Hey, there! Log in / Register
So now will Tom Menino endorse Sonia Chang-Diaz?
By adamg on Wed, 10/29/2008 - 8:49am
And will city councilors Charles Yancey, Sam Yoon, Stephen Murphy, and John Connolly do likewise? You may recall they made a point of not endorsing anybody in the 2nd Suffolk state-senate race after their horse lost by a nose in September. Now that said horse has made them look like, at best, tools, you think they might make the best of a bad situation and endorse their fellow Democrat?
Neighborhoods:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Hey, media orgs, DO YOUR JOB!
I'd also like to know what any of Wilkerson's long time backers, like Crazy Chuck Turner and Jean McGuire (one of the race-baiters from the primary fight), have to say for themselves.
Why aren't we learning more about the impact of this within the State House and hearing less of the same regurgitated crap that they are all still running from their evening newscasts yesterday?
If I were advising them I
If I were advising them I would tell them to sit down and be quiet which is what they seem to be doing. Best political move of the year by all of those crazy Boston politicians.
Sounds like cockroaches
Turn on the lights and they all hide.
Are you new to politics? lol
Are you new to politics? lol Not that uncommon at all.
I think these particular politicians have been quit loyal to a State Senator who had apparently been black mailing most of them into giving her what she wanted for years. Even when it looked like she was going down in flames they rushed to her side instead of helping to deliver the final blow when she lost the primary by endorsing her opponent. They had stood by her side through thick and thin, scandals and losses. They didnt run away when the lights came on, it was only when it became abundantly clear that not only was she being stupid politically but she was taking bribes, bribes for as low as 500 dollars, and not even campaign bribes as in I will give you this if you support my campaign committee and give me 1,000 dollars, we're talking real cash going into her pocket, directly. Do something stupid and you lose a few supporters, get arrested and lose a few more, get indicted for corruption... Lets just say she will be lucky if even Chuck Turner returns her calls at this point.
Horsetrading and such
One of the interesting/sad things about the whole case is that a lot of the people Wilkerson duped (well, let's assume they were duped, at least until we get more Plunder Dome-ish indictments) was that she probably could have gotten these people to do the same exact things they did even if she weren't (allegedly) stuffing money in her underwear.
Wilkerson was a senior senator. Of course, Tom Menino will take her call - and agree to help her out. Of course, Therese Murray will do her a favor and call Boston officials. Naturally, Adrian Walker will stop writing about Winthrop beach erosion long enough to transcribe her thoughts on the licensing commission stomping minority businessmen.
And when she played hardball and blackmailed Boston city government (state government, too, since the licensing board is appointed by the governor)? Eh, again, as long as she keeps getting elected, that's what she's going to do.
Because this is such a systemic thing, it's just as sad as her corruption and betrayal of pretty much everybody around her.
Why would they endorse Chang-Diaz?
It's not like any of them have an obligation to endorse anyone at all, and endorsing Chang-Diaz now might look to some in the chattering class like admission that they were wrong to have backed Wilkerson in the first place.
Right
Chang-Diaz has it sewn up. Why say a word?
They should admit that
Backing Wilkerson WAS wrong in the first place and its important for these politicians to acknowledge that by calling on her to resign from the State Senate and suspend her write-in campaign. This is not a time for "resolve". Its time to create some distance. Especially with the revelation that Wilkerson was exploiting her ties to some of these politicians to advance her bribery schemes.
That depends on what you mean by "should"
While I agree it would be honorable and decent for these guys to go in front of a mic and say, in effect, "I was a sucker," it would provide a soundbite to future opponents that isn't worth putting out there for anyone who thinks he might run for reelection. Does your definition of "should" include group political suicide?
Not the way I see it at all
I can agree that someone like Menino doesn't really have anything to "get out in front of". But for ardent supporters, you definitely need to get out there and say "Look, I was one of her best friends and knew nothing about this. I feel just as betrayed as many of you do."
Voters are going to understand and identify with that sentiment and assuming it's the truth, it's best to put that out there as fast as possible. If you sit on your hands or clasp your mouth, you look just as culpable even if you never had anything to do with it. The political suicide will be to lend acceptance to her action by not reacting to it.
However, with the subpoena now, I imagine they'll be able to just say "pending litigation" and just side-step it all until they have to finally "react" to the verdict and her resignation.
I dont know, while people
I dont know, while people would have a sense of immediate happiness for someone who tosses their friend under the bus those actions come back to haunt you later on. Unless they are pushed into a corner the best option is to just step back and walk away from her. I really do believe that 99 percent of politicians are honest, and less then one percent are dishonest. With that being said the one thing a politician values more than anything else, behind closed doors at least, is true loyalty because its so hard to find. I would imagine if one of her former major supporters came out, without being pushed into it for one reason or another, and made those statements that people would think twice about trusting him/her in the future for anything.
I remember the first person to slam Larry Craig (pardon the pun) after the bathroom incident was none other then Mitt Romney (who Craig had been a supporter of.) While it seemed like a great political move many people that I know who are republicans and involved with the politics were appaled at the tone Romney took, and were not happy at how easy it seemed for Romney to shatter a long friendship for his own political gain. It generated distrust of Romney among republican circles. We all want honest politicians, but we also have all been in situations where out friends got in trouble and many of us cant imagine running up to them as they are being dragged to jail and telling them our friendship is over. Its much easier to just not answer the calls anymore.
Hmmmm....don't know about that, ShadyMilkMan.
This:
is something that I disagree with. Most ( although certainly not all) politicians, unfortunately, are crooked in some way or other, to some degree.
Most of the time what people
Most of the time what people see as crooked is actually just doing business. I need a new basketball court in my area but nobody wants to help me pay for it unless I help pay for their tennis court and this other guys police officer. Its not like politician A is having a basketball court put in his own back yard! Its for the people in his city/town/district. People also complain about access and nepotism in their offices as well, but lets be honest your going to hear more from people who like you. Also if someone was your campaign manager for a year, and you spent hours and hours with them and ultimatly won is it not a suprise then when you pick that person to be in charge of your office?
I dont believe they are any more crooked then you and I.
What I mean by crooked
is the fact that many, if not most politicians have not stood firm on issues when they really should've, which in many cases, has cost them elections that they might've ordinarily won.
I think its all
I think its all relative.
For instance lets say you believe that someone should have stood up in defense of Gay Marriage. Well there was someone on the other side who said stand up for "Defense of Marriage." Just because someone feels a politician made the wrong choice doesnt make them corrupt.
Guess what everytime a politician stands up for an issue you agree with someone on the other side gets pissed off because they didnt do what that other person wanted!
Point taken, ShadyMilkMan, but
regarding being somewhat dishonest, Sarah Palin is a good example, the way she's been lying about the so-called troopergate case, not to mention many other things, and the Democratic POTUS Candidate, Barack Obama, who's been claiming that donations to him have been coming only from private people, but it's recently come out that he's taken lots of public donations as well.
I think we're talking about slightly different things
The original question was about these erstwhile Wilkerson supporters endorsing Chang-Diaz, not merely repudiating Wilkerson. I see no good tactical reason to endorse Chang-Diaz for any of the people Adam named in the original post, and plenty of reason for them to play dumb and wait to see if anyone remembers this next time each of them runs for reelection.
Not just honorable- politically smart
First off, no one has to go in front of a mic. Written statements will do nicely.
The fact is that its MORE likely for this be used against them if they don't do something to get out ahead of this story than if they do. The admission of a mistake here is just a statement of the obvious. This isn't one of Wilkerson's past ethical violations for campaign finance reporting. Sure, that was better to keep your mouth shut about. THIS however was getting arrested by the FBI. The mistake is clear, and acknowledging that mistake doesn't make them any more likely to be targeted in a future campaign. The mistake is just too obvious. Anyone who'd use a reversal against them would already be using this against them and the facts are indefensible if they want to argue in support of Wilkerson.
The thing is, they can get through this without admitting a mistake at all. They don't need to say their past support of Wilkerson was an error. All they need to do is endorse Chang-Diaz and call on Wilkerson to resign. If asked to expound further, just stonewall. This way, the avoid discussing the details of the support they showed Wilkerson in the past while also going on record demanding her resignation now. THAT will have future political value, not just honor. Hoping this goes away and no one ever mentions it again is naive, but also not in the least bit incompatible with calling for her resignation and endorsing her opponent. Just doing them both covers them in either scenario. There just isn't a realistic downside to distancing themselves from Wilkerson right now. In any scenario where that could be used against them in the future, doing nothing would carry greater risks.
Much easier to stonewall if
Much easier to stonewall if you never open your mouth in the first place. Each one is probaly hoping that the other ones will get pulled out in front of the mics first. As they say the tallest blade of grass is the first one to be cut. You know as well as I do that the first person to come out and say ANYTHING or write ANYTHING will become the new target for gossip and media.
Id put my money on Chuck Turner being the first to open his mouth and creating a scene so the rest of them could slink away.
The one unfortunate thing about all this is it will be very awkward for Sonia Chang Diaz when she walks into the State House after her victory because she will have to deal with all of these people on a daily basis, can you say awkward?
Hmm
Is there someone running against Chang-Diaz now that Wilkerson is basically out of it?
Yes, she has opposition - on the ballot, even
William T. Leonard, Socialist Workers Party, at your service.
Mike Ball has rounded up some links on him.
That's today's Boston -
That's today's Boston - where the Democrats are the right wing party on the ballot.
Im not impressed with his
Im not impressed with his web presence. Its hard to find web pages about him, made either by him or others using a general google search. As someone with a common name who isnt that well known outside of my own circles I am capable of finding quite a few hits about myself using a google search, my name and Boston/Massachusetts/My hometown. High up on the list are linked in profiles, myspace, facebook, and other pages controlled by me. Then there are minor newspaper stories and comments by others in blogs and what not. Overall someone looking for me wont have a hard time finding any info on me, and Im not running for office.
I would think that he would at the very least have a propaganda machine (himself, some coffee, and a laptop at midnight) capable of at least moving his name up the list so people could stumble across him alot easier. When your running behind its important you be able to reach out to others by every free means possible.