Some thoughts on a quote in Saturday's Globe

That's great advice Brad ... the party's current focus should be limited and narrow. Great plan! (0.00 / 0)

"The US Senate race is the bottom of the ticket, the top of the ticket, and the middle of the ticket," - Brad Jones

Molon Labe

---

by: Republican Ram Rod Radio @ Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 15:57:55 PM UTC

The entire article is troubling (5.00 / 1)

How many times over the last two years has the MassGOP been in the most widely read newspaper in the state with a highly damaging article like this? This entire article is troubling for the entire party - all 11% of us.

---

by: EJD @ Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 16:38:17 PM UTC

Is History Going to Repeat Itself? (5.00 / 1)

The election for Chair is of critical importance for the direction of the Mass GOP.  We need a leader that will stop the slide into inconsequentiality and move us towards a political force to be reckoned with in setting the direction of the Commonwealth.  We need a leader who will lead the Party for multiple election cycles and stop the seemingly never ending cycle of short term leadership and the lack of stability that comes with persistent changes at the top.

Both of the major candidates have indicated the importance of breaking with the past and rebuilding the party from the ground up.  Whether it be Grassroots Green or "Grassroots Certified" Hughes, both candidates make clear the importance of activists and local RTC and RCCs in building the party up from its current anemic 11% level.  This is indeed encouraging.

However, I am concerned with an impression that I am getting when following the campaigns which, by and large, have been cordial and focused in their debates.  My concern is that one candidate, Ms. Hughes, is, to her credit, receiving the majority of the endorsements from current party leaders whether it be Minority Leader Jones of the unfortunate quote above or National Committee Members Kaufman and Healey whose recent endorsement Ms. Hughes highlights in a FaceBook post:

Honored by the endorsements of our National Committeeman Ron Kaufman and National Committeewoman Kerry Healey. Both Kerry and Ron have given so much to our party, and I am looking foreword to standing with them to rebuild our party.

So here's my concern - With so many members of leadership endorsing her, including Ron and Kerry, how free will Ms. Hughes really be to make changes to the very Party that these leaders have lead into its current predicament?  For example, will Ms. Hughes feel free to make the necessary, in my opinion, wholesale changes at Merrimack Street?

Is this concern over thought or valid?  Thanks

---

by: ConsEph @ Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 19:37:18 PM UTC

No worries (0.00 / 0)

A good question!

If this were the Democratic Party, establishment backing would be stifling.

But our "establishment" was too weak to even vote Charlie Baker into a delegate seat!

The two sides we have are ready to fight about ideology and strategy. But as I am trying to show with my posts, most of what we need to do is build lots of new infrastructure. Sure, that has to be funded, but I think there would be little resistance if the right presentation is made. I have many friends from liberal Republicans to RINO hunters. The one thing they agree upon is how non-functional the party is. In fact, that belief is so strong that anyone who wins the chairmanship should immediately turn to getting people from all sides to start building things. Technology is the great uniter!

(Sorry I wandered off on that path...)

---

by: edfactor @ Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 23:18:29 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Only one person making this about ideology (0.00 / 0)

Ed,
The only person talking about ideology in this race is Kirsten Hughes. In a letter sent to State Committee members she's seeking to divide them along ideological lines again after they achieved a certain degree of unity. Further she posted a highly offensive and polarizing  letter by Mary Tibma (Vice Chair of Needham RTC)in which she disqualified Rick because he's a conservative.  Hughes has established a litmus test that even Bob Maginn couldn't pass.

On the other hand Rick is talking about making the structural changes, improving technology, and so forth.  

Ms. Hughes declined an invitation to speak at the MARA Convention. Rick attended and spoke. He made it clear that although he's conservative, he didn't believe the role of the Chair was to impose his ideology. Rather the State Committee and State Convention were the bodies that had to determine the platform.

So if you're worried about an ideological food fight, it won't come from Rick Green. But I can guaranty you that Kirsten will do her best to marginalize the base.

Just to refresh people's memory: Kirsten was the political director in 2010. As such she played a huge role in the 2010 Convention. At said convention the establishment blocked 2 conservative candidates for Attorney General from getting on the Primary ballot. They did so as not to have anyone on the ticket that disagreed with Baker or Tisei. So they would have rather have left the ballot spot blank than run a conservative.

In response the grassroots had to run a "write-in campaign" in the Primary to get Jim McKenna on the November ballot.

We can gather 3 things from this.  If Kirsten Hughes is elected, the MA-GOP will
1) hand over all its resources to Scott Brown, ignoring all the other party needs.
2) she will only serve as long as it is in Brown's interest.
3) she will continue the imperial chairmanship and her reign promises to be polarizing.
 

---

by: John DiMascio @ Tue Jan 15, 2013 at 12:41:37 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Ugh (5.00 / 1)

John -

While you are a very good person, you are one of the most polarizing activists we have. For you to label someone else as such is rich.

Honestly, it is the support of people like you for Rick Green that worries me a little. It isn't that I think Mr. Green is out there talking ideology. He isn't. (In fact, he isn't saying anything publicly at all.)

Rick Green appears to be a great guy and a great Republican. I really don't think the ideology of the chairman is all that important. But for many of us, the awful MassGOP brand is something we are always thinking about. I have some unenrolled friends who should be easy targets to recruit to the party. But they think we are crazy. Until that changes, we won't win.

Now, if you said, "But Ed, Jen Nassour tried to improve the brand and we got nothing." I would actually agree!! In fact, I think this should be question number one to Kirsten Hughes;

"Ms. Hughes - Jen Nassour was a charasmatic, young female mom who was socially moderate and had strong establishment support. She irritated the conservative activists but we still didn't win any more races or bring in new demographics. How will you succeed where she failed?"

I think that is a tough but fair question.

Mr. Green should be aske a different version of that same question.  

---

by: edfactor @ Tue Jan 15, 2013 at 14:11:48 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

She was not socially moderate (0.00 / 0)

Jennifer Nassour is not socially moderate.  That is a misconception.

Full Disclosure


http://www.redmassgroup.com/pr...

---

by: Rob "EaBo Clipper" Eno @ Tue Jan 15, 2013 at 15:46:42 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Well she did do the Bay Windows interview ... and basically said social issues were going to take a back seat. (5.00 / 1)

It's not like she votes on legislation ... she leads the party.  It would be reasonable for someone to call her socially moderate based on the Bay Windows interview.

Molon Labe

---

by: Republican Ram Rod Radio @ Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 16:21:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

---- wide-spread support (0.00 / 0)

Ed,

I'm an ardent advocate for certain positions. But I'm not running for chair. Just as important,there is a HUGE difference between advocating for a position and LYING, FABRICATING, and maliciously attempting to destroy the newly forged unity of purpose among Stat Committee members in order to get elected chair.

Rick has widespread support from people all over the ideological spectrum.

Yes he was my support and the support of many conservatives. But he also has the support of social moderates and liberals like:

State Rep. Dan Winslow-

State Rep. Shaunna O'Connell

Ms. Susannah Whipps Lee, former Republican State Rep candidate
(Susanna ran out in Western MA.. Ed, she's exactly your kind of "R" on the ocial issues)

S.C. Members  
Bill Ryan  
Mike Cowett
Lisa Barstow who although conservative worked as Communications Director for Elizabeth Childs.

Moving on!

Jennifer Nassour did nothing to try "improve the brand."
She unilaterally made statements about the policy in an attempt CHANGE the party's long held positions.  But that's not the worst of it. She with the assistance of Kirsten Hughes kept 2 conservative candidates for Attorney General of the 2010 Primary Ballot on the ballot!!!!!!!!!! So she's a hypocrite. On the one hand she talked about a "Big Tent." On the other hand she did all that she could, with the assistance of people like Kirsten, to purge the party of its base!

As for the MA-GOP brand ---it is awful. But not for the reasons you keep shouting about.  It's awful because the MA-GOP leadership is perceived as being out of touch from the common person. I'm not saying that is. But that is the perception. Republican in Massachusetts are still seen as the Brahmin, the affluent that look down their noses at the middle class. We've done a horrible job explaining "Why believe in the economic policies we hold to. We talk about small government and efficiencies, which of course are good things. But we do it sounding like cold and calculating bean counters. We play right in to caricature   of Republican fat cats who put dollar signs over people. And that is epitomized by the policy of only supporting the top of the ticket! When all you're worried about is electing on powerful official it sends the message that you don't think representing the "folks" is worthwhile.

---

by: John DiMascio @ Wed Jan 16, 2013 at 12:38:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Tied (0.00 / 0)

For what it's worth, I'm told that the endorsement count by State Committee members is now tied at 28-28 with Kirsten ahead in legislative endorsements.

Both are fine candidates and have plenty of good individuals supporting them (myself possibly excepted j/k).

I do disagree with your assessment that Jennifer Nassour tried to "purge the party of its base".  At best, that's unfair hyperbole but I'd rather not waste either of our time focused upon fighting over the past.  Rather, for what faults & sins there may be, by any & all of us, let us learn from that history so that we are not doomed to repeat it.

Rick Green & Kirsten Hughes have plenty of social conservatives, moderates, libertarians & Republicans of every stripe supporting the both of them.  

One thing that does irk me, and I'm not accusing you of it, is  the tendency to engage in exaggeration for affect and trying to inflate every chairman's election into some existential crisis for the very existence of the Massachusetts Republican Party.  

It's not.  It's important, very much so... but if either Kirsten Hughes or Rick Green are elected the party will go on, perhaps not taking identical steps, but we will march forward if & only if everyone at all levels and in all aspects of the party unite together and collaborate constructively.  I expect that we will.  We need to and therefore we must, and we will.  

---

by: BNCordeiro @ Wed Jan 16, 2013 at 23:39:07 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

could someone list or detail Jones' (5.00 / 1)

"pros" or explain how he was re-elected minority leader?  I'm well familiar with the cons, but have been struggling lately to see where he helps our party (beyond the establishment, that is.

This is a serious question welcoming input.

---

by: Term Limits @ Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 20:57:54 PM UTC

By Caucus (0.00 / 0)

I'm not trying to be flippant but Rep. Brad Jones was elected by a majority of members of the Republican House caucus.  I'm unaware that he had any opposition this time around.

---

by: BNCordeiro @ Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 23:11:28 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The vote was (5.00 / 1)

28-0-1 abstention.

Jim Lyons was the lone abstention.

Full Disclosure


http://www.redmassgroup.com/pr...

---

by: Rob "EaBo Clipper" Eno @ Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 23:30:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

JIM LYONS IS THE BEST (5.00 / 1)

JIM LYONS IS THE BEST
JIM LYONS IS THE BEST
JIM LYONS IS THE BEST

It didn't need to be said, but I felt compelled.

---

by: lonniebrennan @ Tue Jan 15, 2013 at 02:57:14 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I understood this to be true, (0.00 / 0)

which is all the more reason I posed the question, HOW? WHY?  I've never had it answered as to whether or not this year they went for the roll call vote instead of the secret ballot, but that would explain a lot if the former is true. My other theory is there was not enough effort, or strength put forth behind the scenes leading up to the vote to offer a better alternative, because even just talking about it openly puts people at risk for blowback.  That's all I can think of, but looking for other theories because with the low enrollment, and even lower numbers in the State House of our party, I should think it obvious something has to change.
 

---

by: Term Limits @ Tue Jan 15, 2013 at 00:29:45 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

BLOWBACK?? (0.00 / 0)

BLOWBACK?????

 We LOST a state rep. because somehow magically the re-districting just happened to pit TWO NEW state reps against one another (Lyons and Adams). Hmmmm.

And what did the two newbies have in common? I'll be you can guess, and it strikes right to the heart of the matter.

Fortunately, in a move of honor, Adams chose to run for another position (senate) instead (but lost), but did not go against Lyons. Adams was quite honorable.

FOR THE RECORD, I REALLY TRULY like Brad Jones, but I also like a lot of folks.

Still, IF YOUR TEAM doesn't perform, and is FAILING all the time, YOU CHANGE THE MANAGEMENT, you CHANGE the players.

Again, I like the guy,but if you want RADICAL CHANGE (from the 11%), YOU NEED TO CHANGE RADICALLY (toss out a few of the old guard).

---

by: lonniebrennan @ Tue Jan 15, 2013 at 03:05:59 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Why Lonnie! (0.00 / 0)

You couldn't mean that the Republican Leadership conspired to redistrict in such a way as to cost their fellow Republican seats, just because they might present competition, or because they get better press because they actually stand up to the Democrats. You couldn't possibly think that.

I'm shocked I say, I'm shocked.

---

by: John DiMascio @ Tue Jan 15, 2013 at 12:45:27 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It's about Power (5.00 / 3)

Leadership would rather continue as leaders of a minority party with less than 30 Representatives than risk not being in leadership as part of a party with 50+ Representatives.  It's sad and it will continue if Leadership has its way.

---

by: ConsEph @ Tue Jan 15, 2013 at 13:22:19 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Agree (0.00 / 0)

Molon Labe

---

by: Republican Ram Rod Radio @ Tue Jan 15, 2013 at 14:48:50 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Agree, Agree, (0.00 / 0)

Agree with all of the above, and see it as a big problem.  Still, would like to think with 11%, the rest of the gang could have mobilized enough support to help the party/#s.

 @Lonnie, in total agreement except didn't understand what point you were making on the blow back?

---

by: Term Limits @ Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 05:34:02 AM UTC

[ Parent ]