Which Pro-2A Candidate in MA Special Election Senate Race?

PaulD said:
This is a primary. If a person is registered as an independent but wants a Republican, voting for the weakest D isn't a bad strategy.
Click to expand...

I think Markey is the opponent you want to have. Contrary to conventional wisdom, I think Lynchie will crush any Republican with his working class steel worker story because he'll appeal to Reagan Democrats and the key deomgraphics (suburan Catholics) who are the swing vote necessary for a GOP candidate to win.

Markey is far enough to the left to turn off the middle. Lynch is relatively more towards the middle and will eat GOP votes, as well as strip them of their "Washington outsider" arguments.
 
OfficerObie59 said:
I think Markey is the opponent you want to have. Contrary to conventional wisdom, I think Lynchie will crush any Republican with his working class steel worker story because he'll appeal to Reagan Democrats and the key deomgraphics (suburan Catholics) who are the swing vote necessary for a GOP candidate to win.

Markey is far enough to the left to turn off the middle. Lynch is relatively more towards the middle and will eat GOP votes, as well as strip them of their "Washington outsider" arguments.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I could believe that. I was just pointing out that voting to spoil in a primary isn't a bad idea in general. In this specific case, I'm open to the idea that we want Markey to win the D primary. My only fear is that Markey's "ZOMG GUNS" platform could play well with the moonbats here.
 
Winslow came to the GOAL breakfast and introduced himself to us. I'm leaning towards him but I'm not sure who the stronger candidate in the General Election would be.
 
rep308 said:
Bump for Dan Winslow. Met and talked with him a number of times, he's on speed dial up at GOAL headquarters
Click to expand...

GOAL not endorsing him, or anyone, for the primary. They've pretty much given Winslow and Sullivan equal ratings.

All the polling shows the primary is between Gomez and Sullivan with Gomez ahead by 6 pts. Winslow isn't anywhere close in the running.

RealClearPolitics - 2013 Massachusetts Senate Special Election (June 25)

And yes, all the polls, so far, show Markey winning the primary and the election.

Michael Graham also has an ongoing poll on his website.

The Natural Truth

He has had Winslow and Sullivan on his radio program several times, but he doesn’t endorse either. His poll shows the same results as the other polls - Sullivan vs Gomez. Winslow barely registering.

So it is apparent to everyone, except gun owners, the primary is between Gomez and Sullivan. If we split the vote between Winslow and Sullivan the advantage will go to Gomez and he will be the nominee. If we don't want the election to be between an anti-2A Republican and Democrat then we need to get behind Sullivan.

I agree Markey is the most vulnerable candidate, and that Sullivan would have the best chance to beat him. It would, at least, be an interesting race and bring more attention to election issues that voters and the press have been mostly indifferent. For that reason, it seems foolish to crossover to the Democrat primary and vote for Lynch in order to hurt Markey.
 
Last edited:
Acujeff said:
GOAL not endorsing him, or anyone, for the primary. They've pretty much given Winslow and Sullivan equal ratings.

All the polling shows the primary is between Gomez and Sullivan with Gomez ahead by 6 pts. Winslow doesn't register.

RealClearPolitics - 2013 Massachusetts Senate Special Election (June 25)

And yes, all the polls, so far, show Markey winning the primary and the election.

Michael Graham also has an ongoing poll on his website.

The Natural Truth

He has had Winslow and Sullivan on his radio program several times, but he doesn’t endorse either. His poll shows the same results as the other polls - Sullivan vs Gomez. Winslow barely registering.

So it is apparent to everyone, except gun owners, the primary is between Gomez and Sullivan. If we split the vote between Winslow and Sullivan the advantage will go to Gomez and he will be the nominee. If we don't want the election to be between an anti-2A Republican and Democrat then we need to get behind Sullivan.

I agree Markey is the most vulnerable candidate, and that Sullivan would have the best chance to beat him. It would, at least, be an interesting race and bring more attention to election issues that voters and the press have been mostly indifferent. For that reason, it seems foolish to crossover to the Democrat primary and vote for Lynch in order to hurt Markey.
Click to expand...


Based on this, even though I'd prefer Winslow, I'll support Sullivan. I HATE Gomez, and we need the best possible chance of not having Markey or Lynch, both of whom suck fat guy ass.
 
Acujeff said:
So it is apparent to everyone, except gun owners, the primary is between Gomez and Sullivan. If we split the vote between Winslow and Sullivan the advantage will go to Gomez and he will be the nominee. If we don't want the election to be between an anti-2A Republican and Democrat then we need to get behind Sullivan.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't necessarily trust a poll with a sample size of 128. But even if a vote for liberty is "wasted," what chance does Sullivan have? He's a vocal pro-life Republican with close connections to Bush and Ashcroft -- he has exactly zero chance in Massachusetts.

If Sullivan were a principled liberty guy, I'd be fine with going down with the ship, but not for this:

KennethWVT said:
Heard an ad on WEEI while on the road this morning with Sullivan proclaiming his love for the Patriot Act, using the Marathon Bombing as his prop. No way and no thanks.
Click to expand...

Winslow is clearly the most liberty-oriented candidate and has at least an outside chance at beating Markey or Lynch.
 
Politics sucks.
If you vote for Winslow but he can't beat Sullivan and Sullivan wins but will no chance and lose to Lynch or Markey but yet Winslow has a better chance at Lynch or Markey than Sullivan would.
 
Somebody put up a post with a poll so we can show what everyone is thinking, not what they're talking about.

Again, I'm going Sullivan. Gomez is an anti and Winslow is a double agent.
 
Last edited:
KennethWVT said:
Heard an ad on WEEI while on the road this morning with Sullivan proclaiming his love for the Patriot Act, using the Marathon Bombing as his prop. No way and no thanks.
Click to expand...

I heard those spots too, and his support of the Patriot Act is why I will never vote for him.

Winslow for me. Not perfect but the best of the turds. I will also not vote for anyone based on their 'electability'.
 
southshore said:
... I think we need to be suspicious of any R that has an endorsement from the Globe.
...
Click to expand...


Right, because the Globe would never support a guy they dislike just to taint him in the eyes of his Globe-hating base.

Look, the two party system is broken since it guarantees exactly this type of scenario: Super Evil Candidate A polling at 40%, Evil Candidate B polling at 37% and Good Candidate C polling at 10% with the rest undecided... at which point Candidate C is losing its support to Candidate B as voters get all "practical" in choosing the electable lesser evil over the unelectable good... forgetting that the pathetic final results for Candidate C serve to remind the voters that only A and B are viable choices, and supporting C is pointless, thus perpetuating the cycle in the next elections.

I will be voting for Winslow because he's the best candidate of the bunch, and to hell with polls and electability. Even if my vote does not tip the scale in this election, it will signal support that Winslow can use to build his political platform for the next election.

Short-term thinking leads to bad decisions. Whether we talk the national (Rep/Dem/Lib) political dynamic or our republican primary for the special Senate Election, the deal is the same - think about multiple election cycles, not just the nearest one.

Politics is a long game and needs to be thought about accordingly.
 
Winslow's only blemish is his support for UBC, a position can be changed if we provide him with solid rational against it. Sullivan's support for the Patriot Act is a bigger issue because the it infringes on more rights.
 
I heard Sullivan on an RKO ad proclaiming his support for the USA PATRIOT Act. [puke2]

- - - Updated - - -

I heard Sullivan on an RKO ad proclaiming his support for the USA PATRIOT Act. [puke2]
 
June4th said:
Winslow's only blemish is his support for UBC, a position can be changed if we provide him with solid rational against it. Sullivan's support for the Patriot Act is a bigger issue because the it infringes on more rights.
Click to expand...

This was my sentiment, then Winslow tweeted this:

From:@EvanKenney
@DanWinslow do you support the Patriot Act?


Dan's response: @EvanKenney Only with a sunset provision. Sedition law is more helpful to prevent radicalization caused by violent jihad.

https://twitter.com/danwinslow/status/327959104092004352


Ugh, I need to stop looking for libertarians in the major parties...
 
Last edited:
In Winslow's ad he mentions the bostom bombing as a reason to come together and vote tomorrow.

Never let a tragedy go to waste, I guess [rolleyes]
 
Assuming Lynch or Markey win, what happens to their vacated house seat ??

Does the Devaluator get to nominate someone to fill it for the remainder of the term, or will another special election be necessary ???
 
Zappa said:
Assuming Lynch or Markey win, what happens to their vacated house seat ??

Does the Devaluator get to nominate someone to fill it for the remainder of the term, or will another special election be necessary ???
Click to expand...

From About.com

Vacancies in the House, however, take far longer to fill. The Constitution requires that member of the House be replaced only by an election held in the congressional district of the former representative.

"When vacancies happen in the Representation from any State, the Executive Authority thereof shall issue Writs of Election to fill such Vacancies." -- Article I, Section 2, Clause 4 of the U.S. Constitution


​
According to the US Constitution and state law, the governor of the state calls for a special election to replace the vacant House seat. The full election-cycle must be followed including political party nominating processes, primary elections and a general election, all held in the congressional district involved. The entire process often takes as long as from three to six months.

While a House seat is vacant, the office of the former representative remains open, its staff operating under the supervision of the Clerk of the House of Representatives. The people of the affected congressional district do not have voting representation in the House during the vacancy period. They can, however, continue to contact former representative's interim office for assistance with a limited range of services as listed below by the Clerk of the House.
Click to expand...

Filling Congressional Vacancies
 
Last edited:
Apathesis said:
I heard Sullivan on an RKO ad proclaiming his support for the USA PATRIOT Act. [puke2]

- - - Updated - - -

I heard Sullivan on an RKO ad proclaiming his support for the USA PATRIOT Act. [puke2]
Click to expand...
He says it in his radio ads he is so proud!
KennethWVT said:
This was my sentiment, then Winslow tweeted this:

From:@EvanKenney
@DanWinslow do you support the Patriot Act?


Dan's response: @EvanKenney Only with a sunset provision. Sedition law is more helpful to prevent radicalization caused by violent jihad.

https://twitter.com/danwinslow/status/327959104092004352


Ugh, I need to stop looking for libertarians in the major parties...
Click to expand...
Exactly
 

Similar threads

  • Poll
NH - Governor's race
Replies
17
Views
437
Grendizer138
Grendizer138
Are lower 80% prohibited in MA...yet?
2
Replies
34
Views
1K
EJFudd
EJFudd
Lasering and race pistols
Replies
5
Views
174
WojtekWeaponry
WojtekWeaponry
SD shooting in Chicopee, MA
Replies
1
Views
218
VTski4x4
VTski4x4
MA compliant uppers - in Mil or shipped to MA
2
Replies
30
Views
906
Lxpony
Lxpony
Back
Top Bottom