Massachusetts Democrats, still humbled by their defeat in the 2010 US Senate special election, are launching unusually early campaign attacks on the Republican Party, particularly targeting Senate candidate Michael J. Sullivan for his conservative social positions.
Democratic Party leaders and gay rights activists have planned a press conference for Wednesday where they will highlight Sullivan’s opposition to same-sex marriage. The party will hold another event later in the week to attack the former US attorney, who is considered the early front-runner in a three-way GOP primary, for his opposition to banning assault weapons.
Comments
The Democrats are focusing on the wrong issues here if the problem is really a case of not repeating the Scott Brown "upset" and that is the style of campaigning that Coakley did - which was minimal. Brown was out and about, energizing people and basically shaking hands - something Coakley was not known for and did not do much of during the campaign. The slights against her attitude of entitlement go a long way here, and she did not do much to fight against it by going out more and doing campaign stops. If the Democratic party wants to make sure they win this time, then get out there and cross the state in your metaphorical truck and meet people, talk to them and hear their concerns. That is what will go a long way towards making sure a candidate of either party, wins.
This comment has been removed.
I haven't checked into Gomez' positions but he seems a long shot. The other two Republicans are blowhards and would make terrible senators. Lynch is a good man and I believe would represent the state well.
Will the Dems and gay activists be calling out Nick Collins, running in the First Suffolk senate race, for his opposition to Gay Marriage?
Doubt it.
I, for one, will not be voting for Nick Collins this autumn. Linda Forry will have my vote! She has a better record of getting things done for her constituents and she supports strong families (heterosexual and same-sex alike).
The Democrats would be better served by worrying about their own primary and getting the vote out. Let the Republicans sort their own issues and whom to nominate. Their will be enough time in the general election to engage the Republican nominee. This strategy could easily backfire.
I doubt that it will backfire. Just too many very smart people from Massachusetts!
Apparently, you're not from Massachusetts.
I love when politicians say we need to bringpeople together and oh by the way gay people cannot get married. What clowns. If you oppose a ban on assault weapons you are an idiot. Repugs are stupid
If we have to have a war with republicans it might as well be a big war right now!
Republicans can fool a lot of people but they can't fool the people from Massachusetts! Why don't they move back to Dixie where ingnorance is bliss!
This comment has been removed.
Sullivan is not the strongest candidate on the republican side. Winslow is the one who could win it all. He is a moderate republican, a good speaker and debater. If Winslow survives the republican primary, Markey and/or Lynch will be in trouble. Neither Markey nor Lynch has strong appeal with most democratic voters. If the democrats were smart they'd encourage another candidate to throw his/her hat in the ring - a new, younger, candidate would be more palatable than these time-worn party hacks.
More of the same vote Dem
The Mass Democratic Party & John Walsh are focused on supporting Markey (financially and through their surrogates) and taking Lynch out of the picture. If Markey wins, he will morph into Markcoakley for the June election guaranteeing GOP the seat.
As I've said before, Lynch and Sullivan are "Southern Democrats" right out of the mold (or values) of a Southern Democrat.. They're both alike. Winslow would be the Republican's strongest candidate with a chance to win against Markey the clear frontrunner. Winslow is an intelligent version of Scott Brown actually; therefore, he has a chance. It's bad timing to run as a Republican to represent Massachusetts in Washington right now, so I think (and hope) Markey will win.
How can anyone say "hope markey will win" without a little vomit popping up in the back of their mouth?
I am not sold on any candidate at this point because I have not heard any discussions of substance from any of them. I do know, however, that anyone opposing gay marriage is a deal-breaker for me, my family and my extensive network of friends. I can be persuaded on a variety of issues, but a civil rights issue like gay marriage isn't one of them. NO ONE has the right to legislate discrimination into law, and Sullivan would be a huge retrograde step on that score.
This is not the state from which to send a message that a candidate who discriminates, especially one who was supposed to uphold the law as a US Attorney, can and should be elected. Unless he comes to his senses and agrees that DOMA is discrimination, then he should be made to realize how out of step he is with the majority of voters here and a growing plurality of voters nationally by eliminating him from the candidate pool before he snags funding from the despicable Adelson/Koch Brothers cabal...
"....to send a message that a candidate who discriminates,"
This is why he resembles a "Southern Democrat" when we compare the civil rights struggle of the '60's, the busing crisis in South Boston, voting along the lines of a church's doctrine, in this case the Catholic Church, standing up against a woman's right to choose and on and on. Sullivan and Lynch are the same deal. Sullivan worked at Gillette for 16-plus years and heard it all from the Southie employees; meanwhile, Lynch also lived through it all. Enough to cause damage to their thinking.