Hey, there! Log in / Register
Why Lynch will probably still win in November
By adamg on Mon, 03/22/2010 - 4:32pm
Conor Yunits runs the numbers, thinks Southie and disaffected union rank-and-file will still go heavily for Lynch, swamping the lefties of Jamaica Plain:
... If a Wu or Dunkelbarger candidacy is intended just to send Lynch some sort of message that liberals are pissed ... I'm guessing he already knows that. But if liberals actually think they could oust Lynch in the 9th over his health care vote?
Well, in my opinion they'd be better off spending their time fighting to keep the 10th.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
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
He's looking at the wrong
He's looking at the wrong election.
An off season special election where only one candidate ran a campaign to gauge a Democratic primary. Huh? Yeah.
We could find ourselves in a Lynch for Massachusetts party fiasco, but I don't see the teaparty NOT running a candidate against him in this climate and with their whims. That would mean an independent run would favor the Dem.
I think he wins big.
Some of those surburban towns voted big for S. Brown and those same people will vote for Lynch. And I assume that a majority of those voters voted republican against Lynch the last time anyway. If it was next November there might be some lag time but this year he wins big.
And the Southie knuckleheads will hit the polls hard as well.
That cat from Needham doesn't have a chance.
Dunklewho and the lady from
Dunklewho and the lady from Needham will split the ponytail moonbat trust fund vote. The normal people will vote for Lynch.
again the idiot anon who
again the idiot anon who thinks a moonbat is a librul
Guess this concern troll missed the last post about it.
" disaffected union rank-and-file "
Lynch won't need campaign money from the unions if he gets enough campaign money from the health insurance lobby, that is if they didn;t already blow their budget for buying congressmen.
AFL-CIO political director Karen Ackerman has been in touch with Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) officials to communicate that the AFL-CIO may not provide endorsements or resources to Democrats who bucked the bill.
Despite labor's efforts, Reps. Mike Arcuri (D-N.Y.), Jason Altmire (D-Pa.), and Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.), voted against the bill on final passage.
Ackerman made those members aware that it would be very difficult to support them again.
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/8...
AFL-CIO sent a similiar letter to Stephen Lynch
too early to tell
IF the healthcare bill turns out to not have a negative impact on the suburban voter, then they're not going to turn out in drovers like in the Scott Brown election because the motivating issue will have already passed. I think the GOP would rather try to run some other Scott Brown type out there to get one of their own vs. relying on a blue dog Dem. variant to do their bidding in Congress. If the healthcare bill is viewed as a fiasco in the fall, then yes, Lynch will roll right along, but I think he's probably angered a lot of moderate to liberal voters in his district. If there was a valid choice, I'd certainly vote against him at this point, but it's far from clear if there will be. As always, I'm surprised and disappointed by the total lack of independent (i.e. non-union, non-machine) moderates on the ballot.
Aren't the Southie knuckleheads selling out and moving suburbs?
You may be right about the impact of this health care bill
Vaughn, But I have a feeling that the GOP is going to blow this health care thing out of proportion. I mean, here in MA, the health care bill won't really impact anyone except those making over 250K right? And those guys now know they have Lynch on their side.
But I don't think moderate voters are angry like you say.
And the Southie knuckleheads are those that were born, grew up, live and will die in Southie. Southie Knuckleheads are Bluedog Demorcrats in my mind.
Some perspective from Lynch voters who are now against him
My elderly parents who live in Milton have voted consistently for Lynch. Their voting tendencies are to go with what their Catholic teaching dictates. They tend to be liberal except when in comes to abortion which they are against. But they are not one-issue voters and did always vote for the pro-choice Ted Kennedy (and Barney Frank when they used to live in his district).
They are now livid at Lynch and say they won't vote for him again. Their view is that the Catholic thing to do was to vote Yes to get the 32+ million uninsured Americans health care.
And they would be right. The
And they would be right. The Catholic Association of Nuns along with two other Catholic groups supported the bill, and found the bills language on abortion [w/o the executive order mind you] to be enough to past their muster.
So, the question begs asking. Why did Stephen Lynch balk at this bill?
Statewide
He might have been against it on principle, or might think it would benefit him in a statewide run - maybe against Scott Brown. He wanted to take that issue off Brown's table.
We know Coakley's not going to be able to try that race again.
From the Globe...
Globe:
Lynch said he couldn’t support the bill because it “stripped out all the reforms’’ from the House version, including insurance cost controls and the public option.
Insurance companies could act like cartels in the Senate bill, Lynch said.
You mean the same Bill he was
You mean the same Bill he was squirming with and trying to find a reason not to vote for?
Lynch Who?
Stephen Lynch is the kind of Politician that wets his finger, holds it up to the wind to see which way the Political Wind is blowing. He's also legendary for doing "Polls" on issues. He saw that his most wealthiest (sound familiar?) Constituents didn't want the Bill to pass so he went with that. To suggest that Lynch didn't vote for Universal Health Care because it "didn't go far enough" is laughable! He's no dummy...He's putting a "spin" on it because he knows he dropped the ball with respect to his Blue Collar Constituents. That's not to mention Organized Labor who put him in Washington. Please, leave the B/S out of here? Thank You.
Labor litmus test? Yes. Democratic Party litmus test? Hell Yes.
March 19, 2010
Congressman Stephen F. Lynch
88 Black Falcon Avenue
Suite 340
Boston, MA 02210
Dear Representative Lynch:
America has been trying for more than 100 years to enact comprehensive healthcare reform, and the voices of working women and men have been at the forefront of this movement at every turn and in every decade. Working men and women throughout Massachusetts have stood up time and time again - and we are asking that you stand with us now.
Congress has an opportunity to make history and improve the lives of millions of working families. This bill is not perfect, but if Congress does not pass it, we cannot work together to improve it. We fully understand your concerns that this bill does not do enough to hold insurance companies accountable, but this bill is an enormous first step in the right direction. In this year alone, insurance companies will no longer be allowed to deny care to children with pre-existing illnesses, lifetime caps on coverage will be lifted, and parents would be able to keep their children on their policies up to age 26. If Congress passes this legislation, together, we can continue to strengthen consumer protections, increase market competition, and ensure that insurance companies no longer have a stranglehold on consumers. If Congress doesn't pass the bill, none of this is possible. All we are left with is the status quo.
Congressman, we will not be able to explain to the working women and men of our union why you voted against their interests. We have stood together time and time again and you have made an enormous difference in the lives of our members.
It takes courage to make history. We know that you have always had the courage to do the right thing - national health reform is the right thing for Massachusetts families.
Please stand with us once again and do the right thing.
Sincerely,
Robert Haynes, President, Mass AFL-CIO
Mike Fadel, Executive Vice President, 1199SEIU United Healthcare Workers East
Rich Rogers, President, Greater Boston Labor Council
Mark Erlich, Executive Secretary-Treasurer of the Carpenters
Jeff Crosby, President, North Shore Labor Council
Frank X. Callahan, Jr., President, Mass Building Trades Council
Bruce T. Boccardy, President, SEIU Local 888
Francis X. Callahan, Jr., President, Massachusetts Building Trades Council, AFL-CIO
Rocio Saenz, President, SEIU Local 615
Tony Caso, Executive Director, AFSCME Council 93
Peter Wright, Political Director, AFSCME Council 93
Michael Mazzini, MD, SEIU Local 1957 CIR
Michael Grunko, President, SEIU Local 509
Gary Sullivan, President, UWUA Local 369
James Coyle, General Agent, Metropolitan Boston Buildings Trade Council
Tom Gosnell, President, American Federation of Teachers
Don Boehner President of UAW 1596
Bob Madore, President, UAW Region 9A
Edward Collins, Executive Vice President, Massachusetts AFL-CIO
Frank Rigiero, National Business Agent, New England Region, APWU
James Pinkham, President, Plymouth/Bristol Central Labor Council
Stephen Lukosus, National Business Agent, New England Region, APWU
Mark Govoni, Vice President and Political Director, UFCW Local 1445
Joseph P. Carlson, President, Central Mass. AFL-CIO
Funny
How labor back stabs him for the senate seat and uninvites him to the labor breakfast and now want him to vote with him. Complete slap in the face and shows how labor leaders are out of touch with rank and file members.
When are members going to have real leadership who listen to it's members?
Charley
Charley...Your Time-Line is screwed up. He wasn't invited to the Labor Day Breakfast because he made it clear he was voting against it. Also, the Labor Movement is getting stronger by the Day. We will not support a turn-coat! End of Story!
Charlie...
Charlie, your time-line is a bit off. He was "uninvited" because he wouldn't commit to the Bill.
Can't vote for Mr. Lynch
This tax paying, full time working, short haired, works by day, sleeps by night (the moon) and has nothing to do with bats will vote against Mr. Lynch. He has always leaned toward pretending that everything in fine and dandy and nothing need change. I've always wondered if he was somehow related to the ex-mayor Flynn. They both seem to live in a world of their own, and no one elses, reality.
Anonymice who say that
Anonymice who say that they'll never vote for xyz again never, ever voted for them in the first place. It's a law of the internets and talk radio.
"That's right, I'm a Republican, and I'll never vote for Bush again!"
Lying liars.
Financial Impact of Health Care Reform in a Nutshell
Bob Neer lays it out.
As I suspected, Lynch for Senate
Lynch voted against the bill to take the issue off Scott Brown's table.
Lynch is ambitious, bold and his political instincts are very keen. He took on Paul Gannon, beat him for State Rep., then beat Bulger's son for the state senate.
In the Congressional race in 2001, he correctly surmised that consolidating the urban base against Jacques, Joyce and Pacheco would win him the primary.
By running to the right and living in the city, he could win a plurality against any number of more "progressive" suburban / exurban candidates in a 2012 Senate primary. And then it's him and the unions vs. Brown and the tea partiers. Not a contest, in my opinion.
I can tell you another thing, Harmony Wu will not be replacing him in Congress.
http://bostonherald.com/news/us_politics/view/2010...
Do you really think Lynch can win a Democratic primary
for US Senate in Massachusetts as someone who voted
It's a sincere question.
Having said that, since Lynch chose not to run for Senate in a special election when he could do it safely and keep his congressional seat, would the cautious Lynch run for Senate in 2012 when he stands to lose his congressional seat for trying?
Yes, for the reasons mentioned
If you have a primary field of several suburban "progressive" Democrats, Lynch will have a good shot.
The other factor is redistricting - even though Delahunt is sacrificing himself, who knows what the 9th will look like after that?
Wrong deselby!
The reason Steve Lynch won so decisively against Gannon and Bill Bulger Jr. was because people liked him and believed he would be an advocate for Workers Rights, Organized Labor, and the Democratic Platform. Since being Elected to the U.S. Congress he has made it perfectly clear that he no longer holds those beliefs. I have no idea where you are from, however, take a walk down Broadway in Southie and strike up a conversation with the good people there about Steve Lynch. You will be very surprised how angry they are with him. Not just on National Issues, but on local issues as well. Most People feel he forgot where he came from. Steve Lynch is for Steve Lynch only. Steve Lynch is catering to his wealthier Constituents in the Ninth Congressional District to "beef up" his War Chest. His Real Estate Business isn't doing too bad either. Now that Lynch has some opponents for his seat has he begun to put "Coffee Hours" and "Office Hours" in the Local News Papers. How many ways can you spell PHONY?
Was that before or after the Malthusian Eugenics post?
I think I missed it.
Scary though.