The Mom's for Tom's video, shown below, speaks to the Congressional Record of Richard Neal, and like the previous videos, includes personal testimonials for Tom Wesley from women who are from all backgrounds, political and socio economical. To learn more about Tara Kozubfounder, read her take on feminism and women's roles here .
Saturday, October 30, 2010
Personal Attack Ads - Half-Truths, Lies and Politicians – Nothing New – Neither is Political Party Infighting Analysis
An interesting video shown below, entitled “Attack Ads – Circ 1800”, is a well-done short on the reality of American Politics – otherwise known as name-calling. In goes towards the character of the American Politician desperately trying to hold or gain power by swaying the electorate, casting aspersions on the competition. The difference, however, between 1800 and 2010 is the delivery of the “advertising” against an adversary. The pamphlets employed and reports of the same, took weeks, to wend their way to the voting populace, while today’s ads take seconds to reach an audience be it television or radio.
In the Massachusetts Gubernatorial Race, both Deval Patrick and PACS supporting Patrick have released ads charging Republican Charlie Baker with a host of abuses; the Baker Team (and subsequent PAC’s) has, in turn, released counter ads. The difference today – sound bites that allow those to take a portion of audio or video and attach that to an accusation.
How effective are attack ads, especially in Massachustts? Not very, when one considers the January 19th special election between Martha Coakley and Scott Brown. Coakley, who decided late in the election that her opponent might actually have some traction, ran one negative ad after the other, eventually disenfranchising the electorate, and wining the day for Brown (who did not run any personal attack ads, rather focused on what he would do if elected).
It is the ability of the American Public to see only so many attack ads, even if they are a member of that political party, before they become disenfranchised, and depressed; to the point of staying home on Election Day. It appears that overall, the more negative an advertisement becomes and the more personal, the general public starts to take a hard look at the opposition, as those types of ads smack of desperation.
Case in point, the attack ads on Christine O’Donnell who is running for the Delaware Senate became so vicious, that polls are now showing her closing in on her Democrat opponent. Although attack ads are nothing new, the delivery and sheer volume of messages is definitely increased, causing what one might term “voter angst” or perhaps more to the point “voter backlash”.
Incidentally, as this particular election of 2010 has Democrats fighting one another, and or attempting to distance themselves from certain high profile leaders, in an attempt to save their “jobs”, and ensure that the people re-hire them for yet another term, has caused much speculation that there is a division in the ranks of the Democrats. Not unlike political ads, political infighting is not a new phenomenon. From Google: a link here gives the reader insight into the political maneuverings and infighting of the Democrats in the May 24, 1899 edition of the newspaper, the Robinson Constitution. It is an interesting read from the perspective of then union organizers, who felt that Jefferson was getting a bad rap, and further speaks to the ability of the unions to organize and get out the vote.
It should be noted, that today, speaking of a Senator or Congressional Representative, or Governors actual voting record, is seen by that members political party as an “attack” – unfortunately, those in 2010 who voted for unpopular programs, such as the Health Care Reform Package, Stimulus, and Cap and Trade, should, instead of crying foul, man (or woman)up to the fact that they did indeed support those bills, voted them through against the wishes of their constituents and then stand by them.
Instead, they release ads that are not new, in fact, they are recycled every time the Democrats find themselves in the hot seat – making ridiculous claims that Republicans will take away some poor grandmothers (or grandfathers) social security. The problem with this claim, this year, is that seniors know they have had no increases or cost of living raises for the past two years, while the Congress was controlled by, the Democrats. When one has only oneself to blame, one is somewhat behind the proverbial eight ball – so, stretching the truth, and calling names, becomes the norm - the public however, understands transparency. With that said, crying wolf one time too many, may be setting up those who are going to be going out on the campaign trail for the next round (2012), and therefore, it may behoove all politicians and those who want to server our nation, to speak about what they might do, if elected, in contrast to their opponent, without going for the juggler. That would be refreshing – perhaps Senator Scott Brown’s ads should be studied – they were not the sole reason he was elected, rather played a small part, but it was the decency in his advertising that factored into the equation.
Fortuntaly, so far (there is still time however), not one political ad released in 2010 charges that should an opponnet be elected, one's house will be burnt to the ground.
In the Massachusetts Gubernatorial Race, both Deval Patrick and PACS supporting Patrick have released ads charging Republican Charlie Baker with a host of abuses; the Baker Team (and subsequent PAC’s) has, in turn, released counter ads. The difference today – sound bites that allow those to take a portion of audio or video and attach that to an accusation.
How effective are attack ads, especially in Massachustts? Not very, when one considers the January 19th special election between Martha Coakley and Scott Brown. Coakley, who decided late in the election that her opponent might actually have some traction, ran one negative ad after the other, eventually disenfranchising the electorate, and wining the day for Brown (who did not run any personal attack ads, rather focused on what he would do if elected).
It is the ability of the American Public to see only so many attack ads, even if they are a member of that political party, before they become disenfranchised, and depressed; to the point of staying home on Election Day. It appears that overall, the more negative an advertisement becomes and the more personal, the general public starts to take a hard look at the opposition, as those types of ads smack of desperation.
Case in point, the attack ads on Christine O’Donnell who is running for the Delaware Senate became so vicious, that polls are now showing her closing in on her Democrat opponent. Although attack ads are nothing new, the delivery and sheer volume of messages is definitely increased, causing what one might term “voter angst” or perhaps more to the point “voter backlash”.
Incidentally, as this particular election of 2010 has Democrats fighting one another, and or attempting to distance themselves from certain high profile leaders, in an attempt to save their “jobs”, and ensure that the people re-hire them for yet another term, has caused much speculation that there is a division in the ranks of the Democrats. Not unlike political ads, political infighting is not a new phenomenon. From Google: a link here gives the reader insight into the political maneuverings and infighting of the Democrats in the May 24, 1899 edition of the newspaper, the Robinson Constitution. It is an interesting read from the perspective of then union organizers, who felt that Jefferson was getting a bad rap, and further speaks to the ability of the unions to organize and get out the vote.
It should be noted, that today, speaking of a Senator or Congressional Representative, or Governors actual voting record, is seen by that members political party as an “attack” – unfortunately, those in 2010 who voted for unpopular programs, such as the Health Care Reform Package, Stimulus, and Cap and Trade, should, instead of crying foul, man (or woman)up to the fact that they did indeed support those bills, voted them through against the wishes of their constituents and then stand by them.
Instead, they release ads that are not new, in fact, they are recycled every time the Democrats find themselves in the hot seat – making ridiculous claims that Republicans will take away some poor grandmothers (or grandfathers) social security. The problem with this claim, this year, is that seniors know they have had no increases or cost of living raises for the past two years, while the Congress was controlled by, the Democrats. When one has only oneself to blame, one is somewhat behind the proverbial eight ball – so, stretching the truth, and calling names, becomes the norm - the public however, understands transparency. With that said, crying wolf one time too many, may be setting up those who are going to be going out on the campaign trail for the next round (2012), and therefore, it may behoove all politicians and those who want to server our nation, to speak about what they might do, if elected, in contrast to their opponent, without going for the juggler. That would be refreshing – perhaps Senator Scott Brown’s ads should be studied – they were not the sole reason he was elected, rather played a small part, but it was the decency in his advertising that factored into the equation.
Fortuntaly, so far (there is still time however), not one political ad released in 2010 charges that should an opponnet be elected, one's house will be burnt to the ground.
Friday, October 29, 2010
MA2 2010 Update – Polling on the Neal Wesley Race – Contradictions
In a recent video clip on Springfield, MA CBS3, regarding a surge in GOP registration in Massachusetts among Democrats, Congressman Richard Neal, when asked about polls, stated: “I’ve never succumbed to the temptation to interpret polling data until the day after the election”. That, in response to the suggestion that polling data “across the country” favored a GOP upset.
The question of polling by either campaign in the MA2 however appears to be somewhat of a mystery. The New York Times website, considers the MA2 race, “Solid Democrat” based on what the Times lead-in on each of the nations House races, states is “polling, expert forecasts, fundraising, past election returns and other indicators,” in order to predict the outcome of each race. It is more than likely that this race has been rated, like all nine of the Massachusetts house races, by “past election returns”).
In response to an inquiry from this blog after the September 14th primary regarding contacts from sources indicating an internal poll suggested that the Neal campaign was in serious trouble, both the Wesley campaign and Neal campaign denied any internal polling was taking place. However, an article found in the Worcester Telegram (which “heartily” endorsed Tom Wesley for the MA2 Congressional Seat” noted: “Mr. Neal, who said a poll taken months ago indicated he was doing fine, once again said he doesn't discuss campaign strategy.”
Contacted once again October 27th, by the same source, this blog was given the following alleged results from the Neal internal:
On Mr. Neal’s performance, based on likely voters (unenrolled only) approval:
Hampden County: 24% Worcester County: 23%
Additionally, it was implied that the results were consonant with the inclination to vote for Congressman Neal in the upcoming election. The sample of voters was not released, but again indicated it was consistent with other polls with 500 participants, and a margin of error of plus/minus 5%. The individual noted that they were concerned about releasing the marginal’s out of fear of losing their position with the firm.
Understanding that one might be inclined to take this information with a grain of salt, (with the calls coming from outside of the district) the remark regarding polling from the 22 year incumbent, Neal, when pressed on the fact that “hundreds if not thousands” of Democrats were switching party affiliation in the district, by CBS3 (see video with this link) appeared less confident than the earlier remark to the Telegram.
On the current state of the race, noting again, that no internal polling had taken place: Tim Bonin, Wesley Campaign Manager noted: "We feel confident that the moment is right for sending a former Navy pilot and career citizen to Congress."
If the source is legitimate, then the outcome of the MA2Congressional race would be interestingly enough, consistent with the outcome of the percentages projected by the New York Times, however, the projected winner of the race would be reversed.
An extreme note of caution is in order, specifically because when races are hotly contested, one has to be leary of sources that may intend to make the opposition feel “too comfortable” (goes to conacting a conservative blog that has an obvious interest in the race)- that said, going into the final days of the election, one can rest assured that neither campaign will be taking anything for granted.
On campaign “get out the vote” efforts: What is surprising is that Neal, who has significant cash on hand in order to blanket the district with advertising, ran television advertising in the Eastern Portion of the district only, and radio only in the Western portion. He has primarily kept a low profile, agreeing only to two debates: one on Public Television (lowest ranked in the market), and a “pay to attend debate in the Eastern Portion of the district, held at the Milford Chamber of Commerce. As far as focus, Neal has stayed steady on the issues of Social Security and monies he has brought into the district (pork) for the entire length of the campaign. In the advertising spots, he notes he’s running for Congress, but does not allude to any competition, which alerts the viewer or listener to the fact that someone is, indeed running against Neal, at which point the individual turns to Google. Ironically, Neal is, in effect, advertising for the Wesley campaign. Additionally, Neal’s campaign, late start on advertising and rallying the “troops” is reminiscent of the manner employed by the Coakley campaign, sans the overtly negative advertising. The late start and the almost “taking the district for granted” effort, that validates the comparison.
Alternately the Wesley campaign has, to date, run a grassroots campaign, focusing on both the east and west sections of the district. Advertising has been in the form of direct mail, literature drops to all registered voters in the district (regardless of party), phone banking, and standouts. The media, with the exception of the Western district Press, has highlighted the race going into the last few weeks of the campaign. With the NBC affiliate holding a debate with Wesley and Neal, one which Neal declined to attend. Unconfirmed, that the Wesley campaign will also be doing radio and or television advertising in the final days leading up to the election. The focus of the Wesley campaign has been on job growth, homeland security, education and health care reform (the repeal and restructuring of the current legislation)
The outcome will, of course, boil down to which campaign has the best get out the vote effort and ground game, and if those unenrolled do break for Wesley by 76%, (with Republicans and Democrats both voting at 100% for Wesley and Neal respectively - generous) then using voter registration statistics from 2008, minus projected turnout of 30%, The vote would (conservatively) break as follows:
Independents......65224......49570......15654
Republicans........16227......16227.......0
Democrats..........45950...................45950
Total.................127401.......65797......61604
......................................Wesley........ Neal
Note: This is conjecture only, it is imperative that anyone who has an interest in the race, and in a particular candidate to get out and vote on Nov. 2.
The question of polling by either campaign in the MA2 however appears to be somewhat of a mystery. The New York Times website, considers the MA2 race, “Solid Democrat” based on what the Times lead-in on each of the nations House races, states is “polling, expert forecasts, fundraising, past election returns and other indicators,” in order to predict the outcome of each race. It is more than likely that this race has been rated, like all nine of the Massachusetts house races, by “past election returns”).
In response to an inquiry from this blog after the September 14th primary regarding contacts from sources indicating an internal poll suggested that the Neal campaign was in serious trouble, both the Wesley campaign and Neal campaign denied any internal polling was taking place. However, an article found in the Worcester Telegram (which “heartily” endorsed Tom Wesley for the MA2 Congressional Seat” noted: “Mr. Neal, who said a poll taken months ago indicated he was doing fine, once again said he doesn't discuss campaign strategy.”
Contacted once again October 27th, by the same source, this blog was given the following alleged results from the Neal internal:
On Mr. Neal’s performance, based on likely voters (unenrolled only) approval:
Hampden County: 24% Worcester County: 23%
Additionally, it was implied that the results were consonant with the inclination to vote for Congressman Neal in the upcoming election. The sample of voters was not released, but again indicated it was consistent with other polls with 500 participants, and a margin of error of plus/minus 5%. The individual noted that they were concerned about releasing the marginal’s out of fear of losing their position with the firm.
Understanding that one might be inclined to take this information with a grain of salt, (with the calls coming from outside of the district) the remark regarding polling from the 22 year incumbent, Neal, when pressed on the fact that “hundreds if not thousands” of Democrats were switching party affiliation in the district, by CBS3 (see video with this link) appeared less confident than the earlier remark to the Telegram.
On the current state of the race, noting again, that no internal polling had taken place: Tim Bonin, Wesley Campaign Manager noted: "We feel confident that the moment is right for sending a former Navy pilot and career citizen to Congress."
If the source is legitimate, then the outcome of the MA2Congressional race would be interestingly enough, consistent with the outcome of the percentages projected by the New York Times, however, the projected winner of the race would be reversed.
An extreme note of caution is in order, specifically because when races are hotly contested, one has to be leary of sources that may intend to make the opposition feel “too comfortable” (goes to conacting a conservative blog that has an obvious interest in the race)- that said, going into the final days of the election, one can rest assured that neither campaign will be taking anything for granted.
On campaign “get out the vote” efforts: What is surprising is that Neal, who has significant cash on hand in order to blanket the district with advertising, ran television advertising in the Eastern Portion of the district only, and radio only in the Western portion. He has primarily kept a low profile, agreeing only to two debates: one on Public Television (lowest ranked in the market), and a “pay to attend debate in the Eastern Portion of the district, held at the Milford Chamber of Commerce. As far as focus, Neal has stayed steady on the issues of Social Security and monies he has brought into the district (pork) for the entire length of the campaign. In the advertising spots, he notes he’s running for Congress, but does not allude to any competition, which alerts the viewer or listener to the fact that someone is, indeed running against Neal, at which point the individual turns to Google. Ironically, Neal is, in effect, advertising for the Wesley campaign. Additionally, Neal’s campaign, late start on advertising and rallying the “troops” is reminiscent of the manner employed by the Coakley campaign, sans the overtly negative advertising. The late start and the almost “taking the district for granted” effort, that validates the comparison.
Alternately the Wesley campaign has, to date, run a grassroots campaign, focusing on both the east and west sections of the district. Advertising has been in the form of direct mail, literature drops to all registered voters in the district (regardless of party), phone banking, and standouts. The media, with the exception of the Western district Press, has highlighted the race going into the last few weeks of the campaign. With the NBC affiliate holding a debate with Wesley and Neal, one which Neal declined to attend. Unconfirmed, that the Wesley campaign will also be doing radio and or television advertising in the final days leading up to the election. The focus of the Wesley campaign has been on job growth, homeland security, education and health care reform (the repeal and restructuring of the current legislation)
The outcome will, of course, boil down to which campaign has the best get out the vote effort and ground game, and if those unenrolled do break for Wesley by 76%, (with Republicans and Democrats both voting at 100% for Wesley and Neal respectively - generous) then using voter registration statistics from 2008, minus projected turnout of 30%, The vote would (conservatively) break as follows:
Independents......65224......49570......15654
Republicans........16227......16227.......0
Democrats..........45950...................45950
Total.................127401.......65797......61604
......................................Wesley........ Neal
Note: This is conjecture only, it is imperative that anyone who has an interest in the race, and in a particular candidate to get out and vote on Nov. 2.
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Massachusetts – Democrats Switching Ballots to Republicans in “Surge” of Thousands Finals Days Prior to Election
Tom Wesley, a man "For and of the People" Running for Congress Against Richard Neal, and getting a helping hand from "thousands" of Democrats in the District! image Politics2010
A report from news from Channel 3, CBS News Springfield, MA, last evening began by speaking about a surge in voter registration changes and early data suggesting that Republican gains in Massachusetts suggest that change from the Bay State did not end with Scott Brown’s victory in November. From"CBS3’s, (WHFS, Springfield, MA), Matthew Campbell:
“Republicans have been surging. Riding a wave of voter frustration into the November elections, they hope to take key seats in the state and elsewhere.
So far, early numbers suggest they have a very good shot. Springfield's Election Office reported that they've seen hundreds (video below notes “if not thousands”), switch their registration from Democrat to Republican this year. Speaking with Secretary of State William Galvin, he echoes the same results from around the state.”
Both the video (below) and web version of the report began with the sign for a Democrat rally, put up on the Springfield City Hall then taken down as citizens complained about the legality of a Democrat rally banner placed on City property days prior to the event. In interviewing Governor Deval Patrick and MA2 Congressman, Richard Neal, both looked somewhat uneasy at the suggestion that change may occur on November 2nd in Massachusetts.
The shift in the party registration has been evidenced at rally’s in recent days for Neal Challenger, Republican Tom Wesley, who is dubbed as a “career citizen” in reference to his run against Congressman Neal, who was first an aid to George McGovern, then Mayor of the City of Springfield, then a State Legislator, prior to moving on to the Congress in the 1988. Neal has held that position, unchallenged, since that time, and has a record in the past two sessions of voting lockstep with Democrat Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, 98% of the time. Those attending the Wesley events have left the Democrat Party, and are working with vigor for Wesley – the biggest reason for the switch and the surge in voters (internal polls have incumbents breaking for Wesley 70/30 in the district) is the fact that Brown was sent by the people as a message, and that the message was ignored by Congress. This change in party is occurring in the rank and file as well as with elected officials. Recently, a member of the Springfield City Council, Timothy Rooke, switched parties and endorsed Republican Charlie Baker for Governor.
Additionally, in an article released by the Worcester Telegram and Gazette, on October 26th, talks about Neal having a large “war chest” from Special Interest Groups” and interestingly, Neal’s campaign manager, notes that the only polling done was at the behest of the Neal Campaign, and that Neal was doing well. This statement contradicts one made earlier on said polling. When queried by this blog regarding leaks from the campaigns polling firm suggesting Neal was showing dismal numbers in the district, it was said that there simply was no polling taking place.
Although playing “devil’s advocate”, the campaign have done a second round of polls, however, one would hazard to guess, results would be the same. Additionally, these media reports of heavy campaign war chests by Special Interest Groups coupled with the constant articles from all Bay State media about the monies brought into the district and state by both Neal and Patrick are having unintended consequences. They are firming the commitment of the general public to vote Republican and/or switch political parties based on the public distaste for deficit spending.
The Massachusetts 2nd Congressional District, not unlike the balance of the Bay State, has been, for the past few decades, led by those “unenrolleds” or independent voters who make up over 50% of the electorate. Using statistical data of the district ( here ), one can see that using figures from 2008 party registration (no longer accurate based on an unknown increase in Republican Registration and decline in Democrat Registration) the district placed 27% more votes for Scott Brown than Martha Coakely, in January of this year; this suggests certain Congressional districts, like the 2nd, which are rated Likely Democrat by Washington pundits, might better be deemed as a toss-up, at the very least.
In other words, without enough base to stem the tide, will the usual trolling for votes in Nursing homes (this blog has personal experience in that regard in the 2000 election), dead voting in the Bay State, and the union vote (12 %of the voting bloc nationwide), be sufficient to keep the career politicians in office - unlikely as it did not work for Coakley..
Therefore, if thousand are switching political affiliation across the state, then just how many Congressional Districts are in play? The answer is 9, which is historical in that there are 9 challenged Congressional races, let alone the fact that 4 to 5 of those races are most certainly on the radar. Will all races be by wide margins of 5 or more points? Most probably not, however, they will all be close, and it is now a safe bet that the makeup of the Massachusetts Congressional Delegation will be changing on Nov. 2nd.
Finally, based on the video below, one has to ask, do the answers by Deval Patrick and Congressman Richard Neal, and indicate that they are ‘confident’ in this race?
To learn more about Tom Wesley and his citizen’s campaign for Congress visit www.tomwesley.com and volunteer or donate – the final days of the campaign will be critical, and when an opposition may even pull out the dead and disabled to vote to maintain a long-held office, every hand on deck is of import.
Side note: How critical are the MA Congressional Races: polling stations across the state will be monitored by volunteers, in numbers equal to or surpassing the Brown election
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Springfield MA – - Democrat Banner Rally Illegally Hung Over City Hall Summarily Removed – The Rise of Public Opposition to Politics as Usual in MA
First, the blog, Springfield Intruder did an excellent job publishing: “Single Party Rule in Springfield Confirmed with City Hall Banner”, noting the illegal use of public property by a single political party. The banner was hung in response to a rally planned by the local Democrat Party in an effort to “Get out the Vote” for Democrat Candidates in MA, including Deval Patrick and Congressman Richard Neal, both battling for reelection.
This removal of the banner from the City Hall was reported by the Springfield Republican’s Website after the Intruder's post, with the headline “Democratic rally banner pulled off Springfield City Hall after questions from Massachusetts Republican Committee and others”. One had to read into the third paragraph of the article to get a hint of the legality of the issue. The Republican notes the removal was prompted by: ”a ruling from the city solicitor that it had to immediately come down.” Yes, it is illegal to use public property to promote a specific political party.
Seriously, how bad can it be in Massachusetts when the local Democrats can’t get away with doing something illegal, and the local daily paper headlines appear to be a sad attempt at blaming Republicans for complaining about bad behavior?
It is the growing discontent among the populace over seemingly “business as usual” political practices that have led to regular citizens educating themselves about the law and then doing something pro-active.
One merely needs to look at headlines from around the country to understand that people are more engaged than in other elections and wary of politicians and political parties that attempt to subvert the system. From the Drudge Report speaks to the chaos: (Chicago): “Possible glitch with vote-by-mail system”, (Las Vegas Sun) "Angle campaign attorney: Reid “intends to steal this election if he can’t win it outright”(which speaks to the of buying votes by members of the Teachers Unions in conjunction with Senate Majority Harry Reid), (Washington Examiner re: Nevada election) “Nevada voting machines automatically checking Harry Reid's name; voting machine technicians are SEIU members” - and it goes on and on and on.
From Nevada to to the Carolina’s problems with voting machines pointing to fraud by Democrats and their unions (all explained as “glitches with a system”, are made public knowledge in seconds with access to the web, cable television or a radio. It is fair to say then, that residents in Massachusetts and other blue states may be tuning in and getting suspicious as of late, specifically as there are hotly contested races and choices at the ballot box in Massachusetts for the first time in decades.
What established political parties do not seem to understand at any given time, is the ability of the American people to stand up and take notice. This is especially true when a Political Party has “ruled the roost” so to speak for what is literally generations. One would think that the Democrats, who are so tech savvy, would pick up on the angst of the populace and play fair. These types of headlines, including the Springfield Republican’s, only further the notion that the Democrats either control or have sympathizers in the media, and, additionally, cheat if they cannot win on their own merits.
Perhaps letting the chips fall where they may might have worked out better than intended in the long-run – as these types of headlines, far from rallying Democrats to get out and vote for their party, elicit a sense of desperation, and what follows is a renewed commitment for change and anti-incumbent sentiment among those unenrolled voters or independents who are flocking in droves to Tea Party events nationwide and an increasing awareness of the rank and file voter.
Losing the Social Media Battle: Even locally, the allegedly tech savvy Democrat Party has a Facebook fan page following of of 25 “fans” and went "live" on the web late in the game; the 15th of October. Alternately, the Springfield Tea Party has posted to Facebook since May of this year, and has 247 “followers” while the Western Mass Republican’s page has over 700 "fans".. There is no fan page for the Western Mass Democrats.
Although one cannot project the outcome of any given election based on Facebook “fans”, it does go to the level of interest in ending the “One-Party rule” that the Springfield Intruder speaks of, especially in Western Massachusetts. As David Axelrod, Deval Patrick and Barack Obama Mentor and "friend" noted in a recent interview on CNN, he will be watching the Northeast on November 2nd, and further that races may have surprising outcomes.
It will, in the long run, be who has the better ground game, and how disgusted, or demoralized the local party in power’s base is, that will tell the tale in nine Congressional races, the Governor’s race, and hundreds of State offices on November 2nd. One cannot anticipate a Blue State turning red, however, a shade of purple is definitely probable.
This removal of the banner from the City Hall was reported by the Springfield Republican’s Website after the Intruder's post, with the headline “Democratic rally banner pulled off Springfield City Hall after questions from Massachusetts Republican Committee and others”. One had to read into the third paragraph of the article to get a hint of the legality of the issue. The Republican notes the removal was prompted by: ”a ruling from the city solicitor that it had to immediately come down.” Yes, it is illegal to use public property to promote a specific political party.
Seriously, how bad can it be in Massachusetts when the local Democrats can’t get away with doing something illegal, and the local daily paper headlines appear to be a sad attempt at blaming Republicans for complaining about bad behavior?
It is the growing discontent among the populace over seemingly “business as usual” political practices that have led to regular citizens educating themselves about the law and then doing something pro-active.
One merely needs to look at headlines from around the country to understand that people are more engaged than in other elections and wary of politicians and political parties that attempt to subvert the system. From the Drudge Report speaks to the chaos: (Chicago): “Possible glitch with vote-by-mail system”, (Las Vegas Sun) "Angle campaign attorney: Reid “intends to steal this election if he can’t win it outright”(which speaks to the of buying votes by members of the Teachers Unions in conjunction with Senate Majority Harry Reid), (Washington Examiner re: Nevada election) “Nevada voting machines automatically checking Harry Reid's name; voting machine technicians are SEIU members” - and it goes on and on and on.
From Nevada to to the Carolina’s problems with voting machines pointing to fraud by Democrats and their unions (all explained as “glitches with a system”, are made public knowledge in seconds with access to the web, cable television or a radio. It is fair to say then, that residents in Massachusetts and other blue states may be tuning in and getting suspicious as of late, specifically as there are hotly contested races and choices at the ballot box in Massachusetts for the first time in decades.
What established political parties do not seem to understand at any given time, is the ability of the American people to stand up and take notice. This is especially true when a Political Party has “ruled the roost” so to speak for what is literally generations. One would think that the Democrats, who are so tech savvy, would pick up on the angst of the populace and play fair. These types of headlines, including the Springfield Republican’s, only further the notion that the Democrats either control or have sympathizers in the media, and, additionally, cheat if they cannot win on their own merits.
Perhaps letting the chips fall where they may might have worked out better than intended in the long-run – as these types of headlines, far from rallying Democrats to get out and vote for their party, elicit a sense of desperation, and what follows is a renewed commitment for change and anti-incumbent sentiment among those unenrolled voters or independents who are flocking in droves to Tea Party events nationwide and an increasing awareness of the rank and file voter.
Losing the Social Media Battle: Even locally, the allegedly tech savvy Democrat Party has a Facebook fan page following of of 25 “fans” and went "live" on the web late in the game; the 15th of October. Alternately, the Springfield Tea Party has posted to Facebook since May of this year, and has 247 “followers” while the Western Mass Republican’s page has over 700 "fans".. There is no fan page for the Western Mass Democrats.
Although one cannot project the outcome of any given election based on Facebook “fans”, it does go to the level of interest in ending the “One-Party rule” that the Springfield Intruder speaks of, especially in Western Massachusetts. As David Axelrod, Deval Patrick and Barack Obama Mentor and "friend" noted in a recent interview on CNN, he will be watching the Northeast on November 2nd, and further that races may have surprising outcomes.
It will, in the long run, be who has the better ground game, and how disgusted, or demoralized the local party in power’s base is, that will tell the tale in nine Congressional races, the Governor’s race, and hundreds of State offices on November 2nd. One cannot anticipate a Blue State turning red, however, a shade of purple is definitely probable.
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
MA2 – Midterms - Moms For Tom (Wesley) Highlights Diversity and Commitment – Neal Campaigns Hard on “Bacon” – Focus on Campus, Union and Seniors.
The Mom’s for Tom (Wesley) video show below, highlights the commitment of Western and Central Massachusetts women, and the variety of roles played by women who support Tom Wesley. From Latino moms to working moms, to stay at home moms, to Grand moms, the video(s) and movement, begun by Tara Kozub, promotes a simple yet powerful message: Stop spending our children’s’ future. This effective video has garnered a bit of attention in the MA2’s eastern Press – the Worcester Telegram and Gazette. The article here on video politics, reviews an assortment of productions done in support of candidates in Central Massachusetts (which this particular district stretches from Western through Central MA. The author dubs the Moms for Tom video as ”The most earnest, and well-produced, of the bunch.”
Do the Mom’s for Tom have a point? Absolutely, a recent Springfield Republican article highlights the 120 million dollar high speed rail project, 13 miles of which will run from the “Connecticut Line to Springfield’s Union Station”. Credited for bringing more tax dollars to the district? Congressman Richard Neal. One may argue that spending 120 million dollars to improve speed for a 13 miles stretch of rail is a worthwhile investment, however, that investment might be better made when the Federal budget is in place (Congress failed to pass a budget this session), and the nation’s debt is a bit lower. Understanding that the intent is to showcase both the rail and Congressman Neal’s “accomplishments”; the Republican may be, unintentionally doing a disservice to the Congressman, whereas the general public is not particularly thrilled with any spending at this point. This is especially true of those who considered themselves unenrolled or independent registered voters. Although fiscal responsibility is one of the key principals of the Tea Party movement, it appears to have spread across the district, state and nation, crossing all demographics. The general public, Democrats, Republicans, Independents, Green Party affiliates, are, for the most part, concerned about any extra spending at this point.
With Neal unable to run on his record of late (98% vote with Nancy Pelosi), especially in the MA2nd, (which may be one of the most conservative districts in the Bay State), running on pork, might not have been the best choice.
Although Neal is throwing money around the district in his best effort at campaigning, it may not be enough in this particular atmosphere against spending, to stave off the growing attitude of the electorate’s fiscally responsible, anti-incumbent mood.
Neal, for the first time in memory, has been actively campaigning throughout the district, granted in closed environments. For example, Neal’s Facebook page here, touts the “1200” seniors who joined him in Chicopee at the Hu Ke Lau” for his annual “Senior Appreciation Day”. However, one might wonder where 1200 may have sat for dinner in a restaurant where seating for private functions, according to the website is limited to 450 persons. Additionally, attempts at finding any annual event for seniors connected to Richard Neal were unsuccessful. (Granted, searching Google, Google Archives, the two Richard Neal for Congress websites, and the official Congressional Website, may not have been sufficient to find additional articles and or mentions of an annual Senior Appreciation Day.)
Neal has also vested campaign time in visiting the Campus at Smith College (Organized by Obama for America, and the Brewers Association in Colorado. Although there must be more he has done to campaign in the district, little else has shown up in district news, his websites, google, etc. Perhaps now would not be the best time for Neal to be shy, all things considered.
Mom’s for Tom may be saying what fathers, brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles and second and third cousins are thinking – time to reign in the spending and politics as usual.
Mom’s for Tom Video
Do the Mom’s for Tom have a point? Absolutely, a recent Springfield Republican article highlights the 120 million dollar high speed rail project, 13 miles of which will run from the “Connecticut Line to Springfield’s Union Station”. Credited for bringing more tax dollars to the district? Congressman Richard Neal. One may argue that spending 120 million dollars to improve speed for a 13 miles stretch of rail is a worthwhile investment, however, that investment might be better made when the Federal budget is in place (Congress failed to pass a budget this session), and the nation’s debt is a bit lower. Understanding that the intent is to showcase both the rail and Congressman Neal’s “accomplishments”; the Republican may be, unintentionally doing a disservice to the Congressman, whereas the general public is not particularly thrilled with any spending at this point. This is especially true of those who considered themselves unenrolled or independent registered voters. Although fiscal responsibility is one of the key principals of the Tea Party movement, it appears to have spread across the district, state and nation, crossing all demographics. The general public, Democrats, Republicans, Independents, Green Party affiliates, are, for the most part, concerned about any extra spending at this point.
With Neal unable to run on his record of late (98% vote with Nancy Pelosi), especially in the MA2nd, (which may be one of the most conservative districts in the Bay State), running on pork, might not have been the best choice.
Although Neal is throwing money around the district in his best effort at campaigning, it may not be enough in this particular atmosphere against spending, to stave off the growing attitude of the electorate’s fiscally responsible, anti-incumbent mood.
Neal, for the first time in memory, has been actively campaigning throughout the district, granted in closed environments. For example, Neal’s Facebook page here, touts the “1200” seniors who joined him in Chicopee at the Hu Ke Lau” for his annual “Senior Appreciation Day”. However, one might wonder where 1200 may have sat for dinner in a restaurant where seating for private functions, according to the website is limited to 450 persons. Additionally, attempts at finding any annual event for seniors connected to Richard Neal were unsuccessful. (Granted, searching Google, Google Archives, the two Richard Neal for Congress websites, and the official Congressional Website, may not have been sufficient to find additional articles and or mentions of an annual Senior Appreciation Day.)
Neal has also vested campaign time in visiting the Campus at Smith College (Organized by Obama for America, and the Brewers Association in Colorado. Although there must be more he has done to campaign in the district, little else has shown up in district news, his websites, google, etc. Perhaps now would not be the best time for Neal to be shy, all things considered.
Mom’s for Tom may be saying what fathers, brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles and second and third cousins are thinking – time to reign in the spending and politics as usual.
Mom’s for Tom Video
Monday, October 25, 2010
2010 Mid-Terms – The MA 4th and 10th - Polls and Pollsters – Guessing Games and Statistics versus the Ground Game and Enthusiasm
The Boston Globe has released new polling data showing the 4th District incumbent, Democrat Barney Frank, leading his Republican Challenger, Sean Bielat by 13 points, while in the 10th District, Democrat Bill Keating leads Republican Jeff Perry by 4 points, however how accurate is this polling data? The Globes polling on the 4th District mirrors polling recently released by a Rhode Island’s WPRI which has Frank with a 10 point advantage. Both pollsters used samples of approximately 400 likely voters, with the WPIR poll showing 12 percent undecided, while the Boston Globe poll shows 11% undecided in the 4th and 23% undecided in the 10th race.
In the case of the Globe, the poll also factors enthusiasm, with those committed to voting for the Republican candidate leading those intending to vote for the Democrat. The Globe article also brings the Brown-Coakley race into the factor – which, past polling in the Bay State has used President Obama’s popularity as indicative of which way the outcome is likely to lean.
That said it is difficult, with large numbers of undecided’s, small samples, and reliance on previous statistics to indicate the outcome of any race – as it is also easy to pull apart a poll and argue the outcome will be different – what it boils down to is, is the ground game, and to be contradictory, voter enthusiasm.
Back to the Brown/Coakley race: During the early stages of that particular race through the final days, a variety of pollsters and pundits weighed in on the fact that Massachusetts was reliably Democrat, and that Brown’s attempt to upend a Democrat would either fail completely based on Globe polling data, or come “close”. Alternately, after Brown’s 5 point victory, (the only pollster that called this race correctly was Public Policy Polling a Democrat leaning pollster.) pundits began to call the outcome an anomaly, one that could not possibly be indicative of the coming races in Massachusetts.
The single most important factors in the Brown – Coakley race was the ground game and voter enthusiasm, which, those relying on most polls at the time, would have consider Coakley a shoe-in, however, what was happening on the ground in Massachusetts told a different story – which, in every corner of this state, has not changed since the January 19th election. Therefore, to those who call Massachusetts lost for eternity – and malign voters from a variety of districts for continually reelecting certain incumbents, one has to say, it’s not over until the votes have been cast. Historically, Massachusetts has been reliably “Democrat”, with the exceptions being when the economy hits the skids – and it has, in Aces.
Interest in Massachusetts races has climbed to the point where Public Policy polling is considering polling the Bay State again. What that tells us, if anything, is that the races are of interest, or more to the point, outcomes that are one the line, and that the notion of “Safe Incumbent” is, probably somewhat misleading. It will be those who are committed to voting that will determine the outcome as always, and regardless of party, and of advertising dollars spent, or the notion that “nothing ever changes”, those races where there is either no polling (or alleged internals which have been duly noted), or where polls can be examined and reversed by questioning statistics employed, the candidate that has the best ground game now, and the unenrolled in Massachusetts (specifically) in sync, will win, regardless of party. Massachusetts has experience a significant change in collective political think over the past two years, and to deny that in the face of polls with large margins, undecideds and/or are not indicative of the voter registration either in the state or the district, and pundits, is, in a word ludicrous.
In the case of the Globe, the poll also factors enthusiasm, with those committed to voting for the Republican candidate leading those intending to vote for the Democrat. The Globe article also brings the Brown-Coakley race into the factor – which, past polling in the Bay State has used President Obama’s popularity as indicative of which way the outcome is likely to lean.
That said it is difficult, with large numbers of undecided’s, small samples, and reliance on previous statistics to indicate the outcome of any race – as it is also easy to pull apart a poll and argue the outcome will be different – what it boils down to is, is the ground game, and to be contradictory, voter enthusiasm.
Back to the Brown/Coakley race: During the early stages of that particular race through the final days, a variety of pollsters and pundits weighed in on the fact that Massachusetts was reliably Democrat, and that Brown’s attempt to upend a Democrat would either fail completely based on Globe polling data, or come “close”. Alternately, after Brown’s 5 point victory, (the only pollster that called this race correctly was Public Policy Polling a Democrat leaning pollster.) pundits began to call the outcome an anomaly, one that could not possibly be indicative of the coming races in Massachusetts.
The single most important factors in the Brown – Coakley race was the ground game and voter enthusiasm, which, those relying on most polls at the time, would have consider Coakley a shoe-in, however, what was happening on the ground in Massachusetts told a different story – which, in every corner of this state, has not changed since the January 19th election. Therefore, to those who call Massachusetts lost for eternity – and malign voters from a variety of districts for continually reelecting certain incumbents, one has to say, it’s not over until the votes have been cast. Historically, Massachusetts has been reliably “Democrat”, with the exceptions being when the economy hits the skids – and it has, in Aces.
Interest in Massachusetts races has climbed to the point where Public Policy polling is considering polling the Bay State again. What that tells us, if anything, is that the races are of interest, or more to the point, outcomes that are one the line, and that the notion of “Safe Incumbent” is, probably somewhat misleading. It will be those who are committed to voting that will determine the outcome as always, and regardless of party, and of advertising dollars spent, or the notion that “nothing ever changes”, those races where there is either no polling (or alleged internals which have been duly noted), or where polls can be examined and reversed by questioning statistics employed, the candidate that has the best ground game now, and the unenrolled in Massachusetts (specifically) in sync, will win, regardless of party. Massachusetts has experience a significant change in collective political think over the past two years, and to deny that in the face of polls with large margins, undecideds and/or are not indicative of the voter registration either in the state or the district, and pundits, is, in a word ludicrous.
Sunday, October 24, 2010
"Neal, I'm One of You" Perfect Post by It's Clear As Mud
The blog, "It's Clear as Mud", wrote an excellent article on Richard Neal and his ability to relate to his constituents. Entitled Neal, I'm One of You". The author chastises Neal for saying the same, then poses a list of questions asking Neal if he is like any of us at all. Perfect!
It's Clear As Mud.com Worth The Read.
Richard Neal, Incumbant Democrat, Massachusetts 2nd Congressional District facing Tom Wesley, Republican, Career Citizen. Visit and donate: www.tomwesley.com
It's Clear As Mud.com Worth The Read.
Richard Neal, Incumbant Democrat, Massachusetts 2nd Congressional District facing Tom Wesley, Republican, Career Citizen. Visit and donate: www.tomwesley.com
The MA2 Congressional Race: Neal Has To Beat Statistics In Order to Best Wesley – Brown won by 27%, Anti-Incumbent Runs High In MA.
Tom Wesley, the Republican Candidate running against Richard Neal, is not a “career politician”, rather a “career citizen” - a message that may give him extra points in Massachusetts this mid-term. An article with poll released by the Boston Globe 10-24-10, in conjunction with the infamous University of New Hampshire (see Coakley plus 15 a week prior to the 10-19-10 election), suggests that:
Ironically, statistics from the Secretary of State’s office on total voter enrollment by party, analyzed against the returns from the January 19th Special election, show that in the Hampden 2nd, Brown beat Coakley by 27%. Additionally, at that time, the race was not based on besting an incumbent, rather a referendum on Universal Health Care.
A great deal has changed between January and October, specifically continued high unemployment, higher deficits, and a parcel of legislation that was generally unpopular with the electorate. The fact that Richard Neal voted 98% of the time with Nancy Pelosi does not help the Congressman. Additionally, Neal’s latest ads have gone negative, a sure sign of trouble.
A recent mailing to constituents, accusing Tom Wesley of outsourcing jobs, (see Wesley Statement Outsourcing the Facts here,,,) smacks of desperation on the part of the Neal campaign. The fact that Neal is in a district that is not particularly friendly to Democrats seeking Federal Offices as of late, and faced with an unusually high percentage of anti-incumbency fever, even in MA, bodes quite well for one Tom Wesley. In the end, it will be who has the best ground game that will tell the tale. Additionally, although not a national race with the attention Scott Brown received but not a statewide race with a great deal of ground to cover, Wesley, running a good ground game has a clear opportunity, statistically speaking. In this district, a Brown 27% victory is significant – if Wesley has harnessed half of the quiet enthusiasm that was seen in this district during the Brown campaign, then he will, indeed retire Neal with no need for a recount. Neal, on his part, must be aware of the statistics, and although his campaign denied there was any “internal polling”, anonymous sources (allegedly inside the Neal campaign and their pollster) indicated that Neal was down by a figure not unlike the outcome of the Brown Coakley matchup.
Should that be the case, then the Wesley ground game running now until the 2nd, will be have the result of being one of those races on the east coast, Which White House Advisor, David Axelrod, (see article here categorized as one of those surprises no one sees coming.
A summary of statistics in a spreadsheet (click to enlarge) shows the town by town analysis return of votes for the MA2 District.
“In another sign of strong anti-incumbent sentiment, 49 percent of respondents said that, overall, they want to see a new crop of leaders in Massachusetts and in Washington. Only 28 percent said they trust current officeholders.”
Ironically, statistics from the Secretary of State’s office on total voter enrollment by party, analyzed against the returns from the January 19th Special election, show that in the Hampden 2nd, Brown beat Coakley by 27%. Additionally, at that time, the race was not based on besting an incumbent, rather a referendum on Universal Health Care.
A great deal has changed between January and October, specifically continued high unemployment, higher deficits, and a parcel of legislation that was generally unpopular with the electorate. The fact that Richard Neal voted 98% of the time with Nancy Pelosi does not help the Congressman. Additionally, Neal’s latest ads have gone negative, a sure sign of trouble.
A recent mailing to constituents, accusing Tom Wesley of outsourcing jobs, (see Wesley Statement Outsourcing the Facts here,,,) smacks of desperation on the part of the Neal campaign. The fact that Neal is in a district that is not particularly friendly to Democrats seeking Federal Offices as of late, and faced with an unusually high percentage of anti-incumbency fever, even in MA, bodes quite well for one Tom Wesley. In the end, it will be who has the best ground game that will tell the tale. Additionally, although not a national race with the attention Scott Brown received but not a statewide race with a great deal of ground to cover, Wesley, running a good ground game has a clear opportunity, statistically speaking. In this district, a Brown 27% victory is significant – if Wesley has harnessed half of the quiet enthusiasm that was seen in this district during the Brown campaign, then he will, indeed retire Neal with no need for a recount. Neal, on his part, must be aware of the statistics, and although his campaign denied there was any “internal polling”, anonymous sources (allegedly inside the Neal campaign and their pollster) indicated that Neal was down by a figure not unlike the outcome of the Brown Coakley matchup.
Should that be the case, then the Wesley ground game running now until the 2nd, will be have the result of being one of those races on the east coast, Which White House Advisor, David Axelrod, (see article here categorized as one of those surprises no one sees coming.
A summary of statistics in a spreadsheet (click to enlarge) shows the town by town analysis return of votes for the MA2 District.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
