MA-SEN Megathread: Senator Markey wins

[brucejoel99]

It’s pathetic how much everyone on this thread is buying Markeys BS just because they’re anti-dynasty. Even if JK is likely to do more for Massachusetts. I’d say thank god my state is smarter than this thread but clearly from all indications they aren’t

It's pathetic how much you (both in this thread & presumably in real life too) are buying JKIII's BS just because you're pro-dynasty. Even if Markey has literally shown time & time again just how much he does for Massachusetts. Thank god all indications clearly show that your state is smarter than you.

[brucejoel99]

Now, since Warren is certainly going for Cabinet, Pressley will get the seat, not Kennedy

Isn’t Pressley the reason why Kennedy ran against Markey in the first place?

I'm inclined to tnink so. Running against Pressley will be very, very difficult for Kennedy if he loses here and decides to dive at Warren's seat.

Yeah, the fact that it would've been difficult in any event given her popularity is probably the reason he decided to go now for Markey, whom he probably (& seemingly wrongly) assumed would be easier to beat than Pressley.

[brucejoel99]

Now, since Warren is certainly going for Cabinet, Pressley will get the seat, not Kennedy

Isn’t Pressley the reason why Kennedy ran against Markey in the first place?

I'm inclined to tnink so. Running against Pressley will be very, very difficult for Kennedy if he loses here and decides to dive at Warren's seat.

Yeah, the fact that it would've been difficult in any event given her popularity is probably the reason he decided to go now for Markey, whom he probably (& seemingly wrongly) assumed would be easier to beat than Pressley.

It's incredible to think we live in a world where a Kennedy could lose two Senate races.

In Massachusetts, no less!

[brucejoel99]

So far, only Hoyer had openly participated in this primary.
https://twitter.com/greggiroux/status/1294693774782877696

https://twitter.com/hjessy_/status/1294696586870755329

[brucejoel99]

So far, only Hoyer had openly participated in this primary.
https://twitter.com/greggiroux/status/1294693774782877696

https://twitter.com/hjessy_/status/1294696586870755329

Even if that was the reason, that still doesn't excuse it. Why would you have to even it out? Why would want to be neutral in this race?

Staying neutral isn't a good thing when it's a principled politician getting primaried by a shameless opportunist.

Maybe she's just helping out a colleague? The PAC she created was specifically made for young upstarts like JKIII, after all. And not to mention, Schumer & the DSCC have both endorsed & are helping Markey fend off JKIII, so it's not like Pelosi - at worst - staying neutral is the end of the world for Markey or anything.

Plus, it's not like she's lacking in the department of helping principled politicians when they're primaried by shameless opportunists: she just successfully worked to help all 3 primaried Squad members fend off their challengers.

[brucejoel99]

So far, only Hoyer had openly participated in this primary.
https://twitter.com/greggiroux/status/1294693774782877696

https://twitter.com/hjessy_/status/1294696586870755329

Even if that was the reason, that still doesn't excuse it. Why would you have to even it out? Why would want to be neutral in this race?

Staying neutral isn't a good thing when it's a principled politician getting primaried by a shameless opportunist.

HAHAHAHAHAHAH. principled politican.

As someone who actually lives here and knows what Markey is - and don’t get me wrong I agree with many of his positions but principled is not him.

Well you’ll all get your wish sadly but my god are you being sold a bill of goods

You’re never going to explain are you

K

No, he's never gonna tell us what's wrong with Markey because - as we all know & a majority of Massachusetts Democrats have evidently come to realize - there isn't anything wrong with Markey. The only issue MillennialModerate has with Markey is that his last name isn't Kennedy, but he won't actually tell us that explicitly - even though we all know it's true - because he knows deep down it's just not a defensible position in any rationally reasonable way.

If we're lucky, though, maybe he'll tell us whether or not his ass gets jealous of all the sh*t that comes out of his mouth!

[brucejoel99]

So far, only Hoyer had openly participated in this primary.
https://twitter.com/greggiroux/status/1294693774782877696

https://twitter.com/hjessy_/status/1294696586870755329

Even if that was the reason, that still doesn't excuse it. Why would you have to even it out? Why would want to be neutral in this race?

Staying neutral isn't a good thing when it's a principled politician getting primaried by a shameless opportunist.

HAHAHAHAHAHAH. principled politican.

As someone who actually lives here and knows what Markey is - and don’t get me wrong I agree with many of his positions but principled is not him.

Well you’ll all get your wish sadly but my god are you being sold a bill of goods

You’re never going to explain are you

K

What is there to explain? By a lot of members here and by the red rose crew on Twitter he’s being painted as some saint of the far left who has always put his neck out when it wasn’t always the politically prudent thing to do. But that’s not the case. I’m not the smartest person on these forums and I’m not pretending to be and I’ve gotten some things wrong and I will again but I feel a little less intelligent every time I read the Markey praise.

You literally said recently that both Atlas & Massachusetts are stupid for not being as eager to bow down before JKIII as you've been. "Not pretending to be the smartest person" my ass.

The only thing that should make you feel unintelligent is the fact that you're clearly not intelligent.

You could go back and read his record for highlights but just to name a few of the notable ones: He was vehemently against busing in Boston public schools, it would’ve been the politically courageous thing to do to support it but he opposed - a decision that surely saved his political ass back then but wasn’t the morally right one. He supported the ‘94 crime bill wholeheartedly - Now I understand I support Biden who had a role in that bill but don’t tell me that Markey is this darling of the left and fights for what is right over what is politically prudent. He voted for the Iraq war - What turned out to be a foreign policy disaster for this nation, found no WMD’s and cost the nation trillions that could’ve gone to other meaningful causes.

Okay? Yeah, those all suck but he's clearly changed course, proven himself to be a great ally for the State of Massachusetts to have, & stood on the side of working families much moreso than JKIII.

Not to mention, everybody (including our party's presidential nominee who, I'll remind you, you vehemently supported in the primaries) has changed course on those issues, so it's inarguably fair to call out that hypocrisy.

But hey, keep pretending that, had JKIII been in Congress in 1994, he wouldn't have voted for the crime bill. Yeah, it was a bad bill. Markey shouldn't have voted for it, but the idea that JKIII wouldn't have done the same (which was the politically expedient choice at the time) is f**king hilarious. Same for the Iraq War, & same for every other regressive policy that Markey supported. At least Markey's had the decency to evolve.

Or have you conveniently forgotten that JKIII was anti-marijuana until he changed his stance when it was obvious he'd otherwise be left behind, voted in favor of nuclear weapons, voted "against legislation curtailing the government's data snooping power," voted to curtail Dodd-Frank by making it harder to designate financial firms systemically important, co-sponsored the bill that would've banned boycotts of Israel (which, regardless of where you stand on Israel, is just wholly undemocratic in & of itself), & heavily invested in fossil fuel companies?

You shouldn't have, considering we've reminded you about all of this on this forum time & time again. No, you didn't forget about it. You just don't care. And that's fine (I mean, it's not, but whatever), but at least be honest about it.

He spent less time in the state than every member of the Massachusetts delegation (including Warren who was RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT). He’s been known to be an absent political for years. The special election where he won the senate seat was known to be an apathetic race where Democratic voters were bored to tears with the options they had. Then in the general of that special election Markey won against a very mediocre canidate by just 10 points and actually lost more cities/towns than he won. He literally just likes holding the positions and gives off the impression he’s just going along for the ride.

Cool, except that's not a legitimate criticism in anyway. Their job is in DC. Why on Earth should somebody give two sh*ts that they don't come home? That doesn't make them bad at their job, because their job is literally in DC. They represent Massachusetts in DC, not in Massachusetts.

If the best argument JKIII has as to why one should vote for him is because Markey spends his time in the place that the people have literally employed him to go to & represent them at, then that's an excellent argument for JKIII to f**k off. "You don't spend enough time in the state" would be a great argument for a state legislator whose job is literally in the state, sure. But if that really is the best argument JKIII has against Markey (& it seems to be, as that's seemingly the only coherent argument we've all heard), then he has absolutely nothing.

JKIII promising to spend more time at his mansion in the state rather than in DC where his job actually is isn't an argument for electing JKIII. Your Senator represents you in DC, not Massachusetts.

And how can you seriously believe with a straight face that JKIII isn't the one in the race who looks like somebody who just wants power for power's sake (which, yes, is more than enough reason to deny it to him)?

Then he attatches his name to a bill introduced by an popular freshman congresswoman and he’s all of a sudden he’s this left wing darling? Give me a break.

Attached his name to a bill introduced by a popular freshman congresswoman? Jesus christ, yet another issue that's been made clear to you on this forum before: not only did he co-write the resolution with her (so, if anything, it's equally his bill), but it was a full 7 years before AOC was even born when he began to lead the charge for environmental protections in the House. His long record of fighting for the environment is clear as day, especially considering he has a perfect score from the League of Conservation Voters & authored both the 2009 cap-&-trade bill as well as the 1982 Nuclear Freeze Resolution. To imply that his environmental activism is nothing more than an attempt to get the left-wing to support him in the here & now is a disingenuous, outright lie.

But you don't care that it's a lie. You know it's a lie. The only way you can actually attempt to sh*t on Markey is to lie.

And if you think some 70 something year old soon to be retired Ed Markey  - will get more accomplished for Massachusetts or have more influence for Massachusetts then a young, vibrant, enthusiastic guy who yes has the publicity & resources of the Kennedy name then I can’t help you.

For the umpteenth f**king time, the Senate doesn't operate according to publicity. It operates on seniority. If Markey wins, he starts off this next term with 8 years of seniority under his belt; if JKIII wins, he starts off with nothing (or, near nothing, depending on how many non-Representatives become freshmen Senator next year). So if I'm a Massachusetts voter & I want my Senator to carry maximum influence in the Senate, where their influence matters most, then I go for the guy who's already accumulated nearly a decade of seniority over the guy without it.

Not to mention, Markey is the ranking member on both East Asian & Pacific Affairs as well as Environment & Public Works Oversight, & it's that latter committee that's particularly key in regards to his influence, considering Markey has - again - been Capitol Hill's premier environmental activist since 1982.

As for JKIII accruing real influence, how can anybody reasonably square him being able to do that with his obvious ambitions? He's clearly proven that his House seat was nothing more than a springboard to him, & his haste here now suggests that he feels like he needs a Senate seat sooner rather than later, so who's to say the intent here isn't to just attempt to use the Senate seat as another springboard, too, meaning he wouldn't even wanna be in the Senate long enough to gain any real influence in the first place?

So no, JKIII is not gonna be able to use his "publicity" to be more influential for Massachusetts in the Senate than Markey's seniority would be because, again, the Senate doesn't operate on publicity. Seniority is all that matters: Markey's got it, & JKIII doesn't.

If you can't be honest about Markey caring more for the people of Massachusetts than JKIII, then we can't help you.

[brucejoel99]

Okay? Yeah, those all suck but he's clearly changed course, proven himself to be a great ally for the State of Massachusetts to have, & stood on the side of working families much moreso than JKIII.

So we’re arguing about people being politically prudent over personal conviction. And your response is “clearly he changed course”. YES BECAUSE IT HELPS HIM POLITICALLY. The hypocrisy by you is rich considering this is the kind of comment you’d rake me and my support for JK over the coals for but with EM it’s just a genuine change of heart? Please

How convenient of you to just ignore literally everything else in my post that called out your irrational support for JKIII. Just goes to show that literally nothing will stop you from continuing to worship at the altar of JKIII while thinking that Markey is the literal spawn of satan when it has been definitively shown to you time & time again that the latter's record is clearly & infinitely better than the former's. That's what's f**king rich.

[brucejoel99]

Kennedy is now accusing Markey of 'weaponizing' his family and questioning their integrity, while also appropriating their words.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/512310-kennedy-markey-is-weaponizing-my-familys-history?

JKIII likes to use his name when doing so benefits him but gets pissy when he's called out for using his name to benefit him? Now, that's some prime /r/SelfAwarewolves material right there. After all, nobody knows how to 'weaponize' their family history & name to get to where they are today better than a member of the Kennedy family.

Honestly, though, it must be so rough for JKIII to be a Kennedy. I mean, all that free name-recognition & he still ends up being so milquetoast & unremarkable. No wonder he'll soon be - god willing - the first ever Kennedy to lose an election in the state of Massachusetts.

[brucejoel99]

Kennedy hasn't run a great campaign, but Markey's campaign has been despicable.

He's been turning this race into a referendum on the Kennedy family and allied himself with these absolute assholes on the far-left who act as his shock troops doing everything they can to trash JKIII and the Kennedys as a whole.  Most of them had no idea who Kennedy or Markey were three months ago and now they're turned "Vote for Markey" into a progressive litmus test.

And you want to talk personal attacks?  Markey fired first.  But really, he's been firing throughout this campaign by letting Rose Twitter do the dirty work of oppo and character assassination against JKIII.

Such a shame that JKIII fell into this bear trap.  He was a rising star in the party, and ordinarily, running a primary campaign against a 74-year-old incumbent who's lost touch with his district is something we're cool with.  Right, AOC and Cori Bush fans?

Unfortunately, Markey used this destructive, divisive strategy, and now even if JKIII wins his career is going to be forever kneecapped by the relentless demonization and character assassination he's endured from the progressive left, for nothing other than the crime of challenging The Great Ed Markey, who I repeat, none of these people actually knows anything about other than that he's AOC's buddy.  Imagine if someone told them he voted for the Iraq War.  According to Bernie, that's a disqualifying mistake.

The only campaign in this primary that diminished Joe Kennedy was Joe Kennedy's. He's an attractive candidate on paper, sure, but the more you hear from him, the less likeable & authentic he is. He comes off as the CEO's son promoted from sales manager to COO. He's been all over the place without any coherent sense of strategy, & many people are still being left to wonder how he's substantially different from Markey (especially after he changed many of his views to match Markey's).

He clearly had no reason to challenge Markey based on policy, & simply ran because he miscalculated & thought it'd be easy to beat Markey & gain prestige by being a Senator instead of a Congressman, so it's hardly "despicable" for the Markey campaign to call this kind of behavior out.

Moreover, it wasn't online progressives that made JKIII say that Markey is disqualified from having legitimate opinions on race relations because he voted for the 1994 crime bill. It wasn't online progressives that made JKIII shout that writing laws doesn't get anything done & that the only way for progress to occur is to have a revolution in the streets. JKIII is just a bad candidate, plain & simple. This is his first legitimately competitive election, & he's failing spectacularly.

Not to mention, JKIII had nothing to point to from the Markey campaign itself - be it an actual ad or statement or anything - that attacked him, so he had to settle for complaining about mEaN tWeEtS from Markey supporters. At that point, you knew he was in trouble.

And if anything, those actions of online progressives have weakened Markey by being absolute assholes & saying some absolutely awful sh*t that gets published & talked about in papers & on the local news. Do you really believe Markey somehow benefits from fauxgressives creating headlines such as: "Markey Supporters: 'Lee Harvey Oswald got the wrong Kennedy'"? Of course not! So no wonder he's explicitly condemned that sh*t.

Face it: JKIII's only real hope was for Markey to not take his challenge seriously &/or to commit some gaffe or show some age-related incapacity that would raise doubts. With regards to the former, Markey's ground game really improved & he emphasized his 40 years of service for the state to good effect (but sure, keep on saying that people only support him because he's "AOC's buddy," if that somehow makes you feel better for some reason). As for the latter, the debates are on YouTube so go see for yourself. In no way has Markey "lost touch" with the state of Massachusetts.

[brucejoel99]

Kennedy hasn't run a great campaign, but Markey's campaign has been despicable.

He's been turning this race into a referendum on the Kennedy family and allied himself with these absolute assholes on the far-left who act as his shock troops doing everything they can to trash JKIII and the Kennedys as a whole.  Most of them had no idea who Kennedy or Markey were three months ago and now they're turned "Vote for Markey" into a progressive litmus test.

And you want to talk personal attacks?  Markey fired first.  But really, he's been firing throughout this campaign by letting Rose Twitter do the dirty work of oppo and character assassination against JKIII.

Such a shame that JKIII fell into this bear trap.  He was a rising star in the party, and ordinarily, running a primary campaign against a 74-year-old incumbent who's lost touch with his district is something we're cool with.  Right, AOC and Cori Bush fans?

Unfortunately, Markey used this destructive, divisive strategy, and now even if JKIII wins his career is going to be forever kneecapped by the relentless demonization and character assassination he's endured from the progressive left, for nothing other than the crime of challenging The Great Ed Markey, who I repeat, none of these people actually knows anything about other than that he's AOC's buddy.  Imagine if someone told them he voted for the Iraq War.  According to Bernie, that's a disqualifying mistake.

Stay mad lol

No, but GMA has a point here. All of you cheerleaded primaries against Clay, Engel, Crowley, etc., arguing that they were too old or deserved a challenge or whatever. It does puzzle me that some people can't apply the same standard to Markey.

Employing anti-primary messages against Kennedy that you would deride in other races is pretty asinine.

Of course Markey isn't someone even remotely like Lipinski, but neither is this hurting fundraising in other races, nor is it going to cost us a Senate seat or irreparably divide the party. Kennedy was free to mount a campaign against Markey, and did so in part because Markey didn't seem to have a strong foundation of support compared to other incumbents. If this is also, in part, only possible thanks to his last name, then so be it; it's not exactly something Kennedy can help, and any politician is going to use their advantages whatever they may be.

I think this just mostly has to do with the rank opportunism associated with JKIII's primary challenge. In the case of primary challenges against people like Crowley, Engel, & Clay, their challengers made clear cases for why the Democrat they were aiming to replace was out-of-touch with the district & its values. They offered serious arguments for why they'd better represent the district, & voters found their arguments compelling.

JKIII really hasn't done that. Markey has taken on a prominent role regarding climate change, energy issues, etc. & has been a consistent voice on both state & national issues alike. JKIII has ran to the right of Markey & hasn't provided any real argument for why he'd be the better Senator from the state of Massachusetts. It just seems like he's running to elevate his profile for a future presidential or vice-presidential nod & banking on his name-recognition & Camelot nostalgia to pull him over the line. In other words, the challenge is just wrong in ways that AOC, Bowman, & Bush's all weren't.

[brucejoel99]

The Morse internal today had Markey up 43-36 in MA-01, the Richard Neal internal from a couple months ago (according to Zaybay) had Kennedy up 20 points in the district.

Obviously small scale internals aren't the most accurate but that is hard to ignore.

That's consistent with statewide polling that had Kennedy up by 5-10 a few months ago & Markey up by 15 last week.

[brucejoel99]

The thing I think is missing in this contest is the fact the Kennedy family don't really have that great a track record in actually winning competitive races; 1980 bombed, the Lt-Gov race in Maryland was lost, the 2018 Illinois Primary was even more of a joke than 1980.

Joe Kennedy III won his primary in 2012 I assume because Barney Frank endorsed him & because he didn't face a significant primary challenge.

Besides I think the fact that the polls show he's getting 40-45% show he's popular; it's just not that easy to knock off an incumbent senator who hasn't really done anything to repel voters.

What's particularly notable about the possibility of JKIII in particular losing, though, is that he'd be the first ever Kennedy to actually lose an election in the state of Massachusetts itself.

[brucejoel99]

The thing I think is missing in this contest is the fact the Kennedy family don't really have that great a track record in actually winning competitive races; 1980 bombed, the Lt-Gov race in Maryland was lost, the 2018 Illinois Primary was even more of a joke than 1980.

Joe Kennedy III won his primary in 2012 I assume because Barney Frank endorsed him & because he didn't face a significant primary challenge.

Besides I think the fact that the polls show he's getting 40-45% show he's popular; it's just not that easy to knock off an incumbent senator who hasn't really done anything to repel voters.

The only truly competitive race I can think of won by the Kennedy family was JFK's own election in 1960, and that was sixty years ago. And of course, we all know of what has been said about the electoral chicanery that took place in Illinois and Texas during that election. RFK of course had his Senate race in New York in 1964, but he was carried into office on President Johnson's coattails. And again, that was many decades ago. There is no member of the family in recent times who has successfully won a competitive race.

JFK's first Massachusetts Senate race in 1952 against incumbent (& future Nixon 1960 running mate) Henry Cabot Lodge Jr. was really close too: 51-48.

[brucejoel99]

Sorry to interrupt your ideological fights, but I've been wondering something for a while and I wanted to ask here to see if anybody knows.

Do we know in which regions exactly each candidate will perform the best (outside their own CD's, of course)?

We've had 2 polls show regional breakdowns thus far: the JMC poll showing Markey up by 3 over Kennedy, 44-41, & the recent SurveyUSA poll which showed Markey up by 2 over Kennedy, 44-42.

In the former, Markey held a 16-point lead in Boston (47-31) & a 15-point lead in Middlesex (50-35); in the latter, Kennedy held a 17-point lead of his own in Boston (52-35), while Markey still led in Middlesex, this time by 12 points (50-38).

So who knows how this ends up turning out?

(The rest of the regional breakdowns can be found at https://winwithjmc.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Massachusetts-Senate-Dem-Executive-Summary.pdf & http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=1720a395-8d6c-4724-8aef-f3f96ccb5652)

https://twitter.com/vgmac/status/1296484779215532034

Her endorsement was pivotal for Engel. I love you Nancy, but I hope your endorsement here has that same level of efficacy too.

[brucejoel99]

https://twitter.com/vgmac/status/1296484779215532034

This is a bit of a surprise.

Not particularly. If someone challenges an incumbent from the left who votes with Trump 70% of the time, they're an upstart and anyone who works with them needs to be cast out of the party. Squash them like the bug that they are!

If someone challenges a noncontroversial incumbent from the right, they're a "courageous leader" and a "rising star".

Let's all be real about this.

This is really coming down to House vs Senate. I mean the chairs of the Progressive Caucus, both of whom were Sanders supporters, are backing Kennedy.

All the more ironic, given Markey served in the House for nearly 4 decades & was Pelosi's right-hand man on climate change issues during her 1st speakership.

[brucejoel99]

Markey has decided to take a diplomatic approach:

https://twitter.com/EdMarkey/status/1296513596441141248

That was very kind of Markey to tweet that.

I requested my absentee ballot today, but put the wrong e-mail address on the form by mistake. I really hope I don't go to jail for that. (And yes, I did send another e-mail to the local elections office acknowledging my error).

MSP, OPEN UP!!

[brucejoel99]

https://twitter.com/elizacollins1/status/1296536959385575429

If Warren can endorse Markey even though she was literally Kennedy's professor/mentor, then Bernie has no excuse.

[brucejoel99]

https://twitter.com/elizacollins1/status/1296536959385575429

If Warren can endorse Markey even though she was literally Kennedy's professor/mentor, then Bernie has no excuse.

Markey is also pretty close with Warren so she is probably the best qualified Senator to judge this race.

The absence of a Sanders endorsement isn't great (dishonourable mentions: Merkley, Baldwin, Hirono) but they're holding off anyway for whatever reason. The most likely is that they think their endorsements probably won't matter enough to shift the race and don't want to risk alienating Kennedy before he's in the chamber with them. I could imagine that being the case given that the AOC + Warren endorsements probably covers most of what another progressive endorsement might do, but the absence of an endorsement might also have an impact now that we've got to the stage where reporters are asking out-of-state Senators what they think of the race.

Yeah, I feel like Markey will still win but instead of a healthy margin, it'll be a bit more close, with the saving grace being - as you allude to - the other progressives that have boosted him in AOC & Warren, as well as that "with all due respect" ad. But tbh, I honestly don't even know anymore. All I know is that this whole primary has just hit such a high level of ridiculous.

(Another thing I've noticed, though, is that Bernie's list of congressional endorsements is literally just a carbon copy of candidates that endorsed him for President. He didn't endorse progessives like Grijalva, Porter, or Haaland, all of whom had endorsed Warren instead of him. If there's a connection there, then that'd really be some petty, personal bullsh*t).

[brucejoel99]

https://twitter.com/elizacollins1/status/1296536959385575429

If Warren can endorse Markey even though she was literally Kennedy's professor/mentor, then Bernie has no excuse.

Markey is also pretty close with Warren so she is probably the best qualified Senator to judge this race.

The absence of a Sanders endorsement isn't great (dishonourable mentions: Merkley, Baldwin, Hirono) but they're holding off anyway for whatever reason. The most likely is that they think their endorsements probably won't matter enough to shift the race and don't want to risk alienating Kennedy before he's in the chamber with them. I could imagine that being the case given that the AOC + Warren endorsements probably covers most of what another progressive endorsement might do, but the absence of an endorsement might also have an impact now that we've got to the stage where reporters are asking out-of-state Senators what they think of the race.

Yeah, I feel like Markey will still win but instead of a healthy margin, it'll be a bit more close, with the saving grace being - as you allude to - the other progressives that have boosted him in AOC & Warren, as well as that "with all due respect" ad. But tbh, I honestly don't even know anymore. All I know is that this whole primary has just hit such a high level of ridiculous.

(Another thing I've noticed, though, is that Bernie's list of congressional endorsements is literally just a carbon copy of candidates that endorsed him for President. He didn't endorse progessives like Grijalva, Porter, or Haaland, all of whom had endorsed Warren instead of him. If there's a connection there, then that'd really be some petty, personal bullsh*t).

It's not. He endorsed Pressley.

Edit: I'm pretty certain there were others, too. Bonnie Watson Coleman endorsed Biden and got Sanders' endorsement in NJ.

Oh oof, I went to his Get Involved page's list & hers must've slipped my eye. Good to know it's not that issue, then!

[brucejoel99]

Say what you want about Warren but she'd be busting her ass working for Markey.

Tbf she doesn't seem to have been campaigning for him and I don't blame her. She knew Kennedy well and endorsing against him was probably hard enough.

She actually has been campaigning at events of his, they've just been virtual events (for obvious reasons) so perhaps they're not as visible as they'd otherwise be during a normal campaign.

[brucejoel99]

Remember when Kennedy pretended to be running on anything other than his last name?
https://twitter.com/hjessy_/status/1296571562607489026

So much for all that stuff about running on change.

[brucejoel99]

Oops.

https://twitter.com/Sludge/status/1296948297047904256?s=19

BAH GOD, THAT'S ED MARKEY'S MUSIC!!

[brucejoel99]

https://twitter.com/edmarkey/status/1297575426123018240?s=21

I love this guy so much.

The bosses may tell him where to sit. No one tells him where to stand.

[brucejoel99]

This guy could sell you guys ocean front property in Kansas. My god

Alright, into the Oremine you go.

Too late