MA-SEN Megathread: Senator Markey wins

[brucejoel99]

It’s quite sad that the only thing anyone seems to have in Markey’s defence after his decades of service is “dynasty bad”. Personally I really don’t understand why anyone is getting het up about this race. The differences between them are narrow and both would make/continue to be great Senators.

I've talked plenty on here about why Markey's record is good & JKIII's isn't. Not my fault y'all don't read:

"We need to primary people in deep blue seats!!"

...

"Wait, not like that!"

Yeah, I see what you’re saying. Honestly, I don’t think any incumbents are “entitled” to another term, and that primary challenges are always fair game. If incumbents are doing their job well, they shouldn’t have to worry about losing primary challenges.

That's the thing, Markey is doing his job well. He's a good, if not great Senator who's more than well in line with Massachusetts' electorate. I sincerely hope Markey smokes Kennedy's ass in this primary, but the Kennedy name is a hell of a drug for the state of the Massachusetts.

He’s actually not doing his job well. He literally never visits Massachusetts unless there is a campaign to run. Meanwhile Joe was the only member of the House to have monthly office hours IN his district.

Not to mention who will have more pull in Washington? Joe Kennedy or Ed Markey.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=336494.msg6977361;topicseen#msg6977361

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=330877.msg6977364;topicseen#msg6977364

We've literally had this exact same conversation before. I'm sorry you didn't listen before, but I'm not having it again, except to say that if you believe that Kennedy is more likely than Markey to look after your interests (let alone the national interests), when the record & all of the evidence indicates otherwise, then you're nothing more than an enabler of the dynastic politics that allows somebody like JK3 to run for high office on the back of nothing more than his name.

....

No brainer. Kennedy Markey For Senate

FTFY

[It's not just that you are a crook senator]

Honestly, the only politician who has any sort of credibility when they criticize the Iraq war is Barbara Lee. She was the only person who voted against "Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists" resolution. This basically set the stage for Iraq war and any possible future wars.

In short, it is easy to judge people from our 2020 view but lets face it, Kennedy would've voted for both for this and Iraq war. His arguments about primarying Markey is very laughable and transparent. I really hope his career ends soon.

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

Markey is gonna get the bulk of senior voters, and Kennedy will get the younger voters, just like Scarane v Coons and Hickenlooper v Romanoff. Scarane, Kennedy and Romanoff appeal to younger voters.

We dont know what to expect now that it has moved to a VBM election.  Both sides have equal chance to win

Markey isnt the prohibited favorite over Kennedy and the election is in September anyways

Markey is a slight underdog, he is losing by 2 to 6 pts

You have it all backwards.

Markey is getting the vote of the Bernie Bro young left
Kennedy is getting the older vote because they remember the greatness of the Kennedy name.

Its pathetic this is as close as it is to be honest. Not really sure why it is

Why are you trying to argue with OC?

And if it's the only reason JKIII's getting elected, then the greatness of the Kennedy name is a problem.

For me, it’s not. That’s why this is such a no brainer election for me.

JKIII gets the benefit of the doubt from me because yes he is a Kennedy and they’ve consistently represented this state and the nation so well and fought on the right side of practically every issue.

And then there’s the simple fact that Markey is a bit of a typical hack. “the swamp” if you will. He’s a good guy but he’s never in Massachusetts unless there is an election and for instance in a debate a few months ago instead of arguing the issues he just repeated AOC’s name a dozen times... weak.

I’ll be appauled at my state if Markey wins this. Unfortunately it seems as if that may happen.

Mary Jo Kopechne would like a word, or rather, she probably would if Ted Kennedy hadn't deliberately left her to die a horrible death by drowning in a car at the bottom of a pond and then relied on the family political machine to make sure he stayed in the Senate instead of getting sent to prison where he belonged.  

It’s quite sad that the only thing anyone seems to have in Markey’s defence after his decades of service is “dynasty bad”. Personally I really don’t understand why anyone is getting het up about this race. The differences between them are narrow and both would make/continue to be great Senators.

Markey has a long track record of fighting to implement progressive legislation.  Kennedy is an empty suit heir force hack who will definitely move the Senate Democratic Caucus' overton window to the right on environmental issues.  Markey was the Senate's leading advocate for the Green New Deal and was an excellent congressman.  It'd be like saying "let's replace Chris Murphy with Matt Lieberman because something something new blood."

I had no idea voting for the 1994 Crime Bill, NAFTA, and the Iraq War were pieces of progressive legislation.

I had no idea there were people delusional enough to think Kennedy wouldn't have been an enthusiastic supporter of all of those things were he in office then.  Also, you should try doing some research instead of just word-vomiting a few bad votes from a 44 year congressional career.  You might learn a thing or two.

Also, if we're going by the 1994 crime bill then I guess Bernie Sanders is a right-winger who needs to be primaried by an establishment legacy candidate ASAP because he also voted for it.  See, I can cherry pick in bad-faith just like you

You may be right that Kennedy would have supported all of these bills, but I do think that he would've at least opposed the Iraq War.  Second, it's not just a bad vote.  These are votes that had a direct negative impact on the lives of ordinary people in the United States and across the world.  Third, I don't like Sanders and I believe that he was wrong to vote for it. 

Voting for the crime bill != writing the crime bill. The bill itself was a mix of good and bad reforms, but may have skewed positive given VAWA and is assigned with too much of the blame for the growth of the prison-industrial complex (which grew thanks to many other pieces of legislation and acts of government). If I'm not mistaken, Biden got called out on the crime bill because he'd bragged about the creation of some of its worst provisions in the past, not because he'd voted for the final package.

[Coldstream]

It’s quite sad that the only thing anyone seems to have in Markey’s defence after his decades of service is “dynasty bad”. Personally I really don’t understand why anyone is getting het up about this race. The differences between them are narrow and both would make/continue to be great Senators.

I've talked plenty on here about why Markey's record is good & JKIII's isn't. Not my fault y'all don't read:

"We need to primary people in deep blue seats!!"

...

"Wait, not like that!"

Yeah, I see what you’re saying. Honestly, I don’t think any incumbents are “entitled” to another term, and that primary challenges are always fair game. If incumbents are doing their job well, they shouldn’t have to worry about losing primary challenges.

That's the thing, Markey is doing his job well. He's a good, if not great Senator who's more than well in line with Massachusetts' electorate. I sincerely hope Markey smokes Kennedy's ass in this primary, but the Kennedy name is a hell of a drug for the state of the Massachusetts.

He’s actually not doing his job well. He literally never visits Massachusetts unless there is a campaign to run. Meanwhile Joe was the only member of the House to have monthly office hours IN his district.

Not to mention who will have more pull in Washington? Joe Kennedy or Ed Markey.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=336494.msg6977361;topicseen#msg6977361

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=330877.msg6977364;topicseen#msg6977364

We've literally had this exact same conversation before. I'm sorry you didn't listen before, but I'm not having it again, except to say that if you believe that Kennedy is more likely than Markey to look after your interests (let alone the national interests), when the record & all of the evidence indicates otherwise, then you're nothing more than an enabler of the dynastic politics that allows somebody like JK3 to run for high office on the back of nothing more than his name.

....

No brainer. Kennedy Markey For Senate

FTFY

I don’t know if that was supposed to be a list of Markey’s achievements, but it’s not. Fact is, after 44 years in Congress it shouldn’t be that hard to find a reason to vote *for* him, rather than against Kennedy. Which is probably part of why Kennedy is leading, since evidently the people Markey has represented don’t feel he’s done that good a job - or else they wouldn’t be considering replacing him with a relative rookie.

I don’t really care who wins, but if the fact two of his great uncles represented the seat is enough for Kennedy to replace Markey, it does suggest Markey isn’t that good or respected. Ie that this is a problem with Markey’s weakness rather than simply Kennedy’s name.

I mean, does anyone actually think Kennedy could have beaten Warren?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I don’t know if that was supposed to be a list of Markey’s achievements, but it’s not. Fact is, after 44 years in Congress it shouldn’t be that hard to find a reason to vote *for* him, rather than against Kennedy. Which is probably part of why Kennedy is leading, since evidently the people Markey has represented don’t feel he’s done that good a job - or else they wouldn’t be considering replacing him with a relative rookie.

I don’t really care who wins, but if the fact two of his great uncles represented the seat is enough for Kennedy to replace Markey, it does suggest Markey isn’t that good or respected. Ie that this is a problem with Markey’s weakness rather than simply Kennedy’s name.

I mean, does anyone actually think Kennedy could have beaten Warren?

Yes. Almost definitely, if he's doing this well against Markey.

Markey has vastly better approvals in Massachusetts than Warren does (+25 net approval for Markey, +9 for Warren; +/-0 popularity relative to the state's lean for Markey, -20 for Warren). Warren is not considered an unusually strong incumbent and underperformed the state's Republican governor by six points in their respective reelection races in 2018 (Warren's challenger being small-time Trumpbot Geoff Diehl). Markey got almost exactly the same result in 2014 that Warren got in 2018 despite 2018 being 14 points more Democratic nationwide! The Kennedy name really is just that strong a drug for a certain kind of Massachusetts Democrat. All you need to do to see that is look up-thread.

It's fine to support Kennedy if you genuinely think he'd be a better Senator--if you think the GND is moonbat material or if you're concerned by the fact that Markey has endorsements from creepy "population bomb" groups, or if you seriously believe that the other 99 Senators will have more innate respect for someone who happens to be named "Kennedy" than they have for someone they've been working with in various capacities for decades, or even if you just think Massachusetts should play the long game and elect a Millennial Senator who can be chairman of one of the pork committees in the 2040s. But the quality of the arguments that are actually being made for Senator Joe Kennedy is absolutely abysmal, and I'm sorry to be so blunt, but the argument you're making is pretty bad too.

[Coldstream]

I don’t know if that was supposed to be a list of Markey’s achievements, but it’s not. Fact is, after 44 years in Congress it shouldn’t be that hard to find a reason to vote *for* him, rather than against Kennedy. Which is probably part of why Kennedy is leading, since evidently the people Markey has represented don’t feel he’s done that good a job - or else they wouldn’t be considering replacing him with a relative rookie.

I don’t really care who wins, but if the fact two of his great uncles represented the seat is enough for Kennedy to replace Markey, it does suggest Markey isn’t that good or respected. Ie that this is a problem with Markey’s weakness rather than simply Kennedy’s name.

I mean, does anyone actually think Kennedy could have beaten Warren?

Yes. Almost definitely, if he's doing this well against Markey.

Markey has vastly better approvals in Massachusetts than Warren does (+25 net approval for Markey, +9 for Warren; +/-0 popularity relative to the state's lean for Markey, -20 for Warren). Warren is not considered an unusually strong incumbent and underperformed the state's Republican governor by six points in their respective reelection races in 2018 (Warren's challenger being small-time Trumpbot Geoff Diehl). Markey got almost exactly the same result in 2014 that Warren got in 2018 despite 2018 being 14 points more Democratic nationwide! The Kennedy name really is just that strong a drug for a certain kind of Massachusetts Democrat. All you need to do to see that is look up-thread.

It's fine to support Kennedy if you genuinely think he'd be a better Senator--if you think the GND is moonbat material or if you're concerned by the fact that Markey has endorsements from creepy "population bomb" groups, or if you seriously believe that the other 99 Senators will have more innate respect for someone who happens to be named "Kennedy" than they have for someone they've been working with in various capacities for decades, or even if you just think Massachusetts should play the long game and elect a Millennial Senator who can be chairman of one of the pork committees in the 2040s. But the quality of the arguments that are actually being made for Senator Joe Kennedy is absolutely abysmal, and I'm sorry to be so blunt, but the argument you're making is pretty bad too.

I’m not making an argument beyond hating someone for their last name is stupid, and if his last name is enough to beat Markey after he has served in Congress for almost as long as Ted Kennedy -  then Markey can’t be that good. Sorry if that somehow upsets you, but it’s true, Markey can’t be that good if the people of Massachusetts are even entertaining not re-electing him.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I don’t know if that was supposed to be a list of Markey’s achievements, but it’s not. Fact is, after 44 years in Congress it shouldn’t be that hard to find a reason to vote *for* him, rather than against Kennedy. Which is probably part of why Kennedy is leading, since evidently the people Markey has represented don’t feel he’s done that good a job - or else they wouldn’t be considering replacing him with a relative rookie.

I don’t really care who wins, but if the fact two of his great uncles represented the seat is enough for Kennedy to replace Markey, it does suggest Markey isn’t that good or respected. Ie that this is a problem with Markey’s weakness rather than simply Kennedy’s name.

I mean, does anyone actually think Kennedy could have beaten Warren?

Yes. Almost definitely, if he's doing this well against Markey.

Markey has vastly better approvals in Massachusetts than Warren does (+25 net approval for Markey, +9 for Warren; +/-0 popularity relative to the state's lean for Markey, -20 for Warren). Warren is not considered an unusually strong incumbent and underperformed the state's Republican governor by six points in their respective reelection races in 2018 (Warren's challenger being small-time Trumpbot Geoff Diehl). Markey got almost exactly the same result in 2014 that Warren got in 2018 despite 2018 being 14 points more Democratic nationwide! The Kennedy name really is just that strong a drug for a certain kind of Massachusetts Democrat. All you need to do to see that is look up-thread.

It's fine to support Kennedy if you genuinely think he'd be a better Senator--if you think the GND is moonbat material or if you're concerned by the fact that Markey has endorsements from creepy "population bomb" groups, or if you seriously believe that the other 99 Senators will have more innate respect for someone who happens to be named "Kennedy" than they have for someone they've been working with in various capacities for decades, or even if you just think Massachusetts should play the long game and elect a Millennial Senator who can be chairman of one of the pork committees in the 2040s. But the quality of the arguments that are actually being made for Senator Joe Kennedy is absolutely abysmal, and I'm sorry to be so blunt, but the argument you're making is pretty bad too.

I’m not making an argument beyond hating someone for their last name is stupid, and if his last name is enough to beat Markey after he has served in Congress for almost as long as Ted Kennedy -  then Markey can’t be that good. Sorry if that somehow upsets you, but it’s true, Markey can’t be that good if the people of Massachusetts are even entertaining not re-electing him.

1. I don't hate Joe Kennedy. I don't know the man and it seems like he's a good enough Congressman for the kind of Congressman that he is. He was my Congressman for about two years when I was living in the Boston area and I was happy to vote for him then. Earlier in this cycle I actually contemplated voting for him due to being, as I said in my previous post, creeped out by some of the specific environmental groups whose backing Markey has. I just fundamentally don't understand the point of his candidacy if it's not primarily a means to carrying on a family legacy, a motivation to which I'm personally sympathetic but which I'm frustrated and baffled apparently makes him such an unbeatable titan in the eyes of people like MillennialMAModerate. The idea that that constitutes "hating him for his last name" is ridiculous and insulting.
2. I've provided you hard evidence, from not only polling but actual electoral results, that Markey is not a weak incumbent in any but the most abstract "he's too lowkey" or "he's not a good fundraiser" or "he's getting up there in years" kind of sense. His approval ratings are robust and his actual electoral track record is about as good as Warren's if you don't factor in the nationwide environment or significantly better than Warren's if you do. If you want to argue that the electorate might find him low-energy or might find him too old (the latter being an argument that I actually provided for you in my last post by bringing seniority into it), then fine, but again, that's not what you actually are arguing.
3. You don't live here and I do, which of course doesn't inherently disqualify you from having an opinion but does mean you should perhaps be a little humbler when I, or MillennialMAModerate for that matter, attempt to explain that yes, the last name genuinely is that huge a deal here.

[Coldstream]

I don’t know if that was supposed to be a list of Markey’s achievements, but it’s not. Fact is, after 44 years in Congress it shouldn’t be that hard to find a reason to vote *for* him, rather than against Kennedy. Which is probably part of why Kennedy is leading, since evidently the people Markey has represented don’t feel he’s done that good a job - or else they wouldn’t be considering replacing him with a relative rookie.

I don’t really care who wins, but if the fact two of his great uncles represented the seat is enough for Kennedy to replace Markey, it does suggest Markey isn’t that good or respected. Ie that this is a problem with Markey’s weakness rather than simply Kennedy’s name.

I mean, does anyone actually think Kennedy could have beaten Warren?

Yes. Almost definitely, if he's doing this well against Markey.

Markey has vastly better approvals in Massachusetts than Warren does (+25 net approval for Markey, +9 for Warren; +/-0 popularity relative to the state's lean for Markey, -20 for Warren). Warren is not considered an unusually strong incumbent and underperformed the state's Republican governor by six points in their respective reelection races in 2018 (Warren's challenger being small-time Trumpbot Geoff Diehl). Markey got almost exactly the same result in 2014 that Warren got in 2018 despite 2018 being 14 points more Democratic nationwide! The Kennedy name really is just that strong a drug for a certain kind of Massachusetts Democrat. All you need to do to see that is look up-thread.

It's fine to support Kennedy if you genuinely think he'd be a better Senator--if you think the GND is moonbat material or if you're concerned by the fact that Markey has endorsements from creepy "population bomb" groups, or if you seriously believe that the other 99 Senators will have more innate respect for someone who happens to be named "Kennedy" than they have for someone they've been working with in various capacities for decades, or even if you just think Massachusetts should play the long game and elect a Millennial Senator who can be chairman of one of the pork committees in the 2040s. But the quality of the arguments that are actually being made for Senator Joe Kennedy is absolutely abysmal, and I'm sorry to be so blunt, but the argument you're making is pretty bad too.

I’m not making an argument beyond hating someone for their last name is stupid, and if his last name is enough to beat Markey after he has served in Congress for almost as long as Ted Kennedy -  then Markey can’t be that good. Sorry if that somehow upsets you, but it’s true, Markey can’t be that good if the people of Massachusetts are even entertaining not re-electing him.

1. I don't hate Joe Kennedy. I don't know the man and it seems like he's a good enough Congressman for the kind of Congressman that he is. He was my Congressman for about two years when I was living in the Boston area and I was happy to vote for him then. Earlier in this cycle I actually contemplated voting for him due to being, as I said in my previous post, creeped out by some of the specific environmental groups whose backing Markey has. I just fundamentally don't understand the point of his candidacy if it's not primarily a means to carrying on a family legacy, a motivation to which I'm personally sympathetic but which I'm frustrated and baffled apparently makes him such an unbeatable titan in the eyes of people like MillennialMAModerate. The idea that that constitutes "hating him for his last name" is ridiculous and insulting.
2. I've provided you hard evidence, from not only polling but actual electoral results, that Markey is not a weak incumbent in any but the most abstract "he's too lowkey" or "he's not a good fundraiser" or "he's getting up there in years" kind of sense. His approval ratings are robust and his actual electoral track record is about as good as Warren's if you don't factor in the nationwide environment or significantly better than Warren's if you do. If you want to argue that the electorate might find him low-energy or might find him too old (the latter being an argument that I actually provided for you in my last post by bringing seniority into it), then fine, but again, that's not what you actually are arguing.
3. You don't live here and I do, which of course doesn't inherently disqualify you from having an opinion but does mean you should perhaps be a little humbler when I, or MillennialMAModerate for that matter, attempt to explain that yes, the last name genuinely is that huge a deal here.

Jeez. This isn’t debate club, I wasn’t making an argument. I was simply stating that *if* the only reason Kennedy is beating Markey is his last name then Markey can’t be that popular. I apologise for not showing the humility to not prostrate myself before you before daring to voice such a criminally ill informed opinion.

[Coldstream]

I don’t know if that was supposed to be a list of Markey’s achievements, but it’s not. Fact is, after 44 years in Congress it shouldn’t be that hard to find a reason to vote *for* him, rather than against Kennedy. Which is probably part of why Kennedy is leading, since evidently the people Markey has represented don’t feel he’s done that good a job - or else they wouldn’t be considering replacing him with a relative rookie.

I don’t really care who wins, but if the fact two of his great uncles represented the seat is enough for Kennedy to replace Markey, it does suggest Markey isn’t that good or respected. Ie that this is a problem with Markey’s weakness rather than simply Kennedy’s name.

I mean, does anyone actually think Kennedy could have beaten Warren?

Yes. Almost definitely, if he's doing this well against Markey.

Markey has vastly better approvals in Massachusetts than Warren does (+25 net approval for Markey, +9 for Warren; +/-0 popularity relative to the state's lean for Markey, -20 for Warren). Warren is not considered an unusually strong incumbent and underperformed the state's Republican governor by six points in their respective reelection races in 2018 (Warren's challenger being small-time Trumpbot Geoff Diehl). Markey got almost exactly the same result in 2014 that Warren got in 2018 despite 2018 being 14 points more Democratic nationwide! The Kennedy name really is just that strong a drug for a certain kind of Massachusetts Democrat. All you need to do to see that is look up-thread.

It's fine to support Kennedy if you genuinely think he'd be a better Senator--if you think the GND is moonbat material or if you're concerned by the fact that Markey has endorsements from creepy "population bomb" groups, or if you seriously believe that the other 99 Senators will have more innate respect for someone who happens to be named "Kennedy" than they have for someone they've been working with in various capacities for decades, or even if you just think Massachusetts should play the long game and elect a Millennial Senator who can be chairman of one of the pork committees in the 2040s. But the quality of the arguments that are actually being made for Senator Joe Kennedy is absolutely abysmal, and I'm sorry to be so blunt, but the argument you're making is pretty bad too.

I’m not making an argument beyond hating someone for their last name is stupid, and if his last name is enough to beat Markey after he has served in Congress for almost as long as Ted Kennedy -  then Markey can’t be that good. Sorry if that somehow upsets you, but it’s true, Markey can’t be that good if the people of Massachusetts are even entertaining not re-electing him.

1. I don't hate Joe Kennedy. I don't know the man and it seems like he's a good enough Congressman for the kind of Congressman that he is. He was my Congressman for about two years when I was living in the Boston area and I was happy to vote for him then. Earlier in this cycle I actually contemplated voting for him due to being, as I said in my previous post, creeped out by some of the specific environmental groups whose backing Markey has. I just fundamentally don't understand the point of his candidacy if it's not primarily a means to carrying on a family legacy, a motivation to which I'm personally sympathetic but which I'm frustrated and baffled apparently makes him such an unbeatable titan in the eyes of people like MillennialMAModerate. The idea that that constitutes "hating him for his last name" is ridiculous and insulting.
2. I've provided you hard evidence, from not only polling but actual electoral results, that Markey is not a weak incumbent in any but the most abstract "he's too lowkey" or "he's not a good fundraiser" or "he's getting up there in years" kind of sense. His approval ratings are robust and his actual electoral track record is about as good as Warren's if you don't factor in the nationwide environment or significantly better than Warren's if you do. If you want to argue that the electorate might find him low-energy or might find him too old (the latter being an argument that I actually provided for you in my last post by bringing seniority into it), then fine, but again, that's not what you actually are arguing.
3. You don't live here and I do, which of course doesn't inherently disqualify you from having an opinion but does mean you should perhaps be a little humbler when I, or MillennialMAModerate for that matter, attempt to explain that yes, the last name genuinely is that huge a deal here.

Jeez. This isn’t debate club, I wasn’t making an argument. I was simply stating that *if* the only reason Kennedy is beating Markey is his last name then Markey can’t be that popular. I apologise for not showing the humility to not prostrate myself before you before daring to voice such a criminally ill informed opinion.

Gotta be honest though, if this forum is typical of Markey supporters then I pity him because he’s heading for a defeat. The Kennedy derangement is ridiculous.

[Blair]

Yeah I mean it's obvious that Markey is well-liked, respected & able Senator- the fact that he won a primary in 2013 shows that he's clearly popular to a degree, and no-one can actually say anything that he's done wrong (he isn't a Dan Lipinski on abortion, he isn't a Bob Mendendez on overseas trips & he isn't senile or aged like some members of the senate)

I'm pretty sure if polled the majority of Kennedy voters would say they like Markey but they just want Kennedy; it also helps that unlike the other members of the family he is both an attractive & scandal free version (seriously it helps hugely). It's not about having the name but rather elicting that same feeling that the original brothers did; the perception of energetic, do-good idealism with enough ideoligical vagueness & after 1968 the ability to say that anyone criticising the family was belitting their death. As the Boston Globe says...

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/05/20/opinion/no-surprise-joe-kennedy-is-running-senate-like-kennedy/

And on another aside, the difference between Joe Kennedy running in Massachusetts and Caroline Kennedy running in New York shows a lot about the difference between the states when it comes to the name (and the gender behind the name)

I must also admit for the clarity sake and out of embarrassment that at one stage I wanted Kennedy to run; I always found it bizarre that the Senate wasn't used as a springboard for national candidates & I saw Markey in the mould of the other aging New England Senators but having actually read this thread, reviewed the record and having soured greatly on the Kennedy Dynasty I'd probably vote for Markey.

[Coldstream]

Yeah I mean it's obvious that Markey is well-liked, respected & able Senator- the fact that he won a primary in 2013 shows that he's clearly popular to a degree, and no-one can actually say anything that he's done wrong (he isn't a Dan Lipinski on abortion, he isn't a Bob Mendendez on overseas trips & he isn't senile or aged like some members of the senate)

I'm pretty sure if polled the majority of Kennedy voters would say they like Markey but they just want Kennedy; it also helps that unlike the other members of the family he is both an attractive & scandal free version (seriously it helps hugely). It's not about having the name but rather elicting that same feeling that the original brothers did; the perception of energetic, do-good idealism with enough ideoligical vagueness & after 1968 the ability to say that anyone criticising the family was belitting their death. As the Boston Globe says...

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/05/20/opinion/no-surprise-joe-kennedy-is-running-senate-like-kennedy/

And on another aside, the difference between Joe Kennedy running in Massachusetts and Caroline Kennedy running in New York shows a lot about the difference between the states when it comes to the name (and the gender behind the name)

I must also admit for the clarity sake and out of embarrassment that at one stage I wanted Kennedy to run; I always found it bizarre that the Senate wasn't used as a springboard for national candidates & I saw Markey in the mould of the other aging New England Senators but having actually read this thread, reviewed the record and having soured greatly on the Kennedy Dynasty I'd probably vote for Markey.

He beat Stephen Lynch, who isn't really that different to Lipinski. And it can’t be that ridiculous to think high approval =/= actually being liked. Being inoffensive doesn’t equate to genuine support, as evinced by how far behind he is in polling to Kennedy. I find it genuinely staggering that after a 44 year career he is far behind Kennedy, I assumed Kennedy was throwing his career away when he entered. And if Kennedy wins then at least some of the blame must lie with Markey.

[Blair]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1970_United_States_Senate_election_in_Massachusetts

I've actually gone fall cirlce in Atlas as I was a Kennedy fanboy when I joined (I remember a long back & forth with Sanchez about it) the forum & I'm now sh**tposting about Chappaquiddick.

[RogueBeaver]

Firefighters union endorses Kennedy.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

The Kennedy derangement is ridiculous.

See point 1. in my previous post.

Anyway, another thing that has to be accounted for is that Markey, for some reason--maybe age, maybe low-energy-ness, maybe, yes, entitlement on his own part--just is not running an energetic or even competent campaign this time around. He got caught napping on getting enough signatures to even get on the ballot because he falsely presupposed that the state party's cadres would back him rather than Kennedy, and I don't think I've seen a single piece of hard evidence that he's even campaigning other than an interview with him on local TV and a few thinkpieces written on his behalf. It's not that he isn't well-liked or is an inherently uninspiring incumbent, it's that for whatever reason he just isn't putting up that much of a fight.

[KaiserDave]

Firefighters union endorses Kennedy.

[Heir of Camelot]

it also helps that unlike the other members of the family he is both an attractive & scandal free version (seriously it helps hugely)

He's decent looking. He's not in the same league as JFK or even Bobby, let alone greek god JFK Jr. who was arguably the handsomest man in the world at one point.

[brucejoel99]

It’s quite sad that the only thing anyone seems to have in Markey’s defence after his decades of service is “dynasty bad”. Personally I really don’t understand why anyone is getting het up about this race. The differences between them are narrow and both would make/continue to be great Senators.

I've talked plenty on here about why Markey's record is good & JKIII's isn't. Not my fault y'all don't read:

"We need to primary people in deep blue seats!!"

...

"Wait, not like that!"

Yeah, I see what you’re saying. Honestly, I don’t think any incumbents are “entitled” to another term, and that primary challenges are always fair game. If incumbents are doing their job well, they shouldn’t have to worry about losing primary challenges.

That's the thing, Markey is doing his job well. He's a good, if not great Senator who's more than well in line with Massachusetts' electorate. I sincerely hope Markey smokes Kennedy's ass in this primary, but the Kennedy name is a hell of a drug for the state of the Massachusetts.

He’s actually not doing his job well. He literally never visits Massachusetts unless there is a campaign to run. Meanwhile Joe was the only member of the House to have monthly office hours IN his district.

Not to mention who will have more pull in Washington? Joe Kennedy or Ed Markey.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=336494.msg6977361;topicseen#msg6977361

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=330877.msg6977364;topicseen#msg6977364

We've literally had this exact same conversation before. I'm sorry you didn't listen before, but I'm not having it again, except to say that if you believe that Kennedy is more likely than Markey to look after your interests (let alone the national interests), when the record & all of the evidence indicates otherwise, then you're nothing more than an enabler of the dynastic politics that allows somebody like JK3 to run for high office on the back of nothing more than his name.

....

No brainer. Kennedy Markey For Senate

FTFY

I don’t know if that was supposed to be a list of Markey’s achievements, but it’s not. Fact is, after 44 years in Congress it shouldn’t be that hard to find a reason to vote *for* him, rather than against Kennedy. Which is probably part of why Kennedy is leading, since evidently the people Markey has represented don’t feel he’s done that good a job - or else they wouldn’t be considering replacing him with a relative rookie.

I don’t really care who wins, but if the fact two of his great uncles represented the seat is enough for Kennedy to replace Markey, it does suggest Markey isn’t that good or respected. Ie that this is a problem with Markey’s weakness rather than simply Kennedy’s name.

I mean, does anyone actually think Kennedy could have beaten Warren?

https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=336494.msg6977361;topicseen#msg6977361

https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=330877.msg6977364;topicseen#msg6977364

If leading the charge for environmental protections & actually holding influence on that subject matter on account of the seniority that he's already accrued isn't an accomplishment, then I guess accomplishments don't matter anymore.

[MillennialModerate]

Anyone catch the debate last night? It was painful to watch.

Kennedy definitely won the debate but that’s not saying much.

When asked when’s the last time you attended church ... Markey gave a painfully long and drawn out and incoherent answer. Although Kennedy’s answer to “worst characteristic according to wife” wasn’t that great (questions were softballs to be honest)

[RogueBeaver]

https://twitter.com/GlobeKMcCabe/status/1269472551622905859

[KaiserDave]

https://twitter.com/GlobeKMcCabe/status/1269472551622905859

Great news!

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Havent heard much about this race, and I am not as enthusiastic about Kennedys chances.

The COVID 19 has changed the races where political rallies have stopped, which hurt upstart candidates like Kennedy, not as much media exposure

[MillennialModerate]

Havent heard much about this race, and I am not as enthusiastic about Kennedys chances.

The COVID 19 has changed the races where political rallies have stopped, which hurt upstart candidates like Kennedy, not as much media exposure

He’s not a regular upstart canidate ... he’s a Kennedy in Massachusetts.

With that being said and I can’t believe I’m typing these words, his candidacy has been underwhelming and this race is without question Lean Markey. I wanna throw up typing that but I call it like I see it

[Upstater]

Havent heard much about this race, and I am not as enthusiastic about Kennedys chances.

The COVID 19 has changed the races where political rallies have stopped, which hurt upstart candidates like Kennedy, not as much media exposure

He’s not a regular upstart canidate ... he’s a Kennedy in Massachusetts.

With that being said and I can’t believe I’m typing these words, his candidacy has been underwhelming and this race is without question Lean Markey. I wanna throw up typing that but I call it like I see it

Kennedy has led almost every poll.  I don't see why Markey would be favored.

[KaiserDave]

Havent heard much about this race, and I am not as enthusiastic about Kennedys chances.

The COVID 19 has changed the races where political rallies have stopped, which hurt upstart candidates like Kennedy, not as much media exposure

He’s not a regular upstart canidate ... he’s a Kennedy in Massachusetts.

With that being said and I can’t believe I’m typing these words, his candidacy has been underwhelming and this race is without question Lean Markey. I wanna throw up typing that but I call it like I see it

Kennedy has led almost every poll.  I don't see why Markey would be favored.

Well, let's hope the polls are off (they remain close) and Markey wins.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Those polls that had Kennedy leading were all taken before COVID 19, when the D primary was taken place during ST. There hasnt been any recent polls after Covid 19. I donated to Kennedy, but after Covid 19, I have stopped