbers drop you go negative but in this small town? I honestly feel that Eileen has an image problem, she sits atop the hill on the divan gazing down upon the rest of us. She has not used her everyman’s(women’s) background to her benefit. Pols have to realize that they’re playing to the “regular guy” who doesn’t give a fiddler’s fart about lobbyists. Nor does he care about how much money’s been raised from outside the district. It’s about delivering money to his pocket, via jobs and services. I, too was ready to vote for Doherty, but his ads are too amateur. I don’t want someone in the Senate who’s not going to be able to find his way back to the chamber from the bathroom.
September 9th, 2010 at 3:36 pm
The orchestrated chorus of Doherty backers implausibly accusing Donoghue of negative campaigning is pretty strong evidence that the Doherty campaign realizes they stepped in it, and are getting hammered by the backlash.
This was a huge mistake. I voted against Niki Tsongas, Jamie Eldridge, and Patrick Murphy in the Congressional special election (because I supported Eileen), but I came out of that race with a great deal of respect for all of them. I was happy to pull the level for Niki in the general election, I was thrilled with Eldridge was bumped up the Senate, and I was dancing and Irish jig when I saw that Murphy was running for the Council. I’d vote for any of those candidates in a heartbeat.
I can’t say the same thing about Doherty.
September 9th, 2010 at 4:03 pm
If you don’t pay a decent stipend for a job that requires considerable time, only the already-rich can afford to do it.
September 9th, 2010 at 5:01 pm
Good point about the MA-05 race. I say it all the time…that was a classy, issues-driven, grassroots-heavy, hard-working Dem primary and the candidates were all very respectful. Any attacks were all about issues and disagreements about such.
joe - where are you seeing Doherty backers accusing Donoghue of negative campaigning? Just curious.
September 10th, 2010 at 3:34 am
Well, let’s face it folks…how many real-life saints do you know? These are human beings seeking a seat in the state senate, no more and no less. These are not demigods, and the truth is Donoghue and Doherty are two people balancing their desire for a high office with wanting to do decent things for ordinary people. More often than not one wins out over the other.
I’ve seen both candidates discuss the issues in fairly intimate settings amongst small groups of people. Out of the two, I believe that Doherty is the more sincere candidate and cares more about solving the pressing issues of the day. He has concrete points for economic development he wants to pursue if elected, and I think keeping lobbyists from running your campaign in order to maintain something even resembling integrity is a no-brainer. Eileen really blew it for me on that one.
I care about the economy. Donoghue’s relationships with lobbying firms and the corporate class deeply trouble me: who do you think got us into this economic situation anyway? Taking them on with the experience of somebody who put serious lawbreakers behind bars seems like an appropriate response this time around. Chris is the only candidate I’ve heard who has seriously addressed the financial bailout and the padding of the elite in our society recieved from politicians in power who got too cozy to them.
September 10th, 2010 at 7:29 am
Anon wrote “Chris is the only candidate I’ve heard who has seriously addressed the financial bailout and the padding of the elite in our society recieved (sic) from politicians in power who got too cozy to them.”
Are you implying that Chris does not have any connections to “politicians [who are or were] in power who got too cozy to them [power elite]?
September 10th, 2010 at 12:57 pm
“relationships with lobbying firms and the corporate class”
What relationships?? She hired a PR guy to do some PR. Oh noes!!!!
Lobbyists have nothing to do with where she stands on issues. Believe me.
BTW if lobbyists are so so so bad, then explain to me exactly how Doherty is a saintly person given how much backing behind the scenes he has from REGISTERED LOBBYIST John Cox?
September 11th, 2010 at 12:08 am
Well if you bothered reading anything other than the biased brainfarts you expell from your fingertips, you’d know I DID NOT claim that Chris Doherty is a saint. That’s first and foremost. I said they were both human beings making an effort to represent the people of the 1st Middlesex (even though one candidate seems to be working harder and is far less self-entitled than the other).
Also, did your girl Donoghue wear the red jacket so she wouldn’t look quite so flustered for the Lowell Sun debate earlier today? I swear every time she’s hit with reality she loses it big time.
The people who run this blog act as if they were put on planet Earth to tear down Chris Doherty. He could create the cure for HIV/AIDS and you’d find a way to criticize him for it. You’ve been in the tank for Donoghue from day one. You’re no more than an attack dog let off the leash. Only you’re a chihuahua, so it’s less of a bark and more like insignificant, incessant yammering that NEVER SEEMS TO STOP.
If I didn’t know any better I’d think that you’re a paid political operative at Eileen’s beck and call.
September 11th, 2010 at 7:36 am
Nope! I just really really hate dishonest politicking.
That is the ONLY reason I keep hammering on Doherty. I would be doing it even if I hadn’t endorsed Donoghue (actually, it would have driven me to endorse Donoghue).
And you can see from comments I am not the only one. Many of the people who are not happy with the Doherty campaign are long time commenters with their own history of comments and their own credibility, while the Doherty folks coming on here are the ones who are brand spanking new and therefore, without much credibility. You can cry all you want, but your candidate’s record running his campaign stands for itself. Dirty tricks show. I said it early the campaign - if you want to go negative, expect that it could easily backfire upon you. I do really so hate being right.
Also, pick a better nickname than “Anon” - that is, if you even plan on ever commenting again (since the level of drive bys are so high right now, I can’t assume that). People who don’t pick a nickname will be deleted. It gets too confusing for those of us who actually post frequently here or read the blog regularly.
September 11th, 2010 at 9:19 am
If you’re a new commenter you lack credibility ? I’d like to hear the pretzel logic it would take to explain that.
September 11th, 2010 at 9:45 am
That’s easy, credibility is something that is established not assumed. You may be credible and new, but you can’t assume everyone will take you as a credible source without more context and information. For commenters on a blog that usually means a history or at least some decent citing and evidence in the comment if there isn’t a history.
It’s like respect - earned, not assumed.
September 11th, 2010 at 10:14 am
And I thought pretzel making was only your hobby !
September 11th, 2010 at 10:28 pm
This would be particularly true for people who post without anyone knowing who they really are (anonymously), which is most commenters.
I could go on a blog, call myself “Mayberry Maeve,” and say whatever I want. No one will pay me heed if I try to assert something that isn’t obviously or necessarily true - like the Mayor of Mayberry is making ethically questionable decisions about the use of Barney Fife’s time when he’s on the clock.
If this is not an already-known fact, and it comes out of the blue from a new anonymous commenter making accusations, you’re not going to believe that person necessarily.
Whereas, if I have been commenting for a long time on said blog as the same nickname, have said things that have been proven to be true over time, when I assert the same thing, people might actually pay it heed.
September 13th, 2010 at 10:04 am
joe - where are you seeing Doherty backers accusing Donoghue of negative campaigning? Just curious.
Your comment threads, for one.