Hey, there! Log in / Register
Van Ness won't try write-in campaign against Scaccia in November
By adamg on Fri, 09/14/2018 - 11:42am
Gretchen Van Ness, who came in second to incumbent state Rep. Angelo Scaccia in a field of five in the Democratic primary for the 14th Suffolk state representative district (Hyde Park, Roslindale, West Roxbury) told supporters today she will run again in 2020 but that for now, she will concentrate her free time on working to support Question 3, which would enshrine transgender people's right against discrimination in public places.
In an e-mail message, she acknowledged several people have asked her to consider a write-in campaign against Scaccia, who won the Democratic nomination with less than 40% of the total vote:
We've looked carefully at the numbers and I'm afraid there's no clear path to victory. Given the large turnout for the primary, we expect high numbers again in November. Write-in campaigns are technical, labor-intensive and expensive, even in so-called "off" years, and we think the wiser course is to focus our energy and resources on 2020.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
She just had to pile on in
Scaccia is still there because of here - perfectly good progressive candidate already in the race and she couldn't stand to just find something else to do.
With due respect...
the person who comes in second isn't the spoiler.
Who was the 'already in' candidate?
Honestly asking here. Van Ness got the second most votes, but (assuming the same total votes) even if it had been only her and Scaccia heads-up, she would have needed to pull 70% of the votes that went to the 3rd/4th/5th candidates. Seems unlikely.
And even more unlikely - If any of those candidates had been straight up against Scaccia, they would have needed 80-97% of the up-for-grabs votes!
Scaccia......39.6....2,781
Van Ness.....26.3....1,844
Idowu........21.6....1,514
Nzenwa........8.9......626
Uy............3.6......255
To be clear - I don't like Scaccia's politics, I didn't vote for him (ever), but the non-Scaccia 14th just seems too diffuse and divided by identity politics mishigas to mount a real challenger.
Exactly
I would say that there was a Van Ness voter and an Idowu voter, and there is surprisingly little overlap between the two. Add in the Uy and Nzenwa voters and there is no clear mandate for Van Ness.
And yes, I’m a Scaccia voter, but I understand the district enough to know that a straight up Van Ness- Idowu race would probably go to Idowu, which is not seen in recent results.
I read it differently
I read it differently... and I'm not in the district -- so it's an entirely different perspective.
Both Van Ness and Idowu got progressive endorsements -- VN from MassCare, MassVotersAnimals, LGBTQ orgs. Idowu got Sierra Club, Mass Alliance, Blackstonian. Now Van Ness probably wouldn't have gotten Blackstonian, and Idowu might not have gotten LGBTQ endorsements... but there's plenty of chance that if one isn't in the race, the other gets about half of those endorsements.
And, importantly, there are plenty of people who vote sometimes and consider themselves progressive, though they're not especially plugged in. If one candidate is getting most/all of the progressive endorsements, he or she captures that section of voters -- voters who split between Van Ness, Idowu, some other candidate, and staying home because there was no single progressive candidate.
Bottom line: I think there are plenty of supporters of one who would vote for the other. Some would stay home. Few would vote Scaccia. AND(!) I think there are voters who stayed home or blanked because they are progressive low-info voters; with a single progressive candidate, those voters fill in the bubble for VN or Idowu.
Need to Organize
At least some probably many of the votes for the candidates other Scaccia were anti Scaccia votes rather then votes for the particular candidate. Scaccia now goes back to the state house with only 39% of the voters voting for him ie without the support of even the majority of citizens; whereas many state reps have support of well over the majority.The anti Scaccia people need to unite together. The person with the most votes should be the candidate with an agreement that one or more of the other candidates will be given a job as legislative aid. More then one elected official served first as a legislative aid and got experience.
Also part of the fault here lies in the Ward 18 Democratic Committee which in violation of Massachusetts Democratic Party has failed its obligation to hold the required number of meetings and failed its obligation to inform party members of such meetings. A forum should have been held Hyde Park (a neighborhood which comprises a large portion of the district) to allow all candidates to be heard, such was never held.
As a result of the failure of the Ward 18 dems to perform functions performed by other Ward and City and Town Committees Hyde Park has lost out on the opportunity to have the neighborhood represented by more persons on the city council. As a result of the soon to be vacant at large seat the number 5 person in the last at large city council race will get to be in that seat. Had the ward 18 committee helped its own resident a Democrat with the election it is believed he would have been number 5, instead he is number 6 with the number 5 slot going to a person who has repeatedly (at least 15 times) run unsuccessfully for office including as a Republican.
Wait
Is your claim that the Ward 18 Democratic Committee helped Althea Garrison come in 5th last year?
Astute political commentary there.
Indirectly yes. The person
Indirectly yes. The person who came in 6th in the last city council at large race lived in Hyde Park and after a candidates forum held by another ward dems got more votes to endorse (though not enough for the actual endorsement) then a sitting incumbent at large city councilor.
It is believed that had Ward 18 dems helped him in his campaign or even held a candidates forum in Hyde Park so Hyde Park residents could hear him that he (the Hyde Park resident) would have come in number 5 in the race. As a first time candidate the man from Hyde Park didnt have a lot of money for the campaign.
There was a very big gap between the number of votes for the first 4 candidates and number 5 but not a very big gap between number 5 and number 6.
There is simply no excuse for the Ward 18 Democrat committee not performing the functions required by the Massachusetts Democrat Party charter.
Again
The ward committee, if anything, probably endorsed those who came in top four, which means that the only thing it did for the others in the race is mean they wouldn't be elected. That a candidate who was not endorsed by the committee came in 5th, 6th, 7th, or 8th is immaterial.
Moreover, the race is non-partisan, meaning the committee had no role in it. In the 14 years I've lived in Ward 18, I've never seen them do anything in a city race. No candidate forums in all that time, and I have knowledge of the politics of the area going further back and still not forums. That includes 2 open district city council races that cover almost all of the ward.
The thing for me is that I voted for DaRosa. Reading comments like this makes me almost regret doing so.
Havent heard they endorsed
Havent heard they endorsed anyone for city council. As they dont have meetings (or have secret meetings) they couldnt have endorsed anyone in any meeting.
The Mass dems charter requires each ward (and city and town committee) to have at least 4 meetings a year at least one each quarter but ward 18 in violation of the Mass Dems charter does not do this. Also as required by MassDems platform of inclusion and transparency they are required to give notice. This notice can be either an email list of all registered democrats who request to be on it or can be by a listing (believed free) in the Mass Dems newsletter as many other ward and city and town committees do.
As a Democrat ward committee they have a duty to help democrats including providing a public forum for democrats to be heard so citizens in their ward can make informed decisions, this is so even in a primary where citizens of all political parties and non parties are allowed to enter.. Citizens in Hyde Park have a right to knowledge of those running for office. Many other wards city and town committees have such forums.
There are people who if everything else is equal will give someone a vote if they are local as such can bring benefits locally so the local ward committee has a duty to let the residents know of the democrat candidates in their ward via a forum.