Republican Debate 21 August

Here is a link to an Article in The [Lowell] Sun, talking about the debate on Thursday, 21 August, between Candidate Charlie Baker and Candidate Mark Fisher.  The time will be 3:00 PM and the venue will be the MCC's Federal Building on East Merrimack Street.

Attendees are encouraged.

About the candidates, from the Article:

According to several published polls, Baker, who lost the 2010 election to Gov. Deval Patrick, is the leading GOP candidate to win the Sept. 9 primary against the little known Fisher, a Tea Party member.

This is a chance, perhaps the only chance, to see the two Republican Candidates go head-to-head.  Come join us.

Regards  --  Cliff



Add your reaction Share

No August LRCC Meeting

The Headline says it all.  We will resume in September.

In the mean time, pick a candidate and support him or her.

Regards  —  Cliff

Add your reaction Share

Rand Paul Reaching Out

Per The New York Times, Senator Rand Paul from Kentucky is reaching out to Black voters.  Here is the link to the article.

There can be little doubt that after the passage of the Civil Rights legislation in the 1960s, which happened because Republicans in the Senate and House of Representatives voted for it, Black voters gave the credit to Democrats in the White House and Congress.  It is time for Republicans to overcome that historic fact and move on and reclaim our relationship with Black voters.  After all, it wasn't Jefferson Davis who freed the slaves.  It was a Republican.

Regards  —  Cliff

Add your reaction Share

Voter Demographics

Over at the Dick Howe Blog Site is a series of posts looking at the election for US Senator, back on 25 June 2013, when our new Junior Senator became the Democrat, Edward Markey.

The most recent installment was about Voter Demographics.  We are promised a fourth installment, which "will scrutinize the demographics of those who voted in both the 2011 city election and in the 2013 Senate election."

The first installment looked at the overall numbers as of 1 January 2013.  The interesting part, to me was that Unenrolled outnumber Democrats, who outnumber Republicans.

  • Democrats – 22,005 (40%)
  • Republicans – 4,827 (9%)
  • Unenrolled – 27,731 (50%)

The next installment looked at the voters in the 2011 municipal election, where there was a turnout of about 9500.

Observations? The group that accounts for the most votes is the 50-59 cohort (2245 votes from this group of a total of 9513 cast). The group that contains the most reliable voters is the 70-79 cohort (1,372 of 3,414 voted which is 40%).


If you are serious about understanding the voters, it might be worth a stop at Dick Howe's Blog.

Remember, numbers don't lie.

Oh, and it sure looks like an enthusiasm gap on our part.

Regards  --  Cliff

Add your reaction Share

At Least One Person Talking of Challenging Niki for 3rd District

The [Lowell] Sun had an article earlier in the month about Dr Timothy Imholt, of Methuen, who is preparing to challenge US Representative Niki Tsongas, Democrat, from the 3rd Congressional District here in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.  Below are some extracts from the article, written by Reporter Rick Sobey.

Of course it will be a challenge.  The incumbent is in a strong position.  The article quotes Frank Talty, co-director of the UMass Lowell Center for Public Opinion.  (We don't often hear from Mr Talty, do we?)  Mr Talty asserts that the Republicans should not even think about this district.  "Niki has accrued a strong reputation, has been very visible in the community, and is stronger than when she came in, so it will be real tough for a Republican,"

Regards  --  Cliff

Read more
Add your reaction Share

State GOP Committee Needs to Reach Out

In today's edition of The [Lowell] Sun is a response to an earlier OpEd by Columnist Peter Lucas.  Mr Lucas talked about how good things look for the Mass GOP in 2014.  This letter, found here, says there is a lot of work to be done.

Regards  —  Cliff

Add your reaction Share

The Surveillance Society

A friend of mine, commenting on the depth and breadth of Federal Government (and perhaps even some States and Cities) electronic surveillance made the following point:

You may count me among the paranoid/suspicious/worried/angry and ban me forever from the Beltway Club.  For me the issue is clear.  The people have to have the information necessary to form reasonable opinions, and this includes  laws.   Are they willing to sacrifice their rights, including probable cause, for imagined victories in a war on terror that is itself quite nebulous.  Have NSA whistle blowers been presented to the public to present their arguments?  Has anyone asked me if I am willing to continue to cede my rights?

What surprises me the most is reading Loop comments on this issue.  I read this morning that 3 Americans had been killed in Afghanistan by an Afghan soldier and would like someone to explain to me "for what?"  If people are dying to promote an ideal and to protect our freedom (saw this on a poster somewhere), we had better be sure that those freedoms are real.  We can survive another attack; our system of government cannot survive continued attacks on our civil liberties. Maybe we have to water the tree of liberty once in a while.

What I want to see is a very public and understandable discussion/debate on who we are and what is important, to include the people (as in We the People) who still, I hope, form the backbone of the country.  Of course, the "government" can invoke the State Secrets rule without further explanation.  Then it can classify the devil out of various claims so that we all feel safer.  Well,  I do not feel safer.  I feel threatened, and not only by Al Qaeda.

I believe this person's call for "a very public and understandable discussion/debate on who we are and what is important, to include the people (as in We the People) who still, I hope, form the backbone of the country" is exactly what we need, both in 2014 and 2016.  Republicans who run on this issue will provide clarity for the voters.

Regards  —  Cliff

Add your reaction Share

LRCC Meeting Thursday, 4 April

This Thursday the LRCC will be meeting UPSTAIRS at the VFW.  We will enter via the bar, downstairs, and then move up to the main floor, which is more "smoke free".

We will have the following Agenda:

  1. Greet Visitors.
  2. Approve minutes from last meeting.
  3. Treasurer's Report (Submitted electronically, as Kamal Jain is unavailable).
  4. Old Business: (Planned Activities, Ward Reorganizations, Get Out the Vote)
  5. New Business: (Current local political controversy consequences, Possible Primary debates, Senate Primary Candidates)
  6. Comments from Surrogates for Senate Primary Race Candidates.
  7. Comments from the State Committee Reps.

Regards  --  Cliff

Add your reaction Share

The People Are Not Happy

At The Boston Herald is an article on East Walpole baker Ms Andrea Taber, who stopped accepting EBT cards (food stamps) for her whoopie pies and pastries.  She has started her own political movement, "Operation Empty Wallet".

Does anyone have any 'gen on Ms Taber or her movement?

Regards  --  Cliff

Add your reaction Share

The New Republican Man (or not)

On Lowell Telecommunications Corporation's City Life show this last Friday the Dracut co-host, Mr Brian Bond, said that the Republican Party, to survive, will have to move more to the center, to be more moderate.

What does that even mean?  And, more important, what will that mean for garnering votes?

It would seem the last General Election showed that a hard left Democrat (Professor Elizabeth Warren) can garner more votes than a moderate or centrist Republican (Senator Scott Brown).

What is it that Republicans can give up to become more centrist?

On the one hand they can give up firm positions on Social Issues, like abortion.  However, what can they offer that will make Democrats and Independents (Unenrolled) happy.  Will they have to agree to abortion on demand, or can they hold out for live-birth or partial birth abortion laws?

To be more moderate, will they have to agree that the Second Amendment is a source of much trouble in this nation and call for curtailing gun rights?  Will Senator Diane Feinstein be their model?

What about workfare vs welfare?  Will Republicans have to move toward President Obama’s position or will they be safe holding to something closer to what Republicans agreed to with President Bill Clinton, which reduced the welfare roles?

Will these Republicans be allowed to hold to the importance of American support to Israel, or is that becoming too radical?

Having gone wobbly on social issues, what will Republicans then have to offer?  Will they be able to say that, one. the budget should not exceed the revenue and two, that revenue needs to be at or less than 21.5% of GDP, to allow the economy room to grow?

Will it still be OK to say that Keynesian economics didn’t work in the 1930s and it won’t work today?

What will this new Republican look like and will anyone stand up and salute him?

I fear he will be amorphous and that none will salute him.

Regards  —  Cliff

Add your reaction Share

1  2  Next →