MA Special Senate Election – Match-up: Markey vs. Gomez - Youth and Diversity versus the Old Established White – Wait a Second! Gomez is a What?

Compare and Contrast: Ed Markey (Top) and Gabriel Gomez (Bottom) –– image wickedlocal.com

Something odd happened in the Massachusetts Special Election yesterday, there appears to have been a role reversal in the way one views the status quo of political parties. Normally speaking, the Republican on the ticket is viewed by low information voters (and die-hard progressives, etc.) as the “angry old white man” while the Democrat on the ticket is viewed as the hip, young, diverse “rock star”.

If, against the odds, Mike Sullivan had bested Gabriel Gomez in the Republican Primary, that would have resulted in a match of angry old white man against semi-angry old white man, Ed Markey. If Stephen Lynch had bested Markey, the matchup would have been kindly old-time Democrat against angry old white man. Although Sullivan could hardly be cast in the role of angry, but he is older, and he is definitely white. This nonsense is illustrative – given the fact that the mantra for decades has been that the Democrats are the party of diversity, while the Republican’s are made up of nothing but angry, old, rich, white men. This is taught on campuses, it is seen in the news, it is discussed, ad nauseum on MSNBC, yet there appears to be a flaw in this theory. There has been for eons, as one Senator Rand Paul attempted to point out recently while visiting Howard University, but, was lambasted for bringing up the past of the Republican Party, not the present. There are facts and then, there is propaganda. The facts are that regardless of race, gender or ethnicity, individuals choose a political party by their own ideology, for the most part.

Gomez, is young, attractive, a newcomer to politics (sort-of), a first generation Hispanic American, served the nation in the Navy, went on to become a very successful businessman – in other words, living the American Dream. He is the Republican, so those who are unaware can pick up their jaws off that floor.

Ed Markey, on the other hand, is the old guy, normally hair is somewhat askew, and he appears to be grimacing rather than smiling. One might say he is rich, given the fact that he lives in DC, while maintaining his parent’s home in Massachusetts, though rarely setting food in the state. (Boston Globe) In advertising for the primary against Stephen Lynch, he pushed his NARAL rating, and his love for Planned Parenthood. NARAL rates political leaders on their support for unfettered abortion up to and including terminating a "fetus" that is born alive and breathing. (See the Gosnell Horror Abortion Trial in Philadelphia) (Bucks County Courier) – Markey is for Obamacare, higher taxes and no cuts to the Federal Government. Markey is the Democrat Party of today.

What a conundrum!

Once the ads start, it’s going to be a tough one – as Gomez is well-funded, and Markey has the weight of the Progressive wing of the Democrat Party behind him. The Polls suggest that Markey is the favorite, which, at present may be the case – against all the rules of logic, in the upside down world in which we live in Massachusetts.

One might suggest that Markey is going to have to get a lot of help from his friends come the election in June – this one might take a bit more “ballot stuffing” creativity than previous elections to ensure that Markey goes over the top with a 5 to 10 point finish. If Gomez can get out the vote, and ensure he plasters the state, and guilts those racially sensitive (i.e. racists) Democrats and Democrat leaning Independents (more important) into voting for him – Markey may have a rougher time of it. If this race grabs national attention, and it already has (Gomez has ground troops coming in from other states for the primary –young, college students), then there may be an upset. That’s a long-shot – again – maybe.

This is, in all seriousness, a chance for a first in the Bay State, which elected the first African American to the Senate (a Republican), and now has a chance to elect the state’s first Hispanic to the Senate (where he would join the growing Hispanic Republican Caucus in that august body.) This just became the race to watch.

Election date: June 25th, 2013 - In that election, one may vote for the candidate of their choice - for example, if one is a Democrat, one can go into the booth and vote for the Republican, and vice versa.

Visit: Gomez for Senate

Visit: Ed Markey dot com

Compare and Contrast!

Election 2013 – Massachusetts Special Election- Primary – Does One Vote their Conscious, their Wallet or their Party? Who are the Candidates for the Senate Seat and why It Matters. – Issue: ObamaCare

In the Bay State, there appears to be one political power that is a powerhouse, the Democrats, who control the majority of seats in both the State House and the State Senate, as well as the Governor’s office, and the varied city, town and municipal offices – yet, Democrats comprise approximately 35.3% of the States Electorate, when it comes to registered voters, according to the Massachusetts Secretary of States’ office. The Balance of registered voters (from the 2012 voter rolls), 11.5% Republican, .15% Green Party, .4% other, and a whopping 52.58% who are unenrolled and hypothetically vote for whomever they please having no party affiliation. (MA Sectary of State).

There are five candidates running – two Democrats, both U.S. Congressional Representatives: Ed Markey, who has been in the U.S. Congress since 1976 and is a solid Democrat vote in the House, he voted straight party line for The Affordable Health Care Act (ObamaCare). (U.S.House) Stephen Lynch is the opposition Democrat candidate in the Primary, is also a U.S. Congressman, has been in the U.S. Congress since 2001, and his vote was against Obama Care. He is not, always, a reliable Democrat vote in the House, it depends upon the issue, and on this particular Issue, he voted against his Party. (U.S. House)

On the Republican Ticket, one has Gabriel Gomez, a young, former Democrat, who is in favor of repeal, believing the States should design their own programs.(Gomezforms.com). Gomez had written a letter to Governor Deval Patrick outlining his support for the President, and his policies, asking the Govenor to appoint him as an interim Senator. In the letter, he described himself a as moderate, and, as New England Cable News points out, he then suggested he also supported Republican John McCain in 20008.

Michael Sullivan, former U.S. Attorney and crime fighter, is a stalwart Republican, pro-life, Catholic, who was part of the Romney Administration in the State, he has no website for his campaign that appears in Bing or Google searches. In the Republican Debate, he suggested repeal of Obama Care – and does not support the Health Care Law as written (Gazette.net)

Lastly, there is the Libertarian leaning Dan Winslow , - Dan Winslow’s Issue Page, does not refer to the Health Care Act, rather, focuses on the Debt, Jobs, and Energy as the first three priorities. That said, In a recent debate, he is somewhat opposed to Obama Care, and emphasized state’s rights options, citing Massachusetts having an adequate program in place, and suggesting states that meet guidelines under the law, would be exempt from the law, including taxes Mass Live.

As far as the Health Care Act, its hyper-inflated bureaucracy, the fees’ for non-compliance, the increase in insurance premiums for private policies, and the obvious boost to the Insurance companies (one big DC lobby or two), the list goes on, appears to be a hodge podge of options that those that wrote the bill suggested, placing them willy-nilly in no specific order (having read this monstrosity, it is somewhat intelligible, but that’s about it – there are no true costs savings measures, rather additional debt, and the unformatted suggestions that with the cost of implementation, the taxes that are attached to cover specific programs, that there will still be 50 million uninsured in 10 years. In other words, the bill as written gives no assurances that there will be any net positive changes to U.S. Health Care delivery.

But what does Obama Care, Abortion, the Defense of Marriage Act, really have to do with someone running for Senate, other than give the public who may or most likely will not vote in the primary (but will vote in the general election), an idea of how that individual might vote if, and this is a big if, that issue ever was brought to the Senate Floor. With the abortion issue, one knows that it is stated law, and has been decided in the Supreme Court. With the Defense of Marriage Act (or the current, case before the Supreme Court on striking down the Law (which defines marriage as between one-man and one woman), again, it is a Supreme Court issue, and not an issue that will be address in any Federal office (unless of course, someone is running (either party) and needs to use it as a way to strike fear into the hearts of those pro and con in order to get votes.

What the next U.S. Senator will be is either a “party stamp” or someone who thinks for themselves and will vote as they feel the people they represent will best benefit. The only two that strike a chord at this point for this blogger are Stephen Lynch and Dan Winslow. The defense is made by Winslow, who is from Western Massachusetts (not a reason to vote for anyone), but his ability to annoy both major parties, with his Libertarian views.

Lynch would be a second choice, as he is not a straight party vote, but..he is party identified.

What we have here is a somewhat new phenomenon of Liberation-Republican’s, who strict Constitutionalist and are big of personal liberty. They are anti-war, unless of course, to defend, and they are pro-individual and states’ rights, they are above all, fiscally conservative, while being less than enthusiastic about social issues.

On Social Issues: Although this blogger is pro-life (no abortion- no death penalty), and sees no purpose in changing the meaning of marriage as it now stands (given that it is, for the most part a religious term), rather would see legal partnerships that would allow for all “couples” be they strait, gay, or otherwise, allowed to care for one another, with benefits associated, across the board. Those wanting to have a religious aspect or Marriage would do so by going to their church or synagogue or mosque.

Simple!

On abortion; as the Supreme Court is about to decide on the issue of Gay Marriage in two cases, one brought to strike down a California proposition banning Gay Marriage and one that cites DOMA as Unconstitutional, a ruling in June is anticipated. As no one knows how the justices will finally rule, one understand that all justices, those liberal those conservative on the court, are not thrilled to be voting on this issue, and many have indicated through oral arguments that this belongs to the states. Should they decide to rule it a State issue, that will have a bearing on those who would attempt to change Abortion, bringing it back to the court, and with the precedent set (should that be the course) that Gay Marriage is a state issues, why not abortion? This is of course hypothetical now as no one knows the minds of the justices, but both those battles will be fought in the courts.

Leaving Candidates to claim they are anti-or pro on social issues, that they have little or no say over.

One might think in this election therefore, one should be concerned more with their pocketbook, and in that wise, the fiscal conservative, Winslow, will go the distance to protect the rights of the taxpayer.

Note: Although this will be a little watched, and low voter turn-out primary, with an anticipated low-voter turnout special election, it will be decided by those who are more politically minded, and in as this is Massachusetts, those who declare no party.