Markey vs Kennedy in Massachusetts

[Surrealistik]

Markey's been in Mass. politics for almost 50 years and he's the incumbent. He is absolutely more influential in Massachusetts politics than AOC.

Moreover, there was no ideological content to the primary, since the candidates had the same positions on the issues. It was a primary almost entirely about voter preferences as to age (old vs young), presence (is Markey here enough?), which institutional last name you prefer, and whether challenging an incumbent for no particular reason is distasteful.

Actually there was absolutely an ideological component; progs didn't line up behind Markey overwhelmingly for no reason, so that's a complete and total gaslighting, and moreover the apparent adverse consequences of Pelosi's endorsement of Joe Kennedy speak to this further, where just prior he had a 2 point edge, then he ended up underwater by double digits about immediately after, as Markey's fundraising spiked triple what Kennedy's did in the wake of that endorsement.

Yes, on paper they are ideologically comparable, but the fact is that Markey has receipts, Joe doesn't, and Markey has AOC's backing while Joe is the pick of the notoriously anti-progressive Pelosi. Only the most willfully obtuse observer would fail to spot the battle lines here.

 

[gulfman]

It's about time to get rid of those Kennedys.Joe is lucky.It usually takes a jolt to the head to get rid of them.

 

[foolardi]

It's about time to get rid of those Kennedys.Joe is lucky.It usually takes a jolt to the head to get rid of them.

Not even Prohibition could putz a crimp into Old Joe Kennedy's ability to
Bootleg.I once read { just a few years ago } that The Kennedy's were still
receiving Royalties on Scotch imported into the States.

 

[TypicalRussian]

Boston is RIFE with corruption.Even the Boston Diocese Bishops.Unless guys with
the name Whitey Bulger { Brother of a State Senator } isn't enough.It crippled
Johnny Depp's career just to play dat guy in the movie - Black Mass - { 2015}.
- The Friends of Eddie Coyle - { 1973 } have it about right.
The Bay State may have the dubious distinction of producing some
of the most notorious crimes in U.S. History " -

Whats wrong with the catholic church in Mass or orthodox church?do we need to dive into protestants past?

and white bulgar was a gangster, so? tons of cities have them

 

[Greenbeard]

Yes, on paper they are ideologically comparable, but the fact is that Markey has receipts, Joe doesn't, and Markey has AOC's backing while Joe is the pick of the notoriously anti-progressive Pelosi. Only the most willfully obtuse observer would fail to spot the battle lines here.

Sure, ideologically aligned candidates running on the same platform = huge ideological battle! Never mind that none of the campaign was about policy issues at all, nor were out-of-state endorsements a factor. You had a guy trying to jump the line and he got swatted down.

 

[Surrealistik]

Sure, ideologically aligned candidates running on the same platform = huge ideological battle! Never mind that none of the campaign was about policy issues at all, nor were out-of-state endorsements a factor. You had a guy trying to jump the line and he got swatted down.

Apparently per the timing and sea changes in terms of fund raising and polled support, yes, the endorsements clearly mattered; if you have evidence to the contrary I'd like to see it. Put up or shut up.

And secondly, yes, the receipts matter no matter how much you want to diminish their value, or suggest that they were fundamentally the same on the issues. Anyone can pay lip service as Joe Kennedy did; as I stated to you earlier, Markey walked the walk and never wavered from the progressive policy he co-sponsored. Second, as stated earlier, the endorsements strongly imply where each politico's views were really at. I and many other progressives have no doubt that, upon receiving Pelosi's endorsement, which odds are would have eluded him if he were truly serious about such things as MFA, the guy is bull****ting about key points of policy. Conversely, AOC's endorsement is an undeniable vetting of Ed Markey's policy and progressive creds.

If this weren't about ideology, or endorsements as you so boldly assert without a shred of evidence, can you offer an alternate credible hypothesis as to why progressives aligned overwhelmingly with Markey? From everything I've heard within that circle which I obviously frequent, Joe's naked ambition and attempt to 'jump the line', despite being odious and a naked attempt to exploit his name, certainly wasn't the main reason.

 

[Abbazorkzog]

Sure, ideologically aligned candidates running on the same platform = huge ideological battle! Never mind that none of the campaign was about policy issues at all, nor were out-of-state endorsements a factor. You had a guy trying to jump the line and he got swatted down.

Apparently per the timing and sea changes in terms of fund raising and polled support, yes, the endorsements clearly mattered; if you have evidence to the contrary I'd like to see it. Put up or shut up.

And secondly, yes, the receipts matter no matter how much you want to diminish their value, or suggest that they were fundamentally the same on the issues. Anyone can pay lip service as Joe Kennedy did; as I stated to you earlier, Markey walked the walk and never wavered from the progressive policy he co-sponsored. Second, as stated earlier, the endorsements strongly imply where each politico's views were really at. I and many other progressives have no doubt that, upon receiving Pelosi's endorsement, which odds are would have eluded him if he were truly serious about such things as MFA, the guy is bull****ting about key points of policy. Conversely, AOC's endorsement is an undeniable vetting of Ed Markey's policy and progressive creds.

If this weren't about ideology, or endorsements as you so boldly assert without a shred of evidence, can you offer an alternate credible hypothesis as to why progressives aligned overwhelmingly with Markey? From everything I've heard within that circle which I obviously frequent, Joe's naked ambition and attempt to 'jump the line', despite being odious and a naked attempt to exploit his name, certainly wasn't the main reason.

You are both correct. Markey isn't as progressive as progressives are making him out to be, but it was ideological in the aspect of the working-class taking the Dem party back from oligarchs and dynasties like Clinton and Kennedy. FWIW, Markey has parsed his record in congress with entirely sane and reasonable explanations for voting the way he has.

 

[Greenbeard]

And secondly, yes, the receipts matter no matter how much you want to diminish their value, or suggest that they were fundamentally the same on the issues.

They are the same on the issues. There was no ideological content to this race, which is why the campaign spats were over bland, trivial topics. It was a campaign about nothing. No surprise it went to the incumbent.

Markey isn't as progressive as progressives are making him out to be, but it was ideological in the aspect of the working-class taking the Dem party back from oligarchs and dynasties like Clinton and Kennedy.

That would be more plausible if Kennedy hadn't won the working class areas of the Commonwealth. Markey cleaned up in the affluent, college-educated areas, i.e., among Massachusetts' sizable managerial class, whereas Kennedy's strength was in blue collar areas like the Gateway Cities.

 

[Jack Hays]

How Markey Defeated Kennedy in Massachusetts
Edward-Isaac Dovere, The Atlantic

 

[foolardi]

Whats wrong with the catholic church in Mass or orthodox church?do we need to dive into protestants past?

and white bulgar was a gangster, so? tons of cities have them

However most Big city's manage to clean up their Dirty Dodge's. Boston let Whitey
disappear into the night for almost 2 decades.Therefore just imagine how hard it would be to
clean up Politics in Boston.Or a Catholic Church Priest Scandal.

 

[foolardi]

How Markey Defeated Kennedy in Massachusetts
Edward-Isaac Dovere, The Atlantic

It's simple old Political Favor.Markey has been schmoozin' with Mayors and city councils
and business contractors in and around Boston for over 40 years.He should be expected to be paid
serious attention and also awarded votes.Should never have been a slog for him to win over
Bostonians or other in the State.He's only worked on it for more than 4 decades.

 

[Surrealistik]

You are both correct. Markey isn't as progressive as progressives are making him out to be, but it was ideological in the aspect of the working-class taking the Dem party back from oligarchs and dynasties like Clinton and Kennedy. FWIW, Markey has parsed his record in congress with entirely sane and reasonable explanations for voting the way he has.

Progs are well aware of Markey's mixed votation record; yes, we know he voted for the Iraq War despite having misgivings about it, and Biden's crime bill and so on. As I mentioned earlier in this thread though, that isn't the point. He's a co-sponsor on pillar progressive policy and has not wavered since, thus he has the receipts and so he is being rewarded by us for his loyalty to the FDR wing and his betrayal of the neoliberals, just as Pelosi meant to punish him for this dissent by endorsing Joe (and potentially to try to bring in Kennedy fundraising).

They are the same on the issues. There was no ideological content to this race, which is why the campaign spats were over bland, trivial topics. It was a campaign about nothing. No surprise it went to the incumbent.

Yes, you keep saying that, and yes, on paper, they have the same major stances. However you cannot, or will not acknowledge the fact that one has receipts and the other doesn't; this is important. Consider Obama talking a good game on policy in 2008 and failing to live up to most of that which generated his hype. Likewise concerning the implication and value of the endorsements of AOC and Pelosi (an endorsement Pelosi thought important enough to make to commit effective hypocrisy on her no challenging incumbents rule), which, by the numbers, clearly mattered (and which, despite your claims of their irrelevance, you have failed to provide receipts for). As stated, there's quite a bit to suggest Joe is merely paying lipservice whereas Markey has committed to and continues to commit to the policies progressives want to see. I've further noticed that you have failed to provide an alternate plausible hypothesis for a unanimous progressive favouring of Markey; I suspect it is because you literally cannot imagine one outside of the factors I've already mentioned.

Overall, I think it's clear that you don't want to acknowledge that this was a failing and defeat of your wing of the party against mine, and what this implies about the strength of AOC endorsement and the weakness of Pelosi's, nor the fact that Markey is either one of us, or now indebted to us. Remember, Markey spiked 3 to 1 in fundraising after Pelosi's endorsement of Joe, and above all, Markey was losing and in some polling by a lot, until AOC's endorsement.

 

[Greenbeard]

Progs are well aware of Markey's mixed votation record; yes, we know he voted for the Iraq War despite having misgivings about it, and Biden's crime bill and so on. As I mentioned earlier in this thread though, that isn't the point. He's a co-sponsor on pillar progressive policy and has not wavered since, thus he has the receipts and so he is being rewarded by us for his loyalty to the FDR wing and his betrayal of the neoliberals, just as Pelosi meant to punish him for this dissent by endorsing Joe (and potentially to try to bring in Kennedy fundraising).

Kennedy has the same "receipts" (co-sponsorships). Hence the absence of any ideological component to the Senate primary.

 

[Surrealistik]

Kennedy has the same "receipts" (co-sponsorships). Hence the absence of any ideological component to the Senate primary.

Interesting theory.

So where was he among the 16 original co-sponsors on Medicare for All?

I found it especially hilarious how Kennedy lambasted Markey for being slow on signing onto MFA when it took him 2 more years to get on board with Sanders' bill.

 

[Greenbeard]

Interesting theory.

So where was he among the 16 original co-sponsors on Medicare for All?

I found it especially hilarious how Kennedy lambasted Markey for being slow on signing onto MFA when it took him 2 more years to get on board with Sanders' bill.

Kennedy isn't in the Senate. He's signed onto the Jayapal bill.

 

[Surrealistik]

Kennedy isn't in the Senate. He's signed onto the Jayapal bill.

I see you missed the debate.

The fact is that Kennedy was apprehensive about the bill, and didn't throw in his support for 2 years. Yes, I know he wasn't a Senator, and I'm not talking about a literal sponsorship, but he didn't cast his lot with Sanders' bill until much later on; he wasn't anywhere to be seen at ground zero.

 

[Greenbeard]

The fact is that Kennedy was apprehensive about the bill, and didn't throw in his support for 2 years. Yes, I know he wasn't a Senator, and I'm not talking about a literal sponsorship, but he didn't cast his lot with Sanders' bill until much later on; he wasn't anywhere to be seen at ground zero.

This is your great ideological gulf? I rest my case.

 

[Surrealistik]

This is your great ideological gulf? I rest my case.

That Kennedy was a Johnny Come Lately on MFA and ultimately took it up when he felt it would be expedient? Yeah, it kind of is. Also remember that Markey signed onto MFA bills in 2007 and 2009, and that MFA was under basically ceaseless attack in the media when Sanders advanced his bill, which would explain much of Joe's cowardice (which is itself repulsive and insinuates weakness that should be intolerable for a progressive). That and Pelosi's endorsement implies a lot as to the direction his votation would take, if only (but not necessarily only; I feel it speaks to his underlying convictions or lackthereof) because he might feel himself ingratiated to her as I'm sure Markey feels to AOC.

Still waiting on your hypothesis explaining A: the sea changes pre and post AOC and Pelosi's endorsements, and B: overwhelming progressive support of Markey.

 

[TypicalRussian]

However most Big city's manage to clean up their Dirty Dodge's. Boston let Whitey
disappear into the night for almost 2 decades.Therefore just imagine how hard it would be to
clean up Politics in Boston.Or a Catholic Church Priest Scandal.

yeah and the unabomber investigation took the most extensive fbi campaign and went under for 20 years

 

[Abbazorkzog]

That would be more plausible if Kennedy hadn't won the working class areas of the Commonwealth. Markey cleaned up in the affluent, college-educated areas, i.e., among Massachusetts' sizable managerial class, whereas Kennedy's strength was in blue collar areas like the Gateway Cities.

Not a very good argument when you observe instances of non-insignificant amounts of Americans voting against their own interests in every election, particularly more recent ones, Trump's base being a glaringly obvious example of this.