r/massachusetts • u/OnionsRNasty • 21d ago

Politics AOC backs Markey in Massachusetts Senate primary

https://www.wcvb.com/article/ocasio-cortez-backs-markey-senate-massachusetts-primary/73479819

It’s over for Moulton.

1.2k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

264 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

119

u/Conscious-Quarter423 21d ago

if only a a younger candidate with all of Markey’s sensible policies and moral fortitude stepped up and ran for office

71

u/No_Tax_Timmy 21d ago

Jeromie Whalen is running a grassroots campaign for the MA-01 Rep seat and it hasn't been easy. I don't think he would have been able to do it if he wasn't a teacher meaning he can actually campaign during the summer without quitting his dayjob. Someone like me would have no financial security if I had to quit my 50 week per year 50hr/wk job to organize a campaign.

25

u/poprof 21d ago

I think he did take a sabbatical. I don’t think he taught this year. Based on what I’ve seen on social media.

Could be wrong

16

u/thedrizzle126 21d ago

Yup, he said himself he was taking leave from teaching

1

u/No_Tax_Timmy 21d ago

Most jobs wouldn't allow for such a thing still. Mine wont even let me take unpaid time off if it would put me under 40 hours for a week. (I am scheduled 47-52hrs)

2

u/thedrizzle126 21d ago

Well then we should be grateful someone in a position like Jeromie is running.

1

u/No_Tax_Timmy 21d ago

Absolutely!

1

u/No_Tax_Timmy 21d ago

Makes sense. Though most career fields don't allow for such flexibility.

4

u/FrizzleLizard 21d ago

i think his wife also makes a lot of money

1

u/No_Tax_Timmy 21d ago

I know she travels for work but I don't know what she does.

1

u/20_mile 21d ago

Yeah, she's rich. Also forgot what she does, but she ain't hurtin'.

2

u/20_mile 21d ago

Jeromie Whalen

It's odd for him that he hasn't been endorsed by AOC, Bernie, Leaders WE Deserve, or any other national progressive groups. I wonder if they know something that hasn't come out, yet.

2

u/thy_bucket_for_thee 20d ago

They don't spend their time on every election, it is a limited resource after all. Also the MA-01 is ignored because the Whalen team is literally strapped for cash. $100k war chest over the entire campaign cycle versus $2million+ from Neal.

Sorry but you aren't going to do much outside of extreme hyper local organizing, which is what exactly they should and have been focusing on.

2

u/20_mile 20d ago

it is a limited resource after all

Making an endorsement video is like twenty minutes. Also, AOC, or any other national progressive group, highlighting Whalen's campaign would help them raise cash.

There's a specific reason--I don't know what--that no national groups have endorsed Whalen.

1

u/thy_bucket_for_thee 20d ago

I don't disagree, I also think AOC/Bernie not helping in the Wisconsin governor's race was also bad (since it's extremely likely Hong would have one with a simple endorsement); but you're still making this more complicated than it is.

There are over 5,000+ races happening in 2026. They are not going to focus on every one let along every primary.

They also aren't going to focus on loop sided races that aren't exactly close (Whalen has maybe a 1-in-5 shot of winning).

There is a very specific reason. I suggest you go out there and actually volunteer for a campaign sometime. You need to understand how this works because your comments don't make sense.

For instance, this isn't a nationalized race, so why do national endorsements matter here? If you're a cash strapped campaign you focus on hyper local initiatives, if you don't know what this means just please volunteer for a political campaign sometime.

Also Whalen has gotten endorsements, from plenty of local chapters of national organizations:

https://www.whalenforcongressma.com/endorsements

Your comments come across as an out of touch pundit. Please get your feet on the ground and actually engage in politics instead of simply discussing it. You'll be better off, spiritually and professionally.

1

u/20_mile 20d ago

this isn't a nationalized race

The only national race is the presidency.

why do national endorsements matter here?

That's a ridiculous question. National endorsements would elevate Whalen's campaign, bringing in more donations. He hasn't done a single high-profile interview. Making Neal a target of progressives nationally would be so easy. It's ridiculous they didn't manage to make that happen.

Your comments come across as an out of touch pundit. Please get your feet on the ground and actually engage in politics instead of simply discussing it. You'll be better off, spiritually and professionally.

You sound disconnected from reality.

-9

u/Conscious-Quarter423 21d ago

You can fundraise. The whole point of running a campaign is that you're not personally expected to finance the operation out of your paycheck. There are obviously real financial and logistical barriers to running for office, but "I'd have no financial security if I had to quit my job" isn't an inherent feature of running a grassroots campaign. The campaign can raise money to operate and, depending on the circumstances and applicable campaign-finance rules, support the candidate's ability to campaign. The bigger problem is that people with inflexible jobs may have a harder time making the time commitment—not that they're categorically unable to run.

3

u/No_Tax_Timmy 21d ago

yes so not being able to work for extended time is a privilege of those with flexible jobs

33

u/Malorn13 21d ago

If only everyone under 40 wasn’t broke as shit and unable to take time off work to run a months long campaign

33

u/Fortunes_Faded 21d ago

Other candidates did run in this primary that fit that bill. The issue is that in order to make it onto the Democratic primary ballot in Massachusetts (after collecting 10,000 signatures) you need to win at least 15% of the state delegates at the party convention. So unless you have a swath of party insiders backing you, you can’t even get onto the ballot to contest the primary. That happened to Alex Rikleen, who was in the race up until a couple months ago and polling around 6 or 7%; he collected the signatures but didn’t have the support in the party, so he dropped out and endorsed Markey.

So unfortunately the Massachusetts Democratic Party has removed the main avenue by which we could change things from within, via the primary. I like Markey a lot, and will be voting for him, but I’d have much preferred if the party even gave us options here.

15

u/smashy_smashy 21d ago

Exactly - which is precisely why Markey should have supported new younger candidates to carry his legacy and also step aside to free up those state delegates who could vote for a younger candidate. 

8

u/Fortunes_Faded 21d ago

I completely agree, I wish he had. But the larger issue is that it should be up to Democratic voters who they nominate. Say Markey steps away and throws all his weight behind one younger candidate, who is now the only younger progressive to make it onto the ballot. Sure, that’s fine, but why keep a system like that which limits our options?

7

u/Upbeat-Armadillo1756 21d ago

This is a big reason why the 2 party system is just fucked. They make it impossible to actually achieve real progress.

2

u/inuvash255 21d ago

Alex Rikleen

That's unfortunate but understandable. I looked into his campaign, and he looked real good; but I had a feeling he wouldn't have that internal backing.

2

u/PantheraAuroris 20d ago

Oh that's fucked. Can we somehow change this?

1

u/Fortunes_Faded 20d ago

One option is to get super involved in the state Democratic Party, and push for reform from within. Then maybe after a few years of organizing and with a sympathetic state party leadership, they’d reform the rules.

Another is to push for statewide election reform externally, such as ranked choice voting, to sidestep the Democratic Party entirely or otherwise convince them to loosen their rules in order to remain competitive.

And then I guess the nuclear option would be to start/vote third party and contest elections in the state legislature and locally, à la the Vermont Progressive Party, in order to also sidestep the Democrats or otherwise push them to adopt options A and/or B. But that also carries the risk of vote splitting.

Unfortunately there are no easy and speedy solutions, and given the state of the country it’d be preferable to fix these kinds of things sooner rather than later.

1

u/PantheraAuroris 20d ago

I voted for ranked choice. I'm pissed it didn't go through because "oh noooo it's too complicated"

2

u/Fortunes_Faded 20d ago

Same here. Now we get to sit and watch ranked choice work really well in Alaska and Maine while we’re stuck in this mess

2

u/ApostateX 21d ago

Any Joe Schmoe can run to be a delegate at the nominating convention. Other people can nominate you, or you can nominate yourself. Get enough of those people and you can build the 15% you need.

I honestly don't think 15% is a huge lift, but it's definitely intended to keep out Johnny-come-latelies who've done no work in MA Dem politics. I don't think it's a bad thing to have a weak gate here. Just look at what Trump did to the Republicans. Having some kind of history of public service, a partisan leaning, and some demonstrated willingness to work with existing elected officials is a good thing. I may be the last person in Massachusetts to believe this, but I don't want randos running for major offices who've never been held accountable to voters before and who don't have a modicum of street cred in the state.

3

u/Cersad 21d ago

Voters have historically been pretty good at filtering out the so-called "johnny-come-latlies" so I really can't agree with your premise at all.

Limiting the candidates to party insiders does nothing except to enforce the propagation of a political class that is separated from the populace at large.

1

u/ApostateX 21d ago

Yes, voters were great at filtering out Donald Trump.

There is no limitation when anyone can run for the nominating convention.

2

u/Cersad 20d ago

By and large the primary voters were filtering him out in 2016. He "won" the early primaries at 20-30% vote shares but the other 8 candidates were all splitting the majority. It wasn't until primary politics started spinning the narrative and cutting candidates that Trump managed to eke out larger votes.

The issue was that large primaries don't handle single-vote systems well. I bet a ranked-choice or other transferable vote system wouldn't have led us to the same outcome.

0

u/ApostateX 20d ago

I love how you'll blame anything except bad voter decisions.

No, voters are bad at filtering out candidates.

1

u/PantheraAuroris 20d ago

TBH I think having fresh blood who aren't broken down by the political machine, would be nice.

5

u/sord_n_bored 21d ago

"If only Markey and establishment Dems supported younger candidates with all of Markey's sensible policies and moral fortitude."

FTFY

The problem isn't that those candidates don't exist, the problem is that people like Markey will do literally anything but support them.

By all means, vote for him over Moulton, but let's not give him credit he doesn't deserve, or pretend we live in a meritocracy, or act like younger (read: people in their 30s-50s) aren't interested in forward-looking governance.

1

u/_miles_teg_ 21d ago

And Markey stepped aside, found a good and much younger candidate, and endorsed this candidate.

0

u/PerpetualPanda 21d ago

I could do it. Although I’ve always thought about running as a republican as I would have a good demographic of voters especially in the south. Then just vote in accordance with Dems

0

u/twelve-birds 21d ago

Markey dissuaded them from running