Lehigh also not only notes that Goldberg's candidacy was "torpedoed" by her hometown paper's endorsement of Andrea Silbert, he also torpedoes the main point of the Murray candidacy - namely that we somehow needs an advocate for cities and towns in the corner office. Lehigh writes
By my count, with 40 senators and 160 representatives regularly doing the same thing, we'd then have 201 public officials committed to that task.Spot on.
We now have multiple, objective, experienced observers ratifying what at least 14,000 people, and likely tens of thousands more, already know - that Andrea Silbert is the best candidate to back up her campaign promises with a proven record of job creation expertise.
3 comments:
Hardy har. Today's op-ed is yet another example of why Lehigh so often gets sneers and jeers from bloggers.
Specifically to your "spot on" point, it's splotch off. He is beyond left field -- the alley behind the parking lot maybe.
Those 200 advocates have not done the job. Local aid has plummeted. The cities and towns are left to raise property taxes and fees to make up some of the differences. In addition, the infrastructure changes, such as rail improvements, that Murray touts have not happened and are not in the works.
Maybe one of the other candidates could come around to this, but Murray understands the issues now.
Lehigh is not a good horse to ride, Hoss.
I've got to agree about Lehigh; I think he's wrong more often than he's right, which is strange for someone center-left. The problem with the state legislature is that the 200 advocates aren't advocating for the state, they're advocating for the South End or North Hampton. They're advocating for Peabody or Fall River.
While I voted for Andrea Silbert, I do have more confidence in Tim Murray in one aspect: I think he could help cities like Lynn, Springfield and New Bedford emulate Worcester's success. I don't regret my Silbert vote, but Murray's potential here can't be understated. The legisulature is too fractured to show leadership on such an issue; there are too many competing interests.
Does everyone really think that with Dems in the corner office we will have the same cuts to cities and towns we've suffered under the Republicans?
I agree with Scott - why do we need one more advocate for cities and towns when we already have 200...? Aid is down because we are behind $5000 million a year in tax revenue from the loss of jobs. We need more revenue and Andrea is the only candidate with relevant experience and a proven record of job creation.
The truth is all the legislators will still advocate for their particular town, that's their job. Let's give them something to work with.
Silbert is running as the jobs candidate specifically because she truly understands this issue and sees the solution, not just the problem.
Post a Comment